Jumps in narrative

[skip.knox]

I first noticed this technique with Patrick O'Brian (author of a memorable series of sea tales). There it was with battles. He would narrate the ship engagement, which often entailed going right up to boarding the enemy ship (or attacking a port). At the moment of victory, the chapter ends. The next chapter picks up some time later. Not hours later but days or even weeks later, and we learn the details of the victory second-hand.

Now I've noticed a similar technique, this time with John Le Carré, specifically in Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy. There aren't many battles in a Le Carré novel, but he jumps even more than did O'Brian. As an example, the MC George Smiley goes to meet a fellow who is key to his investigation. But we never see them meet. Instead, with the next chapter the two are already together, maybe even already engaged in conversation, and we find out what transpired in between during the dialog (occasionally in narration).

Obviously these two are far too good at their craft for it to be a mistake. It's a technique. What's it do? In O'Brian's case, I *think* he's figuring we don't really need to see the opposing captain surrender, or go through the mechanics of taking command of the conquered ship, etc. Plus, learning the details later introduces a small element of tension, as we discover some surprise (good or bad) that entailed. In Le Carré's case, I think the aim is similar. Cut out unnecessary narrative, with the bonus of being able to drop in a small surprise here and there.

I bring this up because we fantasy writers are often being told to cut, to tighten narrative. This struck me as a specific, practical technique. Thought I'd share.

 

[CupofJoe]

I like it as a technique for the most part. I see it as an extension of the "cut out the mundane". We know people eat, sleep, poop but unless it moves the narrative we don't need to read about it.
Three months of careful diplomacy; meetings in dingy clubs, switching taxis three times, and then a walk around a park for a discrete chat may be very accurate for tradecraft but it could be very boring to read.
It might be interesting to reread early LeCarre to see if his writing style changed. did he include more of the Nuts and bolts in the early stories...
I preferred Alexander Kent [aka Douglas Reman] over Patrick O'Brian, at least for the first three novels.

 

[Night Gardener]

I appreciate a jump in narrative when done well. Especially if [the jump] not only knocks out some of the mundane, but adds some mystery or unexpected happenings. Jumping indeed is useful for changes in or introductions for a new character's POV, or wanting to include vast amounts of implied time.

I plan on including a 'narrative jump' or two in my WIP... one in the lore of the world, and one after the MC performs powerful magic and is rendered unconscious for an unknown amount of time. Not only will it be terrifying for the character when she wakes up, it spares me from writing the initial round of mundane details on how she is found/recovered.

 

[skip.knox]

That's what struck me about these two authors--they cut important bits. Those were the bits that you heard about later. Always in the next chapter. For example, O'Brian would have Aubrey be winning a sea battle. The next chapter picks up with Aubrey at the Admiralty, where we learn that the prize ship sank, or that some other commander claimed it. Relevant information, but O'Brian chose not to take us through that but report it after the fact. It could have been presented dramatically; it was simply a choice he made.

That's where I got to thinking, especially after seeing it in Le Carré as well. If I were told to cut, say, 20,000 words, I could go looking for opportunities like that. IOW, not all narrative jumps are about cutting out the superfluous.

 

[Devor]

A lot of it is about pacing. Sometimes an action sequence or similar event can start to feel long. Finding an earlier moment to cut the scene can help with that.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

I’d guess this sort of cut and jump is all over the place, for a multitude of reasons and with many techniques, not always so obvious.

 

[Mythopoet]

I think Dune by Frank Herbert was the first book I encountered with sizeable jumps in the narrative. The jumps in Dune are a little jarring, if you've never encountered anything like that before, but I think they are one aspect of the genius of the book. Pretty much the whole epic battle between the Fremen and the armies of the Emperor at the climax is skipped right over. You just get the scene leading up to the battle and then the aftermath. And at first I thought that strange, but how do you do justice in mere words to the reality of these almost supernatural desert warriors exploding a huge wall of rock and then riding through the gap on giant sand worms in the middle of a deadly storm? I mean... the movies both try and fail with visuals. (And the Lynch version was utterly ridiculous.) Isn't it better to leave that up to your reader's imagination? Also, I think the skip made it possible to ratchet up the pre-battle tension and then immediately puncture it, because part of the theme of the whole series is how nothing Paul does is really a triumphant victory. His powers don't lead to a bright future. He's always trying to stave off disaster and failing. So thematically, skipping the epic bit fits.

 

[CupofJoe]

That's what struck me about these two authors--they cut important bits. Those were the bits that you heard about later. Always in the next chapter. For example, O'Brian would have Aubrey be winning a sea battle. The next chapter picks up with Aubrey at the Admiralty, where we learn that the prize ship sank, or that some other commander claimed it. Relevant information, but O'Brian chose not to take us through that but report it after the fact. It could have been presented dramatically; it was simply a choice he made.
That's where I got to thinking, especially after seeing it in Le Carré as well. If I were told to cut, say, 20,000 words, I could go looking for opportunities like that. IOW, not all narrative jumps are about cutting out the superfluous.

It is sort of the antitheses of what film would do...
There you would see the action and not the aftermath. The visual would win out over the consequences. In how many cop-films do you see a Cop shooting someone and then nothing about the three months of investigations that would go in in to the circumstances of the shooting...
I think that O'Brian and LeCarre are choosing to focus on the effect of an event and not on the event. It the WHY and not the HOW that matter.
In O'Brian's case it could also be that in 21 books with 2-3 naval engagements a book, there wasn't a fresh way to write the battle [or he was bored with writing them] and if the battle wasn't the focus of the plot he moved passed it to get to what that fight meant on a wider/different stage.
And as you elude it does give you the possibility to be remarkably concise with the narrative.
It could in a lesser hand be used for info-dumping.

I mean... the movies both try and fail with visuals. (And the Lynch version was utterly ridiculous.)

Okay I agree... but the worms looks so Cool in Lynch's version...

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

I've heard it said that a lot of readers skip fight/battle scenes. Often, they're done poorly and that's probably why, or too many in the same story add a certain monotony. Now, I'm not saying Herbert or LeCarre would write poor fight or surveillance scenes. Likely, they'd do just fine.

Maybe though, these narrative jumps were employed to blow past bits both writers felt were boring. Keep in mind, we don't know the naval battle or the days of tedious surveillance weren't written. They very well might have written them and chose to cut them in editing.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

In the Hobbit, isn’t most of the Battle of Five Armies skipped over? It’s been decades since I read it, so I don’t trust my memory after a couple movie versions. But seems Tolkien skipped it for the most part. That would be the first major skip of my life if my memory is right, LOL.

 

[CupofJoe]

In the Hobbit, isn’t most of the Battle of Five Armies skipped over? It’s been decades since I read it, so I don’t trust my memory after a couple movie versions. But seems Tolkien skipped it for the most part. That would be the first major skip of my life if my memory is right, LOL.

Deosn't Bilbo get knocked out fairly early on and when he awakes the fighting is all done?

 

[pmmg]

I've been known to skip a fight scene or two, heck, I've been known to skip a lot of things. In writing them, I do sometimes wish I could just skip them as well (and I probably would depending on the story itself).

Thing is, I don't really care about the blow by blow, just who wins and what it means. IMO, the blow by blow needs to add something to the story and itself be revealing about the characters, otherwise, its just taking up space. I have written out fight scenes, and in them, I do try to make them quick and understood, but battles are very complex things themselves. They probably need their own thread. In the Current WIP, the battles tend to be of a limited perspective, whoever happens to be the POV character at the time, and they done know what is really going on, where the line has cracked, or where they are most needed and all that, they just do what they must and hope it is not too bad. I try to give a type of overview to the reader, but if the character does not know, the reader likely wont either. But, I do think battle do kind of drone on, often because it takes a lot of space to write out all the steps to the dance. I think more skipping might not be all that bad.

As for skipping ahead in story line. I wonder about that greatly, cause the story I am writing does have portions where things just skip ahead. In between story lines years may sometimes pass. I think it will work out, but I am a little concerned. Thing is though, the story will tell you if its okay. If I have a character getting on a boat at the end of one chapter and arriving at a new port in another, it just kind of means nothing important happened on journey across the water. One use I thought was clever, was in the twilight books (least I think it was twilight, now I don't recall...) there is a place where the chapter just says "nothing happened' or something like that. It worked. Skipped past a lot of unimportant stuff, showed the drudgery of waiting and waiting and got on with story again when stuff started happening. I've seen other books do similar stuff, but not often. If I recall, I think Jane Eyre has a chapter like this as well....

I don't feel that I would make the jump though, unless A) what happened could be easily implied or 2) what happened was meant to stay a mystery...and not in a cheap way. Otherwise, if its important, its gotta be shown.