What Makes A Good Story?

[RedMage]

There was a thread here a decade or more ago on "What Is A Story?" It was one of those epic discussions that went on and on, round and round and gave knee jerk reactions to the dozens of forumites who just watched with morbid fascination.

Well, this YouTuber posted a 15 minute video on what a good story is. In order to discuss that, he first defined has to define what a story is. I think he addresses both things admirably and, with only a few minutes of reflection since first watching the vid, I'm inclined to agree with him on both points.

What do you guys think? Both about the video and what makes a good story to you.

 

[Stanley Steamboy]

I guess the 'answer' is a bit reductionist. You need two things, but those two things must be composed of some other things, and those other things are commonly discussed as building blocks of story. And some of those building blocks are essential if your story falls into certain categories, like an adventure. If you are writing a fantasy, you could certainly choose a story with no conflict, but your story will then be a fantasy that isn't quest (or other adventure), and won't actually fit in the confines of genre.

So the Tuber isn't wrong, but he isn't necessarily being helpful by telling us that the components of a story fall into certain categories since you are going to have to be aware of and choose those components anyway.


It is like saying that cooking is Ingredients + Process. Entirely true, since the ingredient categories and processes can take from very disparate places, with grilling eggplant being entirely different from making ice cream. But that misses the essential information that certain things about those ingredients and processes must be in accord for the recipe to produce useful food.

 

[Cicero]

A story that engages and entertains and interesting well realized characters that I care about what happens to them. A story once started keep me coming back for more.


I also have a soft spot for silly pulpy escapist adventures with very obvious tropes and one dismal characters !

 

[Stanley Steamboy]

A story that engages and entertains and interesting well realized characters that I care about what happens to them. A story once started keep me coming back for more.


I also have a soft spot for silly pulpy escapist adventures with very obvious tropes and one dismal characters !

So you didn't watch the video?

 

[RedMage]

I guess the 'answer' is a bit reductionist. You need two things, but those two things must be composed of some other things, and those other things are commonly discussed as building blocks of story. And some of those building blocks are essential if your story falls into certain categories, like an adventure. If you are writing a fantasy, you could certainly choose a story with no conflict, but your story will then be a fantasy that isn't quest (or other adventure), and won't actually fit in the confines of genre.

So the Tuber isn't wrong, but he isn't necessarily being helpful by telling us that the components of a story fall into certain categories since you are going to have to be aware of and choose those components anyway.


It is like saying that cooking is Ingredients + Process. Entirely true, since the ingredient categories and processes can take from very disparate places, with grilling eggplant being entirely different from making ice cream. But that misses the essential information that certain things about those ingredients and processes must be in accord for the recipe to produce useful food.

A good point! So, let's make this more specific to SFFWorld writers. What makes a good scifi, fantasy and/or horror story?

 

[RedMage]

A story that engages and entertains and interesting well realized characters that I care about what happens to them. A story once started keep me coming back for more.


I also have a soft spot for silly pulpy escapist adventures with very obvious tropes and one dismal characters !

So you didn't watch the video?

@Cicero, what do you mean by that? Those are types of stories you personally enjoy (which I make no judgement about). Is a good story to you something that you only know once you've read it?

There are plenty of books that I think sound wonderful from their summaries, but which I put down after only a few chapters. Sometimes just one chapter. Then there are others which the summary sounds fantastic, and reading the whole book leaves me breathless and desperate for more. So, is there a way to determine, a way for us as writers, to decide which of our many story ideas is a good story idea that we should work on, while others need more time in the oven (aka. more development).

 

[Alan L]

I find it funny that virtually every piece of story advice I see is framed in filmmaking. Meanwhile, there are lots of great stories that can't be transformed into good films (and I think the reverse is also true).

His analysis and advice is, IMO, correct. But it's a broad definition. Here in SFFWorld, I presume we're interested in telling SF&F stories. They're genre stories. Readers want our stories to hit the beats that they expect from stories in our genre. If they don't hit those beats, they're not going to be as successful. The masters of the craft are the ones who manage to hit those beats in novel and surprising ways. Maybe one day I'll get to that point but I'm not holding my breath.

This topic has been of great interest to me because I'm not a natural storyteller, I just have ideas I want to explore in fiction. I took some online courses on story structure, learned the three and five act approaches, the hero's journey, blah, blah blah. Wound up sitting there with an idea on one side and a bunch of information and methodologies on the other and no way to connect the two. I discovered the Snowflake Method, and that let me come up with a rough outline, but to reference that video, there was little momentum. The woman who edited my one published short story told me I should take a look at The Story Grid. That gave me an analytical facet that helped me figure out why there was no momentum, but still it wasn't a good story. Then I found The Anatomy of Story and The Anatomy of Genre, both 700 page monsters that break story down into component parts (I have a cheat sheet for Truby's 22 step story structure that might be the most popular post on my site.)

Along the way I looked at a pile of other approaches. The "every scene has to have a conflict and resolution" people and a bunch of other formulaic stuff that might produce good stories in the end, but weren't going to produce the kind of story I wanted to tell. Not that you can't learn and improve a story by looking for those things, but still you can do all of that and still have a story with no momentum.

I think now I have a decent story (read that as I hope like hell I have a decent story). It's unapologetic about being a SF story, and I got there by identifying the beats it need from those 22 steps, looking at what my story wasn't doing, and then hacking away at it until I figured out what do do to fix it.

It's relatively easy to identify what's missing from a story. The trick is figuring out how to fix it.

 

[RedMage]

I find it funny that virtually every piece of story advice I see is framed in filmmaking. Meanwhile, there are lots of great stories that can't be transformed into good films (and I think the reverse is also true).

Same! Everyone talks about Save the Cat and, yet, that was written first and primarily for storytelling in visual media. Yes, yes, it was adapted for the written media and Save the Cat Writes a Novel has been out for... decades now? Plural? I don't know and I'm not going to look for it's publishing or copyright date right now. It can produce great stories and a lot of writers creating written stories like it. I can see why, as I've looked through it myself on more than one occasion. But it doesn't work for me and now I'm digressing... Moving on:

His analysis and advice is, IMO, correct. But it's a broad definition. Here in SFFWorld, I presume we're interested in telling SF&F stories. They're genre stories. Readers want our stories to hit the beats that they expect from stories in our genre. If they don't hit those beats, they're not going to be as successful. The masters of the craft are the ones who manage to hit those beats in novel and surprising ways. Maybe one day I'll get to that point but I'm not holding my breath.

This topic has been of great interest to me because I'm not a natural storyteller, I just have ideas I want to explore in fiction. I took some online courses on story structure, learned the three and five act approaches, the hero's journey, blah, blah blah. Wound up sitting there with an idea on one side and a bunch of information and methodologies on the other and no way to connect the two. I discovered the Snowflake Method, and that let me come up with a rough outline, but to reference that video, there was little momentum. The woman who edited my one published short story told me I should take a look at The Story Grid. That gave me an analytical facet that helped me figure out why there was no momentum, but still it wasn't a good story. Then I found The Anatomy of Story and The Anatomy of Genre, both 700 page monsters that break story down into component parts (I have a cheat sheet for Truby's 22 step story structure that might be the most popular post on my site.)

Ooh, I'll have to check out those books on writing. Thanks for the recommendation!

Last year, I read two books by the writing coach Lisa Cron (link to her site, with books and more): Wired for Story and Story Genius. Definitely worth checking out, too.

Along the way I looked at a pile of other approaches. The "every scene has to have a conflict and resolution" people and a bunch of other formulaic stuff that might produce good stories in the end, but weren't going to produce the kind of story I wanted to tell. Not that you can't learn and improve a story by looking for those things, but still you can do all of that and still have a story with no momentum.

I think now I have a decent story (read that as I hope like hell I have a decent story). It's unapologetic about being a SF story, and I got there by identifying the beats it need from those 22 steps, looking at what my story wasn't doing, and then hacking away at it until I figured out what do do to fix it.

It's relatively easy to identify what's missing from a story. The trick is figuring out how to fix it.

Well said. I love receiving critique on my stories. Some of it can be hard to hear/read, but it's necessary. I love learning what my crit partners enjoyed, what parts made them laugh or what they thought I handled really well. I also like their suggestions for fixing problems. But, that doesn't mean their suggested fixes will actually solve the problem. I don't know if some author "said" it, but I've often heard that crit partners are great at exactly what you said, Alan. Identifying the problem. Finding the solution, not so much. However, I want my partners to suggest things as that gets the wheels turning for me so that I can develop the right solution.

I'm glad to hear that you have a decent story. Now, how have you reached that determination?

I thought my last completed novel was a good story. It had fun characters who were a pleasure to write and just hangout with. An intriguing plot with mystery and adventure, and secondary storylines that I found interesting. My crit partners tore it apart. They loved the characters, but in the end they each found the book had "good bones, but needs lots of work" in terms of plot, world, pacing and more. They each identified the same problems at the same places in the book. And they were correct. It needs a lot of work.

 

[Alan L]

I'm glad to hear that you have a decent story. Now, how have you reached that determination?

Heh. I think I have a good story. The basis is utterly subjective: when I read through what's there I think it's hanging together pretty well (although my attempts to just read through without making significant improvements fail consistently).

I convinced Veronica Olsen, the developer of the writing tool I use (novelWriter.io) to add support for story structure metadata. Then I wrote a tool that pulls that data out for analysis (into a spreadsheet and storyline document). This lets me do the sort of analysis that's covered in The Story Grid. My hope is that will let me cover issues with pace, plot holes, etc. I showed the spreadsheet to a friend and he said "trust you to turn writing into a data analysis project!"

There will be beta readers. I write too slowly for a critique group, and my critique skills are underdeveloped, so it tends to be an unsuccessful, asymmetric relationship. I will leave it to a small cohort of beta readers to either verify my ability to be objective or to bring me back to harsh reality.

Once I incorporate feedback from beta readers it goes to a developmental editor for professional deconstruction, then possibly a second cohort of beta readers before I call the manuscript done.