What makes a scene engaging?

[BWFoster78]

I've been thinking about this topic a lot lately. My primary goal for my writing is to present a story that the reader can't put down. So, obviously, trying to figure out how to achieve this is a huge concern.

I'd like to hear the thoughts of the forum members. What are the qualities in a scene that make it so intriguing that it draws you in?

Thanks!

 

[Penpilot]

Truth and sincerity in whats being told. A year ago I would have given some technical mumbo jumbo but since then I read a persons raw manuscript that had tons of things technically wrong but was completely engaging. I didn't know it at the time but it turned out to be a memoir. I found myself wanting to tell them don't do this or that but was at a loss because of how engaging it was. So yeah, honesty in your prose IMHO can trump almost anything.

 

[Steerpike]

A book that can't be put down. That's tough to do, even with engaging scenes. I rarely find a book that does this for me, and I'm not sure off the top of my head whether I've ever come across it in Fantasy. Maybe some of Steven Brust's works. I'll have to think on it.

A couple of writers who do come to mind, and who do not write fantasy, are Michael Connelly and Robert Crais. It might be worth looking at books you found hard to put down to try to figure out how the author structured scenes and chapters, and what is was about the books that made you want to read 'just one more chapter' each time you were ready to put it down.

 

[FireBird]

When I boil it down for myself, interesting characters make engaging scenes. If I love your plot and love your setting but can't stand your characters there is a good chance I will put the book down. I can deal with a bad plot or a bad setting but not bad characters.

 

[Philip Overby]

Here are things I think make good scenes personally:

1. Interesting characters saying interesting things
2. Something that sticks out about their surroundings. I'm not a fan of scenes that I just picture two floating heads talking to each other. Put them in an interesting place and have them doing stuff.
3. The plot is advanced one way or another or there is some kind of significant character development.
4. Enough description to make the scene shine in some way, but not too much.

Things I think make bad scenes:

1. Too much exposition
2. Spinning wheels without advancing anything
3. Characters talking about stuff that has no bearing on anything whatsoever
4. Tons and tons of descriptive writing that just goes on and on

I think Joe Abercrombie is pretty good at making engaging scenes. His characters have a spark to them that make them engaging. And it seems like every scene has people doing something instead of just standing around. Even when they are just standing around, his character quirks make up for that. (One character is constantly burping because he has some kind of ulcer or something. It's not a big deal, but adds a little flavor.)

 

[Benjamin Clayborne]

Conflict, and characters not getting what they want. Nothing endears you to a character more than watching them get thwarted from their goal.

"Conflict" doesn't have to mean physical fighting or even arguing. It can be internal: a character wanting two conflicting things and struggling to decide which one to go after. There are some who claim that you can have interesting stories without any conflict, but I've never seen one. (I've had people claim that certain stories have no conflict in them, but when examined, they always do.) Conflict can even be against nature itself; there can be conflict in coincidence. (Someone wants to go to the park with friend A but has also been invited to a concert at the same time by friend B.)

 

[BWFoster78]

Conflict, and characters not getting what they want. Nothing endears you to a character more than watching them get thwarted from their goal.

"Conflict" doesn't have to mean physical fighting or even arguing. It can be internal: a character wanting two conflicting things and struggling to decide which one to go after. There are some who claim that you can have interesting stories without any conflict, but I've never seen one. (I've had people claim that certain stories have no conflict in them, but when examined, they always do.) Conflict can even be against nature itself; there can be conflict in coincidence. (Someone wants to go to the park with friend A but has also been invited to a concert at the same time by friend B.)

I agree with this, but I have a question.

What about humor? I think a really humorous scene can engage the reader, and (I know little about this subject so correct me if I'm wrong) it doesn't seem that conflict is necessary to create laughter (though it often helps even there).

 

[Ankari]

I need to reread some of my favorites with the intent to examine every scene. I'm almost positive that not all scenes have conflict in them. Plenty are there just for character development. Some are there to infodump (that is where humor works wonderfully).

What makes a scene engaging? The need to know what the hell is going on. If the author hints at a cataclysmic convergence (Steven Erikson reference) and uses scenes to tell me what that convergence is, I'm all over it.

I can offer examples of scenes that do have conflict but lost my interest. Many of the POVs in WoT did this. I would ready Nynaeve's POV chapter and wonder "Do I really need to read this?" I would mark the page and start counting how many pages I need to read before I get to Mat's or Perrin's Chapters. Rand's chapters always demanded my attention, no matter if there were conflict in it or not.

So, a scene needs to have characters you care about. It needs importance to the story (either through conflict, infodumping, or character development).

 

[Penpilot]

To me, humor is like an adrenaline shot, it can't be sustained. Humor can make you like a character. It can make you engage a character, but if that's all there is, it can't carry a story.

Now since we're talking about one scene, I'd say it can carry the scene, but if there's nothing else happening, I think it becomes shallow and in some instances the scene might as well not be there. I think humor works best when mixed with the drama/conflict of the story. It can bring out the flavor like salt does to meat, but I wouldn't want to eat a bottle of salt alone.

I'm curious as to what others think.

 

[BWFoster78]

I need to reread some of my favorites with the intent to examine every scene. I'm almost positive that not all scenes have conflict in them. Plenty are there just for character development. Some are there to infodump (that is where humor works wonderfully).

What makes a scene engaging? The need to know what the hell is going on. If the author hints at a cataclysmic convergence (Steven Erikson reference) and uses scenes to tell me what that convergence is, I'm all over it.

I can offer examples of scenes that do have conflict but lost my interest. Many of the POVs in WoT did this. I would ready Nynaeve's POV chapter and wonder "Do I really need to read this?" I would mark the page and start counting how many pages I need to read before I get to Mat's or Perrin's Chapters. Rand's chapters always demanded my attention, no matter if there were conflict in it or not.

So, a scene needs to have characters you care about. It needs importance to the story (either through conflict, infodumping, or character development).

Interesting point.

The scene that brings about the culmination of reader's desires doesn't necessarily need conflict. The hero defeats the villian in one scene. The next scene, he gets the girl. This can be much more engaging because it's the satisfaction of what the book has been building to the entire time.

Same thing with your example of a mystery. The big reveal where a reader is shown the answers the protagonist has been seeking does not need conflict to engage.

Thanks!

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

I agree with just about everything above & specifically with Ben's statements concerning conflict.

Ankari makes a good point on POV which I'll add to:

A key for an engaging scene, in my opinion, is the author's POV selection. I feel it should almost always be the character that will have the greatest emotional reaction to the event portrayed in that scene. The rare exception to that is when the POV requires a sense of distance.

Choosing the correct POV has a lot to do with an emotional reaction for the reader as well as story immersion.

 

[BWFoster78]

I agree with just about everything above & specifically with Ben's statements concerning conflict.

Ankari makes a good point on POV which I'll add to:

A key for an engaging scene, in my opinion, is the author's POV selection. I feel it should almost always be the character that will have the greatest emotional reaction to the event portrayed in that scene. The rare exception to that is when the POV requires a sense of distance.

Choosing the correct POV has a lot to do with an emotional reaction for the reader as well as story immersion.

Emotion is crucial to engagement. Without it, the writing is flat.

To me, though, POV selection is a many-faceted decision. For example (to echo Ankari's post): let's say you have a mystery that one character knows the answer to. Even if that person would have the greatest emotional reaction in the scene, you can't use that POV without giving away the mystery.

 

[Ireth]

To me, though, POV selection is a many-faceted decision. For example (to echo Ankari's post): let's say you have a mystery that one character knows the answer to. Even if that person would have the greatest emotional reaction in the scene, you can't use that POV without giving away the mystery.

Exactly. I have a similar issue with one of my WIPs -- the protagonists run into a character who is in disguise, and that her true identity remains under wraps is critical to the rest of the plot. Said character cannot become a viewpoint character despite having an active role in the plot, because to do so would reveal her name and motivations, and thus ruin the reveal during the climax. Her reaction to the main characters during their meeting would be fascinating to write from her POV, but again, it would ruin the surprise completely.

 

[Steerpike]

I don't agree, Ireth. I've actually seen this done effectively, where the author stitches viewpoint to that character but doesn't reveal who it is or anything else the author doesn't want known. I think the trick is to do it in a way such that the reader won't feel slighted.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

Emotion is crucial to engagement. Without it, the writing is flat.

To me, though, POV selection is a many-faceted decision. For example (to echo Ankari's post): let's say you have a mystery that one character knows the answer to. Even if that person would have the greatest emotional reaction in the scene, you can't use that POV without giving away the mystery.

I agree there are exceptions, which is why in my post I specifically stated:

"The rare exception to that is when the POV requires a sense of distance."

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

Either way though, emotional reaction is a huge consideration. For me it's the biggest factor in choosing POV.

 

[Penpilot]

Emotion is crucial to engagement. Without it, the writing is flat.

To me, though, POV selection is a many-faceted decision. For example (to echo Ankari's post): let's say you have a mystery that one character knows the answer to. Even if that person would have the greatest emotional reaction in the scene, you can't use that POV without giving away the mystery.

Totally agree with emotional engagement. BUT with regard to the example situation, I tread very softly in regards to situations like that. I find that holding secrets in that way doesn`t work for me and the revelation of the mystery creates better drama and story than holding it. But that could be because I suck at mysteries.

 

[Benjamin Clayborne]

I agree with this, but I have a question.

What about humor? I think a really humorous scene can engage the reader, and (I know little about this subject so correct me if I'm wrong) it doesn't seem that conflict is necessary to create laughter (though it often helps even there).

I didn't mean to say that only conflict can engage the reader, but rather that conflict is the best way to do it. And again, conflict doesn't have to be overt or violent; even the conflict of someone wanting something but feeling afraid to go after it (only because of their own internal fears, not because of some external threat) can be enough to engage.

Humor can engage as well but as Penpilot said, it's an adrenaline shot; humor in a narrative doesn't really sustain engagement by itself. This is why stand-up comics don't just tell jokes (with rare exception); they tell mini-narratives that are also funny.

Aside from conflict, relatability engages. If you sympathize with the character and find yourself wanting them to get what they want, you'll feel engaged. I don't know how to reliably do this, though; it's one of the difficult masteries of writing.

 

[BWFoster78]

Either way though, emotional reaction is a huge consideration. For me it's the biggest factor in choosing POV.

I can understand that. Actually, I think your point is a great tip and got me thinking. I'm probably going to change the viewpoint character in one of my scenes because of your post.

Thanks a lot for adding to my workload

 

[BWFoster78]

I didn't mean to say that only conflict can engage the reader, but rather that conflict is the best way to do it. And again, conflict doesn't have to be overt or violent; even the conflict of someone wanting something but feeling afraid to go after it (only because of their own internal fears, not because of some external threat) can be enough to engage.

Humor can engage as well but as Penpilot said, it's an adrenaline shot; humor in a narrative doesn't really sustain engagement by itself. This is why stand-up comics don't just tell jokes (with rare exception); they tell mini-narratives that are also funny.

Aside from conflict, relatability engages. If you sympathize with the character and find yourself wanting them to get what they want, you'll feel engaged. I don't know how to reliably do this, though; it's one of the difficult masteries of writing.

I was not interpreting your comment as saying that conflict is the only way; I was just hoping that someone could expound a little on using humor to drive scenes.

Good point regarding relatability.