Plot vs Characters

[sr71plt]

True, but totally irrelevant to your behavior, right? And, no, I don't mind Laurel continuing to be reminded of her behavior here, either. Ownership doesn't require maturity.

 

[CollarAndFeather]

While I have enjoyed stories that don't follow what I'm about to say, here's my thoughts:

Writing believable characters is significantly harder to teach/learn than learning to write plot. The problem, however, is that advice on how to make a good plot is often too formulaic and boring, but if you just focus on the basics you can avoid a lot of that. Understanding tense-and-release can take you a long way.

When it comes down to it, all plot is about conflict (_____vs_____ usually). If you have a series of linked events with at least one conflict, you have plot. If the characters and events are believable, all you need to do then is shape it. Pacing and controlling the audience's perceptions, by when you give them different pieces of information, are things that I find to be powerful and simple tools, since you don't actually have to alter the events of the story much if at all. Throwing curves in also tends to work very well. If you want to see what I mean, pick up a history book and make a short narrative from a section of events, and then make a different story from the same section. There are real characters, situations, and conflicts in abundance for you, so it may help focus you on creating a story out of a series of events, if that's what you want.

That said, a lot of stories get by differently. The 'slice of life' genre, for example, gets by usually on just characters alone, without plot. In the realm of fantasy/sci-fi, many can ignore bad characters and plot together, if the setting is interesting enough. In that way, one part of story-telling isn't better, but different people will respond more to different parts.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

True, but totally irrelevant to your behavior, right? And, no, I don't mind Laurel continuing to be reminded of her behavior here, either. Ownership doesn't require maturity.

But youre the official troll.

 

[sr71plt]

But youre the official troll.

Well, me, and, more especially, Lovecraft68--according to Laurel's posts.

And, yes, she gave you a rose. I pretty much think that should clinch what other posters can understand from Laurel's views on the subject.

Maybe this would be a good place to respond with a cat picture--or maybe a "rally around me" post to the GB.

 

[RoyceConnors]

I've seen comments posted in feedback where a reader, felt the plot was weak and the characters a bit two dimensional, but enjoyed the storyline and liked it, despite the weakness in both of the main areas talked about. Does that make the storyline just as important as the other two in what's better to have in it?

 

[SamScribble]

A question about radio plays: Were listeners reacting more to the characters as they were written, or to the performances as voiced? Would the characters have been as memorable and involving if performed differently?

Well, with a radio play, the listener never gets to read the script, only to listen to the performance. So, yes, the actors - and the producer - have a big part to play. However, only once in 31 broadcast plays can I recall an actor not playing the part as I 'heard' it when I wrote it.

 

[CWatson]

Does a great story with unconvincing characters win? Or can convincing, engaging characters carry the day?

If I had to choose between them, I'd pick convincing, engaging characters doing nothing. I think being good at characterization is a greater strength than having diabolical plot twists, because plot twists without compelling character behind them just aren't really interesting. Besides, there's no such thing as a plot twist anymore; there's a widely-repeated theory that every original story has already been told. And how many times have you gone to the movies, or watched a TV show, only to guess--correctly--what the next twist was going to be? So if every story has already been told, the only place a writer has to show their uniqueness is in how they tell it. And characterization is a big part of that.

Motivation is key, and motivation is a character thing. That's why almost everyone here agrees that strong characterization is more useful than strong plotting skills. You can craft a story almost totally out of character, just by letting their needs and drives cause them to bounce off each other. There's a concept called a "bottle episode" that's based on nothing but. It's a TV term for when you're short on budget, so you write an episode that features your main cast, pre-existing sets, and as few guest stars as possible. Some of the most highly-acclaimed episodes of television ever produced were bottle episodes--Seinfeld's "The Chinese Restaurant," Breaking Bad's "Fly," Star Trek: DS9's "Duet" are just a few examples.

One way to tap into your (clear) strengths is to make the characters contain the story. What do your characters want? What are they striving for? Stories are always about unhappy characters, so take that unhappiness and run with it. Romeo & Juliet is about two teens who can't fall in love openly because their parents hate each other: boom, conflict right there. The Great Gatsby is about a dude who can't give up on his dreams: boom, conflict right there. Avatar: the Last Airbender is about a talented 12-year-old martial artist who doesn't feel mature enough to stop a crusading tyrant, but knows that, by decree of fate, he's the only one who can: boom, conflict right there. (Well, that one's also about Katara and Sokka, Toph, Azula and Zuko--especially Zuko--but Aang's the eponymous Avatar and last Airbender, so let's focus on him.) So what does your character want but not have? Even better--what does your character need, without realizing they need it? And, of course, what's the most painful and convoluted way of them getting it? Ta-da: plot.

So how do you get better at story? Simple: get better at characterization. =)

 

[Bramblethorn]

You can craft a story almost totally out of character, just by letting their needs and drives cause them to bounce off each other.

ObNeilGaiman: "He talks about stories. My brother. Let me tell you the plot of every one of his damned stories. Somebody wanted something. That’s the story. Mostly they get it, too."

It's how most of human history gets made. That's a pretty interesting plot, albeit not a tidy one.

One device that can be interesting is to write about two characters who are driven by the same need but handle it in different ways. The gay kid who satisfies their need for acceptance by running away to SF to find a community that welcomes them, vs the one who goes deep into the closet for mainstream acceptance. (And then they meet at the high-school reunion ten years later, and... hmm, maybe I should write that one.)

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Partial credit.

Nazi Germany is a perfect example of character and plot in harness.

When Stalin was weak and unsure Hitler rolled over Russia, when Hitler was headstrong Stalin rolled over Germany. FDR helped Stalin with an eye to helping Russia emasculate Europe economically, FDR knew what sort of bungler Stalin was.

 

[robertreams]

Golden, you are wasting your time arguing with jbj, he loves to get people rolling, but actually cares about nothing but his own feeble ramblings.

 

[robertreams]

ObNeilGaiman: "He talks about stories. My brother. Let me tell you the plot of every one of his damned stories. Somebody wanted something. That’s the story. Mostly they get it, too."

It's how most of human history gets made. That's a pretty interesting plot, albeit not a tidy one.

One device that can be interesting is to write about two characters who are driven by the same need but handle it in different ways. The gay kid who satisfies their need for acceptance by running away to SF to find a community that welcomes them, vs the one who goes deep into the closet for mainstream acceptance. (And then they meet at the high-school reunion ten years later, and... hmm, maybe I should write that one.)

lol Bramble, if you don't write it, I may steal it,

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Golden, you are wasting your time arguing with jbj, he loves to get people rolling, but actually cares about nothing but his own feeble ramblings.

^^^^^^A fag who cant have me or stay on task in a thread.

 

[sr71plt]

I Besides, there's no such thing as a plot twist anymore; there's a widely-repeated theory that every original story has already been told.

I think it's probably just as viable to say that there are no original characters anymore.

There seem to be enough combination variations on plot, character, setting, and theme to keep the market fed, though.

Guess I'm either simplistic or lucky but I don't hyperventilate over such questions. I just sit down and write stories--and, even though the only criteria I use for writing the next is that there be something different about it, I don't seem to run out of stories to write or plot, character, setting, and theme combinations that are fresh to me at least.

 

[sr71plt]

One device that can be interesting is to write about two characters who are driven by the same need but handle it in different ways. The gay kid who satisfies their need for acceptance by running away to SF to find a community that welcomes them, vs the one who goes deep into the closet for mainstream acceptance. (And then they meet at the high-school reunion ten years later, and... hmm, maybe I should write that one.)

I think I have already--which adds fuel to the "nothing new under the sun" argument.

Not a reason not to write it again, though. Inevitably another writer would give it a different spin or two.

 

[TxRad]

^^^^^^A fag who cant have me or stay on task in a thread.

You always go to name calling because you have nothing else. Par for the course.

Please don't feed the troll guys. Ignore is your best friend.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

You always go to name calling because you have nothing else. Par for the course.

Please don't feed the troll guys. Ignore is your best friend.

Then take your own advice, Elwood.

 

[Bramblethorn]

lol Bramble, if you don't write it, I may steal it,

Feel free. Just remember me when the royalties from the movie deal come in ;-)

I think I have already--which adds fuel to the "nothing new under the sun" argument.

Not a reason not to write it again, though. Inevitably another writer would give it a different spin or two.

Always fun seeing what different people make of the same idea. I remember one Australian TV show ended each week's episode with a new interpretation of "Stairway to Heaven".

 

[CharleyH]

A great narrative seamlessly weaves great characters into the story. Great characters are a product of great narratives.

 

[BuckyDuckman]

I guess characters trump plot in the way the OP is asking the question, though I can respect that slightly empty feeling at the end of a story if I feel as if nothing was settled or nothing really changed. Many of my stories are high on plot and low on characterization. I try to hide behind believing, "Well, the characters are just 'every man' type of people." I'm probably lying to myself.

 

[Hypoxia]

Let the characters do their own plotting. I (as author) have better things to work on.

 

[SamScribble]

Let the characters do their own plotting. I (as author) have better things to work on.

Ha ha ha. Personally, I have always suspected that the author's work was simply to record the characters' thoughts and actions in the clearest, most attractive way. Which, I guess, sort of answers my original question.

 

[wws_wws]

I enjoy characters who are not archetypes, but those are incredibly hard to find/write. How do you make a character behave in an unpredictable manner in an unusual set of circumstances and still be sympathetic? I struggle with that currently.

 

[CollarAndFeather]

I enjoy characters who are not archetypes, but those are incredibly hard to find/write. How do you make a character behave in an unpredictable manner in an unusual set of circumstances and still be sympathetic? I struggle with that currently.

The other way to go is to take an archetype that has been used so much that it's become completely flat and worn out and breathe life and personality back into it. Not quiet a reconstruction trope, as it doesn't need to be deconstructed first.

If you have problems avoiding archetypes, use them; revive, deconstruct, reconstruct, or subvert them. Sometimes it takes a little psychology to put together a good character that still fits neatly within the archetype, but it can be worth it. I sometimes like taking often cliché character types that are used so much, that people have stopped thinking about why they act the way they do and focus on that 'why' until it goes from trampled 2d to vivid 3d.

Taking an overly perfect type, and turning it into someone struggling with their own self image is often an easy way to do that. You have a lot of room to build a full personality with flaws, desires, quirks, and self-contradictions because what you're starting with is their self-image, who they're trying to be, and/or who they want others to see them as.

Almost any character archetype can become a non-static, 3-d character if you ask, "Why?" enough times. Taking a couple archetypes, usually very different ones, and trying to mix them into one character can give really interesting results too!

 

[RoyceConnors]

The other way to go is to take an archetype that has been used so much that it's become completely flat and worn out and breathe life and personality back into it. Not quiet a reconstruction trope, as it doesn't need to be deconstructed first.

If you have problems avoiding archetypes, use them; revive, deconstruct, reconstruct, or subvert them. Sometimes it takes a little psychology to put together a good character that still fits neatly within the archetype, but it can be worth it. I sometimes like taking often cliché character types that are used so much, that people have stopped thinking about why they act the way they do and focus on that 'why' until it goes from trampled 2d to vivid 3d.

Taking an overly perfect type, and turning it into someone struggling with their own self image is often an easy way to do that. You have a lot of room to build a full personality with flaws, desires, quirks, and self-contradictions because what you're starting with is their self-image, who they're trying to be, and/or who they want others to see them as.

Almost any character archetype can become a non-static, 3-d character if you ask, "Why?" enough times. Taking a couple archetypes, usually very different ones, and trying to mix them into one character can give really interesting results too!

Another way to take it, is take Joe Avg. person, m or f and turn then into an archetype. Situations always present themselves that separate some people from others in how they handle it. What lies inside the avg. person that you can bring out in their character?