Influence, manipulate, control?

[Svrtnsse]

In the thread about tension the discussion veered off into whether or how much it's possible to control the emotions of the reader. This is a topic big enough to be worthy of a thread on its own I think, so here goes.

My thinking is that it's impossible to control the emotions of any given reader with any kind of accuracy. However, I believe it's possible to influence readers that are susceptible to my kind of storytelling, and to the kind of stories I'm telling.

A while back I wrote this article: Writing and the Power of Association
It's focused mainly on descriptions and imagery, but it also talks a bit about negatively or positively charged imagery.

We can't control or predict how others associate, but we also can't prevent anyone from having associations to what we write.

 

[Peat]

Musing on this question at work and my thoughts slipped immediately to the old one about half of all money spent on advertising being wasted, with the problem being nobody knows which half it is.

Because - on gut instinct I feel like it can be done with at least some degree of accuracy. If we can't, why do we talk about tearjerkers, why do we tend to name the same authors and scenes for ones that make us sad, or same authors for ones that make us laugh? But its clearly not a precise art.

 

[CupofJoe]

In general terms I think we can gauge a reader's likely reaction. A good writer [and even a bad one] can write to make us feel happy, sad, anxious or whatever. And in the main that will be the result. But as is said we can't control or predict how a specific reader will react at a given time.

 

[Devor]

I think the bigger question here is, how accurate are your responses as a writer when compared with the responses of readers? It's hard to see your writing in a clear light and to figure out if your signals are getting through.

 

[Michael K. Eidson]

I think the bigger question here is, how accurate are your responses as a writer when compared with the responses of readers? It's hard to see your writing in a clear light and to figure out if your signals are getting through.

I think this too. Perhaps the more experienced you become as a writer, the better you are at gauging how others will react to your work, but even then, you'll probably still want to have beta readers.

 

[Penpilot]

I think the bigger question here is, how accurate are your responses as a writer when compared with the responses of readers? It's hard to see your writing in a clear light and to figure out if your signals are getting through.

I think the more skillful the writer, the more closely those two things become. A writer can never achieve 100% simpatico with every reader, but at the very least they can convey a clear understanding of what they're trying to do even if the reader isn't moved by it.

 

[pmmg]

I am pretty sure I could write somethings and get a predictable emotional response or two from a reader. I think this question is falling into that realm where someone can always find an exception who did not have the intended reaction, and then extrapolate that to this is not possible, but I am not after every reader, I am just after many of them. I think can be achieved for many of them, if that is the goal.

 

[Michael K. Eidson]

I am pretty sure I could write somethings and get a predictable emotional response or two from a reader. I think this question is falling into that realm where someone can always find an exception who did not have the intended reaction, and then extrapolate that to this is not possible, but I am not after every reader, I am just after many of them. I think can be achieved for many of them, if that is the goal.

As far as goals, swaying most of your readers to have a desired emotional response is probably good enough, but not at all the same as someone making the blanket statement writers can control the emotions of their readers, which was the statement, I believe, that was objected to in the other thread.

 

[Devor]

I think people forget we have.... an audience.

GRRM talked about how sometimes people hate his books because their lives are hard and they want to read something peaceful and escapist, and he said, "Sure, nothing wrong with that, but my books probably aren't for you."

There's a point where you write to manipulate a reader's emotions, and there's also a point where, if that reader's emotions don't want to play along, then your work just might not be for them.

The thing is, writers can manipulate a reader, in part, because readers want them to. Much of the time that's the whole point of reading a story. And if a reader just doesn't want to go there with you, that's alright, they can find something else.

 

[pmmg]

As far as goals, swaying most of your readers to have a desired emotional response is probably good enough, but not at all the same as someone making the blanket statement writers can control the emotions of their readers, which was the statement, I believe, that was objected to in the other thread.

In fairness, I think that whole conversation started with some members talking about producing story elements that would allow the reader to infer the emotions going on on set, it did not become about control until someone else said that one could not control how a reader will perceive things.

I feel I might argue that that very word 'control' has done just that. I think a lot of this conversation is just a reaction to that word.

Part of that conversation was also that it was futile to even make the effort. I had to disagree, which I did. I think the effort is worthwhile, and in fact kind of required, else why even bother? If I am not writing to affect people or make my story real in their heads, than what I am I trying to do?

I suppose I choose to make the effort. Some will be effected, some wont. Oh well. Did everyone cry at the end of Old Yeller? No, but a great many did. Was that what the author wanted...I bet it was. So, it seems he had some success.

I believe somethings can be controlled, and occasionally, its an emotional response. Now, I am just after a reader, and I know that even if I become a best seller, the vast majority of people will never read my book. And many who read it, will put it down and say it was complete tripe or something worse. I am just after a few, and if myself, and they, can enjoy an adventure and a type of experience together, then awesome. And if they come to me somewhere along the way , and say “ I really loved your work and I cried so hard when old Yeller died” I might just feel like I had a little bit of control over that.

A few tears today, the whole world tomorrow! Muhaha ...

 

[Michael K. Eidson]

...it did not become about control until someone else said that one could not control how a reader will perceive things.

I feel I might argue that that very word 'control' has done just that. I think a lot of this conversation is just a reaction to that word.

You might be correct on that. I don't want to go look at the pertinent posts in that thread now. I think the word 'control' is a bit strong, and if people had originally chosen different language, we wouldn't be having this discussion. I would readily agree that authors have influence on readers. Persuasion is very much a part of the reader/writer experience. If that were not true, we'd have far fewer people writing stories or posting on forums.

 

[Nimue]

*sigh* Here’s the exchange you’re referring to, MKE:

How do you make sure a reader feels the tension in a scene?

So you have this setup of change or intra-character friction, something more subtle than imminent violence, there are plenty of implications...but how do you bring them to light, and make sure that tension continues past the end of a scene?

This is how I try to manipulate an emotional response, both on the larger scale of an entire novel, and in the small, scene by scene scale. Spoon feed little bits of info to hopefully create one dramatic emotion.

None of us can control how readers perceive things. Aiming to try is pointless.

Note how no one believes you can control the reader’s reactions? Hello says she tries to hopefully elicit an emotion, I said “make sure” in passing, but in context, what I was asking about was conveying tension at a scene level. Incidentally, no one really answered that question...

Control vs influence produced plenty of debate, but like other discussions about what a writer can or can’t do, is or isn’t doing, I find it less real than a discussion of one’s actual, personal process. Often whatever “side” we champion is more reaction than conviction. Been there, argued that.

If you set any of our writing down next to each other, I don’t believe you’d find vast differences. We all plan some and improvise some; we all think about our readers at some point and only about ourselves at others; we all write within the conventions of what inspired us and with the originality of our desires. Tell me about your experience, not your stance.

 

[Svrtnsse]

I knew there was a point where it all went astray and we began talking past each other, but I couldn't find it myself

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

How do you make sure a reader feels the tension in a scene?

Nimue, you asked for the actual process. Hopefully, that question can keep us clear of semantic debates. I'll give you my process. It may be pertinent to myself alone here, but it's important to me because I believe tension (of some type) should be on every page.

I plan every scene as if its a story of its own. As with a lot of my processes, I've developed a worksheet for scene planning. It's a conglomeration of scene building principles from several sources.

A well-constructed scene requires five components. I list them out like this:

Conflict - Identify the main conflict in this scene.

Action - What action takes place in this scene?

Surprise - What in this scene surprises the character and/or the reader? (The surprise may be big or little.)

Turn - What changes in this scene? (The change may be little, like a change in outlook or mood, or a change of location. The change may be major, like a plot reveal or the occurrence of a major event.)

Sensory Detail - List the sensory detail you might use to describe characters, setting, and action.

Next in the worksheet, I consider Turning Points. In every scene I write, there should be an Outer Turning Point and an Inner Turning Point.
I write them out.

Outer Turning Point - What is the precise moment when the focal character's circumstances change?

Inner Turning Point - The way in which what's happened is changing the focal character's self-understanding.

Lastly, for hugely important scenes, those with big changes to character or plot, I conduct a brief character interview. The idea here is to ensure I've written in change, which I believe is essential to tension: the inner changes, the outer changes, and what they mean to the character.

At the scene beginning -
How do you see yourself right now?

Are you confident you'll get what you want?

How do you think others perceive you?

Is this the real you, or the fake you?

What is your emotional state?

At scene end -
Who are you now?

How do others perceive you?

Are you more confident/certain now, or less?

What have you discovered that you didn't know about yourself?

Lastly, a solid scene scene has its own arc. There's a beginning, middle, and end. Moving quickly from the end of one arc to the beginning of the next can move the story along in a satisfying manner for the reader. I do not utilize consideration scenes, where my characters mull over what happened and think about what to do next. In my opinion, those scenes bore. They're low on tension because it's a duplication of what the reader already knows, so I avoid them. There are exceptions, of course, but in my opinion they're rare.

 

[Michael K. Eidson]

*sigh* Here’s the exchange you’re referring to, MKE:



Note how no one believes you can control the reader’s reactions? Hello says she tries to hopefully elicit an emotion, I said “make sure” in passing, but in context, what I was asking about was conveying tension at a scene level. Incidentally, no one really answered that question...

Control vs influence produced plenty of debate, but like other discussions about what a writer can or can’t do, is or isn’t doing, I find it less real than a discussion of one’s actual, personal process. Often whatever “side” we champion is more reaction than conviction. Been there, argued that.

If you set any of our writing down next to each other, I don’t believe you’d find vast differences. We all plan some and improvise some; we all think about our readers at some point and only about ourselves at others; we all write within the conventions of what inspired us and with the originality of our desires. Tell me about your experience, not your stance.

Thanks for setting the record straight, Nimue, but why are my eyes burning now?

For my part, I will try not to get sidetracked by the semantics in this discussion, since that tree has been pummeled to a stump. If someone says "control" or "manipulate" in this thread, I will take it to mean "influence" and go on.

So...what are we actually discussing in this thread now???

 

[Nimue]

Ah yes, this is what’s interesting to me. Ironically, this is now off-topic for this thread—Svrt, I hope you don’t mind? I do want to dive into process, and particulars...

I like the focus on change and arc. I think I can add that to “is the character being challenged in this scene?” as a useful diagnostic tool. “Is the character changing in this scene? Are their circumstances, is their perspective changing?” Worksheets could be very useful, as I’m having so much trouble writing a scene from scratch the way I want it to feel and play out... My question for you is—and forgive me if you answered this before, talking about worksheets is ringing a bell—where does this fall into the timeline of your process? Is it something primarily for revision, is it in the planning stage, do you keep these questions at the front of your mind while drafting?

A little bit of a digression, but you mentioned in there not using “consideration scenes, where characters mull over what’s happened”. I may be wrong, but this seems to me a misapprehension of the scene-sequel format. No one’s really suggesting a sequel have nothing happen but repetition, but rather that it’s a good place to make clear character reaction, have them make choices and yes, pay off some tension with catharsis. As I have jotted in my notes, the arc I’ve read in many places is
Goal > Conflict > Disaster/Outcome/Yes-But/No-And > Reaction > Dilemma > Decision, where the first half of that is Scene and the second half Sequel. While you say you don’t use this, I can’t help but notice your format of Outer Turning Point and Inner Turning Point also map onto Scene and Sequel. Doesn’t one largely follow the other? Circumstances change, action happens, and then the character changes, reaction happens. Not that it needs to be a separate chunk of pages, after its own scene break—a sequel can be a few lines, as is often mentioned.

Pardon the assessment of your process—I find the way that writing advice attempts to name and dissect inherent storytelling concepts fascinating, and live in hope as usual that a different angle might bring some small epiphany...

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

Ironically, this is now off-topic for this thread—

I think we're still on topic. The idea is influencing readers & maintaining tension is certainly a way to do so.

My question for you is...where does this fall into the timeline of your process? Is it something primarily for revision, is it in the planning stage, do you keep these questions at the front of your mind while drafting?

The short answer is all three.

There are times when I just sit and write a scene with only a scant outline of what will happen. In those cases, during revision I'd apply the worksheet, and especially if something just isn't working for me or beta readers.

Currently though, and during the period of this worksheet's creation, I'm in the midst of a rewrite. Some of that is a revision, but most of it falls under the category "new draft", if you will. Many characters, plots, settings, etc. didn't exist in the first draft.

More often than not, I'm filling this worksheet out, with as much detail as I can stand, based off a scene or chapter outline, before I start the actual writing.

A little bit of a digression, but you mentioned in there not using “consideration scenes, where characters mull over what’s happened”. I may be wrong, but this seems to me a misapprehension of the scene-sequel format. No one’s really suggesting a sequel have nothing happen but repetition, but rather that it’s a good place to make clear character reaction, have them make choices and yes, pay off some tension with catharsis.

Sorry for the confusion.

I meant specifically scenes of low tension, where there is little happening other than the character thinking about what's happened to them. There's no action. There's no change. I've been running a live crit group of about 15-20 writers for 4 years running now & I see these types of scenes a lot, where the MC takes a respite, drinking a cup of coffee and ruminating over what just happened to them.

As an aside, I don't really adhere to the scene>sequel format, at least not consciously, though I do see the similarities regarding turning points. But yes, outer change and inner change should follow one another. The order could go either way. I employ them on the worksheet so I don't miss those moments of change in every single scene. Otherwise, I feel like I'm not getting the most out of the scene. The turning points also force me to think a bit deeper sometimes, so it can be effective in brainstorming.

I should also point out the worksheet also employs a mini-outline that I fill in with the basic arc. Beginning, middle, end. That's mainly for reference though as the chapter/scene outline has greater detail.

Pardon the assessment of your process—I find the way that writing advice attempts to name and dissect inherent storytelling concepts fascinating, and live in hope as usual that a different angle might bring some small epiphany...

No pardon necessary. I enjoy craft discussions & I've learned a lot from them.

 

[Steerpike]

I still think it is largely semantic--the word choice, I mean. The first dictionary I pulled up online listed "control" as a synonym of "influence." I don't think they're exactly synonymous, but I think influence is a form of control. Merriam-Webster's has one definition of influence as follows:

"a : the act or power of producing an effect without apparent exertion of force or direct exercise of command." (emphasis added.)

When you influence a reader, you're exercising a form of control. However, you're doing it without it being obvious that you're exercising control, and that is important in writing. Readers don't want to feel that they're being manipulated or controlled, despite the fact the works of fiction do precisely that.

I do think you can predict how the vast majority will react to certain aspects of a work, at least in a general sense. There are always outliers, but if a character is torturing kittens its safe to say most will react negatively.

 

[Heliotrope]

So I do like scene/sequel. I get what Tim is doing, and I find I get a similar type of structure from scene sequel. I don't typically think of it while I'm drafting (I'm going to use that word instead of "writing" because it is a more accurate description of what I'm doing.)

Instead, I will draft and draft and draft and once I have a basic sort of outline I think works (or doesn't) then I will go scene by scene, or chapter by chapter and apply scene/sequel.

I go through and ask:

Is the goal explicitly shown early on? (This is to make sure the character is active in the scene, not sitting around letting stuff happen to them. If the character is not active in the scene then I will redraft it to make sure they are.

For example, in an early draft I had a character "taken along" by some other characters so they could show her what was happening at the museum. I found her too passive. The reader was being taken for a ride. In a later draft I changed it so that the other characters had unfinished business to do at the museum and refused to take her, thinking she would be in the way. But, instead of hanging back, she followed them, to see for herself what was going on. They caught her, but by then it was too late and she had to go with them. It was a simple change, but a change that gave her a more active role in the scene... . thus increasing the tension.)

Is there real conflict? For me, conflict means something getting in the way of the goal. With the goal of "follow these guys to see what is going on, but don't get caught" then getting caught was a conflict.... but there were a few more conflicts after that.

Does it end in disaster? There is such a hate on for cliff hangers on this site, and I don't know why? It is a good idea to end with your character always "falling forward". I think it was Skip who put it in those terms once and I just loved it. The goal does NOT go as planned. This does not need to be a physical disaster. It could just be a new twist. New information. Something that makes the task seem so much more impossible.

This first part of the scene is usually pretty fast paced, but then things slow down because... well, now what?

This is the emotional stuff.

Reaction: Does it feel authentic?

Dilemma: This needs to be internal. Inner conflict. What am I going to do? If I do this... then this bad thing will happen. But if I make the other choice, than that bad thing will happen. Stuck between a rock and a hard place INTERNALLY.

Decision: Is never easy. It can't be an easy choice. but they make a choice and that leads to....

Next Scene.

New Goal....

repeat. repeat. repeat.

For me, having an active character is a HUGE part of reader investment and tension. Having a character that leads the plot, where the plot is based on their inner conflict, which leads to choices, which leads to moving plot forward is what creates emotional investment and tension.
:

 

[skip.knox]

I shall dive in and muddy the waters further, because I see two levels here. One is at the level of a scene, or even an accumulation of scenes, where the writer really is going for something specific--horror, comedy, whatever. At that level, I really do think there is something specific to aim for, and we can realistically say the author has succeeded or not depending on the general consensus of the readership (that will happen at every level, from beta readers to the vast buying public). If I write a scene intended to be scary, and all my readers bust a gut laughing, then I've failed.

The second level, though, is for the book as a whole--what is sometimes called theme or message. That level is very much chancier. That's where, often, readers will "see" things in the book the author did not. At this level I don't think there's such a thing as failure, unless all my readers file it under Did Not Finish.

The third level (I misled you; hah! surprise!) is what I guess I'll call personal. Writers write for all sorts of reasons. Sometimes, they just have a story that needs to get out. Maybe they have an intended message, but really it's more that they have something to say, something they feel needs saying. Here I think of something like A Prayer for Owen Meany. That book has some strong religious themes in it, but Updike was not intending it as polemic. It was more an exploration. But there, you see? That's my reaction to the book. I know others who put the book down because there was "too much religion" in it. I don't think Updike cares much one way or the other. He had something to say and he said it.

Related--not a fourth level!--are those who write a book as a kind of experiment. I'm going to tell a rip-roaring adventure. I'm going to try my hand at mystery. That sort of thing. For the writer, it's almost an exercise (Ray Bradbury famously wrote Fahrenheit 451 in nine days, as an experiment--to write a novel as he would a short story). This sort of thing isn't without intended meaning, but the meaning is secondary, almost unavoidable (who would want to write a boring adventure?).

So, I can see method, technique, operating at that first level. Even at the second--that's where we pay attention to setting, mood, word choice across the whole of the novel, and worry over arcs. But at the third, the squishiest, where the work is most open to interpretation by the reader, the best we can do is do our best, click Submit, and hope.