Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/24168
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/24168
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

The starting point here has to be to ask yourself whether you are writing a novel or a polemic. If your story is just an excuse to make an argument against some form of discrimination, then you are going to be stuck trying to write both sides of a debate where you are on one side and trying to set it up to win. It's not that that can't sell, as long as your audience feels the same way you do about the issue. People love books that confirm their opinions. But you also need a victim for them to root for. Save the victim, stand them in the front row of the debate, and have you hero make the speech your audience wants to hear.

On the other hand, if you actually want to write about politicians and how they behave, that is something altogether different because politicians don't actually debate, they posture. It is not ever about proving a point by argument, it is always about positioning yourself to win votes and casting your opponent in a bad light. Politicians never answer the question they are asked and they never address the points their opponents make. They talk past each other and over each other. The key to making that sort of a scene work it to write it like a prize fight. Each one is looking for an opening, for a way to sting, for a way to grandstand. The arguments themselves are secondary at best. There are mere weapons in the war. What makes or breaks the scene is not the arguments but how they are used tactically in the war for votes. Make every line a blow and let the battle go back and forth, and you will have a compelling scene.

Original score: 4