I wanted to
blather on about challenges today.
Simple, basic challenges. Well, a type that
should be simple, but still gets messed up sometimes.
That
challenge is called choice.
We’ve all used
or come across choice. As I said, it’s probably
one of the easiest challenges a writer can create. Character A has to decide between two options
(B and C). It’s s triangle.
Sometimes
these choices are tough. Sometimes they’re not. Sometimes A is pursuing B, but it’s clear C should be the priority.
Making the decision between B and C provides the conflict, the drama,
and maybe even some comedy depending on how it’s done. There can also be an opportunity for some character growth in there.
You’ve
probably heard of romantic triangles.
It’s one of the most common ones out there. A is dating B, but then comes to realize C is
their real soul mate. Maybe Dot is
engaged to an antagonistic jock, but can’t help falling for the free-spirited caterer. The standard in most romantic triangles is
that B is very clearly not the right person for A, while C is so blatantly
right it’s almost frustrating.
Another common
one is “work vs. family.” Will Wakko
choose to spend the weekend with his family or working on the MacGuffin account? There are a few versions of
this. Sometimes it’s family instead of friends. It’s usually work on the other leg, but it
could be any sort of mild obsession or compulsion. Am I choosing my best friend or this treasure
map? My pets or my new apartment?
Triangles are fantastic because they’re a very
simple plot and framework that we can all immediately relate to and
understand. They make for easy subplots
in novels, and in short stories or screenplays they can almost be the entire
story. This is one of the reasons we
keep seeing them again and again and again.
However...
Simple as
they are, there are still a few basic rules to a triangle.
Actually,
that’s a lie. There’s only one rule. Triangles
are so simple there’s just one rule to making them work.
We have a
triangle because there’s A, B, and C.
Three points. If I toss out one
of these—let’s say B—then I’ve only got two points. That’s a line. Our structure is just A to C now.
Let me expand
on the examples above...
Wakko is so obsessed with landing the
MacGuffin account that he misses his daughter’s karate tournament, his son’s piano
recital, and the anniversary party his husband arranged for their best
friends. But Wakko keeps at it because
this promotion will put him in a key position for the next account, and
that’s the big one that’s going to put him in the corner office and change
their lives.
The stress
of all this is too much, though, and Wakko snaps. He screams at a client. When he’s called on it, he even yells at his
boss and gets fired. But after a week at
home with his kids and husband, he realizes this is where he was supposed to be
all along, with his family. They may not
be filthy rich, but the film ends with all of them happy together.
Or what about this one. Dot’s a painter-turned-graphic designer engaged to a square-jawed former quarterback turned TV producer. He’s crass, he’s mean to every waiter, and he undresses every woman he meets with his eyes—even when Dot’s right there with him.
Or what about this one. Dot’s a painter-turned-graphic designer engaged to a square-jawed former quarterback turned TV producer. He’s crass, he’s mean to every waiter, and he undresses every woman he meets with his eyes—even when Dot’s right there with him.
Then she
meets their potential caterer, a free spirit who does watercolors and
incorporates his talents into his food.
They talk art. They talk careers.
They have a casual lunch and talk more
art. When Dot comes home early one night
and catches her fiancé with his secretary (who he’s decided to marry instead
for... reasons), she finds herself calling the caterer. And suddenly, Dot’s heart is fluttering like
it hasn’t in years as she realizes this is the person she’s supposed to be with.
Do both of those examples feel a little... lacking?
Do both of those examples feel a little... lacking?
Y’see,
Timmy, what happened in both of them was that character A never really did
anything. Once B was eliminated, there
wasn’t anywhere to go, story-wise, except with C. Character
A didn’t make a choice, they just went with what was left.
Make sense?
B and C both have to remain valid choices. My story has to maintain that triangle up
until the moment of choice. B can still
be a bad choice, but A has to actively realize that and then decide to go with
C instead. Once that’s happened, I can
get B out of the picture, but not until then.
If not, ending up with C isn’t a triumph. It’s a consolation prize. Which I’d guess isn’t terribly satisfying for C.
If not, ending up with C isn’t a triumph. It’s a consolation prize. Which I’d guess isn’t terribly satisfying for C.
Or for the
readers.
Next
time.... Next time’s going to be golden,
that I can promise you.
Until then,
go write.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.