I’ve read two recently published novels in the last few days, and as I was reading the second one, I realized something. Books nowadays are written in the form of movies. Either that or I read them that way, and I don’t think that’s it because I don’t see this movie formula in older books. Let me describe what I mean, and you see if you recognize it in the next novel you read.

1. Scene changes: The author writes a page or two or three about one set of characters in one setting; then he leaves some extra space or inserts a line or few dingbats and switches to another character or characters in another locale. The reader knows that all these separate stories and characters are going to come together by the end of the movie, er … novel, but no one except the scriptwriter himself knows exactly how they are related or how they will resolve into a satisfying ending. Older writers don’t switch scenes nearly so quickly. Tolkien has long sections about one set of characters before he moves to another set; Dickens has different sets of characters in different settings, but he follows David Copperfield, for instance, as he goes from one setting to another. David is the thread that ties everyone together.

2. Plot and action: Every short scene has to have some sort of physical action. Even when the characters are just talking or thinking at first, they’re almost always interrupted by some Event or Important Pronouncement. Someone jumps out the window; shots are fired; secrets are revealed; at the very least the love interest falls into the hero’s arms–or slaps him.

3. Romance: No modern movie or book is complete without at least one romance. Moby Dick would never make it these days. Where’s Ishmael’s love interest? No Huck Finn or Red Badge of Courage either. In fact one of the books I read is set during WWII, but the author can’t decide whether he’s writing a war novel or a romance. I guess it’s both at the same time. At least Henry V (Shakespeare) waits until the battle part is all over before he woos his lady love.

I’m not saying these rules don’t work to produce a readable story, but when did these become the rules? Do publishers or editors tell writers to write according to this formula? I’m really curious. Maybe there’s name for this kind of writing or a set of rules written down somewhere in Publishing Land, and I’m way behind because I just noticed the phenomenon. I so, go ahead and tell me. I’m used to being behind the times.

The first book I read, Improbable by Adam Fawer, was an absorbing thriller. It worked. I could have done without some of the more graphic violence, but I guess that’s part of the formula, too, so that your movie book will get at least a PG-13 or an R rating. (Actually, if I had to watch some of the stuff described in this book, I’d give it an X rating.) Lots of violence, plot twists galore, and little or no sex (but the obligatory love interest is there). You can read a good review of Improbable by Kevin at Collected Miscellany here and here’s an interview with the author Adam Fawer.

The other book is The Keeper’s Son by Homer Hickam, author of Rocket Boys which was made into a very successful movie, October Sky. This one, as I said, is set during WWII off the coast of North Carolina. Maybe Mr. Hickam writes movie-style because he’s already had one of his books made into a movie. However, the romantic interludes were just a distraction in the middle of a German submarine vs. US Coast Guard war novel. The novel focuses on Josh Thurlow, the captain of the Coast Guard boat, and on Krebs, commander of the German submarine that is sinking freighters with impunity just off the coast of Killakeet Island where Josh’s patrol and rescue boat is stationed. The duel between these two men and the details about life on a German submarine are interesting, but we keep on having other subplots and supporting characters stuck in the middle of it all whose presence is unnecessary. There’s a Preacher who’s lost his faith, a German who may be Josh’s long lost brother, a crazed-by-grief Navy commander who shanghais one of Thurlow’s sailors, etc.

I really read this book only because it comes before Hickam’s newest book, The Ambassador’s Son, which also features Josh Thurlow and is set in the South Pacific. I guess Thurlow got a transfer after the first book. I thought that The Ambassadot’s Son sounded interesting because it also has two fictional characters named “Shafty” and “Nick” who turn out to be none other than JFK and Richard Nixon, in their younger war years. I don’t know if I’ll read this sequel or not, though; as I read the blurbs it seems to me that again there’s altogether too much romance worked into the mix. Maybe I’ll just wait for the movie.