Scenes, Sequels and MRU:s

can somebody ban this guy?

in all seriousness I'm a bit wary of anything that comes too close to suggesting there's mathematical equations for writing.

I do believe there are techniques that can be learned, but this sounds dangerously formulaic.

Whatever tickles your brain cells.

I've no idea what to make of it.

-Derek

It's not so much a 'mind map' tool, rather a 'timeline' tool that follows a logical sequence of events.

May be something to add to the editing kitty for those obliged, but could turn a story into a cyclic type of read every paragraph if one goes overboard. I try not to over-analyse such things - just write what seems to sound OK. But, if it works for anyone then all the best with it.

JJ

Other folk know it as stimulus/response or whatever. In response to a given stimulus, folk normally feel, think, act, then speak -in that specific order no matter how many of the four elements are used.

It's well known to Swain readers (those of Bickham and others, too) and it's also largely commonsense and touched upon many times by existing critiquers in the SYW Forum.

It reminds me a little of Evan Marshall's method. Marshall is an agent, and he wrote a how to book on the mechanical side of writing, The Marshall Plan for Novel Writing. In it, he says action should have reaction. It was an interesting concept, but oddly enough, I found it getting in the way of actual writing. Though it seems like common sense, one of the things I found was that not everything fits neatly together to do that each time.

With the MRU, it seems to be something focused on first and third person--I suspect I would have diffculties because I'm writing in omniscient and not inside any character's head. Even what's observable might not fit, because not all the characters show their feelings or reactions.

Maxinquaye, it actually kind of tickles me to see someone else discussing this book. I have it on my bookshelf and I've read through it twice, after which I saw a huge leap in my the quality and coherency of my writing.

It brought about an awareness in the flow of a scene I hadn't previously thought about. I'm still in the first draft of something so I try not to focus on the MRUs at this time because I have noticed when doing so, it does slow me down until I peter out to a stop. It will be a tool I whip out for edits and when I feel a scene is dragging or is missing something.

I will caution about posting things to the forums that take on a lecturing tone, since I can't really see where there is something you wish to engage in a dialogue over. There are a few writers here who react poorly to that.

But I don't see any issue with bringing a technique to the table and placing it there for others to see. While it may not work for some, it may be the very thing needed by another to get over that next hump. Sometimes it just needs to be 'verbalized' without being engaged in 'nuts and bolts' style of deconstruction of their work, possibly robbing their prose of their voice.

Bufty said:

It's well known to Swain readers (those of Bickham and others, too) and it's also largely commonsense and touched upon many times by existing critiquers in the SYW Forum.

Click to expand...

It may be commonsense but there were some of us who kind of 'knew' something was going on and didn't have the language to put it together until it was spelled out in a way we could understand. Some of us here on the forums are rather new to this thing called writing and need things explained a few times before we 'get it'.

Maxinquaye said:

Hahaha, well this was a total mispost anyway since it is probably OT here, but there was a discussion in another thread where this came up, and I decided to write something quickly about it in a thread where MRU:s weren't totally OT, and where it wouldn't derail that OP:s post.

Click to expand...

No worries. Like I said, I'm thrilled someone else knows about the book because it really has done a world of wonder for me in my writing and my reading. I'm keeping your name handy and perhaps we can pick this discussion up in PM?

Adding this link for those who aren't familiar with this technique and don't want to spend money to buy the Bickham or Swain books.

http://www.advancedfictionwriting.com/art/scene.php

-cb

I'm having a hard time believing something this basic needs discussion. This is basic logic, built into our thinking processes. Do you actually expect someone to respond to something before the outside stimulus? You would get the same series of responses from a five-year-old. You don't need to think about it, you just do it.

I read the book three times so far, and each time I find something new. Here are my questions though: how long would sequels be and would MRUs be used as extensively?

RJK said:

I'm having a hard time believing something this basic needs discussion. This is basic logic, built into our thinking processes. Do you actually expect someone to respond to something before the outside stimulus? You would get the same series of responses from a five-year-old. You don't need to think about it, you just do it.

Click to expand...

And sometimes, it gets done incorrectly. Or awkwardly.

Sometimes, we know these things intuitively but still need to see the ideas given word before we truly understand the mechanics behind it.

I will say that the book does get a bit more involved in the explanations behind the techniques.

> I'm having a hard time believing something this basic needs discussion.

This is the Basic Writing Questions forum.

> This is basic logic, built into our thinking processes. Do you actually
> expect someone to respond to something before the outside stimulus?

MRU goes beyond stimulus-response; that's the lowest granularity level that can be encapsulated within a scene. You can have MRUs across scenes, called Scene/Sequels. An example would be Luke Skywalker fighting Vader (goal is killing him, conflict is Vader is a tough cookie), then finds out he's his father (disaster), followed by a sequel scene where he's stuck between joining the Empire or continue fighting to death (dilemma) and jumps to his death (decision) instead, which fortunately fails and he's recouped by his friends.

-cb

It looks to me like a good way to analyze something that isn't working, like if a beta reader gets a WTF. Not everyone is logical right out of the box. The too-common habit of as-phrasing, for instance, often puts carts before the horses and bottles inside the milk.

Correct punctuation, though, please -- MRUs

Maxinquaye said:

There is a definite order, and first you always have motivation (or stimulus). It is objective, and outside the POV.

There's an absolute order to this MRU. You can't change it, because the order follows human physiology.

You can't have Rachel above thinking about Beirut before she hears the crash, and you can't have her drop to the floor in fear before the bang.

Click to expand...

Actually I want to disagree with this. If you compare to Dramatica theory, that says there are action-driven stories but there are also decision-driven stories. Decision-driven stories basically use reverse MRUs. No, time doesn't go backwards, people don't react before the stimulus. But the roles are switched, in that the people are supplying the stimulus and the world is doing the reacting.

In a typical hero vs. villain story, if the villain's side is shown it will generally have the opposite MRU pattern from the hero's, because one is always the instigator and one is doing the reacting.

I must be dumb, but you have completely lost me here. I haven't a clue how what you are saying has any connection to the MRUs approach mentioned in this thread.

sunandshadow said:

Actually I want to disagree with this. If you compare to Dramatica theory, that says there are action-driven stories but there are also decision-driven stories. Decision-driven stories basically use reverse MRUs. No, time doesn't go backwards, people don't react before the stimulus. But the roles are switched, in that the people are supplying the stimulus and the world is doing the reacting.

In a typical hero vs. villain story, if the villain's side is shown it will generally have the opposite MRU pattern from the hero's, because one is always the instigator and one is doing the reacting.

Click to expand...

> If you compare to Dramatica theory, that says there are
> action-driven stories but there are also decision-driven stories.

Dramatica is a storytelling theory. Given enough parameters, it can create a framework of characters, motives, and issues. It has nothing to do with how a text is structured to perform the storytelling; that's the MRU approach. In fact the two can be complementary.


I want to tell a story where some farmer boy becomes a hero ==> Dramatica

I need to structure my chapter so to show Luke finding out about his father and decide he doesn't want to kill him anymore nor join the Empire ==> MRUs


> It is bound to have different techniques than novel writing.

Storytelling can take many forms, including novels. There are no bounds on the vehicle used. At best there are notes on how the individual members of the audience can proceed through the work (as opposed to a play or time-limited TV shows where everyone experiences the same thing at the same time within stricter bounds).

-cb

cbenoi1 said:

> If you compare to Dramatica theory, that says there are
> action-driven stories but there are also decision-driven stories.

Dramatica is a storytelling theory (and intended for both screenplays and novels). Given enough parameters, it can create a framework of characters, motives, and issues. It has nothing to do with how a text is structured to perform the storytelling; that's the MRU approach. In fact the two can be complementary.

Click to expand...

Actually Dramatica also delves into structure. The program only goes to act structure + suggestions for which themes need to be explored in scenes in that act, but the written theory materials (Armando's book, not the original theory book) go down to the scene level. And that's exactly the level where MRU's apply. MRUs also are useful in the pre-writing phrase if you are doing something like a scene outline or a notecard method where each scene gets a card.

Perhaps I should also mention the Vector Theory of Plot (Cynthia Joyce Clay) because this theory contributes to my understanding of scene, sequel, MRUs, and action vs. decision driven stories. Vector theory is that physics stuff where objects in motion travel in straight paths until they collide with each other, then either combine or bounce off, resulting in them traveling at different angle(s) and speed(s). When applied to plot, this means that each vector is a character or faction. the direction they are going corresponds to the theme they represent, and the speed is their motivation/determination.

So if we have a hero and a villain, because they are thematically opposed they are going different directions. They are headed for a crash (conflict). But there's also other characters either going their own directions or just sitting still. Plot structure as a whole is an illustration of the argument between the hero's theme and the villain's theme. So at the beginning it isn't much of an argument because there's lots of voices saying different things, but over the course of the story the hero and villain bump into other characters and polarize them, either attracting the secondary characters to their own faction or repelling them to join the opposing faction. Then when everyone has chosen sides it's time for the climactic battle between the two factions to see which wins the thematic argument.

What does this have to do with scene, sequel, and MRUs? The hero or villain's interaction with a secondary character is a scene which motivates that character, who reacts by joining one of the two factions, which prompts a sequel scene. Also, if the hero and villain have a skirmish scene in the beginning or middle of the story, this provides motivation (usually to whoever is the loser) and they react by coming up with a new or improved plan of attack in their sequel scene.

(This also all applies to stories that aren't hero-villain stories, but it's less clear-cut there.)