How can it get any WORSE?

[Caged Maiden]

I guess to me, when I was writing this OP, I thought about all the ways I could increase the stakes and tension (largely at Helio's prompting). The girl was almost nonexistent in the first draft. She was present but not in immediate peril, simply existing as a ward. But Helio told me to make that situation have more drama, and I have, and I love it. I certainly feel the situation is worse than my original idea, and since the girl and the MC are soon parted, it wouldn't make sense for me to involve her in too much more of the plot, but because of what I've established in this rewrite, as far as their new connection and the MC's new level of protectiveness, the resulting changes will then later make things worse, as well. The girl will be a factor in the ensuing journey, now, too.

I've done several levels of making things worse, but rather than destroy everything and uproot a larger scale of the world than I originally planned, I just took my original ideas and gave them more gravity.

Is there another term for what I'm doing? I'm increasing tension and connectedness in the story by making situations more immediate, more dramatic, and more uncomfortable for the characters. I see how there are different degrees of making something worse, but it all honestly came from the process of asking those questions, "What would make this worse?" and if you follow exactly what Donald Maass says about that question, and the progression of the thought process of making things worse, it all fits comfortably within that scope, despite the seeming factions developing over what actually "makes it worse" and what is just increasing drama and tension. Interesting.

I suppose how we communicate as writers is a fallible experience both with the limited phraseology of writing and within the language we must use.

When I read Writing 21st Century Fiction, it's quite clear that there are a number of questions I ought to be asking myself as I conceptualize scenes and situations. They lead to a worsening effect, but it appears the concept isn't as black and white as I might have thought.

 

[FifthView]

But all that stuff had to be invented by the author in the first place, in order for all the worsenings to happen...

Well obviously, anything the readers read will have been decided by the author before publication....Maybe my phrasing wasn't so great.

But those things you listed, the steady taking-away, are things the reader will experience as a worsening of his earlier condition. The story is built that way, to show that.

But let's say we have an MC who wants to get out of a certain lifestyle, who has a young ward. If we decide before writing to make it worse by making that young ward susceptible to enjoying that bad lifestyle, and we never present to the reader any other alternative, then the reader won't experience it as a worsening of the MC's condition.

Anything in a book may seem new to a reader, new information, on first read. So as those initial conditions are painted for the reader, there might be a corresponding feeling that things are worse than first imagined–although, it might be that early in the book readers will still be forming an initial understanding of the MC's situation. But I don't think that's quite the same as leading a reader to think things are going one way and then something else pops up that worsens the MC's situation.

 

[Heliotrope]

Yes. So you are sort of talking about the invisible tension built in to a story vs. The visible tension that increases as we go.

Ok, so I think that for me, "make it worse" means "make this have more impact".

Instead of hiding the girl and telling me about how worried you are, show me why you are so worried about her.

If the girl is going to be taken later, make it crystal clear how important she is to the mc.

With Indiana Jones the impact of him having the idol taken is intensified by the fact that he had to work so hard to get it.

 

[FifthView]

Yes. So you are sort of talking about the invisible tension built in to a story vs. The visible tension that increases as we go.

I don't think it necessarily increases as we go, meaning a steady increase; it might come and go. It depends on the story, what kinds of wrench you are throwing into the works...when and where you throw it.

Ok, so I think that for me, "make it worse" means "make this have more impact".

I do think that works. I think that can work at many levels, as I think I've said numerous times in this too-long thread. I'm not really trying to refute you, throw your ideas in the trash bin, say that what you are talking about is not a real worsening.

But I'm beginning to feel that any other POV I add to our discussion is read as if I am trying to do those things to your idea, and that's not want I want to do. Mostly, I'm filled with questions: my normal state.

 

[ThinkerX]

I guess to me, when I was writing this OP, I thought about all the ways I could increase the stakes and tension (largely at Helio's prompting). The girl was almost nonexistent in the first draft. She was present but not in immediate peril, simply existing as a ward. But Helio told me to make that situation have more drama, and I have, and I love it. I certainly feel the situation is worse than my original idea, and since the girl and the MC are soon parted, it wouldn't make sense for me to involve her in too much more of the plot, but because of what I've established in this rewrite, as far as their new connection and the MC's new level of protectiveness, the resulting changes will then later make things worse, as well. The girl will be a factor in the ensuing journey, now, too.

Oh heck. Make it worse.

(Good?) girl hanging out with the bad boys. As in really bad. Not to mention twisted. So she gets propositioned by an especially nasty character who does not grasp the meaning of the word 'no' and views torture as a hobby. And make it worse yet - this evil dude is 'in tight' with the bosses. He gets hurt, they take an interest. And your MC has a front row seat to all this.

 

[Chessie]

Since I just lost an hour's worth of writing on my computer because reasons...figured I'd jump with one last example on yes---this too long a thread. (honestly, it's nice having some serious discussions about a subject that hasn't recently been brought up)

For me, "make it worse" doesn't do anything positive as I've stated before. Try/fail cycles is how I see it, and I actually think that they're the same thing. For those of you who've played Skyrim, I'm like Tolfdir in the COW quest "if you allow me to indulge for a moment..."

One of the main reasons why I can't work from an outline is because story changes too much as I draft it. What I DO like to have in place before I start though is an idea of how I can pin characters up against each other. As story takes shape, this gives me a starting point within the confines of plot to worsen the situation for everyone involved. Since I'm redrafting a novel, I'll use it as the example:

The female lead is new to the outlaw life. She's uncomfortable with stealing from people and/or hurting them. However, she's in a relationship with a more experienced brigand, one who's not afraid to use violence to get what he wants.

He, however, has a strong fear of magic. Although he's good at evading the law, magic is outlawed in their land and people are often accused falsely of sorcery (which is punishable by burning). It's an interesting fear for reasons I won't go into, but guess what happens? His woman ends up becoming obsessed with a rare form of magic and is possessed by it.

Due to her inexperience and also his greed, they end up taking a hostage from one of their carriage hold ups. The events that take place as the try/fail cycles end up being nothing more than increasing tension and aggression between the characters. It leads to bad things and eventually violence.

But I while I wrote the first draft, I didn't ask myself how to make things worse. I asked myself how I could challenge these characters with one another. Jealousy is a big factor in this story, and we all know how that feeling makes people do some pretty crazy things. So for me, how can I throw a wrench in isn't what does it. What works in my head is understanding the people I'm writing about and how a natural progression of their feelings can escalate the situation.

It's like any experience in life, really. You start out with a problem, handle it the wrong way, it becomes worse because of cause and effect, you try again but eff it up because you're just guessing at how to fix the problem, problem becomes worse, you learn something and try again but fail due to reasons outside of your control, etc.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

For me, "make it worse" doesn't do anything positive as I've stated before. Try/fail cycles is how I see it, and I actually think that they're the same thing.

Well, if they're the same thing, then try/fail cycles must also do nothing positive for you... Yes, I am running and hiding now, heh heh.

Now to be honest, I don't use "make it worse" or "try/fail cycles" consciously. I just write the stories how they feel they need to be written. But that's boring for discussion's sake.

 

[Chessie]

Well, if they're the same thing, then try/fail cycles must also do nothing positive for you... Yes, I am running and hiding now, heh heh.

LOL Fair enough point you make there, buddy. What I meant is the phrasing. You know like, when you were a kid and someone tried explaining an assignment to you and you were left with a "huh?" But then someone else explained the same assignment in a different way and you said, "ah, okay." That's where I was going with that half-baked response.

 

[Caged Maiden]

HA! Thinker, I can't DO any of that because that's sort of the path my MC gets on...but I've also considered whether that initial thought is TOO WORSE. You know? Like perhaps back in 2008 I made it too much too fast in the WORSE department? I mean, she and her mortal enemy get taken prisoner by a greedy treasure hunter that thinks they stole from him, and they get tortured and interrogated before escaping. So...if I don't set that up as a steady worsening, I'm just throwing things in for shock value. And I'm not sure whether three interrogation scenes is the right kind of build-up I want anymore. Oh rewriting...you're no fun!

 

[Demesnedenoir]

Yes, but the smartass in me can't resist temptation.

LOL Fair enough point you make there, buddy. What I meant is the phrasing. You know like, when you were a kid and someone tried explaining an assignment to you and you were left with a "huh?" But then someone else explained the same assignment in a different way and you said, "ah, okay." That's where I was going with that half-baked response.

 

[Heliotrope]

Yeah, I'm really thinking most of us are arguing semantics, with some strange over exaggeration and extreme thinking thrown in for flavor...

I think it is the "make it worse" phrase that is throwing people for a loop.

I'm coming at it from a plotter's stand point, and others are coming at it from a pantser's stand point, but I think at the end of the day we all do the same thing.

- How can this scene have the most impact possible?
- How can this ending have the most impact possible/
- How can this character grow the most?
- How can I create high stakes?
- How can I show this character's growth in the most effective possible way?

Right? We are all doing those things. So whether we call it try-fail cycles, raising stakes, raising impact, creating challenges, creating complications, reveal and complicate, whatever... it is all the same thing.

Don't make the path too easy for your character. Reader's like drama and intrigue and mystery. Make those things happen. Utilize every possible way of making the story interesting. Use the setting. Use the characters. Use symbols and foreshadowing. Whatever the He!! you have to do to tell a damn good story, with high emotional impact, do it.

Whatever you want to call that is up to you.

I call it "make it worse" (lol).

*Edit: And if one more person makes a comment about how then every story would be about a mass murderer and world wars and man eating alien zombies and suicide I'm going to scream.

 

[Heliotrope]

I do want to add, that even as a plotter, my plots rarely stick to the 'plan' because I often find my first few ideas are never the best ones and I change them to better ones as I go along. So for me, often 'make it worse' or whatever you want to call it, works backwards.

I will use Psychotick's example as my sample:

So if I were reading Psychotick's battle scene as his beta, and I found it was lacking impact, my first reaction would never be "You need to re-write ths scene." Instead, I would probably think for a while, "Why is this scene lacking impact?" "Why am I not getting the emotional rise that I should be getting from a scene like this?" Often times I would look back and check for certain things:

Are the stakes clearly explained?
Are the stakes high enough?
Is the prize of winning high enough?
Was there enough struggle before this point to make a win "feel" like a success?
If the character walked away right now, would it matter? Are they invested enough in the plot that they matter?

Sometimes that means you may need to still take some more things away from the character. It still needs to get worse for them before it can get better... giving the battle scene more impact when they win, or when they lose. Sometimes that means adding in sisters, or wives, or loyal servants that can be kidnapped and killed, to give that character more suffering so that the win feels more powerful...

Etc... then I would try to find out when went wrong and fix it... essentially giving the scene the emotional impact it was lacking.

 

[Sheilawisz]

Yeah, I'm really thinking most of us are arguing semantics, with some strange over exaggeration and extreme thinking thrown in for flavor...

I think it is the "make it worse" phrase that is throwing people for a loop.

I'm coming at it from a plotter's stand point, and others are coming at it from a pantser's stand point, but I think at the end of the day we all do the same thing.

- How can this scene have the most impact possible?
- How can this ending have the most impact possible/
- How can this character grow the most?
- How can I create high stakes?
- How can I show this character's growth in the most effective possible way?

Right? We are all doing those things. So whether we call it try-fail cycles, raising stakes, raising impact, creating challenges, creating complications, reveal and complicate, whatever... it is all the same thing.

Don't make the path too easy for your character. Reader's like drama and intrigue and mystery. Make those things happen. Utilize every possible way of making the story interesting. Use the setting. Use the characters. Use symbols and foreshadowing. Whatever the He!! you have to do to tell a damn good story, with high emotional impact, do it.

Whatever you want to call that is up to you.

I call it "make it worse" (lol).

*Edit: And if one more person makes a comment about how then every story would be about a mass murderer and world wars and man eating alien zombies and suicide I'm going to scream.

Okay, this is going to be a harsh post because I am growing more and more desperate with this discussion. My apologies in advance, in case that I make you go mad with this:

First I have to say that I am not this thing that people call a pantser. It's not like I just sit down and start writing whatever that comes to my mind, that's not how it works. When I start a story it's only because I already have in mind a very good idea of what the story is and what it wants, because we have already clicked and work together.

I do not know every detail of a story when I start it (like I said before in this thread, many times I am surprised by the characters doing unexpected stuff and the story reacting in ways that I did not imagine) but it's not like I just sit down, start pantsing or whatever that people want to call it and then the story works by sheer luck.

At the start of this discussion, the meaning of M.I.W. was very clear and you just began to make it more and more complicated and deeper, broadening the term until now it includes character growth, story deepness and emotional impact in general. I think that you just realized what bad and poor advice it was at the start, and now you want to make it sound broader and greater.

A truly good Fantasy story includes not only tension and great challenges, but also great characters that people will enjoy, love and cheer for as the story grows and develops. It needs not only adrenaline-filled moments but also moments when the reader cries, laughs, cheers, wonders, fears and in general forgets that he or she is actually just reading a story.

We have to transport the readers to our Fantasy world.

All of this comes from inspiration, patience, discipline, talent and a lot of practice in the art of Storytelling. Just like there is no formula for writing the most beautiful music in the world, there is no formula for somehow creating great stories simply by following a series of very calculated and scientific steps.

I never, ever even think of those things that you listed while I am writing a story. I never ask myself any of those How can this? and How can I? questions because I just let the story flow, and whenever that I am doing something wrong I just feel Something is not alright here and do not go any further until it has been done well.

We are not supposed to make a path for the characters, they are supposed to make their own path and we tell it. In case that you need to make everything well designed and planned it means that you do not have a good enough story with you, and having a good story to tell is the most important ingredient in what we do.

And yeah, I'll say it again: Following M.I.W. as it was described at the start of this discussion has a very serious potential for derailing a story pretty bad and creating a mess instead of something good.

I am being so harsh with this only because I fear people will make things harder for them and for their stories, and all because of approaching our craft as science instead of art.

I know that many people here hate what I am saying, and that's okay, take me as crazy if you want. No harsh feelings, this is nothing personal between you and me.

 

[Miskatonic]

Yeah I think we can say that worse doesn't equate to "how much more misery can I visit upon my character(s)".

It's a question that can gauge whether you have not gone far enough or have gone too far.

 

[ThinkerX]

Not so much

'making it worse'

as

'keeping the reader interested.'

 

[Penpilot]

And yeah, I'll say it again: Following M.I.W. as it was described at the start of this discussion has a very serious potential for derailing a story pretty bad and creating a mess instead of something good.

All writing advice used or interpreted incorrectly has the potential to not only ruin stories and create messes, it can ruin your ability to write. I speak from personal experience on this. But that doesn't mean one should ignore the potential of using a particular piece of advice.

I've said this before. Writing adivce is a tool, and like all tools, it can build you a house or tear one down. It's the skill of the weilder that determins if hammer strikes the nail's head or the thumb. And how does one become more skilled with a hammer? Probably by hitting a fair share of thumbs along the way.

But no matter how skilled you get, there's still the risk of striking a thumb, but does that mean we should stop using hammers? Ever?

I am being so harsh with this only because I fear people will make things harder for them and for their stories, and all because of approaching our craft as science instead of art.

There's an art and a science to writing. To me, the science of writing is the craft, and craft is the tools in your toolbox and your ablity to use them.

Yes, learning to use tools can be hard and make things seem harder to do.

But to me, it's like athletics, many just want to go out and play the game. It's simple just go out run, kick, jump, hit, skate, or throw. But if one wants to be a professional althlete, one has to learn about technique and understand the mechanics of what they want to do with their bodies. They have to know nutrition, and how to build their bodies to perform. This inaddition to just practicing the game.

That's the science of it. The art builds off the science and is reflected in an athete's performance, the way the read game situations and how they react.

So the science of writing lies in the tools. The art lies in how we use them.

And like any tool, there will be favorites in the toolbox, there will be ones that never get touched, and there will be ones that never even make it into the toolbox. Where a tool ends up is personal taste, and it's not one tool fits all. It's whatever tool works for you.


Edit: I remember an episode of Writing Excuses where Mary Robinette Kowal talked about her expereince with writing a story on a deadline. The jist of it was inspiration failed so she had to fall back on craft to make the story good. In essence the art failed her so she fell back on science, and if memory serves the story came out well.

 

[psychotick]

Hi,

And for me the problem is that with all these pieces of advice they come across as rules. Especially to those new to the writing game. Just put yourselves back in the shoes when you were writing your first book, and people came up to you and said - kill the passive voice, get rid of the purple prose, shorter, more impacting sentences, no run ons, and all the rest of this junk.

Yes all of this can be useful advice. But it can also be a disaster in the making. And newby writers sit there and just lap it up as if it was the bible of writing. As if ther was some cookie cutter recipe for making a perfect book. They don't understand that it all has to come back to their judgement. It's their work.

To my mind the most important thing a newby writer can do is to develop his or her voice. To become stronger in his or her artistic expression. To be able to say - well this is me and this is my story. Only when they've reached that stage will they be able to say - well thanks - that's intersting advice, but it's not the book I'm writing, the story I'm telling, the characters I'm portraying. It's all about judgement - knowing which advice to accept, where and when, and which to ignore.

At the end of the day as a writer you want to be able to hold your book in your hand and say - this is my book! It's not some mass produced, politically massaged work of fiction determined by agents, editors, publishers and well meaning fellow members of writing fora which has little or no relation to what I wrote or even what I wanted to write. But that's what we keep seeing. New authors writing clones of other books, instead of writing their own books.

Look assume you all get agents and publishers and the interviews start and someone asks you - who do you write like? The answer you want to be able to give is - I write like me. I don't care if it's commercial, if it meets modern expectations of what a book should be like, if it follows the ten million rules that people keep setting out. It's my book, my vision. No one else's.

Cheers, Greg.

 

[Russ]

Hi,

And for me the problem is that with all these pieces of advice they come across as rules. Especially to those new to the writing game. Just put yourselves back in the shoes when you were writing your first book, and people came up to you and said - kill the passive voice, get rid of the purple prose, shorter, more impacting sentences, no run ons, and all the rest of this junk.

Yes all of this can be useful advice. But it can also be a disaster in the making. And newby writers sit there and just lap it up as if it was the bible of writing. As if ther was some cookie cutter recipe for making a perfect book. They don't understand that it all has to come back to their judgement. It's their work.

To my mind the most important thing a newby writer can do is to develop his or her voice. To become stronger in his or her artistic expression. To be able to say - well this is me and this is my story. Only when they've reached that stage will they be able to say - well thanks - that's intersting advice, but it's not the book I'm writing, the story I'm telling, the characters I'm portraying. It's all about judgement - knowing which advice to accept, where and when, and which to ignore.

At the end of the day as a writer you want to be able to hold your book in your hand and say - this is my book! It's not some mass produced, politically massaged work of fiction determined by agents, editors, publishers and well meaning fellow members of writing fora which has little or no relation to what I wrote or even what I wanted to write. But that's what we keep seeing. New authors writing clones of other books, instead of writing their own books.

Look assume you all get agents and publishers and the interviews start and someone asks you - who do you write like? The answer you want to be able to give is - I write like me. I don't care if it's commercial, if it meets modern expectations of what a book should be like, if it follows the ten million rules that people keep setting out. It's my book, my vision. No one else's.

Cheers, Greg.

This is one end of the spectrum on how one should approach writing and I understand why some people hold this view, but I don't agree with it.

All of the really creative people I know who are successful teachers that there is a time to ignore the "rules" of writing and that time is when you 1) understand them and 2) then can make a well reasoned decision to ignore them. What leads to freedom to be original in a skilled endevour is mastery of the basics. Your advice actually strikes me as backwards to how people learn and develop.

I also think this "fear" assumes newbies are idiots and will apply the rules blindly. I don't think most people are that dumb and I think your "fear" underestimates the ability of even a new writer to use their brain to discriminate. I am not a carpenter but even I know you don't but a small screw in with a sledgehammer.

It also depends upon what your goals are and how you view writing as an endevour. If you write for yourself than write any way you want. If you write for an audience than you must take your audience into consideration and what the "rules" or writing do is give you time tested tools to communicate your story to your audience more effectively, which is a good thing. In most cases the rules enhance your ability to communicate your story from the audience rather than take away from it. Not having a command of the "rules" means having to re-invent everything from scratch or unthinking imitation. How practical is that?

I do a lot of public speaking and there are rules about how to be an effective public speaker. The process works well when I decide what I want to convey to the audience and then utilize the rules to help me decide how to get that message across. Writing is the same. And if I give a speech to say a group of lawyers and several of them say to you "I think your message would have been clearer if you organized your material this way" or "it might have been more effective if you used this expression instead of X", do you simply ignore them or try to learn something from or about your audience so you can communicate better.

The "rules" can also sell your writing if commercial success is one of your goals.

If we follow your route we may as well shut down several significant parts of this forum.

 

[FifthView]

Yeah I think we can say that worse doesn't equate to "how much more misery can I visit upon my character(s)".

It's a question that can gauge whether you have not gone far enough or have gone too far.

Might as well interject with something bubbling around in my mind since this discussion began. I'm adding this outside any ongoing disputes about this or that; it's just an observation.

Often what is added or changed to "make it worse" is not itself a bad thing, a bad event.

So let's say we have an MC who is a minor noble aged 24. Perhaps he has always had feelings for the king's youngest daughter but, because of the difference in station, has never pursued a romantic relationship with her, never even slyly hinted. His father finds a suitable match for him, an arranged marriage with another minor noble's young daughter, who is attractive, intelligent, and so forth. Our MC suddenly finds his mind open to that possibility, so he starts courting this fiancée. After a month or so, he learns that the king's youngest daughter has always fancied him–she now starts pursuing him for a romantic relationship. This is not a bad thing; but it might make his position "worse."

Perhaps that example will be written off as a complication rather than a worsening.

In my earlier example in this thread, I had a young orphan trying to protect his young twin sisters in a war-torn city. In a later comment, I added also the possibility that I would make him come from a religious faith that is peaceful, his parents' religion. (Thinking, go deeper. His parents have been killed, he's now the sole guardian of his sisters, he's young, so why wouldn't he look to the only role models he has had?) Given his predicament–in the middle of a war, infected with a parasite that sometimes causes him to do reckless things like killing for no reason–I thought that adding that religious faith would complicate things, make his life worse, more conflict-riddled. But having such a faith is not itself a bad thing under other circumstances (interjecting here to say I don't want to debate religious faith.)

And yes, I suppose that in either of the two examples above, the MC might suffer more. But suffering from conflicting desires or because there is a conflict between personal beliefs and the exterior reality is not necessarily the same type of suffering experienced when truly bad things happen.

 

[Russ]

The definition of MIW, to my mind, is fairly simple:

It is a change in circumstances that makes it more difficult for the MC to achieve a goal.