Your Opinion on Building Tension in This Scene:

[BWFoster78]

Here's the scenario:

We see Character A in mortal peril at the end of a scene. In the following scenes, Characters B, C, and D realize that Character A should have returned a long time ago.

I show Character B saying something like this, "Character A must be okay." and "That's a good sign (that Character A is okay), right?"

My feeling is that these kind of statements emphasize Character B's worry about Character A. My editor says that statments like these decrease tension because "Never say your character must be OK when he/she is in danger. OK = no tension."

While I agree with the sentiment, I think, perhaps, the issue is that the editor didn't read doubt and hopefulness into the statements, though it boggles my mind how anyone can misinterpret that. Would you:

1. Get rid of those references
2. Make the inherent doubt of the references somehow more clear
3. Leave the references as is

Thanks.

Brian

 

[Steerpike]

I think the references are fine, and I would interpret it as Character B trying to reassure himself that Character A is OK. The tension is created because A is shown in peril at the end of the previous scene and hasn't returned. The fact that Character B supposes A must be OK doesn't really affect the tension in my view. Firstly, even if Character B honestly believes A must be OK, Character B could very well be wrong, since he has no real knowledge of whether A is OK. Secondly, in this case it is evidence of worry and attempts to reassure oneself than anything. I don't think most readers would misinterpret that.

 

[Braveface]

Yeah, if it is to reassure themselves...or even deny reality because maybe they don't want to have to face whatever has endangered 'A' in a rescue mission. Their body language would reflect this. Maybe breathing differently, arguing too intently, bringing up instances when A got back just fine...when C & D have worried over nothing. It should be over-the-top "He's FINE". I like the idea of them imagining what action will be taken if it comes to a rescue attempt and getting the adrenaline rush in advance, just whilst sitting there. This might affect speech, making it more disorientated.

 

[Devor]

I agree with your editor.

I see the doubt and fear, but I still feel that the false reassurances decrease the tension instead of increase it. These statements are meant to reassure the character. Now substitute the reader for the character. Either:

- They work, and the reader is reassured as well.
- They don't work. So what's the point?

Either way, I don't see an increase in tension. I only see a break in the buildup. I mean, maybe if they're followed by something that raises tension:

"He's going to be okay, right?"

"No, he's not going to be okay, SHUT UP! Just SHUT. UP. He's going to die, and all you can do is lie about it? Don't you care?"

"Right now, no, I can care later. It's time to stand the Hell up and face the job in front of us. There's time for fearing and grieving, but it's not now, damnit."

That sorta thing.

 

[Svrtnsse]

I guess it depends on what's happening around the comments B makes. From your original post its obvious that B is worried about A, but does it come through in the context of the story? If it doesn't, maybe the reader will think B really thinks A is okay. If you're showing B as being nervous/worried then the words they say really shouldn't be an issue - rather, it seems to me they'd just emphasize how worried they really are.

 

[BWFoster78]

I guess it depends on what's happening around the comments B makes. From your original post its obvious that B is worried about A, but does it come through in the context of the story? If it doesn't, maybe the reader will think B really thinks A is okay. If you're showing B as being nervous/worried then the words they say really shouldn't be an issue - rather, it seems to me they'd just emphasize how worried they really are.

Svrtnsse,

The argument seems to be:

A - Steerpike (if I've accurately captured his thoughts) and I think that the words add an emotional component that makes the situation more tense.

vs.

B - The editor and Devor (again, if I've accurately understood) feel that the words inherently detract from the tension.

This is an interesting discussion. I'd love to get more input.

 

[Twook00]

I can see both sides. I don't really feel like it adds tension to the scene, but I can understand a character making these statements. I interpret it as this character is afraid and is trying to reassure him/herself.

Adding tension, at least in my mind, would be better done by the characters finding Character A's shoe or something similar. Something that hints at danger and points to the worst possible conclusions.

In my hometown, we had a flash flood last year that devastated a community in our area. Two of our locals (one a police officer and one a wildlife officer) were called out for search and rescue.

These two officers went into a house that collapsed while they were inside. The next day, we learned that the two officers could not be found. For a couple of days, we we're glued to our local sources (friends, facebook, news, etc.) and it was much the same as you mentioned. People were trying to stay positive and reassure one another that these guys would survive. This eased tensioned by making us feel better about the situation.

But as time slipped by and the officers' boats were found and then other missing people were found (deceased unfortunately), that's when folks started feeling anxious.

 

[Steerpike]

Yep, that's my view, given the context. As a reader, I know Character A is in peril. I know Character B doesn't know whether A is OK or not, so B's statement can't detract from that tension for me. Rather, B's statement highlight's worry, which can be shared by the reader and tension can be added that way.

 

[Devor]

If the character is in mortal peril, the reader should already feel worried. The question about whether it increases tension comes down to whether the statements represent a higher or lower amount of worry than the reader is already feeling. To me, the statements reflect a lower degree of worry than what I expect the reader to already be experiencing after a cliffhanger. That's a guess, but if the cliffhanger was strong, I think it's a good guess.

As Twook00 illustrated with his example above, denial is an early stage of worry - not one that shows an escalated state of worry. I think you would get a much higher amount of tension by showing anger, depression, bargaining, or even acceptance that he's already dead.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

Here's the scenario:
My editor says that statments like these decrease tension because "Never say your character must be OK when he/she is in danger. OK = no tension."

If someone said this to me, I might be inclined to think I didn't convey the scene's intention properly. At this point, is the dialogue about the character in the last scene, or is it about the present character dealing with worry? It seems you're trying to have a link between the two chapters with the tension from one being transferred to the next.

I think that can work fine IF you shift the emotional focus well, while keeping the safety in question. To do this effectively, it needs a LOT more than dialogue. As a reader, I need to see some real trepidation or fear on this other character's face, or if it's a POV character, let me sense the emotion and internal sensations that accompany an overwhelming unease (or whatever they are truly feeling).

If done well, you could even increase the tension by letting the reader experience the worry, the coping mechanisms of this character, and the inability to actually settle a gnawing doubt.

 

[BWFoster78]

At this point, is the dialogue about the character in the last scene, or is it about the present character dealing with worry? It seems you're trying to have a link between the two chapters with the tension from one being transferred to the next.

The scene tension is based on B trying to find A. However, I don't think that I should leave previous tension out because the character in this scene has a specific scene goal. The fact that the group is being pursued should still add tension, as should their search for A.

It's my belief that A's mortal peril adds tension to all time passing between the end of that scene and the scene where A is finally found.

I think that can work fine IF you shift the emotional focus well, while keeping the safety in question. To do this effectively, it needs a LOT more than dialogue.

See, I don't get this. As Steerpike wrote, a reader should understand that, since B has no knowledge of A's safety, nothing that B does or thinks (assuming no supernatural ability) can possibly make A safer.

Hence, what the dialogue accomplishes is to SHOW a natural reaction to a situation in which a friend is in danger. If someone told me, "Brian, T.Allen is in danger." I'd say, "Man, I hope he's okay."

If done well, you could even increase the tension by letting the reader experience the worry, the coping mechanisms of this character, and the inability to actually settle a gnawing doubt.

I get what you're saying, but I'm worried about pace. I think, perhaps, it is better for me in this scene to focus on the frantic need to find A and minimize internal worrying, etc.

 

[T.Allen.Smith]

The scene tension is based on B trying to find A. However, I don't think that I should leave previous tension out because the character in this scene has a specific scene goal. The fact that the group is being pursued should still add tension, as should their search for A.

It's my belief that A's mortal peril adds tension to all time passing between the end of that scene and the scene where A is finally found.

I agree. My intention was to tell you that you can carry the emotion forward through another character.

See, I don't get this. As Steerpike wrote, a reader should understand that, since B has no knowledge of A's safety, nothing that B does or thinks (assuming no supernatural ability) can possibly make A safer.

Hence, what the dialogue accomplishes is to SHOW a natural reaction to a situation in which a friend is in danger. If someone told me, "Brian, T.Allen is in danger." I'd say, "Man, I hope he's okay."

I'm not saying you shouldn't have the dialogue. I'm saying you might need more than just dialogue. If you want to transfer the tension from character A to character B, adding an extra layer or two of emotion, might be more effective.

I get what you're saying, but I'm worried about pace. I think, perhaps, it is better for me in this scene to focus on the frantic need to find A and minimize internal worrying, etc.

You don't need to be overly verbose to convey the emotion of the scene's beginning. When I said, a LOT more, I didn't mean to imply that you had to add 1k words to do this well. I meant only that you might need a couple cooperating angles to transfer the tension and emotion well (dialogue & description primarily). You can be efficient with space, and keep the pace quick, if you chose the right, and powerful, descriptors.

 

[Svrtnsse]

You don't need to be overly verbose to convey the emotion of the scene's beginning. When I said, a LOT more, I didn't mean to imply that you had to add 1k words to do this well. I meant only that you might need a couple cooperating angles to transfer the tension and emotion well (dialogue & description primarily). You can be efficient with space, and keep the pace quick, if you chose the right, and powerful, descriptors.

You mean something like:
"I'm sure A is fine, don't worry," said B, from where he sat leaning against a tree.
or
"I'm sure A is fine, don't worry," said B, pacing back and forth.

The words B is saying are the same but the descriptions convey two very different ways of saying it. I don't know if you might be already doing something like that or if it's just the dialogue, but if you aren't, it might be a good idea.

 

[Twook00]

The characters should also stay true to themselves and react in a way that's expected. If this is written in 3rd limited, you might have a character say "Look, I'm sure Character A is fine," only to have him think the opposite. What is taking him so long? Come on, Character A, help us out here.

 

[Helen]

Here's the scenario:

We see Character A in mortal peril at the end of a scene. In the following scenes, Characters B, C, and D realize that Character A should have returned a long time ago.

I show Character B saying something like this, "Character A must be okay." and "That's a good sign (that Character A is okay), right?"

My feeling is that these kind of statements emphasize Character B's worry about Character A. My editor says that statments like these decrease tension because "Never say your character must be OK when he/she is in danger. OK = no tension."

While I agree with the sentiment, I think, perhaps, the issue is that the editor didn't read doubt and hopefulness into the statements, though it boggles my mind how anyone can misinterpret that. Would you:

1. Get rid of those references
2. Make the inherent doubt of the references somehow more clear
3. Leave the references as is

Thanks.

Brian

There's a similar line in THE HANGOVER when they're waiting for the cops to release the Mercedes.

So I say it's good.

 

[PaulineMRoss]

We see Character A in mortal peril at the end of a scene. In the following scenes, Characters B, C, and D realize that Character A should have returned a long time ago.

I show Character B saying something like this, "Character A must be okay." and "That's a good sign (that Character A is okay), right?"

My feeling is that these kind of statements emphasize Character B's worry about Character A. My editor says that statments like these decrease tension because "Never say your character must be OK when he/she is in danger. OK = no tension."

I think your editor is wrong. So long as there's no ambiguity about Character A's situation and the reader knows absolutely that A's peril is real and serious, it's not a problem. In fact, what B, C and D say can INCREASE the tension:

"Character A must be okay": Reader thinks: 'Oh no! They're not going to rescue A! He's DOOMED!'

"Is Character A okay, do you think?": Reader thinks: 'Aha! They're going to rescue A! This should be GREAT! But he's in real trouble, how on earth are they going to find him/get there in time/release him from the dastardly wizard's spell...?'

Either way works for me. As someone else said, there are various stages in the worrying-about-a-missing-person scenarion, and which ones you show depends on your characters and how you want to pace the scene (long discussion or straight to 'let's go look for A'). But there's loads of tension in it, whatever you decide.