Here are the assumptions that I'm making.
- Good stories are about people.
I'm extending the definition of people to include aliens, talking animals, gods, dwarves and elves and orcs and anything with sentience enough to be able to participate in a story. Hell, if you want to anthropomorphize nature, go right on ahead. Write a story about the East Wind and the West Wind getting into a fight.
The thing is, there has to be some element of intensionality in a story. If you remove the intention, then all you have left is a bare description of natural phenomena. There's nothing wrong with that if it's what you're after--but it's not a story. - Good stories are about change.
They're about starting in one state and ending in another state--that's what change is. Perhaps the characters learn something. Maybe they don't, but the reader does. The important thing is that the action or inaction of the characters brings about a change or lack of change.
Sure, that's impossibly broad and general. So? You can write an interesting story about someone trying to keep things the same just like you can about things changing. But since without that struggle, things would have changed, there is a net difference between the potential and the actual. The story doesn't like on those endpoints, but in the difference between them. - Good stories are about struggle.
"John went out to get his mail." Where's the story in that? It's just right outside. If there's no struggle, there's no story.
Ah, but what if John is agoraphobic, terrified to go outside. Then you've got a story. Or what if there's a letter he's dreading, so every day he finds it harder and harder to go to the mailbox. Or perhaps there's a flood or a snowstorm, and John desperately wants to go get his mail, but nature is keeping him from doing so.
See, anything can be a story as long as there is inherent struggle. Assumption 2 was about change. But that change is worthless if it is easy to achieve. Where there are obstacles, and therefore something to struggle against, there is a tension between the potential and the actual.
Stories without people
Well, technically there are people. But instead of real people, they're cardboard cutouts. They're one dimensional, single note players who are manipulated like puppets to serve the whims of the author. They can usually be described in a single word, and cater to stereotypes.
The rich guy. The blonde bimbo. The scientist. The jock. The accountant. Each of these conjure up an image of a character. You know what they're wearing, what they'll do in a given situation, the way they talk. And they're not real. You'll never meet someone whose life and personality is encapsulated in a single personality trait. But stories are full of these.
Stories without change
Look no further than network television for this. Don't you ever get pissed off by TV shows that seem to hit a reset button between every episode? You can watch the episodes in any order because there is never any character development. Maybe the guest stars reach a new point, but the main characters, the one that you watch the show for, they are constant. It's clumsy and frustrating.
Stories without struggle
Genre stories are really bad about this, as are action hero movies. When the purpose of the story is wish fulfillment, everything just comes too easily for the main character. It's like the entire plot serves to illustrated how ABSOLUTELY AWESOME they are. It's unrealistic, the hallmark of infantile Mary Sue fan fiction. You can write a character that anyone can relate to without making them Superman.
--
So, when I talk about good stories, I'm talking about stories that meet these minimum qualifications. I'd love to hear some counterexamples!
No comments:
Post a Comment