TECH: Cardboard Baddies

[mbarker.livejournal.com]

Original posting: Sat, 26 Mar 1994 18:35:02 JST

[any comments happily used...]

In recent years, I've noticed a trend in popular writing which treats companies, governments, religions or religious groups, cultures, and other collections of humanity in a surprising way. Specifically, many writers simplify and caricature groups like this, even when the smallest individual characters briefly appearing in the writing are carefully detailed and fraught with complexity.

Since I tend to think such collections of individuals are more than the sum of the parts, let alone some sort of mediocre average or lowest common denominator of the parts, I find such characterization of groups sadly weak. It is, of course, simpler for the writer.

Perhaps this is a reaction to the unacceptability of writing about individuals in terms of stereotypes and cliches. The writer looking for a way to embody the evil villain or pure hero of olde merely assigns the desired comically flat characteristics to legal entities who can hardly be irritated at such piss poor handling and understanding of their reputation, personality, motives, and thoughts, and proceeds to write up the cliched battle of good and evil without considering how unrealistic the writing may be.

It is unfortunate that real companies and other groups of people can't be as simple-minded and stereotyped as our writers would have them be in this kind of writing. It would certainly make it easier for them to deal with the world if they didn't have to make sense and provide reason and rationales for the actions being taken by the people in the group.

Of course, fixing the writing isn't possible, is it? After all, writers as a group are obstinate, stubborn critters totally unlike the individuals doing the writing, so we are stuck with how writers do things, no matter what we as individuals might like to do.

Cardboard characters aren't good for your writing, whether it's the waiter bringing coffee or the twisted megacorp oppressing the masses. Make them both at least as human as the guy next door, and watch your writing improve.

TECH: Plotting Quote

[mbarker.livejournal.com]

original posting: Fri, 1 Apr 1994 18:35:02 JST

"The facts appear to be these: Nothing is more important than idea and plot for the writer who wants to be published. Theme _is_ of consequence, but over-emphasizing it can turn the writer into a preacher or missionary. Characterization is very important; its exaggeration is a series of unpurchasable, vignette-like character sketches - for the reader, boredom. It's always preferable that you have something to say, a view point on the human condition.

"But it's okay of all you have is an engrossing, involving plot founded on interesting ideas - because that may be sufficient to place your work." (p. 21)

(from the essay "Plotting as Your Power Source" by J.N. Williamson)

How to Write Tales of Horror, Fantasy, and Science Fiction
Ed. J.N. Williamson
1987, Writer's Digest Books
ISBN 0-89879-270-3

TECH: Story Types

[mbarker.livejournal.com]

original posting: Mon, 8 Nov 1993 18:00:05 JST

In previous discussions, I've mentioned some of the categories of stories that I've dreamed up to understand some of my reading and writing. I'm not sure what the masters of ltierature might call these, but I thought it might be helpful if I set down my list...

1. Straight-line. This is the story told in chronological order, as someone advised Alice to do, starting at the beginning and then going on until you reach the end. Very simple, but strong. Can include flashbacks and other trickery, but the main story plods along from time A to time B.

2. Framing. These are stories where one or more flashback(s) takes over. I.e., the "framework" story starts, then we flashback to the "inner" story and march along in that time for a while, and eventually return to the "framework". Pure form is frame, inner, frame. Obviously, this can be twisted and turned into lots of different forms - with the inner story framing another story, multiple inner stories, etc. The main story usually is in the "inner" stories.

In some cases, the frame is merely glue to transition. Other times, the frame is a story in itself, as are the "inner" stories. One reason these are used is to take various short stories and make a book-length presentation.

I think in most cases the "inner" story completes (is resolved) before returning to the framing story.

3. Braided. This is a name I made up for a story where there are multiple levels interlaced. E.g. ABABAB ordering, with bits from story A alternating with bits from story B. Ordinarily the final scene provides linkage between the two stories, but it doesn't necessarily. Can be frustrating to readers, although they will try to figure out connections and will accept it IF there is a good reason for "jumping" their point-of-view around. Note that a clear identification of which thread we are in is very necessary - a repeated sentence, the name of the viewpoint character, or even subtitles.

Both framing and braiding can be done on the simple level of time. They can also be done on other bases, such as character point-of-view, style, etc. One version of "framing" that some people have used is that "mock-academic" quotation from a history book - followed by the "real-life" events. This is a very subtle way of adding to the "suspension of disbelief" of the reader - the dry style of the history book somehow adds to the believability of the story.

anyone else? I'm sure I've missed a few ways (The Things They Carried - shopping list style?), but these are some I have seen, at least.