Just a few quick observations regarding the structures of six novels: Blowfly, by Patricia Cornwell (A Scarpetta Novel)[2003]; For Whom the Bell Tolls, by Ernest Hemingway [1940]; The Bourne Legacy, by Eric Van Lustbader [2004]; Hannibal, by Thomas Harris [2000]; Duma Key, by Stephen King [2008]; War of the Worlds, by H.G. Wells [1898].
Questions to be asked regarding each book:
1. Is the book divided into parts?
2. If the book is divided into parts, are the parts named?
3. Is the book divided into chapters?
4. If the book is divided into chapters, are the chapters named?
5. If the book is divided into chapters, are the chapters subdivided?
6. If the chapters are subdivided, are the subdivisions named?
I'll enter notes on each book in order according to date, but I won't answer the questions in list form. Instead, I'll just type a simple paragraph describing the structure of the book.
1. War of the Worlds (1898)
H.G. Well's book is divided into two books and includes an epilogue but no prologue. Book 1 is composed of 17 chapters; book 2 is composed of 10 (including the epilogue, which is chapter 10). Chapter numbering resumes from one at the beginning of each book. The chapters in both books are named, and none of the chapters is subdivided into smaller sections.
2. For Whom the Bell Tolls (1940)
Hemingway's book consists of 43 numbered but un-named chapters, with neither an epilogue nor a prologue present. The book is not divided into sections and none of the chapters are subdivided.
3. Hannibal (2000)
Thomas Harris' book is divided into six named sections. The sections are divided into un-named chapters but the chapter numbers continue through the various sections without resetting. The book contains a total of 103 chapters and none of the chapters is sub-divided. Finally, the book has no prologue or epilogue.
4. Blowfly (2003)
Patricia Cornwell's Scarpetta novel is structured in a manner identical to Hemingway's FWtBT. The book contains no prologue, no epilogue, and consists of a total of 124 numbered but un-named chapters.
5. The Bourne Legacy (2004)
Eric Van Lustbader's novel is divided into a total of four sections: "Prologue," "Part 1," "Part 2," and "Epilogue." The book contains 31 numbered but un-named chapters that run continuously from the beginning of "Part 1" to the end of "Part 2."
6. Duma Key (2008)
Stephen King's novel exhibits the most-complex structure of the all six books considered here. It contains neither a prologue nor an epilogue but is divided into 12 sections. Each section division consists of a section titled "How to Draw a Picture" and is numbered from I to XII. The book's total of 22 named chapters are interspersed between the "How to Draw a Picture" section dividers and are themselves subdivided into sections numbered with lower-case roman numerals but are not otherwise named.
Pros and Cons of Above Structures for Today's Readers
The first thing that comes to mind when comparing, say Duma Key to War of the Worlds is that Duma Key seems much more geared toward a person who is able to read sometimes for long periods of time and sometimes for short periods of time. The fact that its chapters are divided into sub-sections that provide convenient 'stopping points' for busy people who have to go to work, drive, tend to family business, etc. gives it appeal to such an audience.
Really, who has time to sit through a 900-page novel consisting of three 300-page chapters?
The structure of War of the Worlds actually seems to me more dictated by the content than any consideration of the prospective readership's time constraints. The 'stopping points' are placed in such a way that they seem to complement the telling of the story in a truer artistic sense.
Of course, it's a little past five in the morning and I've been up all night so I just might be reading too much into King's motivations regarding his novel structure and, if I am, I'm sorry. These are just my thoughts right now.
Regarding the other books, I think it's pretty interesting that Blowfly and For Whom the Bell Tolls have exactly the same structure. This is quite a classic, though simple, way of telling a story and I don't fault either author one bit for using it. I personally prefer more sophistication -- such as with Nabokov's Lolita and Pale Fire -- but I enjoyed both novels pretty well anyway. I guess it's sort of like a classic meal; like spaghetti and meatballs rather than some new-fangled way of eating foie gras and black truffles.
Okay, enough of this for now. My eyse are dry and I'm kinda starting to doze here. Maybe I'll revisit this in the future.
No comments:
Post a Comment