The moral of a story is something that perplexes me in writing.

I don't mean going into a story ready to preach, but every story has a meaning behind it, even if the meaning is nothing.

I have always believed these to be things that just show up naturally in the course of writing. After all, we want to tell the story for a reason.

How can we figure out what are moral is if its not obvious? If it doesn't jump out at you.

For example I have story that I am currently revising. Its mostly complete - storyline wise, though its nowhere near ready for submission. After putting my characters through adventure and trials, I am still not sure what my story is really about other than the story itself.

My own way of looking at it is this. A strong dramatic story will have a motivated/determined entity struggling against (i.e., in conflict with and acting in opposition to) a significant obstacle to produce some outcome. So there is always an implicit premise that can be formed based on the result of the struggling forces. So start there. What's up against what in your story, and what is the outcome? It could be as simple as "good triumphs over evil" or "love will last through many trials."

For my part, I don't even consciously think about a premise, except maybe as an after-the-fact exercise when making editing decisions.

I look at a moral as a premise that has an overtone of morality (from some moral belief system) to it, as in the traditional morality tales for children. A premise in general could fly against that approach. You could have as a story premise: "greed leads to wild success and happiness", as long as your story events support that idea.

On the more literary side of contemporary fiction it seems common to have mixed or ambiguous outcomes, which might make the premise/moral idea a little tricky. "Greed leads to success for some and destruction for others" perhaps? Dunno.

The romantacist resolution staple of poetic justice comes from a range of themes oriented around good and evil. Poetic justice's template moral and message is good will triumph, be rewarded, evil will fail, be punished.

Pithy maxims are a staple of fables and fairy tales, message and moral. Don't count your chickens before they hatch. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Life goes on. Time heals all wounds; wounds all heels. A penny saved is a penny earned. Mind your P's and Q's. In for a penny, in for a pound. Be careful what you wish for . . . ad infinitum.

Beginning with a theme, a moral or message presents, in reading and contemplating, and writing and contemplating. Pick well-know or favorite stories and study them for theme and moral and message. Like Star Wars, for expample, a theme is good and evil, and poetic justice. A moral is that good will triumph. Another, it's never too late to repent. Blood is thicker than water, and so on.

quote:

---

Maybe these are two different questions - how to add depth and how to see the moral of the story?

---

My interpretation: Maass describes a premise as a summary of the story, with the underlying theme(s) expressed in the plot and the characters. Theme is the 'good vs. evil' or whatever.

Oy, I’d love to get my notes out and delve further, but no time now.

My premise boilerplate, a larger than life character emerges from suffering insuperable struggles in dramatic contexts while addressing a life-defining complication.

quote:

---

My premise boilerplate, a larger than life character emerges from suffering insuperable struggles in dramatic contexts while addressing a life-defining complication.

---

I'm betting the underlying theme is there, even if you haven't identified it yet.

Dramatic contexts as I mean it are settings and other characters and their circumstances that affect change.

I perceive Maass' ideas translating to short story, with a little elbow grease.

My premise boilerplate contains seven essentials of story, not all the essentials, but it's a good start: character, idea, milieu, event, and in the combination of them a plot and a theme and an emotional context, though they're not immediately interpretable as such in that template. However, once I've filled in the blanks of each, their meanings become apparent and useful to me. I.e., an orphaned boy strives to come of age in a secret magic milieu while confronting the evil that killed his parents. Plot, theme, message, and moral come to me from interpreting a story of any length by that method, reading or writing.

A book of similar subject matter I found useful is "The Plot Thickens" by Noah Lukeman. I don't recall if premise is explicitely discussed in that book, but it deals with the general enriching and strengthening of stories, of which giving them meaning is a significant one.

quote:

---

...so whats the moral to Lord of the Rings then? Don't let Orcs take over the world?

---

quote:

---

Three Rings for the Elven-kings under the sky,
Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die,
One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.
One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.

---

From Wikipedia: One Ring

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Ring

quote:

---

...remove everything from a story that is not related to or does not outright support the premise.

---

This is probably the best approach to take when you are told that your story doesn't have enough "focus."

Card, I remember him saying how a theme unifies a story, how orienting on a theme provides a filtering mechanism for deciding what's essential to a story. Aristotle, Freytag, Lubbock, Maass, and others, too, say the same. Ayn Rand is the only writer writing on writing I've read who really digs in to the theme topic and deconstructs its methods and relationships in writing.

The And Plot as detailed at Turkey City Lexicon describes a consequence of a story without a well-developed theme. Something happens, something happens, and something happens to no meaningful end. Non sequitur, happenstance chance, haphazard, and incoherent plots derive from lacking a clear impression of a story's theme before writing, though a potent one might surface during writing.

I've commented on theme in some stories in critiques. Several writers replied they were unaware of the themes they were subconcsiously incorporating into their stories. I was astonished that that was unintended in several that had powerful themes. Their resolutions and sometimes climaxes weren't as satisfying as I like, though. By focusing on their themes I was able to offer concrete advices on how to treat them so they had stronger, more meaningful climaxes and endings.

Lately, I've been concentrating on theme for its power to offer insight on dynamic openings. My current story's opening finally started singing when I'd nailed down its theme. Sort of a parallel to the theme of Don McLean's American Pie with contrasts to Carlo Collodi's The Adventures of Pinnochio. I've also grasped its message and moral, somewhat from a pithy Biblical maxim, 1 Corinthians 13:11, "When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me."

If by antagonism you mean conflict, the most useful discussion of that I have come across is in Jerry Cleaver's "Immediate Fiction." His approach is very much geared to the layman, accessible, but not terribly academic or thorough.

I recognize that an antagonist isn't necessarily a villain or a nemesis. An antagonist can be a partner, a lover, a parent, a friend, a respected and trusted acquaintance, and so on.

I've noted that antagonism might be either favorable or unfavorable or both. An example of a favorable, positive valence of antagonism is the interaction between a trainer and an athlete that encourages performance improvement. Their interactions occur in a range of possibilities, but in general, they share a coodetermined mutual goal in an intradependent relationship, getting the athlete in the best competition trim possible.

I've identified seven categories of interaction related to antagonism.

• Coodetermination
• Cooperation
• Coordination
• Contention
• Competition
• Confrontation
• Conflagration

The natures of those interactions orient around types of relationships.

• Dependent
• Codependent
• Interdependent
• Intradependent
• Independent

Similar to antagonism but distinguishably different, I understand conflict as forces in diametric opposition as pertains to story. Forces in opposition can be antagonistic, but not necessarily compel change. The way I see it, antagonism can come from any direction, not just diameteric, polar opposites. For example, conflicts for an athlete might be winning or losing, success or failure in reaching another goal, recognition or anonymity, approval or disapproval, acclaim or derision. From conflict comes the natures of antagonism, tension, and causal motivations and stakes, the consequences of success or failure, favorable or unfavorable outcomes in resolving a confict.

Anyway, a theme like coming of age might orient around a conflict of resistance to adulthood's obligations and wanting to enjoy the privileges of adulthood. The forces of antagonism involved seem unlimited. Messages and morals abound from such a theme-conflict.

If I ever get a little more financially fluid, I'll look into acquiring those recommended books. As it is, they're not in the local regional library system yet.

When I have tried starting with a theme, the result hasn't felt sincere.

I come from the same school, and it is only under duress that I even think post-story about things like theme or premise or moral. I once took an online fiction writing course and when it came time for the obligitory sections on theme and voice, during a forum discussion I admitted not even understanding what either of those things really meant even after all the lessons and discussions. I was told by the instructer, "That's strange, because your writing traffics in both quite adeptly." So it's possible in my view for theme and whatnot to emerge subconsciously, and as has been discussed before, it can be employed as a unifying factor during revision. Or it can be part of the composition from the start.

extrinsic,

Antagonism as you describe it sounds like one of the elements of dramatic conflict in my way of thinking. Responsive action on the part of the character to resolve the conflict is required in the story model I use in composition, but whether it changes the character is, strictly speaking, optional (although I'd guess that in general it does). My background and understanding of the finer points is limited (shallow and broad-brushed) I'm sorry to say. So it sounds like we have similar understandings of conflict, but my understanding of antagonism's role is much more limited--I think of it as the opposing force in the conflict, sometimes in the person of the "villian", sometimes not (as you point out). In short, the obstacle to whatever the story's character in question wants or needs.

My grasp of antagonism comes in part from chemistry. In chemistry, antagonists are compounds that chemically interact to form a new compound, each original compound acting upon the other and in the process erradicating the original compounds. Change. Hydrochloric acid mixed with sodium bicarbonate yields carbon dioxide and table salt and water. That reaction is itself useful in many ways. One type of fire extinguisher is based on the same principle.

For example, Gollum in the Lord of the Rings. He's by turns villain, nemesis, friend, confidant, enemy, and antagonist in interaction and relationship with Frodo. He's a rich and deep character from his many facets. Frodo's compassion for and patience with Gollum enhances Frodo's character through his empathy, which contributes to resonance with readers' empathy for Frodo and perhaps Gollum.

Thematically, Gollum is an Everyman character physically, emotionally, and morally corrupted by the ring. In my opinion, Gollum is the main, if not the sole everyman character in focal perspective. Potent messages and morals there for readers and Frodo and Sam. There but for the grace of Providence go I.

Gollum's antagonism toward Frodo is readily perceived as potential or actual obstacle or opposition, but I see his antagonism contributing on additional levels. Not just obstacle or opposition, but compelling favorable change in Frodo from the cautionary influence he represents. Frodo wears the ring less, readers understand why, subconsciously at least. Then when Frodo does don the ring, tension is heightened. For suspense, the complications of the question posed earlier in the story steadily intensify; Will Frodo be corrupted by the ring? Gollum timely adds to tension from his positive and negative valence antagonisms at critical junctures of the plot.

Anyway, I've seen many story recipes where any given writer's outlook on the essentials of story and their meaning to a story vary widely. In part, I believe those different approaches favorably contribute to the manifold creative, original variety of stories.