Are there any established rules for splitting books into parts, chapters, sections etc?












9















I am working with an author, whose approach is to write her text, approximately divided by indicators where she wants the breaks to be, with the idea that later she and I would improve the breaks and decide, what will the sections become: parts, chapters, sections, etc. This is mostly based on the LaTeX memoir document class which I used to typeset the book.



The book is a science fiction novel, but not purely science fiction. It has elements of a psychological drama and bits of other styles, such as crime and action. The overall volume of the manuscript is around 700 pages and she is planning a sequel or several under the same title with different subtitles. Currently it is divided into 8 chapters and each has from 2 to 10 sections with 8 being most common.



The work is almost complete and I have typeset it for the time being as chapters and sections, but now we both are debating, whether our chapters look rather like parts, and our sections should be chapters. The only problem is that early in the manuscript the chapters are much shorter, and increase in length as the text goes.



The chapters currently contain hugely different locations as the plot moves across the book's universe. The sections contain more of a high-level topic as the plot develops within one location. We are kind of content with this sectioning and are not necessarily looking to change it - we are only looking for any well-articulated and commonly accepted reasons to improve what we have.



We are aware of this question and agree with both answers; however, they are more than 6 years old. Are there any commonly accepted guidelines for choosing parts vs chapters vs sections for the work described above and where could we read about it?










share|improve this question




















  • 3





    Why is it a problem that the answers are 6 years old? If I remember correctly, even the Iliad is divided into chapters (so you can skip the infamous ship's catalog!), and the problem space and format has not changed much since than.

    – pipe
    May 13 at 11:43
















9















I am working with an author, whose approach is to write her text, approximately divided by indicators where she wants the breaks to be, with the idea that later she and I would improve the breaks and decide, what will the sections become: parts, chapters, sections, etc. This is mostly based on the LaTeX memoir document class which I used to typeset the book.



The book is a science fiction novel, but not purely science fiction. It has elements of a psychological drama and bits of other styles, such as crime and action. The overall volume of the manuscript is around 700 pages and she is planning a sequel or several under the same title with different subtitles. Currently it is divided into 8 chapters and each has from 2 to 10 sections with 8 being most common.



The work is almost complete and I have typeset it for the time being as chapters and sections, but now we both are debating, whether our chapters look rather like parts, and our sections should be chapters. The only problem is that early in the manuscript the chapters are much shorter, and increase in length as the text goes.



The chapters currently contain hugely different locations as the plot moves across the book's universe. The sections contain more of a high-level topic as the plot develops within one location. We are kind of content with this sectioning and are not necessarily looking to change it - we are only looking for any well-articulated and commonly accepted reasons to improve what we have.



We are aware of this question and agree with both answers; however, they are more than 6 years old. Are there any commonly accepted guidelines for choosing parts vs chapters vs sections for the work described above and where could we read about it?










share|improve this question




















  • 3





    Why is it a problem that the answers are 6 years old? If I remember correctly, even the Iliad is divided into chapters (so you can skip the infamous ship's catalog!), and the problem space and format has not changed much since than.

    – pipe
    May 13 at 11:43














9












9








9


2






I am working with an author, whose approach is to write her text, approximately divided by indicators where she wants the breaks to be, with the idea that later she and I would improve the breaks and decide, what will the sections become: parts, chapters, sections, etc. This is mostly based on the LaTeX memoir document class which I used to typeset the book.



The book is a science fiction novel, but not purely science fiction. It has elements of a psychological drama and bits of other styles, such as crime and action. The overall volume of the manuscript is around 700 pages and she is planning a sequel or several under the same title with different subtitles. Currently it is divided into 8 chapters and each has from 2 to 10 sections with 8 being most common.



The work is almost complete and I have typeset it for the time being as chapters and sections, but now we both are debating, whether our chapters look rather like parts, and our sections should be chapters. The only problem is that early in the manuscript the chapters are much shorter, and increase in length as the text goes.



The chapters currently contain hugely different locations as the plot moves across the book's universe. The sections contain more of a high-level topic as the plot develops within one location. We are kind of content with this sectioning and are not necessarily looking to change it - we are only looking for any well-articulated and commonly accepted reasons to improve what we have.



We are aware of this question and agree with both answers; however, they are more than 6 years old. Are there any commonly accepted guidelines for choosing parts vs chapters vs sections for the work described above and where could we read about it?










share|improve this question
















I am working with an author, whose approach is to write her text, approximately divided by indicators where she wants the breaks to be, with the idea that later she and I would improve the breaks and decide, what will the sections become: parts, chapters, sections, etc. This is mostly based on the LaTeX memoir document class which I used to typeset the book.



The book is a science fiction novel, but not purely science fiction. It has elements of a psychological drama and bits of other styles, such as crime and action. The overall volume of the manuscript is around 700 pages and she is planning a sequel or several under the same title with different subtitles. Currently it is divided into 8 chapters and each has from 2 to 10 sections with 8 being most common.



The work is almost complete and I have typeset it for the time being as chapters and sections, but now we both are debating, whether our chapters look rather like parts, and our sections should be chapters. The only problem is that early in the manuscript the chapters are much shorter, and increase in length as the text goes.



The chapters currently contain hugely different locations as the plot moves across the book's universe. The sections contain more of a high-level topic as the plot develops within one location. We are kind of content with this sectioning and are not necessarily looking to change it - we are only looking for any well-articulated and commonly accepted reasons to improve what we have.



We are aware of this question and agree with both answers; however, they are more than 6 years old. Are there any commonly accepted guidelines for choosing parts vs chapters vs sections for the work described above and where could we read about it?







novel formatting chapters






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited May 12 at 16:56









Cyn

23k150108




23k150108










asked May 12 at 14:14









user39231user39231

462




462








  • 3





    Why is it a problem that the answers are 6 years old? If I remember correctly, even the Iliad is divided into chapters (so you can skip the infamous ship's catalog!), and the problem space and format has not changed much since than.

    – pipe
    May 13 at 11:43














  • 3





    Why is it a problem that the answers are 6 years old? If I remember correctly, even the Iliad is divided into chapters (so you can skip the infamous ship's catalog!), and the problem space and format has not changed much since than.

    – pipe
    May 13 at 11:43








3




3





Why is it a problem that the answers are 6 years old? If I remember correctly, even the Iliad is divided into chapters (so you can skip the infamous ship's catalog!), and the problem space and format has not changed much since than.

– pipe
May 13 at 11:43





Why is it a problem that the answers are 6 years old? If I remember correctly, even the Iliad is divided into chapters (so you can skip the infamous ship's catalog!), and the problem space and format has not changed much since than.

– pipe
May 13 at 11:43










6 Answers
6






active

oldest

votes


















20














It sounds like the divisions emerged organically and intrinsically from the story – that's how it should be. Don't worry that some are long and some are short. That's not a flaw.



Forcing the story to fit a rigid, arbitrary amount of pages – like a screenplay that must introduce pre-requisite conflicts at "percentages" of running time to fit cinema turnover schedules or TV commercial breaks – is much likelier to lead to narrative flaws, even if clever writers are good at constructing stories that make such contrived "conflict beats" seem natural.



Structure should fit the story, not the other way around



Book chapters are not TV episodes. Novels are not Hollywood screenplays (hopefully). Most readers will not conform their reading sessions to these structures, the way it would work with timed-media where viewers are passive to external commercial forces like distribution and opening weekend box office returns. Sure, novels can be structured this way – like a movie or TV episode – but that only makes sense if the goal is to "dumb it down" for readers programmed by mass-media entertainment, or if the author hopes to sell the novel as a treatment for Hollywood. Novels are more often about characters and ideas, movies are about action and conflict. In timed-media, character development and ideas are secondary to pacing. That's not right or wrong, it's just a different narrative medium.



Chapters denote character turns and story progression



I would call the shorter divisions "chapters" – although there is no obligation to number them or label them.



Since they emerge from the story, rather than the other way around, it's likely the author is using the divisions to punctuate character "turns" and story development, not contrived conflicts aimed at the easily bored, impatient attention spans of passive viewers. Conflict-narratives are made more complicated, and resolved, within a set conflict-arc. Character narratives are not so neat, and in most cases rich personalities do not "solve" their flaws with a pat psychological self-realization at the midway point, or a simple conflict resolution at the top of Act 3.



A chapter might be short because that's where the emphasis of change needs to be. Character turns are often subtle and incomplete, so a non-diegetic chapter break can can be a narrative tool to cue the reader that something significant has occurred, like a pregnant pause or a fade to black. They have a moment to stop and consider what has just happened.



Sections are bottlenecks



I would call the longer divisions "sections" but again there's no obligation to label them at all.



Since they (roughly?) reflect locations, and the story is about world-hopping, it makes sense to name these longer sections after their locations. It gives a feeling of importance to the structure, like a point of no return. Characters cannot go back and "fix" an earlier conflict on another planet, that opportunity has passed. The story moves on and leaves certain elements and story threads behind. A tonal shift, or re-focusing of the story (characters and goals) seems likely at these bottlenecks. For the reader it's a signal that everything has changed as a new phase begins.



2001: A Space Odyssey is a very clear example. It breaks its story into "chapters" that progress the character and conflict, and "parts" that are clearly labeled and are profoundly different in tone, cast of characters, and story goals.



TL;DR



Call the shorter divisions "chapters" and allow the book to present those emphasis markers where necessary.



Name the longer sections after the planets – or a similar neutral/factual term that signals the last "world" has been left behind and a new one begins.






share|improve this answer





















  • 1





    Hi wetcircuit, i don't understand part of your answer but it's not germane to this stack. I've created a question about it on Movies, I hope you'll take a look.

    – Steve Vaught
    May 12 at 21:19






  • 1





    This answer feels a little bit rude towards TV / movie viewers, and I don't think this adds anything to the answer.

    – DreamConspiracy
    May 13 at 8:45



















8














Short answer: break where it makes sense.



Some points at which breaks are traditionally made or ways to define breaks include:




  • change of site, the place the action is taking place changes.


  • change in POV character, someone different starts telling the narrative.


  • change in auxiliary characters, the people the narrator is interacting with changes.



The actual length of any given section of the story isn't that important as long as the break points make sense, some chapters may be longer or shorter and chapters may extend or shorten as the narrative progresses. Unless you're looking at a subgenre like the 50 word story then word count, whether as a whole or any particular division, shouldn't be a primary concern—telling the story is the main thing.






share|improve this answer

































    2














    There are major works of SF that follow a structure like that. David Brin’s The Uplift War is the first example to come to mind. It’s divided into seven parts (each of which jumps forward in time to a new phase of the war) with 111 chapters, each of which is named after its viewpoint character and about six pages long on average. (It’s part of a series written in the same style.) Another variant I’ve seen is to insert section or chapter breaks headed by the location, or location and time.



    A number of “classic” SF novels are divided into two or three “Books” (other than the volumes printed and sold). For example, the novel Dune is divided into Books I–III and Lord of the Rings into six “Books,” so that each volume of the trilogy was divided in half. Tolkien, a scholar of Medieval England, was following the conceit that he was translating a collection of a multi-volume work, and might have been trying to evoke the sense of ancient works written on scrolls, which are shorter than a modern volume and usually printed that way today. This device allowed Tolkien to use a parallel story structure for the second and third volumes. The break in the middle of The Fellowship of the Ring instead marked a major turning-point in the story, where the main characters stopped running for their lives and learned about their mission. Frank Herbert had read and lifted several terms and lines from The Sabres of Paradise. While I don’t know if it also inspired any of the story structure, this source of his did have three parts.



    A “Part” or “Book” containing multiple chapters usually represents a major shift, like a new stage of the main character's life, a jump in time, a change in viewpoint character, a change of setting, or a switch to a parallel plotline. If one picks up where the other left off, it’s probably a chapter.



    Chapters and parts don’t need to be close to each other in length.



    Numbered or named sections would be more unusual, the memoir class has commands to typeset them “by just leaving a blank line or two between a pair of paragraphs, or there might be some decorative item like three or four asterisks, or a fleuron or two,” (according to the manual). That would be more conventional in a novel.






    share|improve this answer

































      1














      I understand you have short and long chapters.



      How about splitting the longer ones into several smaller chapters?



      The only rules I can come up with for chapters are:




      • The reader uses them as a "reading unit" so they should probably be about equal in size and not too long (but I've seen books with basically one chapter per page...)

      • The reader might put the book down when having finished one chapter. So you might want to make sure the chapter ends on a point where the story is interesting enough to get the reader to come back the next day.


      Apart from that, I don't think anything says a chapter have to look in a special way.



      I've seen authors switching POV in the middle of a chapter, or keeping a POV per chapter, or having many chapters in one POV followed by one chapter with many POVs, or jumping back in time in the middle of a chapter, or having a separate chapter for a flashback. The same goes for settings and plots.



      The division of a text into chapters is probably one of the things in writing that has least rules of all.



      This is especially true with regards to story structure and dramaturgy. Your division of the story into chapters will almost definitely not affect the overall structure and story arc. Unless you move chapters around...



      You could almost think of chapters as the packages your new IKEA furniture comes in. You rip it apart and put it together in your living room, regardless of if it comes in one, or five packages.



      Your reader will do the same with your chapters and build your story in their mind if it's in one or 50 chapters.



      I was about to say, parts have more logic to them, but when I picked an example I wanted to use, it turned out, there wasn't that much logic there. ("The Passage" by Justin Cronin, I thought it was divided into parts separated by time jumps, but I don't think so—if I could just find that book and verify that...)



      Or, as in for instance "The Cloud Atlas", where parts are an important element of the structure. Each part contains one half of a completely different type of story in that book.



      Parts pretty much follow the same logic, or lack thereof, as chapters. Maybe, because they are optional, a reader might want them to have a more logical reason to be there than chapters.



      I've sometimes experimented with putting an act in a part each, but I don't think it's needed. In fact, it could seem blatant and make the reader aware that you are throwing acts at them.






      share|improve this answer

































        0














        Your first step is to decide on the levels of division. What is a first level division, a second level division, etc.? Once you've done that, you need to decide what to call them. You have many options here, as other answers have shown. The “read in one sitting” sections should probably be called chapters. Chapter subdivisions probably don’t need to be named at all: you can have a fancy divider (this is traditional), or perhaps just a small gap between paragraphs, which seems to be more common these days.



        The larger sections, comprising a few chapters each, could reasonably be called books, sections, parts or something else. (Actually, the words section and part are so flexible that they could also be applied to smaller bits, such as chapter subdivisions, if you did wish to name them.)



        Another option, which I have not seen covered in other answers, would be to pick a more whimsical naming scheme which matches your story. Are there any terms from your narrative that you could draw on in picking vocabulary. Many sci-fi works speak of a galaxy/universe divided into sectors. Your narrative parts take place in different areas, different sectors. Could you use the word sector to name these divisions? Other examples will occur to you as you look over your narrative.






        share|improve this answer































          0














          As the OP mentions LaTeX, this answer uses "part" in the sense of that typesetting system, i.e. as the next bigger hierarchie above "section/chapter" and below "physical book".



          While I have not enjoyed a formal writer's education (i.e., university or whatever kind of school writers could go to), I have also never heard of formal "rules" for splitting books or other texts. "Rule" in the sense that there is some kind of prescription how to do it.



          But some choices seem to be pretty popular. I.e., splitting simply to avoid paper books too large to be handled (and this is different in different countries; i.e., "The Reality Dysfunction" trilogy had 3 very thick books in some countries, and 2x3=6 in others).



          But my favourite aspect is if the author really takes the opportunity to bring an overarching "part" structure into the story itself. For example by doing very large time- or place-based jumps at "part boundaries". For example, "The Earthsea Quartet" or "A Canticle for Leibowith" make very good use of that. Both would very well fit into a standard continuing format (they are short enough to comfortably fit into a single, even thin book), but due to their parts, sometimes with ominous titles, they really set the tone for what is to come.



          Also, and this may be old-fashioned, sometimes it is very fitting if as a reader you can see the names of the parts beforehand, alltogether. This would probably not be so wise for the smaller chapter names (if you give them names at all) because it would spoil too much; but for large parts it has a very eerie effect on me to kind of know the scope of what's to come already. Obviously this is not so trivial, but if done right... bliss.



          Chapter breaks are a great opportunity to add small pre-faces for each chapter (e.g., Neal Asher used this to absolutely astounding effect in "The Skinner", which I don't remember much of except those little encyclopedia-like bits).



          Hope that helps. Aside from that, if you have no preferences either way, I'd simply look at how others do it and derive your own rules (number of pages per chapter etc.).






          share|improve this answer
























            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "166"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fwriting.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f45139%2fare-there-any-established-rules-for-splitting-books-into-parts-chapters-sectio%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            6 Answers
            6






            active

            oldest

            votes








            6 Answers
            6






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            20














            It sounds like the divisions emerged organically and intrinsically from the story – that's how it should be. Don't worry that some are long and some are short. That's not a flaw.



            Forcing the story to fit a rigid, arbitrary amount of pages – like a screenplay that must introduce pre-requisite conflicts at "percentages" of running time to fit cinema turnover schedules or TV commercial breaks – is much likelier to lead to narrative flaws, even if clever writers are good at constructing stories that make such contrived "conflict beats" seem natural.



            Structure should fit the story, not the other way around



            Book chapters are not TV episodes. Novels are not Hollywood screenplays (hopefully). Most readers will not conform their reading sessions to these structures, the way it would work with timed-media where viewers are passive to external commercial forces like distribution and opening weekend box office returns. Sure, novels can be structured this way – like a movie or TV episode – but that only makes sense if the goal is to "dumb it down" for readers programmed by mass-media entertainment, or if the author hopes to sell the novel as a treatment for Hollywood. Novels are more often about characters and ideas, movies are about action and conflict. In timed-media, character development and ideas are secondary to pacing. That's not right or wrong, it's just a different narrative medium.



            Chapters denote character turns and story progression



            I would call the shorter divisions "chapters" – although there is no obligation to number them or label them.



            Since they emerge from the story, rather than the other way around, it's likely the author is using the divisions to punctuate character "turns" and story development, not contrived conflicts aimed at the easily bored, impatient attention spans of passive viewers. Conflict-narratives are made more complicated, and resolved, within a set conflict-arc. Character narratives are not so neat, and in most cases rich personalities do not "solve" their flaws with a pat psychological self-realization at the midway point, or a simple conflict resolution at the top of Act 3.



            A chapter might be short because that's where the emphasis of change needs to be. Character turns are often subtle and incomplete, so a non-diegetic chapter break can can be a narrative tool to cue the reader that something significant has occurred, like a pregnant pause or a fade to black. They have a moment to stop and consider what has just happened.



            Sections are bottlenecks



            I would call the longer divisions "sections" but again there's no obligation to label them at all.



            Since they (roughly?) reflect locations, and the story is about world-hopping, it makes sense to name these longer sections after their locations. It gives a feeling of importance to the structure, like a point of no return. Characters cannot go back and "fix" an earlier conflict on another planet, that opportunity has passed. The story moves on and leaves certain elements and story threads behind. A tonal shift, or re-focusing of the story (characters and goals) seems likely at these bottlenecks. For the reader it's a signal that everything has changed as a new phase begins.



            2001: A Space Odyssey is a very clear example. It breaks its story into "chapters" that progress the character and conflict, and "parts" that are clearly labeled and are profoundly different in tone, cast of characters, and story goals.



            TL;DR



            Call the shorter divisions "chapters" and allow the book to present those emphasis markers where necessary.



            Name the longer sections after the planets – or a similar neutral/factual term that signals the last "world" has been left behind and a new one begins.






            share|improve this answer





















            • 1





              Hi wetcircuit, i don't understand part of your answer but it's not germane to this stack. I've created a question about it on Movies, I hope you'll take a look.

              – Steve Vaught
              May 12 at 21:19






            • 1





              This answer feels a little bit rude towards TV / movie viewers, and I don't think this adds anything to the answer.

              – DreamConspiracy
              May 13 at 8:45
















            20














            It sounds like the divisions emerged organically and intrinsically from the story – that's how it should be. Don't worry that some are long and some are short. That's not a flaw.



            Forcing the story to fit a rigid, arbitrary amount of pages – like a screenplay that must introduce pre-requisite conflicts at "percentages" of running time to fit cinema turnover schedules or TV commercial breaks – is much likelier to lead to narrative flaws, even if clever writers are good at constructing stories that make such contrived "conflict beats" seem natural.



            Structure should fit the story, not the other way around



            Book chapters are not TV episodes. Novels are not Hollywood screenplays (hopefully). Most readers will not conform their reading sessions to these structures, the way it would work with timed-media where viewers are passive to external commercial forces like distribution and opening weekend box office returns. Sure, novels can be structured this way – like a movie or TV episode – but that only makes sense if the goal is to "dumb it down" for readers programmed by mass-media entertainment, or if the author hopes to sell the novel as a treatment for Hollywood. Novels are more often about characters and ideas, movies are about action and conflict. In timed-media, character development and ideas are secondary to pacing. That's not right or wrong, it's just a different narrative medium.



            Chapters denote character turns and story progression



            I would call the shorter divisions "chapters" – although there is no obligation to number them or label them.



            Since they emerge from the story, rather than the other way around, it's likely the author is using the divisions to punctuate character "turns" and story development, not contrived conflicts aimed at the easily bored, impatient attention spans of passive viewers. Conflict-narratives are made more complicated, and resolved, within a set conflict-arc. Character narratives are not so neat, and in most cases rich personalities do not "solve" their flaws with a pat psychological self-realization at the midway point, or a simple conflict resolution at the top of Act 3.



            A chapter might be short because that's where the emphasis of change needs to be. Character turns are often subtle and incomplete, so a non-diegetic chapter break can can be a narrative tool to cue the reader that something significant has occurred, like a pregnant pause or a fade to black. They have a moment to stop and consider what has just happened.



            Sections are bottlenecks



            I would call the longer divisions "sections" but again there's no obligation to label them at all.



            Since they (roughly?) reflect locations, and the story is about world-hopping, it makes sense to name these longer sections after their locations. It gives a feeling of importance to the structure, like a point of no return. Characters cannot go back and "fix" an earlier conflict on another planet, that opportunity has passed. The story moves on and leaves certain elements and story threads behind. A tonal shift, or re-focusing of the story (characters and goals) seems likely at these bottlenecks. For the reader it's a signal that everything has changed as a new phase begins.



            2001: A Space Odyssey is a very clear example. It breaks its story into "chapters" that progress the character and conflict, and "parts" that are clearly labeled and are profoundly different in tone, cast of characters, and story goals.



            TL;DR



            Call the shorter divisions "chapters" and allow the book to present those emphasis markers where necessary.



            Name the longer sections after the planets – or a similar neutral/factual term that signals the last "world" has been left behind and a new one begins.






            share|improve this answer





















            • 1





              Hi wetcircuit, i don't understand part of your answer but it's not germane to this stack. I've created a question about it on Movies, I hope you'll take a look.

              – Steve Vaught
              May 12 at 21:19






            • 1





              This answer feels a little bit rude towards TV / movie viewers, and I don't think this adds anything to the answer.

              – DreamConspiracy
              May 13 at 8:45














            20












            20








            20







            It sounds like the divisions emerged organically and intrinsically from the story – that's how it should be. Don't worry that some are long and some are short. That's not a flaw.



            Forcing the story to fit a rigid, arbitrary amount of pages – like a screenplay that must introduce pre-requisite conflicts at "percentages" of running time to fit cinema turnover schedules or TV commercial breaks – is much likelier to lead to narrative flaws, even if clever writers are good at constructing stories that make such contrived "conflict beats" seem natural.



            Structure should fit the story, not the other way around



            Book chapters are not TV episodes. Novels are not Hollywood screenplays (hopefully). Most readers will not conform their reading sessions to these structures, the way it would work with timed-media where viewers are passive to external commercial forces like distribution and opening weekend box office returns. Sure, novels can be structured this way – like a movie or TV episode – but that only makes sense if the goal is to "dumb it down" for readers programmed by mass-media entertainment, or if the author hopes to sell the novel as a treatment for Hollywood. Novels are more often about characters and ideas, movies are about action and conflict. In timed-media, character development and ideas are secondary to pacing. That's not right or wrong, it's just a different narrative medium.



            Chapters denote character turns and story progression



            I would call the shorter divisions "chapters" – although there is no obligation to number them or label them.



            Since they emerge from the story, rather than the other way around, it's likely the author is using the divisions to punctuate character "turns" and story development, not contrived conflicts aimed at the easily bored, impatient attention spans of passive viewers. Conflict-narratives are made more complicated, and resolved, within a set conflict-arc. Character narratives are not so neat, and in most cases rich personalities do not "solve" their flaws with a pat psychological self-realization at the midway point, or a simple conflict resolution at the top of Act 3.



            A chapter might be short because that's where the emphasis of change needs to be. Character turns are often subtle and incomplete, so a non-diegetic chapter break can can be a narrative tool to cue the reader that something significant has occurred, like a pregnant pause or a fade to black. They have a moment to stop and consider what has just happened.



            Sections are bottlenecks



            I would call the longer divisions "sections" but again there's no obligation to label them at all.



            Since they (roughly?) reflect locations, and the story is about world-hopping, it makes sense to name these longer sections after their locations. It gives a feeling of importance to the structure, like a point of no return. Characters cannot go back and "fix" an earlier conflict on another planet, that opportunity has passed. The story moves on and leaves certain elements and story threads behind. A tonal shift, or re-focusing of the story (characters and goals) seems likely at these bottlenecks. For the reader it's a signal that everything has changed as a new phase begins.



            2001: A Space Odyssey is a very clear example. It breaks its story into "chapters" that progress the character and conflict, and "parts" that are clearly labeled and are profoundly different in tone, cast of characters, and story goals.



            TL;DR



            Call the shorter divisions "chapters" and allow the book to present those emphasis markers where necessary.



            Name the longer sections after the planets – or a similar neutral/factual term that signals the last "world" has been left behind and a new one begins.






            share|improve this answer















            It sounds like the divisions emerged organically and intrinsically from the story – that's how it should be. Don't worry that some are long and some are short. That's not a flaw.



            Forcing the story to fit a rigid, arbitrary amount of pages – like a screenplay that must introduce pre-requisite conflicts at "percentages" of running time to fit cinema turnover schedules or TV commercial breaks – is much likelier to lead to narrative flaws, even if clever writers are good at constructing stories that make such contrived "conflict beats" seem natural.



            Structure should fit the story, not the other way around



            Book chapters are not TV episodes. Novels are not Hollywood screenplays (hopefully). Most readers will not conform their reading sessions to these structures, the way it would work with timed-media where viewers are passive to external commercial forces like distribution and opening weekend box office returns. Sure, novels can be structured this way – like a movie or TV episode – but that only makes sense if the goal is to "dumb it down" for readers programmed by mass-media entertainment, or if the author hopes to sell the novel as a treatment for Hollywood. Novels are more often about characters and ideas, movies are about action and conflict. In timed-media, character development and ideas are secondary to pacing. That's not right or wrong, it's just a different narrative medium.



            Chapters denote character turns and story progression



            I would call the shorter divisions "chapters" – although there is no obligation to number them or label them.



            Since they emerge from the story, rather than the other way around, it's likely the author is using the divisions to punctuate character "turns" and story development, not contrived conflicts aimed at the easily bored, impatient attention spans of passive viewers. Conflict-narratives are made more complicated, and resolved, within a set conflict-arc. Character narratives are not so neat, and in most cases rich personalities do not "solve" their flaws with a pat psychological self-realization at the midway point, or a simple conflict resolution at the top of Act 3.



            A chapter might be short because that's where the emphasis of change needs to be. Character turns are often subtle and incomplete, so a non-diegetic chapter break can can be a narrative tool to cue the reader that something significant has occurred, like a pregnant pause or a fade to black. They have a moment to stop and consider what has just happened.



            Sections are bottlenecks



            I would call the longer divisions "sections" but again there's no obligation to label them at all.



            Since they (roughly?) reflect locations, and the story is about world-hopping, it makes sense to name these longer sections after their locations. It gives a feeling of importance to the structure, like a point of no return. Characters cannot go back and "fix" an earlier conflict on another planet, that opportunity has passed. The story moves on and leaves certain elements and story threads behind. A tonal shift, or re-focusing of the story (characters and goals) seems likely at these bottlenecks. For the reader it's a signal that everything has changed as a new phase begins.



            2001: A Space Odyssey is a very clear example. It breaks its story into "chapters" that progress the character and conflict, and "parts" that are clearly labeled and are profoundly different in tone, cast of characters, and story goals.



            TL;DR



            Call the shorter divisions "chapters" and allow the book to present those emphasis markers where necessary.



            Name the longer sections after the planets – or a similar neutral/factual term that signals the last "world" has been left behind and a new one begins.







            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited May 13 at 12:00









            a CVn

            2,89731834




            2,89731834










            answered May 12 at 15:45









            wetcircuitwetcircuit

            16.2k22978




            16.2k22978








            • 1





              Hi wetcircuit, i don't understand part of your answer but it's not germane to this stack. I've created a question about it on Movies, I hope you'll take a look.

              – Steve Vaught
              May 12 at 21:19






            • 1





              This answer feels a little bit rude towards TV / movie viewers, and I don't think this adds anything to the answer.

              – DreamConspiracy
              May 13 at 8:45














            • 1





              Hi wetcircuit, i don't understand part of your answer but it's not germane to this stack. I've created a question about it on Movies, I hope you'll take a look.

              – Steve Vaught
              May 12 at 21:19






            • 1





              This answer feels a little bit rude towards TV / movie viewers, and I don't think this adds anything to the answer.

              – DreamConspiracy
              May 13 at 8:45








            1




            1





            Hi wetcircuit, i don't understand part of your answer but it's not germane to this stack. I've created a question about it on Movies, I hope you'll take a look.

            – Steve Vaught
            May 12 at 21:19





            Hi wetcircuit, i don't understand part of your answer but it's not germane to this stack. I've created a question about it on Movies, I hope you'll take a look.

            – Steve Vaught
            May 12 at 21:19




            1




            1





            This answer feels a little bit rude towards TV / movie viewers, and I don't think this adds anything to the answer.

            – DreamConspiracy
            May 13 at 8:45





            This answer feels a little bit rude towards TV / movie viewers, and I don't think this adds anything to the answer.

            – DreamConspiracy
            May 13 at 8:45











            8














            Short answer: break where it makes sense.



            Some points at which breaks are traditionally made or ways to define breaks include:




            • change of site, the place the action is taking place changes.


            • change in POV character, someone different starts telling the narrative.


            • change in auxiliary characters, the people the narrator is interacting with changes.



            The actual length of any given section of the story isn't that important as long as the break points make sense, some chapters may be longer or shorter and chapters may extend or shorten as the narrative progresses. Unless you're looking at a subgenre like the 50 word story then word count, whether as a whole or any particular division, shouldn't be a primary concern—telling the story is the main thing.






            share|improve this answer






























              8














              Short answer: break where it makes sense.



              Some points at which breaks are traditionally made or ways to define breaks include:




              • change of site, the place the action is taking place changes.


              • change in POV character, someone different starts telling the narrative.


              • change in auxiliary characters, the people the narrator is interacting with changes.



              The actual length of any given section of the story isn't that important as long as the break points make sense, some chapters may be longer or shorter and chapters may extend or shorten as the narrative progresses. Unless you're looking at a subgenre like the 50 word story then word count, whether as a whole or any particular division, shouldn't be a primary concern—telling the story is the main thing.






              share|improve this answer




























                8












                8








                8







                Short answer: break where it makes sense.



                Some points at which breaks are traditionally made or ways to define breaks include:




                • change of site, the place the action is taking place changes.


                • change in POV character, someone different starts telling the narrative.


                • change in auxiliary characters, the people the narrator is interacting with changes.



                The actual length of any given section of the story isn't that important as long as the break points make sense, some chapters may be longer or shorter and chapters may extend or shorten as the narrative progresses. Unless you're looking at a subgenre like the 50 word story then word count, whether as a whole or any particular division, shouldn't be a primary concern—telling the story is the main thing.






                share|improve this answer















                Short answer: break where it makes sense.



                Some points at which breaks are traditionally made or ways to define breaks include:




                • change of site, the place the action is taking place changes.


                • change in POV character, someone different starts telling the narrative.


                • change in auxiliary characters, the people the narrator is interacting with changes.



                The actual length of any given section of the story isn't that important as long as the break points make sense, some chapters may be longer or shorter and chapters may extend or shorten as the narrative progresses. Unless you're looking at a subgenre like the 50 word story then word count, whether as a whole or any particular division, shouldn't be a primary concern—telling the story is the main thing.







                share|improve this answer














                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer








                edited May 13 at 11:10









                Community

                1




                1










                answered May 12 at 16:17









                AshAsh

                6,624836




                6,624836























                    2














                    There are major works of SF that follow a structure like that. David Brin’s The Uplift War is the first example to come to mind. It’s divided into seven parts (each of which jumps forward in time to a new phase of the war) with 111 chapters, each of which is named after its viewpoint character and about six pages long on average. (It’s part of a series written in the same style.) Another variant I’ve seen is to insert section or chapter breaks headed by the location, or location and time.



                    A number of “classic” SF novels are divided into two or three “Books” (other than the volumes printed and sold). For example, the novel Dune is divided into Books I–III and Lord of the Rings into six “Books,” so that each volume of the trilogy was divided in half. Tolkien, a scholar of Medieval England, was following the conceit that he was translating a collection of a multi-volume work, and might have been trying to evoke the sense of ancient works written on scrolls, which are shorter than a modern volume and usually printed that way today. This device allowed Tolkien to use a parallel story structure for the second and third volumes. The break in the middle of The Fellowship of the Ring instead marked a major turning-point in the story, where the main characters stopped running for their lives and learned about their mission. Frank Herbert had read and lifted several terms and lines from The Sabres of Paradise. While I don’t know if it also inspired any of the story structure, this source of his did have three parts.



                    A “Part” or “Book” containing multiple chapters usually represents a major shift, like a new stage of the main character's life, a jump in time, a change in viewpoint character, a change of setting, or a switch to a parallel plotline. If one picks up where the other left off, it’s probably a chapter.



                    Chapters and parts don’t need to be close to each other in length.



                    Numbered or named sections would be more unusual, the memoir class has commands to typeset them “by just leaving a blank line or two between a pair of paragraphs, or there might be some decorative item like three or four asterisks, or a fleuron or two,” (according to the manual). That would be more conventional in a novel.






                    share|improve this answer






























                      2














                      There are major works of SF that follow a structure like that. David Brin’s The Uplift War is the first example to come to mind. It’s divided into seven parts (each of which jumps forward in time to a new phase of the war) with 111 chapters, each of which is named after its viewpoint character and about six pages long on average. (It’s part of a series written in the same style.) Another variant I’ve seen is to insert section or chapter breaks headed by the location, or location and time.



                      A number of “classic” SF novels are divided into two or three “Books” (other than the volumes printed and sold). For example, the novel Dune is divided into Books I–III and Lord of the Rings into six “Books,” so that each volume of the trilogy was divided in half. Tolkien, a scholar of Medieval England, was following the conceit that he was translating a collection of a multi-volume work, and might have been trying to evoke the sense of ancient works written on scrolls, which are shorter than a modern volume and usually printed that way today. This device allowed Tolkien to use a parallel story structure for the second and third volumes. The break in the middle of The Fellowship of the Ring instead marked a major turning-point in the story, where the main characters stopped running for their lives and learned about their mission. Frank Herbert had read and lifted several terms and lines from The Sabres of Paradise. While I don’t know if it also inspired any of the story structure, this source of his did have three parts.



                      A “Part” or “Book” containing multiple chapters usually represents a major shift, like a new stage of the main character's life, a jump in time, a change in viewpoint character, a change of setting, or a switch to a parallel plotline. If one picks up where the other left off, it’s probably a chapter.



                      Chapters and parts don’t need to be close to each other in length.



                      Numbered or named sections would be more unusual, the memoir class has commands to typeset them “by just leaving a blank line or two between a pair of paragraphs, or there might be some decorative item like three or four asterisks, or a fleuron or two,” (according to the manual). That would be more conventional in a novel.






                      share|improve this answer




























                        2












                        2








                        2







                        There are major works of SF that follow a structure like that. David Brin’s The Uplift War is the first example to come to mind. It’s divided into seven parts (each of which jumps forward in time to a new phase of the war) with 111 chapters, each of which is named after its viewpoint character and about six pages long on average. (It’s part of a series written in the same style.) Another variant I’ve seen is to insert section or chapter breaks headed by the location, or location and time.



                        A number of “classic” SF novels are divided into two or three “Books” (other than the volumes printed and sold). For example, the novel Dune is divided into Books I–III and Lord of the Rings into six “Books,” so that each volume of the trilogy was divided in half. Tolkien, a scholar of Medieval England, was following the conceit that he was translating a collection of a multi-volume work, and might have been trying to evoke the sense of ancient works written on scrolls, which are shorter than a modern volume and usually printed that way today. This device allowed Tolkien to use a parallel story structure for the second and third volumes. The break in the middle of The Fellowship of the Ring instead marked a major turning-point in the story, where the main characters stopped running for their lives and learned about their mission. Frank Herbert had read and lifted several terms and lines from The Sabres of Paradise. While I don’t know if it also inspired any of the story structure, this source of his did have three parts.



                        A “Part” or “Book” containing multiple chapters usually represents a major shift, like a new stage of the main character's life, a jump in time, a change in viewpoint character, a change of setting, or a switch to a parallel plotline. If one picks up where the other left off, it’s probably a chapter.



                        Chapters and parts don’t need to be close to each other in length.



                        Numbered or named sections would be more unusual, the memoir class has commands to typeset them “by just leaving a blank line or two between a pair of paragraphs, or there might be some decorative item like three or four asterisks, or a fleuron or two,” (according to the manual). That would be more conventional in a novel.






                        share|improve this answer















                        There are major works of SF that follow a structure like that. David Brin’s The Uplift War is the first example to come to mind. It’s divided into seven parts (each of which jumps forward in time to a new phase of the war) with 111 chapters, each of which is named after its viewpoint character and about six pages long on average. (It’s part of a series written in the same style.) Another variant I’ve seen is to insert section or chapter breaks headed by the location, or location and time.



                        A number of “classic” SF novels are divided into two or three “Books” (other than the volumes printed and sold). For example, the novel Dune is divided into Books I–III and Lord of the Rings into six “Books,” so that each volume of the trilogy was divided in half. Tolkien, a scholar of Medieval England, was following the conceit that he was translating a collection of a multi-volume work, and might have been trying to evoke the sense of ancient works written on scrolls, which are shorter than a modern volume and usually printed that way today. This device allowed Tolkien to use a parallel story structure for the second and third volumes. The break in the middle of The Fellowship of the Ring instead marked a major turning-point in the story, where the main characters stopped running for their lives and learned about their mission. Frank Herbert had read and lifted several terms and lines from The Sabres of Paradise. While I don’t know if it also inspired any of the story structure, this source of his did have three parts.



                        A “Part” or “Book” containing multiple chapters usually represents a major shift, like a new stage of the main character's life, a jump in time, a change in viewpoint character, a change of setting, or a switch to a parallel plotline. If one picks up where the other left off, it’s probably a chapter.



                        Chapters and parts don’t need to be close to each other in length.



                        Numbered or named sections would be more unusual, the memoir class has commands to typeset them “by just leaving a blank line or two between a pair of paragraphs, or there might be some decorative item like three or four asterisks, or a fleuron or two,” (according to the manual). That would be more conventional in a novel.







                        share|improve this answer














                        share|improve this answer



                        share|improve this answer








                        edited May 13 at 19:29

























                        answered May 12 at 23:42









                        DavislorDavislor

                        68116




                        68116























                            1














                            I understand you have short and long chapters.



                            How about splitting the longer ones into several smaller chapters?



                            The only rules I can come up with for chapters are:




                            • The reader uses them as a "reading unit" so they should probably be about equal in size and not too long (but I've seen books with basically one chapter per page...)

                            • The reader might put the book down when having finished one chapter. So you might want to make sure the chapter ends on a point where the story is interesting enough to get the reader to come back the next day.


                            Apart from that, I don't think anything says a chapter have to look in a special way.



                            I've seen authors switching POV in the middle of a chapter, or keeping a POV per chapter, or having many chapters in one POV followed by one chapter with many POVs, or jumping back in time in the middle of a chapter, or having a separate chapter for a flashback. The same goes for settings and plots.



                            The division of a text into chapters is probably one of the things in writing that has least rules of all.



                            This is especially true with regards to story structure and dramaturgy. Your division of the story into chapters will almost definitely not affect the overall structure and story arc. Unless you move chapters around...



                            You could almost think of chapters as the packages your new IKEA furniture comes in. You rip it apart and put it together in your living room, regardless of if it comes in one, or five packages.



                            Your reader will do the same with your chapters and build your story in their mind if it's in one or 50 chapters.



                            I was about to say, parts have more logic to them, but when I picked an example I wanted to use, it turned out, there wasn't that much logic there. ("The Passage" by Justin Cronin, I thought it was divided into parts separated by time jumps, but I don't think so—if I could just find that book and verify that...)



                            Or, as in for instance "The Cloud Atlas", where parts are an important element of the structure. Each part contains one half of a completely different type of story in that book.



                            Parts pretty much follow the same logic, or lack thereof, as chapters. Maybe, because they are optional, a reader might want them to have a more logical reason to be there than chapters.



                            I've sometimes experimented with putting an act in a part each, but I don't think it's needed. In fact, it could seem blatant and make the reader aware that you are throwing acts at them.






                            share|improve this answer






























                              1














                              I understand you have short and long chapters.



                              How about splitting the longer ones into several smaller chapters?



                              The only rules I can come up with for chapters are:




                              • The reader uses them as a "reading unit" so they should probably be about equal in size and not too long (but I've seen books with basically one chapter per page...)

                              • The reader might put the book down when having finished one chapter. So you might want to make sure the chapter ends on a point where the story is interesting enough to get the reader to come back the next day.


                              Apart from that, I don't think anything says a chapter have to look in a special way.



                              I've seen authors switching POV in the middle of a chapter, or keeping a POV per chapter, or having many chapters in one POV followed by one chapter with many POVs, or jumping back in time in the middle of a chapter, or having a separate chapter for a flashback. The same goes for settings and plots.



                              The division of a text into chapters is probably one of the things in writing that has least rules of all.



                              This is especially true with regards to story structure and dramaturgy. Your division of the story into chapters will almost definitely not affect the overall structure and story arc. Unless you move chapters around...



                              You could almost think of chapters as the packages your new IKEA furniture comes in. You rip it apart and put it together in your living room, regardless of if it comes in one, or five packages.



                              Your reader will do the same with your chapters and build your story in their mind if it's in one or 50 chapters.



                              I was about to say, parts have more logic to them, but when I picked an example I wanted to use, it turned out, there wasn't that much logic there. ("The Passage" by Justin Cronin, I thought it was divided into parts separated by time jumps, but I don't think so—if I could just find that book and verify that...)



                              Or, as in for instance "The Cloud Atlas", where parts are an important element of the structure. Each part contains one half of a completely different type of story in that book.



                              Parts pretty much follow the same logic, or lack thereof, as chapters. Maybe, because they are optional, a reader might want them to have a more logical reason to be there than chapters.



                              I've sometimes experimented with putting an act in a part each, but I don't think it's needed. In fact, it could seem blatant and make the reader aware that you are throwing acts at them.






                              share|improve this answer




























                                1












                                1








                                1







                                I understand you have short and long chapters.



                                How about splitting the longer ones into several smaller chapters?



                                The only rules I can come up with for chapters are:




                                • The reader uses them as a "reading unit" so they should probably be about equal in size and not too long (but I've seen books with basically one chapter per page...)

                                • The reader might put the book down when having finished one chapter. So you might want to make sure the chapter ends on a point where the story is interesting enough to get the reader to come back the next day.


                                Apart from that, I don't think anything says a chapter have to look in a special way.



                                I've seen authors switching POV in the middle of a chapter, or keeping a POV per chapter, or having many chapters in one POV followed by one chapter with many POVs, or jumping back in time in the middle of a chapter, or having a separate chapter for a flashback. The same goes for settings and plots.



                                The division of a text into chapters is probably one of the things in writing that has least rules of all.



                                This is especially true with regards to story structure and dramaturgy. Your division of the story into chapters will almost definitely not affect the overall structure and story arc. Unless you move chapters around...



                                You could almost think of chapters as the packages your new IKEA furniture comes in. You rip it apart and put it together in your living room, regardless of if it comes in one, or five packages.



                                Your reader will do the same with your chapters and build your story in their mind if it's in one or 50 chapters.



                                I was about to say, parts have more logic to them, but when I picked an example I wanted to use, it turned out, there wasn't that much logic there. ("The Passage" by Justin Cronin, I thought it was divided into parts separated by time jumps, but I don't think so—if I could just find that book and verify that...)



                                Or, as in for instance "The Cloud Atlas", where parts are an important element of the structure. Each part contains one half of a completely different type of story in that book.



                                Parts pretty much follow the same logic, or lack thereof, as chapters. Maybe, because they are optional, a reader might want them to have a more logical reason to be there than chapters.



                                I've sometimes experimented with putting an act in a part each, but I don't think it's needed. In fact, it could seem blatant and make the reader aware that you are throwing acts at them.






                                share|improve this answer















                                I understand you have short and long chapters.



                                How about splitting the longer ones into several smaller chapters?



                                The only rules I can come up with for chapters are:




                                • The reader uses them as a "reading unit" so they should probably be about equal in size and not too long (but I've seen books with basically one chapter per page...)

                                • The reader might put the book down when having finished one chapter. So you might want to make sure the chapter ends on a point where the story is interesting enough to get the reader to come back the next day.


                                Apart from that, I don't think anything says a chapter have to look in a special way.



                                I've seen authors switching POV in the middle of a chapter, or keeping a POV per chapter, or having many chapters in one POV followed by one chapter with many POVs, or jumping back in time in the middle of a chapter, or having a separate chapter for a flashback. The same goes for settings and plots.



                                The division of a text into chapters is probably one of the things in writing that has least rules of all.



                                This is especially true with regards to story structure and dramaturgy. Your division of the story into chapters will almost definitely not affect the overall structure and story arc. Unless you move chapters around...



                                You could almost think of chapters as the packages your new IKEA furniture comes in. You rip it apart and put it together in your living room, regardless of if it comes in one, or five packages.



                                Your reader will do the same with your chapters and build your story in their mind if it's in one or 50 chapters.



                                I was about to say, parts have more logic to them, but when I picked an example I wanted to use, it turned out, there wasn't that much logic there. ("The Passage" by Justin Cronin, I thought it was divided into parts separated by time jumps, but I don't think so—if I could just find that book and verify that...)



                                Or, as in for instance "The Cloud Atlas", where parts are an important element of the structure. Each part contains one half of a completely different type of story in that book.



                                Parts pretty much follow the same logic, or lack thereof, as chapters. Maybe, because they are optional, a reader might want them to have a more logical reason to be there than chapters.



                                I've sometimes experimented with putting an act in a part each, but I don't think it's needed. In fact, it could seem blatant and make the reader aware that you are throwing acts at them.







                                share|improve this answer














                                share|improve this answer



                                share|improve this answer








                                edited May 13 at 20:51

























                                answered May 12 at 17:48









                                ErkErk

                                1,415810




                                1,415810























                                    0














                                    Your first step is to decide on the levels of division. What is a first level division, a second level division, etc.? Once you've done that, you need to decide what to call them. You have many options here, as other answers have shown. The “read in one sitting” sections should probably be called chapters. Chapter subdivisions probably don’t need to be named at all: you can have a fancy divider (this is traditional), or perhaps just a small gap between paragraphs, which seems to be more common these days.



                                    The larger sections, comprising a few chapters each, could reasonably be called books, sections, parts or something else. (Actually, the words section and part are so flexible that they could also be applied to smaller bits, such as chapter subdivisions, if you did wish to name them.)



                                    Another option, which I have not seen covered in other answers, would be to pick a more whimsical naming scheme which matches your story. Are there any terms from your narrative that you could draw on in picking vocabulary. Many sci-fi works speak of a galaxy/universe divided into sectors. Your narrative parts take place in different areas, different sectors. Could you use the word sector to name these divisions? Other examples will occur to you as you look over your narrative.






                                    share|improve this answer




























                                      0














                                      Your first step is to decide on the levels of division. What is a first level division, a second level division, etc.? Once you've done that, you need to decide what to call them. You have many options here, as other answers have shown. The “read in one sitting” sections should probably be called chapters. Chapter subdivisions probably don’t need to be named at all: you can have a fancy divider (this is traditional), or perhaps just a small gap between paragraphs, which seems to be more common these days.



                                      The larger sections, comprising a few chapters each, could reasonably be called books, sections, parts or something else. (Actually, the words section and part are so flexible that they could also be applied to smaller bits, such as chapter subdivisions, if you did wish to name them.)



                                      Another option, which I have not seen covered in other answers, would be to pick a more whimsical naming scheme which matches your story. Are there any terms from your narrative that you could draw on in picking vocabulary. Many sci-fi works speak of a galaxy/universe divided into sectors. Your narrative parts take place in different areas, different sectors. Could you use the word sector to name these divisions? Other examples will occur to you as you look over your narrative.






                                      share|improve this answer


























                                        0












                                        0








                                        0







                                        Your first step is to decide on the levels of division. What is a first level division, a second level division, etc.? Once you've done that, you need to decide what to call them. You have many options here, as other answers have shown. The “read in one sitting” sections should probably be called chapters. Chapter subdivisions probably don’t need to be named at all: you can have a fancy divider (this is traditional), or perhaps just a small gap between paragraphs, which seems to be more common these days.



                                        The larger sections, comprising a few chapters each, could reasonably be called books, sections, parts or something else. (Actually, the words section and part are so flexible that they could also be applied to smaller bits, such as chapter subdivisions, if you did wish to name them.)



                                        Another option, which I have not seen covered in other answers, would be to pick a more whimsical naming scheme which matches your story. Are there any terms from your narrative that you could draw on in picking vocabulary. Many sci-fi works speak of a galaxy/universe divided into sectors. Your narrative parts take place in different areas, different sectors. Could you use the word sector to name these divisions? Other examples will occur to you as you look over your narrative.






                                        share|improve this answer













                                        Your first step is to decide on the levels of division. What is a first level division, a second level division, etc.? Once you've done that, you need to decide what to call them. You have many options here, as other answers have shown. The “read in one sitting” sections should probably be called chapters. Chapter subdivisions probably don’t need to be named at all: you can have a fancy divider (this is traditional), or perhaps just a small gap between paragraphs, which seems to be more common these days.



                                        The larger sections, comprising a few chapters each, could reasonably be called books, sections, parts or something else. (Actually, the words section and part are so flexible that they could also be applied to smaller bits, such as chapter subdivisions, if you did wish to name them.)



                                        Another option, which I have not seen covered in other answers, would be to pick a more whimsical naming scheme which matches your story. Are there any terms from your narrative that you could draw on in picking vocabulary. Many sci-fi works speak of a galaxy/universe divided into sectors. Your narrative parts take place in different areas, different sectors. Could you use the word sector to name these divisions? Other examples will occur to you as you look over your narrative.







                                        share|improve this answer












                                        share|improve this answer



                                        share|improve this answer










                                        answered May 13 at 12:23









                                        TRiGTRiG

                                        226110




                                        226110























                                            0














                                            As the OP mentions LaTeX, this answer uses "part" in the sense of that typesetting system, i.e. as the next bigger hierarchie above "section/chapter" and below "physical book".



                                            While I have not enjoyed a formal writer's education (i.e., university or whatever kind of school writers could go to), I have also never heard of formal "rules" for splitting books or other texts. "Rule" in the sense that there is some kind of prescription how to do it.



                                            But some choices seem to be pretty popular. I.e., splitting simply to avoid paper books too large to be handled (and this is different in different countries; i.e., "The Reality Dysfunction" trilogy had 3 very thick books in some countries, and 2x3=6 in others).



                                            But my favourite aspect is if the author really takes the opportunity to bring an overarching "part" structure into the story itself. For example by doing very large time- or place-based jumps at "part boundaries". For example, "The Earthsea Quartet" or "A Canticle for Leibowith" make very good use of that. Both would very well fit into a standard continuing format (they are short enough to comfortably fit into a single, even thin book), but due to their parts, sometimes with ominous titles, they really set the tone for what is to come.



                                            Also, and this may be old-fashioned, sometimes it is very fitting if as a reader you can see the names of the parts beforehand, alltogether. This would probably not be so wise for the smaller chapter names (if you give them names at all) because it would spoil too much; but for large parts it has a very eerie effect on me to kind of know the scope of what's to come already. Obviously this is not so trivial, but if done right... bliss.



                                            Chapter breaks are a great opportunity to add small pre-faces for each chapter (e.g., Neal Asher used this to absolutely astounding effect in "The Skinner", which I don't remember much of except those little encyclopedia-like bits).



                                            Hope that helps. Aside from that, if you have no preferences either way, I'd simply look at how others do it and derive your own rules (number of pages per chapter etc.).






                                            share|improve this answer




























                                              0














                                              As the OP mentions LaTeX, this answer uses "part" in the sense of that typesetting system, i.e. as the next bigger hierarchie above "section/chapter" and below "physical book".



                                              While I have not enjoyed a formal writer's education (i.e., university or whatever kind of school writers could go to), I have also never heard of formal "rules" for splitting books or other texts. "Rule" in the sense that there is some kind of prescription how to do it.



                                              But some choices seem to be pretty popular. I.e., splitting simply to avoid paper books too large to be handled (and this is different in different countries; i.e., "The Reality Dysfunction" trilogy had 3 very thick books in some countries, and 2x3=6 in others).



                                              But my favourite aspect is if the author really takes the opportunity to bring an overarching "part" structure into the story itself. For example by doing very large time- or place-based jumps at "part boundaries". For example, "The Earthsea Quartet" or "A Canticle for Leibowith" make very good use of that. Both would very well fit into a standard continuing format (they are short enough to comfortably fit into a single, even thin book), but due to their parts, sometimes with ominous titles, they really set the tone for what is to come.



                                              Also, and this may be old-fashioned, sometimes it is very fitting if as a reader you can see the names of the parts beforehand, alltogether. This would probably not be so wise for the smaller chapter names (if you give them names at all) because it would spoil too much; but for large parts it has a very eerie effect on me to kind of know the scope of what's to come already. Obviously this is not so trivial, but if done right... bliss.



                                              Chapter breaks are a great opportunity to add small pre-faces for each chapter (e.g., Neal Asher used this to absolutely astounding effect in "The Skinner", which I don't remember much of except those little encyclopedia-like bits).



                                              Hope that helps. Aside from that, if you have no preferences either way, I'd simply look at how others do it and derive your own rules (number of pages per chapter etc.).






                                              share|improve this answer


























                                                0












                                                0








                                                0







                                                As the OP mentions LaTeX, this answer uses "part" in the sense of that typesetting system, i.e. as the next bigger hierarchie above "section/chapter" and below "physical book".



                                                While I have not enjoyed a formal writer's education (i.e., university or whatever kind of school writers could go to), I have also never heard of formal "rules" for splitting books or other texts. "Rule" in the sense that there is some kind of prescription how to do it.



                                                But some choices seem to be pretty popular. I.e., splitting simply to avoid paper books too large to be handled (and this is different in different countries; i.e., "The Reality Dysfunction" trilogy had 3 very thick books in some countries, and 2x3=6 in others).



                                                But my favourite aspect is if the author really takes the opportunity to bring an overarching "part" structure into the story itself. For example by doing very large time- or place-based jumps at "part boundaries". For example, "The Earthsea Quartet" or "A Canticle for Leibowith" make very good use of that. Both would very well fit into a standard continuing format (they are short enough to comfortably fit into a single, even thin book), but due to their parts, sometimes with ominous titles, they really set the tone for what is to come.



                                                Also, and this may be old-fashioned, sometimes it is very fitting if as a reader you can see the names of the parts beforehand, alltogether. This would probably not be so wise for the smaller chapter names (if you give them names at all) because it would spoil too much; but for large parts it has a very eerie effect on me to kind of know the scope of what's to come already. Obviously this is not so trivial, but if done right... bliss.



                                                Chapter breaks are a great opportunity to add small pre-faces for each chapter (e.g., Neal Asher used this to absolutely astounding effect in "The Skinner", which I don't remember much of except those little encyclopedia-like bits).



                                                Hope that helps. Aside from that, if you have no preferences either way, I'd simply look at how others do it and derive your own rules (number of pages per chapter etc.).






                                                share|improve this answer













                                                As the OP mentions LaTeX, this answer uses "part" in the sense of that typesetting system, i.e. as the next bigger hierarchie above "section/chapter" and below "physical book".



                                                While I have not enjoyed a formal writer's education (i.e., university or whatever kind of school writers could go to), I have also never heard of formal "rules" for splitting books or other texts. "Rule" in the sense that there is some kind of prescription how to do it.



                                                But some choices seem to be pretty popular. I.e., splitting simply to avoid paper books too large to be handled (and this is different in different countries; i.e., "The Reality Dysfunction" trilogy had 3 very thick books in some countries, and 2x3=6 in others).



                                                But my favourite aspect is if the author really takes the opportunity to bring an overarching "part" structure into the story itself. For example by doing very large time- or place-based jumps at "part boundaries". For example, "The Earthsea Quartet" or "A Canticle for Leibowith" make very good use of that. Both would very well fit into a standard continuing format (they are short enough to comfortably fit into a single, even thin book), but due to their parts, sometimes with ominous titles, they really set the tone for what is to come.



                                                Also, and this may be old-fashioned, sometimes it is very fitting if as a reader you can see the names of the parts beforehand, alltogether. This would probably not be so wise for the smaller chapter names (if you give them names at all) because it would spoil too much; but for large parts it has a very eerie effect on me to kind of know the scope of what's to come already. Obviously this is not so trivial, but if done right... bliss.



                                                Chapter breaks are a great opportunity to add small pre-faces for each chapter (e.g., Neal Asher used this to absolutely astounding effect in "The Skinner", which I don't remember much of except those little encyclopedia-like bits).



                                                Hope that helps. Aside from that, if you have no preferences either way, I'd simply look at how others do it and derive your own rules (number of pages per chapter etc.).







                                                share|improve this answer












                                                share|improve this answer



                                                share|improve this answer










                                                answered May 13 at 15:29









                                                AnoEAnoE

                                                79528




                                                79528






























                                                    draft saved

                                                    draft discarded




















































                                                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Writing Stack Exchange!


                                                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                                    But avoid



                                                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                                    draft saved


                                                    draft discarded














                                                    StackExchange.ready(
                                                    function () {
                                                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fwriting.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f45139%2fare-there-any-established-rules-for-splitting-books-into-parts-chapters-sectio%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                                    }
                                                    );

                                                    Post as a guest















                                                    Required, but never shown





















































                                                    Required, but never shown














                                                    Required, but never shown












                                                    Required, but never shown







                                                    Required, but never shown

































                                                    Required, but never shown














                                                    Required, but never shown












                                                    Required, but never shown







                                                    Required, but never shown







                                                    Popular posts from this blog

                                                    Færeyskur hestur Heimild | Tengill | Tilvísanir | LeiðsagnarvalRossið - síða um færeyska hrossið á færeyskuGott ár hjá færeyska hestinum

                                                    He _____ here since 1970 . Answer needed [closed]What does “since he was so high” mean?Meaning of “catch birds for”?How do I ensure “since” takes the meaning I want?“Who cares here” meaningWhat does “right round toward” mean?the time tense (had now been detected)What does the phrase “ring around the roses” mean here?Correct usage of “visited upon”Meaning of “foiled rail sabotage bid”It was the third time I had gone to Rome or It is the third time I had been to Rome

                                                    Slayer Innehåll Historia | Stil, komposition och lyrik | Bandets betydelse och framgångar | Sidoprojekt och samarbeten | Kontroverser | Medlemmar | Utmärkelser och nomineringar | Turnéer och festivaler | Diskografi | Referenser | Externa länkar | Navigeringsmenywww.slayer.net”Metal Massacre vol. 1””Metal Massacre vol. 3””Metal Massacre Volume III””Show No Mercy””Haunting the Chapel””Live Undead””Hell Awaits””Reign in Blood””Reign in Blood””Gold & Platinum – Reign in Blood””Golden Gods Awards Winners”originalet”Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Slayer Looks Back On 37-Year Career In New Video Series: Part Two””South of Heaven””Gold & Platinum – South of Heaven””Seasons in the Abyss””Gold & Platinum - Seasons in the Abyss””Divine Intervention””Divine Intervention - Release group by Slayer””Gold & Platinum - Divine Intervention””Live Intrusion””Undisputed Attitude””Abolish Government/Superficial Love””Release “Slatanic Slaughter: A Tribute to Slayer” by Various Artists””Diabolus in Musica””Soundtrack to the Apocalypse””God Hates Us All””Systematic - Relationships””War at the Warfield””Gold & Platinum - War at the Warfield””Soundtrack to the Apocalypse””Gold & Platinum - Still Reigning””Metallica, Slayer, Iron Mauden Among Winners At Metal Hammer Awards””Eternal Pyre””Eternal Pyre - Slayer release group””Eternal Pyre””Metal Storm Awards 2006””Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Slayer Wins 'Best Metal' Grammy Award””Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman Dies””Bullet-For My Valentine booed at Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Unholy Aliance””The End Of Slayer?””Slayer: We Could Thrash Out Two More Albums If We're Fast Enough...””'The Unholy Alliance: Chapter III' UK Dates Added”originalet”Megadeth And Slayer To Co-Headline 'Canadian Carnage' Trek”originalet”World Painted Blood””Release “World Painted Blood” by Slayer””Metallica Heading To Cinemas””Slayer, Megadeth To Join Forces For 'European Carnage' Tour - Dec. 18, 2010”originalet”Slayer's Hanneman Contracts Acute Infection; Band To Bring In Guest Guitarist””Cannibal Corpse's Pat O'Brien Will Step In As Slayer's Guest Guitarist”originalet”Slayer’s Jeff Hanneman Dead at 49””Dave Lombardo Says He Made Only $67,000 In 2011 While Touring With Slayer””Slayer: We Do Not Agree With Dave Lombardo's Substance Or Timeline Of Events””Slayer Welcomes Drummer Paul Bostaph Back To The Fold””Slayer Hope to Unveil Never-Before-Heard Jeff Hanneman Material on Next Album””Slayer Debut New Song 'Implode' During Surprise Golden Gods Appearance””Release group Repentless by Slayer””Repentless - Slayer - Credits””Slayer””Metal Storm Awards 2015””Slayer - to release comic book "Repentless #1"””Slayer To Release 'Repentless' 6.66" Vinyl Box Set””BREAKING NEWS: Slayer Announce Farewell Tour””Slayer Recruit Lamb of God, Anthrax, Behemoth + Testament for Final Tour””Slayer lägger ner efter 37 år””Slayer Announces Second North American Leg Of 'Final' Tour””Final World Tour””Slayer Announces Final European Tour With Lamb of God, Anthrax And Obituary””Slayer To Tour Europe With Lamb of God, Anthrax And Obituary””Slayer To Play 'Last French Show Ever' At Next Year's Hellfst””Slayer's Final World Tour Will Extend Into 2019””Death Angel's Rob Cavestany On Slayer's 'Farewell' Tour: 'Some Of Us Could See This Coming'””Testament Has No Plans To Retire Anytime Soon, Says Chuck Billy””Anthrax's Scott Ian On Slayer's 'Farewell' Tour Plans: 'I Was Surprised And I Wasn't Surprised'””Slayer””Slayer's Morbid Schlock””Review/Rock; For Slayer, the Mania Is the Message””Slayer - Biography””Slayer - Reign In Blood”originalet”Dave Lombardo””An exclusive oral history of Slayer”originalet”Exclusive! Interview With Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman”originalet”Thinking Out Loud: Slayer's Kerry King on hair metal, Satan and being polite””Slayer Lyrics””Slayer - Biography””Most influential artists for extreme metal music””Slayer - Reign in Blood””Slayer guitarist Jeff Hanneman dies aged 49””Slatanic Slaughter: A Tribute to Slayer””Gateway to Hell: A Tribute to Slayer””Covered In Blood””Slayer: The Origins of Thrash in San Francisco, CA.””Why They Rule - #6 Slayer”originalet”Guitar World's 100 Greatest Heavy Metal Guitarists Of All Time”originalet”The fans have spoken: Slayer comes out on top in readers' polls”originalet”Tribute to Jeff Hanneman (1964-2013)””Lamb Of God Frontman: We Sound Like A Slayer Rip-Off””BEHEMOTH Frontman Pays Tribute To SLAYER's JEFF HANNEMAN””Slayer, Hatebreed Doing Double Duty On This Year's Ozzfest””System of a Down””Lacuna Coil’s Andrea Ferro Talks Influences, Skateboarding, Band Origins + More””Slayer - Reign in Blood””Into The Lungs of Hell””Slayer rules - en utställning om fans””Slayer and Their Fans Slashed Through a No-Holds-Barred Night at Gas Monkey””Home””Slayer””Gold & Platinum - The Big 4 Live from Sofia, Bulgaria””Exclusive! Interview With Slayer Guitarist Kerry King””2008-02-23: Wiltern, Los Angeles, CA, USA””Slayer's Kerry King To Perform With Megadeth Tonight! - Oct. 21, 2010”originalet”Dave Lombardo - Biography”Slayer Case DismissedArkiveradUltimate Classic Rock: Slayer guitarist Jeff Hanneman dead at 49.”Slayer: "We could never do any thing like Some Kind Of Monster..."””Cannibal Corpse'S Pat O'Brien Will Step In As Slayer'S Guest Guitarist | The Official Slayer Site”originalet”Slayer Wins 'Best Metal' Grammy Award””Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman Dies””Kerrang! Awards 2006 Blog: Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Kerrang! Awards 2013: Kerrang! Legend”originalet”Metallica, Slayer, Iron Maien Among Winners At Metal Hammer Awards””Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Bullet For My Valentine Booed At Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Metal Storm Awards 2006””Metal Storm Awards 2015””Slayer's Concert History””Slayer - Relationships””Slayer - Releases”Slayers officiella webbplatsSlayer på MusicBrainzOfficiell webbplatsSlayerSlayerr1373445760000 0001 1540 47353068615-5086262726cb13906545x(data)6033143kn20030215029