Advice Please: Plot Problems

[Thomas White]

Originally Posted by scarletpeaches

I don't develop a plot at all. That comes as a result of what the characters do.

But what drives the characters? What gives them purpose? What demands them to act for the entertainment of the reader? What exactly makes that particular point in their life worthy of recording anyway?

[akiwiguy]

Originally Posted by scarletpeaches

If your characters take action, decide for themselves what to do rather than waiting for the plot to happen to them, they'll become more active in deciding their own destiny.

Personally I can't stand reading books where things happen to the characters. I prefer them to be the ones who make things happen.

I'd go a step further... if you had a whole book of no more than "things happening to characters", would you even have something you could call literature? Anyway...

I also tend to begin with characters who then drive (or at least unexpectedly and dramatically alter my preconceptions of) the plot. But I'm not saying that's right or wrong. I do, however, definitely prefer reading books with very strong characterisation... clever plots with flat characters cause me to very quickly lose interest.

I guess it must be something to do with our perception. If I was asked to name one author who is brilliant at characterisation, it would perhaps for me be Graham Greene. Yet in Wikipedia (mind you who know who writes that stuff) the very first thing said about his style is...

His novels are written in a lean, realistic style with clear, exciting plots

It does then though go on to say...

Yet he also concentrated on portraying the internal life of his characters, their mental, emotional and spiritual depths.

But when I think Graham Greene, I definitely think characters before I think plot. Just me I guess. But I am going to take a stab here, and OK he never did make it over for a barbeque to tell me this personally, but I'll bet he started with his theme and characters before plot. His work just smacks of it.

[maestrowork]

Originally Posted by scarletpeaches

I don't develop a plot at all. That comes as a result of what the characters do.

If you wait for plot to drive characters there's a danger of ending up with passive, cardboard characters in a novel bordering on the deus ex machina.

If your characters take action, decide for themselves what to do rather than waiting for the plot to happen to them, they'll become more active in deciding their own destiny.

Personally I can't stand reading books where things happen to the characters. I prefer them to be the ones who make things happen.

Perhaps we're back to the distinction between story and plot.

There's always a plot -- characters do something, then come the reaction and consequences, then the characters react to them and do something else. That's plot. Even in the most character-driven literary fiction, there's a plot. You don't see characters just sitting around doing nothing, musing about their existence and then nothing comes of it.

But what we care about is story. What is the story about? If after reading the whole thing we still don't know what the story is about, then either there is something wrong or it's an experimental piece or it's a collection of vignettes.

If you can't summarize your story in one sentence, or if the summary is something like "three women live through their lives, contemplating their future" then there's a problem, because there may be no direction, no overall structure or themes or arc.

[justpat]

Plot isn't always the important thing. I've read that there are 3 kinds of stories.

1. Plot driven

2. Character driven, where the characters are so interesting the plot doesn't really matter (I'm sure this isn't easy to pull off, but it can be done)

3. Setting driven. Something like the Lord of the Rings where the setting is really the main point, the characters are flat and the plot is very basic, but its still interesting.

[Doug Johnson]

If there's a main conflict, how the characters overcome it is the main plot.

If there's no conflict, then it's "experimental fiction."

If there's lots of little conflicts, but no over riding conflict, it's probably not a novel. It's probably a series of related short stories.

[Stuart Clark]

I'm with Doug on this one. You've got to have conflict and the resolution of that conflict is what drives your plot. It's what every story is about.

Bizarre as it sounds, I'd recommend a book called "Writing Screenplays that Sell" by Michael Hague. He goes into great detail about character conflict (internal and external) and character motivation. All of it can be applied to novels as well as screenplays.

Good luck
Stuart

[Doug Johnson]

Originally Posted by Stuart Clark

I'm with Doug on this one.

Mr. Clark is obvioulsy an extremely intelligent person.

What a book is about, isn't the same thing as the plot. The DaVinci Code didn't sell a gazillion copies because of its plot, but it has one.

The whole point of a novel, is that the narrator gives it "narrative drive." If all Salinger had wanted to do was say, "If you try to solve all the worlds problems, you'll go crazy," he could've done that in one sentence. Or written an essay to prove his point. If he'd just wanted to play with language, he would've written a poem. If he'd wanted to prove it clinically, he would've performed research and submitted the results for peer review.

Like I said, you might have a series of short stories, or experimental fiction. There's nothing wrong with writing either.

[Oliveman]

Originally Posted by justpat

Plot isn't always the important thing. I've read that there are 3 kinds of stories.

1. Plot driven

2. Character driven, where the characters are so interesting the plot doesn't really matter (I'm sure this isn't easy to pull off, but it can be done)

3. Setting driven. Something like the Lord of the Rings where the setting is really the main point, the characters are flat and the plot is very basic, but its still interesting.

This is false. There is always a plot, and that is what drives a story. The Lord of the Rings, by the way, does not have flat characters or plot, but in fact makes a strong point through the details of its plot that nothing is so simple in achieving a singular goal as it seems. The "setting-driven" feel comes from the embellishment of imagry and the high voice (beowulf sort of deal) that can be put in the style category, not the direction or emphasis of plot. The levels of conflict in a story's plot, its complexity, or subtlty - changes in these do not mean there is no plot, only a plot presented in a different way. Something still ties a true story together. The plot ALWAYS matters. Subject material and presentation are a different matter.

[scarletpeaches]

Originally Posted by Oliveman

This is false. There is always a plot, and that is what drives a story...

Uh...riiiiight. Plenty people here would disagree with you there, and I'm one of them. Not that there isn't always a plot, but whether or not it drives the narrative. To me, plot is secondary. It grows from the actions of the characters, who come first.

Characters are what drive my stories. But, if you know my work better than I do, then who am I to argue?

[Stew21]

My last WIP's premise was two diabolically different sisters who happen to be best friends. There was a romance sub-plot, a losing-your-friend sub-plot, and then the (possibly overused) being-comfortable-in-your-own-skin sub-plot.

This sounds like Jennifer Wiener's "In Her Shoes".



Characters and a "premise" are good places to start, but I think the reader has to want to follow the characters down a path of some sort. See them learn a lesson, transform in some way (as Orion said).
Make the reader care about what happens to your characters first and foremost, but challenge your characters with tough situations so you can see how they react, adjust, fail, succeed and change.

[scarletpeaches]

What motivates them? I ask myself, "What does he/she want?" and take it from there.

Motivations and actions are down to what we want, so...it's that simple. Ask yourself what your characters most want and that'll tell you a lot about their personalities.

[Mr. E]

My characters have surprised me countless times by taking the plot in a totally new direction I hadn't even thought of. I had a general plot planned from the beginning, and it came to fruition...but getting there was a hundred times more fun because of the characters involved.

I thinks it's a delicate balancing act (as are so many things in this crazy passion/profession/hobby).

[justpat]

Originally Posted by Mr. E

My characters have surprised me countless times by taking the plot in a totally new direction I hadn't even thought of. I had a general plot planned from the beginning, and it came to fruition...but getting there was a hundred times more fun because of the characters involved.

I thinks it's a delicate balancing act (as are so many things in this crazy passion/profession/hobby).

Yeah, when my characters start misbehaving I drop pianos and stuff real close to them until they straighten up. I just haven't figured out yet how to tie all the falling items into my story.

[justpat]

Since I personally dislike a book without a really good main plot, it will be hard for me to point out specific examples, but I know there are tons of books out there with out them (as Scarlet says, there is always 'some' plot, what I'm talking about is when the plot is not the main driving force)

As for Lord of the Rings characters, hmm. They are so strictly good or evil, with no internal conflicts or hard decisions to make: to me, that is flat. Don't get me wrong though, they are still great books.

[Thomas White]

Then the only difference I can see between our styles is that you have your characters act as the catalyst to a plot, whereas I have mine thrust in the middle of it's development.

I just don't like the suggestion that your preferred approach leads to stronger characters and a thicker plotline. I could list plenty of reasons why I think this isn't true, but you'd just disagree anyway. Both have their advantages and disadvantages, but a good author can work around these and produce a great work all the same.

[TB4me2000]

But...no matter if the characters go out and do something on their own accord or the action comes out of nowhere and the characters just go along with it, or whatever else falls in between, something is happening, right? That something is, in my mind, a plot...

[Jordygirl]

Why don't I do plots? (I forget who asked this... sorry!)
I don't do plots because, well, I find characters a zillion times more interesting and they always come first, so I hardly ever start out a story with a firm "plot" in mind; just a beginning and a resolve.
Can the over riding theme sometimes be the plot? That makes no sense to me but it's what ties the story together, right?

(I've only seen the movie In Her Shoes, not read the book, but my story seems way different. Of course, I'm sure the book is way different than the movie, so...)

[Sage]

Without a plot, how do you know when you've reached the conclusion? So maybe look at the end of the book & see where you felt it was done, & look at how you got to that ending. What, when you resolved it, gave you the satisfaction that the story was done? Wasn't that the conflict? Didn't it give you plot?

[Linda Adams]

Originally Posted by Jordygirl

Why don't I do plots? (I forget who asked this... sorry!)
I don't do plots because, well, I find characters a zillion times more interesting and they always come first, so I hardly ever start out a story with a firm "plot" in mind; just a beginning and a resolve.

But the plot can make the characters more interesting as well. I've found a lot of fantastic character development driven by complications created by the plot. It was like all these elements were coming together to make the characters grow and react and do things they wouldn't normally do. What if the plot complications forced the character into making an ethical decision? What if the character was a naive, innocent person who changed because of the plot? It's an opportunity for even more character development.

[Doug Johnson]

Originally Posted by Jordygirl

Can the over riding theme sometimes be the plot?

No. There's a reason virtually all good stories told over the last 3,000 years have some things in common.

[maestrowork]

Originally Posted by Jordygirl

Why don't I do plots? (I forget who asked this... sorry!)
I don't do plots because, well, I find characters a zillion times more interesting and they always come first, so I hardly ever start out a story with a firm "plot" in mind; just a beginning and a resolve.

But do you just describe your characters and do they do anything? Characters are NOT interesting until they do something, and when they do something, something else happens because of their action. That is plot. Whether it's character-driven or not, that's still a plot. However, if that plot is aimless -- things happen, then something else happens, but they don't come together in any shape, form, or structure or theme,then you have a very unfocused story.

Serious, interesting characters DO things, and have to face consequences.

[Oliveman]

Without a plot, you might as well give us an elaborate character description. Character is revealed through action/reaction, and it is revealed to a deeper extent as extremes of situations are reached, what do they do when circumstances thrust them out of the norm, to the extremes of their reality? People misconstrue, many times, a plot where the conflict is centered on a personal or inner level rather than the extrapersonal with that of a character-driven plot. Furthermore, colorful characters, and the existence of many of them, all interacting, are both only methods used to bring out the plot of a story more, and belong in the category of presentation- a way of bringing out the plot and relating it to the reader through people that people engage with out of interest, empathy, or sympathy - a remarkable way to build trust.

[scarletpeaches]

I think too many people are assuming that "I don't outline the plot beforehand and concentrate on character," means "My book doesn't have a plot," which is simply not true.

[scarletpeaches]

It's his characters that give his books such strong plots. Bendrix, for one. The End of the Affair is on my 'favourite books' list and I can't tell you how many times I've read it. In fact I think I'll go and dig it out, read it again to give myself a lesson in tortured passion.

After all...if Bendrix wasn't so tortured and passionate, would there be a plot? Well he wouldn't have done what he did (and the book would have been completely different. Flat and uninteresting IMO)...which I won't reveal for the sake of spoiling it for those who haven't yet read.

[C.bronco]

I think that you have a premise and a conclusion. The plot is how the characters get to the conclusion. There has to be a point to the story. You are telling it to communicate something.

When I wrote fiction in college, I had your dilemma, but now I'm the other way around. My fiction is definitely plot driven.