Plot and Character more Important than Prose?

I'm the type of writer, who I'm sure is like most, that frets over using the right word, right sentence structure, right exact perfect mechanics of prose to get across what I want to communicate in my stories. But does that really matter? Does prose actually have that much of a bearing on how it comes off to the reader as we think it does?

The other night as I was driving along the highways for work late at night, I popped in the audio book of "Epic of Gilgamesh" which is considered by a lot of people to be the oldest story in history. (Written around the 18th century BC. on the clay tablets pictured above.) Suffice to say, the word choice and sentence structure is not very advanced. There are many parts that repeat itself verbatim many many times to the point where I was chanting along with the narrator by the middle of the book in some parts. Overall, the work is very basic and has about the same sophistication I would expect out of a 10 year old.

But still, this story drew me in and kept me awake so I didn't crash my car. (yay!) And I began to wonder why that was, since it was so basic. And the reason is that the plot and characters are well developed. In reality, this is all that The Epic of Gilgamesh has going for it, and it has survived for almost 4000 years!

This brought me to another train of thought then. A lot of the classics that we know and love are indeed translations from the original work. And the format they were originally written in is usually not how we experience them in present day. For instance, just about everybody knows and likes the Iliad and Odyssey, however I don't know many people who have read it in the epic poem format. It's usually the modern spin offs that they have seen. But the power of the characters and plot has allowed this story to survive and still impact people after many years.

Shakespeare wrote plays, but still, people pick up those plays and read them as if they were a book, still getting enjoyment out of them. There is virtually no description, and all we have is dialogue that many of us struggle to comprehend without putting on our thinking caps. And still, he's widely read by people far and wide, even after they graduate. What keeps drawing people to these works, again, is the power of the characters and plot.

Even more modern works that end up getting translated loose a lot of the feel of the author, no matter how good the translation. But still, there are great pieces of literature that survive this process to still touch our hearts. Because the only thing that really can be translated across language and time barriers is in my opinion, character and plot.

I'm not saying that you should be writing your work at that 10 year old level, but perhaps a lot of the agony we spend trying to come up with the perfect word could be better spent on making sure we have an overall story that connects with the reader.

Inserting the 'Knowledge Gap' into your writing

The last two weeks, I've been reading David Baboulene's book "The Story Book" and I've learned quite a lot that I want to share with you. The book is primarily concerned about script writing for movies, but the same principles apply to any type of story you are trying to tell. I recommend you check it out if you have a Kindle (paperback is listed at like $40!?!?! while the Kindle version is only $1.99) and then go watch the movie Back to the Future since this is the key example that keeps coming back again and again.


But anyways, the key concept of the book that I feel is well worth your time to actually look at and analyze would be the concept of a "knowledge gap" and how it helps create a subtextual plot.


First, we need to lay down the knowledge gaps and what they are. Quite simply, it is a lack of information that either some subset of the characters or the reader is privileged to.


A knowledge gap for the reader might be the lack of knowledge that one of the characters is really a vampire. The character who is a vampire knows this fact and acts accordingly, but the reader does not. This allows the reader's imagination to go into overdrive trying to figure out why this particular character hates the sunlight. All of a sudden, boom, they've engaged their own imagination. And once that is up and running, it's easier for them to apply that to other aspects of the story. (Plus is also gives them a puzzle to figure out without them knowing it. And we all love to solve puzzles, so it keeps us interested)


Once it's revealed to the reader that this character is a vampire, the author might take our vamp into some little village somewhere. Here, the reader knows he is a vampire, but the other characters do not. This again gives the reader some things to play with and imagine all on their own, like how the characters are going to react, or even how they would react in a similar situation.


Now both of those concepts are pretty basic (although you don't really hear them discussed much, regardless of the jargon used to describe it) What you really want to know by reading this post, is how to use that simple concept to create a plot of pure subtext.


I won't be able to teach this to you in a single blog post, but what might get you on the right track is to look at your stories and see what kind of underlying message you want to get across. It is usually this underlying message that really brings out the power in a story, since it is something that the reader 'discovers' on their own without being told bluntly what it is. This makes that underlying message stick a lot longer with the reader because they came up with it 'on their own.'


A simple example I can give you would be if you have a husband and wife in your story, and you want to get across the point that marriage is hard but worth it. You don't have to make the characters fight, make up, and talk about how happy they are. You could write a scene where they fight, say doing the dishes, then at the end have the husband pause for a moment, smile, and blow a handful of dish bubbles at the other right at the point where their argument is at its most intense.


The knowledge gap here would be that the reader doesn't know that this is actually a happy married couple. So their mind is thinking "wow, when will they get divorced. They really hate each other. I wonder if he cheater on her. Does she no longer love him?" But in reality it's just innocent bickering. The other knowledge gap would be between the husband and wife. The husband knows(and so should the reader at the obvious 'paused and smiled' cues) that he's realized their argument is stupid and it's not worth fighting about (which is why he playfully blows the bubbles at her). But she doesn't know this, making the reader feel like they are in on the playfulness.


The plot of my little example is pretty simple on the surface. Husband and wife fight. Husband ends fight by blowing bubbles at wife. The subtextual plot is, Husband and wife have difficulties, but in the end they realize how much they enjoy being around each other. The subtextual plot is the one you feel closer to, and it also has a lot more power than just the superficial one.


What do you think of this method of putting in subtext? Do you already do this or have some other method?

Reading

As a writer, you need to read in order to write. It’s just one of those truths out there. I personally can’t stand when I talk with somebody and they say “I’m writing a novel.” or “I’m thinking about starting a novel.” My next question then is usually “What kind of book are you writing.” They then start to sputter because their book is far too complicated to be stuck in a single genre and be summed up in a mear couple sentences. So then I follow up with, “What do you read?” And let me tell you, it is incredibly sad when the response I get is “I don’t really read all that much.”

Seriously?

If you want to be a painter, you need to be immersed in paintings. If you want to be a musician, you need to immersed in music. If you want to be a writer…I guess that’s all you need. No! You need to be immersed in books. The question then is, what should you, as an author, read?

I think there are about four levels that an author has in their reading list. The first level is the most crucial for them to read. It’s their genre and where they will get a lot of their voice from. The second level are the classics. They help immerse the author in truly great works in the art. The third level is the out-of-genre modern books. These, if time requires, should be sacrificed, but are important none the less. Finally, we come to the non-fiction aspect. Here you can gain incredible insights into how the world, mind, people, organizations, etc. work. Reading non-fiction, while it won’t necessarily help much with your prose and story telling, it will give your writing a real sense of legitimacy.

So obviously reading in your genre is the first thing you want to do. You need to know what types of things fans of your genre like and expect. You need to know whether or not certain themes have been done to death and become cliched. You need to figure out what things have not been done and would make your work new and unique. You also will find that a lot of descriptions are shared throughout genres. Romance will describe love making pretty frequently. If you write romance you better have lots of ways to describe that. Fantasy will describe new and interesting characters/worlds. You had better be able to do that if you write fantasy. And so on and so on. So I’ll stop here since I shouldn’t have to convince any of you on this point.

With respect to the classics, you might say that it’s a waste of time to read those. You might say that “people don’t write like that anymore.” or “That style sounds so dated.” But there is a lot you can learn. First, each writer will have at least one fundamental aspect of story telling down right mastered. Be it plot, voice, dialogue, characterization. No matter the time period, those aspects never go away as requirements for a good story. So learn from them because they are classics for a reason.

Imagine you read the ten greatest books published each year (as defined by Professor Smith’s 2134 Literature 435 class at Yale) How would those books on rank overall on average? Perhaps the top book might crack the top 200 of all time, once in a while. The 10th greatest book that year, probably in the 1000’s. So to hammer this point even further. Even if you read (regardless of genere) the best books each year, chances are they still won’t match up to the classics in terms of greatness. So since you emulate what you read, read great books.

Now onto those out of genre books. They will provide you with a good round backing for the rest of your story. There are some things that certain genre books do quite well. For instance those a fore mentioned romance books. If you read some of those, I will guarantee you that the next little romantic encounter you throw into your thriller novel will be written much better. Similarly for the romance writer: If you read more thrillers, you will be more apt to put a compelling bit of suspense and action to spice up your romance.

The same thing goes for all the other genres. Literary fiction will teach you characterization and good symbolism/theming. Fantasy/Scifi will teach you how to really create a compelling setting. Mystery will teach you how to create suspense and good puzzles. Even childrens books will teach you how to convey a message in as few words as possible.

Finally, as for non-fiction, reading those types of books will give your books that last little touch of legitimacy that can change something from good to great. Reading a book on psychology will make your characters more believable in their actions and emotions. They can give you insights into family situations you don’t have personal experience with. They can teach you just how far a person can go in terms of mental illness. Other books can teach you just how the inner functions of government work. Another might give you some great perspective on the life of a police officer. These books might not be relevant for whatever you’re working on now, but you never know when this knowledge will come in handy and help you craft the perfect scene and or book.

So keep reading, read wide, and read often.

Please let me know if I forgot anything.

Emulate Television or Movies in your Writing?

I feel that a lot of times, authors will be inspired by movies when they begin writing. And I understand that appeal, since a number of us probably end up watching more movies than we read books. I mean they are less time consuming, can be shared easily with other people, and usually don’t require a lot of imaginative effort. So then we as writers start to imitate what we see on the screen in our writing, we make a huge mistake.

The truth is that while books and movies may share a lot of story structure in the middle and end, the beginning of a novel is more akin to a television show. If you plan on taking story telling hints from the visual stories, then I suggest TV rather than movies. (at least in the beginning).

TV programs compete with 100s of other shows on at the same time as them, and when the break between programs comes on and people start surfing, they need to grab hold of the viewer and can’t let go. They need a compelling hook with an interesting character facing some sort of problem. For instance a ER type show might begin by showing some very unusual and possibly deadly ailment affecting a patient, a cute little 6 year old girl. Yea, everybody want to see if she makes it.

Does that sound familiar? Isn’t that pretty much what every writing tip tells you about your first page? Because just like the TV viewer, a reader browsing a bookstore is surfing through tons of books, all trying to grab their attention. If they happen to look at your book, you have only a couple lines to hook them before they move on, just like in TV.

Contrast this with movies where the viewer has spent the money on the ticket and entered the theater with their popcorn in hand. This gives the movie a chance to slowly bring the viewer into their world. They can have the opening credits scroll by in a fog while they show the setting. Then they can show the main character getting ready for work and doing their daily routine before anything interesting happens. But the only reason they can get away with this is because the viewer has already committed to the work. This just does not happen with books unless you are such a big name that readers pre-commit to you.

So when you write that opening chapter, don’t take us on a journey through the geology of your world and/or start with the character in their ordinary routine. I see that far to often in the fiction that I critique. Give us a compelling character stuck in a problem that we need to know the resolution of. Without that your book will be put back on the shelf or deleted from the editor/agent’s inbox.

Game Theory for Writers: Part I. Go Ahead and Burn That Bridge!

I had hoped to get this out much earlier, but later is better than never.

I also am going to have to do this in a couple different series since there is SOOOOOO much I could write about and don’t want to overwhelm all at once.

Now first, why do we care about game theory (GT) in writing? Well for one it helps you get a good grasp on what people would do in various situations. For second it will allow you to identify strategies that a smart character would use to win some sort of game (by game I could mean a game of checkers, or the “game” of taking over the world. Basically game just means a situation where there is some sort of competition). So hopefully you will be able to craft out a well thought-out plot that has your evil villain choosing the wrong strategy and going down in defeat because your hero was smart and picked the right one.

If that convinced you, now we need to get you grounded in GT. Basically all you do is write down the different choices the different players could make and the outcomes of those choices. So a real simple model game would be odd/even. This would be where player 1 (Bob) holds either 1 or 2 fingers behind his back. Then player 2 (Meg) tries to guess the number. Real simple.

Now lets say that when Bob chooses a 1 and Meg chooses a 1, then Meg gets $2 and Bob gets $1. If Bob chooses 1 and Meg chooses 2, then Meg gets nothing, and Bob gets $1. Now if Bob chooses 2 and Meg chooses 1, then again Meg gets nothing and Bob gets $1. Now if they both choose 2, then Meg gets $2 and Bob gets nothing. This is shown by the following chart.

Meg/Bob	Bob (holds 1)	Bob (holds 2)
Meg (guesses 1)	2/1	0/1
Meg (guesses 2)	0/1	2/0

So you can easily see that Bob should always choose 1, since his payoff is always going be be as good or better than if he chooses 2, and Meg, knowing this should also choose 1 every time. And since neither player can do better than this, both choosing 1 is called a Nash Equilibrium. Yes that same John Nash from A Beautiful Mind.

What does this particular game tell us about writing? Not much frankly, but that is notation that you need to know before we get onto the good stuff.

So the first thing I want to show you is why a smart character will eliminate one of their options in certain situations in order to gain an advantage. Yes that’s right, you can gain an advantage if you eliminate an option. So a businessman can gain an advantage over a competitor if he shuts down a factory, or a warrior if they burn their ships. Lets see how.

Lets take a business case. Say Sony and Microsoft are both existing in the business world. Microsoft happily making software, and Sony happily making TVs. Then one day both of them get the idea to make a gaming system, but then the market research folks come in and spoil the day. They conclude that if both companies enter the market, the competition for market share will be a drain on the company and they will both make $0 in profits. If both companies give up plans to make a gaming system, they will both go back to making $2 billion in profits. But if one company retreats, while the other company goes forward; the company making the gaming system will see profits of $5 billion, and the other will suffer from embarrassment and their customers won’t want their products. They will only make $1 billion in profits.

Here is the chart:

Sony/Microsoft	Microsoft (retreat)	Microsoft (go ahead)
Sony (retreat)	2/2	1/5
Sony (go ahead)	5/1	0/0

After many intense negations, neither company is willing to let the other be the only one with a gaming system, so obviously the best solution is for both of them to retreat. But then Bill Gates out of nowhere guts his software business and declares that from this day forward, Microsoft will focus only on their gaming system. They have essentially removed the option for them to retreat, and only the second column remains. Sony now has to choose between $1 billion in profits, or $0. Unless they want to sacrifice their company too, they will retreat and Microsoft will win.

So a warrior then who burns the bridges behind them and forces themselves to fight will gain this advantage. Same with somebody playing chicken who removes their steering wheel. Same with hostage negotiations when you have a policy where you can’t negotiate. The list goes on.

The one caveat with this is that the other player must know this. If not there could be disastrous results.

Now go out there and show off how smart you can make a character look by having them eliminate the safe option and take victory!

The Difference Between Relatable and Real in Writing

Note: I’m trying something new here. I’m writing in a quasi-socratic method style. Hopefully it works, and if not…let me know.

As writers we are torn between trying to write something that brings the average reader in, while also writing something that will catch their attention and command it through the entirety of the story. Not to mention we are competing with TV, cell phones, Twitter (you can follow me as Michael_A_Tate BTW), and all other distractions with a medium that takes time, effort, and concentration. As authors we are in a tough position.

So how do we create a story that the reader can relate to but does not bore them? Simple. We take something extra-ordinary and pair it with something the reader is familiar with. For example, a hostage situation is a pretty extra-ordinary situation, and an office building is a pretty common setting. Here the reader takes the setting that you lay out and merges it with their own personal setting. Then you throw in the fireworks of a hostage situation and you have a decent story.

So there we go, we’ve got our formula right? Mmmm not quite. An example would be getting a new pet while living on an alien planet. We’ve got something extra-ordinary and relatable right? As you can imagine, this situation is not quite as appealing as the previous example. We’ve got to change our approach just a little.

Perhaps we can make the claim that setting must be relatable and the plot must be the thing that is extra-ordinary?

But by now I’m sure you’re shouting at me about how successful something like Star Wars is. Hmmm, I must have been wrong then. So let me revise. You need to have an extra-ordinary situation along with something that the reader can relate to. Does the hostage story have that? Check. Does the pet story have that? No. Does Star Wars have that? Lets see.

In Star Wars the setting is not relatable for most people. What about the plot? No. Most people are not going to be able to relate to being part of a rebel alliance aimed at destroying an empire. So perhaps we should look at character. Luke is a teenager with strict guardians. He longs for adventure and feels confident in his abilities before he’s ready. Now what kind of people generally love Star Wars? Teenagers like Luke…or something like that. I’ll give Star Wars a check.

How has our formula evolved? We realize that we need something relatable, be it characters or setting. (I’ll put my preference on characters) and we need an exciting plot.

So why is this again? Why doesn’t a story that deals with the slings and arrows of everyday life make it big (if at all)? It’s because the reader does not want to re-live what just happened to them that day. They don’t want to read 10 pages on how a character filed some papers at work, how the drive home was slow because of construction, and how long it took them to do the dishes because the dishwasher broke. I probably even bored you right there with those couple sentences so you can see what I’m talking about.

If you put those types of things in your plot (even if you have an really good one) then your plot becomes boring. So keep an eye out for those things.

I think we’ve concluded that relatable is good in a story, since it gives the reader a tie to their world; but writing something that is real and honest to everyday life is boring and makes the plot suffer.

The difference:

relatable = good for the story
real = not so good for the plot