Lack is the hardest, IMO, Mystery is hard to do well (without pulling that proverbial wool), and Conflict's probably the easiest (external, that is - internal kind of relates back to Lack).
One of the easiest ways to create external conflict is between characters. I hate you is really easy, but a bit overdramatic most of the time and will wear thin ultra-fast without justification. More believable character conflict will occur on an internalization level with subtlety in dialogue, but to really inject truth into fiction (particularly in 1st POV), you can create conflict through misinterpretation of intention.
You know what your characters mean when they act/say something, but the opposing character does not. Sometimes it's hard to separate, and sometimes you might not want to travel down that path if you've got a bunch of other things blowing up, but layering in misinterpretation of intention can create secondary conflicts that add dimensionality to story and characters (e.g., friends aren't always friends), and, in some instances, can juice up the mystery (e.g., if MC interprets character Friend's actions in a certain way, but reader realizes through story development that there's more going on, then author
When I'm reading a book and I come across conflict through misinterpretation it really gets me every time. I get glued to the story even more, if not just from the sheer annoyance that I have with the characters for not communicating properly. I turn the pages even faster, hoping the characters will clarify themselves and save themselves from the murky waters of misinterpretation.
ReplyDeleteMy age is showing: I totally got the JR references.
ReplyDeleteI like complicated characters and complicated plots, as long as there is a way to follow the progression and I can see that everything WILL eventually tie itself together. I don't like it when the tie up is in the form of a character summarizing how everything fits though.
Seriously gotta show me through the ongoing story.
.......dhole
You know what your characters mean when they act/say something, but the opposing character does not. Sometimes it's hard to separate, and sometimes you might not want to travel down that path if you've got a bunch of other things blowing up, but layering in misinterpretation of intention can create secondary conflicts that add dimensionality to story and characters.
ReplyDeleteGreat advice! I didn't know I was unconsciously doing this "knowledge-gap" thing till I read this post :)
Consider taking part in the The Rule of Three Blogfest ?
It is a month-long shared-world fiction extravaganza in October, one in which I would Love to see one of your stories..because its rules demand escalating conflict and limited characters in a defined world...
I'm with Donna -- you're showing our age! Worse yet, I live in Dallas near Southfork.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I dislike misinterpreted conflict. It frustrates me because it usually comes from lack of proper communication, or lying. The sort of conflict I mean is the date-movie conflict, where the guy loves the girl but won't tell her, and so forth.
My favorite conflict is internal. That's the one we most often deal with.
Mystery I don't think is that hard. I like the dangle-feed-dangle approach, whereby the author dangles a mysterious grape, and soon thereafter feeds it to the reader, only to dangle a second, juicier grape, soon to be gobbled and followed by another juicy, succulent orb of ripened sweetness!
Dangle-feed-dangle.
I think what gets most mystery writers is they only have one big grape, and they dangle it for 350pp. Don't do that. Satisfy the reader with each chapter and open new questions.
I'll confess I don't understand the "lack" point. I suppose that means consequences of the conflict.
- Eric
Eric, definitely not into date-movie conflict either... It's not necessarily so much the won't tell or lying (that's kind of wool-pulling, IMO), but the idea that people interpret things differently (the classic example of man says to wife: "you look fine" wife thinks: "you think I'm fat.")... it's difficult to do, but can add depth to the characters (but, yeah, definitely don't make them annoying date-movie types who are 2S2L, where L = love instead of live and S can stand for Stupid or Stilted)
ReplyDeleteAnd I think you nailed why I consider mystery hard. One big mystery can be okay if you feed smaller ones in there (or escalate the clues, or whatever), but often it's just a standalone with intermediate interruptions to distract. And my problem with many mysteries stems from the fact that the authors deliberately withhold information the characters should know.
Lack's definitely more ambiguous, but can be a consequence of the conflict or an originator. For example, your MC can be a troubled teen who grew up without a father. Now, to prove himself a man, he joins a gang, gets into trouble, etc., etc. An adult figure steps into his life; they butt heads initially, but eventually it becomes a Lifetime movie of the week and boy gets a father figure. Not the greatest example (Friday Night Lights does it much better), but lack tends to explore the emotional holes and consequences - external and internal. Lack's hard to pull off well by itself (and doesn't necessarily need resolution), but it tends to be a component within many stories.
Dude, after my post today, my good friend Paul Joseph suggested I make sure I was following your blog. Which is weird, because I totally recognize your avatar.
ReplyDeleteBut apparently I wasn't following you, which sucks, but at least I've remedied it now.
Looking forward to getting to know you better!
Matt, thanks, and ditto on all parts, especially the avatar :) -- lightsaber Yoda, yep... that guy's everywhere.
ReplyDelete