Hatrack River Writers Workshop   
my profile login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Writers Workshop » Forums » Open Discussions About Writing » plotting worries

   
Author Topic: plotting worries
Starweaver
Member
Member # 8490

 - posted      Profile for Starweaver           Edit/Delete Post 
I'm having uncomfortable feelings about the story I'm working on now. I thought I'd share some of my concerns here, and perhaps get some reactions. (I'm also thinking that perhaps just articulating my concerns will help me address them.)

The story is novelette length. It takes place on two asteroid worlds in the 23rd century that have very different cultures. There are two main characters, both women. One has a bit of alien technology lodged mysteriously in her brain. The other is the scientist who is studying her condition. The two fall in love and become life partners. PoV shifts from the patient to her partner as the story moves forward.

I'm more than halfway through it now, and my worries are these:

1. Everything I've read about plot has emphasized escalating tension as the character struggles against obstacles or antagonists. I'm not sure this story has much of that. There is a conflict, of sorts, because the one with the thing in her head is determined to not have it removed, and her partner is naturally concerned for her safety and would prefer to take it out. The different cultural backgrounds of the two characters feed into these goals in (I hope) interesting ways. Nevertheless, the two of them are still basically on the same "side" and I'm not portraying the difference as something hugely contentious that could destroy their relationship.

2. The story takes place over many years of time. Consequently, it's starting to feel like I'm just "hopping in" and showing scenes from their lives with huge gaps between.

My hope was that the interest in the story would come from the mystery of where the alien technology comes from and what its purpose is, as well as exploring the cultural differences between the two worlds and how it plays out in the relationship between the two main characters. Now I don't know if that's enough to hold someone's attention for 10,000 words or more.

Do you think this premise is structurally flawed or weak, or is it something that can work if I do it right?


Posts: 52 | Registered: Feb 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
steffenwolf
Member
Member # 8250

 - posted      Profile for steffenwolf           Edit/Delete Post 
I don't think there's anything structurally wrong with what you've described, though of course it's hard to judge based on the high-level information you've given.

"Nevertheless, the two of them are still basically on the same "side" and I'm not portraying the difference as something hugely contentious that could destroy their relationship."

They don't have to be on different sides to introduce conflict. Any real relationship has conflict. Many romance plots are based primarily around intrarelationship conflict. Also, many mystery plots are centered around discovering the meaning of ____ or how it got to be there, etc..., so as you describe it it sounds like you're on good ground. How to make it compelling--that's a more difficult question. If I had a great answer to that one, then I expect I would have some sales under my belt.

This blurb definitely interests me, but whether the story would be compelling just depends on what happens and how it's written. Is that vague enough for you?

[This message has been edited by steffenwolf (edited March 04, 2009).]


Posts: 299 | Registered: Oct 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Starweaver
Member
Member # 8490

 - posted      Profile for Starweaver           Edit/Delete Post 
Thanks, Steffenwolf. I know I didn't give a lot of detail. (It's not nearly ready to be critiqued, which is what would be needed for any kind of full opinion on the matter.) You comments were cogent and reassuring.

I think I'm having trouble internalizing some of the information I've gotten from books on writing. They seem clear and obvious when I read them, but when it comes to integrating them with my own story ideas I sometimes feel I'm losing the thread.

My ideas usually don't involve an antagonist character, and much of the writing on plot assumes that set-up. I like more subtle forms of conflict.


Posts: 52 | Registered: Feb 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
dee_boncci
Member
Member # 2733

 - posted      Profile for dee_boncci   Email dee_boncci         Edit/Delete Post 
From what I could tell from your description, there doesn't seem to be much room to move/escalate the story because there doesn't appear to be much at stake. In other words, what difference does it make if the find the answer or not?

My first instinct would be to explore possibilities of having the alien technology threaten one of the characters' lives/health, or their relationship with each other. Or introduce another dynamic that seriously jeopardizes something the characters care about that is linked somehow with the alien technology.

That way, there's an emotional urgency to finding the answer to the mystery, rather than simply intellectual curiosity.


Posts: 612 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
extrinsic
Member
Member # 8019

 - posted      Profile for extrinsic   Email extrinsic         Edit/Delete Post 
I see several areas of concern.

Interesting premises are not dramatic action, per se. Interest in a milieu, idea, character, or event is as likely to result in an episodic story, an anecdote, or a vignette, as it is in a fully-realized story.

Dramatic action is not necessarily physical movement, excited passions, or strenous contention and conflict but it is a character struggle involving purposes and problems.

Plot movement begins with a predicament presenting to a reader, and soon thereafter if not at the same time to a protagonist, and in the example presented, also a dueteragonist with a similar predicament. The implanted device apparently being the shared predicament. A predicament then establishes the flow of a story's suspense by artfully delaying the anwser to a question posed by the predicament presenting. In this case, the implanted device is fraught with questions, how did it get there, why does one want it to stay in, and the other want it out, what difference does it make in their lives beyond their differences of whether it belongs inside her, and so on. What is done to address it being there, and what's finally done about it.

Examining the eytmology of protagonist is illustrative, pro antagonist, pro antagony, pro anti-agony. A protagonist is a character who attempts to achieve a goal through the agonies of addressing a predicament. Antagonism can be internal or external, it can be in the character of an antagonist persona or a setting or a prevailing cultural more, etc., or as perhaps indicated, for one source in this case, it can be self-antagonism.

Tension develops from establishing and maintaing a sympathetic reader resonance with the protagonist. A source of sympathy involves an emotional cluster reaction, pity and fear being more potent than most. Escalating the emotional cluster reaction throughout the story increases tension. Suspense is established and maintained by artfully posing a question or questions that are artfully delayed in answering in an escalating sequence. In simplified questions: what happened, how's it addressed, what's the outcome; beginning, middle, and ending.

A complete story takes a single predicament and follows it through to resolution. A complete story results in a reversal of fortune. Incomplete but satisfying stories come along all the time, but they have a resolution of sorts in a change of consequence to the protagonist's predicament and/or a logical, believable decision related to resolving the predicament.

A story taking place over a long period of time risks becoming episodic, the narrower the passage of time the better. Motivating forces (inciting forces) tend to have immediate reactions seeking immediate solutions. If causation is stretched over a lengthy time, it can logically diminish in potency until a new inciting force gives it fresh impetus.

An example of a storyline that's not particularly contentious, limited in conflict, but tension is noteably driven by coodeterminate, cooperative, and coordinate antagonism is the 1981 film Chariots of Fire written by Colin Welland and directed by Hugh Hudson. An athlete wants to win a race at the Olympics. Some small contentions and conflicts are part of the story as tension escalates, but the underlyng antagonism is the problems and purposes of winning the race. It takes place over the course of five years.

The magnitude of dramatic action and character passions in that story weren't high but they were sufficient for an emotionally stimulating story. Magnitude of dramatic action and character passions contribute mightily to a reader's satisfaction. Larger than life characters and purposes and problems are the bread and butter of fantastical genres. Real-life magnitudes the mainstay of literary genres.

[This message has been edited by extrinsic (edited March 04, 2009).]


Posts: 6037 | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Starweaver
Member
Member # 8490

 - posted      Profile for Starweaver           Edit/Delete Post 
dee-boncci, extrinsic, thank you for your comments. Although I did not mention it in my first post, the alien technology is causing blackouts where bodily functions drop to an extremely low level, and the blackouts become longer in duration as the story progresses. So it is ominous and potentially life-threatening.

Extrinsic's remarks about the story being too stretched in time are very helpful. It may be hard to maintain suspense while the characters themselves are carrying on their lives for years without really resolving the matter.


Posts: 52 | Registered: Feb 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Kathleen Dalton Woodbury
Administrator
Member # 59

 - posted      Profile for Kathleen Dalton Woodbury   Email Kathleen Dalton Woodbury         Edit/Delete Post 
I remember being taught in secondary school English classes that conflict could be divided into three types:

man against man

man against nature

man against himself

and that these types could be pretty broad.

For example, if you include in "nature" anything over which humans have little control and/or of which humans have little understanding, you could include your alien technology.

Conflict isn't just fighting per se. It can also be argued to be trying something and failing, then learning from the failure and trying something else.

Conflict can also be described as being anything that has an "or-else factor" which is a situation that could have disastrous results if something doesn't change soon. What you just told us about the blackouts sounds like an "or-else factor" to me.

Maybe if you thought about your plot as a "struggle" plot or a "growth and learning" plot instead of a "conflict" plot, you'd be better able to see that you do have a plot to work with?


Posts: 8826 | Registered: A Long Time Ago!  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
dee_boncci
Member
Member # 2733

 - posted      Profile for dee_boncci   Email dee_boncci         Edit/Delete Post 
I remember two more along those lines:

Man against the gods

Man against machine

And I believe there was one other. Aristotle was attributed with that list.

Of course it can all be boiled down to:

Someone against someone/something


Posts: 612 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Zero
Member
Member # 3619

 - posted      Profile for Zero           Edit/Delete Post 
Those always seemed silly. Kind of like saying the only kind of conflict is "something against something". Not very useful IMO.
Posts: 2195 | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Zero
Member
Member # 3619

 - posted      Profile for Zero           Edit/Delete Post 
Dang it, I just noticed that dee said exactly what I said.

Blast it!


Posts: 2195 | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Zero
Member
Member # 3619

 - posted      Profile for Zero           Edit/Delete Post 
I mean isn't everything Man against Nature in the sense that everything happens to exist in nature? Man fighting himself, well, he's a natural creature. So is the man he might otherwise be fighting. Fighting machines doesn't seem very natural but they're all made of natural resources and organized by creatures of nature. So every conflict is Man versus nature. Isn't it?
Posts: 2195 | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
steffenwolf
Member
Member # 8250

 - posted      Profile for steffenwolf           Edit/Delete Post 
If you argue that man is nature, then every conflict is just nature vs. nature. Since nature is always changing, at conflict with itself, that's just "nature" the normal state of things.

However, I think people are generally classed outside of nature when having this discussion. Nature conflicts are generally very physical, fight for survival, while people's conflicts can be metaphorical, emotional, spiritual, etc...


Posts: 299 | Registered: Oct 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Starweaver
Member
Member # 8490

 - posted      Profile for Starweaver           Edit/Delete Post 
Thanks, KDW and all, for your replies. As I expected, just articulating the problem made things clearer. When I started writing, it wasn't clear to me how the cultural difference would help move the plot; that took shape as I wrote. At this point, I think it will work - two people with different approaches to the same problem, coming from their distinctive characters, and resulting in decisions that move the story toward the final scene. It's a matter of making the importance of their differences clear and compelling.

The time span of the story is still a worry, but I want to keep it that way for a variety of reasons, and work on keeping the suspense going.

It may not be the tightest combination of story elements, but I now think it will work well enough to be worth completing.

@zero: I think you've over-analyzing those conflict categories. The system's main use, it seems, is to help junior high kids recognize that there is some kind of conflict or tension in every story, and that there are alternatives to good-guy/bad-guy conflict. Yes, everything is part of nature, but this stuff isn't for science class, it's for English class.


Posts: 52 | Registered: Feb 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Zero
Member
Member # 3619

 - posted      Profile for Zero           Edit/Delete Post 
No I'm actually just devil's advocating. my friends call it "giving you crap".
Posts: 2195 | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Starweaver
Member
Member # 8490

 - posted      Profile for Starweaver           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Examining the eytmology of protagonist is illustrative, pro antagonist, pro antagony, pro anti-agony.

I don't believe this is correct. My dictionary shows the term derived from proto- (first) + agonistes (agent, actor). The latter word is derived from a verb meaning to contend, ultimately from agein, drive or lead. The idea was that in Greek drama, the principle character was usually the first to speak.

[This message has been edited by Starweaver (edited March 05, 2009).]


Posts: 52 | Registered: Feb 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
extrinsic
Member
Member # 8019

 - posted      Profile for extrinsic   Email extrinsic         Edit/Delete Post 
I resisted using the term protagonist until thoroughly understanding it made it useful. I didn't find a singular standardized dictionary entry informative, definitive, or particularly authoritative. By happenstance or intent I found the power of the word that meant something to me through dissenting opinions, history of Greek drama, deeper scrutiny of reference entries, and other sources. I don't follow a majority consensus blindly. When a dissenting or minority consensus better suits my purposes and needs, that's the one I'll choose over one that doesn't aid my goals. I stand behind my statement: Protagonist means to me, even if it's me alone, hero championing against agony.
Posts: 6037 | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
dee_boncci
Member
Member # 2733

 - posted      Profile for dee_boncci   Email dee_boncci         Edit/Delete Post 
The understanding I like is one that makes use of the "first agent" root meaning. The protagonist is the prime mover of the story. It's probably an imperfect way of looking at it, but I have no formal education in drama or literature, and it suits the idea of a character-driven story.
Posts: 612 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TaleSpinner
Member
Member # 5638

 - posted      Profile for TaleSpinner   Email TaleSpinner         Edit/Delete Post 
When I first read this thread I thought the story would not involve enough tension, for it did not appear to have what Ben Bova calls a “time bomb” – a clear penalty for the MC if she does not resolve the central conflict in time.

But then I remembered “The Time Traveller’s Wife”, a novel whose structure is similar to yours. It’s a love story, the usual boy meets, loses, finds girl kind of thing, except he travels in time and she doesn’t, so their love doesn’t follow the normal sequence of events. Like yours, the story covers many, many years and we dip into their lives to experience significant events.

As readers, we’re not held by tension, but by the two main characters, for whom we care deeply because of the strength and depth of Niffenegger’s writing. How will they surmount the difficulties his time travels cause? Will they meet again, when, how? Will their love survive such unique challenges? We keep reading because each event is profound, rewarding in itself, and contributing another piece to the overall jigsaw puzzle of their lives.

So perhaps the question is, does your story really need tension?


Posts: 1796 | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
extrinsic
Member
Member # 8019

 - posted      Profile for extrinsic   Email extrinsic         Edit/Delete Post 
Sympathy and suspense are what comprise tension. An endearing love story: the feature creating sympathy. But the preeminent emotional cluster isn't the pity-fear one. In the case of The Time Traveler's Wife, I project the predominant emotions are sadness-affection (sadness--with its inherent pity counterpart--from their separations). Suspense: the artful delay of answering questions posed by a story. I surmise from the title and the summary given that time travel is the complication that causes the predicament, that poses the questions wanting answers. A potent question that presents is will the couple reunite at last and finally.

Magnitude is another matter. Tension doesn't necessarily have to rise to unsustainable heights in a love story that follows conventions of the romance epic. It merely should keep a reader involved in finding answers.

[This message has been edited by extrinsic (edited March 06, 2009).]


Posts: 6037 | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TaleSpinner
Member
Member # 5638

 - posted      Profile for TaleSpinner   Email TaleSpinner         Edit/Delete Post 
"The Time Traveller's Wife" is more complex and subtle than you imagine, extrinsic.

I don't know how to sumarise it further without spoiling it, but I think it's okay to say that the man suffers from an odd genetic defect which means he cannot control when he travels in time, or which time he travels to. And when he travels in time, his clothes -- and his wallet -- get left behind. At the start of the story he knows who she is, and she is but a child. Later, she knows who he is, and since he's younger than he was when she first met him, he doesn't know who she is. Different questions arise through the story, more subtle than, will they meet and stay together? It's not the usual golden-age-style time travel story.

The writing is emotional, tender, not the sort of story I would usually enjoy. You find it on the literature shelves at my bookshop, not SF. (My daughter recommended it to me.)

Structurally, it's fascinating in that we're never confused about the chronology, even though their personal timelines are intertwined like a pair of tangled mobius strips.

Highly recommended for anyone who wants to study emotional SF, time travel stories and their structure, and subtle hooks and tensions.

[This message has been edited by TaleSpinner (edited March 07, 2009).]


Posts: 1796 | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

   Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2