Most Shows With Overpowered Supernatural Characters Always Try To Come Up With Elaborate Excuses To Explain

Writing from Scratch #7: The Event Plot

The Event Plot

The problem of an Event plot is a disruption to the status quo. The solution comes either from setting everything right again or adapting to the change. The Event plot is probably what most people think of when they think “what is a plot?” Any story that deals with a life-changing or world-changing event is an Event.

The first plot I analyzed, from The Expanse television series, is an Event plot. Let’s look at another: The Princess Diaries. As we did with Lord of the Rings, we’ll look at the movie rather than books because more people will be familiar with the movie (which is a damn shame).

The Event: Mia Thermopolis’s grandmother tells Mia that she is the princess of small European kingdom Genovia, and she must take the throne.

Read More on WordPress

Writing from Scratch #4: The Milieu Plot

The Milieu Plot

The problem of the milieu plot involves a problem of location or setting. The character is often either in a place they need/want to escape from or not in the specific place they need/want to be in. The try-fail cycles will involve traveling away from or to the location. Gulliver’s Travels, The Great Escape, and The Hobbit contain milieu plots.

The Lord of the Rings contains one very large milieu – the problem of getting the One Ring from the Shire where its been hidden for a number of years to Mordor where it can finally be destroyed. We can further break this down into smaller milieu plots. Let’s look at one: the problem of crossing the Misty Mountains. (And we’ll use the events as they occur in the movie, since more people have watched that than read the book)

A few solutions they could try are not considered because they already know they are too dangerous, such as the northern route, which is swarming with orcs and goblins, and the Gap of Rohan, which gets too close to Isengard for comfort.

First try: take the Pass of Caradhras. Fail: No, they can’t cross this way, and Saruman is actively attacking them.

Second try: enter the Mines of Moria. Fail: Yes, they are able to enter, but the Dwarven reception committee they were expecting to lead them through is not there.

Third try: search Moria for the Dwarves and a guide through. Fail: No, there are no Dwarves to guide them, and goblins have now been alerted to their presence and are attacking.

Fourth try: run like hell away from the goblins. Fail: Yes, they are able to run across a chasm to escape the goblins, but a Balrog takes out Gandalf.

Final try: follow Gandalf’s instructions to flee (or “fly”). Solution: they get out of the Mines of Moria, and are on the other side of the Misty Mountains, ready to continue with another micro-milieu.

Prompt: write a flash fiction with a Milieu in which your character’s plot-problem is that they need to go to their grandmother’s house for Sunday dinner. The character, setting, genre, and stakes, as well as what is preventing them from simply going to Grandma’s is up to you. This simple plot can create a story that is anything from family drama to international spy thriller.

If you want to read more of my 80+ posts, you can check them out on my website theferalcollection.com

Writing from Scratch #6

The Character Plot

The problem of a Character plot involves a character’s worldview – their beliefs, values, desires, and fears. Many but not all stories include a Character plot, often called a character arc, in which a character’s worldview shifts. A Character plot is entirely concerned with the internal state of the character in question and as such is rarely seen on its own. When it is on its own, as it is in “Miss Brill” by Katherine Mansfield, you can end up with an extraordinary story.

Because a Character plot is entirely internal, the try-fail cycles don’t work out exactly the same as they do when dealing with an external/physical problem and solution; they are also up for interpretation by the reader when done subtly and beautifully as in “Miss Brill.” Character plot try-fails are often not even done intentionally as typically the character does not realize a change in the worldview needs to occur. So, read “Miss Brill” (it’s short, less than 2,000 words) and try for yourself to determine the problem – it’s not stated directly – and identify the try-fails. After, you can read over my interpretation, please let me know in the comments how our thoughts compare!

Read More on WordPress

Writing from Scratch #9

Complex Plots, Part 2: Modifying Plots

The second way we’ll try complicating a plot is through plot modifiers. This happens when a try-fail cycle not only furthers the solution of one plot-problem but spawns a new plot-problem. What these plots actually modify are the stakes. They can give far-off worst-case scenarios more immediacy, which is what the plot analysis we’ll be getting into today does. Or they can show clear examples of what’s at stake for more abstract cases (think of Gollum in The Lord of the Rings clarifies our fears for what could happen to Frodo).

How does this work? Let’s look back at the plot analysis I did for The Expanse, Season 1 Episode 2, “The Big Empty.” A brief recap:

The Background: The Knight, a small, rickety life-boat sized spaceship with 5 survivors is all that’s left of the Canterbury after an attack on the larger vessel.

The Problem: The Knight’s radio is dead.

Read more on WordPress

Review of The Dresden Files: Peace Talks (spoilers ahead)

This review is gonna be slightly different than my normal reviews as I am the only Paules Sibling of Awesome who reads The Dresden Files, so I have not talked through my thoughts with B beforehand. I also don't see the necessity of providing a rating for a book that is the sixteenth in a series (not counting the short story collections) - clearly I enjoy the books. Spoilers ahead!

So, the peace talks in question went about as disastrously as expected knowing Harry Dresden was involved, but obviously I didn't expect that. Years ago, Jim Butcher promised us an apocalyptic trilogy to end the series (titled Stars and Stones, Hell's Bells, and Empty Night, in case you missed it), but I never figured we'd actually get to a point where that ending seems in sight.

My big fear going into this was that Karrin Murphy would not survive. I was pleased to see that a) she did and b) she was as badass as ever, despite her injuries from Skin Game. Of course, who knows what will happen in Battle Ground, but really my only hope is that Murphy makes it to the end of the series. Just Murphy and Harry at the end of things, just as they were at the beginning.

Continue Reading on WordPress

Outlining: one writer’s approach

…So I was puttering around on Twitter the other day, as one does, and in mid-putter found that someone on my timeline had just RT’d some tweets from a discussion about which approach to writing a book (or other longish piece of prose) was the best: pantsing or plotting. (”Pantsing”, for those of you who may not have come across the term, indicates just sort of making up a story as you go along, without establishing an underlying structure first or (sometimes) knowing how it’s going to end. “Plotting” means having some kind of plan about where the story is going to go – which I would normally take as meaning a premise or outline of some sort.)

And the person at the core of this particular thread, Rebecca F. Kuang, said this:

wait can someone who isn’t a pantser actually explain themselves? how detailed does your outlines get? do you really know the sequence of and content of every scene ahead of time? how you figure out smaller plot threads before you’re ~in~ it?

Since I’m emphatically not a pantser, but a four-decade plotter, I thought maybe I could bring something useful to the discussion. I asked how much detail on the process was wanted? as I’d been doing this for a while.

Rebecca said: 

haha well what i’m most curious about is how you can “feel” the story’s tone/heft/urgency and connect with the characters and their plight from an abstract outline? i’d like to plan more, but i have a hard time thinking from a birds eye view

It’s a good question. But for a moment there I was brought up short, as the concept of an “abstract” outline kind of startled me. I couldn’t imagine what kind of outline that would be. And then the horrible thought occurred: Wait. Can it be that when some of these folks hear “outline” they’re thinking about that godawful high-school English kind of thing? Full of Roman numerals and numbers and capital letters and small letters – ? 

Oh gods no. No no no no no no, it’s not like that at all.

…So I got into the subject a little: what novel outlines can look like, the trick I was taught about how to structure them, and how to make them work for you. (There are some references to Scrivener in there, because that’s what I use, but the advice will work perfectly well no matter what software or other instrumentality you’re using. My outlines tend to start out with pen and writing paper, but they don’t stay on paper for long.) There are also a couple of examples of the kind of outline you would send an editor when querying.

The thread got long, and a little disjointed. So when it was over I cut my bits together and polished them a little; and at the end added one (extremely important) afternote. Then I put it up on my main blog, right here. So if this is a subject that might interest you, maybe you want to take a look, as (to my great pleasure) I’m already hearing from people who say they’re finding the info / approach in the post useful.

Just as an FYI: A copy of the post will also go up on FicFoundry.com when that site goes live at the end of the month, as that’s where all my writing stuff will be going from now on. (It was past time that whole batch of content had someplace of its own. That’s getting sorted now.)

…And now back to work. (Yet another outline, as it happens…) :)

Writing from Scratch #8

Now that we have gone over the four simple plot-problems (1, 2, 3, 4) and how they are solved through try-fail cycles, we’ll take a look at how to make complex, compound, and compound-complex plots through the same devices as sentence creation.

The first way we’ll try complicating a plot is by making the solution of the first noted plot-problem dependent on the solution of a second plot-problem, which stands in for easy solution prevention. We’re typically going to use dependent plots to strengthen audience satisfaction when the character is finally able to succeed. Or, like in the case-study we’ll look at today, they can be used to draw what appeared to be disparate plots together in longer works.

Read more on WordPress

Writing from Scratch #12: Compound Plots, Part 2

Compound Plots, Part 2: Parallel Plots

Parallel plots share a lot in common with subordinate plots. As with subordinate plots, parallel plots occur simultaneously – the individual problems and their solutions should be introduced and resolved at roughly the same time. However, parallel plots can be divided from each other and stand on their own, unlike with a subordinate plot which is dependent on the principle plot for its try-fail cycles.

“Parallel plots” is a bit of a misnomer. “Parallel” comes from the idea of parallelism in sentence construction because parallel plots often act as mirrors to one another or two sides of the same coin; they often work on each other indirectly to strengthen or emphasize the Thought of the story. What we don’t want to do is fall into the trap of thinking that the plots cannot intersect; although you should be able to separate them into their own stories, in a single story, they are meant to work together.

Superhero stories have parallel plots a plenty with the main character dealing with a plot-problem as their civilian identity and dealing with a different plot-problem as their superhero identity. We’ll look at one of these examples, Spiderman: Homecoming. Peter Parker is dealing with a Character plot in overcoming his lack of confidence to ask Liz out on a date; meanwhile Spiderman is dealing with an Inquiry plot involving the sale of alien tech weaponry on the streets. These do have points of overlap – they should for effective storytelling. However, if you take the Inquiry plot out of the story, you have a rom-com/coming-of-age story with a complete plot of no confidence to ask Liz out to yes confidence to ask Liz out. If you take the Character plot out of the story, you still have Spiderman investigating the origin of the alien tech weaponry.

Continue Reading on WordPress

‘River of Fish’ stair runner by The Rug Company. Designed by Barber & Osgerby.

Submitted via Google Form:

I am quite intrigued about how animals seem to have higher tolerance for pollution and germs while humans seem to lose it. Animals still just eat off the ground and drink straight from streams. However isn’t that exactly what our ancestors did? I absolutely do realise the world in the past also was less polluted than now. But past humans and animals did that in the past in the same environment, while in the present day environments only animals do this and humans can’t. Yes, animals and humans are of course always getting sick, but animals have way less access to healthcare than humans and manage to thrieve while humans need all this heathcare. Also, it is very evident in humans in human communities lacking healthcare being worse off. But with animals, I don’t seem to see the problems occuring as I’d expect for almost no healthcare for them. At least in this way.. the only biggest issues are like lost of land/hunting, and if health is the main issue? Basically, no heathcare affects humans worse than wild animals. And attitudes are if humans eat something off the ground it’s panic, an animal.. nope. So for actual story writing, I want to address these things in my story where both people and animals are time travelling. Also, I suppose how environmental changes would affect these out of time people.

Feral: there are a lot of assumptions in your ask that just don’t hold up.

Assumption #1: Animals have a higher tolerance for pollution and germs than humans do. Animals do get sick and die. In the case of pollution, higher pollution in a given area is more indicative of human life than animal life. Humans and our domesticated pets are the creatures living in cities with horrible smog conditions and the like, and while pollution definitely causes illnesses and disabilities in humans, one of the reasons you don’t see wild animals as much in these areas is because the development and pollution it causes has killed them off. As for germs, it is true that in industrialized countries, humans are probably more susceptible to germs, bacteria, viruses, etc, due to the inhibitions sterilized environments place on the development of natural immune systems. But animals still get sick and die, too; they may not die as frequently from illness as humans (I have no data one way or another), but I would argue that many also just don’t live long enough to die of illness over another cause.

Assumption #2: Animals eat straight off the ground and drink from streams, and that’s what our ancestors did. Our ancestors always cooked - eating straight from a raw carcass means more bacteria, more difficult digestion, and less calories. And it’s very likely that humanity didn’t exist before cooking, and only exists because of cooking. Our reticence to drink directly from natural water sources has a lot more to do with human pollution than any naturally occuring bacteria; see the multiple cholera outbreaks in history. Also, a polluted water source will usually kill the animals that live in that water source, the decaying carcasses of which further pollutes the source, and animals drinking from that source will also absolutely become sick.

Assumption #3: Humans can’t forage and drink from streams in the same way animals can in not overly polluted environments. There is a whole community of wilderness survival experts who disagree with you. The knowledge of what is and isn’t safe to eat and drink isn’t taught to us by elders anymore (again, in industrialized places), but that doesn’t mean we couldn’t learn it and survive just fine.

Assumption # 4: Animals don’t require healthcare the way humans do. Animals also don’t pack themselves into crowded stadiums during worldwide pandemics and otherwise tend not to do stupid shit that will almost certainly cause them harm. A broken leg on a wild land-based animal is a death sentence, so access to healthcare would definitely keep more animals alive. We know this because we offer animals healthcare - wildlife rehabilitators exist. Meanwhile, a broken leg, even in a human community without good or any healthcare options, would probably not result in death.

Assumption #5: Wild animals thrive. Not really. I mean, there are populations that do better than others. This is often due to human intervention and interaction. Prey animals will “thrive” when humans have killed off all their natural predators. Scavenging animals will “thrive” when there’s plenty of human food waste and refuse for them to eat. An invasive species will “thrive” after humans introduce them into an environment where they don’t have any natural deterrents to population growth. An animal community “thriving” is very different from a human community thriving. And an animal community that is afflicted by a virus is far less likely to survive it than a human community. Here’s a list of mass animal die-offs that occured just between January 1 and June 1 of 2015; literally tens of millions of animals dead in 5 months.

Assumption #8: You don’t see these problems occuring or dead animals all over the place therefore, wild animals are not dying everyday everywhere from disease and pollution. You probably do not live in a place where you see massive wild animal populations; the thriving wild animal populations you claim exist are in your imagination. In a truly balanced, natural ecosystem, homeostasis is achieved; you have neither mass die-offs nor population explosions. But due to human intervention in the environment, those ecosystems are becoming far less visible. And most population centers don’t have nearly the wild animal populations necessary to make any judgements based on anecdote and personal observation on how wild animals survive or don’t.

Assumption #7: Humans eating off the ground as a “panic” response due to environmental reasons. This is 100% societal. We have moralized cleanliness. Eating something off the ground is seen as demeaning and dirty, and you have to be in really desperate straits to do it. You know, unless you follow the 5-second rule. Because that’s totally how germs work. If I drop something on my kitchen floor while I’m cooking versus outside while I’m grilling, there isn’t really a difference except that I feel gross about eating the thing that dropped on the ground outside that I immediately picked up even if there is nothing that is actually harmful on it - meanwhile my kitchen floor could absolutely have bacteria on it because I’m really lazy about mopping.

I think a lot of what you’re putting forth in this Ask is more socialized or due to industrialization than having anything to do with wholly naturally occurring environmental factors.

As for how the narrative will address these things, that’s a plot issue that I don’t have any advice on, but I hope this has given you some food for thought.