Third Book: Well, That Was Fast

After only tapping the surface of my research mentioned last week, I painfully realized a major thread of the third act of my next book was glaringly wrong, flying in the face of all known facts and coming off as little more than a plot device than an actuality.

Given this, what else could I do but drastically change my loose outline? Don’t get me wrong, I would be remiss if I didn’t admit I briefly debated simply keeping the plot point as-is and denoting it as merely a product of the fictional universe I’ve created or an extreme reaction given an extreme situation.

But that’s cheap. Something Dan Brown or Michael Bay would do, surely, but not me.

So yesterday I trashed the entire last act of my bullet-list and forced myself to reconsider the plot. The main problem I faced was that I had already developed conclusions and repercussions solely based the events I had to remove, so I had to debate (with myself, Gollum-like, of course) whether or not I should simply find another way to get to those same conclusions or remove them outright.

What resulted was something of a compromise, with some things changing, some staying the same and others just completely thrown out. As to what the third act now looks like, well, the cogs turned and I manage to come up with, in my opinion, an ending far more interesting than the one I had originally intended. It requires some additional drops throughout the book in order for it to not seem left-field, but should result in a more concise, fulfilling ending that all seems much less contrived.

It also happens to completely alter the book’s antagonist. Well, no. That’s not right. What it does is completely change all of the book’s antagonists, with some picking up the slack from those who could no longer reasonably serve the plot, while those fell by the wayside or took to supporting roles instead.

I forgot how fun this part of the process can be. Honestly, it’s been far, far too long.