The first chapter of my WIP is split into two parts. The first follows the antagonist over a time period of about 20 minutes, the second follows the protagonist over the period of a day. The first part is about a third of the chapter's word count and both parts end at about the same 'in universe' time. Is there any reason I should avoid this structure? It is a fantasy genre and the second part fleshes out the characters that appear in the first part. The events in the first part are repeated in the second but from a different POV and with far less detail, but some new ones.
It sounds interesting to have the story viewed in another POV but you should stick to one. I think the reader who's reading the story might get bored of reading the same story twice. If the event happens at the same time, maybe put words like "meanwhile" and the story switches at another POV and switches back at the main character
it can be done... Rashomon (technically the short story 'in a grove') tells the same story four times... and there are numerous books that tell the same events more than once from different perspectives... the key is to make the perspectives interpretation of events different enough that it remains interesting to the reader
oh so that means there are different books telling the same stories in different ways-- I need to read one of those books
The idea was: Part 1: (All from Person A POV) Person A steals an object from the campsite of Person B. Person B chases. Person A gets away for a short amount of time before Person B catches up again. Object disappears. Person A escapes. Part 2: (All from Person B POV) Person B collects objects 24hrs earlier. Camps for the night. Journeys. Sets up camp. Discovers Person A running away with the object. Chases. Loses Person A. Hunts and finds Person A. Object disappears. Person A disappears. Aftermath. Parts in bold could be a bit repetitive but they would be much terser in Part 2, and would be overlayed with the thoughts of Person B.
I've never seen Rashomon but I've read about it a few times. It's always cited because it's such an interesting way to present the same story several different ways. The way it's structured is as a trial after someone has been killed. Each section is a different witness's testimony, and each saw it happen differently, or had different info that made their version unique. I'm assuming after a brief segment of testimony it switches to the actual event as that witness saw it or thought they did. Otherwise it would be a pretty boring movie, nothing but a courtroom drama with talking heads.
there are other books that do it in a less extreme way... for example in the long firm by Jake Arnott which is written in 5 different PoV (one per section), each PoV references some of the same events and their perception of them varies... there are also countless police procedurals and crime thrillers that tell the story from the PoV of both criminal and cop, sometimes covering the same time period from both perspectives
