So I came up with this idea for a story today, and I want to know if it would work, or if the plot twist would be too obvious. So the story is split into three different parts, with parts one and two following different characters. We will say that the character from part one is named Bob. So throughout the first part, Bob will explore the world of the story, doing different things, and obviously having a major goal. Throughout this part, Bob will often think about an enemy that he dreams of killing. Bob will let the reader know what this enemy looks like (this is important). In the end of part one, Bob would go through some sort of dungeon or forest or something. Things will seem as if they are drawing to a climax, and then Bob will enter a room, or area depending on where he is, and at the same time, his enemy will also enter. This is the end of the first part. The second part goes back in time (this is not known to the reader. It would be covered up by being set in a different area with very little ties to the area of part one). We now follow another character (let's call him Jim), as he also does his own things and achieves his own goals. Now, the thing is that Jim is actually Bob's enemy, and Bob is his. Neither character is good or evil, and the reader should hopefully be equally attached to each. Somehow Jim is lead to the same area as Bob (and the reader will hopefully start to piece together what is going on, if not, they get an even bigger shock), and he also enters the room at the same time. He sees his enemy; end part two. Part three brings about a fight between the two characters, and only one survives. Some readers would be neutral, not having a favourite character, and some would lean to one or the other. From then on the story continues and wraps up however suits the previous events. Now, the identities of the characters would be covered by fake names, and a change in appearance (somehow), or at least hair colour via dye. Is there anything else that would need to be covered up? So I'm curious, would this work? Obviously a lot of it has to do with how well it is covered up and executed, but would it have potential, or would it be too predictable? Hopefully I covered everything. I'd really like to know what you guys think. Thanks
I think it would be somewhat predictable, but that might not matter in a well written story. The only problem I see is for there to be a natural tendency to favor the character you read about first.
It is unsound to rely on the reader not knowing that Jim is Bob's enemy until the end of part 2. You do not know how much the reader has looked ahead, how much of the story has been spoiled for him, or whether or not he can catch on. You should write parts 1 and 2 in a way that the reader can be equally sympathetic to both characters, even if he knows that they are enemies. The way you separate parts 1 and 2 in order to build up to part 3 sounds like a clean and potentially effective organization. Its advantage is not primarily that the reader is shocked to find that the character with whom he has sympathized in part 2 is actually the enemy of the character with whom he sympathized in part 1. Its advantage is that it gives each character an uninterrupted stretch of narrative to tell his own story in depth.
So, like, in part two it explores Jim's side of the story, and you end up sympathetic for both characters? I really like the sound of that. It would be a bit like A Study in Scarlet (Sherlock Holmes) parts one and two. I think that could work really well. Yeah, I thought of that. Because of that, I think writing it like I've just said above would be better.
Yes. One of my favorite kinds of fictional experiences is when I simultaneously sympathize with two characters even though I know that they are at odds with each other.
