Positive Transformation in the Arc of a Story
I'm writing a novel about an obsessive character who is bothering the people around him but just will not or cannot accept that a change must come.
When is the most effective time (or if not - the normally accepted time) in the arc of a story to forcibly kill off the ego of the character (in the first third, second or last third part of the tale) in order for a phoenix type resurrection of the character as a more balanced person to occur?
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/36435. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
2 answers
It depends. How much do you have to tell about the MC after he undergoes this transformation? Is this the main conflict of your story, or merely something that impedes the MC from dealing with the main conflict?
Basically, smooth sailing is boring. If there's more conflict for your character after this arc has been addressed, you can have the "transformation" early. If that's the main conflict, then after the "transformation", you've only got the resolution, so perforce it would have to be late. If the "transformation" itself is a lengthy process with complications, you can have it early.
0 comment threads
Generally, the conflict is resolved in the third act. Acts end with (effectively for the story and characters) an irrevocable something, a decision, an act taken, words spoken, event transpiring, etc.
That is not to say this must be the final sentence of a chapter, there can be ramifications or consequences described, but that is the end of the act.
The end of the LAST Act (ACT III in the 3-act structure, ACT IV in Freytag's four act structure, ACT V in Shakespeare's 5 act structure, etc) is the resolution of the story.
In your story, the "phoenix rising" sounds like the final bit of ACT III, generally the last 5% of the total story length. ACT II would likely end with the irrevocable event that instigates this "killing off" of the ego, and thus leads into ACT III. ACT III would begin with the consequences, what to do next, and the denouement would be the re-assembly of the ego, accomplished in the last 5%, leaving enough room to show the reader the irrevocably changed person going forward.
Although many people write their stories to fit the 3-act structure religiously, I don't recommend that. They are derived from actual highly successful novels and stories, and as such are descriptive statistics: The % are, on average, how highly successful stories happen to be plotted.
But averages don't tell us everything; as the aphorism goes: Freeze one hand in a bucket 35F water, and the other in a bucket of 160F water, and on average you're not uncomfortable.
As descriptive statistics, you can use them to see when you are straying terribly far from the norm; more than 10% perhaps is either stretching the reader's patience (boring them) or rushing the tale too much (confusing them). And of course good books can range from 60,000 words to 700,000 words (but the reader has an idea of what to expect from the # pages or heft of the book).
0 comment threads
0 comment threads