No one taught me how to write. But I've had more mentors than I can count.
I was having a chat with one of my sisters the other day. She asked me, "what do you do when you have a story in your head that you feel you have to write just to get it out of your head, but you don't have time to work on it and you don't really know how to write a story?"
She was referring to herself, obviously. I said, "you work on it a little bit at a time until it's done. It might take you ten years, but if you're just writing it to 'get it out of your head' then the time frame doesn't matter."
The conversation then, of course, led into specifics of this story she wants to write. And I found myself having a difficult time giving her advice, or even talking about it in general. Which made no sense to me. I'm a writer. I'm published. I should know what to tell her and what not to tell her. I should enjoy talking about this subject.
But it's hard when someone knows *nothing* about *anything*, and I know more than that person will ever need. It was hard not to get into teaching mode. It was hard not to talk about publishing (she's not interested in that). It was hard not to start breaking down story structure, even on the most basic level. Like saying, "your story has to start with a change."
Does her story have to start with a change? She just has something in her head that needs a release. Does it really matter how she starts the story?
I concluded that it doesn't. I concluded that A LOT of things I know about writing and publishing and yadda yadda yadda -- just about everything I discuss on this blog -- don't matter in her case.
But if she were to work on this story and fall head over heels in love with it (as most people do with their first "baby") and decide she wants other people to read it, or pursue publication... then we're talking about a completely different animal.
Even still, I'm not going to suggest that she take a writing course, per se. Because I don't think that's the best way to learn, not at first.
Following a writing blog, I think, is a way of "taking a writing course." Everything you learn from it is self-taught and you're not going to be graded on anything or forced to read your work in front of "the class", but it is still a way of teaching the craft. And I think that's why writing blogs are so popular with new and/or unpublished writers. They're in that sponge state -- ready to absorb anything they can.
Which is fine. But there is something even more basic than reading about writing that you can do to teach yourself how to write fiction.
Going back to my sister for a minute, it became pretty clear, pretty quickly, during our conversation, that the story in her head is historical fiction. Unfortunately, that's an area I don't have a lot of experience in. I was really really really REALLY tempted to tell her this, but I didn't. And I won't, not until she says she wants to pursue publication.
What is it?
To read every novel you can find that is similar, in at least one way, to the story you're writing.
Speaking for myself, doing the above has taught me more than all other things combined. Having a perceptive eye helps, too. Because you can read read read every waking minute, but it won't benefit you at all if you're not simultaneously analyzing what's in front of you.
The first analyses I remember ever doing is noting how the words are laid out on the page--the format, both of exposition and dialogue. If you have a sharp eye, it doesn't take much to understand why a new paragraph is started here and not there. And that when someone speaks, the dialogue is often tagged. You'll also note the use of punctuation. Chapter breaks. Scene breaks. Etc.
I tend to notice the basic visual stuff first.
It's not until I would finish reading a novel that I'd start to analyze the story. While reading, when I was just starting to learn, I could say whether or not I was interested in a story. I might have even been able to give a reason why I liked or didn't like something. But I didn't really understand how it all worked until I had the full story to refer to.
Story pertains to plot and characters. And it's funny, really, how you figure out the storytelling part in between the actual writing part. First you note the technical writing, then story, then...
You're back to the writing again, the words, except this time it's more about finding your personal style. And doing so requires a knowledge of both the technical aspects of writing and the creative aspects of storytelling. For anyone just starting out, it really does take some time and practice before you find your own comfortable rhythm. Dare I say, your author voice.
Anything beyond the first step, however, I think it's okay to start looking into writing "courses" -- either through blogs that teach, or books on craft, or a writers' retreat, conference, etc. But when you're fresh out of the gate, I firmly believe the best thing you can do to prepare yourself to write anything in the realm of fiction, is to read what you want to write. Read what's already out there. Read what's been published recently.
When someone wants to break into a particular career field, they can intern with someone who has experience in that field. And you don't intern with someone fresh out of college OR someone on the brink of retirement. You're paired with someone on that pleasant middle ground -- experienced enough to teach, but hasn't had time yet to be jaded or considered "old school."
Associating with other writers is a great way to learn. Ask as many questions as come to mind. Ask and observe. Observe what they write (if they're published), how they write, how they network, etc, etc, etc.
Think of yourself as an author intern. Study. Analyze. Ask. Observe. Ask again. Apply. Practice practice practice. Go back to step one and repeat. That's how you learn to write fiction.
Happy writing,
~Lydia
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
For the (Secret) Love of Vampires
I don't read vampire novels, but somehow, I've always been fascinated by them. Even long before the Twilight years, when the most recent vamp film I had to reference was this:
I don't know... there is something about them that sucks people in (lame pun totally intended). The idea of appearing youthful for eternity? Maybe. For me it might be more about the fashion, not gonna lie.
My very first attempt at a novel-length project, when I was a teenager, was about a vampire--a female vampire with a herd of wolves as her pets. She lived alone, slept during the day, worked at night. She was a scientist, trying to find a cure for her disease.
My vamp story was sci-fi, not fantasy. Unfortunately, I never finished it. All I had was an interesting character, a setting, a spark of an idea... but no real plot. At that time in my life, I had no clue how to even write a novel. I was more interested in poetry and screenplays. Writing a novel was just too hard. (I laugh at that now, because I can't write poetry for shit anymore, but I'm working on my fifth novel. ha!)
Some years later, after finishing my first real novel, I revisited my vamp novel idea to see if I could brainstorm it into an actual story. I still have that brainstorming file saved, and came across it this morning while searching for something else.
To be honest, it's really not a bad idea. I just don't know if/when I'll ever have time enough to devote to finishing it. And the world doesn't really need another vamp novel right now, no matter how unique I think it is. Right? Right.
But what is it about vampires that makes us want to write about them? It seems like just about everyone has a vamp story of some kind inside of them, whether they've written it or not. Whether they will admit it or not.
So, just for fun, here's a snippet of mine. Like I said it's sci-fi. This is taken from a hospital scene, told from the viewpoint of the other lead of the story, a medical doctor.
BLEEDING HEART
©2009 by Lydia Sharp
Okay, confession time! Who of you out there also has a secret vamp novel they never told anyone about? Just between us (and the rest of the Internet)... pinky swear.
~Lydia
I don't know... there is something about them that sucks people in (lame pun totally intended). The idea of appearing youthful for eternity? Maybe. For me it might be more about the fashion, not gonna lie.
My very first attempt at a novel-length project, when I was a teenager, was about a vampire--a female vampire with a herd of wolves as her pets. She lived alone, slept during the day, worked at night. She was a scientist, trying to find a cure for her disease.
My vamp story was sci-fi, not fantasy. Unfortunately, I never finished it. All I had was an interesting character, a setting, a spark of an idea... but no real plot. At that time in my life, I had no clue how to even write a novel. I was more interested in poetry and screenplays. Writing a novel was just too hard. (I laugh at that now, because I can't write poetry for shit anymore, but I'm working on my fifth novel. ha!)
Some years later, after finishing my first real novel, I revisited my vamp novel idea to see if I could brainstorm it into an actual story. I still have that brainstorming file saved, and came across it this morning while searching for something else.
To be honest, it's really not a bad idea. I just don't know if/when I'll ever have time enough to devote to finishing it. And the world doesn't really need another vamp novel right now, no matter how unique I think it is. Right? Right.
But what is it about vampires that makes us want to write about them? It seems like just about everyone has a vamp story of some kind inside of them, whether they've written it or not. Whether they will admit it or not.
So, just for fun, here's a snippet of mine. Like I said it's sci-fi. This is taken from a hospital scene, told from the viewpoint of the other lead of the story, a medical doctor.
I scanned through my new patient's e-chart, not entirely sure what I was searching for. Perhaps I'd know it when I saw it. There was something primal about her delicate features, even as she slept. Like she might somehow be consciously aware of my presence without having to awaken her senses. Heightened neurological activity at night… daytime sluggishness… extreme photosensitivity… anemia. Someone so young didn't deserve all these physical issues. She'd never get the chance to truly live.
Unless I found a way to fix her.
BLEEDING HEART
©2009 by Lydia Sharp
Okay, confession time! Who of you out there also has a secret vamp novel they never told anyone about? Just between us (and the rest of the Internet)... pinky swear.
~Lydia
Monday, November 28, 2011
Monday Movie: What I Learned From Watching ROBIN HOOD (shortly after reading a disappointing novel)
I wanted to title this post "An Open Letter to Authors", but then I realized that isn't entirely fair. Most of you are doing a good job out there, and what I'm going to discuss here doesn't apply to every single type of novel.
But it applies to most. And if you write sci-fi and fantasy, especially, please, listen up. Your readers expect certain things, and in the end it's up to you, the author, to make sure your story is the very best it can possibly be.
You start with the seed of an idea, a concept-- or maybe an interesting character in an interesting situation-- and you build your story from there. It might be something completely new (relatively speaking) or it might be a retelling of a classic (as is the case with the movie Robin Hood), but in any case, the basics are the same.
The most basic of all basics in storytelling is that there must be conflict. I don't think any published story is lacking conflict. But some authors, even though the conflict is there, for some reason, choose to do nothing with that conflict.
They set it up. Let it fester. Then... walk away quietly.
And this is enraging.
Enraging to the point of not reading anything from that author ever again.
How can you end a novel, or any story, without a showdown of the two main opposing forces?
Even in a series, every novel within that series has to end with a showdown. In the early books of a series the reader understands that the individual showdowns are not going to resolve everything. But they still expect a huge confrontation at the end.
(ASIDE: a few examples of how to do this well: Janice Hardy's Healing Wars series, Lauren Oliver's Delirium series, and Julie Kagawa's Iron Fey series)
That's just natural storytelling. You build the conflict until it explodes. So why are so many novels I'm reading lately ending with a whisper? When the author, through the story events up to that point, promised me a shouting match?
The ending conflict should be the largest of the entire novel.
Oh, you guys... I thought this was basic. Storytelling 101. Am I wrong?
According to the movie Robin Hood, no. I'm not wrong. Which doesn't make me feel any better. In truth, it actually infuriates me because it means that people who are supposedly professionals in the publishing industry-- authors, editors, etc-- do not have a basic understanding of storytelling.
This isn't about personal tastes, opinions, regarding story content and/or writing style. I'm talking about the basic structural foundation of every good story ever told.
In the movie Robin Hood, there are a lot of forces at work. Enemies are made. Friendships are forged. Secrets are revealed. It's a very complex story.
So... after all that build-up, do you think the movie can simply end with, say, Robin Hood and Prince John sitting down to tea with Prince Philip of France, having a mild argument, agreeing to disagree, and then going their separate ways?
*snarf* NO!
We're talking about life and death matters here. Two countries at war. Blood must be shed, and someone has to walk away victorious.
There is nothing quiet about that. The movie ends with a battle on the beach-- the biggest conflict of the entire story is settled right then and there. Archers let loose a waterfall of arrows from atop the cliff's edge. Cavalry thunders down from the hills, not stopping until their swords clash with the infantry being dumped onto the sand from barges. The water runs red with blood from both sides.
It's HUGE.
Even in stories that aren't told on such an epic scale, whatever that final conflict is that leads to the story's resolution-- the climax-- has to be the BIGGEST of the entire story. That's why they call it a climax. It's the peak, the highest point of tension.
So when I read a novel and I can't even pinpoint the climax? Yes, that makes me angry.
When I read a novel that feels like it is leading up to a big showdown... and the protagonist just walks away from her plight without an ounce of resistance from the antagonist? Yes, that makes me angry.
How could you possibly think that was the best choice for your ending? No confrontation at all? REALLY?
I don't know... it seems like all you need lately is a high concept idea and away we go to the presses, before the idea has even had a chance to grow. These stories are still seedlings.
*shakes head* A concept is not a story.
No. That needs to be bigger.
A concept is not a story.
Similarly...
Elegant prose is not a story.
A string of irrelevant conflicts is not a story.
If you want to write good stories, enjoyable stories, satisfying stories, then you must learn the basics of storytelling.
Maybe that should've been my post title.
~Lydia
But it applies to most. And if you write sci-fi and fantasy, especially, please, listen up. Your readers expect certain things, and in the end it's up to you, the author, to make sure your story is the very best it can possibly be.
You start with the seed of an idea, a concept-- or maybe an interesting character in an interesting situation-- and you build your story from there. It might be something completely new (relatively speaking) or it might be a retelling of a classic (as is the case with the movie Robin Hood), but in any case, the basics are the same.
The most basic of all basics in storytelling is that there must be conflict. I don't think any published story is lacking conflict. But some authors, even though the conflict is there, for some reason, choose to do nothing with that conflict.
They set it up. Let it fester. Then... walk away quietly.
And this is enraging.
Enraging to the point of not reading anything from that author ever again.
How can you end a novel, or any story, without a showdown of the two main opposing forces?
Even in a series, every novel within that series has to end with a showdown. In the early books of a series the reader understands that the individual showdowns are not going to resolve everything. But they still expect a huge confrontation at the end.
(ASIDE: a few examples of how to do this well: Janice Hardy's Healing Wars series, Lauren Oliver's Delirium series, and Julie Kagawa's Iron Fey series)
That's just natural storytelling. You build the conflict until it explodes. So why are so many novels I'm reading lately ending with a whisper? When the author, through the story events up to that point, promised me a shouting match?
The ending conflict should be the largest of the entire novel.
Oh, you guys... I thought this was basic. Storytelling 101. Am I wrong?
According to the movie Robin Hood, no. I'm not wrong. Which doesn't make me feel any better. In truth, it actually infuriates me because it means that people who are supposedly professionals in the publishing industry-- authors, editors, etc-- do not have a basic understanding of storytelling.
This isn't about personal tastes, opinions, regarding story content and/or writing style. I'm talking about the basic structural foundation of every good story ever told.
In the movie Robin Hood, there are a lot of forces at work. Enemies are made. Friendships are forged. Secrets are revealed. It's a very complex story.
So... after all that build-up, do you think the movie can simply end with, say, Robin Hood and Prince John sitting down to tea with Prince Philip of France, having a mild argument, agreeing to disagree, and then going their separate ways?
*snarf* NO!
We're talking about life and death matters here. Two countries at war. Blood must be shed, and someone has to walk away victorious.
There is nothing quiet about that. The movie ends with a battle on the beach-- the biggest conflict of the entire story is settled right then and there. Archers let loose a waterfall of arrows from atop the cliff's edge. Cavalry thunders down from the hills, not stopping until their swords clash with the infantry being dumped onto the sand from barges. The water runs red with blood from both sides.
It's HUGE.
Even in stories that aren't told on such an epic scale, whatever that final conflict is that leads to the story's resolution-- the climax-- has to be the BIGGEST of the entire story. That's why they call it a climax. It's the peak, the highest point of tension.
So when I read a novel and I can't even pinpoint the climax? Yes, that makes me angry.
When I read a novel that feels like it is leading up to a big showdown... and the protagonist just walks away from her plight without an ounce of resistance from the antagonist? Yes, that makes me angry.
How could you possibly think that was the best choice for your ending? No confrontation at all? REALLY?
I don't know... it seems like all you need lately is a high concept idea and away we go to the presses, before the idea has even had a chance to grow. These stories are still seedlings.
*shakes head* A concept is not a story.
No. That needs to be bigger.
A concept is not a story.
Similarly...
Elegant prose is not a story.
A string of irrelevant conflicts is not a story.
If you want to write good stories, enjoyable stories, satisfying stories, then you must learn the basics of storytelling.
Maybe that should've been my post title.
~Lydia
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Trying New Things: Co-Writing
Sometimes (no, all the time) you have to be honest with yourself.
Sometimes you need a break.
Scratch that.
Sometimes you need a change.
My recent (nearly two-month long) illness forced me to tap the brakes and slow down a bit. I had just finished novel number four, which I'd been working on for nearly a year, and then went right into the ups and downs of querying agents. Soon after sending out the first batch of queries, I dove into novel number five. At the same time, I also took on a new book review gig. Plus blogging and READING and tweeting and blogging and beta-reading and critiquing and SURVIVING SYNOPSIS HELL and... did I mention BLOGGING?
Yeah.
I should have seen it coming, but I was too busy being busy to realize I was burning myself out. While I may take a blog break from time to time, I will never stop blogging. It's an addiction that I'd rather not cure. And while what I write may vary from day to day or week to week, I will always be working on something. I can't not write. And I can never stop reading, so... there goes my time.
But my sickness really screwed with my mental focus. So I hit a wall of blech last week. Fortunately, while chatting with my bestie writer-friend (who is sometimes more bestie than writer-friend and sometimes more bitchy-CP than writer-friend, haha), she picked up on my blech cues and offered some help.
She suggested I write something for fun. No pressure. No stress. No nothing except what I choose.
My dear bestie writer-friend has been begging me to co-write something with her for like... three years. Maybe more. So we got to talking about some stuff and a few hours later, we had the foundation of a fantasy novel laid.
When she and I get together, it's kind of scary how amazing the results are, so I'm not sure why I'd resisted co-writing with her for so long. I mean, we've been helping each other with our own individual stories for years now (I can honestly say that I wouldn't be a published author if not for her), it only makes sense that we should collaborate something.
Our first chat laid the foundation of the story world. Then we discussed possible lead characters.
The next chat was much more indepth. And so was the next. And the next. Now we're at the point where we're each taking a stab at writing a scene. Within just a few days we've gone from literally nothing to a real story with a real plot and real characters. It's real.
But still, no pressure. We're just a couple of bestie writer-friends having some fun with words. If anything comes of this, awesome. If not, it was a great experience.
I think that's the best attitude to embrace when trying anything new. Do it for fun. Do it to learn. Don't expect brilliance. Don't self-induce stress.
This is my first time trying out co-writing, although my bestie has been doing it for years (with other writers, obvs). You might be seeing more blog posts about it as we move along through our project, but in the meantime, I'm curious:
Have any of you ever co-written before? What made you try it? What was your experience (good, bad, somewhere in between)?
Happy (co)writing,
~Lydia
Sometimes you need a break.
Scratch that.
Sometimes you need a change.
My recent (nearly two-month long) illness forced me to tap the brakes and slow down a bit. I had just finished novel number four, which I'd been working on for nearly a year, and then went right into the ups and downs of querying agents. Soon after sending out the first batch of queries, I dove into novel number five. At the same time, I also took on a new book review gig. Plus blogging and READING and tweeting and blogging and beta-reading and critiquing and SURVIVING SYNOPSIS HELL and... did I mention BLOGGING?
Yeah.
I should have seen it coming, but I was too busy being busy to realize I was burning myself out. While I may take a blog break from time to time, I will never stop blogging. It's an addiction that I'd rather not cure. And while what I write may vary from day to day or week to week, I will always be working on something. I can't not write. And I can never stop reading, so... there goes my time.
But my sickness really screwed with my mental focus. So I hit a wall of blech last week. Fortunately, while chatting with my bestie writer-friend (who is sometimes more bestie than writer-friend and sometimes more bitchy-CP than writer-friend, haha), she picked up on my blech cues and offered some help.
She suggested I write something for fun. No pressure. No stress. No nothing except what I choose.
My dear bestie writer-friend has been begging me to co-write something with her for like... three years. Maybe more. So we got to talking about some stuff and a few hours later, we had the foundation of a fantasy novel laid.
When she and I get together, it's kind of scary how amazing the results are, so I'm not sure why I'd resisted co-writing with her for so long. I mean, we've been helping each other with our own individual stories for years now (I can honestly say that I wouldn't be a published author if not for her), it only makes sense that we should collaborate something.
Our first chat laid the foundation of the story world. Then we discussed possible lead characters.
The next chat was much more indepth. And so was the next. And the next. Now we're at the point where we're each taking a stab at writing a scene. Within just a few days we've gone from literally nothing to a real story with a real plot and real characters. It's real.
But still, no pressure. We're just a couple of bestie writer-friends having some fun with words. If anything comes of this, awesome. If not, it was a great experience.
I think that's the best attitude to embrace when trying anything new. Do it for fun. Do it to learn. Don't expect brilliance. Don't self-induce stress.
This is my first time trying out co-writing, although my bestie has been doing it for years (with other writers, obvs). You might be seeing more blog posts about it as we move along through our project, but in the meantime, I'm curious:
Have any of you ever co-written before? What made you try it? What was your experience (good, bad, somewhere in between)?
Happy (co)writing,
~Lydia
Friday, November 18, 2011
3 Things You Can Leave Out of Your Query, and 3 Things You Should Include
The following tips pertain to novelists querying literary agents.
Things you can leave out of your query (because they are rightly assumed):
1. That your manuscript is complete. If you haven't finished the novel, then you shouldn't be querying. Period.
2. That you are seeking representation from the agent addressed in the letter. That's like walking up to the counter at McDonald's and prefacing your order with, "I'm here because I'm hungry and eating your food will make me not hungry anymore. Since I can't approach the cooks back there, could you act as a go-between for me?"
Counter girl: *blinks*
3. A one-sentence (or longer) description of your novel immediately following the 2-3 paragraph summary. Rather than emphasize your pitch, this usually detracts from the tension you've built up in the preceding paragraphs. And it tells the agent nothing new, so, in my opinion, it's a bit insulting. Like saying, "just in case you didn't grasp what I just told you, here's the gist of it in simpler terms."
For a perfect example of what I mean, click here and skim down to the title of the novel in all caps. Read that paragraph and the first two sentences of Janet's comments that follow (in blue).
_____
Things you should include in your query (because they will make a good impression):
1. Comparative titles. This shows you know the current market and, more importantly, where your work fits in the market--you know your target audience. It also shows that you read the types of novels you write. You don't have to say your novel is exactly like these titles, just that they're similar in tone, content, style, etc.
2. A specific reason you're querying this agent for this novel. Even if it's a newer agent who doesn't have a sales record established yet, there has to be a reason you selected this person from the masses. What was it? Be honest.
3. Clean writing (no misspelled words, punctuation errors, grammar issues, etc). Yes, this can mean a pass instead of a request if you let it slip. Don't believe me? Click here.
_____
Those of you who have been through the query process before (or are currently going through it), what would you add to either of these lists?
Happy querying,
~Lydia
Things you can leave out of your query (because they are rightly assumed):
1. That your manuscript is complete. If you haven't finished the novel, then you shouldn't be querying. Period.
2. That you are seeking representation from the agent addressed in the letter. That's like walking up to the counter at McDonald's and prefacing your order with, "I'm here because I'm hungry and eating your food will make me not hungry anymore. Since I can't approach the cooks back there, could you act as a go-between for me?"
Counter girl: *blinks*
3. A one-sentence (or longer) description of your novel immediately following the 2-3 paragraph summary. Rather than emphasize your pitch, this usually detracts from the tension you've built up in the preceding paragraphs. And it tells the agent nothing new, so, in my opinion, it's a bit insulting. Like saying, "just in case you didn't grasp what I just told you, here's the gist of it in simpler terms."
For a perfect example of what I mean, click here and skim down to the title of the novel in all caps. Read that paragraph and the first two sentences of Janet's comments that follow (in blue).
_____
Things you should include in your query (because they will make a good impression):
1. Comparative titles. This shows you know the current market and, more importantly, where your work fits in the market--you know your target audience. It also shows that you read the types of novels you write. You don't have to say your novel is exactly like these titles, just that they're similar in tone, content, style, etc.
2. A specific reason you're querying this agent for this novel. Even if it's a newer agent who doesn't have a sales record established yet, there has to be a reason you selected this person from the masses. What was it? Be honest.
3. Clean writing (no misspelled words, punctuation errors, grammar issues, etc). Yes, this can mean a pass instead of a request if you let it slip. Don't believe me? Click here.
_____
Those of you who have been through the query process before (or are currently going through it), what would you add to either of these lists?
Happy querying,
~Lydia
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
Is Your Gag Running? Better Go Catch It
That is quite possibly my lamest post title ever in the history of this blog. Oh, Lydia... what did you put in your coffee this morning? *shakes head*
I think I confused the snot out of a lot of you last week by using Inception as an example in story structure. (Note to self: Inception bad. Too confusing, even when you understand it.) So this week I'm going to talk about something a bit lighter, more fun, easier to grasp. The running gag.
Despite the comedic connotation, running gags aren't always a joke of some sort (usually, but not always). What makes it fun is the repetition of it, really, rather than the actual gag. They can be used effectively in pretty much any type of story as a way to emphasize character arc.
You can see these clearly in movies (because most points of storytelling are easier seen in movies), but if you know what to look for, you'll notice they are frequently used in novels, too. They just don't stand out as much in written form. You notice them on a more subconscious level, I think, when reading. Unless the author puts forth a dramatic effort to make the gag run and jump right off the page.
It's not necessary, but good storytelling often includes a running gag. Because it focuses on a specific aspect of a character's unique personality, running gags can create a stronger connection between the audience and the character than might be the case without it.
Blake Snyder describes it like this:
The pay-off of the running gag, which emphasizes the character arc, is that it must have some sort of twist at the end. Different in a way that demonstrates how the character has changed over the course of the story.
For example, in the romantic comedy Two Weeks Notice, the lead character played by Sandra Bullock orders Chinese take-out for herself as part of an established routine in her single life. Every time she orders, the order is HUGE, and the person on the other line always asks how many people this is for. She answers, "No, it's for one. Just one. Always for one."
This happens at least twice during the movie (maybe even three times). We remember it because it's repeated. Then, at the end, after she has admitted she's fallen in love with the other lead character (played by Hugh Grant) and they are now together as a couple, she orders the Chinese take-out again.
But this time it's for two. Because the story has changed her. She's not single anymore.
Yes, it's as simple as that. And it's extremely effective. Running gags are not essential to the plot, really. You can remove them and tell the same story. But in my opinion they are essential to connecting with your audience and making your characters vividly real.
I love using a running gag for either the main character or an important side character. It's usually something added during revisions, though, because I just don't know my characters well enough during a first draft to find an effective running gag yet. Even if the story is serious or dark in tone, running gags are fun to write. If nothing else, they sharpen your character development skills and deepen your storytelling.
What are your favorite running gags, either in movies or novels? Have you ever used one in your own stories?
Happy writing,
~Lydia
I think I confused the snot out of a lot of you last week by using Inception as an example in story structure. (Note to self: Inception bad. Too confusing, even when you understand it.) So this week I'm going to talk about something a bit lighter, more fun, easier to grasp. The running gag.
Despite the comedic connotation, running gags aren't always a joke of some sort (usually, but not always). What makes it fun is the repetition of it, really, rather than the actual gag. They can be used effectively in pretty much any type of story as a way to emphasize character arc.
You can see these clearly in movies (because most points of storytelling are easier seen in movies), but if you know what to look for, you'll notice they are frequently used in novels, too. They just don't stand out as much in written form. You notice them on a more subconscious level, I think, when reading. Unless the author puts forth a dramatic effort to make the gag run and jump right off the page.
It's not necessary, but good storytelling often includes a running gag. Because it focuses on a specific aspect of a character's unique personality, running gags can create a stronger connection between the audience and the character than might be the case without it.
Blake Snyder describes it like this:
Running gags are repeating themes, character tics, or bits that are interspersed throughout a [story]. As an audience, our appreciation for these gags grows with each use because we feel smart for remembering them and feel more a part of the story because of it. If a character is set up as liking coffee, then whenever he or she walks into a restaurant and orders coffee -- we love it! It's nothing. But we laugh with recognition that we know this character.Save the Cat! pp. 190-191
The pay-off of the running gag, which emphasizes the character arc, is that it must have some sort of twist at the end. Different in a way that demonstrates how the character has changed over the course of the story.
For example, in the romantic comedy Two Weeks Notice, the lead character played by Sandra Bullock orders Chinese take-out for herself as part of an established routine in her single life. Every time she orders, the order is HUGE, and the person on the other line always asks how many people this is for. She answers, "No, it's for one. Just one. Always for one."
This happens at least twice during the movie (maybe even three times). We remember it because it's repeated. Then, at the end, after she has admitted she's fallen in love with the other lead character (played by Hugh Grant) and they are now together as a couple, she orders the Chinese take-out again.
But this time it's for two. Because the story has changed her. She's not single anymore.
Yes, it's as simple as that. And it's extremely effective. Running gags are not essential to the plot, really. You can remove them and tell the same story. But in my opinion they are essential to connecting with your audience and making your characters vividly real.
I love using a running gag for either the main character or an important side character. It's usually something added during revisions, though, because I just don't know my characters well enough during a first draft to find an effective running gag yet. Even if the story is serious or dark in tone, running gags are fun to write. If nothing else, they sharpen your character development skills and deepen your storytelling.
What are your favorite running gags, either in movies or novels? Have you ever used one in your own stories?
Happy writing,
~Lydia
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Quotable Quotes
It shouldn't be an Easter egg hunt for the plot line.
~literary agent Bree Ogden on query letters
Monday, November 14, 2011
Monday Movie: What I Learned From Watching JUNO
If you write anything for teens, I highly recommend watching this movie.
As you can see from the opening above, Juno, the lead character, is portrayed as "average girl living in average America." We'll see later how she is really anything BUT average. I think the point of this opening, though, is to show that any teen girl could potentially be in her situation, and that's part of the appeal of this movie.
Real teens living in the real world have real problems that, more often than not, they don't know how to deal with, even if they claim the opposite is true. And this is why contemp YA is so important. It explores those issues in a way that isn't preachy. It could even be called entertainment.
The movie follows Juno, a sixteen year-old girl who gets pregnant with a baby she knows she isn't ready for. It's never a question of "do I want this baby?" Clearly, from the beginning, she doesn't want the baby. It's more a question of "what am I going to do with this baby?"
Teen pregnancy is nothing new. And there's really nothing new presented in Juno's situation in this movie. She considers abortion, then decides against it. She tells her parents, they're upset yet supportive. She finds a couple to adopt the baby once it's born.
None of that is unique in itself. So how does the movie draw you into the story?
Character character character.
If this movie were a novel, I would call it literary fiction. The premise is about the character's journey through a transitional period, self-discovery, making difficult choices that will affect her for the rest of her life.
How can a story be led by a character who doesn't know who they are? Actually, those are the best leads for this type of story. Because, even though they don't know who they are, we, the audience, can see who they are by watching them interact with the people and situations in their world.
That's character. And Juno has a LOT of it. What makes her character so endearing is that she has a quirky perception of people and things that permeates her dialogue and her decisions. This is what sucks you into her story and makes you care what happens to her.
As an example, one of the first things we hear in a voice-over from Juno details the nature of her relationship with her estranged mother:
She inexplicably mails me a cactus every Valentine's Day. And I'm like, "Thanks a heap coyote ugly. This cactus-gram stings even worse than your abandonment."
It's a sad/serious situation, yet she just made us laugh about it. We want this type of person to succeed.
Aside from having a great voice to string us along, Juno never allows herself to become a whiny victim of her circumstances. She is a very good example of a strong, proactive female lead, even if she doesn't see this in herself. And this is why she works so well for this story. She takes charge of her own plight.
But along the way, she is still a vulnerable, naive sixteen year-old girl. We see this in little nuances during different situations between Juno and pretty much every other character in the story.
It's this innocence (that she isn't truly aware of) that makes her a realistic teenager. Teens are in that horrible in-between stage of having lived enough to know what's wrong with the world, but not having lived enough to really know how to fix it. They're mostly guessing as they go along, hoping their plans will all work out in the end.
The love story in this movie is also unique. Juno gets pregnant with her best friend's baby. They're not really in a romantic relationship when they have sex. They just do it to... do it. Or at least that's what they keep telling themselves, even long after Juno is bulging with evidence of their "you wanna try this? sure."
Bleeker is just as quirky of a character as Juno, yet you still get a sense of "average teenage boy" from him. He isn't popular, but he isn't an outcast. He's average. And he's genuine. But the biggest thing about his character that makes him realistic is that he doesn't have a clue how to handle the baby situation. He doesn't even know if he should be involved, especially since Juno is giving the baby up for adoption once it's born.
Through this whole movie, even when Bleeker wasn't in the scene, I'm thinking, "how does he really feel about all of this? He's the father!" And again, there are these little nuances throughout that show he cares for Juno. (two words: the panties) He even calls her beautiful at a time when she feels outrageously fat and ugly. But he never pushes his feelings on her -- romantically or otherwise -- and he respects that she has the right to go about this baby situation in whatever way she feels comfortable.
So by the time we get to the ending and Juno starts realizing her true feelings for Bleeker, we're already rooting for them to get together. And they're such a wacky couple. It's so pathetically sweet and adorable that you can't NOT love it.
So here's what I learned:
* An effective teen voice is conveyed through a viewpoint unique to that character, and the best of them have a thread of odd humor.
* The best lead characters take charge of their situation, even if they're unsure of the outcome. They're willing to take chances and make mistakes. They don't act like helpless victims.
* Choose a lead who has the most to learn from the events of the story.
* Some of the biggest turning points in a story can come through the slightest little nuance.
* For maximum impact at the end of a romantic thread, both sides should have an internal struggle throughout, not just one person or the other.
* Supporting characters should have distinct personalities that emphasize their individual role in the story.
* Not every story for teens has to have an amazingly unique premise. But if that is lacking then the story must be driven by an amazingly unique character.
* A realistic teen lead has a balance of experience (relevant to their background) and naivety.
Has anyone else seen this movie? What did you you learn from watching it?
~Lydia
As you can see from the opening above, Juno, the lead character, is portrayed as "average girl living in average America." We'll see later how she is really anything BUT average. I think the point of this opening, though, is to show that any teen girl could potentially be in her situation, and that's part of the appeal of this movie.
Real teens living in the real world have real problems that, more often than not, they don't know how to deal with, even if they claim the opposite is true. And this is why contemp YA is so important. It explores those issues in a way that isn't preachy. It could even be called entertainment.
The movie follows Juno, a sixteen year-old girl who gets pregnant with a baby she knows she isn't ready for. It's never a question of "do I want this baby?" Clearly, from the beginning, she doesn't want the baby. It's more a question of "what am I going to do with this baby?"
Teen pregnancy is nothing new. And there's really nothing new presented in Juno's situation in this movie. She considers abortion, then decides against it. She tells her parents, they're upset yet supportive. She finds a couple to adopt the baby once it's born.
None of that is unique in itself. So how does the movie draw you into the story?
Character character character.
If this movie were a novel, I would call it literary fiction. The premise is about the character's journey through a transitional period, self-discovery, making difficult choices that will affect her for the rest of her life.
How can a story be led by a character who doesn't know who they are? Actually, those are the best leads for this type of story. Because, even though they don't know who they are, we, the audience, can see who they are by watching them interact with the people and situations in their world.
That's character. And Juno has a LOT of it. What makes her character so endearing is that she has a quirky perception of people and things that permeates her dialogue and her decisions. This is what sucks you into her story and makes you care what happens to her.
As an example, one of the first things we hear in a voice-over from Juno details the nature of her relationship with her estranged mother:
She inexplicably mails me a cactus every Valentine's Day. And I'm like, "Thanks a heap coyote ugly. This cactus-gram stings even worse than your abandonment."
It's a sad/serious situation, yet she just made us laugh about it. We want this type of person to succeed.
Aside from having a great voice to string us along, Juno never allows herself to become a whiny victim of her circumstances. She is a very good example of a strong, proactive female lead, even if she doesn't see this in herself. And this is why she works so well for this story. She takes charge of her own plight.
But along the way, she is still a vulnerable, naive sixteen year-old girl. We see this in little nuances during different situations between Juno and pretty much every other character in the story.
It's this innocence (that she isn't truly aware of) that makes her a realistic teenager. Teens are in that horrible in-between stage of having lived enough to know what's wrong with the world, but not having lived enough to really know how to fix it. They're mostly guessing as they go along, hoping their plans will all work out in the end.
The love story in this movie is also unique. Juno gets pregnant with her best friend's baby. They're not really in a romantic relationship when they have sex. They just do it to... do it. Or at least that's what they keep telling themselves, even long after Juno is bulging with evidence of their "you wanna try this? sure."
Bleeker is just as quirky of a character as Juno, yet you still get a sense of "average teenage boy" from him. He isn't popular, but he isn't an outcast. He's average. And he's genuine. But the biggest thing about his character that makes him realistic is that he doesn't have a clue how to handle the baby situation. He doesn't even know if he should be involved, especially since Juno is giving the baby up for adoption once it's born.
Through this whole movie, even when Bleeker wasn't in the scene, I'm thinking, "how does he really feel about all of this? He's the father!" And again, there are these little nuances throughout that show he cares for Juno. (two words: the panties) He even calls her beautiful at a time when she feels outrageously fat and ugly. But he never pushes his feelings on her -- romantically or otherwise -- and he respects that she has the right to go about this baby situation in whatever way she feels comfortable.
So by the time we get to the ending and Juno starts realizing her true feelings for Bleeker, we're already rooting for them to get together. And they're such a wacky couple. It's so pathetically sweet and adorable that you can't NOT love it.
So here's what I learned:
* An effective teen voice is conveyed through a viewpoint unique to that character, and the best of them have a thread of odd humor.
* The best lead characters take charge of their situation, even if they're unsure of the outcome. They're willing to take chances and make mistakes. They don't act like helpless victims.
* Choose a lead who has the most to learn from the events of the story.
* Some of the biggest turning points in a story can come through the slightest little nuance.
* For maximum impact at the end of a romantic thread, both sides should have an internal struggle throughout, not just one person or the other.
* Supporting characters should have distinct personalities that emphasize their individual role in the story.
* Not every story for teens has to have an amazingly unique premise. But if that is lacking then the story must be driven by an amazingly unique character.
* A realistic teen lead has a balance of experience (relevant to their background) and naivety.
Has anyone else seen this movie? What did you you learn from watching it?
~Lydia
Friday, November 11, 2011
#FridayReads and Weekend Movies
I'm still getting my butt kicked by the raging sore throat that wishes me dead, so no "industry" post today. Because that requires a thought process I'm currently lacking.
This cold/flu/whatever has made it difficult for me to read sometimes. I've been watching a lot more movies than usual because it's just... easier. There I said it. But even so, the storyteller part of my brain is still paying attention when I watch movies, so. It's all good.
While waiting for my prescription to be filled yesterday, The Hubby and I went to the library... not to return anything. NO. We each walked out with a new huge stack of books and movies. I'm not sure why I checked out more books when I still have a ton waiting for me to read that I checked out a month ago (and renewed... and renewed again). But I couldn't resist. Every time I go to my lovely library I look to see what new YA novels they've acquired.
I seriously could have cleaned out half the "what's new?" shelf yesterday, but I limited myself to these two:
Not sure when I'll actually get to reading either of those, but they're in my possession now, so. That's forward progress.
The rest of my stack was movies. I had more of a purpose with these than to just veg out, actually. My current WIP is a "romantic comedy" (if that's even a term we use for fiction anymore), so I thought I'd watch some movies that claim to be romantic comedies, yanno, to kind of amp up my writing mojo and wake up my muse a bit.
But that didn't happen yesterday. Here's why.
I only got through one section of the DVD collection at the library before I felt like I would pass out (from fever... or something equally illnesses-related, idk) and we had to leave. So my selection was somewhat limited. The first movie I watched once I was feeling better later was 27 Dresses.
It claims to be "the ULTIMATE romantic comedy" right on the front cover. I read the blurb. It fit my bill -- romance between young single people, an awkward yet unique situation, and comedic shenanigans throughout.
I stopped watching it half-way through. Has anyone else seen that movie? It had so much potential but... argh.
I really liked the opening scene. But it went downhill pretty quickly after that. Why, can someone please tell me WHY, Jane and Kevin don't really do anything together until the movie is half over? (and then when they do get together, there's no real reason for it -- that's when I shut the movie off) I swear, half the movie was about Jane pining over dude that's not really worth pining over, and getting all angsty about her sister, who is the biggest cardboard-cut-out every-man-loves-me-and-every-woman-hates-me slut-whore character that I've ever seen.
The only unique thing about the movie -- Jane's addiction to weddings -- is just tossed aside for like... an hour. I was really excited to see this funny story about Kevin following her around to all these weddings for his "big article" and crazy mishaps and then they fall in love... aww, so sweet...
But it never got going like it should. It was all like, "hey! awesome plot ahead!"
Then it goes, "jk! lol." But it's the only one laughing.
Am I just being too picky because I'm sick? Maybe that's it. If someone tells me here that that movie is worth finishing, I'll give it another chance when I'm feeling better.
Anyway. I've got a lot more movies to get through this weekend, but today I'm not taking any chances. The Hubby and I are going to watch 13th Warrior. We've seen it before, several times, so we know we'll like it. For now, that's just what I need.
Weirdly, I just noticed, both of those movies have a number in the title.
What are you reading and/or watching this weekend? And if anyone can recommend a good romantic comedy, either novels (preferably YA) or movies, please let me know. Thanks!
~Lydia
This cold/flu/whatever has made it difficult for me to read sometimes. I've been watching a lot more movies than usual because it's just... easier. There I said it. But even so, the storyteller part of my brain is still paying attention when I watch movies, so. It's all good.
While waiting for my prescription to be filled yesterday, The Hubby and I went to the library... not to return anything. NO. We each walked out with a new huge stack of books and movies. I'm not sure why I checked out more books when I still have a ton waiting for me to read that I checked out a month ago (and renewed... and renewed again). But I couldn't resist. Every time I go to my lovely library I look to see what new YA novels they've acquired.
I seriously could have cleaned out half the "what's new?" shelf yesterday, but I limited myself to these two:
Not sure when I'll actually get to reading either of those, but they're in my possession now, so. That's forward progress.
The rest of my stack was movies. I had more of a purpose with these than to just veg out, actually. My current WIP is a "romantic comedy" (if that's even a term we use for fiction anymore), so I thought I'd watch some movies that claim to be romantic comedies, yanno, to kind of amp up my writing mojo and wake up my muse a bit.
But that didn't happen yesterday. Here's why.
I only got through one section of the DVD collection at the library before I felt like I would pass out (from fever... or something equally illnesses-related, idk) and we had to leave. So my selection was somewhat limited. The first movie I watched once I was feeling better later was 27 Dresses.
It claims to be "the ULTIMATE romantic comedy" right on the front cover. I read the blurb. It fit my bill -- romance between young single people, an awkward yet unique situation, and comedic shenanigans throughout.
I stopped watching it half-way through. Has anyone else seen that movie? It had so much potential but... argh.
I really liked the opening scene. But it went downhill pretty quickly after that. Why, can someone please tell me WHY, Jane and Kevin don't really do anything together until the movie is half over? (and then when they do get together, there's no real reason for it -- that's when I shut the movie off) I swear, half the movie was about Jane pining over dude that's not really worth pining over, and getting all angsty about her sister, who is the biggest cardboard-cut-out every-man-loves-me-and-every-woman-hates-me slut-whore character that I've ever seen.
The only unique thing about the movie -- Jane's addiction to weddings -- is just tossed aside for like... an hour. I was really excited to see this funny story about Kevin following her around to all these weddings for his "big article" and crazy mishaps and then they fall in love... aww, so sweet...
But it never got going like it should. It was all like, "hey! awesome plot ahead!"
Then it goes, "jk! lol." But it's the only one laughing.
Am I just being too picky because I'm sick? Maybe that's it. If someone tells me here that that movie is worth finishing, I'll give it another chance when I'm feeling better.
Anyway. I've got a lot more movies to get through this weekend, but today I'm not taking any chances. The Hubby and I are going to watch 13th Warrior. We've seen it before, several times, so we know we'll like it. For now, that's just what I need.
Weirdly, I just noticed, both of those movies have a number in the title.
What are you reading and/or watching this weekend? And if anyone can recommend a good romantic comedy, either novels (preferably YA) or movies, please let me know. Thanks!
~Lydia
Thursday, November 10, 2011
Live Chat Tonight with Literary Agent Gordon Warnock
Another month has gone by (already?) and it's time for our writers' chat! This month we have a very special guest panelist, Gordon Warnock of Andrea Hurst Literary Management.
Gordon Warnock, Senior Agent, combines industry knowledge with a sharp editorial eye and experience as a college-level tutor to provide friendly and respectful aid with polishing manuscripts and book proposals. From his start as an intern, he has since worked his way up to becoming a full agent and an integral part of Andrea Hurst Literary Management. He frequently participates in conferences and workshops and speaks throughout the community. He is an honors graduate with a B.A. in Creative and Professional Writing.
With a zest for fresh, new writing and a deep love of the classics, Gordon always has his eye out for works which will not only thrive in the current market but will also withstand the test of time, bringing joy to readers for years to come. In that spirit, he seeks to establish involved, long term working relationships with talented and dedicated authors of many genres.
Tonight's discussion will cover:
communication with agents on social media
communication with agents at the query level
communication with agents as a client
Questions from YOU, the viewers, can be submitted at any time during the chat and will be held in a queue until the final fifteen minutes. Gordon will then answer as many questions as he can until the hour is up.
If you have any questions about the chat in general, you can post them here in the comments and I'll answer them as promptly as I can.
Chat goes live HERE about ten minutes before 9pm EST tonight (Thursday, Nov. 10). Hope to see you there!
~Lydia
Gordon Warnock, Senior Agent, combines industry knowledge with a sharp editorial eye and experience as a college-level tutor to provide friendly and respectful aid with polishing manuscripts and book proposals. From his start as an intern, he has since worked his way up to becoming a full agent and an integral part of Andrea Hurst Literary Management. He frequently participates in conferences and workshops and speaks throughout the community. He is an honors graduate with a B.A. in Creative and Professional Writing.
With a zest for fresh, new writing and a deep love of the classics, Gordon always has his eye out for works which will not only thrive in the current market but will also withstand the test of time, bringing joy to readers for years to come. In that spirit, he seeks to establish involved, long term working relationships with talented and dedicated authors of many genres.
Tonight's discussion will cover:
communication with agents on social media
communication with agents at the query level
communication with agents as a client
Questions from YOU, the viewers, can be submitted at any time during the chat and will be held in a queue until the final fifteen minutes. Gordon will then answer as many questions as he can until the hour is up.
If you have any questions about the chat in general, you can post them here in the comments and I'll answer them as promptly as I can.
Chat goes live HERE about ten minutes before 9pm EST tonight (Thursday, Nov. 10). Hope to see you there!
~Lydia
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Amp Up Your Debate
The debate portion of a story wraps up Act One. It's the final decision-making your protagonist must go through before committing themselves to whatever events make up the meat of your premise. That exact point of decision is how your story "breaks into" the second act.
As we discussed in last Wednesday's post, the inciting incident is the first push that gets the story moving. Then the catalyst gives it a second push that places your protagonist in a sticky spot -- the debate. Once the catalyst has appeared and done its damage, the protagonist literally cannot go forward, or choose to withdraw, without first making a tough decision that has been forced upon them.
The protagonist certainly played a part in getting themselves to this point (that's part of being a proactive protagonist), but as I'd mentioned in the post last week, the best catalysts are largely out of the protagonist's control. This aspect is vital if you want the choice they have to make to be as difficult as it possibly can. If the choice is not difficult, you leave your audience with a distracting feeling of "Why are they doing this, when they can just [fill in the blank]? That would be so much easier! RAR!"
The debate area of your story has the potential to either amp up the tension and keep the reader turning pages faster than they were before, OR... it can make them want to stop reading and possibly throw the book across the room.
This part of the story is crucial to getting your reader into the middle. So how do you make it enticing and irresistible?
As the name of this section implies, the protagonist is faced with a two-sided choice. She can either go this way or that way, and that's pretty much the extent of her options. Before you can understand how to create the best/most difficult two-sided choice for your protagonist, you must first have a clear antagonist in mind.
And before we go any further, I'd like to clarify that antagonist does not equal villain. Every story has a protagonist and an antagonist, and the antagonist is not always a physical being or entity. The antagonist could very well be something within the protagonist that she is fighting. Or perhaps something that happened in her past that she now needs to come to terms with. Etc, etc, etc.
Or, yanno, it could be your typical evil villain. Lots of possibilities.
In basic terms, your antagonist is whatever your protagonist must overcome by the end of the story.
When your protagonist gets that second push from the catalyst, she should already have a sense of the core conflict at stake in your story. She won't understand the full scope of it yet -- if she did then there wouldn't be much point in putting her through the ringer to get her to the end -- but it's already in motion so she knows a bit of what's involved. And whatever bit she knows about the conflict when she gets to the debate has to have a certain level of importance in her life, or else she won't feel pinned between a rock and a hard place -- forced to make a tough choice.
The first way to amp up the debate is to involve the antagonist somehow, either directly or indirectly.
Let's look at some examples of how this is done.
In The Wizard of Oz, the catalyst is the tornado that snatches up Dorothy's house. Once she has dropped into Oz, her choices are extremely limited. She either stays in Oz or finds a way home.
Before she can even devise a way to do this, the Wicked Witch of the West appears and amps up the debate. Dorothy is pretty much already set on finding a way home, but when the WWW tries to take the ruby slippers and good ole Glinda transfers them to Dorothy's feet, a new and frightening element has been added to the mix.
Dorothy really has to think now. Does she want the WWW as an enemy? Of course not. But the alternative isn't much better -- to give her the slippers, granting the WWW even more power, which she will likely use against Dorothy anyway.
So. What does Dorothy do? She decides to take a chance. She keeps the slippers as a means of protection and journeys forward to find the Wizard, despite the fact that doing this means the WWW will be trying to stop her the entire way.
The above is an example of an antagonist's direct involvement in the debate. And it should also be noted here that the antagonist wasn't introduced until the debate. Holding off on the antagonist's introduction in the story if they are directly involved in the debate, is a highly effective way to amp up the tension at this crucial part of the story. It's not the only way to do it, but it does work.
In the movie Inception, the antagonist is indirectly involved in the debate. Everything about this particular story is complex, and the debate is no exception. But in order to understand the technique used here I'm going to have to reveal some things that might seem spoilery if you haven't seen the movie yet. (Although, if you haven't seen the movie yet, I'm quite honestly shocked and appalled.)
The audience doesn't clearly understand who or what the antagonist is until they've seen the full story arc. So to make the debate still seem effective, the writers had a tricky task ahead of them. There are actually several things that work together as antagonists in this story, but if I had to choose a single person or thing, it would be Mal, Cobb's dead wife.
Mal is introduced very early in the story, in the very first scene, the inciting incident. But even though we know she's a major player, her involvement in the debate is seemingly nonexistent if you don't know the full story. When we get to the debate part of this story, we can clearly see that the "high stakes" for Cobb is to be with his children again. But we don't realize that Mal's previous actions are what caused Cobb's current separation from his children.
So her involvement is indirect because she caused the hardship that the protagonist is trying to fix. But we don't realize this until much much later.
The actual debate is between Cobb and Saito, regarding a job that seems impossible. Cobb knows it can be done but it's extremely dangerous and there's no guarantee they'll succeed. In fact, the odds are overwhelmingly against them. He's only done it once before and the results were disastrous (not surprisingly, we find out later that this is what caused Mal's actions that led to Cobb's children being taken away from him).
This is where the second way to amp up your debate comes into play -- giving both sides a vital need that only the other can provide. If they hadn't done this in Inception, the debate would have been seriously lacking tension.
Saito is the one who prompts the debate in this story, by making the initial offer to Cobb -- do this really difficult thing for me and I'll get these goons off your back. Saito can't do it without Cobb. He needs him.
Cobb's first reaction is that it isn't worth it. He feels he can take care of himself just fine without Saito's help. That's when Saito amps it up by offering something Cobb would have much more difficulty refusing. He promises that if Cobb does this job for him, he'll make sure Cobb can be with his children again.
And there it is. Now everything is in place for Cobb to make one of the toughest choices of his life. Once he decides he's going to do the job for Saito, the story breaks into the second act and the meat of the premise begins -- the main draw of the movie, living in and controlling people's dreams.
Mal continues to fight against his efforts through the entire story, but it isn't until somewhere in the second half of the second act that we get further explanation of her involvement. She is a very complex antagonist. Which is appropriate, I suppose, for one of the most complex movies I've ever seen.
So if your debate is feeling kind of blah-dee-dah, or not getting the reaction from readers that you intended, see if you might be missing something vital:
1. The protagonist has been shoved into a corner and the only way out is to make a tough choice.
2. A clear antagonist. Clear to you, the author, always. But not necessarily clear to the reader at this point. Whether they are clear to the reader or not, during the debate, highly depends on the individual story.
3. Either direct or indirect involvement of the antagonist.
4. People on both sides of the debate have a need that only the other can provide. This is a large part of what makes the choice as difficult as possible for your protagonist.
Happy writing,
~Lydia
Friday, November 4, 2011
The Benefits of Book Reviewing
When I started taking my publishing career seriously, one of the first things I realized I needed to improve was my reading habits. I just wasn't reading enough, both in general and (especially important) in my area of writing interest.
I've been reading fiction since I was four years old. I've been writing fiction since I learned how to write (the proper way) in first grade. I continued to write all through high school, but after graduation, Real Life quickly took over. My reading and my writing suffered (read: went into hibernation).
Not long after I tackled my first novel, I came to the realization above -- I need to read more.
Around the same time, I also started following writing and publishing blogs, which opened my eyes to my "industry ignorance" even more. These blogs also introduced me to books, on occasion. But I expended most of my efforts (and still do) at my local library, just browsing shelves upon shelves of books both newly released and otherwise.
The more I read, the more I wanted to talk about what I was reading. So when I started my own blog, here, one of my original regular features was a book review.
You don't want to look through those archives, trust me. My first attempts at reviewing were pretty awful. Unbalanced. Overly negative. Embarrassing.
And worst of all, they had no style.
I've learned over the years that writing book reviews (and blog posts and... pretty much anything) requires a certain flair -- whatever yours happens to be. You can't just talk about a book, weigh the good and bad (which is all just opinion anyway). You have to make it interesting. You have to give it style.
So the first benefit I came to appreciate from writing book reviews was that it is a good way to practice writing for an audience.
It also helps you keep a finger on the pulse of publishing. You see what publishers are putting out what titles, and when. And what authors are selling.
When you're still in the "aspiring author" category, that is so vital. The more you know about the industry, the better your chances are of breaking into that industry.
In 2009 I started writing official book reviews for a website that isn't my own. This was before I had anything published (very shortly before, but still before). So it kind of scared the snot out of me that someone would trust me to post content on their site.
But I swallowed my fears and did it. And I have to say, writing reviews for The Book Book was a crucial stepping stone in my writing career.
It made me look at what I was reading more objectively. I finally understood the need for balance in a review, and how I viewed what I was reading in general, as I read it. Even if you "hated" the book, there is always something good you can find to say about it, because, hello, you finished it. One of the rules at The Book Book is that you must have finished the book to review it, and I think that's standard for any review site.
Personally, I don't finish reading a book unless there is something about it that is keeping me engaged. Sometimes I just want to see if my prediction for the ending is right, but still, that's something. The author kept me turning pages.
It didn't take long to find my own personal review style. Because it was basically the same as the one I use for blogging. Part nerd, part spaztastic, part snarky, part wtf, part let's-be-reasonable-and-look-at-all-possible-sides. And it worked. My first review was well-received, and I've continued to post reviews there for over two years now.
Another benefit of writing for a website that isn't your own is that you expose your writing to an audience you might not have had contact with otherwise. I've "met" a lot of people through my involvement with The Book Book who have since become loyal blog-friends and tweeps. The same can be said of my involvement with Writer Unboxed, and recently, the YA Contemps and Gay YA.
When you write a good review of something, the author and publisher take note. And trust me, they don't forget. This is an excellent way to forge relationships with colleagues.
This past year (late 2010 to present), especially, has been crucial to my relationship development with other people in the industry. Perhaps it was because my blog traffic had increased, or someone saw me on The Book Book, I don't know. But I started getting emails from publishers who wanted me to review their books.
Books that hadn't released yet or were newly released. They wanted me to help them with promotion. Really?
I was flattered, but even so, I knew my own limitations. I only have so much time to read and write, so the books I commit myself to reviewing having to be something I would pick up off the shelf regardless. And that's why I rejected some of the offers presented and started writing reviews (almost solely) for Harper Perennial.
Which was odd at first. Because most of what I get from them is adult literary fiction, aka not something I myself write. But I'm glad now that I review books for them. It has expanded my readerly horizon, and I'm a firm believer that reading things outside your area of writerly expertise has a way of helping you. It broadens your overall perspective and gives you more fodder to mix things up and keep your stories interesting.
Once I started reviewing for a specific publisher, another benefit was quickly seen. I've gained a lot of experience communicating with editors and marketing directors. This is another way of forging relationships, but it has also removed a bit of the natural fear factor that unpublished authors have of speaking with industry professionals.
Which has in turn given me more confidence when communicating with literary agents, something that was immediately beneficial since I'm still in the process of querying.
When I started contributing for the YA Contemps, I gained more insight into my area of writerly focus, YA novels. I already had some involvement with the YA community, or else I wouldn't have been offered the position, but in the two months since joining that group, I've learned a lot about what it takes for a novel to stand out among the masses.
Every month, for the YA Contemps, I sift through dozens of upcoming titles. I have to choose ONE for my spotlight.
How do I decide? Because I'm putting my name and my reputation (not to mention, the reputation of the website) behind me, the premise of whatever novel I choose has to really speak to me.
The premise. The concept. The hook.
Doing this has made it abundantly clear to me how important it is to have a stellar pitch/jacket blurb for your story. Applying this to myself, it has helped me to understand the importance of having a clear premise from the very beginning (as I talked about in Wednesday's post), and later, the importance of making that premise shine in your query letter.
Contributing for YA Contemps, although I don't write book reviews for them, I will do what I can to get a review copy of the book ahead of time so I can spotlight the book as effectively as possible at the time of its release. This (again) involves communicating with published authors, editors, and marketing directors. Experience like this is priceless for the pre-published author.
Writing book reviews has also helped me pinpoint my specific tastes as a reader, which in turn aids my writing. Who you are as a reader can say a lot about who you are as a writer, and putting your tastes out there for public view by way of book reviewing can help you establish connections with readers who may very well be your future fans.
So, the bottom line is, as busy as it makes my workload, I will never regret my decision to write book reviews. The benefits far outweigh the costs (time, energy, focus). And it combines two of my very favorite things -- reading and writing.
Have a great weekend,
~Lydia
I've been reading fiction since I was four years old. I've been writing fiction since I learned how to write (the proper way) in first grade. I continued to write all through high school, but after graduation, Real Life quickly took over. My reading and my writing suffered (read: went into hibernation).
Not long after I tackled my first novel, I came to the realization above -- I need to read more.
Around the same time, I also started following writing and publishing blogs, which opened my eyes to my "industry ignorance" even more. These blogs also introduced me to books, on occasion. But I expended most of my efforts (and still do) at my local library, just browsing shelves upon shelves of books both newly released and otherwise.
The more I read, the more I wanted to talk about what I was reading. So when I started my own blog, here, one of my original regular features was a book review.
You don't want to look through those archives, trust me. My first attempts at reviewing were pretty awful. Unbalanced. Overly negative. Embarrassing.
And worst of all, they had no style.
I've learned over the years that writing book reviews (and blog posts and... pretty much anything) requires a certain flair -- whatever yours happens to be. You can't just talk about a book, weigh the good and bad (which is all just opinion anyway). You have to make it interesting. You have to give it style.
So the first benefit I came to appreciate from writing book reviews was that it is a good way to practice writing for an audience.
It also helps you keep a finger on the pulse of publishing. You see what publishers are putting out what titles, and when. And what authors are selling.
When you're still in the "aspiring author" category, that is so vital. The more you know about the industry, the better your chances are of breaking into that industry.
In 2009 I started writing official book reviews for a website that isn't my own. This was before I had anything published (very shortly before, but still before). So it kind of scared the snot out of me that someone would trust me to post content on their site.
But I swallowed my fears and did it. And I have to say, writing reviews for The Book Book was a crucial stepping stone in my writing career.
It made me look at what I was reading more objectively. I finally understood the need for balance in a review, and how I viewed what I was reading in general, as I read it. Even if you "hated" the book, there is always something good you can find to say about it, because, hello, you finished it. One of the rules at The Book Book is that you must have finished the book to review it, and I think that's standard for any review site.
Personally, I don't finish reading a book unless there is something about it that is keeping me engaged. Sometimes I just want to see if my prediction for the ending is right, but still, that's something. The author kept me turning pages.
It didn't take long to find my own personal review style. Because it was basically the same as the one I use for blogging. Part nerd, part spaztastic, part snarky, part wtf, part let's-be-reasonable-and-look-at-all-possible-sides. And it worked. My first review was well-received, and I've continued to post reviews there for over two years now.
Another benefit of writing for a website that isn't your own is that you expose your writing to an audience you might not have had contact with otherwise. I've "met" a lot of people through my involvement with The Book Book who have since become loyal blog-friends and tweeps. The same can be said of my involvement with Writer Unboxed, and recently, the YA Contemps and Gay YA.
When you write a good review of something, the author and publisher take note. And trust me, they don't forget. This is an excellent way to forge relationships with colleagues.
This past year (late 2010 to present), especially, has been crucial to my relationship development with other people in the industry. Perhaps it was because my blog traffic had increased, or someone saw me on The Book Book, I don't know. But I started getting emails from publishers who wanted me to review their books.
Books that hadn't released yet or were newly released. They wanted me to help them with promotion. Really?
I was flattered, but even so, I knew my own limitations. I only have so much time to read and write, so the books I commit myself to reviewing having to be something I would pick up off the shelf regardless. And that's why I rejected some of the offers presented and started writing reviews (almost solely) for Harper Perennial.
Which was odd at first. Because most of what I get from them is adult literary fiction, aka not something I myself write. But I'm glad now that I review books for them. It has expanded my readerly horizon, and I'm a firm believer that reading things outside your area of writerly expertise has a way of helping you. It broadens your overall perspective and gives you more fodder to mix things up and keep your stories interesting.
Once I started reviewing for a specific publisher, another benefit was quickly seen. I've gained a lot of experience communicating with editors and marketing directors. This is another way of forging relationships, but it has also removed a bit of the natural fear factor that unpublished authors have of speaking with industry professionals.
Which has in turn given me more confidence when communicating with literary agents, something that was immediately beneficial since I'm still in the process of querying.
When I started contributing for the YA Contemps, I gained more insight into my area of writerly focus, YA novels. I already had some involvement with the YA community, or else I wouldn't have been offered the position, but in the two months since joining that group, I've learned a lot about what it takes for a novel to stand out among the masses.
Every month, for the YA Contemps, I sift through dozens of upcoming titles. I have to choose ONE for my spotlight.
How do I decide? Because I'm putting my name and my reputation (not to mention, the reputation of the website) behind me, the premise of whatever novel I choose has to really speak to me.
The premise. The concept. The hook.
Doing this has made it abundantly clear to me how important it is to have a stellar pitch/jacket blurb for your story. Applying this to myself, it has helped me to understand the importance of having a clear premise from the very beginning (as I talked about in Wednesday's post), and later, the importance of making that premise shine in your query letter.
Contributing for YA Contemps, although I don't write book reviews for them, I will do what I can to get a review copy of the book ahead of time so I can spotlight the book as effectively as possible at the time of its release. This (again) involves communicating with published authors, editors, and marketing directors. Experience like this is priceless for the pre-published author.
Writing book reviews has also helped me pinpoint my specific tastes as a reader, which in turn aids my writing. Who you are as a reader can say a lot about who you are as a writer, and putting your tastes out there for public view by way of book reviewing can help you establish connections with readers who may very well be your future fans.
So, the bottom line is, as busy as it makes my workload, I will never regret my decision to write book reviews. The benefits far outweigh the costs (time, energy, focus). And it combines two of my very favorite things -- reading and writing.
Have a great weekend,
~Lydia
Thursday, November 3, 2011
Book Cover Love
Since I haven't done one of these in a while, here are a few upcoming YA & MG novels with covers that have me salivating in anticipation.
_____
Above by Leah Bobet
releases April 1, 2012
_____
Tempest by Julie Cross
releases January 17, 2012
(every time I look at the Tempest cover, I hear the INCEPTION soundtrack)
_____
Winterling by Sarah Prineas
releases January 3, 2012
_____
Invisible Sun by David Macinnis Gill
releases March 27, 2012
_____
Scarlet by A. C. Gaughen
releases February 14, 2012
_____
Time Snatchers by Richard Ungar
releases March 15, 2012
_____
Pure by Julianna Baggott
releases February 8, 2012
_____
Storybound by Marissa Burt
releases April 3, 2012
_____
_____
Above by Leah Bobet
releases April 1, 2012
_____
Tempest by Julie Cross
releases January 17, 2012
(every time I look at the Tempest cover, I hear the INCEPTION soundtrack)
_____
Winterling by Sarah Prineas
releases January 3, 2012
_____
Invisible Sun by David Macinnis Gill
releases March 27, 2012
_____
Scarlet by A. C. Gaughen
releases February 14, 2012
_____
Time Snatchers by Richard Ungar
releases March 15, 2012
_____
Pure by Julianna Baggott
releases February 8, 2012
_____
Storybound by Marissa Burt
releases April 3, 2012
_____
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Defining Your Catalyst, Your Inciting Incident, and Your Premise (and how they all work together to create Act One)
As I'd mentioned in last Wednesday's post, I've recently begun work on a new novel, and a large part of that beginning process for me involves creating a beat sheet (like the one found in Blake Snyder's Save the Cat!).
While discussing this new project with one of my CPs the other day, and also discussing one of her works in-progress, I was trying to explain why it's vital to understand the difference between the inciting incident and the catalyst.
Because they are easily confused. They both push major plot events into motion, and they both occur in Act I.
Also, you can't create an effective catalyst until you have a solid premise. All of these things fit together seamlessly -- the inciting incident, the catalyst, the premise -- in a well-structured story, and therefore, are of major importance when crafting a pitch.
Act I of your beat sheet looks something like this:
Inciting Incident (opening event that marks a change)
Set-Up (everything from the opening to the catalyst, which includes the inciting incident)
Catalyst (introduction of a new person, place, thing, or a specific event)
Debate (forced to make a choice now -- should I do this or shouldn't I?)
Break Into Two (decision to move forward into Act II, the meat of the premise)
Let's start with basic definitions of the terms "inciting incident" and "catalyst."
to incite means "to stimulate or prompt into action; to provoke"
So an inciting incident has to happen at the very beginning of a story -- it is the initial change in the main character's world that stimulates his/her story into action. In my humble opinion, the inciting incident should be clear by the end of chapter one.
Have you ever read the first chapter of a novel and thought, "Nothing has happened yet. Why should I keep reading?"
That's because a lot of *things* can happen in an opening, but if those things don't stir anything up, don't change something in the character's world or viewpoint (either external or internal), don't incite anything... then you really did read a bunch of nothing happening, as far as the story is concerned.
The inciting incident gets the story moving. It's the initial push.
The catalyst occurs a bit further into the story (not too far in, though; usually by page 25-50, generally speaking), and you should understand why that's the case just by reading a basic definition of the term.
a catalyst is "a substance that accelerates a reaction"
In story terms, "substance" in the above definition can equal a person, place, or thing... or, usually, a specific event.
So, let's say you're in your car and you need to get somewhere. Your inciting incident would be putting the key in the ignition and starting the car. After that you might adjust your mirrors and your seat, set the temperature, find your favorite radio station -- all of that is your set-up. But you won't go anywhere until you put the car in gear and press your foot down on the accelerator.
That's your catalyst. It gets the story going where it needs to go, at an accelerated pace. It's the second push.
You can also think of it like swinging on a swing. The first push from the person standing behind you gets you started, but you don't really take off until a later push, after the momentum has had a chance to build.
Then you're soaring. There's no way out of it. You can't slow down and get off without riding out a few big swings first. And that's what the catalyst of a story does, too.
When the catalyst hits your character/s, they are forced into the debate part of the story. The debate gives them one last chance to back out before the meat of the premise takes over in Act II. But they can't decide to back out without first going through this debate that the catalyst has thrust upon them.
Once the catalyst is introduced, there's no way out but through. It can rightly be called the point of no return. That can't be said about the inciting incident, because it's so close to the beginning that there are still many avenues the character/s can take to avoid whatever lies ahead in the story. But the catalyst corners them and forces them to make a hard choice.
And this is why it's so important to know what your exact premise is. Because the inciting incident can force a character into a certain situation, yes, but it doesn't necessarily force the character into your premise.
For example, in the move Due Date, Peter's story gets an initial push from the fact that his wife is only days away from a scheduled delivery of their first child, in Los Angeles, while he is on the other side of the country for a business trip. He has to get back home quickly or he'll miss the birth. At this point in the story, he has a lot of options to choose from in order to accomplish that goal. Nothing has really been forced upon him yet.
This has nothing to do with story structure but it's vital enough to storytelling to mention here -- your lead character has to have a goal from the very beginning, and that goal has to be relevant to your premise in some way. Because if he/she doesn't have that, then they won't be proactive enough, have the necessary drive, to lead their own story.
The introduction of Ethan's character is an appropriate catalyst because it comes about by chance but is still crucial to the plot. (When you start to really analyze story structure you'll notice that the best catalysts are not a direct result of the protagonist's actions/choices, but are more a result of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, or the result of someone else's actions/choices.) It also brings the two main characters together into a situation they can't evade without making a hard choice, one that will thrust them into the main premise of the story.
While on the plane, a horrible mix-up (inadvertently caused by Ethan) forces them both off the plane, and also removes Peter's access to pretty much any other way to get back home. (If I remember correctly, his wallet is confiscated for some reason.)
The inciting incident (Peter on the wrong side of the country at the worst possible time) is accelerated by the catalyst (Ethan getting them kicked off the plane), making the conflict even more intense than it was before the catalyst was introduced.
Peter is faced with a choice now -- either accept Ethan's offer to drive him back to Los Angeles (even though he wants to get as far away as possible from this person who caused this major problem for him)... OR, don't get back home in time for his child's birth.
It's a tough choice, but it's still a choice. And once Peter makes the decision to go with Ethan, they are thrust into the meat of the premise -- this wild cross-country road trip with a time limit -- and Act II begins.
All three of those elements (inciting incident, catalyst, premise) work together to hook the audience into the main draw of this story.
If you're having trouble defining your catalyst, it is likley because you don't have a solid premise yet. (personally, this has been the case for every story that I've struggled with)
In Due Date, the movie is about the journey to get to Peter's wife in time. The inciting incident places him in the worst possible location to realize that goal. The catalyst paves the way for an insane roadtrip.
In order to define your premise, you first have to know what type of story you're telling.
In just about any buddy story (like Due Date) or any basic romance, the catalyst can be the introduction of the "other buddy" or the "love interest." OR a specific event that forces them into a situation together.
For example, in Dumb and Dumber, a classic buddy movie (*sigh* why am I using all of these hokey comedies as my examples today?), the two buddies already know each other very well at the start of the story. But there is still room for growth in their relationship. The catalyst, then, thrusts them both into a situation in which they must work through their differences and solve the problem together.
But what if you're telling a story like Jaws? Simple. Everything stems from your premise.
The basic premise for Jaws is "a group of people stranded in open water must survive the repeated attacks of a rogue shark." The inciting incident puts the protagonist/s in the worst possible place -- on their boats out in the middle of the ocean. And then the catalyst thrusts them into the premise by stranding them with a blood-thirsty great white shark.
edit: (silly, Lydia, that's Jaws 2. get your movies straight)
Once you have a solid premise in mind, Act I of your story practically writes itself. Because the sole purpose of Act I is getting the protagonists to the heart of that premise. It's much easier to create an appropriate inciting incident and catalyst if you have a specific situation in mind that you're pushing the character/s toward.
And if you ever forget what the catalyst is, or confuse it with the inciting incident, just think of this guy.
Happy writing,
~Lydia
While discussing this new project with one of my CPs the other day, and also discussing one of her works in-progress, I was trying to explain why it's vital to understand the difference between the inciting incident and the catalyst.
Because they are easily confused. They both push major plot events into motion, and they both occur in Act I.
Also, you can't create an effective catalyst until you have a solid premise. All of these things fit together seamlessly -- the inciting incident, the catalyst, the premise -- in a well-structured story, and therefore, are of major importance when crafting a pitch.
Act I of your beat sheet looks something like this:
Inciting Incident (opening event that marks a change)
Set-Up (everything from the opening to the catalyst, which includes the inciting incident)
Catalyst (introduction of a new person, place, thing, or a specific event)
Debate (forced to make a choice now -- should I do this or shouldn't I?)
Break Into Two (decision to move forward into Act II, the meat of the premise)
Let's start with basic definitions of the terms "inciting incident" and "catalyst."
to incite means "to stimulate or prompt into action; to provoke"
So an inciting incident has to happen at the very beginning of a story -- it is the initial change in the main character's world that stimulates his/her story into action. In my humble opinion, the inciting incident should be clear by the end of chapter one.
Have you ever read the first chapter of a novel and thought, "Nothing has happened yet. Why should I keep reading?"
That's because a lot of *things* can happen in an opening, but if those things don't stir anything up, don't change something in the character's world or viewpoint (either external or internal), don't incite anything... then you really did read a bunch of nothing happening, as far as the story is concerned.
The inciting incident gets the story moving. It's the initial push.
The catalyst occurs a bit further into the story (not too far in, though; usually by page 25-50, generally speaking), and you should understand why that's the case just by reading a basic definition of the term.
a catalyst is "a substance that accelerates a reaction"
In story terms, "substance" in the above definition can equal a person, place, or thing... or, usually, a specific event.
So, let's say you're in your car and you need to get somewhere. Your inciting incident would be putting the key in the ignition and starting the car. After that you might adjust your mirrors and your seat, set the temperature, find your favorite radio station -- all of that is your set-up. But you won't go anywhere until you put the car in gear and press your foot down on the accelerator.
That's your catalyst. It gets the story going where it needs to go, at an accelerated pace. It's the second push.
You can also think of it like swinging on a swing. The first push from the person standing behind you gets you started, but you don't really take off until a later push, after the momentum has had a chance to build.
Then you're soaring. There's no way out of it. You can't slow down and get off without riding out a few big swings first. And that's what the catalyst of a story does, too.
When the catalyst hits your character/s, they are forced into the debate part of the story. The debate gives them one last chance to back out before the meat of the premise takes over in Act II. But they can't decide to back out without first going through this debate that the catalyst has thrust upon them.
Once the catalyst is introduced, there's no way out but through. It can rightly be called the point of no return. That can't be said about the inciting incident, because it's so close to the beginning that there are still many avenues the character/s can take to avoid whatever lies ahead in the story. But the catalyst corners them and forces them to make a hard choice.
And this is why it's so important to know what your exact premise is. Because the inciting incident can force a character into a certain situation, yes, but it doesn't necessarily force the character into your premise.
For example, in the move Due Date, Peter's story gets an initial push from the fact that his wife is only days away from a scheduled delivery of their first child, in Los Angeles, while he is on the other side of the country for a business trip. He has to get back home quickly or he'll miss the birth. At this point in the story, he has a lot of options to choose from in order to accomplish that goal. Nothing has really been forced upon him yet.
This has nothing to do with story structure but it's vital enough to storytelling to mention here -- your lead character has to have a goal from the very beginning, and that goal has to be relevant to your premise in some way. Because if he/she doesn't have that, then they won't be proactive enough, have the necessary drive, to lead their own story.
The introduction of Ethan's character is an appropriate catalyst because it comes about by chance but is still crucial to the plot. (When you start to really analyze story structure you'll notice that the best catalysts are not a direct result of the protagonist's actions/choices, but are more a result of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, or the result of someone else's actions/choices.) It also brings the two main characters together into a situation they can't evade without making a hard choice, one that will thrust them into the main premise of the story.
While on the plane, a horrible mix-up (inadvertently caused by Ethan) forces them both off the plane, and also removes Peter's access to pretty much any other way to get back home. (If I remember correctly, his wallet is confiscated for some reason.)
The inciting incident (Peter on the wrong side of the country at the worst possible time) is accelerated by the catalyst (Ethan getting them kicked off the plane), making the conflict even more intense than it was before the catalyst was introduced.
Peter is faced with a choice now -- either accept Ethan's offer to drive him back to Los Angeles (even though he wants to get as far away as possible from this person who caused this major problem for him)... OR, don't get back home in time for his child's birth.
It's a tough choice, but it's still a choice. And once Peter makes the decision to go with Ethan, they are thrust into the meat of the premise -- this wild cross-country road trip with a time limit -- and Act II begins.
All three of those elements (inciting incident, catalyst, premise) work together to hook the audience into the main draw of this story.
If you're having trouble defining your catalyst, it is likley because you don't have a solid premise yet. (personally, this has been the case for every story that I've struggled with)
In Due Date, the movie is about the journey to get to Peter's wife in time. The inciting incident places him in the worst possible location to realize that goal. The catalyst paves the way for an insane roadtrip.
In order to define your premise, you first have to know what type of story you're telling.
In just about any buddy story (like Due Date) or any basic romance, the catalyst can be the introduction of the "other buddy" or the "love interest." OR a specific event that forces them into a situation together.
For example, in Dumb and Dumber, a classic buddy movie (*sigh* why am I using all of these hokey comedies as my examples today?), the two buddies already know each other very well at the start of the story. But there is still room for growth in their relationship. The catalyst, then, thrusts them both into a situation in which they must work through their differences and solve the problem together.
But what if you're telling a story like Jaws? Simple. Everything stems from your premise.
The basic premise for Jaws is "a group of people stranded in open water must survive the repeated attacks of a rogue shark." The inciting incident puts the protagonist/s in the worst possible place -- on their boats out in the middle of the ocean. And then the catalyst thrusts them into the premise by stranding them with a blood-thirsty great white shark.
edit: (silly, Lydia, that's Jaws 2. get your movies straight)
Once you have a solid premise in mind, Act I of your story practically writes itself. Because the sole purpose of Act I is getting the protagonists to the heart of that premise. It's much easier to create an appropriate inciting incident and catalyst if you have a specific situation in mind that you're pushing the character/s toward.
And if you ever forget what the catalyst is, or confuse it with the inciting incident, just think of this guy.
Happy writing,
~Lydia
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)