Thriller is the most difficult literary genre. Reading Follett, I realized how much effort and study will make the task easier. Let me explain: Once you choose a known atmosphere, a time, and places known (that's because it's important to study) remains the choice of an effective technique. I don't know if I have chosen the right word. However, Follett - take Code to Zero for example - divides the novel into three parts, each making up a story in itself. One part is the story of the protagonist, other one is the story of the enemy, finally, there's a space dedicated to co-stars, flashbacks, and so on. This allows for several things: a plot quite complex, the possibility for a writer to take a movie, because this division into blocks allows, through the main part of the protagonist, to have a base to work for a screenplay. Obviously it isn't always exactly. But that's what I learned by reading most of his novels: The Third Twin, On Wings of Eagles, The Man from St. Petersburg, Triple, etc. The reader can easily skip the parts that feels boring - but maybe this isn't an advantage for the writer - and is better made the character development, and their evolution in the story. In your opinion, am I doing wrong? P.s I'm not English ... please, have mercy on my mistakes. :redface:
Hey thanks for the info. That might be really useful. And as for doing something wrong, no, you aren't. Write how you want. You decide whether it's right for your story or not.
I am not sure I agree that thriller is the most difficult genre. Maybe it's just me but that seems to come a tad easier than other parts. That structure is an interesting one. I can't say I'd want to stick with it strictly but I am sure a good novel can be constructed in that way.
I would contend that humor is far more difficult than thrillers. The strategies for ramping up suspense are clearly defined, but humor is a delicate balance that few can master.
I'm glad that you find this little analysis interesting, because it confirms to me that I'm following the right approach. Otherwise, I'll ask Mr. Follett to give me back the money I spent to read him! @Cogito - Yes I agree. In fact, even in the thriller is important to put some moments of humor. I love Satire in particular, and I'm sure that masters like George Carlin, Bill Hicks, Lenny Bruce, ect., did things much more difficult! Knowing what makes laugh, is still a mystery. But in a thriller you haven't a chance to say: "I was just kidding". You have to study well: Sherlock Holmes can't speak about "radio waves", because in his era, are still called "Hertzian waves", (real mistake made in the last film of 2009). In a comedy would be funny, but in a thriller, if you notice it, would be bad.
