TUESDAY TIPS AND TIDBITS – What are your characters saying?

In a continuing attempt to help new (and not so new) authors better understand the mechanics of writing, we are offering our twist on writing tips. Today, it’s DIALOG.

Dialogue (or it can be spelled ‘dialog’) – what your characters say in your story – can be a crucial component of your fiction. However, it can also be one of the most difficult things for a writer to write well. Many beginning writers are afraid of dialog, and some just plain don’t get it. Even some experienced writers go overboard with dialog and use it when it might not be the most appropriate choice for a particular segment of a story.

What’s so complicated about dialog, and why is it so darned important anyway? Dialog is an excellent way to break up monotonous narrative, show interactive tension, ramp us suspense, delivery story surprises, and demonstrate characterization. Done right, it can make a story sing. Done wrong, and it can tell a reader you don’t know what in the hell you’re doing.

DISSECTING DIALOG. The first problem many writers have with dialog is that they don’t understand how it’s structured. The truth is, dialog can take on many forms when narrative delivery descriptions or ‘tags’ are added. Basically, dialog consists of the quoted matter (words that are actually ‘spoken’) and the delivery part or ‘tag,’ if present. Things can get dicey when it comes to figuring out how to correctly punctuate dialog.

The US rule is, what is spoken by a character is bracketed by double quote marks, like so:

“I don’t really want to go on that trip.”

Add a tag like he said to it, and the punctuation instantly gets complicated. The US rule is, the tag must contain a transitive speech-delivery verb (like said, yelled, cried, etc. – NOT laughed, smiled, nodded, or other actions that don't deliver spoken words) in order to be connected to the dialog with a comma or lowercase tag as part of the total dialog sentence like so:

He said, “I don’t really want to go on that trip.”

“I don’t really want to go on that trip!” he yelled.

“I don’t,” he said with a sneer, “really want to go on that trip.”

Note that in all three examples above, the tag is connected to the dialog so the quoted matter and the tag together form a complete overall sentence. The transitive verb allows that because transitive means the verb, by its meaning, requires an object, a what, a something to act upon. He said what (what is the object of the verb said, or more precisely the quoted dialog portion of the sentence – “I don’t really want to go on that trip.”)

Note that the following example using spoke instead of said changes the structure because spoke is not a transitive verb that requires an object. Therefore the tag and the dialog would not be joined together as one sentence because spoke cannot take an object in the sentence structure:

He turned and spoke. “I don’t really want to go on that trip.”

AS IF THINGS WEREN'T ALREADY COMPLICATED. Dialog can be just one sentence or sentence fragment or even just one word. It can be several paragraphs long. There is no limit on how much speaking a particular character can do in a story, but common sense dictates that writers should not allow their characters to have a monolog that is pages long, because it can become quite tiresome to read.

The trouble starts when you have two or more characters speaking. Then you have to give visual signals and other clues to let your reader know that a speaker is changing in the scene. That is done by putting everything a different speaker says in a different paragraph, like the following example:

Lydia clapped her hands together. “Okay, everybody! Let’s get started. Please pay attention.”

“Wait,” George interrupted. “Before you start bossing everyone around...” He stood and circled around the table to face Lydia. “I just want to point out that you are not the jury foreman. Dick is.” He pointed at the small man adjusting his thick glasses.

Note that in the US, when quoted dialog is broken into more than one paragraph, the convention is to not put end quotes in the first paragraph, but to start the new paragraph with beginning quotes and include end quotes only when the dialog is interrupted by a tag or other narrative content. Example:

Lydia clapped her hands together. “Okay, everybody! Let’s get started. Please pay attention.”

She turned to her right. “George, would you do the honors and pass out an instruction packet to everyone? 

“Now, people, before you open your folders, please pay attention to the following instructions...”

“Miss Garner,” George interrupted, sounding a bit puzzled. “I don't see the instruction packets anywhere.”

A lot of common advice will tell you never to vary your tag verbs from said with the reasoning that it is so common a word that it is virtually invisible. But that really isn’t true. If you used he said or she said in every line or paragraph of dialog, it will get monotonous. But if you don’t use enough tags, the reader may not be able to follow who’s talking. So you have to use common sense and make some judgment calls. Used sparingly, I think it’s perfectly alright and even recommended you change your speech delivery verbs to fit the dialog occasion and use yelled or whatever when appropriate. However, the dialog content itself should give the reader plenty of clues as to how the conversation is going, whether it is subdued or heated. So use tags only when necessary to remind the reader who is speaking or to give clues as to what’s going on while the characters are speaking.

NO TALKING HEADS. Narrative that accompanies your dialog should show readers what your characters are doing and where they are while they are talking. Otherwise you just end up with disembodied voices – talking heads. Have your characters interacting with their environment, objects, each other, whatever. Just don’t have them yacking and not doing anything while they’re yacking. Here’s what I’m talking about:

“Have you seen Zach yet?” Bo said.

“No, man,” Koz said.

“He was supposed to be here by now,” Bo said.

“Dude, chill, will ya? You’re blockin’ my light and bustin’ my buzz,” Koz said.

Now, let’s try it again with some environmental interaction:

Bo opened the patio door and walked out by the pool. “Have you seen Zach yet?”

Koz shifted on the poolside lounger, trying to avoid Bo’s shadow. “No, man.”

“He was supposed to be here by now.” Bo checked his watch again.

“Dude, chill, will ya?” Koz waved him off. “You’re blockin’ my light and bustin’ my buzz.”

With a few references to the surroundings, you present your reader with a more detailed picture of the environment where the conversation is taking place. With some body language, you give your reader a better impression of what your characters are doing and what their attitude is. Of course the dialog alone should help give some idea of attitude in word choices and delivery. Just don’t go overboard with body language and external details, or you will overwhelm your dialog. Let the content of the dialog carry the scene and add the extra narrative clues sparingly, just to add spice to the dialog.

WHAT DIALOG CAN – AND CAN’T – DO FOR YOUR STORY. Beginning authors oftentimes try to make dialog do too much. They try to sneak in backstory infodumps by using the all too familiar technique commonly called ‘As You Know, Bob.’ This basically consists of two characters talking to each other, one explaining to the other key elements of backstory or plot development – oftentimes when the listening character already knows what’s being explained (thus, ‘as you know...’). Here’s an example of ‘As You Know, Bob,’ riddled with beginner errors like spelling out too much for the reader, assuming the reader can’t follow simple clues to come to his/her own conclusions. This underestimating the intelligence of the reader can be off-putting and downright insulting for the reader to wade through. Supposing this is a murder mystery, taking the approach of telling everything to the reader in this step-by-step method takes all the fun out of it because it does not allow the reader to think for himself and draw conclusions on his own – because the author is too busy telling him what he wants him to conclude. Bad for the author, and bad for the reader. Also, some needlessly repeated words and unnecessary ‘conversational’ phrases are thrown in there too, just because beginners also do that a lot too. See if you can pick them out.

Ted turned to his partner, Bob, and said, “As you know, Bob, we just started this investigation and have no clue about the identity of the murder victim. However, evidence surrounding the body in the hotel room strongly suggests that the woman was a prostitute hired by the visiting dignitary, Chancellor von Dreschel.”

Bob nodded his head. “Yes, Ted, I was there when we found the girl’s calling card from Kelly’s Escort Service in her handbag.”

“So, Bob, I think we should pay a visit to Kelly’s Escort Service right now.”

“Yes, Ted, I think you’re right. They can tell us who they sent on this ‘assignment.’ Then we will have a better idea of how to confirm the murder victim’s identity.”

Now let’s try a do-over with a little tweaking and more finesse:

Ted pulled off his latex gloves and frowned. “Chancellor von Dreschel appears to have been a very naughty boy. With issues.”

Bob sighed and nodded. “I’ll call the number on that card we found in the vic’s handbag. Somebody at Kelly’s Escort Service ought to be able to give me a name to go with the body.” He shook his head as he looked down at the hotel room’s blood-soaked carpet where the mutilated corpse had been found. “Damn shame. She must have been a beautiful girl – until that kraut bastard got hold of her.”

Note that both samples above have the same characters saying basically the same thing but in drastically different ways. The second example gives a lot more detail but actually uses fewer words (95 vs. 122 in the first example). If you’re new to writing dialog, study the differences between these two passages carefully. This may help you recognize what’s considered good dialog – and what’s not so good. Your objective should be to write the good stuff.

Sometimes what characters don’t say is just as important as what they do say. You can add a lot of personal tension with what you leave out of your characters’ dialog. See the second example below and note how little the characters actually say. How they don’t say a lot of stuff becomes much more meaningful than if they had a full-blown argument with volleyed insults. The first example is the full-blown argument. The second is more subdued, with fewer barbs exchanged. Both have attitude, but depending on the mood of the scene you’re trying to create, one approach may work better than the other.

Gary stepped back. “I don’t like what you’re saying, Jolene.”

“Too bad, so sad.” Jolene flipped him the bird from across the room. “You don’t get to tell me what I can say and what I can’t.”

“But ... but I thought we were together.”

“Think again, sucka!” Jolene propped her hands on her hips and wagged her head side to side in that defiant stance he had absolutely grown to hate. “I’m with Tom now.”

“Tom?” Gary felt the blood drain from his face. She’d been cheating on him with Tom? “He’s a loser!”

“Hey!” she shouted, thrusting an arm in the air. “Who you callin’ a loser? Tom’s my man!”

“You ... you deserve Tom!”

“Damn right I do!”

Here’s the more subdued version with less verbal jousting, but no less emotional:

Gary pulled his hands from the tabletop and folded them in his lap. “What are you saying, Jolene?”

Jolene sipped her coffee slowly, darting a glance at him and then quickly looking away.

“I ... I thought we were ... together.”

Jolene sighed heavily and set her cup down in the saucer. The unexpected clatter made Gary wince as if she’d slapped him. He knew what was coming ... he knew.

“Gary...” she said softly, staring at her cup. “I’m with Tom now.” She looked up sharply, her eyes pleading. “I-I wanted to tell you before, but–”

“But you didn’t.” He huffed, suddenly close to crying, but he choked it all back. Why should I even care? Tom is such a loser. And if she’d rather–

He shook his head and clenched the napkin lying in his lap. Taking a deep breath, he calmed himself and dropped the napkin on the table. He couldn’t make himself look at her as he grumbled, “You deserve Tom.”

“Thank you, Gary,” Jolene said, sounding relieved. “I was so hoping you’d understand.”

Whichever version you prefer over the other, you can see how differently the same scene can be played with a few subtle changes in body language and dialog delivery. Which brings up the next topic...

MAKING IT SOUND REAL. Every character you write should have a unique voice. Sometimes that’s not entirely possible, because many characters of the same ethnic and economic background will talk similarly and use the same type of vocabulary and cadence. However, when one social group meets another, differences immediately become apparent due to accents and colloquial expressions, along with vocabulary and modes of speaking. The trick is to make your written representation of dialog for people with accents or unusual speaking habits readable while still conveying that uniqueness of character. For instance, a British nobleman’s attempt to get a woman’s attention will be quite different from the same attempt by an LA gang member. Can you guess which is which?

“Pardon, madam, could you please step aside and allow me to pass by?”

“Yo, bitch, move!”

 Many authors take care listening to real people talk so they understand the cadence of everyday speaking and learn how to write halting and impromptu dialog. However, every author should take care to edit out all the ‘ahems’ and ‘uhs’ and ‘you knows’ heard when real people speak, and just put a few pauses in for the desired effect. Never overdo an accent either. The Southern accent is the one most abused in writing dialog, and in the hands of an inexperienced writer, it can be rendered almost unreadable, like the following example:

“Ahh wahhnchall ta know ahh wasn’t thar the night mahh bruthahh wuz kilt.”

Here’s the translation with just a hint of the accent:

“I want y’all to know I wasn’t there the night my brotha was kilt.”

Comprenez-vous du français? Adding foreign phrases can enrich your dialog, but take care to do that sparingly and only when the meaning can be inferred by surrounding context. Also, make sure the addition of language that would be foreign to your target reading audience is really necessary for the story. Don’t just throw some French in there because you took three years of French in high school and want to impress your readers with how cultured you are. And last, take extra care to use the correct spelling and syntax for your foreign phrases so that a reader who is familiar with the language won’t catch you having your character say ‘stinky soap’ when you wanted to convey ‘beautiful day.’

And last, resist the urge to create an entirely new language for your sci-fi alien or Middle Earth fantasy characters. It’s an incredible investment of time and has already been done by others. And really, who speaks Klingon, except at geekfests? Most of your readers will not want to wade through a bunch of gibberish just because you want to show them how clever and industrious you are to write your whole novel in your own made-up language.

IN CLOSING, dialog is the heart of most fiction. Make sure you understand how to make it work for you and let it help enrich your writing. Every character has something to say, just make sure it’s what you want your readers to hear.

Pat Morrison, Penumbra Publishing

TUESDAY TIPS AND TIDBITS – Writing for the Market

Most writers know that sage advice warns against ‘writing for the market.’ What is ‘writing for the market,’ and why does everyone say it’s bad, when maybe it is the smartest thing a writer can do – if it’s done right?

WRITING FOR THE MARKET means, basically, the writer takes a cursory look at the existing genres and picks one that seems hot, and then churns out a book as fast as possible that is similar to what is selling well.

Twilight was all the rage a couple years ago. Now look at the teen vamp market – it is totally saturated. According to her own blog archives, even Amanda Hocking discovered, to her dismay, that the teen vampire market was already saturated when she began writing her young-adult vampire series, My Blood Approves. Her books had very little in common with Stephanie Meyers’, but the inevitable comparisons were still drawn. And with less than stellar editing, Hocking’s entry faired well only because of inventive and relentless self-marketing efforts. Hocking quickly moved on to other genres and came up with what is now a winner for her – young-adult trolls. The self-published Trylle series has been picked up by a major publisher and is now re-released with new covers and new editing. Hocking took home an advance of a couple mill on that one.

The Hunger Games is another commodity that is now very hot, with the first movie soon to hit theaters. Suddenly there are spoof books popping up to cash in on this market. Clearly some of these authors (Bratniss Everclear’s The Hunger but Mainly Death Games: A Parody) are churning out schlock for the sheer hope of making money off a concept another author has worked very hard for several years to make popular. Copycat authors’ work usually fades into the distant past without even a last sigh as they expire. And does any reader take them seriously? Obviously 52 readers on Amazon read the book and went to the trouble of giving it a 5-star review. But others, like Meagan Hightower, clearly thought it was a cheap rip-off, according to her review excerpt taken from Amazon...

I usually love reading parodies (like Nightlight); however Bratniss Everclean's THE HUNGER BUT MAINLY DEATH GAMES has to be one of the worst parodies I have ever read. I thought I would like it because of how many 5 star reviews there were, but sadly I could not like it. The only good thing is that I bought it on my Kindle and won't have to look at it ever again. Unlike the original HUNGER GAMES, this particular parody had almost no action. It didn't even logically follow through on the plot points because many points were negated repeatedly. The characters were very Out of Character to the point that I felt certain that I wasn't reading a HG series parody, except for the fact that title of the book is used so many times that it is obvious it's trying to be a HG parody. The humor wasn't even funny to me because fart and trash jokes aren't my thing...

Obviously I am not advocating that any writer take this approach in ‘writing for the market.’ What I am advocating is this: study the market.

STUDYING THE MARKET. Your experience as a writer will drive what you decide to write about and how you will write it. While seasoned writers may feel they’ve earned the right to take license with their subject matter and try something new (new at least for them), many beginning writers will choose subjects to write about that are closer to home, meaning they write about what they are familiar with or are fascinated by. Those writers first entering the writing market may choose any number of processes or combinations of them to decide what to write.

Emulating a favorite author or genre is a good way for a writer to teach herself to write and at the same time produce a marketable book. Presumably the beginning writer chooses a genre she enjoys reading and will have read everything in the genre she can get her hands on. She will thereby know what’s the hottest and the latest in the market, and know what’s already been done so she can avoid a trite redo of a popular author’s work. The smart writer will come up with something that sticks with the genre’s staples but brings in something new and exciting and not already done to death. The writer who’s not so market-savvy won’t fair as well, and will churn out another same ol’ kinda book that readers have already read and are tired of. Even if the story is basically the same, (historical Highland romance where the heroine must save her people from a warring interloper, for instance), the clever beginning writer will add a new twist that’s never been seen before.

But the larger the market and the older it is, the less likely a new author will be able to come up with new twists. (Time-travel? Been there, many times. Magical Druid spell-casting healer white witch ghost hero reincarnated? Already seen it all.) So the challenges are ever greater for the newer writer to come up with something unique to the genre. In the same vein, the seasoned writer may find a favorite genre saturated with copycats and simply choose to delve into another genre less populated. But the less populated genre may be less populated for a reason – the readership is small, and market profits are likewise small. Still, a genre that has not been done to death but remains to be explored with new ideas may be just the ticket for any writer, regardless of experience. Innovative ways to tap hidden market potential are every writer’s dream.

To learn what is innovative and what is passé, every writer must study the market. That means reading older books – which may mean browsing used bookstores or library sell-offs to find books 10, 20, even 30 or 40 years old, just to get a feel for what’s already been done. Thanks to digital reissues, the job of market study is becoming easier.

Does this mean a writer hoping to break into a favorite genre has to read everything that’s ever been written in that genre before writing? No. What this means is that the writer should be aware of what’s already been done, and know what books and authors are considered ‘standards’ in the genre. Usually these are the authors who pioneered the genre. But that doesn’t mean a writer new to the genre should write like them or even try to read everything out there – which could literally take years. That level of market research is not required or advised. Reading a few ‘revered’ older books is advisable to see what was done and how it was done, while keeping in mind that reader tastes change as readers change. What may have been popular 10 years ago might be sneered at now.

A good way to gauge the efficacy of a genre is to join some reader groups or forums where people chat or comment about their favorite reading experiences. Amazon has many reader forums, and you can start your own thread to get reader comments about what you’re researching. Keep in mind, however, that you may get a lopsided or uneven response, depending on who might be populating a particular forum at a given time.

HOW MUCH RESEARCH IS NECESSARY? Only you can decide that. If you feel you’ve investigated the genre thoroughly enough to get a feel for what has been popular and may no longer be because it’s been overdone, then you’ve got important usable information to work with. But remember, even a favorite story can become something new and different and exciting in the hands of a new writer - especially a writer whose tastes are a mix of other genres. Those writers can almost always bring something new to a tried and true storyline. So don’t shy away from doing a storyline that’s already been done – as long as you can add to it in a unique way.

WRITE WHAT YOU WANT TO WRITE. In the process of researching what’s been written, don’t ignore what you want to write. There is absolutely no reason to write something simply because you think it will fair well in the market – unless you are ghost-writing for someone else, or are writing a work for hire. Remember why you wanted to write in the first place – because you have something to say to your readers. Figure out what that something is and make it uniquely yours. Maybe you’ll come up with a whole new genre that doesn’t yet exist, simply because what you have inside you to say to others is different enough to not have already been said. Maybe the market wasn’t right until now for someone else to say it. Maybe now the time is right for you to say it.

But only when you take a little history tour to find out what’s already been done can you decide what’s left to be done. Then you can put on your creative thinking hat and start trying to figure out a unique twist for your particular writing project – and tell it in your own words in your own way. Hopefully enough other people will identify with it to want to read what you’ve written, to make you a trailblazer in whatever genre you choose to enter or create. So ... do your research, then get busy and write!

Pat Morrison
Penumbra Publishing
http://penumbrapublishing.com

TUESDAY TIPS AND TIDBITS – Two deadly writing sins that will ruin any book

Two serious ‘writing sins’ authors often commit can ruin a story and make the reading experience less than satisfactory. I’m not talking about authorial failures like bad plotting or poor dialog. I’m talking about two behaviors or attitudes authors often exhibit when writing. These are: ignorance and arrogance. Each alone can mar a story, but combined, they can be deadly.

IGNORANCE. This one is pretty straightforward. A writer who is ignorant of (or chooses not to bother confirming) accepted grammar/punctuation rules can make reading difficult, even unpleasant for readers. Likewise, a writer who doesn’t know enough background or support information about a subject that is crucial to his story can end up making the story seem implausible, even laughable. Things like police procedures in a murder mystery, or the logistics of space travel in a science fiction novel, should be based on reality and known scientific concepts to seem authentic to the reader, even if these fictional truths or technologies are purely inventions of the writer’s imagination.

So, the mystery/thriller/crime writer who doesn’t know the business end of a gun from a gum-shoe should at least spend a little time in the library or on the internet looking at how the police force in his story’s setting is structured, and take a look at some gun sales web sites to figure out the difference between a rifle and a pistol. Likewise, if a science fiction writer isn’t good at extrapolating scientific fiction ‘factoids’ from known science facts, then at least a quick visit to Wikipedia should be on his list of things to do before publishing his story. There are also many free web sites that explain various grammar grapplers, including comma usage, dialog punctuation, and so forth. There are even a free online dictionaries and encyclopedias available, although sites whose information is provided by volunteers should be double-checked elsewhere for accuracy.

It’s OK for a writer who is not sure of any aspect of his story to go ahead and finish a first draft and put in a few notations like ‘look this up later.’ But eventually that research aspect of writing has to be done. With all the sources available, there is no excuse for a writer to remain ignorant about the basics of writing or factoids necessary to lend authentic details to his story. But, sadly, many writers ignore this at their peril and to the detriment of their stories. At that point, writing flaws cannot be chalked up to ignorance, but instead laziness.

ARROGANCE. This is the worst of the deadly writing sins. And at the risk of stereotyping, I am going to go ahead and say that writers of high fantasy are the most prone to be guilty of this bad writing attitude. Paranormal fantasy writers can oftentimes be strong runners-up. The reason for this, I think, is that writers of fantasy believe that the fantasy genre gives them unlimited license to write any damn thing they want and, by virtue of ‘because I say so,’ expect their readers to accept it without question. That belief is simply not correct in the world of writing well.

Writers who use magic as the basis for fantastic things that happen in their stories have to first define the rules of how magic works in their world. The rules must be consistent and work as expected. That doesn’t mean there can’t be surprises. But any surprise that deviates from the rules laid down by the writer better have a believable explanation and a prior ‘fair warning’ set-up in the story so the reader doesn’t cry, “Foul!” Alas, many a quest/fantasy writer will pull the most unbelievable surprises out of his elven hat simply because of the arrogant belief that this is his story, and he can do whatever he wants with it. And if readers don’t get it or like it, then they are not true fantasy fans. (Yes, there really are authors who hold fast to this belief. None of them are published though, and if they are, their books are not very popular.) This type of literary snobbery can be seen in literary fiction too, where an author will write some stream-of-consciousness BS without any concern whatsoever for the difficult reading experience it creates. Why? Because, in this author’s mind, it’s not about the reader, it’s all about the author and whatever he feels like writing at the time. This kind of inappropriate, self-centered attitude most often stems from inexperience and a lack of understanding of what makes great literature great.

The same holds true for writers of every other genre. Science fiction wannabe writers too are guilty of thinking that concept trumps everything, even logic and believability. I recently posted an article at http://penumbrapublishing.blogspot.com about fiction flawed concepts. But poorly supported concepts are not all that can plague science fiction. What I find most of the time when I read science fiction is that the author simply doesn’t think things through about the logistics of what is supposed to be possible in his science fiction universe. Time travel, faster-than-light space travel, and other technologies that clearly have not been invented yet in our reality, should have a believable timeline for becoming available, especially if the story is a futuristic extension of our own world reality. Oftentimes in less than 300 years, there are human colonies on other planets that have clearly had to be there for 300 years to reach the level of technology and the number of past generations apparent in the story, yet there’s no believable timeline for how and when those people got to those colonies before they physically should have been there to fit the story’s claims. Again, arrogance is most often at fault, with the author believing that the genre of science fiction gives him free license not to have to support his story hypotheses with facts or pseudo-facts based on facts.

And when you have cross-genres like science fiction romance, any attempt at explaining the technology that would be necessary to support the story usually just flies out the window with the spaceship. I have read some science fiction romance that was written by a former physicist, and that was technologically believable. But in that case, the author did have the science background necessary to make the fictional version of science believable. What happens in most science fiction romance, however, is that the romance totally outstrips the science fiction so that you just have a bunch of oddly dressed hunky men running after women on a spaceship. They could just as well be oddly dressed hunky men running after women on a desert isle, and the story would be no different because the believable science fiction basis for the story simply hasn’t been established well enough by the writer. Those kinds of stories are usually called ‘futuristic’ because they don’t even pretend to compare to ‘hard’ science fiction that’s more about the technology and the concept than personal character interaction. Unfortunately, there is no ‘futuristic’ genre category choice on most book distribution retail sites, so ... let the reader beware.

LOSE THE ATTITUDE, WRITER DUDE. On behalf of all readers out there (including me), I beseech newbie writers and lazy writers and writers wanting to try a new genre ... get rid of any notion that some genres gives you free license not to write well. Get rid of the snobbery of attitudes such as, “Those readers just didf’t understand what I was trying to do with this story.” Do your homework and research whatever you need to in order to make your story the best it can be in your hands. Think of the reader before your own ego, and write not for the market but for the reader hiding within you that wants to read an excellent story. When you do that, your story’s closer to being publishable.

Pat Morrison, Penumbra Publishing

TUESDAY TIPS AND TIDBITS – Flawed Concepts

“This couldn’t possibly happen!”

Have you ever watched a movie or read a book, and the whole time you were viewing/reading, you kept telling yourself, “Oh, come on! How could that possibly happen?” A lot of ‘concept’ stories, especially science fiction or dystopian, are guilty of engendering exactly this reaction with an audience. I’m not talking about fantasy or supernatural effects, with possession by demons or ghosts walking through walls or vampires flying through the air without wings. I’m talking about the believability of the basic concept of the storyline. Many ‘concept’ stories get so hung up on demonstrating the extremes of societal flaws, they end up being flawed to the point that they are effective only as ‘think’ pieces. I happened to watch the movie In Time, starring Justin Timberlake, and that was exactly my reaction. “This couldn’t possibly happen.”

The movie itself was done well. The acting was pretty good. The script was certainly okay. The movie had enough action and suspense to keep viewers entertained. The futuristic dystopian society was laid out just fine. But one specific detail on which the entire storyline was predicated made me keep asking “Why would anyone agree to that? How could this situation have come about, and how could it continue?”

Let me explain enough about the movie to demonstrate without spoiling it for anyone who might want to watch it and hasn’t yet. In the near(?) future, it’s not “Your money or your life,” it’s “You’re money IS your life.” Literally. People live in different districts, based on their ‘wealth.’ No problem here. That’s the way things are now. The very wealthy live to excess in gated communities and have the cops in their back pocket. People from the ghettos are not welcome, and are sternly escorted out if not arrested and jailed. The problem comes with the concept of currency in this dystopian mirror reality. In this future, everyone has a ticking clock inside that counts down to the last second of time they have left to live. Everyone gets to live to the age of 25, but after that, if they don’t manage to earn more time, they die instantly the moment the time on their clock runs out.

Tick-tock, Tick-tock

The graphics of the bioclock were done very well in the movie, with a lighted string of numbers imbedded in one’s forearm counting down as every second ticks by. People work in factories or at other jobs for more time. Everything – food, shelter, bus rides – cost time. And the price of everything keeps going up. We all know how inflation works, but it’s much worse in this future. A simple bus ride across town could cost two hours of your hard-earned time. The concept is very clever because it actually does equate money and lifetime down to the last second. People can give away time to others, or it can be stolen – all with the twist of a wrist.

“How did things get this way?”

The problem with this interesting concept is that it was not explained in the movie WHY the whole of society would agree to this severe conversion from currency to time allowed to live. And I could not visualize any way that it would be possible. I kept asking myself, “How did things get this way?” and kept trying to come up with plausible answers the whole time I was watching the movie – which actually distracted my interest and focus from the movie. And still, after the movie was over, I kept trying to come up with some scenario that would explain how this way of life came to be, to a point that everyone would willingly submit their children at the time of birth to have a countdown clock imbedded in their arm and an instant heart-attack switch placed in their chest. I couldn’t. And so I finally realized that it was not my imagination that was flawed to the point that I couldn’t really enjoy the movie, it was a basic flaw in the logic that allowed the scriptwriters to base an entire movie on a clever concept that could not be explained in a believable and acceptable manner.

Because this one thing was missing from In Time, this background explanation of how people came to accept (or were forced to accept) the currency-to-time conversion, the movie left a nagging plot hole that detracted from the effectiveness of the storyline and the underlying concept.

The movie, The Adjustment Bureau with Matt Damon, was sort of like that as well, although there was more fantasy and allegory associated with that movie to help explain away the whole ‘magic door’ thing.

“Could this really happen?”

Because there is a limited number of story types available, writers are always looking for ways to put a new twist on that basic story, to make it innovatively different. Technology, fantasy, mythology, and history – and any mix of those – are all sources to use to add a bit of uniqueness to a story. And many writers draw from these sources hurriedly without thinking through just how they’ll make everything work together to demonstrate that major social issue they want their story demonstrate, or that moral they want to focus on and drive home to their audience. To make a story believable, it is extremely important to make everything work together – characterization, world-building, setting, plotline, and so forth – but especially the underlying theme or concept. It is the most important aspect.

The real test of whether a story can even be pulled off successfully is whether the concept is viable, and how it can be demonstrated believably. If a story loses believability somewhere along the line, the audience is lost. Maybe not everyone, but enough that there will be serious detractors for the story.

Before a writer can even begin writing a single word of a story, there has to be that nugget of what the story is about. Oh, sure, some writers get the inspiration nudge to start a story simply from a flash of a scene in their mind, or some snatch of a conversation between sketchy characters, but at some point the writer needs to think the story through logically from beginning to end and ask, “Could this really happen?” If the answer is, “No,” then the writer must either figure out some way that it could believably happen, or move on to another story idea. A writer who chooses, after some deliberation, to scrap a seemingly unworkable storyline concept, probably is doing himself and a lot of readers a huge favor. But even if he decides, against his better judgment, to pursue writing a story wherein he hasn’t quite figured out how it could happen believably, at some point he’ll have to figure that out or suffer the consequences. So, it’s better just to figure out the basics of the concept first, before wasteing time writing scenes and building characters to carry the story forward. The writer who plans her writing journey ahead of time will get there eventually. Go forward without a clue, and who knows where a story will end up?

Do YOU have a pet-peeve movie or book you'd like to share? Or a story concept in general you think is lame? Let us know!

Pat Morrison, Penumbra Publishing