Throughlines

[Heliotrope]

Right, I think I'm getting it now. I was thinking of the goal as the making of the difficult decision, but it's not. It's just the climax of the story. Roy's goal isn't to make the decision, but the decision stands in the way of his goal, and once he makes it he's either achieved the goal or not.

The goal then would be something like Roy needs to lose his big match in order to secure a comfortable retirement for himself and his manager?

Sure, if that is the goal right from the beginning.

Roy needs to lose his big match in order to secure a comfortable retirement for himself and his manager, but when he learns a long forgotten love needs his help he is forced to choose between loyalty to his current life, and responsibility to his past.

Note* losing the match had better have some significant stakes, more than just simply securing a good retirement, unless retirement was literally life or death. It has to matter to the point where the reader is glued to the page until the very last chapter to see what he is going to do and how he is going to pull it off.

When warned by his doctor that he is one punch away from permanent brain damage, Roy must lose his next big match in order to secure a comfortable retirement for himself and his manager...

Something like that. It gives you a very direct throughline, start to finish, and hints at the conflict.

Anyway you do it, I can feel the conflict dripping out of this story. But without a concise throughline it will come across on the page as too abstract, like the writer wasn't even clear on exactly where he was going with it, and it dilutes the tension and can even get downright confusing.

 

[Svrtnsse]

Sure, if that is the goal right from the beginning.

Roy needs to lose his big match in order to secure a comfortable retirement for himself and his manager, but when he learns a long forgotten love needs his help he is forced to choose between loyalty to his current life, and responsibility to his past.

Something like that. It gives you a very direct throughline, start to finish, and hints at the conflict.

Anyway you do it, I can feel the conflict dripping out of this story. But without a concise throughline it will come across on the page as too abstract, like the writer wasn't even clear on exactly where he was going with it, and it dilutes the tension and can even get downright confusing.

Cool, then I get it.

I'm not sure that will be the exact throughline for the story, but it'll be something along those lines. Thanks for the help.

 

[Heliotrope]

Yay! I love this stuff. These sorts of discussions on structure and clarity.

I meant what I said, about the conflict. I can really feel a great story here, buried under all the excess muck.

 

[FifthView]

I had never heard of a "throughline" before. From this discussion it sounds like it is distinct from theme, though I'm not exactly sure how yet. Is it something that encompasses the entire story,or a single character like a character arc? Maybe I'll check out the podcast, thanks for recommending.

For the moment, theme in context with the subject of throughlines is a little amorphous for me.

I've been thinking of serial v. episodic approaches for stories in a shared universe, specifically the original Star Trek v. Voyager v. something like the CW's Flash or Arrow.

The original Star Trek was episodic. There was no throughline for the whole series. In this regard, the original Star Trek series was open-ended:

"Space: the final frontier. These are the voyages of the starship Enterprise. Its five-year mission: to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no man has gone before."​

Technically, it was a five-year mission, so it would have an end. But this fact had no bearing on the events of the episodes, and the individual episodes had no substantial bearing on that end point.

Individual episodes of Star Trek had their own throughlines. Viewers tuned in to see a standalone story—what danger occurs, how it resolves—without any thought about where those individual stories were leading for the series as a whole.

Voyager was different. It had a series throughline: Ship is flung to an unexplored quadrant of the galaxy in the initial episode and must survive there while trying to get back home—which they eventually did in the final episode of the series. [Oops, spoiler alert, heh. Statute of limitations.]

Voyager is still somewhat episodic. Viewers tuned in to see whatever new danger occurred and how it would resolve during the episode (or the next episode sometimes.) But there's almost always the understanding that events in the episodes had a bearing on the final outcome of the series: Would they survive? Would they get home? Often enough, the crew was searching for some help or technology in an episode, things that would help them reduce the time/space of their journey home. Sometimes, they were encountering new foes that would hound them for large sections of that journey.

Where Voyager went wrong sometimes—in my personal, biased opinion—was when they'd spend a whole episode that was "human interest," or focused on some side story about an individual character, a story that didn't relate much to their voyage except to the degree that this character was in the show. This happened more in the first few seasons. Some of these episodes were better than others, but some annoyed me greatly. (Especially those focusing on Chakotay or that were largely flashbacks.)

Then there is Flash, Arrow, and most of the best television now airing. These shows have a very clear throughline for each season—but not necessarily for the entire series run. Some of these shows, as with Voyager, occasionally have filler episodes that have little or nothing to do with the season throughline. I think this is largely due to the need to fill up a whole season's play list, heh, and happens far more often in seasons lasting 22-24 episodes. (I'm very positive about the trend toward shorter seasons, lasting 8-12 episodes, but those lasting longer can still be done well—if the writers are up to the task.)

So...there are these three general approaches vis-a-vis throughlines. But every one of these shows also has a theme or multiple themes.

The original Star Trek's theme is that show opener: To boldly go, to explore.

Voyager's theme is isolation, the dangers of isolation, and the way this isolation forces us to become stronger. This theme reappears in episodes in many ways, not only relating to the larger voyage and the Voyager's crew becoming stronger. Characters are isolated from the rest of the crew in an episode and must find their way out. When Seven of Nine joins the crew, the theme is seen in reverse: The crew of the Voyager is that strange world, Seven is isolated and must change, grow stronger. Neelix and Kes go through a similar process. The Doctor is isolated, must find his identity and fully join the crew.

TL;Dr I suppose, conceptually, throughline is best understood in terms of the trajectory leading from initial, primary conflict to its resolution, but theme is what arises during the journey from A to B. Theme is a bit more qualitative; throughline, structural. But I'm not sure this description is great, heh. Two people can have the same trajectory, two stories can have the same structural trajectory, but there could be two different themes. A man flung to a far-distant place may spend the whole journey home learning that we carry our troubles with us, wherever we are they are, and home is wherever we are. This would be a different theme than what Voyager uses.

 

[Heliotrope]

I don't think the throughline has anything to do with theme. Two authors could take the same basic throughline but each have their own different theme focus. Lets pretend there was a throughline writing challenge. We were given the basic throughline, and we each had to write a story for it.

Retired con-man Markus wants his daughter to have a better life than he did, but is orchestrating a bank heist in order to pay for private school worth the price?

Ok, basic throughline. Markus is going to orchestrate a bank heist to pay for his daughters private school tuition so she doesn't end up a washed out jail bird like her old man.

But every author will take this in an entirely different direction. Some might focus on the theme of over coming your past and accepting who you are, others might focus on the theme of fatherly love, others might focus on themes of trust and honesty in relationships. Some authors might make it a drama, others a comedy. Throughline are purely structural, the "may pole" as FifthView put it (perfect analogy!) where as theme, dialogue, scenes, setting, are all the ribbons tied around it.

 

[Heliotrope]

Ps, I may do something with above throughline... it's totally a comedy in my mind and could be super fun to write lol

 

[FifthView]

This could also go the route of The Unforgiven, except with a heist rather than assassination.

One of my difficulties considering throughline and theme together arises because I suppose different throughlines lend themselves better to exploring some themes, although perhaps this is because exploration of a theme requires constituent parts that may also be required by some throughlines.

If Markus didn't have a daughter and the desire to pay for private school, the theme of fatherly love might be harder to explore. Maybe there could be flashbacks to Markus' father however, and the theme could be explored that way sans daughter and private school–although we'd need to find a slightly different throughline or at least a new reason for the heist, new motivation, new stakes.

In short, I'm not sure "throughline has [nothing] to do with theme" is apt. I do understand that theme and throughline are substantially different things, however, for the writer crafting a story.

I don't think the throughline has anything to do with theme. Two authors could take the same basic throughline but each have their own different theme focus. Lets pretend there was a throughline writing challenge. We were given the basic throughline, and we each had to write a story for it.

Retired con-man Markus wants his daughter to have a better life than he did, but is orchestrating a bank heist in order to pay for private school worth the price?

Ok, basic throughline. Markus is going to orchestrate a bank heist to pay for his daughters private school tuition so she doesn't end up a washed out jail bird like her old man.

But every author will take this in an entirely different direction. Some might focus on the theme of over coming your past and accepting who you are, others might focus on the theme of fatherly love, others might focus on themes of trust and honesty in relationships. Some authors might make it a drama, others a comedy. Throughline are purely structural, the "may pole" as FifthView put it (perfect analogy!) where as theme, dialogue, scenes, setting, are all the ribbons tied around it.

 

[Heliotrope]

I see what you mean. Ok, my example was too specific. I really think this all ties into Blake Snyder's story types. If I make the throughline much more simple:

A character goes after a McGuffin, which he believes is the key to his happiness.

That throughline is still a may pole, in the most stripped bare possible way, open to any interpretation of theme.

So my opinion still stands that throughline have nothing to do with theme. They are purely structural.

Snyder believes there are really only about ten successful story types, or throughlines, which are all then interpreted in infinite ways.

Monster in the House

A character must kill the monster before it kills them. (Alien, Jaws, Jurassic Park, Scream, Tremors....)

Golden Fleece

Character goes after a McGuffin in order to find happiness, but ends up discovering something else, himself. (Wizard of Oz, Star Wars, Road Trip, Vacation, Lord of the Rings, Oceans Eleven)

Out of the Bottle

Character gets his wish, only to find life was better before. (Liar, Liar, Bruce Almighty, Freaky Friday)

Dude with a Problem

Ordinary dude finds himself in extraordinary circumstances. (Die Hard, Schindler's list, Titanic, The Terminator).

Rites of Passage

Character must navigate and cope with life events beyond their control.

Buddy Love

Two characters who don't like each other are forced to work together until they understand how much they need each other. (All romance stories, Wayne's World, Lethal Weapon)

Why done it?

Character must find out why the mystery happened in order to stop it from happening again.

The Fool Triumphant

Underdog takes on the establishment. (Dave, Amadeus, Forrest Gump, underdog sports stories)

Institutionalized

Guy takes on the man or risks losing his identity to the man.

Superhero

Extraordinary character thrust into ordinary world.

 

[FifthView]

Helio,

I think I'll stand by the idea that different throughlines may lend themselves better to exploring some themes. I don't think this necessarily means that some themes require a particular throughline or that a particular throughline limits the sort of theme the story can have.

Perhaps I should qualify that by saying that different throughlines may lend themselves better to exploring some themes in depth, heh. Some stories are more "about" a theme than other stories even if the latter also have themes.

Snyder believes there are really only about ten successful story types, or throughlines, which are all then interpreted in infinite ways.

Ok, so here you are equating throughline with story type, and each of those story types has a description that is somewhat vague or general. In an earlier comment, you suggested that Svrt add some specifics to highlight the goal and stakes:

I think the only issue with the throughline statement in this exercise is the lack of a clear (specific) goal. The statement here is still pretty abstract and doesn't point to the linear goal/stakes of the story.

I don't know what the goal is, but if I were making it up it might be something like:

Fading wrestling champion Roy needs to win one last fight in order to settle his debts and retire in comfort. But when he is asked by his manager to intentionally lose, Roy finds himself choosing between integrity and loyalty.

I put the specific goal in italics to show what is missing from your throughline. The direct, concrete, start to finish goal.

I'm wondering whether story type and throughline should be thought of as equivalent terms. I think, probably not—although I do think that story types suggest particular conflicts and potential throughlines and possibly a general goal.

Beyond the abstract considerations, there are the practical considerations when deciding to write a story. I think this is where new writers can trip themselves....I know this affects me a lot.

If I begin with "I want to write a [story type] story," then that gives me little clue how to proceed, heh. The details, the structure, are still vague. I want to write a heist story. Okay, so now what? I know there are thieves, a thing to be stolen, and probably dangers in trying to steal it. There is a beginning and an end, sure—as with every story hah.

Those story types are not structure, but only descriptions of structure in the abstract, heh.

If I add some of the specifics—

My MC is Markus, a retired thief, and he's doing the heist to pay for his daughter's private school so she doesn't end up like him...but the target is a former employer who has been hunting for Markus with blood in his eyes...the item is on a train being protected by werewolf and vampire guards...and if Markus is discovered, that former employer will not only kill him but also take Markus' daughter and force her into indentured servitude...

—then I have a more specific throughline. This is not some vague idea of a throughline, a throughline in the abstract sense of, well, there's a beginning and an end. This is not a generic heist or generic "Golden Fleece" story. The throughline is a retired thief trying to pull off a heist so his daughter has a bright future (while risking his daughter's future!) and overcoming his former employer's designs on him, his daughter, and protecting the treasure. The questions asked are not merely, "Will he successfully steal the Golden Fleece?"

There's a difference between a real, solid throughline, and a mere abstraction of one, heh. Or maybe put another way: The may pole is more than the bit in the ground and the top orb, or beginning circumstances/catalyst and goal. It's the whole metal or wooden length of the pole. The ribbons circle that entire length, so I need to know what the ribbons are circling. If I have some more of the specifics, I can begin to imagine the progress of the story, what the scenes will need to do, the obstacles, the players, etc.

Starting with theme is also problematic. Let's say I want to write a story about the power of a father's love. Okay, even more than when starting with a general story type idea, I have a wide-open set of potential stories to consider. It could be any one of those story types. Which of those would best allow me to explore that theme? Maybe there's no answer to that; it could be any one of those story types.

But is there a particular throughline that would better help me explore that theme in depth—or, more easily? I could choose the elements of the throughline that would help me to do this.

This isn't an idle question for me personally, because I often start with thematic elements, like "I want to write a love story about two young men from very different, sometimes antagonistic cultures," or in other words, about the way true love transcends these cultural divides. I think I'm not alone in this....Thematic elements can be a great spur to writing. But starting with thematic elements (what I want the story to be "about," I sometimes think) and having no concrete throughline can lead to a meandering story, lots of scenes in which the primary characters interact or else lots of world building happens, or whatever, but it just doesn't feel as if it's going anywhere in an engaging way. Even if I have vague ideas about the beginning (two men from different cultures collide) and end (aha, true love!), that still doesn't tell me much about how to structure the story in a practical way: What scenes to write, where to put them, which POVs to use, and so forth.

If I return to the example of CW's Flash, I could say every season has the same throughline, if considered abstractly. A new baddie is introduced in the first episode, probably a speedster, and Flash & Co. will need to defeat him in the last episode. Let's call this the Flash Story Type, heh. This provides a vague structure we'll call the Flash Formula. And for the sake of the May Pole Concept, we could say that what distinguishes one season from the next is the collection of ribbons circling this basic throughline.

We could say the Flash Story Type and Flash Throughline and Flash Formula actually describe lots of other shows. Heck, these describe 24.

Knowing these broad formulae might help somewhat in structuring our own version, but probably not so much in designing our particular scenes and episodes and characters and so forth. Yet these things are what circle that Flash Pole. (Or...Flash Point? Heh.) So if we consider our throughline with more specifics, like the Baddie is a terrorist planning to use nukes on American soil, and our MC is an ex anti-terror agent on the outs with his former agency, and there's a mole on the inside of that agency working with the terrorist...Well, now we have a season of 24 and will have a better idea of how to choose the ribbons we weave around the pole. The questions raised are not merely, "Can Jack Bauer defeat the terrorists before it's too late?"—because the answer's already always "Yes."—but also, will Jack Bauer be able to overcome the hostility he experiences from high level figures in that agency and rejoin it, and will the mole be exposed before doing massive damage to Bauer's quest, etc.

 

[FifthView]

Helio, I think the TL;DR version of my above comment would be that structure can be thought of in the abstract or the concrete, and for the concrete structure to take shape, specifics are required.

In a discussion like this, we can approach the topic in the abstract in order to come to a clearer understanding of what is meant by throughline, and this could help when considering our own stories. By distilling it, we can see how all good stories have a throughline.

But from a creative standpoint, trying to build particular stories, a consideration of the specifics can help us understand the throughlines of our individual stories.

We're not exactly talking about different things but maybe approaching the topic from two directions.

As the discussion has developed, I've also been thinking in terms of the hook, promise, and sense of story progress as these relate to throughlines. So this led me to consider how the specifics influence reader engagement with particular throughlines. For instance, rather than being hooked by the broad and vague story throughline suggested by "Guy takes on the man or risks losing his identity to the man," the specifics of "Fading werewolf wrestling champion" takes on "a corrupt Werewolf Wrestling Federation" and "risks losing his retirement or his integrity" might be the throughline that interests a reader. Some other story falling into that story archetype might not interest the reader much at all despite having a similar throughline.

 

[Futhark]

Fascinating post. Serendipitous for myself, as I have been pondering a great deal about where to start my story. After reading lots of excellent blogs I've decided to drop the prologue that introduces the villain and start with the MC in his normal world. He is basically a detective Mage in a pre-industrial oriental-ish society, part nobleman, part city official.

I had been toying with the idea of him investigating a missing person, which is a sub-plot. When 'upper management' finds out, the case is closed and he is reprimanded. The reason I would include this in the story is to get him to start questioning what knowledge the government is withholding. It ties in with his character arc.

However, this particular sub-plot does not tie in with the main plot, and I have been thinking that including it would confuse and perhaps irritate readers. From my understanding of what this post is about, I am more convinced that this is true.

Have I got this right? How do you give the throughline to the reader and introduce them to the characters normal world at the beginning?

 

[Heliotrope]

Helio,

I think I'll stand by the idea that different throughlines may lend themselves better to exploring some themes. I don't think this necessarily means that some themes require a particular throughline or that a particular throughline limits the sort of theme the story can have.

Perhaps I should qualify that by saying that different throughlines may lend themselves better to exploring some themes in depth, heh. Some stories are more "about" a theme than other stories even if the latter also have themes.



Ok, so here you are equating throughline with story type, and each of those story types has a description that is somewhat vague or general. In an earlier comment, you suggested that Svrt add some specifics to highlight the goal and stakes:



I'm wondering whether story type and throughline should be thought of as equivalent terms. I think, probably not–although I do think that story types suggest particular conflicts and potential throughlines and possibly a general goal.

Beyond the abstract considerations, there are the practical considerations when deciding to write a story. I think this is where new writers can trip themselves....I know this affects me a lot.

If I begin with "I want to write a [story type] story," then that gives me little clue how to proceed, heh. The details, the structure, are still vague. I want to write a heist story. Okay, so now what? I know there are thieves, a thing to be stolen, and probably dangers in trying to steal it. There is a beginning and an end, sure–as with every story hah.

Those story types are not structure, but only descriptions of structure in the abstract, heh.

If I add some of the specifics–

My MC is Markus, a retired thief, and he's doing the heist to pay for his daughter's private school so she doesn't end up like him...but the target is a former employer who has been hunting for Markus with blood in his eyes...the item is on a train being protected by werewolf and vampire guards...and if Markus is discovered, that former employer will not only kill him but also take Markus' daughter and force her into indentured servitude...

–then I have a more specific throughline. This is not some vague idea of a throughline, a throughline in the abstract sense of, well, there's a beginning and an end. This is not a generic heist or generic "Golden Fleece" story. The throughline is a retired thief trying to pull off a heist so his daughter has a bright future (while risking his daughter's future!) and overcoming his former employer's designs on him, his daughter, and protecting the treasure. The questions asked are not merely, "Will he successfully steal the Golden Fleece?"

There's a difference between a real, solid throughline, and a mere abstraction of one, heh. Or maybe put another way: The may pole is more than the bit in the ground and the top orb, or beginning circumstances/catalyst and goal. It's the whole metal or wooden length of the pole. The ribbons circle that entire length, so I need to know what the ribbons are circling. If I have some more of the specifics, I can begin to imagine the progress of the story, what the scenes will need to do, the obstacles, the players, etc.

Starting with theme is also problematic. Let's say I want to write a story about the power of a father's love. Okay, even more than when starting with a general story type idea, I have a wide-open set of potential stories to consider. It could be any one of those story types. Which of those would best allow me to explore that theme? Maybe there's no answer to that; it could be any one of those story types.

But is there a particular throughline that would better help me explore that theme in depth–or, more easily? I could choose the elements of the throughline that would help me to do this.

This isn't an idle question for me personally, because I often start with thematic elements, like "I want to write a love story about two young men from very different, sometimes antagonistic cultures," or in other words, about the way true love transcends these cultural divides. I think I'm not alone in this....Thematic elements can be a great spur to writing. But starting with thematic elements (what I want the story to be "about," I sometimes think) and having no concrete throughline can lead to a meandering story, lots of scenes in which the primary characters interact or else lots of world building happens, or whatever, but it just doesn't feel as if it's going anywhere in an engaging way. Even if I have vague ideas about the beginning (two men from different cultures collide) and end (aha, true love!), that still doesn't tell me much about how to structure the story in a practical way: What scenes to write, where to put them, which POVs to use, and so forth.

If I return to the example of CW's Flash, I could say every season has the same throughline, if considered abstractly. A new baddie is introduced in the first episode, probably a speedster, and Flash & Co. will need to defeat him in the last episode. Let's call this the Flash Story Type, heh. This provides a vague structure we'll call the Flash Formula. And for the sake of the May Pole Concept, we could say that what distinguishes one season from the next is the collection of ribbons circling this basic throughline.

We could say the Flash Story Type and Flash Throughline and Flash Formula actually describe lots of other shows. Heck, these describe 24.

Knowing these broad formulae might help somewhat in structuring our own version, but probably not so much in designing our particular scenes and episodes and characters and so forth. Yet these things are what circle that Flash Pole. (Or...Flash Point? Heh.) So if we consider our throughline with more specifics, like the Baddie is a terrorist planning to use nukes on American soil, and our MC is an ex anti-terror agent on the outs with his former agency, and there's a mole on the inside of that agency working with the terrorist...Well, now we have a season of 24 and will have a better idea of how to choose the ribbons we weave around the pole. The questions raised are not merely, "Can Jack Bauer defeat the terrorists before it's too late?"–because the answer's already always "Yes."–but also, will Jack Bauer be able to overcome the hostility he experiences from high level figures in that agency and rejoin it, and will the mole be exposed before doing massive damage to Bauer's quest, etc.

I get what you are saying, but personally I believe all those extra details are the ribbons, not the pole.

The Flash storyline is simply a "Superhero" story line, the same as all "Superhero" storylines. Flash has to stop the bad guy before the bad guy destroys the whatever. It's the same as every Batman, Superman, X-man, Spider-Man storyline. The "throughline" is identical, beat for beat.

Super villain plots to destroy x.
Everyone is too typical and normal to be able to stop him.
They need the (insert super hero here). He is the only one who can do it.
Poor superhero is so misunderstood by society. He just wants to be a "real" boy.
He saves the world to try to prove to everyone he has value.
No one cares. Things resume as normal. Superhero goes back into hiding....

Until next time.

The end.

The setting, the bag guy, the costume, the unique and humanizing back story... all that is ribbons.

I'll maybe give you theme. You have convinced me on that one. Yes, some throughlines do lend themselves to specific types of themes.

 

[Heliotrope]

Helio, I think the TL;DR version of my above comment would be that structure can be thought of in the abstract or the concrete, and for the concrete structure to take shape, specifics are required.

In a discussion like this, we can approach the topic in the abstract in order to come to a clearer understanding of what is meant by throughline, and this could help when considering our own stories. By distilling it, we can see how all good stories have a throughline.

But from a creative standpoint, trying to build particular stories, a consideration of the specifics can help us understand the throughlines of our individual stories.

We're not exactly talking about different things but maybe approaching the topic from two directions.

As the discussion has developed, I've also been thinking in terms of the hook, promise, and sense of story progress as these relate to throughlines. So this led me to consider how the specifics influence reader engagement with particular throughlines. For instance, rather than being hooked by the broad and vague story throughline suggested by "Guy takes on the man or risks losing his identity to the man," the specifics of "Fading werewolf wrestling champion" takes on "a corrupt Werewolf Wrestling Federation" and "risks losing his retirement or his integrity" might be the throughline that interests a reader. Some other story falling into that story archetype might not interest the reader much at all despite having a similar throughline.

This is true, in that of course specifics and details make the story more engaging to the reader, but I argue those are again, the ribbons. The way you have packaged the story. The throughline is simply the basic goal.

Save the girl. Destroy the ring. Find the McGuffin. Lose the match.

That is the linear, forward moving aspect of the story that keeps the reader reading.

Is he going to be able to destroy the ring?

Some readers are going to be partial to a certain type of story, of course. So where I may not pick up a book about a werewolf wwf wrestler struggling with making choices about his career, I may pick up a story about a woman struggling with the choice between persuing a career, or motherhood. Both stories would fall in the "institutionalized" category, and match the throughline beat for beat.

Character is offered a route to happiness through their career.
But then something unexpected happens that makes them second guess that choice.
Now they have to decide what would really make them happy,
But it will come with sacrifice.
They will make that sacrifice and it will be bittersweet, but they know they made the right choice.
The end

Both stories, the mother and the werewolf, are basically, at their core, the same story. They have just been dressed in different ribbons.

 

[FifthView]

I get what you are saying, but personally I believe all those extra details are the ribbons, not the pole.

This is another area where our outlooks differ somewhat. When I originally thought of the may pole metaphor, I'd mostly been thinking of the ribbons as events, scenes, chapters, subplots, side quests, character arcs and various developments—what is put before the reader, how the reader's focus is drawn. These things should appear significant, keyed into the throughline, and not extraneous, to preserve a sense of progress in the story.

In a successful story, the throughline constrains these developments. We don't spend a whole chapter having Markus trying to bake a pie unless his efforts have a bearing on the throughline of the story. That would be a loss of focus, vis-a-vis the throughline, and would probably have a negative effect on the reader's experience. (Pacing, most likely.)

So, these ribbons are connected to the pole, and the pole constrains them.

Sometimes the connection is not explicit, for instance in the case of a chapter used mostly for character development: the character may not be doing anything to directly address his primary goal, but whatever character traits are shown or whatever character growth happens should seem to have some bearing on the overall throughline. An example might be something like a training montage, if growth is what's being shown. If the chapter's used to show character traits or perhaps a character's relationships, it would be because these affect the kind of path the character's on, which would include the path of the throughline, and should provide a sense of some progress (a progress in the reader's understanding of that character, stakes, whatever.) There's nothing wrong, per se, with showing Markus trying to bake a pie—if that passage is keyed into the throughline.

But let's suppose that a chapter of Markus engaged in some non-plot-specific activity is important to the story and pacing. We still have to make sure the chapter is connected to and circling the throughline. But do we have to make it about baking a pie? Maybe he could bake a cake, repair a child's bicycle, shop for school clothes, whatever. These details may not be as constrained by the pole as the general development of "showing Markus trying to be a good single father" or showing Markus "struggling with the basics of child-rearing" or "showing Markus as a retired thief trying to be a good single father, struggling because being a father is not his primary skill set" or whatever. As an author, perhaps you could pick and choose those details according to....what? Not the pole.

Unless, of course, a part of the throughline includes those details: Markus, a retired master thief struggling to master the new skill set of being a good single father, decides to help his middle grade daughter win a school pie bake off contest. Heh. Then maybe the chapter showing him trying to master the skill set of baking a pie would key into that rather well, the detail is constrained by the pole. A chapter showing him trying to repair a bicycle...might also key into that throughline detail of "new skill set of being a good father" and maybe into the detail of "middle grade daughter...school." This is just a facile example of what I'm kinda thinking. (But after writing that, I think it'd be a great, funny story.)

 

[FifthView]

Futhark,

I think this ties in with what Heliotrope said in an earlier post on this thread:

Here is the issue. If you start the story too early the reader will grab onto anything the MC is doing and they will think that is the MC's goal. So if we saw Frodo fishing for twenty minutes and he wanted to catch the biggest fish to beat a hobbit called Walt in a fishing contest the we would assume the story was about a fishing contest or a rivalry between Hobbits. When Gandolf showed up later and asked Frodo to destroy the ring and Frodo went off and Walt was never mentioned again, then we would wonder wtf was the point of all the early stuff.

Hence, start as close to the throughline as possible.

That second sentence especially: "If you start the story too early, the reader will grab onto anything the MC is doing" and think that's what the story will be about. If they latch onto this beginning, this'll spark their interest in that story, and they'll be thrown for a loop if the story suddenly veers into another direction.

However, at the same time, I don't think this is an exact science, heh.

I'd mentioned earlier that I think readers automatically assume that what an author puts in a story is important. That's the natural beginning state for the reader. That's also a double edged sword, especially for the beginning of the story. If you start too early, then you could be misleading the reader about the story you are telling. But at the same time, readers are still easing into a novel at the beginning, and I believe this means we can get away with a lot more at the beginning than later into the story. In other words, we are given the benefit of the doubt, heh, and we might be able to ease readers into the main plot.

I had been toying with the idea of him investigating a missing person, which is a sub-plot. When 'upper management' finds out, the case is closed and he is reprimanded. The reason I would include this in the story is to get him to start questioning what knowledge the government is withholding. It ties in with his character arc.

However, this particular sub-plot does not tie in with the main plot, and I have been thinking that including it would confuse and perhaps irritate readers. From my understanding of what this post is about, I am more convinced that this is true.

Part of the issue is deciding on focus. And part of that revolves around the length of time you spend on any given sequence, developments, and so forth. If your MC is a detective, starting with him in the midst of an investigation is not a bad thing, even if that particular investigation has nothing to do with the main story. This introduces the character, his milieu, etc. But, if the whole of the first chapter is nothing but that investigation, and it's a longish chapter, and his bosses calling him in to reprimand him only happens at the very end of that chapter, then that's probably putting too much focus on that inconsequential investigation. You can still start with it, but wrap it up pretty quickly, say on page two or maybe two-and-a-half, when he's called in by his bosses. The rest of the chapter could be more about the main throughline.

But focus isn't only about number of pages. You could possibly make clear to the reader that this investigation is ho-hum, just another part of this detective's daily life, one of many investigations, nothing particularly relevant to the main throughline, if you thread through that chapter other elements relating more clearly to the main throughline. Let's say in paragraph three (or sooner!) your MC reads a short message from his boss directing him to report in, the message signals very clearly to him that something is wrong, he's probably in trouble, and so forth. Then he spends the entire rest of the chapter continuing on this investigation, disregarding the summons but thinking about it lots, and maybe at some point in his investigation a representative of the higher-ups shows up—let's say your MC is standing in a dark room, having just broken into a residence during the middle of the night, and there's a shifting sound in the corner, he freaks, but that representative just steps out of the shadows and says, basically, "Hey bub, they're waiting for you."—and then he continues working that room after the rep disappears. The chapter could end with him reporting in to his bosses and that reprimand, in this case.

^In this case, the investigation can last throughout the first chapter, but much of the "focus" is on the primary throughline. You'd probably want to include some details, perhaps something that representative lets slip, about the shady nature of his bosses and the government, to better tie into the main throughline...details that raise the pertinent questions for this MC and the reader.

Edit: I'd forgotten this part: "this particular sub-plot does not tie in with the main plot." In a case like that, I might be wondering whether subplots add anything to the overall story. Is it merely a device to fill up time? Then it's only filler. But it could be used as a device to show something important about the world, that MC, etc., and so it could be useful to the main throughline. Is that missing person investigation going to continue throughout the story in some way?

 

[Heliotrope]

Hi Futhark,

I meant to answer your question, but I always get so distracted by FifthView lol!

FifthView, you and I probably are coming at this from two different angles, but still arguing the same thing. We do that a lot.

I think a lot of what you mentioned earlier about the ribbons still being tied and wrapped around the same pole is where I'm going to go with my response to Futhark.

Ok, Futhark, I would need to know more about your planned character arc to get into more detail, and based on the info you gave I'm still not sure on what type of story you are working on, so take all this with a grain of salt

Here is the thing about subplots, they NEED to be there to move the main plot forward. Always. They must be tied around the same pole. Whether this is to explore the THEME in more depth, or to give background knowledge to the reader that the MC can't know about, they must be connected to the main plot.

Here is the thing though, they can appear totally unrelated, but by the end they MUST be tied back to the pole in some way.

So in the case of THEME, if I were writing a story about "fatherly love" and exploring the relationship between a father and his daughter, I may include a subplot where the father is also responsible for looking after his own, aged father, who maybe has dementia or something. This "B" plot, as it is known, would add depth to the theme, show why the father wants a certain type of relationship with his daughter, and maybe he learns something from the old man that helps him connect with his own daughter... that cliché "I wish I had done things differently with you son. Don't make the mistakes I made" moment.

I could also add a "C" plot, where maybe the daughter has a best friend who has a seemingly "perfect" relationship with her dad. The friend's dad is super rich and super cool etch, etc, etc, or maybe he is super strict and has lots of rules, but the daughter likes that because she thinks her dad is too easy and doesn't really care about her. Wherever. Then by the end the girl realizes the relationship isn't "perfect" and that every relationship has it's flaws.

You get the idea. Sub plots must feed into the main plot and character arc in regards to theme. They must serve a purpose and be wrapped around the same pole.

In regards to moving the plot forward, sometimes information must be given to the reader that the MC can't know about. This might be something like revealing the villain's plans to the reader, so the reader knows what is going to happen when the MC enters the scary cave, and they are on the edge of their seat knowing the bad guy is waiting. In this case you can have a B plot where the reader get's extra "Chapters" showing the bad guy in action.

In the case of your story, the opening investigation could do a few things that would then tie in by the end so it doesn't feel so pointless.

1) It could reveal a flaw that will be overcome by the end.

Many stories use the opening scene to reveal the character's flaw that will be overcome at the end, thus showing "change" and highlighting the character arc. Examples of this include:

In 21 Jump street with Channing Tatum and Jonah Hill the two boys start out at High School, Channing as the Jock and Jonah as the nerd. We see their weakness and their strengths. Then we jump forward ten years later and they are in cop school, and they need each other and the other has a strength that matches the other's weakness. Finally, we see them patrolling a park and they try to take down some drug dealers. Channing Tatum doesn't know his Miranda rights, and Jonah Hill refuses to use his gun.

Ok, all this seems irrelevant AT FIRST. But then we get into the main plot. The two men, as a result of their idiocy, get recruited into the Jump Street division. They have to go back to High School (tying in the opening scene and making it relevant to the main plot) to investigate a drug problem. Turns out the guys dealing drugs to the teenagers are the SAME guys from the park scene at the beginning (again, tying it all into the main plot). And guess what? By the end Tatum is going to remember his Miranda rights, and Hill is going to have to shoot his gun. Oh, and the two guys will end up as best friends.

Every single part of the story, every sub plot, every character introduced becomes relevant in some way to the main plot. I personally think the writers were MASTERS of structure. They are the same duo who wrote the Lego Movie, and that movie is also a perfect structural masterpiece.

So in the case of your story, use the investigation, but find ways to tie it into the main plot, whether that includes using the same characters later on, making the discovery of a key piece of information that may seem unrelated but he will need later, or showing a lesson that will need to be learned to show growth by the end.

 

[Futhark]

Thanks so much for the replies. I agree with FifthView about focus, and the MC's work on this missing person conspiracy is not the focus of the story. It was an idea more akin to a side quest in a game, not suitable for a novel. What I should be focusing on is the primary throughline, as you say, which is saving the nation from a resurgent inimical force. Perhaps a routine investigation into shadow elements (say a warlock abducting people to experiment on) that still exist would be more fitting.

Heliotrope, thanks for the advice on subplots. To give you a little info about the MC. He is a reserved, rather anxious and isolated person trying to live up to the expectations of society and familial honour. His arc is about becoming self-empowered and purposeful as an individual. The theme is questioning the strengths and limitations of society (I guess). The antagonist is his mirror, fighting to restore the lost privileges of witches and warlocks everywhere, but his arc is about over-powering and oppressing others rather than providing freedoms.

So, thinking out iPad here, the beginning could be a subplot that is threefold in purpose. It introduces the MC's normal world, some of his strengths and flaws, and provides background info on baddies that will be relevant for the main TL.

Thanks again for the replies, greatly appreciated.

 

[Futhark]

I found an interesting webpage, storymind.com that has an article

Throughlines - and How to Use Them!

By Melanie Anne Phillips

That may interest you two and your 'lively discussion'.

Cheers, Futhark.

 

[FifthView]

One of the Mythcreants podcasters casually mentioned "character throughline" or some such in another podcast I listened to after the one I linked in the OP.

I don't particularly have a problem with thinking about multiple throughlines, as suggested by that article, although I think doing so shouldn't distract from the idea of a central throughline for the whole story. Each ribbon could be thought of as a different "line," heh, and the weaves in the cloth of each ribbon could be thought of as having different "lines" woven together.

At some point, complexity in the theory/abstractions could become distracting.

OTOH, when I mentioned that these ribbons could be woven down the may pole, plaited, that's similar to what that article says: "Essentially, a number of different throughlines are layered, one upon another, much as a craftsperson might weave a tapestry."

I found an interesting webpage, storymind.com that has an article

Throughlines - and How to Use Them!

By Melanie Anne Phillips

That may interest you two and your 'lively discussion'.

Cheers, Futhark.

 

[Jorunn]

I've been pouring over this thread and the linked resources as this is the exact trouble I'm having with my current WIP. The difficulty is I have two MCs who each have their own goals and two ominous overarching threats/conflicts that will be resolved over the course of what is currently believed to be two books. It's been tricky to distill a clear throughline out of it all. Possibly because I keep getting tangled up in my own brain and distracted by potential rearrangements of plot points that could all prove to be interesting in their own way...

Goal of MC 1: Wants to be accepted and have a real role in her society.
Goal of MC 2: Wants to maintain/return to peace and order.

These make sense for their characters and they do each achieve them by the end of the story, but as they are they feel very nebulous. But the best I can muddle out for a collective throughline of the first book is "Twin sisters stranded in an unfamiliar city must adapt to their new abilities and surroundings before a burgeouning threat destroys their new home".

And I don't know if that makes sense? I have other stories where the throughline is right in front of my nose
(Young woman flees her occupied homeland in search of a better life and goes on a quest to find her missing brother.) Easy. But this one is a PAIN for some reason.