Tension. The assertion was that it is absolutely necessary for a story to be worth reading. If there is no tension in the story, why should I care what's happening? I would agree with that, but people seem to have a lot of different opinions about what tension means in this context.

Remember "studying" short stories and novels in school? Did you ever have to discuss the types of conflict in the story?

I had to; and Kathleen reminded me.

Man versus Man
Man versus Nature
Man versus Himself

Essentially that is it. As long as you have a stong sense of conflict, you can create the tension needed to make a good story.

I'm not sure why, but I can't help thinking of children's television shows. Most of the conflict is not between the characters, it is more of a Man vs. Nature or "How do we solve today's problem..." type tension.

I love watching cartoons. I always have and hope that I always will. One of my favourite cartoons is The Magic School Bus. The only time they really have a Man vs. Man conflict is if one of the kids issues a challenge to another, which ends up leading the group into the Man vs. Nature conflict.

Of course the best stories often have two or three conflict types happening. So-and-So gets into a fight with Someone, while at the same time they both have to deal with the same Big Picture, but So-and-So seems at odds with who he is and through the conflict with Someone and by over-coming the Big Picture, he learns something new/important about himself.

Sometimes the more subtle the conflict in the story, the deeper or better the story seems.

"The interplay of conflicting elements in a piece of literature, especially a poem."

but I also like the following:

"A balanced relation between strongly opposing elements."

There's an aweful lot that can fit within either of those definitions. And I don't see any story being too interesting without some form of tension.

Tension is important in just about every art form. Music requires it every bit as much as fiction (well, GOOD music, anyway). Ever notice how you can almost always tell when there's a key change coming? That's from the tension the composer puts into the piece. As the tension mounts and seems near the breaking point, it resolves to the new key. As a listener you almost feel that sense of, "ah...." relief when it comes.

Same with good fiction. The story grips you with the tension and as it builds, you start turning the pages faster until it finally resolves and you have same "ah" sensation. And then the story is truly over (if it's a big "ah") or that situation, at least, is resolved.

One thing about tension--whichever kind--is that it must be relieved and allowed to snap back. Then, of course, it builds again and breaks again. If you end the tension too soon, the snap back to normalcy isn't strong enough, and your work won't be exciting. If you drag it on too long, the snap back is anitclimactic and you'll lose readers before it happens, anyway.

When the tension is person vs. person, relief comes from a win, a defeat, or even a draw (though that leaves you to continue building the exact same tension again). Relief can also come from an interference: A third party says, "No fighting, today, folks!" and the tension is broken to be rebuilt later.

When the tension person vs. setting (I prefer to see it as setting, not nature--a haunted house isn't nature but it is a setting), the tension is broken when the person secures relief from the setting because of their own actions, because the setting gives up or ends of its own accord, or when the setting defeats the person.

When tension is within a person, it is broken when a decision is made, when the person surrenders to that part of their nature they are attempting to suppress, or when their internal conflict is suddenly marginalized by an outside force.

Perhaps it is like two sides of the same coin.

Heads: The author uses various conflicts to build reader anticipation.

Tails: Reader anticipation is fueled by how the author uses conflict with his melieu, characters, etc.

Together, author conflict and reader anticipation create tension.

(Just throwing this out for discussion )

quote:

---

Tension doesn't necessarily have to appear in the first thirteen lines, since we're often establishing a character, POV, and setting at this point.

---

So when is it necessary for the tension to appear in the first thirteen lines?

I would argue that it is necessary to introduce tension within the first thirteen lines of a short story. And the shorter the story, the sooner the tension needs to be introduced. So, for a flashfic, it should be the first sentence.

As for novels, the tension had better be introduced within the first two pages (maybe three), but the sooner you introduce it the more likely you are to keep your reader going past those first few pages; and the longer you put it off the more likely you're going to lose your reader.

Test it out. Pull out your favorite book(s) of all time. Read the first thirteen lines. Identify, if possible, a source of conflict/tension/problem.

A story is like a math problem. You need to see the problem up front, and (as our high school math teacher so effectively drilled into us) we need to show how we solved the problem, the we finish with the answer. The problem is the tension, the steps to solving it is the body of the story, the answer is the climax/resolution. You can't start showing your steps until you know the problem. You can't (well, if you're my son, you think you can) give the answer without working through the steps.

My question is, why would you want to delay showing the conflict? Why can't you introduce the conflict in the midst of establishing your character/POV/setting? Why can't you show something ABOUT your character through his reaction to or role in the conflict?

quote:

---

You're focussing on tension generated by conflict, which I usually call "story tension", but you seem to be missing another kind, which is nearly as important. That is the tension caused by the reader wanting to know more about the details of your story.

---

This is the sort of "tension" that needs to be present from the very beginning of the work. It is usually called something other than tension, though. And it is pretty circular if we call that which persuades a reader that the story is worth reading "tension", and say "that [tension] is absolutely necessary for a story to be worth reading."

What we normally refer to as "tension" is dramatic tension, which can be described as a state of anxiety produced about the outcome of a story (or story arc). A dramatic tension can normally be expressed as a question which the reader will want answered by the end of the story (or story arc).

One important thing to understand about dramatic tension, it isn't necessary to make a narrative text worth reading, but it is absolutely necessary in order for that text to be considered a story. Stories, narratives with a dramatic structure, fulfil a peculiar desire of the audience which is not a function of writing (or animation, acting, direction, etc.) as such. Also, any competent story beginning will present a number of different questions that might interest the audience, only some of which will become the focus of the story. Developing a narrative focus on the main dramatic tension of the story is a function of the entire narrative, not of the opening alone. Holding up Ender's Game as an example (as always) we can see that Card doesn't raise the main conflict and then just forget about it till the end. Every page of the story at least reminds us of Ender's struggle to remain himself against the forces that would shape him into a tool of humanity's survival.

The same is true of minor tensions that may be employed to move the story forward through parts of the story arc. You don't just begin a chapter with the question of whether the heroes will defeat the level boss and then ignore that question until the end of the chapter.