Which way would you rather read this?

[goofy06]

I'm working on the 2nd draft of my fantasy WIP. The first draft was total crap, the second draft is getting better, but still pretty much crap. The problem that's come up in cleaning up the crap is this: In the original story, the main character is unaware of her special talents/abilities/heritage. It's complicated, but she is descended from both the good guys and the bad guys that will eventually have to face off with only one winner. She's surprised to learn of her heritage and abilities and much of the story centers on the adjustments she has to make in order to take her place in that world, deal with the shock, and choose whether she will fight with her family (even if they are evil) or join the good guys. She also has to deal with falling in love with the leader of the good guys. In other words, it's a pretty typical fish out of water story where the character is surprised to find her life turned upside down.

But as I've been revising, I'm starting to see that it might be better told from this perspective: She knows exactly who she is and that part of her lineage is evil and so she approaches the good guys seeking to defect. Telling it this way loses the element of surprise, but it seems like a more active way to tell the story, giving the MC more control over the events in the story. She is still choosing between her family and the good guys, but it's an active betrayal. She still has to learn how to harness her abilities and deal with life amongst the good guys, who don't really trust her. And she's still falling in love with the leader of the good guys, but she has to be accepted by them before that can happen. But maybe I'm just trying to over complicate something.

So the question is: Which way would you rather read it if you were picking a story off the shelf?

I have my preference, but I think either telling has its merits. I'm sort of worried that the "surprise, you aren't who you think you are" type of story has been overdone, particularly in fantasy and YA (mine is sort of older YA -- the MC's are college age). Plus, telling it this way seems to lead to a lot more "explaining" where other characters are telling her about her abilities, skills, and heritage and less activity on her part. But there is something about the surprise approach that attracts me and makes for a conflict of its own.

I wonder if a story where a character takes a more active role in deciding which side she will take and how she will get there is a better choice. Since she knows exactly who she is not as much has to be explained to her. Some things still do, obviously, but it seems like she can better hit the ground running and get to the meat of the conflict, which is choosing to betray her family and use her talents for their destruction.

[Danthia]

Let the protag be proactive. A protag that drives the story is much more interesting than one who sits back and lets the story happen to them. If there's no goal and the protag isn't trying to achieve something, readers will wonder what the point of the story is.

[Tracey Bentley]

It's your story but I prefer characters who act rather than react throughout.

[maestrowork]

Passive characters are interesting up to a point, but the most memorable and identifiable characters are those who ACT instead of REACT. The ones who drive the plot instead of being driven.

Think on your favorite characters in literature, movies or TV, or video games. Then think to yourself: how many of them are proactive, and how many are passive?

Also, here's the rub: in most dramatic story, there comes a point (the POINT of NO RETURN) where the protagonist(s) must decide to do something, to take a leap of faith, and become the actor instead of the reactor. Your character may be passive up to a point, but eventually (and sooner better than later), the point of no return should happen. That's when your character, as well as your readers, have an investment in the stakes. Otherwise, it could become a "who cares?" type of story and your readers will read something else.

[RavenCorinnCarluk]

*smirks* I'd rather read the story where she decides to go with the bad guys.

Joking aside, maybe do a little of both. Let her start out ignorant, but quickly make her aware of her duality, and have her start acting toward choosing which side to follow.

[cwfgal]

Yup, what the others said ... action rather than reaction, or at least heavily weighted that way.

Beth (aka Annelise Ryan)

[MGraybosch]

Originally Posted by goofy06

So the question is: Which way would you rather read it if you were picking a story off the shelf?

To be honest, I'd be more interested if your protagonist said, "A plague on both your houses!" and decided that she was going to be on her own side instead of deciding to side with the "good guys" or the "bad guys".

[Subcreator]

Originally Posted by goofy06

I'm sort of worried that the "surprise, you aren't who you think you are" type of story has been overdone

Yes. It is ridiculously overdone. I would probably put it down in disgust.

[MGraybosch]

Originally Posted by Subcreator

Yes. It is ridiculously overdone. I would probably put it down in disgust.

Then I'm fucked, unless I can get away with having the protagonist say, "I had suspected as much for years. Try again."

[Stunted]

I could see myself enjoying either story, but the first one appeals to me more, especially if it's a YA novel. I don't know why. I think that seeing her change her mind is more interesting than seeing her enact a plan that she's already formulated, especially because "siding with the goodies" is the non-controversial thing to do.

Also, I think that the reason there's so much "Surprise, xyz about your identity!" is so popular in YA books is that really resonates with teens. So long as they aren't all the same, I don't think there could ever be too many of them.

Good luck!

[S.J.]

First, a disclaimer: I'm not trying to sway you! Do what you think is best, and if that means ignoring me/anyone else, do it.

That out of the way, I would definitely rather read the second plot. As soon as I read it, I was thinking: "What are her reasons for choosing the Good Guys? How does she know/think they're good?" "She's betraying her own (evil) family! What are they going to do??? Can she really sever all ties from them?" "What if she's done bad things to the Good Guys in the past?" Etc. Etc. The fact that it's her own decision makes me think about all these things, and using that at the beginning of your story sounds like a great opening.

However, I also agree (in part) with Stunted above: choosing the Good Guys at the beginning is an uncontroversial thing to do, so you'd have to have her do 'bad' things after changing sides or similar, to keep the tension and conflict high. Maybe she could revert to the Bad Guys for some reason - homesickness or the (false) realisation that she's evil and that's never going to change (perhaps after being told so by a Good Guy?). That way, it would be even harder for the Good Guys to trust her when she comes back to them, and the tension/main character's confusion would be the same as in the first version of the story.

In a nutshell, the second one seems to have so much potential, as well as having the added benefit of being less common.

Sorry if this is too long/my rambling is incomprehensible. Whichever plot you choose in the end, this story sounds exciting and interesting (aka, the opposite of crap). Good luck with writing it!

[vox]

You could probably make it work either way, but version two gives you some interesting opportunities for conflict. The MC's inner conflict at realizing she has a distaste for her own family, and all that scenario brings with it, as well as her having to discover and master her powers without the aid/instruction/understanding of her family. Both situations could help foster a lot of empathy from readers.

Best of luck!

[Telstar]

What if going the middle ground? Like she discovers it in the first or second chapter?