Writtenwyrdd

Violence in your writing: where do you draw the line?

I ran across a CNN article that made me stop and think about the plethora of violence in the current crop of speculative fiction.  Basically, the article was talking about the increasing presence of violence against children in video games, and asked the question: are we less sensitive to the issue of violence against children because of the medium, or are we as a society becoming less sensitive to such violence?  Or are we just becoming insensitive to violence, period?  And he speaks about the quandry of deciding how or if to use these plot devices.

Here's what the article has to say.

...But, increasingly, I'm getting uncomfortable with how comfortable game developers have become with putting children in peril and, often, allowing them to be gruesomely killed.

If you watch local TV news, read the newspaper or skim through CNN's headlines, there's not a day that goes by when you don't hear about some unthinkable violence or long-term abuse against a child. The video game industry, which has strived since the 1980s to have the same cultural cachet as TV and movies, has found a taboo that can make gamers feel like they're consuming more mature, provocative entertainment.

When such depictions are presented in an artful, entertaining way, video game advocates are put in a position of defending content that might be less palatable in other mediums. Would the "Dead Island" trailer work as a live-action preview of a movie or would it have provoked outrage?

I wonder if our tolerance for virtual gore and bloodshed in games has numbed us to the mutilation and torture of children because they're virtual characters, no more real than the barrel-chested Nazis in "Wolfenstein 3D" or the turtles in "Super Mario Bros."

Or, more disturbingly, maybe we've become so used to hearing about violence directed at kids that its depiction in video games is just another reflection of our culture. Perhaps developers, many of whom have kids of their own, are exploring their own fears as they build complex, dark game narratives, fully aware that once there's an "M for Mature" label on the package, there'll be little outcry.

It's a tough question.  I have no problem with sex, violence, horror, or general nastiness in a story...if it is useful to the story.  The old "if it serves the story" line we all have seen trotted out.  It's true...but it's also an excuse for anything you envision, to greater or lesser degree.  Let me be clear, though: Obvious, beat-me-over-the-head-with-a-stick agendas are not what I am talking about.  In my not-so-humble opinion, agenda novels are obnoxious bits of proselytization better used as doorstops.  But for the 'real' novels, the question remains: what is too much in terms of violence--particularly crimes against children, women, racial hatred, etc.?  These topics are touchy to address and have a coherent, unemotional discussion about...especially in this country, where we all pretend we aren't prejudiced and to even bring up the topic for discussion implies you are in favor of prejudice.  And where should we writers draw the line? Where should we consider what we owe society or our culture or humanity as a whole?  Or do we have a responsibility in those arenas?  We are writing for money, after all.

Yet, as is traditional in spec fic, our genre usually touches on squicky topics that readers are more comfortable addressing in a setting that isn't too close to the real world.  Brave New World, Animal Farm, 10,000 Leagues Under the Sea, Frankenstein, etc. are all prime examples of this sort of examination that basically created the sf genre.  In recent decades, though,there's a lot of what could be termed gratuitous violence.  For example, my current favorite genre, urban fantasy, is pretty much defined by the dark and violent world of the paranormal.  Not only do we expect the violence, we are waiting for it.  Likewise, cyberpunk or post-apocalyptic tales are also violent by definition.  And these sorts of stories generally have violence not just as stuff that sets the scene or provides plot complications or a crime for our characters to solve...those genres also have a stylistic sense that is all about the violence.  And there's nothing wrong with that.  It's what we are reading the genre for, at least in part.  (I mean, what are the kick-butt heroines going to be kicking if not the butt of some presumably-violent baddy?). 

But I suggest that, as writers, it is worth considering our choices regarding the use of violence in our stories--particularly violence that involves subjugation of the weak, racism or other 'taboo' evils.  So ask yourself this:  why did you choose to put that particular bit of violence there in your story?  And do you know what, exactly, you are saying in the subtext formed by that particular choice?  Are you pointing up the foibles of racism, or portraying the extreme vileness that a particular political or social program may ultimately lead to?  Or are you just going for the titillation factor, or trying to push squick buttons in your audience? 

It's okay to do what you want in your own writing.  If you like buckets o' blood and squickiness, more power to ya.  I have my preference and you have yours.  As is usual in the USA, your readers will vote their opinions by buying your work. 

But beyond the pure commercialism or even our sense of artistry in the creation of our stories, I suggest we writers need to at minimum consider that subtext. If nothing else, it may provide you with a coherent response to haters who slam you for your choices in their reviews.

Writing by the Snowflake method

found an excellent article on Writing by the Snowflake Method by the Write Strong blog.  While I've seen a lot of this information before, and likely so have you, the description of how the author plots out a novel idea is very lucid and simple to follow.  So I thought some of you might want to print it out for quick reference. 

The great thing about the Snowflake Method is it doesn’t force you to SIT DOWN AND FIGURE EVERYTHING OUT RIGHT NOW! That kind of pressure doesn’t usually help the creative process. Instead, with this method, you gradually evolve from a single core idea into a fully fleshed-out novel structure, complete with characters, plot pacing, and so on. It teases the story out of you, bit by bit, and by the end, I’m often surprised by how much detail I’ve infused the story with before I’ve even begun writing.

That there is the reason this sort of method works for me.  I'm a gal who likes to let the muse out while I write.  The surprises that come along are often the best bits of writing or the best ideas or characters you come up with.  Stifling that good stuff with the gag of a rigid plot doesn't work for me.

Hope this is useful to you.  Happy writing!

Plot in the Bible

Susannah Rickards at Strictly Writing has a great article about finding plot in a place I bet few of us have considered:  In the Bible.  Basically, she noticed that the Christmas story is an excellent example of plot.  You can check out her article here.  It's worth reading, as she has some excellent points about how the plot of the story works and why.

It struck me while reading that article that most religious and mythological tales were originally told, not written.  And as they were part of an oral tradition, they had to function as tales that would keep a reader's attention and stick in their brains.  They had to entertain, not just function as cautionary tales.  So it makes sense that many of the ancient texts have definable plots that exemplify what we consider good plotting techniques today.

You could take Susannah's breakdown of The Greatest Story Ever Told and create an entirely different one that no one would recognize as christian...Oh.  Wait.  C.S. Lewis did that, and nobody was fooled!  Well, it would be a challenge to try and create a story around that plot breakdown, anyhow.

Small structure for paragraphs and scenes

I was reading blogs the other day, and ran across Tia Nevitt's post about structure for paragraphs and scenes.  It's a great post full of examples wherein she talks about paragraph structure.  Essentially, even a small paragraph should foreshadow the next paragraph, and should also leave the readers wanting more. 

It's been my observation that small plot structure--paragraph and scene--is basically the same as the large structure of chapter and arc.  Each needs to inform the reader, engage the reader's interest, leave the reader wanting to know more, and having some element that transitions/leads logically to the next paragraph or scene.  Chapters lead to the next chapter; books lead to the potential sequel.  Just so do paragraphs and scenes work. 

Some of this stuff is very subtle, and sometimes it's quite blatant.  In one story I've had hanging about for a while, I have a gal jumping off a cliff into the sea.  That's the logical chapter ending, as it has a dramatic cliff hangar (literally), and it naturally leads to the next scene/chapter, where the characters end up on the beach. 

That seems simple enough.  But where the writer can fail themselves is overlooking the need for foreshadowing and cliff hangar in small ways, i.e. in paragraphs and scenes.  The small size of a paragraph makes it seem like you do not have real opportunity to forshadow or add a cliff hangar; but if you translate the two things into logical progression and hooking the reader, it makes more sense.  But, essentially, that's still a cliff hangar and a forshadowing.

This is true even in a conversation.  I'll give you a rather mundane example.

"Are you okay?"

"No," he replied, rubbing his bloody knuckles.  "I just shut my hand in the car door."

So, what's going on here? First sentence is a hook.  We readers don't know what's going on, but someone's been injured, it sounds like.  We automatically expect to find out in the next paragraph (that's the forshadowing); and we also are anxious to know what has happened (which is the cliff hangar or hook.)  In the second line, we get the answer to the first forshadowing and expect to know what's going to happen about dealing with the smashed hand.  But if the writer ignores the expectation she's set up, for example if the character next says, "Can you watch my purse for a minute, I have to run to the ladies' room," you would react with a doggie head tilt or think the author was an idiot. 

And with the hook it's the same.  By failing to continue in a logical manner, the hook, which carries on until we resolve the issue of the smashed hand, has its momentum dragged to a dead stop.  The readers are jolted from their submersion in the writing, and they are forced to try and figure out what you are trying to do here.  They are generally going to be unhappy because the change of topic makes no sense, is illogical. 

Apparent nonsense in responses can be appropriate if you have characters that logically would behave so, but, again, it's the logic that you establish in the story that you must continue to support in the use of small structure in your writing.

 

Coincidence? I think...maybe

"If the coincidence creates a complication, it can remain in the plot.  Otherwise, get rid of it." Theresa, Edit Torrent blog

Edit Torrent had a post the other day about coincidence in your story plot.  Basically, it boils down to the above rule.  Everything that is apparently coincidental must go if your plot hinges upon it...unless the coincidence is causing some sort of monkey wrench in the works of the plot.  Those sorts of 'coincidences' are good ones at times.  But I would suggest that you don't have more than one or two such coincidental complications.  Too much of that sort of thing will attract unwanted attention from readers and might wreck their suspension of disbelief and enjoyment of your story!

But I have to add something to Theresa's observation:  Coincidence can be a useful too in a story plot if it aids the plot by making the main character suspicious.  Too many coincidences aren't coincidences.  They are a red herring, enabling your character to twig to something not smelling right.

Can you think of other uses for coincidence in a story?  Do you think that any genre, such as children's stories or fairy tales, can have coincidence without it being a problem?  I'm inclined to think that those particular types of tale can (sometimes) have coincidence, as coincidence is part of the story structure--particularly in fairy tales.  Three brothers, travelling separately, all run across the same hag who either blesses or curses them?  There are other examples, many others, where things 'just so happen' to occur to several people with different results...that usually end up with a moralistic wrap up underscored by the coincidental meeting and its results for the participants.

Idea: real world tech and its implications

Speculative fiction that is set in near-world time or setting is going to have a dated feel very quickly if the tech is not predictive enough or if your guesses as to future tech trends are off. 

But urban fantasy and near world science fiction or science fantasy need not feel too outdated if we are smart in our strategies for worldbuilding with current and speculative technology.  It's not just guesswork.

Here are my thoughts as to how you can make your best attempt at avoiding that dated feeling a few years after your story is out.

First, you can avoid the problem by a complete end run: avoid a serious sharing of the world and the tech.  This is most appropriate for romance category novels or short stories, as these focus on different elements than a proper spec fic novel.  In romance, it's all about the love, the sex, the interactions of the characters and the inevitable misunderstandings.  In a short story, you must settle for giving the world a feel that suits the situation and setting, but you don't have the space in which to engage in real details...so you can gloss over the tech to a large degree.

However, if you are going to make me love your story, you are going to build a world in which I want to set up camp and return to again and again.  And that takes details, baby!  and, like Jules Verne or H.G. Welles--or more recently William Gibson's 1980s cyberpunk--you want your novels to stand the test of time...or at least a few decades.  So, my thoughts on how to do that follow: 

Determine cultural trends or outlooks that influence how technology is used.  In Dune, for example, Frank Herbert proposes a loathing of thinking machines, so anything that isn't run by the human mind is verboten.  If the world in which you are writing has an abhorrence, a fetish, a focus that is a strong undercurrent, give some thought to how that will or can affect the way people behave, the items that they use, or other matters such as how the government uses the technology.  Perhaps your government in the story is using invasive technology to determine your role in life (DNA testing in Gattica); or perhaps the military has started using cloning technology to create soldiers for battle.  (It might be expedient to build the army in the solar system where they are being used, for example, rather than expend the resources to recruit and train and then ship bodies where they are needed.)

Layering: Be aware of other options for your technology.  You should consider at least a couple of other applications besides the one you originally develop, or where they will have an effect due to their lack. If you integrate a technology into the world, you need to give some thought to how it can be used in other areas.  Why?  So you round out your world just like a character.  And if the tech is top secret, then you can show how there is another option to that secret tech in civilian use, for example.  If the military docs have special regeneration chambers, but the civilians do not have access or knowledge of it...what DO they have access to?  There should be some tech that is approaching that level, a few generations behind, perhaps, but approaching regeneration.  It might be something like a liquid skin patch infused with nanotech that speeds clotting or tissue regeneration, but cannot replace limbs or fix major damage.  (Your guess is as good as mine.)  but there ought to be a level of tech that is in the ballpark with the other technology in use in the same society.

The basic areas that we generally see technology from one field used in another are

• military
• medical
• cultural
• individual use (personal entertainment, time/labor saving, silly gadgetry, toys)
• religious
• social control
• media/entertainment (public)
• commercial applications

Of course, if you choose to have a gap in tech, for example one based upon the strata of society, that is also a legitimate choice, and you will have to extrapolate from there who has what and why this is so.  Which leads me to my next point: extrapolation.

Extrapolation.  Consider social and personal implications of the technology at hand.  If you suddenly had a world were every second counted, literally, you would be extrapolating from our current society and it's passion for being in touch and minute by minute accountability of what we are doing.  Now we see Facebook and other things that show real time where you are and what you are doing; and in a future society, you could have something as weird as people who share (instead of web cams) their visual perspective of their daily activity.  Virtual reality of people riding along with someone doing something.  That idea has great merit, and could work in military, police, social, sports or what have you for applications.  (I'm going to use that one some time; it's too cool.)  But if someone can make money from it, you know that there will be an application used to make money.

So, extrapolating further, where could that particular idea bear fruit in your spec fic world?

• Porn.  Instead of watching, someone can ride along with you in full sensurround.
• Sports.  Athletes franchise the rights to have people experience their play real time.  (You can bet that negotiations over that are going to be hot and heavy, and it will become a new market niche like web companies, ebooks or other things that took off in the past few years.)
• Commercial.  Test drive a car virtually.  Have a vacation virtually (already done, alas.)  Attend class reunions via a double if you can't travel personally.  I could go on and on.
• Medical.  A surgeon could learn how to perform a new procedure by riding along with the surgeon doing the work.  Students can virutally explore cadavers.

Your world is a character.  As I mentioned above, by integrating tech in layers and rounding out your world, you're making your world deeper and more meaningful.  It's far more gripping and your readers can engage with the characters more if the world has more detail and feels more realistic.  Just like a flat spear carrier type of character, a world that's filled in will engage readers more.  And I believe that readers of speculative fiction prefer detailed worlds.  It makes them happy to engage with the world just as much as the story. 

So, those are my thoughts on the matter.  Any more ideas from the bullpen?

Happy writing!

 

When the plot thins

The past week I've read several books.  And there was a theme of sorts, that of plot holes.  I really liked all three books which had plot holes.  They are really enjoyable and really well written...but they have major plot holes.  And I have to wonder how that could have gotten by editors once it got past the author.

One book, by Katie McAllister, is her newest Dark Ones book.  It's great, so go read it if you like paranormal romance.  But there was one glaring plot hole which really struck me.  Her character Fran is supposed to go somewhere with a friend, but she disappears due to being shanghaied, and when she returns home later that day, there is zero mention of it by her friend.  It's like the problem never happened.  And that's bad because it's such a glaring oversight.  It bothered me the rest of the book, and a couple of other minor slip ups really caught my attention because of it, which mildly reduced my enjoyment of the interesting plot, cool characters, and funny, snappy dialog. 

Similar sorts of things in the other two books, and it's inexcusable, if you ask me. 

I'm wondering: Is it the result of Ms. McAllister being a best selling author, or is it because the publishing houses are spending less money on editing services?

In any case, as writers, we need to take care of plot holes before they go to the agent or publisher.  My suggestions are 

• Take the time to go through your work, read it cold with fresh eyes, and look for subplots that are begun and subsequently dropped;
• Go through the story a second time and identify all subplots as well as the main plots;
• Map out the subplots and main plot point by point; identify the subplots which are actually lead ins for a sequel (such as future romantic interests or set up for a secondary character becoming star of her own novel) and the ones which are vital to be completed this story.
• After you have mapped the plots out, you should be able to see where you dropped the ball.  And when you fix that, you read through it again after letting it sit in order to be sure that the novel is fixed.

There are a lot of great books on writing out there; but my all-time fav is "Self-Editing for Fiction Writers," by Renni Browne and Dave King. 

Talking it out

Well, who's got plot? Anyone want to talk plot?

Moi, I am writing a military sf story set many thousands of years in the future during a time when the human Imperium (highly xenophobic) is fighting to encompass (e.g. 'repatriate') all human colonized worlds under their banner. Like it or not. And their enemy is a group descended from the first interdimensional Pilots who enabled humanity to first reach the stars. Problem is, that group rebelled and they disagreed with the Humancentric approach to galactic civilization. This spawned a millenia long war of sorts. Given the vast distances of space and the high cost of resources, the war is not so much pitched battles as it is insurgency and the winning of hearts and minds through social engineering.

But violence does occur, and our hero is a new private in the military, who discovers he's got a talent for snooping out Pilots--one which puts him in a very bad spot, as it looks like he might be one of them.

I'm trying to get a new name for the Pilots, but cannot think of anything. Nor can I as of yet think of a cool gang sign for them. Any ideas?

What plot problems are you having?

Dialog as a plot device: Part II, underutilized techniques

Do you know why I think it's important to get a handle on using dialog as a plot tool, as a means of forwarding the plot?  It's because we look at information that seems to be unusual or not expected in accordance with Chekov's "Gun Over The Mantle Rule."   If something significant or seemingly out of context is mentioned, it is deemed important and will be used later on.  (Possibly a learned expectation, because that's the convention we see over and over in our reading careers, but still a factor to consider.)  At any rate, it's the same as when you leave clues in a mystery: readers see something seemingly innocuous but placed in the story in such a way as to appear important...because anything in the story is only there because the author (we assume) deems it important.  And if it is not important, it's a red herring and needs to be addressed or it is a dangling plot thread. 

So when you have characters notice something, or have them say something, or structure the dialog so the reader infers a meaning/problem/whatever that isn't already resolved-- like the gun on the mantlepiece, your reader will be expecting to see that element return and be wrapped up. 

So you need to be wary of unintended implications or irrelevant mentions, too.  Failure to do so will annoy your readers.

OPPORTUNITIES FOR STRONG DIALOG
It's my observation that dialog is often underutilized as a writing tool.  New writers in particular, if they aren't busy using too-literal and long-winded speeches, seem to rush through the talk to get to the action scene, or toss in a few words here or there because they know you have to have dialog.  They just don't yet have a feel for what to do with it and for how dialog can function to serve the story. 

In my observation, there are a few things that are commonly overlooked and which I don't usally see spelled out in articles about dialog:

• Subtext in dialog, e.g. implication,
• Utilizing dialog as a plot tool (speeding up a scene or focusing a reader's attention on what is important), and
• Paraphrasing dialog.

Subtext.  One of the places where I think many writers miss an opportunity is that their dialog lacks subtext.  You can use dialog to imply deceipt, foreshadow, or other important things about the story or characters.  (Particularly useful if you want to hint at an unreliable narrator.) And you can add a great richness to the reading experience by having layered meaning like this.  

Implied subtext is the most difficult type of dialog to write because it's derived from how you say things instead of saying them directly; and the way it works, in part anyhow, is that your reader discovers what is important because of what the characters notice as well as by what they say.  The subtlety of this is really fantastic to read when done well, and gives a lovely depth to dialog scenes.  (That said, it's not just the actual dialog that accomplishes this, but also the tags, stage business, character thoughts and other details that are part of the scene.)

Using dialog as a plot tool.  I really do think that dialog serves a much deeper role than we generally give it credit, at least when we first start out in our writing careers.  One of the most underutilized means of using dialog, I find, is based on an overlooked opportunity.  We can direct a reader's attention using dialog in a much more direct manner.  It's a writer's only opportunity to directly tell a reader something without directly telling them.   

An example would be that you obviate a bunch of stage business and move the story along by having your character say, "Johnny, put down that puppy and leave your daddy's razor alone!" instead of walk her through the noticing, the description of the scene  with a half-shaved dog and the rest of the actual action.  One line does it all, saving you effort and getting past a bit of business that you wanted in the story but which you don't need to dwell on. Because, as we all know, not all events have the same weight, and minor events, even when they are needed in the story, do not need to be given equal treatment.  Less important = less page space allocated.  So dialog is one graceful way of dealing with a scene in shorthand. 

And you can reference past events and provide backstory or narrative in the same manner.  This is also a form of subtext or implication, but the shade of meaning is different, because I'm talking about using dialog to direct the readers' attention.  Basically, a character paying attention to something is a clue to readers that they should notice and pay attention to this thing, too. 

Paraphrasing.  A similar technique is the paraphrase, where your character tells us a summary of a conversation.  Sometimes a telling detail is needed, but you really don't want to bore the reader with the whole scene or conversation.  Or, you may have shown us what's being referred to already, but we need to know another character has been told, thus avoiding a plot hole.  We don't need to hear the whole thing again. (There are many examples of this being done badly, so try to be creative and not write an actual summation.  A reference to a summation having been given is likely better.)

This technique of paraphrasing is good for both a first person narrator or for a speaker in a conversation (who may or may not be the narrator), but only the latter is actual dialog. 

Examples.  Statements such as, "Long and short, Joe, we agreed to disagree," or "Well, I gave him what he wanted.  Enough said, okay?" are both versions of paraphrasing.  But you can see that one sums up a conversation (presumably with a mention as to what it was about coming earlier); and the second sentence is implication.  In the second example, the reader is led to infer something about the person saying it, in this case presumably the person is annoyed at having to answer or doesn't want to discuss this point for some other reason.  The circumstances the writer presents prior to or with the dialog should fill in the picture and have readers paying attention for further details regarding the matter referenced.

Which last basically points out that choice of details in your dialog make a critical difference in reader focus as well as understanding. 

What do you think the important underlying functions of dialog are to a novel in terms of structure?

 

Dialog as a plot device, Part I: common mistakes

Electric Spec emagazine has a recent post on their blog about dialog.  I found it interesting, and it gave me some food for thought. 

What is dialog?  We all know that dialog is basically communication between characters.  Most of us are also aware that dialog moves the plot along and provides characterization, motivation, or information.  It breaks up narrative and can speed up pace and add a much needed dose of seeming reality to a story.  But...have you considered dialog very much?  Or studied where it can fail or further your story?

DIALOG PROBLEMS
Common problems.  The biggest problems I've observed in things I've critiqued are

• Dialog that's too literal, 
• Speech that doesn't serve the story/ isn't moving the plot forward,
• References that are unclear or when readers are missing important information required to understand what's being discussed, and
• Parallel conversations that create confusion as to meaning.

Dialog that's too literal. We have to write in a manner that feels realistic but actually isn't.  Fictional dialog is not like real speech. Real-world dialog is cluttered with junk.  It rambles and it makes no sense when used in writing because it's difficult to parse the meaning with all the extraneous verbiage ('How are you?"  "Hi," "Bye," and other bits of language that we salt our speech with), and garbage sounds (um, oh, like, you know).  Often actual conversation has more than one conversation going on, and people are constantly interrupting each other as well.  You also can't translate non-verbal communication (body language/posture, gesture, tone of voice, facial expression) entirely, and must choose selected stage business, description, or dialog tags that serve that purpose instead.   

In particular, new writers will begin a dialog as we would in real life.  And it doesn't work to have a half page of "Hi, how are you?" "I'm fine, what are you doing?" et cetera.  It's crap and doesn't belong, ever. 

Speech that doesn't serve the story.  Any scene you write, no matter if it's narrative, action, or dialog, needs to serve the story as a whole.  It should further the plot, provide characterization,  give important information or serve the story in some other manner.  Preferably it serves two or even three functions at once. Unfortunately, interesting information isn't necessarily important information.  If you can't state why the info needs to be in the story, that bit needs to go.  (And this can also include extraneous verbiage like the previously mentioned meaningless pleasantries.)

References that are unclear or when readers are missing important information.  We all know that conversations have layers of meaning.  Often how something is said is more telling and truthful than what is said.  And a writer has to portray this in a way that the reader follows. So it's imperative to consider dialog and attached details for their implications. 

Often this is best done from the consideration of what does the reader already know?  And, based on that knowledge, what do you want them to infer from your characters' dialog?  If you are not precise enough in how you word the conversation, you will not be steering readers to the proper conclusion.  And let me just say that, in my observation, the usual expectation of a writer is to give the readers too much credit and providing too few clues.  (I suspect this is a case of knowing what you meant but not seeing it's not what you said.)

Let me say this again:  Writers often assume the reader understands more than they do. 

I'm a savvy reader, and if I can't figure out what you are talking about or I'm not comfortable with my assumption as to what you meant to imply, you really did not have enough information there.  It's a fine line to walk between beating your readers over the head with too much information and painting a picture that doesn't need captions.  Being pedantic and therefore obvious and heavy handed is just as bad as confusing readers.  (Thus the value of beta readers, who can point these places out.)

A scene is especially vulnerable to confusion early on in a story, when the reader hasn't yet been introduced to all the issues or complications. As an example, I recently read something by a friend which was very good, if still rough.  But  on page four there was a conversation that confused me because I didn't know enough yet to understand the reference implied.  I was left to guess which of two known issues were meant, but neither fit, so I was confused, irritated, and frustrated...and I focused a lot of my attention on figuring out what later details could have been meant!  I had to read about thirty pages on before I knew what was being referred to on page four...and it turned out there were not one but two different things that were important to understanding that conversation! 

Parallel conversations that create confusion as to meaning.  Basically, having two topics at once = confusion.  When done poorly, dialog makes the reader guess at your meaning, and readers hate that.  Readers like to feel smart by reading between the lines of the dialog...but they must be right in their guessing or you make them unhappy because your writing was flawed and misled them to the wrong conclusion.  They are also made unhappy by having to stop and puzzle out what you are saying.  And it's worse when a reader hasn't got the information yet to understand what you are implying, yet knows you are implying something.  (Frequently, this latter is by a vague and open-ended reference.)  So (oxymoronically) you need to make your implications plain and unmistakeable...but not state them flat out. 

It's possible to manage parallel dialog so you clearly have two conversations; but it's much easier to muck it up and give the reader crossed signals, especially if you create a parallel conversation unintentionally.  An example is if you have one character, who is already mad at a friend, dealing with some other issue (in this case shipping a package.)  So in the same sentence your character answers a question about where to ship a package with two different statements. "You know I hate it when you do that, leaving before we're finished. And I think that you should have sent this yesterday, when it wouldn't have to go overnight." 

Okay, so we have two topics here: the reason for the anger and the package.  We get that the speaker is peeved and that's carrying over to the dialog, but the first sentence obviously refers to something about which we have no knowledge, and the mention seems out of the blue if you have no background on the fight or their relationship except to tell me that Mr. POV is angry at Mr. Package (snicker). But we do get it that the first part is maybe referencing something besides the shipping of a package, which is halfway there.  The writer just needs to get the rest of the situation to the reader before this sentence or needs to change the dialog to clarify. (And beyond the lack of background, the writing in the sentence is poorly structured anyhow, adding to the confusion.)

Unintended confusion like that makes the reader pause to consider what you're trying to say, pulls them from the story, annoys them, and makes them trust you less. And, most* of the time, it's better to rewrite the dialog than to leave that sort of double-meaning sentence in there.  (*That would be about 99% of the time.)

So, you need to be careful that you either say one thing at a time or that you orchestrate the dialog to carry both topics without confusion.

There are a lot of ways to use dialog to your advantage, but its far easier to use dialog mechanically and with little thought to elegance.  So, what I suggest is that you give an edit to your work and decide what your dialog can be used for, how it can be used to add depth to your writing.

What do you find are areas where novice writers or you personally have issues?

Tune in Wednesday for part two.

Story structure and revision checklist

Alexandra Sokoloff has the best blog with advice for writers trying to improve their story structure.  And recently she had another brilliant article on revising/editing and an outline of the components to the three acts.  Check it out here.

Here's the checklist:

STORY ELEMENTS CHECKLIST

ACT ONE

* Opening image
* Meet the hero or heroine
* Hero/ine’s inner and outer desire.
* Hero/ine’s problem
* Hero/ine’s ghost or wound
* Hero/ine’s arc
* Inciting Incident/Call to Adventure
* Meet the antagonist (and/or introduce a mystery, which is what you do when you’re going to keep your antagonist hidden to reveal at the end)
* State the theme/what’s the story about?
* Allies
* Mentor (possibly. May not have one or may be revealed later in the story).
* Love interest
* Plant/Reveal (or: Setups and Payoffs)
* Hope/Fear (and Stakes)
* Time Clock (possibly. May not have one or may be revealed later in the story)
* Sequence One climax
* Central Question
* Central Story Action
* Plan (Hero/ine's)
* Villain's Plan
* Act One climax

___________________________

ACT TWO


* Crossing the Threshold/ Into the Special World (may occur in Act One)
* Threshold Guardian (maybe)
* Hero/ine’s Plan
* Antagonist’s Plan
* Training Sequence
* Series of Tests
* Picking up new Allies
* Assembling the Team
* Attacks by the Antagonist (whether or not the Hero/ine recognizes these as being from the antagonist)
* In a detective story, questioning witnesses, lining up and eliminating suspects, following clues.


THE MIDPOINT


* Completely changes the game
* Locks the hero/ine into a situation or action
* Can be a huge revelation
* Can be a huge defeat
* Can be a “now it’s personal” loss
* Can be sex at 60 — the lovers finally get together, only to open up a whole new world of problems


______________________________
ACT TWO, PART TWO


* Recalibrating — after the shock or defeat of the game-changer in the Midpoint, the hero/ine must Revamp The Plan and try a New Mode of Attack.
* Escalating Actions/ Obsessive Drive
* Hard Choices and Crossing The Line (immoral actions by the main character to get what s/he wants)
* Loss of Key Allies (possibly because of the hero/ine’s obsessive actions, possibly through death or injury by the antagonist).
* A Ticking Clock (can happen anywhere in the story)
* Reversals and Revelations/Twists. (Hmm, that clearly should have its own post, now, shouldn't it?)
* The Long Dark Night of the Soul and/or Visit to Death (aka All Is Lost)

THE SECOND ACT CLIMAX

* Often can be a final revelation before the end game: the knowledge of who the opponent really is
* Answers the Central Question


_______________________________

ACT THREE

The third act is basically the Final Battle and Resolution. It can often be one continuous sequence — the chase and confrontation, or confrontation and chase. There may be a final preparation for battle, or it might be done on the fly. Either here or in the last part of the second act the hero will make a new, FINAL PLAN, based on the new information and revelations of the second act.

The essence of a third act is the final showdown between protagonist and antagonist. It is often divided into two sequences:


1. Getting there (storming the castle)
2. The final battle itself

* Thematic Location — often a visual and literal representation of the Hero/ine’s Greatest Nightmare
* The protagonist’s character change
* The antagonist’s character change (if any)
* Possibly allies’ character changes and/or gaining of desire
* Could be one last huge reveal or twist, or series of reveals and twists, or series of final payoffs you've been saving (as in BACK TO THE FUTURE and IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE).

* RESOLUTION: A glimpse into the New Way of Life that the hero/ine will be living after this whole ordeal and all s/he’s learned from it.

You can refer to the linked article and find her other articles on the various acts and their components and well as her excellent advice on what to look for in an edit.

An additional excellent source for aid in revision is the book, Self-Editing for Fiction Writers by Renni Browne and Dave King. 

Additionally, a great article by Adam Heine at Author's Edge on using MS Word when writing a manuscript--the Document Map. 

 

How not to write...

The Ten Commandments of Crime Fiction, by Dana Kaye at Hey, There's A Dead Guy In My Livingroom blog. 

The Ten Commandments of Crime Fiction

1.    Thou shall not cut your characters any slack

Plots are most compelling when the characters have the odds stacked against them

2.   Thou shall develop your characters

No one likes one-dimensional characters

3.    Thou shall not head hop

Switching POV mid-scene pulls readers out of the story

4.    Thou shall earn every coincidence

While life contains many coincidences, they have little place in your novel

5.    Thou shall omit unnecessary scenes

If a scene does not further the plot, it has no place in your novel

6.    Thou shall not rely on cliché

Does this really require explanation?

7.    Thou shall omit needless adverbs

We don’t need to know how someone sighed or shrugged or shouted

8.    Thou shall utilize your setting

The setting of your novel should enhance your characters and plot

9.    Thou shall revise

I don’t care what your mother says, your first draft is not perfect

10.  Thou shall not settle

Don’t settle on an easy ending or an easy fix to a plot problem

What is High Concept?

"Only High Concept projects can be sold from a pitch because they are pitch driven. Non-High Concept projects can't be sold from a pitch because they are execution driven."    "High Concept Defined Once & For All," By Steve Kaire at The Writers Store 

Premise and High Concept... What's the difference?  As I was discussing in yesterday's post, knowing your premise is an important tool to help you both write and edit less.  Knowing your premise helps you to make better decisions as to character motivation, theme, plot elements and etc.  In short, it helps you to prevent having to revise difficult to change elements such as an entire character arc that is threaded throughout your novel. 

And to beat the topic to death, let me again quote Alexandra Sokoloff: Sokoloff says "You will learn a lot more about what your book or film is about as you're writing it. But you need to know what you think it's about before you start that draft." 

I have always understood High Concept to be something that makes your pitch stand out from the background, something that makes it the proverbial "lightning in a bottle" to the film producers or book editors out there.  But what does that mean, in specific terms?  Darned if I know!  Seems like High Concept is more defined by example than by words. 

But I found a definition that I think is clear enough I can use.  "High Concept Defined Once & For All," By Steve Kaire at The Writers Store has an explanation as to what and how High Concept is...and what it isn't.   

High Concept is a term that's been confused, misunderstood and misused by writers for decades. The common belief is that it's any movie that can be pitched in one sentence. A man who battles his wife for custody of their children is one sentence, but it's a million miles from being High Concept.

Others define it by describing it as "one film crossed with another film." In Robert Altman's The Player, the writers pitch their project to a producer as Out of Africa meets Pretty Woman. That is not what a High Concept film is. What they used is a framing technique that is given prior to pitching your project to prepare the listener for what's coming. You cross two well known films that touch upon the material you are about to pitch so the producer has some idea where you're going with your pitch. That is an example of a common pitching technique and not what defines High Concept.

Story ideas, treatments and screenplays can all have High Concept premises. But only High Concept projects can be sold from a pitch because they are pitch driven. Non-High Concept projects can't be sold from a pitch because they are execution driven. They have to be read to be appreciated and their appeal isn't obvious by merely running a logline past someone. This is the reason why films like "Pulp Fiction," "Star Wars" and "Sideways" could never be sold from a pitch.

The rest of the article gets into more detail on the topic.  Any thoughts or better links/definitions, please feel free to post in the comments.

Another source of great information on story structure is Alexandra Sokoloff's blog.  You can spend hours there.  As I linked and quoted her yesterday, just go to yesterday's post for relevant linkages.

Additionally, just a reminder about my currently running flash fiction blog contest.  Submissions close Sunday, August 22nd. Please see here for the details.

Do you know your premise?

Catching up on the blog reading today, and ran across Betsy Dornbusch's musings at her blog on premise and how/why one should stop and think while writing. 

For me at least, writing is taking more and more thought. One reason is because I refuse, yet again, to revise a book 700 times only to have it turned down because the premise is wrong. I used to leap in without much of a premise because I didn't put enough thought into it.

She has a good point.  You can give yourself a lot of heartburn and heartache by getting 100k words written only to realise you have got some major flaws and the premise of your story won't work.  So less need for revision of plot elements is a Good Thing.

But what the heck IS a premise?
I always struggle with defining these sorts of terms for myself.  But my basic take on defining premise is this: The premise of your story is what you, the writer, are aiming for the story to be. If the premise were a plant's roots, your intentions are the soil from which those roots spring, and the story structure that grows from those roots is the framework upon which the the other aspects of the work depends."  That's rather general, but it will do for me.    

Now, I admit that definition is very similar to the definition of the story's goal, e.g. the plan...the diff being that a goal is transitory and there can be many of them in a story, because each scene, chapter, character, etc. has their own goal or goals.  But premise is what you, the writer, are trying to say.  Not theme, which, unless you really want to beat your audience over the head with it, is subtextual; but the author's concept of what the story is about.  That is MORE than the plot.  You can have a murder mystery with the story actually about the personal growth/change of the detective.  The vehicle in which you tell that story is the plot; but it's not the premise, if I understand this concept correctly.

An interesting article on StoryForms blog talks about premises.  The author's definition of premise is multiple choice:

• It is the meaningful act by a person that causes change in themselves through a battle with an opponent.
• Premise is what the drama is about.
• It commits the story to one sentence and evokes its essential meaning.
• The premise is Aristotle’s unity and an essential part of story.
• It answers the question, what is the beginning , middle and end?
• The dictionary defines premise as ‘A proposal from which a conclusion can be drawn. Or A proposal from which an argument is based.’

I'm not sure that mass of options is helpful. Myself, I rather like the loose "it's what the drama is about" definition.  You can call that a GOAL, or, as Alexandra Sokoloff calls it, your PLAN.  That's easy to define.  A goal or plan can be anything--but basically it's what your character wants to accomplish.  There are multiple goals along the way, however, which your characters have to deal with

Now, Alexandra Sokoloff, my favorite source for technical breakdowns of writerly terms where they intersect with film and screenwriting, has a number of useful posts on premise and high concept. Several articles there that deal with premise include "What is high concept?" and "What's your premise?" The most interesting thing I think she says (in the last cited article) about premise is that, "It should be simple, right - to answer the question: “What’s your book about?” But writers who are used to being in the thick of writing sometimes have only the vaguest idea of the big picture." 

Along the lines of what Betsy's talking about, about thinking before writing, about knowing your book, Ms. Sokoloff says "You will learn a lot more about what your book or film is about as you're writing it. But you need to know what you think it's about before you start that draft."  An important point, especially if you are interested in not wasting your time and discouraging yourself by endless revisions. 

So, to get back to Betsy's thoughts, sitting and thinking about story and what you want before you start typing is important, or, at least, moderately useful for most of us.  I can see I would benefit from doing a bit more of that, at any rate. 

But be careful...'thinking' can lead to naps can lead to writing avoidance! [What? Why are you looking at ME like that?]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Some other articles on premise, plans/goals and high concept:
Premise - ordinary versus high concept, "High Concept Defined Once & For All," By Steve Kaire at The Writers Store.  Tomorrow's post will feature this article. 
"Premise, Foundation of Story Telling," by Bill Johnson
"What's the Plan?" by Alexandra Sokoloff
"Plan, Central Question, Central Action" by Alexandra Sokoloff

 

Additionally, just a reminder about my currently running flash fiction blog contest.  Submissions close Sunday, August 22nd. Please see here for the details.

Jumping into the lake of Verts

Well, taking a few minutes off from ACTUALLY WRITING, I thought I'd catch up on my blog reading via trusty Google Reader, which helps me at least know when I am blowing off my favorite 200-or-so bloggers rather than simply forgetting to check in regularly.  And, lo! I read a few snippets of things here and there and had a relatively interesting idea or two.  (Forgive me in advance for not looking up the links and references; I am being intolerably lazy, I know, but you will just have to live with it.  Either that, or you won't have a post to read.)  So I have a few things that struck me as interesting things to use.  (I should probably have broken this up into two posts, but instead you get a really long and rambly one.  Enjoy!)

Children and parenthood.  One blogger mentioned that in her novel she decided to have a slayer who has retired from slaying in order to deal with parenthood and ensure she maintains custody of her daughter.  The blogger poses the question: why don't we see more parents/parenting and children in urban fantasy?  Are we afraid to have children in the monster-slaying biz, or are we afraid to actualize children like in Lost Boys, where teens hunt and kill the monsters on their own?  Is it PC-ness or something else?  There's lots of room for interesting stories when parenthood crossbreeds with urban fantasy, I'd think.  It would be possible to have the children be involved, or the parent might want to keep them in the dark...or, even better, the kids could be embarrassed by mom/dad the slayer when they find out.  Or the reverse.

Less common settings.  And another blog mentions a cool sounding book based on an African (Senegalese?) myth, which is a milieu that isn't dealt with nearly enough.  Even better, the story is humorous.  We see very little in the US in the way of books set in other cultures or using other mythologies besides Greek, Roman, Native American or other familiar to our culture themes.  It seems that Norse and Celtic mythology and tales are the predominant "alternative" cultural motifs.  African myths and tales are rich in variety, characters, what have you.  (Read some of Migene Whippler's collected tales of the Orisha for a few examples.  Most are out of print, but I own them all because they are that interesting.)

Let go of the dysfunction. Stacia Kane has a great post from a couple days ago about Twilight and the one thing it really gets right: the concept that relationships are good things, and wanting to love and be loved isn't something to be ashamed of; and neither are marriage and kids.  We tend to downplay that in our society, and Stacia discusses how the criticism of the Twilight books can become negative criticism of wanting a relationship more than college and a career.  And there is nothing wrong with wanting to love and be loved.  Nothing.  And while the whole Edward thing is a bit creepy, the fact that Bella wants a relationship more than college and a career isn't inherently a form of mental disease.  So...how about having healthy relationships between your characters for a change, instead of a dysfunctional emotional shoot out in every chapter?  Or physical/emotional abuse?  Or lying, grudges, passive aggressive behavior?  [As a side note, the Kitty the Werewolf series by Carrie Vaughn has a very stable and healthy relationship between Kitty and her husband.  I just read the latest installment of the book and the thing that I pondered rather fondly after I finished reading it was that the relationship was so normal and Ms. Vaughn wrote it so well.]

Avoiding the Ooooh, Butterfly! Then there is the mention (by Mynfel, I think) about being easily distracted by the next shiny idea when you hit the middle-of-the-story hump, that place where things and thoughts get rather tangles and you absolutely must push through against your own mental inertia in order to get to the end.  (Is it mental inertia?  Or is it just that by that time the New, Shiny Idea has been niggling at you long enough you cannot further resist it?  Just sayin'...)

But really, the Big Idea of this post is that there are all sorts of trends, tropes, ideas, or commonalities in the everyday world that don't make frequent appearances in the (oft dysfunctional) fantasyland world of urban fantasy or fiction in general.  And perhaps we should, as writers, take a look at those elements--both to enliven what may be a stale plot and to look at other issues that might provide some interesting character development opportunities or plot enhancement.

When What Next rings your bell.  So, you have all these ideas for plot points or interesting things you can toss into the mix to add to the conflict or obstacles for your hero/ine.  Or you get stuck in that middle-of-the-book doldrum, or you have a scene that you can't figure out how to fix.  Lillith Saintcrow says she just kills off a character to get the story rolling again.  And while that probably works, it might seem a little obvious after a while if that's your only trick pony...so perhaps you can try something a little less bloody and with a bit more variety:  You can use the list of odd little tropes, ideas, trends like we discussed above.

Take things you don't see much of and see how they would play out in your chosen genre.  Or pick a trope or plot element that you have been using in the story and invert it, subvert it, convert it. 

Invert it.  Take any plot element and stand it on its head.  Work from there to see that shakes out from the idea tree.  For example, if the vampire slayer bad ass is totally tough and totally able to kick vampire butt from here to next week...you have her not so tough in ways that give her a real Achilles heel.  For example (and there are better ones out there, I'm sure) you could take a vampire slayer, the Chosen One like Buffy, and make her get ill at the sight of blood.  Or even pass out.  So how is she going to deal with that reaction?  I imagine she will have to get pretty clever about it.  Perhaps therapy, or perhaps she finds a way to make herself color blind!  You can take any expected ability of a hero and pull the rug out from under it, making an unforseen complication and a rich opportunity for variety in your plotting.  Also, humor opportunities might arise; and that is a plus.

Subvert it. Usually in a paranormal romance (like most romances) there's a common mistake where lovers lie by omission or deliberately out of fear.  Well, subvert that trope by making the lie a big, ridiculous one, one that is so egregious by the understatement (I have a child and her mother and I are estranged) versus the reality (my kid's mother is your arch enemy and I don't know how to tell you and I don't want you to hate me because I want you bad, future baby mamma #2.)  In other words, make the paranormal romance pivot on a fairly typical plot element of the lie/misunderstanding and twist it.  So, as in the example above, the fact that the guy turns out to be the father of the child of Our Heroine's the Evil Enemy--and then, to make matters worse and more complicated, he's got to drop everything to go to a parent/teacher conference when the kid acts out at Evil Doer's Prep by insisting she be called Joan of Arc and be martyred by burning at the stake.  (Or something equally outre.)  Just try finding something extreme and outrageous and see if that gets you moving.  You can always modify it later on, right?  

Convert it.  Take a trope or plot element and make bad into good, good into bad, enjoyable into loathed, sexy into turn off.  Whatever.  But if you turn things around, or have your character(s) react differently from what the reading audience would expect, you give yourself an opportunity for memorable differences between your vampire novel and the many, many others.  

There are lots of ways to change things up and make your storyline more interesting.  But when you feel most comfortable with a plot element, you might consider if it's because it's something you've seen a lot of times previously.  And you may want to dip at least a toe into the lake of Verts. 

So, if you are stuck...Find the Verts. 

Have a plan.

"You always hear that “Drama is conflict”, but when you think about it – what the hell does that mean, practically?  It’s actually much more true, and specific, to say that drama is the constant clashing of a hero/ine’s PLAN and an antagonist’s, or several antagonist’s, PLANS."  Alexandra Sokoloff

What she calls a plan is what I've always thought of as the goal, as the thing the character wants to accomplish.  But put the way Ms. Sokoloff does, I can see that the basic pattern of a novel or movie is for the character to have a series of different plans, or approaches, to achieving the goal (or the alternate goal, if the goal changes.)

So, what I take from this article is the observation that the plan changes due to obstacles, but there should always be a plan to reach the goal of the moment.  If you don't show that, you are probably experiencing a plot hole or lack of clarity in that regard.

Excellent article.  Go read and learn, young padawan. :)

 

Coincidence? I think not! (At least not in your plots)

"[I]t's hard to acknowledge that too much of our plot relies on coincidence. But acknowledging that is really the first step to remedying it. And all you have to do is think, "If this same thing happened because someone made it happen, how would it happen."  Alicia, Edittorrent blog

The above-quoted article is an excellent one.  Plot coincidences can be too glib, too easy--and cause readers to toss your book in irritation. I have to say that when I read the post, I could recall a number of occasions where I paused and shook my head, thinking, "How unlikely is that?" at an important plot element that depended entirely on chance.  Not necessarily plot complications that get in the way but don't entirely impede the plot; but ones that solve the problem, kill off the bad guy, or net the hero/ine the McGuffin s/he's been aiming for. 

Coincidence as the basis for the story.
This is one use of coincidence that I think can be readily used with little to no problem.  And that's because the story starts here.  Example:  A man buys a lottery ticket and actually wins.  (The Lottery, by Pat Woods)  The coincidence is the basis for the story, but essentially has nothing to do with the story plot.

But that's how it really happened!
Yes, truth is stranger than fiction.  However, in fiction, you aren't plotting reality, you are plotting a story.  And a story is not about facts but about emotional resonance.  It has to feel real to the readers, not be real.  The difference should be clear to you if you are a reader.  However, I believe confusion as to this point is growing among new writers because they watch a lot of television and movies, where coincidence is rampant.  It's accepted in the visual media, but not generally in the written.  And that, I believe, is because the written story requires more participation on the part of the reader.  And dropping in coincidences is practically the same thing as dropping in a deus ex machina element: It takes away from the reader's involvement because coincidence, if too easy, makes the story less worthwhile.  Investment feels like a cheat or a waste at that point, and readers get upset with you.  A great article on this point is here.

A story's logic is linear, more or less.
Now, you can definitely have coincidences in a story.  Too many or the wrong kind, however, and you have problems.  Just as the fact that you make a promise to readers by the inital worldbuilding/scene setting in the opening, you promise them by the medium you are using (written story) to have the plot make sense.  True life doesn't always make sense.  Life is constantly complicated by random acts of chaos which are neither logical nor linear.  But people want their books to make sense.  They want a linear progression, more or less:  Something happens, logical response is decided upon and protagonist goes there, dealing with ensuing complications along the way.  And the complications are ones that could be expected based on the type of story.  Man versus Society, for example, might have complications such as the EPA trying to block your entrepreneurial protagonist's attempts to reopen a business that will energize the economy of his town.  But in the cited example you wouldn't have the solution nor the conflict based upon a random circumstance that couldn't logically be expected.  For example, you wouldn't have a mysterious benefactor send over a crew to spend sixty million to retrofit the plant and make the EPA happy, thereby providing jobs for everyone.  (Not unless you were writing a Santa story, anyhow!)  And you wouldn't have the conflict based upon the random fact that your protagonist's ex-wife was rich and politically connected enough to sue and slap injunctions  and create endless trouble--just because he cheated on her and she's still angry about it.  

The first example is just too implausible, being a deus ex machina; and the second one, while it might be appropriate for a romance or some such where an angry ex being trouble would seem relevant, would not work if the story is a drama about a man who wants to open a business and falls afoul of government regulatory bodies.   

It's a matter of degree.
I doubt that a story can function without some level of coincidence, at least to add to plot complications or the initial problem.  In Alicia's blog post, she discusses how some coincidence makes sense (the Frenchman, because he has no real function other than red herring) but that important events that depend on random coincidence are a fatal plot flaw.  I tend to agree.  There are exceptions, of course.  You can't have mythic hero's journey tales a la Greek mythology like the Oddyssey without having gods who add random chaos just because they hate each other.  There's some logic there, but the application of godly disfavor or favor is appreciably random, in particular when it's Hera or Zeus involved.

Those are my thoughts on the matter.  What are yours?  Do you find some coincidences to be okay and others totally unacceptable no matter what?  Or do you feel, like I do, that it's a matter of degree?

Plot and foreshadowing

Alexandra Sokoloff has another great post on story structure, this time focusing on foreshadowing.  Check it out here.

Starting blocks rather than writing blocks

"Nothing is more exciting than the promise of a story in your head, but in order to get it on the page you need to figure out exactly what you need to do to make it work. You need to realistically outline and throw out what bogs the readers down. You need to set up a game plan to hook your readers and keep them reading. Here are some simple steps to help you build the frame that you hang your story on." N.M. Kelby, Writer's Digest online article, 16Feb2010

So, you have an idea.  You're in the metaphorical starting blocks.  But, tell me:: After the Big Idea sparks your urge to start a new piece of fiction, where do you begin?  For me, the process begins with that idea, which is usually a scene.  So I write that scene/idea and discover my protagonist.  And, by some miraculous process--subconscious  or divine, who knows?--I discover the general idea.  The above article and a recent Edit Torrent article speak to this.

Now, you could argue the process really begins just with an idea, say a parameter like "I want to write a vampire romance."  And so you envision a character (heroine, an average working gal), and then envision the problem (she doesn't want to be involved with a vampire) and the thing that forces this upon her (she's writing a thesis for her Master's degree and vampires are it for subjects whether she wants to study them or not.  Why this is so to be answered later.) 

The above is what I did for Blood Shot, but I really did both the 'write the scene' and 'ask the questions' things at the same time.  I think that breaking down the process as in a you must follow a list A through Z is going to be less than helpful for those writers who are advanced enough to have their backbrains do the processing that a newbie might have to consciously follow.  We've likely done the thinking for a story start often enough we can do it seat of the pants and just use 'it feels right' as the basis for a green light for starting the story. 

But that's a pantser tendency, and for die hard outliners, they might have to do a lot more thinking. 

In the Writer's Digest article, you are told to start with your protagonist, then establish time and place and announce the stakes.  This is typical first scene stuff, though--especially for speculative fiction, where much of the fun for readers is learning a new world along with the story.  You make a promise with that first paragraph as to what type of story this will be (fantasy or science fiction, romance or urban, etc.) and you give enough to show the reader who is important/protagonist and enough about the world for the reader to get his or her feet beneath them.

I disagree that you always start with a protagonist.  I think that speculative fiction by its very nature often requires a writer to begin with something that is important, not just with a protagonist.  In fact, you might not start with any main character at all,just with an incident in some faraway place or time that establishes the basis of the story.  (Some people call this a prolog; but I find that it can often be a first chapter, lol.)  Point being, spec fic isn't like most 'standard' types of fiction.  And, for that matter, detective stories can begin with a crime such as a murder, because that's an attention grabber for readers. 

But I think it's valid to say that the big thing about starting your spec fic tale is this:  You have some flexibility in how you structure your opening, because (as I mention in this earlier article) you have a different set of readers who will allow you to start in a different manner than, say, a romance or literary novel.  Just be sure you open with something interesting that either informs readers about the crux of the main plot or introduces a main character (not necessarily the protagonist/hero.)

Monocultures in your fictional worlds

"The chances of having a single planet with only one culture present is low. Exceptionally low. So low that writers who resort to this better have a really good excuse or else." Liana Brooks

Ms. Brooks has an excellent article on monocultures in your stories.  In terms of worldbuilding, monocultures seem like an easy out for a writer.  Too easy, too glib, and possibly annoyingly so for readers, because the audience for spec fic is a lot more demanding in their expectations.  They are used to having an entire world shown, not a simplistic sketch.  They are reading in large part to discover the world the writer creates, too!

I have been working off and on on a story set in a world with ties between Faerie and Earth.  It occured to me right off that I had to have multi-national conflicts on both sides of the gateway for the story to work.  And it's both been a nightmare and deepened the plot considerably.  More is at stake.  Blame can be shared, spying can be attributed to more than one source, thus deepening the mystery/confusion.  Et cetera.

However, I can think of a few examples where books have a monoculture technically, but due to political factions it's as if there are multiple cultures.  Tinker and Stealing The Elf King's Roses are two examples of that sort of worldbuilding.  (Both are excellent reads if you haven't tried them already.)

 

Minor characters

Along the lines of the previous post, Liana Brooks discusses minor characters and deciding if they're pulling their weight.  (It's the 'gun on the mantlepiece' used for characters.)

How do you outline your stories?

I'm presently outlining (in some detail) a story, Blood Shot. It's both an experiment in discipline and to see if a detailed outline will be helpful to my pantser self.

Over the years I have seen a few varieties of outlining, and my vast preference is 4x6 cards, but they encourage me to keep adding plot elements...a Bad Thing. So I'm adapting a few key concepts and came up with the following format for each scene or chapter (depending on how much detail I've come up with already):

POV Character, POV type. Setting: ___. Description of locale. Action:  describe it in general.  Purpose 1: Main purpose. Purpose 2,3,4, etc.: Additional purposes.  (intended purposes: establish characterization, introduce new character, narrative/worldbuilding, backstory, motivation, action that moves plot forward, significant plot devices like Climax or Black Moment, red herrings, which plot or subplot it serves.)

I do this as a bulleted list using Word 2003.  I keep one plot point per bullet for now, but I use the colors to make finding the data simple. You can organize your outline however it makes sense for your process, but if you use Word's outline function, it's complicated and vastly more work than it's worth.

What I do find interesting about this experiment is that I am able to see just how much weight a scene is pulling. I read somewhere, and agree, that if a scene doesn't do at least three of the following-- further the action, provide important information (including worldbuilding narrative for spec fic), establish or develop character or relationships-- it shouldn't be there. The outline process lets me see where this does and does not happen, so I can fine tune it before I waste time on writing something I won't keep.

My slightly disconcerting finding is that I seem to toss all of the elements I listed into most scenes in the parts I've already written!

So I now have to consider what is TOO DENSE?!!

A thought about plot and story

Story (n):  "narrative: a message that tells the particulars of an act or occurrence or course of events;"
Plot (v): "devise the sequence of events in (a literary work or a play, movie, or ballet);" and (n): "the story that is told in a novel or play or movie etc."

Despite the definitions above, I'm inclined to say that plot and story aren't the same thing.  Perhaps it never occurred to you to split that particular hair.  But, while helping a friend with his synopsis, it occurred to me that his crazy-but-good story was hideously difficult to describe as a linear plot, yet functiond as a story because story implies meaning and sense.  Nonsensical can make sense in a novel. 

One might make the mistake of thinking that the novel then was either not a workable spec fic genre novel (too literary, perhaps); of that it was totally unworkable.  But what ho! Not so!  Try reading Delaney's Dahlgren, a classic with an ouroborous for a plot, which I adored.  There's a worthwhile story there about a man who finds himself in a strange world with no memory, and begins to wonder if he's in a story himself.  I find some parallels in my friend's novel plot and its story, and it occured to me that it was worth a mention here.

So that's my thesis: The plot can be meaningless, but there needs to be meaning in the story...and the story is the characters' journey.  And I'm not talking literal plot points but the essential meaning for the characters (and thus the readers.)

You can have a goofy, strange, indescribable-in-a-linear-manner plot that blurs reality with fiction/ meta concepts/ psychodrama-- but the way you the writer share the characters' experiences makes the writing make emotional sense, even if it isn't logical.  If you make it make sense, feel acceptable, even the weirdest stuff will feel appropriate and even make a certain bizarre sense.  That's your goal. 

I'm sure not everyone will agree with me.  But then, that sort of odd plot isn't everyone's cup of tea, either.  I've read Dahlgren at least a half-dozen times, so you can guess my feelings. 

I'd like to hear your thoughts on this, too.  Maybe I'm just talking stuff. 

What kind of story IS it, anyhow?

Coincidentally, Alexandra Sokoloff has a post today on what type of story, and it's quite relevant to this morning's longish post on plot.

Basically, we have a number of options for types of story.  I suppose these could be called tropes, or even cliches.  But they are story forms that work, that reach into the human psyche when done right, and are thus timeless and endlessly recyclable.  Paraphrased from the linked article, some of these are

• King Arthur story - chosen one coming into his/her own;
• Reluctant Witness story;
• Mentor story - wise figure aids protagonist;
• Mysterious Stranger story - a “fixer” character comes into the life of a main character, or characters, and turns it upside down;
• Cinderella story;
• Deal with the devil story.

Ms. Sokoloff has lots of examples of which movies and books fit the lists.  Very good for reference if you are aware of how others have accomplished the same story plot structural goals.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And a thoughtful quote from the linked article:

"You have to create YOUR OWN definitions of types of stories, and find your own examples to help you learn what works in those stories. All of writing is about creating your own rules and believing in them."   Andrea Sokoloff

Plot patterns and the urban fantasy sub-genre

I've been thinking for a while now that the urban fantasy subgenre is getting overwhelmingly drowned in mystery plots or police procedurals, which has gotten me thinking about plot.  Because it doesn't matter which flavor of paranormal world we are dealing with; in an urban fantasy there is nearly always some central mystery that must be solved. 

The nature of an urban fantasy--that it takes place in a cityscape that is, generally speaking, rather like our own barring the paranormal elements--lends itself to the sorts of plots that take place in one general location.  You cannot easily have a quest like in an epic fantasy when you don't hit the road, for example.

I never considered myself much of a mystery reader, so this trend has me rather uncomfortably thinking that perhaps I have no business writing a mystery sort of plot in my urban fantasy landscape.  And as I like writing urban fantasy landscapes, this is a sticking point for me.

Basic plots--how many and what they are--have been argued over tremendously.  I find references to lists of 1, 3, 7, 20, and 36 plots here, but it seems generally held as a truism that "there are only 7 plots."  Those are

• [wo]man vs. nature
• [wo]man vs. man
• [wo]man vs. the environment
• [wo]man vs. machines/technology
• [wo]man vs. the supernatural
• [wo]man vs. self
• [wo]man vs. god/religion.

A useful discussion on the truth of the "only 7 plots" generalization is here, but I don't really think it matters to ponder that issue excessively, especially for spec fic, and really especially when we're talking fantasy, because using the above list, urban fantasy would be man v supernatural.  So that list is more philosophical than practical for writers in the spec fic field.  But the patterns of the plot aren't the same thing as the plot, and dissecting those in particular sub-genres can be really useful to get a handle on what drives those particular types of stories.  Paranormal romances, for example, are romances set in a paranormal world; and readers of that sub-genre know they will be getting a romance.  Urban fantasy has a character pitted against a tough adversary over some issue involving a mystery to be solved.  Epic fantasy has a quest and the hero(ine) must journey to accomplish that goal and go through an (epic) struggle. 

Specifically for the urban fantasy genre, plot patterns, as I said above, seem to be overwhelmingly either mysteries or police procedurals. Almost always, an investigation takes place.  Look at the Harry Dresden by Jim Butcher, the Nightwatch series by Sergei Lukanyenko, the Nightside series by Simon Green, the Mercy Thompson series by Patricia Briggs, the Greywalker series by Kat Richardson, the Anita Blake series by Laurel K. Hamilton, the World of the Lupi series by Eileen Wilks, et cetera and ad infinitum.  All of these series (and many more) are basically ones where some problem is presented and the protagonist(s) have to solve the problem, either via civilian investigation or, if the protagonist is a cop, police investigation (police procedural).  So, to me, a definition of plot type is rather useless and I find that what I am really looking for is a way of looking at these types of stories in a manner that helps me think of them differently.

So I come to plot patterns.  Some types of plot patterns (from the ArtsEdge site) are

• from problem to solution
• from mystery to solution
• from conflict to peace
• from danger to safety
• from confusion to order
• from dilemma to decision
• from ignorance to knowledge
• from questions to answers

This list is handy, as it doesn't distinguish the entities with which the protagonist(s) are in conflict, just the manner of the conflict.  And, when looked at from this angle, the concept that all the urban fantasies appear to be mysteries or police procedurals isn't quite true, if you only look at what the desire of the protagonist is.  In fact, you could probably find any of the above in most of the urban fantasies!  They are very general.  And to my way of thinking, this list doesn't address the manner in which the goal is reached, and that seems to me to be a mystery or a police procedural for any urban fantasy I've examined, because the protagonist needs to figure out the crux of the matter, the solution, and protect themselves from their various adversaries on their way to the goal.  Basically, what happens in a noir detective story.  (If anyone has a dissenting opinion or example, please let me know.)

However, I still want to consider the plots I'm toying with and make them not overtly appear to be a mystery to be solved.  I have yet to accomplish it, lol.  If the objective of the plot, for example, is to accomplish a goal, say returning a stolen artifact before a time limit runs out and some major big bad thing destroys the universe...it's still basically a mystery, because without the protagonist searching for answers, the story wouldn't move anywhere.  Or if the protagonist is seeking to avenge the death of a loved one, they have to solve some sort of mystery or investigate to find the killer.  Again, no investigation, no plot progression.  To my way of thinking, any need for discovery turns the plot pattern into one involving investigation and thus becomes a mystery.  Over and over and over I find this to be true.  And I find it annoying!

So, really, is it some sort of mystery that makes the urban fantasy, not the kick-butt hero(ine) and the fact that the setting is in an urban environment?  It seems to be the case.  Do you think I'm mistaken in that perception?  I never thought I'd be annoyed at a lack of hair splitting in sub-genre definition, but here it is, lol.

The flavor of a culture, or a truism? (repost)

Reposted from February 24, 2008

"There was a great simplicity and openness of character about the Gauls, a love of liberty and a generous sympathy with the oppressed.  They scorned surprises and strategems in war, trusting only to strength and valour.  This absense of craft was indeed one of the reasons why they succumbed to the Romans so much sooner and more easily than the Spaniards.  The conquest of Gaul was begun about a century later than that of Spain, but it was concluded earlier.  For the Spaniard kept up a scattered guerilla warfare, protecting himself in his mountains, whereas the Gaul came on with fire and fury, and shattered his whole strength at once against the Roman legions.  Another reason for the comparatively easy subjugation of the Gauls lay in their inability to combine.  Their internal animosities were of more importance to them than the exclusion of the foreigner." De Bello Gallico, According to the Text of Emanuel Hoffman via Google book search. (footnotes and bibliographical refs are omitted)

Does this sound familiar?  I'd bet it does if you have read ANY epic fantasy or military SF! 

First published in 1898, this tome talks about the Gauls and their conquest by the Romans. 

However, from Lord of the Rings to many of the recent epic fantasies I've read, the dynamics are remarkably similar. 

Which tells us something about epic fantasies.  Either the cultures we prefer to see in them are divisive and troublemaking, or this rather ubiquitous social dynamic of divisiveness and inner cultural conflict obscuring threats from outside is a pervasive human condition. 

I rather think the latter.  How do you weigh in on this? 

In terms of writing, though, the loosely connected tribal society that can't get its act together because of internal conflict is rather useful from a plot conflict perspective.  A major obstacle to overcome!

Happy writing!

The muddle in the middle

Jen Debenedictus has a great article on middles and such.  Check it out here.

Plot, the perpetual need to overthink it, and some simple ways to get a handle on the plot monster

"Contrary to many general-purpose dictionaries, a plot is not the main story of a work. A plot is the series of events providing conflict within a story. The search for a murderer is a plot. Surviving a natural disaster is a plot. A plot can be summarized without specific names or settings. (Do not argue with teachers about this… plot is whatever they want it to be!)

The plot is sometimes called the “spine” of a story. The plot is the action, while the story is the emotions associated with the action. Yes, a plot can be caused by the emotions of characters, but the action is apart from the story. Plots are the results of choices made by the characters: the characters take action (or don’t) and events happen as a result.

Aristotle set the “rules” for modern plots: there is a beginning, middle, and end. The beginning is short, the ending shorter, and the middle is where most of the plot twists reside. If you write 100 pages, it might take 30 to introduce the characters and plot, 50 for the twists, and 20 for the ending. The beginning ends with the introduction of the primary plotline. The middle ends with a climactic showdown.

Many writers “plot” their plots, like a timeline. It helps to see where choices are made and actions taken, so you can pace the story. Pacing is important because most stories accelerate in action as they progress. While the beginning events might last days, the end usually occurs in hours."  Tameri guide for writers article

The most important thing to take from this is that "story is the emotions associated with the [plot] action." But all the rest of the above is great stuff to tattoo on the backs of your hands. 

As I have a terrible tendency to get all confused about plot (overcomplicating things, as is my wont) this quote particularly resonated with me.  There are many excellent points on story structure (including a nifty chart you can cadge for your own use).  Something I found particularly useful, though, was this handy rule of thumb for discerning plot:

"It should be possible to state a plot in one or two sentences. If a plot requires more than two dozen words to describe, it is too complex. The primary plot is simple; the story is complex. The more provocative, unusual, and thoughtful a plot, the more likely a reader or audience is to want to know the complete story. Shakespeare’s plots are simple, but the plays have wonderful depth. Tom Clancy spy novels are long and complex, but the plots are easy to state. Think about your favorite stories and how simple the primary plots are." 

Short story tips

"The ultimate crime in writing is to be boring.  You risk that every time you are careless with your plot."  p7, Creating Plot by J. Madison Davis. 

I'm sure you all are aware that short stories differ somewhat from novels.  Not including length, of course.  And then there are the varieties of short stories, to include flash fiction (which can be of various lengths from 100 to 1,000 words, generally); short stories; novellas; and the mid-range category between short story and novella length, the .

I've been considering this topic all during NaNo November, because one of the difficulties with working on my WIP was that I have plot issues.  I think that A Lighter Shade Of Pale needs to be reconsidered some, and it's making me stick at the point where the story is supposed to be heading into the confrontation.  Things are off, and it's a plot issue.  So, unless I can figure a way to avoid rewriting the story and keep most of what I've got written, I'm going to have to rewrite the whole blankety blank thing at some point to make it work.  (But I think the ace in the hole is that I can expand the story and keep what I've got by making it a full on novel.  We shall see.)

Anyhow, this bunch of forehead-bunching think sessions has caused me to look around for information and thoughts on short story writing.  I like the three-act format, but it isn't the be-all and end-all of plot structure.  And it's not working to help me get the kinks out of ALSOP. 

Tips on constructing a short story.  I borrowed this from Kate Kelly's excellent post on the subject, here.

1. Stick to a single POV. Multiple POV short stories can be made to work, but if a story can be told from a single perspective it’s better to do so.

2. Avoid preamble. You don’t have much space so get into the story and your character’s head right from the very first sentence.

3. Make every word count – a short story should be tight.

4. Minimise number of settings – try to keep the number of scenes down – only those that the story actually needs.

5. Minimise number of characters – you don’t have the space to develop a wide cast of interesting and varied characters, so keep these to the bare minimum.

6. Keep it consistent – this goes for voice and rhythm as well as POV.

7. Finish with a punch – make your last line really memorable to that it resonates with the reader after they have stopped reading.

8. Don’t write on beyond the story’s natural end – this is so easy to do. Come back to it later and check whether where you have ended it is the best place or whether it would have more impact if you finished it a couple of paragraphs earlier.

9. Edit it – let it rest for a few days, then come back to it with a critical eye. Rewrite if necessary – I’ve been known to turn a story completely about!

10. And finally enjoy it!! Writing short stories is fun.

 And remember:

"One spectacular scene after another does not make a novel.  They must be connected."  Ibid, p10

 

"I don't give a sh*t"

"[A]bove all, in an ending, the reader/audience has to CARE. A good ending has an emotional payoff, and it has to be proportionate to what the character AND the reader/audience has experienced."  Alexandra Sokoloff

I highly recommend reading the linked post.  Ms. Sokoloff discusses why readers will accept your ending (if you do it right) and what you need in a climax/ending for them to be happy with your story and how you end it.  Basically, you have to give them an emotional payoff that takes into account things like who dies, who doesn't die, who suffers and transforms, do the characters suffer enough to make the catharsis of the ending/climax emotionally satisfying, etc.  (Not that she spells out all these things, but you can infer them readily enough from the text.)

And a reminder to please read and vote on the entries for the Chthulu-inspired Halloween Horror Contest.  Entries here.  Voting needs to be in by end of day, Monday, November 9th.  And please feel free to repost this information and/or mention the need for voters.  There are some great entries, and your horror-loving friends will thank you!

Your mystery's a joke (nyuk, nyuk!)

"A murder mystery is like a joke. In both cases, the storyteller sets up a situation, carefully leads the audience down a false path only to deliver a big twist at the end. We know we're being duped, and we go along willingly, happily even! That gap between expectation and delivery touches some deep and primal sense of human enjoyment.

With a joke, the gap is a twist of words ('Nope, I'm a frayed knot'), of situation ('Shut up and keep swimming') or perception ('But this one's eating my popcorn!'). With a mystery, the twist is finding out who the *real* killer is, and why. In both cases, the storyteller is deliberately lying to the audience, and the audience is happy to go along with the lie."   Steve Malley, his Full Throttle & F*** It blog

And a reminder to please read and vote on the entries for the Chthulu-inspired Halloween Horror Contest.  Entries here.  Voting needs to be in by end of day, Monday, November 9th.  And please feel free to repost this information and/or mention the need for voters.  There are some great entries, and your horror-loving friends will thank you!

 "That's the tricky thing with fiction. I have gotten into more mild arguments with critique partners, my editors, myself (nothing like arguing with yourself) over motivations and characters and so on . . . on this and this alone. The believability issue.  I think newer writers find this particularly galling. In other words, we ALL know people capabale of being yes, THAT horrid, and yes, THAT eccentric. But put them in a fictional world and it starts to stretch readers' minds as far as believability."  Erica Orloff, from her blog

The above quote is from a great post by author Erica Orloff on characters and believability.  The salient point of the post is that what might be documented fact can come across to readers as false and unbelievable. 

She's so right.  And it's because readers' sense of what is believable is affected by other factors than reality.  Writing serves in part to make sense of the world.  And this is an unvoiced, unacknowledged, subconsious expectation.  Whereas the real world does not have to make sense.  We deep down want order instead of randomness, instead of chaos...but the real world denies us this.  So in made things, we want order.  We want logic.  We want A to follow B and Slot C to be the proper form for Tab D. 

Even in a memoir, we can't just write the facts.  It has to be a good story!  In other words, memoirs have to make that sort of sense, too.  So the memoir or biography writer needs to make the facts make sense.  Needs to interpret these things that happened in a manner that is acceptable and sensical for readers.

As Ms. Orloff says:

"I have come to the conclusion watching the behaviors of people who are really just ugly at times . . . that many people's cruelties are banal. As if they are blithely unaware they are rude or mean. Do I REALLY think the snarky woman who finds a way to insult to me at cocktail parties has nothing better to do than think of insults on my mothering skills? If I repeated to her what she said now, months after the fact, she would likely say, "I never said that." Or . . . "I must have been kidding." Or, like the lady who moved out of the neighborhood, I have a sneaking suspicion that excuse would be, "I must have been drunk." Some people's cruelties are completely banal. They don't even think about them. They don't lose sleep. They just wander through life that way.

But in a fictional world, writers set up REASONS for dismemberment and cruelty. We very often even give serial killers motivations of some sort (look what Thomas Harris did when he RUINED the Hannibal Lechter franchise). Give reasons . . . and people will BELIEVE your fiction.

But real life? A lot more banal."

Amen to that. 

And a reminder to please read and vote on the entries for the Chthulu-inspired Halloween Horror Contest.  Entries here.  Voting needs to be in by end of day, Monday, November 9th.  And please feel free to repost this information and/or mention the need for voters.  There are some great entries, and your horror-loving friends will thank you!

Troubleshooting your plot holes

Mary Buckham*, co-author of Break Into Fiction, is guest posting over at the Romance University site.  Her excellent article on troubleshooting plot holes is here.  *(Attribution corrected 11/9/09.)

She gives a few tips on dealing with plot and story issues that keep your story from working:

Trouble shooting a novel length commercial fiction story and rejection letters:

- The infamous “sagging middle” indicates a lack of plot, lack of turning points, lack of stakes rising and possibly a lack of character development.

 - A rejection that says “Interesting story concept but I didn’t connect with the characters” means character development is lacking.

- A rejection that says “…not big enough to be single title” may indicate a large enough premise for a single title but what you consider subplot is not significant to the central story line. 

How do you find these holes?  A good place to start is with the character to see if he/she is truly motivated or just “doing things the author needs them to do.”  Or, ask yourself if your character’s external goal is really strong, or worthy of an entire book. 

Another problem we see often is that the central character(s) don’t really accomplish anything or move the story forward – they just go from one non-escalating action to another that has no true impact on the story.

Is your plot drifting?

Another great post on Blood Red Pencil by guest blogger Kathryn Craft.

How do you find out if your piece is drifting?
The easiest way is when a test reader says, “I’m confused.” But the piece itself has many ways of telling us “this isn’t working.” As you re-read, look for the following indicators that your structure needs reinforcement. See if you might have:

• included language that smacks of an authorial “note to self.” These can be rather entertaining, once you look for them. Possibilities include “Before I tell you more about that…”, “This may seem off-topic, but…”, “The point I’m trying to make is…”, and “All will soon become clear.”
• reiterated aspects of the story because you were so off-track you felt compelled to remind the reader where you started.
• stated the subject outright—yet never referenced it again.
• put a line break in a short piece because after several misfires you needed to start again.
• introduced too many notions for the length of the piece, thus exemplifying the very definition of “scatter-brained”—in shorter works, think depth, not breadth.
• included sentences whose topics open up a whole different world—they may need their own story.
• said you would “show” something when you’ve only shown the opposite—as in, “what not to do.”
• used passive voice, which can obscure the cause and effect which creates structure.

Each sentence must tip the reader into the next, but from any one sentence, the possible directions are legion. It is up to you as author to pick one and guide the reader on the journey. If you find that the possibilities inherent in your prose are too numerous for one piece, great! Dump them into a file on your computer for development into other pieces at another time.

New terminology:  Pinch points vs turning point.

From Romance University's post by CJ Lyons:

"In a novel or movie,  a turning point takes the plot in a new and different direction, often through a decision and action taken by the main character.  A pinch point is often a much quieter scene, not so much action as emotional, setting up the character’s motivation for the following action.

We show WHY the character must change through the main plot’s action with its turning points.

Pinch points let you take a short breather from the main action and show HOW the character changes by letting the reader in on their inner conflicts and goals.  More emphasis is on what they NEED rather than what they WANT.

In romances (and thrillers!) these are often the “quiet” scenes—the ones that nothing seems to be happening but you can’t forget them because so much actually DID happen, emotionally.

Think emotion, think theme.  Theme is what separates Drama from Action. Theme reflects primal, universal emotions.  It’s the ultimate emotional velcro to connect your audience with your story."

Plot: The three-act, eight sequence structure

Shamelessly borrowed from Alexandra Sokoloff, whose advice on story structure is fabulous:

THE INDEX CARD METHOD.

This is the number one structuring tool of most screenwriters I know.

Get yourself a pack of index cards. You can also use Post-Its, and the truly OCD among us use colored Post-Its to identify various subplots by color, but I find having to make those kinds of decisions just fritzes my brain. I like cards because they’re more durable and I can spread them out on the floor for me to crawl around and for the cats to walk over; it somehow feels less like work that way. Everyone has their own method - experiment and find what works best for you.

Now, get a corkboard or a sheet of cardboard big enough to lay out your index cards in either four vertical columns of 10-15 cards, or eight vertical columns of 5-8 cards, depending on whether you want to see your movie laid out in four acts or eight sequences. You can draw lines on the corkboard to make a grid of spaces the size of index cards if you’re very neat (I’m not) – or just pin a few marker cards up to structure your space. Write Act One at the top of the first column, Act Two at the top of the second (or third if you’re doing eight columns), Midpoint at the top of the third (or fifth), Act Three at the top of the fourth (or seventh).

Then write a card saying Act One Climax and pin it at the bottom of column one, Midpoint Climax at the bottom of column two, Act Two Climax at the bottom of column three, and Climax at the very end. If you already know what those scenes are, then write a short description of them on the appropriate cards. These are scenes that you know you MUST have in your story, in those places - whether or not you know what they are right now.

And now also label the beginning and end of where eight sequences will go. (In other words, you’re dividing your corkboard into eight sections – either four long columns with two sections each, or eight shorter columns).

Now you have your structure grid in front of you.

What you will start to do now is brainstorm scenes, and that you do with the index cards.

A movie has about 40 to 60 scenes (a drama more like 40, an action movie more like 60), so every scene goes on one card. This is the fun part, like putting together a jigsaw puzzle. All you do at first is write down all the scenes you know about your movie, one scene per card. You don’t have to put them in order yet, but if you know where they go, or approximately where they go, you can just pin them on your corkboard in approximately the right place. You can always move them around. And just like with a puzzle, once you have some scenes in place, you will naturally start to build other scenes around them.

I love the cards because they are such an overview. You can stick a bunch of vaguely related scenes together in a clump, rearrange one or two, and suddenly see a perfect progression of an entire sequence. You can throw away cards that aren’t working, or make several cards with the same scene and try them in different parts of your story board.

You will find it is often shockingly fast and simple to structure a whole story this way.

And this eight-sequence structure translates easily to novels. Now, if you’re structuring a novel this way, you may be doubling or tripling the scene count, but for me, the chapter count remains exactly the same: forty to sixty chapters to a book. And you might have an extra sequence or two per act, but I think that in most cases you’ll find that the number of sequences is not out of proportion to this formula. With a book you can have anything from 250 pages to 1000 (well, you can go that long only if you’re a mega-bestseller!), so the length of a sequence and the number of sequences is more variable. But an average book these days is between 300 and 400 pages, and since the recession, publishers are actually asking their authors to keep their books on the short side, to save production costs, so why not shoot for that to begin with?

I write books of about 300 - 350 pages (print pages), and I find my sequences are about 50 pages, getting shorter as I near the end. But I might also have three sequences of around 30 pages in an act that is 100 pages long. You have more leeway in a novel, but the structure remains pretty much the same.

 

Excellent info on story plot elements

Check out these articles on Beyond The Ruins of Elechan.  Lengthy, but excellent stuff.

Inserting fantasy into your story

A recent post on Electric Spec ezine's editor blog discussed various means a writer can use to introduce fantastic elements into their writing.  She refers to an interesting book for this talk, namely Rhetorics of Fantasy (RoF) by Farah Mendlesohn.  (FYI - You can read parts of the book on Google Books.)

Apparently, Mendlesohn states there are five sorts of approaches:

1. The Portal-Quest Fantasy, "...where a character leaves her familiar surroundings and passes through a portal into an unknown place.  Although portal fantasies do not have to be quest fantasies the overwhelming majority are, and the rhetorical position taken by the author/narrator is consistent." (Chapter 1)
2. The Immersive Fantasy.  "The immersive fantasy is a fantasy set in a world built so that it functions on all levels as a complete world.  In order to do this, the world must act as if it is impervious to external influence; this immunity ismost essential in its relationship with the reader.  The immersive fantasy must take no quarter: it must assume that the reader is as much a part of the world as are those being read about.  It shoudl construct an irony of mimesis in which ornamental speech and persuasive become inseparable (Frye, Anatomy of Criticism 245).  The immersive fantasy is both the mirror of mimetic literature and its inner soul.  It reveals what is frequently hidden: that all literature builds worlds, but some genres are more honest about it than others.  Mimetic literature, that fabulous conjuration of "the real," is the product of a mimetic "bible." (Chapter 2)
3. The Intrusion Fantasy.  This involves a world which is affected by an intruder, something from outside the story world's reality--frequently an Evil Overlord sort like an evil god or power such as Sauron in Lord of the Rings.  "The trajectory of the intrusion fantasy is straightforward: the world is ruptured by the intrusion, which disrupts normality and has to be negotiated with or defeated, sent back whence it came,or controlled.  In a few cases the intrusion wins but there is always a return of some kind....[and] once you know a novel is intrusion fantasy, its structure is unnervingly transparent." (Chapter 3) 
4. The Liminal Fantasy.  Strange things are placed in the story, but they wouldn't be so strange to the story's characters if they occurred in the right manner (ex. the right time or place.)  "We place the absurd in different moments, but doubt because the [characters seem] to question whether anything truly fantastical has happened at all.  We could even see this as an immersive fantasy because the protagonists take it all for granted.  Except that they do not."  "It can be truly liminal, 'what it's like to have fallen into the crack." (Chapter 4) (This one in particular is confusing!)

The Plan

"In the first act of a story, the hero/ine is introduced, and that hero/ine either has or quickly develops a DESIRE. She might have a PROBLEM that needs to be solved, or someone or something she WANTS, or a bad situation that she needs to get out of, pronto.  Her reaction to that problem or situation is to formulate a PLAN, even if that plan is vague or even completely subconscious. But somewhere in there, there is a plan, and storytelling is usually easier if you have the hero/ine or someone else (maybe you, the author) state that plan clearly, so the audience or reader knows exactly what the expectation is."  Alexandra Sokoloff*

So, you have a character with a problem.  they come up with a plan, it clashes with the plans of others, and (as Ms. Sokoloff points out in her article) the hero/ine doesn't succeed the first or even the second try.  Secondary plans come into play.  Things get complicated, and it looks like your character won't win (and they might not, if you want that sort of ending.) 

The point of this ramble, though, is the important point in the quote:  There needs to be that initial plan.

Something worth thinking about also is this:  "So almost always, the initial plan fails. Or if it seems to succeed, it’s only to trick us for a moment before we realize how wretchedly the plan has failed. That weak initial effort is because it’s human nature to expend the least effort possible to get what we want, and only take greater and more desperate measures if we are forced to."*

And, something which occurred to me whilst contemplating The Magus of Athlinar (stalled on a plot point conundrum this past month):  You can say to hell with the beginning and write the middle,where you know the pivotal action is!  And that probably means that the short story will be starting at the right place!  Woot!  I think I'm a genius, lol.

Nobody promised it was easy. Now, give me a beer.

"Just so you know--it is excrutiatingly difficult to plan a novel really, really slowly so you can write each scene in full detail at the same time.  It's like running a snow-plow while stoppign to examine each snow flake with a magnifying glass.  Chances are almost certain your snow-plow's going to wind up in a lake, and you'll spend the rest of the year getting it back out again.  Plannign and writing use different parts of the brain, and writers who regularly attempt this [plotting while writing] and expect tolike the results are the ones who wind up drunks." A. Victoria Mixon

Well, we know Ms. Mixon's on the side of the planner and not the pantser, don't we?  I am by nature a pantser most of the time, but I at least don't (still) make the mistake of plotting out too many scenes in extreme detail as I'm writing.  But I get something out of seat-of-the-pants writing that Ms. Mixon doesn't mention, and that is ideas. 

I discover my fictional world by writing scenes, by discovering the characters.  Sure, it's probably a lot of 'wasted' writing that's more backstory than useful to the final product; but it's what works for me.  I have tried to do this on 4x6 notecards, filling in ideas, putting the ideas into a relational database, drafting out complex plots and what not.  But what ends up happening is that, when I start actually writing, other ideas and details come up and then the complicated scene ideas are no longer that wonderful...although they can come in handy to keep me on a generally straight road.

But I continually get snarled up in the middle.  That old muddle in the middle is the quagmire of death, and it's the reason I've temporarily abandoned novels for shorter works.  I need to discover my inner A. Victoria Mixon, apparently!

Avoid commando plot elements

"Fiction's like a spider web—each thread belongs to the whole and has some essential function. Spiders don't go around pimping their webs with ghastly and unnecessary props that do nothing to help them catch the fly. Neither should fiction. Not saying fiction should be utilitarian or strictly weblike, but come on—is there a valid *reason* that spiderweb is full of penguins?" The Intern

That everything should have a purpose in your writing is generally true.  However, I do disagree with the above in part: I think that random world-building observances to add a sense of scene or place or to underscore theme or emotion are very useful--just not useful when overdone.  However, for plot elements specifically, you should have a reason for all the threads, because they all need to weave together to form the web of story. 

Perhaps the motto to take from this post is: Leave nothing dangling.  Don't go...commando.  (Yes, I did have to make the obligatory allusion to a guys parts.  Really.  It's in the contract.)

Tension and expectations in your story

Victoria Mixon's got a fabulous post on tension and story plotting up on her blog.

Writing for teenagers

I see a teenage novel as a story with a teenage character(s) at the centre, written from a teenage viewpoint, which explores a situation which teenage readers often fear, aspire to, dream about or experience, and which provides an emotional connection to themselves as teenagers now. It has no visible boundaries or safety-nets and may be frightening, cutting-edge, brutally honest, shocking or sad, (but doesn't have to be) but in fact there are boundaries of acceptability and hope: 
"it takes them to the edge but will not throw them over."  Nicola Morgan

Nicola Morgan at Help! I Need A Publisher! blog has an excellent article on writing for teen (with links at the bottom to other great articles.  The quote above is from one of them.)  If you have ever considered a YA project, step on over and see what she has to say.  Great stuff!

Why your plot may suck

Victoria Mixon, editor, is guest posting at Nathan Bransford's blog today.  And her post is a keeper!  It's "Everything You Need to Know About Writing a Novel, in 1000 Words."

Confusing action scenes

"The trouble is, suspense involves a bit of fear. You're scared something bad will happen to a character you care about. That's how it works. If the hero is completely unassailable there's no tension: they'll win, so why get interested? You already know what's going to happen. Conversely, if the scene is going to have any dramatic tension, there has to be a chance the hero will suffer, will lose, will fail."  Kit Whitfield, from her blog

Blog hopping this morning, I came across Kit Whitfield's post on, basically, some of the reasons why Transformers 2 is considered to suck, big time.  [Before we go on to the main topic, let me just say that, although I gave it an immediate "too long and boring despite the noise and explosions and things morphing all over the goddamn place" I didn't hate it; it was just dull and dumb with confusing scene cuts.  Not engaging.  Brain candy of the glitteriest and most unfulfilling sort...but I didn't hate it.]

However, Ms. Whitfield expresses one reason Transformers 2 was dull and hard to grasp:  The action director broke the 180 degree rule, which basically states when you make a scene cut, you need to maintain continuity so as not to confuse the viewer, for example "if a vehicle leaves the right side of the frame in one shot, it should enter from the left side of the frame in the next shot. Leaving from the right and entering from the right will create a ...sense of disorientation."

Or, more clearly, "The 180° rule is a basic guideline in film making that states that two characters (or other elements) in the same scene should always have the same left/right relationship to each other. If the camera passes over the imaginary axis connecting the two subjects, it is called crossing the line. The new shot, from the opposite side, is known as a reverse angle." (From Wiki, link above.)

How this applies to writing.
Ms. Whitfield's post got me to thinking about action scenes and about emotional hooks.  I read Lilith Saintcrow's new book, Strange Angels last night, and although a few spots made my eyes cross (descriptions in the character's style were sometimes convoluted to the point of meaninglessness) it was a gripping read that had me staying up until I finished the book...because I was hooked emotionally.  I cared about the characters, and I also wanted to know what happened next.  So both suspense and emotional hook accomplished.

Now, the reader has to care about the outcome of all the crises your characters face.   If s/he doesn't, you will lose their interest.  These mini-crises build up to the major crisis, and the main character has to come out of these early crises to get to the big climactic crisis.  The important thing out of all these moments building to the climax is that the reader has to have serious doubt that your character can actually reach her goal, that the character really could lose or die or fail.  And, sometime, your character does experience a set back, so you have to ensure that if that does happen, readers believe your character can overcome this new obstacle, too, and keep slogging forward. 

It's not straightforward always, but the emotions you create in a reader are. They must care about your characters, must want them to win. 

And this applies to fight scenes, or action scenes in books as well.

In Ms.Saintcrow's book Strange Angels, there were a number of fight scenes.  I found them really well crafted and very clear as to what was occurring.  Here and there i think they got a bit overlong and a touch too descriptive about things like sounds (and I say this because I stopped to notice during the fight scenes, which did pull me from the reading a teensy bit) but the actions were very clear and the emotional drama was high.  It flat worked for me as a reader.

And after reading Kit Whitfield's post on Transformers, I realised something about how movie structure and book story structure overlap.  It's not quite the 180 degree rule, but it is something worth considering, and which I think Lilith Saintcrow used to good effect:  Keeping the focus of the pov character written so it stayed in focus yet keeping her also feeling and worrying about her compadres in the middle of a fight. 

That sounds rather simplistic and obvious, but I can think of other fight scenes where the character's emotions weren't engaged (e.g. not blended in with the writing) and where others were involved but the pov character doesn't feel for them.

So maybe this is s bit of hair splitting, but like the quote at the top of this post, it occurs to me that if you don't fully engage the readers' emotions your story won't grab them as much...but that can't happen if your character doesn't care herself.  You need to write them so they care, and that has to be a strong, clear thread throughout the story you write.  It doesn't have to be overt, but it needs to be there...at least for me. 

What do you think? 

The double edged device

Pure research for its own sake is probably the best way we have of discovering random things that eventually lead to dramatic breakthroughs that save lives, promote health and all good things.

But research can also be a double-edged and dangerous things.  Because we humans have a tendency to take neutral stuff, even stuff that can save lives, and twist it to ugly things.  This study disturbs me for that reason.  Imagine if the military had that sort of stuff and used it as an interrogation method.  Get someone seriously jonesing for a drug he's never taken.  While they might be tough-minded enough not to crack, add that withdrawal trauma to waterboarding or whatever other official "non torture" method of interrogation is in use at the time, and the victim might crack faster.

I can see using this in a novel.  I do hope no one uses it in real life, however.

But this dichotomy brings to mind a useful trait of devices that can be used for good or ill.  We need radioactive materials developed as sources for medical instrumentation and scanning devices, or for scanners at border ports, or to source the power of space probes.  We dread it because of nuclear bombs, North Korea becoming worryingly shrill and waving the "I'll nuke you!" flag just yesterday (re conflicts in the DMZ) being the latest example of why.

But this edge of danger to an item, a technology, a device can be really fruitful when used in a story.  You have a technology that has major benefits for life, the universe and everything...but it can also end life as we know it.  Whether that technology is your MacGuffin and your characters are chasing after it or trying to remove it from the hands of terrorists (24 anyone?) or it's just an ancillary item that suddenly is used in a surprizing way (I rather like this approach) after an innocuous introduction, tech like that can be very useful to your plot development.

It can also increase tension when something "bombproof" goes awry.  An example of this is in Lois McMaster Bujold's Vorkosigan series.  She has a drug called "penta" which when used causes people to spill their guts.  The drug has vast implications because torture is not needed.  And we the readers chug along not worrying for Miles our protagonist until he's captured by an enemy and is injected with the drug.  Then we learn that a very few, including her protagonist Miles Vorkosigan, have an idiosyncratic reaction.  Penta doesn't work on him!  It works somewhat in that he can keep babbling to the point he says nothing really, because if he can segue into reciting something like Shakespeare he can't stop until he gets to the end.  I thought that was a clever device, because it both was funny, and it served to give the reader the sudden worry that Miles might be tortured instead of just questioned.  This added lots of tension!

Besides all that, itsn't it always intriguing and pleasing when something seemingly mundane suddenly arises as a great big nasty bugaboo?  As a reader I like having something 'normal' become part of a clever plot twist.  I suppose the danger is in being too clever, or trying this too often.  Like Goldilocks, that little housebreaker, you need to find what works juuuust right.

The Hawthorne Effect

A blog I stop by frequently for interesting ideas and plain old feel good tips is Vlad Dolezal's "Fun Life Development" blog (formerly known as "An Amazing Mind".)  A recent post on "The Hawthorne Effect" is an interesting tidbit of information which I thought useful to share for your future story plotting needs.

Basically, the Hawthorne Effect is that, when people know they are being observed, they are more efficient.  They don't need to even try; they just are.  The trick is, though, that you cannot be critical, you have to be neutral when you let someone know they are being observed.  So, you can have your evil genius use this principal by just mentioning to his lackeys, "I notice that you are using five bullets to kill the enemy when Evil Minion #5 is only using three," walking away and laughing while the Evil Minions automatically strive to do better.

Or something like that.

Seriously, though, you can have a cop utilize this human trait to effect, or your hero, or an artificial intelligence that is seeking to manipulate humanity (for their own good, of course.)  A parent can do so as well.

Might be a fun bit of business to use, or you could hang major plot elements off this concept.

The cool thing about The Hawthorne Effect is that it only improves the behaviors observed.  It could cause backfiring and poorer performance, though, if you do not word the mention neutrally and make the object of the experiment think s/he is being manipulated, criticized or ordered about.  If they feel out of control, you have lost.

Plot summaries

Can you summarize your plot?  What is your elevator pitch?  I sure hope it is not boiled down to something like these, which are funny, but not a great pitch.  Enjoy.

(This link was all over Twitter. I don't know how to retweet so you get it on the blahg.)

Kill your darlings--the hard way

"When you’ve reached that place where you don’t know what happens next, start shaking things up. I firmly believe one must mistreat one’s characters. Smack them around. Up the ante, dish out some injury. Plenty of new authors treat their characters like fragile flowers. Don’t fall into that trap. Beat them up! They can take it–they’re tough! Really!"  Lilith Saintcrow

And the whole post is excellent advice.  When the middle sags, do something drastic. Might not always work, but if you feel like your plot is dying on you...send in the guns, metaphorically speaking.  Or I suppose you could send in the clowns...but that might only work if you are good at funny.  Dunno.  YMMV and all that.  And she also recommends killing the other kind of darlings--the bits of story and writing that are lovely and which do not move the story along.

In my writing classes, I’m famous for getting out the red pen. A student is never required to submit their work for an in-group critique, but if they do they must expect no mercy. The catchphrase my students love most is, “I know you love this…but it has to DIE.” Dead weight in a story, unless it’s slowing down the pacing for a good reason, must go. No matter how beautifully written dead weight is, you’ve got to get rid of it. You don’t have to delete it–many a good book has been spurred by a choice nugget in the slush pile–but you can’t afford to weigh a good story down.

I have to ask, though:  Is it deus ex machina if you drop a complication on the story from out of nowhere?

On the writing front, I am on some new medication that seems to be bringing back the haunting refrain of depression.  Whee!  So it's been all that backchatter from my negative tapes replaying in my head, making it very difficult to get past it.  Also, been having my migraine cycle, which makes me have a distracting headache (Thank the gods for the preventatives I take; they make it bearable!) and occasional nausea and really painful light sensitivity.  Makes looking at the computer difficult.

Sigh.  My self pity goes hand in hand with the migraines and being blue.  You can't talk yourself out of being depressed when it's your medication doing it to you.  I keep telling myself that it will pass, and that once I get the bypass surgery over with (later this year) I won't be taking all these meds any longer anyhow, so buck up, yada yada.

I don't think I heard that right...

"Any man who reads too much and uses his own brain too little falls into lazy habits of thinking." Albert Einstein

The above quote cracked me up.  I wish I could be full of gentle humor, brilliance and true wisdom like Einstein.  I'd have liked to have met him.

I've actually had that thought about myself from time to time.  It has to do with the way the human mind likes to make assumptions, a form of mental shorthand, I suppose.  We interpret data based on past performance and experience and while it may be wrong we still fall for it and are surprised to discover we erred. 

And it occurs to me you might use this tendency in your plot structuring.  As in you set up your readers the same way you set up your characters.  They see a tendency to do one thing several times over in a particular secondary character, and when the secondary character does something just slightly different, you have the main character either not notice or misinterpret the behavior or words in a manner that aids in the plot development.

I'm sure I've seen this done before a zillion times, but have I ever really considered that the writer was exploiting our human nature in this way?  I had not. 

Now that I point it out, however, I hope to use it scientifically.  And I hope you do, too. 

Happy writing!