posted
Is this way of writing generally a poor choice for plot advancement and/or fulfillment? It seems that simply inserting a useful mechanism into the plotline in the most convenient spot is just a little... weak. (Maybe it's just me.)
But wouldn't using a deus ex machina run the risk of making the reader feel cheated, feel, "Oh, that's convenient."
quote:Is there ever a time Deus ex machina is a good thing?
Unless you're writing parody, not really. What deus ex machina usually indicates is a failure of foreshadowing - you haven't put the gun on the mantelpiece, so the shot comes out of nowhere, and then you have to explain about the gun and waste a lot of time and everyone is confused and jerked out of the emotion-laden climax and generally irritated.
The standard excuse used is that the writer wanted to "surprise" the reader. Well, my baby brother was always surprised when I "remembered" game rules that meant I won, but I can't say it was a surprise I'd want my readers feeling.
posted
So this may be a stupid question, but what are some actual examples of a Dues ex Machina, other than the classic Greek dramas? The original example from the greek plays was essentially that God comes down and resolves the conflict and the play ends or something like that, but are more sublte shades of that even apparent in writing at all?
I mean how often does your hero get to the end and then sudddenly God fixes the problem?
Another problem I see is that in a fantasy setting you could think of all magic as a sort of dues ex machina. The hero comes up against a problem and uses magic and over comes it, so magic does all the work and fixes all the problems.
So does anyone have some examples of more subtle but still "bad" examples of deus ex machina? (I'm presuming that pretty much all use of dues ex machina demonstrates the author's inability to come up with a geniune solution to a plotline)
posted
I'm afraid I don't see how Jordan has been guilty of deus ex machina. I also don't recall how he broke his own rules about balefire, nor what that has to do with deus ex machina. It's been a while since I stopped reading the series, so perhaps I have forgotten something, but the only things I thought he was guilty of was not having FINISHED already and having way to many POV characters.
But I have seen examples of deus ex machina used, and one I recently ran across was in the works of David Eddings. In his case, he literally had a god come in and fix things when the characters couldn't do it themselves any longer. That was the point I stopped reading his work, BTW. I had never seen a truer form of deus ex machina save for Greek plays.
More subtly, I think most episodes of Star Trek are guilty of this. The number of times they have a five percent or less chance of something working and they pull through....I'm sorry, at some point it would be nice for the characters to win out rather than the statistics god.
And now I must go off and think, because I know I've seen dozens of examples but for the moment I can't place them.
posted
I can think of a great time to use deus ex machina: when it makes things worse or the protagonist.
Incredible coincidences or events that spring from a higher power are fine when they cause the conflict in the story, not when they resolve the conflict. Readers won't mind if your antagonist benefits from deus ex machina. Heroes need to earn success, villians can stumble into it.
Have you seen the new King Kong yet? While we could do a long debate on good and evil in that story, Carl Denham is the primary antagonist. Ann Darrow, Jack Driscoll, and Kong himself are the protagonists. Throughout the story Darrow, Driscoll and Kong must constantly save themselves from disaster. They must earn their success. Denham is constantly struggling (and exhibits heroic characteristics of bravery and resourcefulness) but in scene after scene he is saved by deus ex machina.
It's an interesting premise, and instantly sparks the question of what you would do in that scneario, and furthermore, how are you living your life now knowing that history repeats itself for those who do not learn from it?
posted
Sure, you can have a god (or a guy with godlike powers) stroll into your story and settle everybody's hash---but what are his motivations? "Star Trek" series---all of 'em---are just loaded with that sort of thing here and there. And for a more sophisticated angle on it, anybody read Silverberg's "The Alien Years"?
Any introduction of divine beings or divine powers can ruin a story for me faster than bad spelling and grammar. But it can be done---after all, the ancient Greeks loved those dramas where it happened (usually offstage, though). I liked "Q" in "Star Trek," 'cause he seemed to have some kind of motivation for his actions, puzzling though it was...
posted
I have to disagree. Dues ex machina remains deus ex machina even if the potential is foreshadowed earlier in the story. BUT...there is a similiar writing flaw that can be prevented by an early mention. I don't know if there's a name for this flaw, but it goes like this: "Suddenly, Paul flew at his attackers and kicked the guns out of their hands in a whirl of steely legs. Paul had a black belt in karate." The time to mention that black belt was a long time ago. When you fail to do so, it can feel a bit like a cheat. But ultimately, the problem is the failure to mention the black belt. Paul still overcame the challenge on his own.
Here is some gray area: "Paul was surrounded by four gunmen, each with their weapons trained on him. There was no way out this time. Hw closed his eyes. He heard the shots. But he didn't feel them hit. He opened his eyes and saw the gunmen on the ground, each with a sniper's bullet through his chest."
Did Paul solve his own problem? Maybe. Just mentioning the snipers isn't enough, though. Paul had to have had some significant involvement in putting those snipers in place for this not to be a deus ex machina. Otherwise, even if you say right off that trained hitmen were looking for these gunmen, it remains deus ex machina. The key is main character involvement. What did he do to solve the problem, whether in the xlimas moment or in the story leading up to the climax? He can't just be a bystander.
posted
The key element in DEM is the "ex machina" bit. See, the Greeks would lower an actor onto the stage using a crane to convince the audience that this was a god--a person with supernatural powers to resolve the situation. The problem comes about when the writer has done nothing else to show that this character is a god.
Like Christine says, if the character had tried to get somebody on his side, say by going to the FBI with the--patently ridiculous--story about these gunmen being after him, then it isn't "out of the blue" when the HRT shows up and blows the bad guys away. You can even have the guy saved by some literal god (remember Navy Seals) and it's fine as long as you've already introduced that god and given a reason said god might intervene.
posted
^^^ An example of such intervention that 'works' (in my honest opinion) can be found in David Weber's fantasy series (Oath of Swords, The War God's Own, and Wing Rider's Oath). The character of the so-called 'War God,' Tomanak, pops in and out of the stories at random...but clearly when it suits his own strategy. Not just to save the main characters from certain doom. In fact, Tomanak is a god who believes in letting his servants take care of themselves, not in handing down 'divine intervention' whenever they call for it. Then again, DEM may not apply as specificially here since the characters themselves are in service to the being or deity in question, and that his standing is generally accepted as absolute within the context.
Inkwell ------------------ "The only difference between a writer and someone who says they want to write is merely the width of a postage stamp." -Anonymous
[This message has been edited by Inkwell (edited January 03, 2006).]
posted
Peter F Hamilton uses DEM in his novels, but for some reason it didn't bug me. I think primarilly because he did set the stage for "god"like involvement.
[This message has been edited by HuntGod (edited January 09, 2006).]
posted
An example of Deus ex Machina done over and over again in a kind of fun way is Simon Green's Deathstalker series.
The heros are CONSTANTLY being cornered by some nasty superhuman badguy, then literally falling through a hole in the floor or something equally physical and implausible, so they can live to run away another day.
But it actually works. And I enjoyed the series. Maybe because, as Doc Brown said, it makes things worse for the protagonists. Their falling through floors and whatnot often makes their lives only temporarily okay before they are confronted with an even more impossible situation.
Also, Simon Green has some awesomely badass characters, and you really want to know more about them, despite the plot devices.
Is it a case of DEM if a god takes human form and no one knows that he is one until he chooses to reveal it?
I had the idea of setting something like a god in human form in my fantasy novel after reading that some anceint cultures believed that the gods could appear in any form at any time.
posted
Hey guys, I think the comment that DEM is usually sympotomatic of a failure to clue-in the reader along the way is pretty accurate.
In my opinion DEM often occurs when a writer thinks up a 'great' new idea part-way through the writing but fails to go back through the material already written and add the elements at logical points that make it work in the end.
The same goes for flashbacks. Often, it seems, a writer gets to a point in their storytelling and realise Hey, I need to explain this in greater depth to make the idea work but instead of taking the time to go back to the point in the story where the information could and should have been presented, they just go ahead and writes it as a flashback.
It's a bit lazy and makes me feel somewhat cheated.
posted
Cali: I have seen this exact plot device (god in human form) many times. In some cases, it was clearly DEM. In other cases, it was not. One of these was my above most notable example of DEM ever..David Eddings. Ick Ick Ick.
Is it DEM in your story? That depends. Does the hero resolve his own problems or does he get into a sticky situation the the god has to save him from? If your god simply acts as an observer, perhaps even as a counselor, then I do not think you have a DEM situation at all. But the moment he/she steps in and saves the day with his/her infinite godly powers then, I'm afraid, it is DEM.
Ask yourself this: How did the hero solve his problem?
posted
{i]The Spanish Prisoner[/i] was a very edgy and acclaimed movie that ended with a DEM. Though at the end you could see that it had been foreshadowed.
In The Matrix it seemed like DEM the first time I saw it, but watching it again it was a little less surprising. They made up for it by having the second movie have no ending.
posted
Edgar Rice Burroughs was famous for his use of deus ex machina. His Barsoom series was rife with it. He would ram amendments to the laws of probability through Congress like crazy.
But for some reason, it *worked* in his novels, probably due to the era in which he wrote. They are almost a written version of the old movie serials like Flash Gordon, complete with handsome heroes, stunningly beautiful maidens to be rescued, evil villains plotting to take over the world and cliffhangers galore. Fun stuff.
I think the reason deus ex machina doesn't work as much anymore is due to the increasing sophistication of readers. As science progressed and the Information Age came into being, people in general were more insterested in why things worked the way they did and Science Fiction in particular picked up on that trend.
But the pendulum is swinging the other way a bit. Heck, Douglas Adams' Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is almost nothing BUT deus ex machina, and it works because the whole series is a farce (in the literary sense).
In fact, go to Wikipedia and look up "deus ex machina." It has a wonderful listing of places it has been used in modern writing and cinema, even by such greats as Asimov.
[This message has been edited by krazykiter (edited January 10, 2006).]
I don't see the God in human form as a case of DEM, simply because the characters this being interacts with are unaware of it, and the one that does know, well people thinks she's ill.
He helps, but only when the hero is so close to death, other then that he is an advisor to her lover, then he is gone. The only other god in the tale is stripped of his power, so it's fair. Each are limited on the use of their influence & power.
posted
I agreed with everything you said except one thing:
quote:He helps, but only when the hero is so close to death, other then that he is an advisor to her lover, then he is gone.
This is the DEM. As an advisor, it's fine. A god who has been stripped of his power is fine (even a little intriguing). Whether or not the main character knows that another character is a god is irrelevant to this discussion (though certainly important in your work).
When the main character does not solve his/her own problem or even have a hand in it you have a DEM.
Problem: Character X is close to death. Solution: Someone he has been travelling with turns out to have been a god in diguise and saves him. Main Character's Role in Solution: ???
He can have help. His role in the solution doesn't have to be physical. If you want this story ot have religios overtones, for example, his role may be to suddenly realize that Character Y is a god and pray to him for help. Simply praying for help won't work, though. Inviting DEM in doesn't make it any less so.
Or perhaps the main problem wasn't the hero's death. Let's look at this situation:
Problem: World coming to an end Solution: Character X travels to the pit of fire to kill the leader of the Orks Main character's Role: He travels to the pit of fire to kill the leader of the Orks Result: Character X is on the brink of death
Now if you have a god come in and cure the main character as a reward for being the hero it's better. It's still a baby DEM, but it's not in relationship to the BIG PROBLEM, the story problem. It's a solution to a minor problem that resulted from solving the big problem.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
) and it's fine as long as you've already introduced that god and given a reason said god might intervene.
