Story Structure
I gained a lot of momentum from the answers to my first question. I've read a couple of writing books and read a lot of articles online. Although I'm still quite 'green', I have a much better idea as to what writing is all about.
I am currently studying and trying to get a handle on Story Structure. But I'm getting confused with the information I've come across. I've found good info at websites like thescriptlab.com, helpingwritersbecomeauthors.com, and advancedfictionwriting.com.
They talk about 5 plot points, two plot points combined with pinch points, 3 disasters...
I can't find any real consistency, other than everyone agrees with the 3 act structure. I've even reviewed several additional writing books to get more clarity, but most of the descriptions of structure are vague.
As a plotter, I feel I need to get a clear understanding of the important structural / plot components before I can move forward. Can anyone shed some light on this?
I'll be brief as the other answers are thorough and valuable. 1) Novels succeed because they are good stories. Three-ac …
8y ago
It seems you have done enough reading/thinking about writing, and should go ahead with writing. You do have your "toolbo …
8y ago
Plots are like skeletons. They're made up of individual bones called plot-points. You can look at any specific plot-str …
8y ago
All these analytical schemas are interesting, but I don't think you can rely on them for building a story. It is like di …
8y ago
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/20934. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
4 answers
You are accessing this answer with a direct link, so it's being shown above all other answers regardless of its score. You can return to the normal view.
I'll be brief as the other answers are thorough and valuable.
1) Novels succeed because they are good stories. Three-act stories are consistently successful, but many books become bestsellers with alternatives. A good story envelops the reader in your built world and makes them care about the outcome. The characters leap off the page.
2) Eventually, a plotter needs to take some risks by unleashing imagination. You can hold to an outline, but between your "data points" the material needs to be fresh, and it should flow with smooth transitions.
3) There is NO replacing just sitting down and writing. Plotting is great, but one must get ideas down on paper as they pop into your head because one will forget later.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/20949. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
It seems you have done enough reading/thinking about writing, and should go ahead with writing. You do have your "toolbox", now you need practice. Make outlines and follow through with writing. When you have enough of it, in a split second it'll occur to you when its time. You can always structure your story even during second draft. First drafts are for putting down your story, minus the fancy words, structure, and anything else that isn't story.
Story structure usually happens on itself. You can create a rough outline and start writing, but you can follow a strict structure,it is better if you dont. After all you are writing Fiction. You can't expect to put story inside a formula and churn out a book. Like other's suggest, structure is easy to see after a first draft is finished, and impossible to get to a draft with structure alone.
Story telling comes first, anything else can wait.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/20942. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
Plots are like skeletons. They're made up of individual bones called plot-points.
You can look at any specific plot-structure and see how its plot-points are arranged. You can perceive where the high and low points are, and with a little study, you can even find out why those points are where they are.
...but that doesn't make any specific plot-structure/skeleton universally right and all other bones arrangements wrong.
You wouldn't use a human skeleton to build a horse, nor would a horse skeleton work for a whale. No plot-structure will serve every writing task, and a body of writing isn't necessarily bad just because it doesn't strictly adhere to your favorite plot-structure.
I would suggest that you plot first and apply structure later. Get the important plot-points out on a sheet of paper, then see which skeleton best fits the resulting story. Once you find a structure that your story can live in, study it closely and follow or ignore its guidelines as your story demands.
Let's say that you are lucky and the story that is growing inside you seems to fit a Hero's Quest plot structure. In a hero's quest, a lone hero leaves a life of normality to find friends, fight enemies, face challenges and finally defeat evil; returning to his normal life with improved wisdom and maybe wealth.
I like to think of the Hero's Quest as a horse skeleton. It has an obvious front where we meet it's character, the kind eyes and a noble long nose.
Climbing aboard near it's shoulders, we are completely divided from our world; literally, our feet can no longer touch the ground.
Lacking both bridle or saddle, we slide down our mount's back, in constant terror that when we run out of horse, we will return violently to the ground. Our quest is to grab the mane and take control of beast before it bucks us off. If we can do that, the horse will take us to whatever destination we desire.
Our struggles to stay on board and avoid the looming calamity, are the middle plot points. These are the opportunities that yield the minor victories and defeats which make the ride interesting. Finding that a shoulder blade provides a hand-hold. Victory! Discovering that sweaty palms can't hold onto horse hide. Defeat!
The adventure is in the details, not in the destination. But those details can take on many forms. By the time your story is finished, your horse might look more like a camel or maybe even like a centipede, with dozens of bumps which offer your hero hope. The important part isn't how many plot points occupy the back of your horse. It is the constancy of the quest and the turmoil of the ride.
What you can learn from a plot structure is subtler than simple plot point counts. Hidden in the structure is valuable advice on how to handle the transitions between points, a.k.a. the joints. In the case of my own use of the Hero's Quest, I have discovered that hopeful climbs should be slow and carefully-arduous. Falls from hard won heights should be fast and chaotic and hope-shattering. Then in the plains between each mountain (or camel hump), your hero should be quick (but only believably quick) to get back to climbing.
It is the cadence of the story that I get from its plot structure. That is how these valuable tools continue to help me write.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/20938. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
All these analytical schemas are interesting, but I don't think you can rely on them for building a story. It is like dissecting a body. An autopsy may tell you what killed them, but it won't bring them back to life.
I think they can be great tools to figure out why a story is not working. But I don't think they are a scaffolding for building a story. If they were, everybody who read a writing book would be turning out best sellers.
I think the way you write a story is this: You invent a set of characters. You spend time with them until you know them and eventually fall in love with them. Then you torture them until either they break or triumph. It is a cruel business, and emotionally exhausting. I think most stories fail because the writer is not patient enough to fall in love, or not cruel enough to torture, or not tireless enough to see it through.
And when it is all done, if the story works, an analysis may reveal that it fits the common pattern, or, if it fails, that it fails to meet the pattern. But the patterns means nothing without the falling in love and the torturing and the patience unto death.
0 comment threads
0 comment threads