In an article in Jezebel 'Why Choosing Your Own Adventure Can Really Pay Off' (2009) by Doree Shafrir, Shannon Gilligan was interviewed about choose your own adventure books. She described how children in the past had loved to play these books as they allowed them to "try on other personalities. Then try on other roles." This is interesting, as she went on to say that often these CYOA's focused on children as the protagonists who were often young people themselves. However, she raised the fact that playing as a character in a CYOA is similar to creating an 'avatar' online, a different persona as it were that allows online users to take on new personalities.
She continued to say in her view that there is no definite way for writing a CYOA but, starting with a mind map, as I did is certainly the best way, since it allows the book and game play to be more structured.
I will admit however, that although I mapped my story initially, I ended up constantly adding to it as I always love to come up with new ideas and these often occur after I have planned. So I ended up writing rather like the other method Gilligan mentioned where writers would write the CYOA as it went along in order to make it feel organic. Gilligan explained that if she used this method she would always run out of pages. Although I never confined myself to a number of pages, I did however cut 2000 words from my final piece as I felt some of it was not entirely central to the plot. Therefore, despite her method being a good one in order to come up with a complete book within the page constants, I think that my method allowed me to be more creative and use good ideas I hadn't originally planned for.
It's interesting she considered that an average CYOA is "between 100-110 manuscript pages", therefore my 37 pages of demo (excluding the front and back cover) make up nearly one third of an entire CYOA. This is a good thing, as my book is intended to be the first act made available as a demo before the final release.
In another article 'The Surprising Legacy of Choose Your Own Adventure Books' (2014), Patrick Wensink stated "I didn’t realize that the magic of Choose Your Own Adventure wasn’t the fantastic stories or the unique method of storytelling." (but rather) "The secret of the second person". This made me think, as I spent so much time focusing on my story and the characters that the reader interacts with, that I never thought of the player as a character. In this case they are neither the first or third person, thus they are the Wensink's 'second person' since they (the reader) are directly told what options they have and the consequences. Therefore, from including the reader within the experience you make them feel important and as a result want to find out what happens to themselves and the characters they meet and grow to like. This is something that ordinary books generally don't do as they either refer to the characters in the first or third person.
I find all the above research fascinating as, although I did this research after writing my CYOA, I do in fact see what they were getting at. It could just be because I was the one to write 'Home Base 2-7-1', but I did feel just as immersed in the experience as those who will go about reading it for the first time.
Not to blow my own trumpet, but I believe this is because I concentrated on making an epic story with believable/living characters, not just lifeless drones who might tell you what to do next. It also helps that I was using my own personal experience from reading and writing CYOA books both as a child and more recently as an adult (see previous posts).
Within my CYOA I included numerous conversations between the characters. By doing this I feel that I was able to hint at the relationships the reader may have already had with the characters before the events in the book. As a result, I believe the reader will feel more inclined to react as the character would to a new and dangerous situation. Having choices that allow the player to decide what kind of person they want to be also helps the player to believe they are the character they are playing and as a result choose to do what would make sense for them. Thus making sense of Gilligan's believe that readers "try on other personalities. Then try on other roles."
Wensink's statement becomes especially true when you are faced with a simple moral dilemma e.g. whether or not to return a purse. By returning it you would gain nothing except perhaps a feeling of self worth as a result of having helped someone. Otherwise, by stealing the item you commit a crime, but receive something for your trouble despite possibly feeling bad about it later. It is these two 'paragon' and 'renegade' decisions that may lead to the same path, but will allow the reader the opportunity to role play. After all, what if the player was a security officer who stole it? They could consider themselves to be a bent cop. Whereas a mechanic who may only have a busy job with not many apparent benefits who chooses return the purse can achieve more than wealth by gaining pleasure from doing a good deed.
It's these little touches that we don't always think about and only realise after analysing a narrative that can add greatly to a reader's / player's experience, and one that I am glad I have discovered through this research and module.
Harvard Referencing:
- Shafrir, D (2009) Why Choosing Your Own Adventure Can Really Pay Off. Available at: http://jezebel.com/5342799/why-choosing-your-own-adventure-can-really-pay-off (Accessed: 28/1/2014).
- Wensink, P (2014) The Surprising Legacy Of Choose Your Own Adventure Books. Available at: http://www.theweeklings.com/pwensink/2014/01/15/the-surprising-legacy-of-choose-your-own-adventure-books/ (Accessed: 28/1/2014).
No comments:
Post a Comment