Craft 8: On Plot and Structure
I’ve read/been told two very succinct definitions of plot that have stayed with me, though I can’t remember the source:
1) Get your character up a tree-then throw rocks.
2) …And then it got worse.
I think I'm going to need more than that. I had my arm twisted was encouraged by elidyce and bambu345 to participate in this year's NaNoWrMo. That commits you to ( Read more... )
1) Get your character up a tree-then throw rocks.
2) …And then it got worse.
I think I'm going to need more than that. I had my arm twisted was encouraged by elidyce and bambu345 to participate in this year's NaNoWrMo. That commits you to ( Read more... )
Hmmm. Dunno. No sign of morning sickness yet...
, I'm a Georges Polti (36 Dramatic Solutions) and a Lajos Egri (The Art of Dramatic Writing) sort of girl.
argosy has mentioned Egri before I think--so I'll take that as a double endorsement. I tend to feel plot is my achille's heel, and what makes me most anxious. I haven't particularly felt the need for structure before, but now...
Patty's a big Clive Cussler fan, but now that she's written for awhile, she's a little less than enamored of his Gary!Stu-ing himself into every book.
Smith is a huge fan, and when my friend and I were trying to get her stories into his anthology we really tried to get into his head--I even tried Cussler because of that, but yeah, the GaryStu part among others was a turn-off. Though I'm sure Cussler must have his stengths to be such a huge bestseller. I just found it interesting that Smith cites him as the best of plotters, yet from this quote of his I found he doesn't seem to be structured or an outliner.
In general I subscribe to the transitional arc in a three-act structure.
I've never thought of novels as being in that kind of structure. So that's true pretty much of all your stories? Even one shots like "Bane of Existence" and "Spoils of War?" So you could break down "Guard, Check, Mate" or "Paladins" that way? Interesting. I've never really thought of it in that sense, though reviewing these sources I came across an explanation of that structure: First act curain marks the establishment of characters and situations. Second act complicates the relationships and often involves confrontations. Third act resolves the problems with character change.
I don't think on those terms we're even at the first curtain with BOS.
:gulp:
So, cuz I can't wave at you and not ask (unless you tell me to shut up) how is The Summoning coming? Act Three?
Reply
So don't sweat it worrying about curtains and such, especially in a novel. Act 1 sets up the problem. Act 2 complicates it. Act 3 resolves it. Easy. Just remember that your act 3 is by far the shortest.
Even shakespeare and 5 acts really can be seen in a much more understandable form in 3 acts.
Also, one thing they say, and I think McKee says this, though none of his ideas ore original to him. All stories should have a beginning, a middle, and an end -- though not necessarily in that order.
Reply
But I'm sure you realize how many bad stories lack an end, or even a middle.
I think the middle is where many get bogged down--at least that's true of many of the WIPs I've tried reading. Very few can sustain the intensity and fun of their beginings. Many seem to be able to recapture some of the old spark in the ending but...
But that does seem to be a good, and simple way really to think of it: beginning, middle, and end.
All stories should have a beginning, a middle, and an end -- though not necessarily in that order.
::nods:: Yup--that's the thing about fiction--cuz we're unstuck in time--so we can do things like frames.
Reply
Some of us never have any morning sickness at all. I'll just check you for that pregnant 'glow.' ::grins::
I studied Egri in my Story Development class at the AFI, but I found him above my understanding initially. I honestly think you have to be a writer to appreciate him, because after I began to write, I re-read his book and found it extremely helpful.
I've never thought of novels as being in that kind of structure. So that's true pretty much of all your stories? Even one shots like "Bane of Existence" and "Spoils of War?" So you could break down "Guard, Check, Mate" or "Paladins" that way?
::nods:: all of them. Sometimes there isn't a clear act I, II, and III, but there is always a transitional arc of some sort filled with rising tension and a denouement.
Actually with BOS you've got a double-segmented story (sixth and seventh year being the natural breaks,) and each segment having three acts. You're currently nearing the end of your first act of the first segment. If that makes sense.
As for Summoning, I've just finished the first half of the next chapter. I've been ill unfortunately, and was at the doctor's yesterday. He gave me some rather strong medication, and I'm feeling better tonight. I think I'm something like a coal-miner's canary. Any little change in my environment and I react. Ugh. I want a do-over of a summer!
Reply
I was discussing with someone recently the great divide between readers and non-readers, but there really is one also between writers and non-writers. A lot of things I didn't understand, or seemed crazy, made sense only after I started writing creatively. And you never read fiction the same way again--or even watch films. I almost always see the ending coming now--almost always. Very hard to surprise me.
::nods:: all of them. Sometimes there isn't a clear act I, II, and III, but there is always a transitional arc of some sort filled with rising tension and a denouement.
Easy to see that in "Morning Has Broken" - first chapter/act Hermione's suspicions coalesce; second, complications and confrontations; third, solution.
Actually with BOS you've got a double-segmented story (sixth and seventh year being the natural breaks,) and each segment having three acts. You're currently nearing the end of your first act of the first segment. If that makes sense.
It does to my relief. No way I'm a third there (unfortunately) but the last chapter did feel like the end of the beginning, with all the characters important in the future, of at least this half, given their moment and the basic relationships established.
I'm sorry you're not feeling well! But glad you're making progress on your own monster WIP!
Reply
Absolutely. There are distinctions in all sorts of ways.
And you never read fiction the same way again--or even watch films. I almost always see the ending coming now--almost always. Very hard to surprise me.
No. You can't because you know too much about the mechanics of story-telling. So it really takes something unique and fresh to grab your attention.
And, yes, Morning has broken had very clear delineations between acts. I could have broken the story up into six chapters which would have made it a little less clear. But I write long chapters, and I want to maintain that until I finish Summoning. Which I'm about to go back to... I have two scenes to write this morning.
My thoughts about BOS are that with your next chapter you'll have reached the 1/6th mark. You have to have the explosion to dynamically break the tension line... the following chapter then resumes the story with a new, higher arc. At least that's how I see it.
Thanks... I'm starting to feel better, and really wishing for a do-over summer. Although I think this must mean I'll be very healthy all winter!
Reply
I didn't know/think when I started it would work that way in the sense of length and structure, but I was always working to this moment in my story from the very first--in a way, I find what Hermione did in those tryouts a lot more disturbing than Snape on the Tower. I understand what Snape did--or think I do--I don't think I can understand what Hermione did. I always considered this point absolutely crucial to the story and relationship.
Which, of course, is making the next chapter a bitch to write--though I haven't tried much--other things have kept me busy, but I'm going to have to wrestle with that because yes, its key. And because I'd like to revise Chapter Two and write a couple of updates before NaNo hits.
When I first started writing, I did get a book on "Scene and Structure" What stuck in my mind was the presentation of story as "scene" and "sequel" - that after the important action, you close with the character's thought or feeling on its significance, on something that drops the curtain so to speak. That's what the author called the "sequel" So I guess I've had that much elementary structure in mind since.
And I certainly do hope Winter will be kinder than Summer to you! Ouch!
Reply
That Hermione cheated to help Ron was outrageous... and if we'd seen her remorse or her self-disgust for having broken one of the rules which mattered most, I would feel differently. But for her to accuse Harry of cheating in Potions, but resort to the very same strategy was hypocritical at best. However, if, having broken one of her own ethical rules to help Ron after he's treated her so shabbily, we see her remorse, her anger and self-recrimination... then some of her later actions make sense.
I'll look forward to where your next chapter takes you. ::grins::
'Scene and Structure'? Hmmm, interesting... I always think of their 'sequel' as the transition to the next level of tension.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed that I'll be healthier for the foreseeable future. I can't afford to be ill. Thanks. I trust all is well with you.
Reply
But, I'd generally agree, all such acts in the past, including Umbridge, were acts that were either defensive in nature or at least punishment of a breech of trust. And Hermione's behavior to Harry both about the Potions textbook and his seeming use of Felix Felicis just makes it worse. It's hard to reconcile what she did at the tryouts not just with the Hermione of past books, but of that book--and about the only thing that could help is if we say her get some kind of comeuppance or feel some remorse.
Hope you're feeling better!
Reply
I think in each case... the bug/blackmailing, the hex/disfigurement and the Umbridge situation are, in addition to trust and defensive maneuvers, examples of her abstract ability to see what needs to be done but not looking beyond the solution to the consequences. This goes hand-in-hand with Snape's assessment of her. She doesn't think outside the box. She's given a problem, e.g., how to keep people from revealing the existence of the D.A., and her capacious memory remembers a charm which gives an oath-breaker a visible sign of their betrayal. She's intellectually thrilled to have found the answer, but doesn't think in practical terms of how that will play out. I think that's a very natural consequence of her youth and inexperience.
Having said all of that, then, her cheating for Ron is completely and totally out-of-character, and I'm glad you're going to address this in BOS>
Reply
Heh and an insight I'll definately have to steal.
Having said all of that, then, her cheating for Ron is completely and totally out-of-character, and I'm glad you're going to address this in BOS
It was a great deal of the impetus in starting it, though also why its a bit intimidating dealing with it. Can you really say something is OOC when its the creator herself that does it? Yet reconciling that Hermione with the one we knew before...
And before I can write that scene, I have to understand why she did it, and none of the motivations that I've mused over or that others have offered work very well for me.
Reply
Be my guest!
Can you really say something is OOC when its the creator herself that does it? Yet reconciling that Hermione with the one we knew before...
Of course you can say that! Just because the original source material is hers, doesn't mean she isn't fallible. Her focal point is Harry and his heroic arc, not Hermione's consistencies or not. This is the same author who's thrown up the genetic insanity rationale for the reason Tom Riddle became Voldemort. ::tsk, tsk... cheap way out::
I'll bet you a ficlet the reason JKR would give for having Hermione Confound Cormack is that her emotional confusion about Ron drove her to it.
You might consider handling it by not handling it. She can't explain why she did it. She doesn't really understand it, and is terribly disappointed in herself as a result. I haven't read the book again and don't remember, but I don't think she was gloating about her actions. Later on, when Ron takes up with Lavender, the fact that she had done something so shameful(which perversely might just draw her closer to Snape; it's not as if he hasn't done something shameful,) is really going to rub her the wrong way... and it's from this that I can see the whole flock of canaries situation evolving.
Sorry for running away with the thought, but that's my .02.
Reply
Although with Riddle, I think that's JKR's original conception from the beginning given an interview I saw with her, though I agree a bad decision especially given her emphasis on choice as being everything in the direction of a life. If in Voldie's case it's hereditary madness...
And I guess we can call Hermione out of character--for now. There is one book left. Maybe there Hermione will have a comeuppance and reevaluation of how she's acted? Though if we have to depend on the last book to resolve all the things we have problems with, it'll have to be the length of the OED.
And I don't mean the Concise edition...
I haven't read the book again and don't remember, but I don't think she was gloating about her actions.
Sheepish is how I'd call her attitude. Harry's is positively approving. His only concern is that later she might tell Ron and hurt his confidence.
Later on, when Ron takes up with Lavender, the fact that she had done something so shameful(which perversely might just draw her closer to Snape; it's not as if he hasn't done something shameful,) is really going to rub her the wrong way... and it's from this that I can see the whole flock of canaries situation evolving.
::snicker:: now that's quite the picture...
Sorry for running away with the thought, but that's my .02.
Run away. Your two cents is worth a good more than 2 Galleons in my book.
Reply
It's like her conceptualization of Snape. She has no idea what she's got on the page. There was sufficient evidence in canon for how and why Riddle became Voldemort. He made the choice to open Slytherin's Chamber of Secrets... not because he was insane, but because he'd been repudiated by his family (both sides) and was seeking his birthright. What's not to understand about that? After the basilisk killed Myrtle, then he was stuck with the consequences. Being sent down or covering it up. Since he loved Hogwarts, the only place he'd ever been accepted and respected (he was Head Boy,) covering it up was his only choice. The rest of his life spirals very neatly from there. How sad there wasn't someone JKR respected to tell her this.
And I guess we can call Hermione out of character--for now. There is one book left. Maybe there Hermione will have a comeuppance and reevaluation of how she's acted? Though if we have to depend on the last book to resolve all the things we have problems with, it'll have to be the length of the OED.
I agree that Hermione's 'revelation' won't be forthcoming in book seven, although we can hope there's some sort of explanation for her actions. Ron's always been a little spiteful and insecure, so he wasn't as far out of character as she. Perhaps it was JKR's way of distancing Hermione from Harry so that her hero could learn to stand on his own two feet. In that case, she's screwing up the dynamics of the trio's friendship, which is one of the strengths of her books in the first place. Of course, I don't mean to be JKR bashing. I have, after all, spent three years playing with her characters, but I think an evaluation of her story is helpful to me as a writer.
Reply
I still hope... She comes across as very canny in the interview I saw. If you can see her face... Mischievious. She loves messing with us. And HBP read soooo much like a setup. Though given Snape, even more reason to have made the evolution from Tom Riddle to Voldemort a choice.
Jodel of Red Hen has pointed out the parallels and contrasts between the three half-bloods one generation apart. Voldemort, heir of Slytherin, Snape head of Slyterin, and Harry who was almost sorted into Slytherin. She even thinks Snape will ultimately be revelaed to be an orphan--possibly because of Voldemort in some way.
One who chose evil? One who chose to turn away from evil? One who chose good?
But you weaken that if you make it inate with Voldie. Though it would explain why JKR could say Snape is worse than Voldemort yet still have him wind up a White Hat. Snape has chosen to do evil things in his past, has chosen to be cruel at times. With Voldmort, it was never a choice.
Perhaps it was JKR's way of distancing Hermione from Harry so that her hero could learn to stand on his own two feet. In that case, she's screwing up the dynamics of the trio's friendship, which is one of the strengths of her books in the first place.
When I finally rented the films, I looked at the interviews with JKR in the Special Features. The way she talks of the trio--a whole bigger than its parts, I can't see her doing that. Harry did split from Ginny at the end of 6, but didn't pull away from Hermione and Ron.
Ron, I'm afraid, seemed very much in character. Especially when I did a deeper reread of the books, I saw a spiteful and cruel side that I thought was as bad or worse than anything we saw with Snape (Astronomy Tower aside). We don't notice it too much because of Harry's perpective, and because at times Ron can be very sweet - a side we never see in Snape.
But, no, nothing Ron did in the book seemed out of character. Or Harry either. He did seem to get over Sirius awfully fast, but the young especially often have the ability to push things down and away for a while--it helped I think having Snape to hate. And Draco never came across better than he did in Book 6. First time I ever saw a gleam of humanity and conscience, of some depth.
For all the fuss about Snape in Book 6 in the fandom, I think it's really Hermione whose character was assasinated in HBP. And the hell of it is I'm not even sure JKR realizes that.
Of course, I don't mean to be JKR bashing. I have, after all, spent three years playing with her characters, but I think an evaluation of her story is helpful to me as a writer.
I think it's all the more helpful *because* you've written in her universe. I see too many ficcers speak of JKR as if she's the gospel on writing and uncritically imitate her. And since I think she is very flawed despite her strengths, I think that's a grave mistake.
JKR is a wonderful world-builder and plotter. And she has a knack for creating characters (in a superficial way mostly imo) that are memorable and distinctive in a manner reminiscent of Dickens. But I don't think what she's brilliant at - her originality - can really be imitated. And what can be, her style, I don't think should be.
Reply
This is a very good point, but I would be very sad to see it be inate with Voldemort. Snape's choice to become a Death Eater is very easily understandable. There are just so many choices she can make from where she is now, I just hope it doesn't hollow out her main plot.
Ron, I'm afraid, seemed very much in character. Especially when I did a deeper reread of the books, I saw a spiteful and cruel side that I thought was as bad or worse than anything we saw with Snape (Astronomy Tower aside). We don't notice it too much because of Harry's perpective, and because at times Ron can be very sweet - a side we never see in Snape.
I couldn't agree more. I've never liked the idea of Ron and Hermione, but after book six, the relationship screams abusive in huge, multicolored lights! He's an insecure jerk with occasional moments of sweetness. As for Snape, I actually thought he was very kind to Narcissa at Spinner's End, and I thought it showed a very intriguing facet of him.
JKR is indeed canny, and works her audience beautifully. However, I'm sure to be disappointed in book seven, if only because there's no possible good ending for Snape, and I'm not even sure Draco will survive Voldemort. It's hard to know.
JKR is a wonderful world-builder and plotter. And she has a knack for creating characters (in a superficial way mostly imo) that are memorable and distinctive.
I've long thought her characters were fairly cardboard cutouts... with a few key characters fleshed out. It's that which makes her fandom so rich and diverse. She's used archetypal characters to extremely good effect, and bent a few stereotypes in the end. I'm just sorry to have seen the dumbing down of Hermione, and I hope not to see more of it.
Reply
Leave a comment