I've mentioned to a few people that my big idea for a second book is likely to be controversial. Really controversial. And so I've been trying to work out the best way to approach the whole idea. My first idea was to just leap straight in with the first real scene, but I think that would be a little too shocking and doesn't provide the kind of little turns I like to put into these things - that 'WTF just happened?' moments that I enjoy. And so, inevitably I think, I went back to Frankenstein and the recursive structure from that. So I have someone telling a story, of someone else's story of the main narrative. That should give me the distance that I like, and the slightly disreputable enveloping narrators should make the whole thing a little more 'unreliable'.
I managed to bang out a 1,000 words of Chapter 1 (the first envelope) tonight while watching the Poland-Russia game in French and planned a little of the second envelope. Now the second envelope is controversial, but is nothing compared to the nugget of the story.
One other interesting thing to ponder: this story has a lot of real people in it, so I'm thinking as part of my mitigation strategy, that the narrator for the first envelope could be me.
What does that do to the story?
The first paragraph (so far), by the way, is this.
The last message I got from Davy was a text a couple of days before he pegged out. It just said “ur story” and then had the address of a hotel and a ‘code word’ to say to the receptionist. By the time I landed in Miami, he’d gone.