Event vs. Emotions: A Plot vs. Character Sequel

[Mindfire]

A spin-off from the "plot vs. character" thread. It occurred to me that some weirdos, like myself, get the same kind of thrill from a good plot as one might from watching dominoes fall, seeing a complex Rube Goldberg machine in action, or taking apart a complex device. Watching all the pieces fall into place, seeing how everything is interconnected and how the events unfold is a significant part of the attraction, if not the attraction itself. Other readers are more engrossed by the personal experiences present in the story, the emotional highs and lows. Essentially, "Events" vs "Emotions". All things equal, where do you lean? And what's the right balance to have between them? I fully expect myself to be in the minority, but I'm interested to hear other opinions.

To clarify: Events/Emotions and Plot/Character may be similar, but they are distinct. Try thinking of them as separate but intersecting axes on a coordinate system, just like Good/Evil and Lawful/Chaotic in the classic alignment system.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

[*]Events and Emotions, like Character and Plot, are intertwined but still unique. In their rawest possible forms "Event" would be something happening without any personal context whatsoever, like a date on a timeline, while "Emotion" would be feelings that aren't particularly relevant or useful to anything, like an irrational mood swing. Neither of these in their "raw" forms are very useful. But which do you feel should take the lead role?

This already skews the requested argument. The emotions we discussed before, in terms of what a character experiences, aren't "feelings that aren't particularly relevant or useful to anything". They are reactions to events.

Trying to separate and distill them down to raw elements, independent of one another, does a disservice to each element.

 

[Mindfire]

This already skews the requested argument. The emotions we discussed before, in terms of what a character experiences, aren't "feelings that aren't particularly relevant or useful to anything". They are reactions to events.

Trying to separate and distill them down to raw elements, independent of one another, does a disservice to each element.

Hrmblegrumblemumblegrumble...

*removes offending segment*

 

[Anders Ämting]

All things equal, where do you lean? And what's the right balance to have between them?

I tire of these false dichotomies.

If all things are equal I don't lean at all, because neither holds dominion of the other. That's what the word "equal" means. I'm not sure why you seem to think one has to choose between a well-crafted plot and engaging emotions, or balance one against the other. Last time I looked they were not actually mutually exclusive, so you don't have to neglect one in favor of the other.

 

[Mindfire]

I tire of these false dichotomies.

If all things are equal I don't lean at all, because neither holds dominion of the other. That's what the word "equal" means. I'm not sure why you seem to think one has to choose between a well-crafted plot and engaging emotions, or balance one against the other. Last time I looked they were not actually mutually exclusive, so you don't have to neglect one in favor of the other.

Sorry, there's a word missing. All other things equal.

 

[WyrdMystic]

I take the same stance on this as I did with the other poll - I think both are just as important, it's only the emphasis that a writer gives one or the other that changes. Even if you lean towards plot or events or whatever - the character, emotion or whatever is still just as important.

 

[BWFoster78]

I think that we have two different opinions on both what plot is and on its relative importance.

Truthfully, I don't see much of a distinction between Events and Plot. Plot is, perhaps, more encompassing than Events, but really?

 

[Steerpike]

I think 'plot' is the thing that ties events together, but it is a fine hair to split. In any event, if the characters interest me in some way, a good writer can turn the most mundane plot or series of events into a great story. If the characters don't interest me or hold some kind of emotional connection, then I don't really care how the events turn out.

I don't have to like the character (see Ian Graham's Monument for a great character-focused fantasy where the character has no real redeeming features), but the character has to engage me in some manner.

 

[Devor]

I voted for "event" because I interpret emotion to refer to a strict in-the-character's-head, here's-what-he's-feeling type of narration. More important, I think, are the reader's emotions. Readers like characters, but they also get to know them through their dialogue and their actions, I think, even more than their internalized POV observations. And I think there are a lot of cases where too much "emotionalization," let's call it, can be very put offish.

But events, to me, are both plot and character development. So, events.

 

[WyrdMystic]

Knowing that I'm going to be repetitive here..........its all egg and chicken. Without one, there wouldn't be the other.

 

[Jamber]

I agree with what others have said about emotion and event being part of the same whole. If you're consciously avoiding emotion, don't compare your work to a sentimental and plotless book; compare it to one that has both drama and that inspires feeling. What will make your book sell?

There's probably an increasingly large audience of young people disinterested in characterisation (or empathy). But do they read?

cheers
Jennie

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

There's probably an increasingly large audience of young people disinterested in characterisation (or empathy). But do they read?

I don't agree with this statement. People of all ages can be, and are, captivated by great characters. It doesn't matter if they read or not. Young or old, people can find characters that fascinate them across different mediums...books, comics & graphic novels, TV, movies, video games, RPGs.

They may not be aware why it is they love a particular work but that doesn't mean they are disinterested in characterization.

 

[Jamber]

I don't agree with this statement. People of all ages can be, and are, captivated by great characters. It doesn't matter if they read or not. Young or old, people can find characters that fascinate them across different mediums...books, comics & graphic novels, TV, movies, video games, RPGs.

They may not be aware why it is they love a particular work but that doesn't mean they are disinterested in characterization.

Yes, of course. I just feel there's an increasing youth audience not interested in empathising in an immersive novellistic way. This may be less to do with their attitudes (if they have any) to character than difficulties with reading and processing emotion from abstract cues.

It may not 'matter if they read or not', but if we're talking about novel writing then I'd argue it's something to consider.

regards
Jennie

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

Yes, of course. I just feel there's an increasing youth audience not interested in empathising in an immersive novellistic way. This may be less to do with their attitudes (if they have any) to character than difficulties with reading and processing emotion from abstract cues.

It may not 'matter if they read or not', but if we're talking about novel writing then I'd argue it's something to consider.

regards
Jennie

I understand what you're saying. However, if a reader or viewer has trouble processing emotional cues, wouldn't that be a fault of the author/director?

Heck, if we're using abstract cues to foster an emotional reaction then we're doomed to failure. Doing it well, with concrete, specific cues in an imaginative fashion is what elicits an emotional response or, at the very least, a higher potential for connection to the character.