[warfitz45]

I have no writing degree. Most of my study has been through various sources, and primarily concentrated on sentence structure, creating a voice, pacing, etc. However, now that I've finished my 2nd novel, I find myself struggling in one particular area -

PLOTTING!

Personally, I think I failed to study formula writing and so my writing (err - storytelling) tends to be a bit unweildy. Actually, my writing style is frequently praised so I don't think I have a weakness in that area. With plotting, outside of studying the typical 3 Act structure, and only limited in that study, I've not focused on anything. I'd love to see some books/comics/movies/WHATEVER broken down into their 3 act structure, or outline structure, or anything that would help supply form to my learning of this artform.

wf

[Laer Carroll]

Every story writes to a formula to some extent. But "formula" too much suggests mechanically writing to a pattern, especially specific ones well-used or too-well-used.

Instead think of primal patterns, ones used by everyone because they have some deep connection to the ways we feel and think. What have you observed in all the stories in books and films and told while sitting around the lunch table? How can you CREATIVELY use those primal patterns?

Aristotle's three-act-structure and Joseph Campbell's hero's journey are often cited. But those are not general enough for me. An aerospace software and systems engineer who has worked at the very edge of the art for many years, I came up with what (for me) works well.

Every story has the following pattern.


Somewhere, somewhen, someone strives for something. This is true even for Absurdist and Anti-story works if you look deeply enough.
The someone may be a single person or a group who share some common goal (for a time). They may be human, orc or elf, god or paramecia, even a robot as long as it has needs and the desire to satisfy those needs.

The goal may be simple like a treasure or complex like an anti-trust law suit put together by a large team of attorneys. It may be positive, leading to motion toward it, or negative, like evading an invading avalanche of zombies.

Strife may be simple ("Run away!") or complex like a bank heist. Struggle means acting against obstacles. The obstacles may be have locations on one (or MORE) of the four PEMS dimensions - physical, emotional, mental, and social. So can the actions against each obstacle. Shorter stories have fewer obstacles and actions against them. Epic multi-character multi-book stories have many more, and very often a complex mix of them.
________________________________________
Plot (noun) is the path you plot (verb) for your character(s) to overcome or avoid obstacles. In a single ever-futureward time-line such as the one we popularly assume we live in, every action our protagonist(s) take have a cause-effect relationship. The actions may be intended when we have an action-oriented main character such as a detective, but even the most control-freak protagonist may have accidents.

But we can tell the story in a different order than the normal time flow, with flashbacks and flash-forwards. We can even tell it backward.

The spine underneath every plot is made up of obstacle-action vertebrae. Each obstacle must be perceived or predicted, a plan made to overcome or avoid it, the action attempted, and a post-mortem done. ("Whew! Glad that's over!" or "God! Where did we go wrong? How can we possibly do THAT again?")
________________________________________
In the three-act structure the FIRST ACT finds our character(s) in an equilibrium. It may be happy or tragic. Then a trigger-event happens, sometimes called the inciting incident. It delivers a new piece of information which breaks the balance. Our protagonist sees an opportunity to pursue, or a danger to avoid. S/he decides to take action. This is sometimes called the "pivot" of the story, because hi/r life's path will now spin into a new direction.

The SECOND ACT is the long often-hard path toward the goal. The goal may change over time, forcing the protagonist(s) to re-plot their course (with you as their hidden god-like partner in their effort). They make a plan. It may be simple (Flee! or Fight!). Or it may be complex (Reconnoiter, Get resources such as money and weapons, Get to the castle, Scale the walls, Fight the defenders, Mop up). They carry it out. Or try to. Some companions in their striving may die or be permanently defeated and drop out.

The THIRD ACT is when the very last obstacle is attempted or avoided. This is often called the resolution. The situation becomes stable once again. It may be happy or tragic.

Now the protagonist(s) must make a final decision. Do they give up the goal as lost? A treasure may have been destroyed. Or dropped into the deepest ocean or fieriest volcano. Or do they decide whether or not take the goal? It may have become undesirable, either because it changed, or because the protagonist(s) have.

Many romances have a familiar formula/pattern/trope. The mousy/wimpy protagonist yearns for a superjock/cheerleader. They set out to win their love/whatever. They make-over/buff-up and succeed in capturing the interest of their Beloved - with the help of a faithful friend (of the Opposite or Preferred sex). They approach their object of desire. And suddenly they notice their friend is sad. And handsome/gorgeous. And loyal. And true. And witty. And charming. And smart (or appropriately stupid). Scales fall clink! clink! from their eyes. THIS is their True Love!
________________________________________
Chances are none of this primal view of stories is new to you. It or parts of it may be so familiar, though, to be almost invisible. Open your eyes. And venture into your next novel.

[Window Bar]

Con Sellers, a writer of over 100 novels in the 60s, 70s and 80s, died about twenty years ago. He lived close by; so I knew him and took a few classes from him. He was often accused of being a 'formula writer.' Privately, he'd shake his head and say, "If there's a formula, I wish somebody would show it to me."

He considered writing to be hard work. The biggest difference between him and all those who fail was that he did the work.

That said, there are certain structural basics to learn. But just knowing the difference between a foundation and a roof does not equal being an architect.

[KatG]

I have no writing degree. Most of my study has been through various sources, and primarily concentrated on sentence structure, creating a voice, pacing, etc. However, now that I've finished my 2nd novel, I find myself struggling in one particular area -

PLOTTING!

Personally, I think I failed to study formula writing and so my writing (err - storytelling) tends to be a bit unweildy. Actually, my writing style is frequently praised so I don't think I have a weakness in that area. With plotting, outside of studying the typical 3 Act structure, and only limited in that study, I've not focused on anything. I'd love to see some books/comics/movies/WHATEVER broken down into their 3 act structure, or outline structure, or anything that would help supply form to my learning of this artform.

wf

Well we can do that. Most stories can sort of be broken down into three acts, though it's an organizing concept that is more applicable to movies and plays, from whence it came and which usually have a shorter time frame. Is that what you want to do, though? The basic idea of the 3 act is the old line we learned in school: Act 1: rising action; Act 2: bumpy up and down bits; Act 3: climax and resolution.

There is a difference between story and plotting. Are you having characters you like but have no idea what story to put them in? Or do you have a story premise to put them in, but are unsure of how to work them through the idea (plotting)?

[CMTheAuthor]

I agree that trying to divide up your story into a pre-set number of segments would not be the best approach. Books are a bit more organic in design than that.

Instead, I'd suggest looking at the story as a single continuous line of events, where each one flows into the next. If you want to divide it up at all (and I'd advise not to), divide it up by each of these events. Each event should build on the previous one, until you reach whatever your climax is - which is the biggest event of all.

Just be careful with the transitions though, or you'll end up with something that looks like it would fit less in a book than in a episodic format like a TV show, which defeats the point of writing a book in the first place.

[warfitz45]

Well we can do that. Most stories can sort of be broken down into three acts, though it's an organizing concept that is more applicable to movies and plays, from whence it came and which usually have a shorter time frame. Is that what you want to do, though? The basic idea of the 3 act is the old line we learned in school: Act 1: rising action; Act 2: bumpy up and down bits; Act 3: climax and resolution.

There is a difference between story and plotting. Are you having characters you like but have no idea what story to put them in? Or do you have a story premise to put them in, but are unsure of how to work them through the idea (plotting)?

First, thanks to everyone for their advice. I knew when I wrote the word "formula" that I would get some negative reactions, but I'm a firm believer in someone knowing the "rules" prior to "breaking them". In my lifetime, this has worked for everyone in virtually everything, including grammar. I've told many to not break the rules of grammar unless you know why you're doing it. Painters have to study form. Architects study form. Even in my job working w/ "delinquent children", I know a form and train others to fit w/in that form prior to developing their own style of working w/ children. What I am looking for is some sort of form so I can write w/in it and then choose how to adjust as needed, and yes, eventually develop my own organic style.

Laer - I'm going to have to go back through your response as I think much of what you wrote will be applicable as I fully understand it and look at it w/ my overall story arc.

KatG - Mine is definitely a plotting issue. I've wrote the novel. Actually, you even helped me w/ the query letter for the novel (still haven't submitted due to the above-mentioned problems). I sent it to several valued readers, including fellow sffworlder - Steve "B5". The consistent problem from 3 readers, and the ones I'd consider my most skilled, is that it builds to something big but ends too quickly. My hope was to find something that would give some form to the story arc so I could make the best use of my rewrite.

[Dawnstorm]

A formula could help you structure your plots, or it could make them come across mechanical and contrived. You say your writing is "a bit unwieldy", but I'm not sure what to make of this? You did finish two novels, so you did wield your writing, right? Was it tough going? Are you unhappy with the result? How do you know you're stuggling with plot? When does this become acute? On re-reading? While writing?

Also, I often see the three-act structure described in terms of the five-act structure.

Three act structure: Beginning - middle - end. (There are fancy Aristotalian names for that I'm not sure I can remember; except "catastrophe" for end.)

Five act structure: Exposition/Inciting incident - Rising Action - Climax/Turning Point - Falling Action - Resolution/Denouement

Basically, the first views dramatic structure as a linear journey from beginning to end (with normality restored in comedies, and destroyed in tragedies - Aristotle was quite formulaic that way). The second views dramatic structure as symmetric - a move from equilibrium to equilibrium.

Both these structures are really most suited to analysing Greek drama. Modern stories can end during the climax, before the resolution, for example (open ending). Add to that that many novels are episodic in nature (e.g. the picaresque novel) and have no clear dramatic development.

Finally, you can analyse anything with plot:

Three-act Structure:

Beginning: Stomach growls; refrigerator empty
Middle: Decide to order a pizza; choose one; order it
End: Pizza Arrives; rejoice in eating it

Five-act Structure:
Exposition: Stomach growls; refrigerator empty
Rising action: Decide to order pizza; choose one; order it
Climax: Look frequently at watch; doorbell rings; yay, Pizza!
Falling action: Pay for pizza, eat it
Denouement: Leave the cardboard box on the table and go to bed; curse yourself next morning since the room smells of cold grease

If you add complications, the story may change. For example, if you find you don't have the cash to pay the delivery service, your "centre of gravity" shifts:

Exposition: Stomach growls; refrigerater empty; order pizza
Rising Action: Wait to many growls of your stomach, check wallet, ****!
Climax: Doorbell rings, open door, argue with delivery boy (who either bills you, or takes the pizza back away with him, dunno how this works)
Falling Action: Either eating pizza, or sitting around hungry some more
Denouement: Going to bed well fed or hungry

Depending on what you want to do with the story, you could end the no-money version of the story when the doorbell rings, for example.

Really, it's all just a frame of reference to describe what you're doing. And if you do it right it can help you pin-point the problem. But its not mould for stories. It's not writing by numbers. The same events can be arranged differently; your accents matter.

ETA: Ah, if I'd seen your latest post before submitting this one, mine would have looked a lot different - or wouldn't be here at all and I'd be waiting to write a different one.

[KatG]

First, thanks to everyone for their advice. I knew when I wrote the word "formula" that I would get some negative reactions, but I'm a firm believer in someone knowing the "rules" prior to "breaking them". In my lifetime, this has worked for everyone in virtually everything, including grammar. I've told many to not break the rules of grammar unless you know why you're doing it. Painters have to study form. Architects study form. Even in my job working w/ "delinquent children", I know a form and train others to fit w/in that form prior to developing their own style of working w/ children. What I am looking for is some sort of form so I can write w/in it and then choose how to adjust as needed, and yes, eventually develop my own organic style.

KatG - Mine is definitely a plotting issue. I've wrote the novel. Actually, you even helped me w/ the query letter for the novel (still haven't submitted due to the above-mentioned problems). I sent it to several valued readers, including fellow sffworlder - Steve "B5". The consistent problem from 3 readers, and the ones I'd consider my most skilled, is that it builds to something big but ends too quickly. My hope was to find something that would give some form to the story arc so I could make the best use of my rewrite.

Okay, good, mention a few details and I'll remember which one it is. And to be clear, I am in the there are no rules in fiction writing camp. More of the let's look at your specific problem camp. Which isn't the entire structural arc sounds like -- it's the possibility that you're rushing your ending or getting a bit anticlimatic with it. Rushing your ending, particularly rushing action, is a really common problem. Whether it is an actual problem for the story depends on what you wanted to do with the story. Do you feel like the ending is too rushed? Did you shortsheet some major characters? Did you run out of steam on the last events, were uncertain about them? Did you do the action you wanted, but with minimal detail and character inner thought/exposition? Did you have Hamlet and everybody die in one paragraph? It happens a lot, mostly because stuff that is in the writer's head doesn't make it down to the page.

[MrBF1V3]

Wow! There's a formula?

(Dawnstorm, I love the way you make me think.)

Actually, knowing the story I would suggest the set up was epic, the pay-off was episodic. (warfitz, I hope you don't mind me talking about your story in this setting.) It was like the origin of Superman followed by the story of how he caught a group of bank robbers. I think I suggested lessening the set up, maximizing the pay off and mixing the two together so they run together more. (Or something along those lines.) I didn't intend to cause a crisis, the work is fine it's still a bit rough.

If I break down how I usually do plot to the lowest common denominator. It's about how particle 1 gets from point a to point b--which isn't always a journey. Particle 1 is usually a character. There are also other particles, some of which interact with particle 1--some are helpful, some are not, some have their own destination which may be mutually exclusive.

I don't know if it's about learning the rules so you know how to break them in this point. It's figuring out which rules apply and which don't. Not only is every story different, every story teller is different too. Consider a story you might tell your friends sitting around the table. The same pattern applies.


B5

[warfitz45]

Wow! There's a formula?

(Dawnstorm, I love the way you make me think.)

If I break down how I usually do plot to the lowest common denominator. It's about how particle 1 gets from point a to point b--which isn't always a journey. Particle 1 is usually a character. There are also other particles, some of which interact with particle 1--some are helpful, some are not, some have their own destination which may be mutually exclusive.

I don't know if it's about learning the rules so you know how to break them in this point. It's figuring out which rules apply and which don't. Not only is every story different, every story teller is different too. Consider a story you might tell your friends sitting around the table. The same pattern applies.

As for unweildiness, there's always editing.

B5

You should know! You read it! I'm really glad you jumped into here. It'll make explaining things a bit easier if you're in the background telling me - "No, that's not what you wrote!"