Memoirs about life after adoption

Question

A few years ago I decided to write a book about what it was like to grow up in an abusive household as an adoptee. As I started digging into my own history the story grew and it has turned into a start to finish story of my journey to try and find my true identity after being horribly abused. Is it easier to write this kind of story in a linear fashion or should I bounce back and forth. I’m 75000 words into it and need help putting it together. Thanks

Answer 1

There are two questions that seem relevant here:

1. What type of narrative is more easy to write? and
2. Which is more pleasant to read?

In my experience, it is certainly more easy to follow your ideas as they come to you in an associative fashion while you write. This is called "discovery writing" or "writing by the seat of your pants". It requires little effort on the part of the writer, at least during the first draft. A common, though not ubiquituous, problem with discovery writing is that the resulting story will often suffer from plot holes and other inconsistencies and that, to the reader, it may appear unstructured and lacking narrative dynamic (e.g. a build up of tension towards a climax and a satisfying resolution). Therefore discovery writing often requires heavy and painful rewriting. Painful, because it is difficult to throw out and completely change things that you have already written. And difficult, because it is not easy to let go of a structure that feels logic to the writer on an associative level.

While it is more pleasant to follow your ideas wherever they may lead you when you write (your first draft), it is often more efficient (as it doesn't require as much rewriting) and more pleasant for the readers if you think about how you want to structure your narrative before you begin. This approach is called "outlining", because you create an outline that you follow like a guide or roadmap while you write. Outline writing is more effortful during the first draft (and the outlining stage), but the result is usually more controlled and pleasant to the reader.

Now on to your actual question.

Both a story told in a chronological manner and a story told unchronologically can have a pleasant-to-read narrative structure. For example, in a chronological story it might be suspenseful for the reader to find out at the end where the events lead, while in a non-chronological story, that tells the outcome first, it might be equally fascinating to find out which events lead to that end. Both are valid approaches, but both put the focus on different aspects of the story. The chronological story, for example, focusses on the outcome (where the depicted events lead the protagonist, e.g. abuse leads to trauma), while the non-chronological story focusses on how to achieve a certain outcome (how the protagonist got there, e.g. what you did to empower yourself to lead a good life despite unfavourable starting conditions).

So the first thing you need to decide is where the focus of your story lies and what it is that you want to convey to the reader, or, in other words, the argument you are trying to make. Then structure your narrative to achieve that effect, much like you would arrange the information in an essay to lead the reader from an initial question to a final answer.

If you decide on an unchronological or "back and forth" narration, I recommend that you write down each of the elements of your narrative (that is, the individual events), print and cut them, so that every piece of paper contains one story element, and then move them around into different linear arrangements until you find one that you like. You can do this with pieces of paper on your desk (I do it on the floor) or virtually on the "corkboard" within a writing software like Scrivener.

Answer 2

Is it easier to write this kind of story in a linear fashion or should I bounce back and forth. I’m 75000 words into it...

Easier

There are many non-commercial (personal) reasons to finish your story without giving any thought to other people reading it. Don't worry about what you 'should' do.

You may be running out of steam and doubting your work-process. Writing can be a marathon, the real challenge is to finish. Try not to over-complicate it by changing the rules halfway through.

If publication is your goal, it's ok to stick with a chronology in the 1st draft. If you just need a break and want to work on another part of the story, feel free to do that without any obligation for it to flow or transition.

Save the structural narrative decisions for the 2nd draft.

Bounce Back and Forth

'Non-linear storytelling' sounds avant-garde, but probably the more common narrative structure in biographies is a frame story.

Often the larger context of the person's life experiences – which may not have a satisfying narrative arc – are contrasted with a 'current' or focused conflict/struggle which does have a satisfying conclusion.

The frame story is generally presented as uncertain or open-ended, but more grounded as an 'everyman' conflict, with much lower stakes and a relatable 'protagonist'. This narrative device helps to keep the story set in the real world, and the allows the reader to identify with the MC.

The biography is then told not in flashbacks, but as a parallel story that is interspersed within the frame story's conflict arc. The parallel story follows its own linear timeline, allowing for artistic license like the compression of incidents and consolidation of characters.

Acts

The structure of the biographical timeline probably follows the style of Acts comprised of many scenes that illustrate a specific conflict or coming-of-age realization. the parallel timeline can progress linearly, covering as much chronological time as needed. The reader stays within that Act, witnessing related events until some truth is discovered, or some point-of-no-return is crossed.

Acts are not mini-stories with a climax and confrontation in each. Acts in this context function more like shortstories where the goal is less about furthering the plot through action or character beats, and more about gradually coming to understand the situation as it really was. Once the reader has that knowledge and draws the intended conclusion, it's time to move back to the frame story.

The frame story's 'ordinary conflict' gains exponential depth through context each time we return to it, but also resets the MC as a familiar protagonist with relatable wants and goals.

When we return to the parallel biography timeline, the previous realization is now in the past or a cold status quo. A new coming-of-age realization, or a new layer of truth needs to be the focus of the new Act.

There are no requirements for how long or how many acts are needed. It's probably not possible to know which parts of the biography should be grouped together to best appeal to the reader's emotions and empathy. It's likely most readers will need measured introductions to the reality of abuse, and breaks from the on-going power imbalance. Again, worry about structural logistics in the 2nd draft.

The biography and the frame story are paced to finish together – the biography concludes with the final coming-of-age realization (either rejecting or radically accepting the abuse cycle), with the frame story generally getting the final conclusion and showing the 'results' of the Biography ending as a pay-off. After the reader witnesses the final realization, the frame story can also conclude.

In someone else's story the frame might be some crucial moment related to why they are important (triumph or tragedy) implying a narrative cause-and-effect through juxtaposition, without explicitly saying it. In an autobiography the conclusion to the frame story might be as simple as surviving and enjoying life after all is said and done.