Elizabeth Russell's Blog, page 19
October 30, 2018
The Six Swans
October 29, 2018
The Children of Lir
October 26, 2018
How to Increase Drama by Lengthening Sentences
October 25, 2018
The Seven Ravens by Ludwig Bechstein
October 23, 2018
The Seven Ravens
October 21, 2018
3 Tips to Improve Sentence Structure
October 16, 2018
Introducing My New Novel: Trinian, An Epic Fantasy
October 9, 2018
Literacy: The Phenomenon that made us Culturally Inept
October 3, 2018
When to Dance to Death – How to End Your Story
In the Grimm’s version of Snow White, the evil queen attends Snow White’s wedding at the end and receives the sentence to dance in iron-hot shoes until she dies. Snow White gets a happy ending, and the Queen dances to death.
Here, the protagonist is happy and the villain is miserable, and all is right and just in the world, but what about the stories where the main character has a tragic ending, [image error]like Hamlet or Gone with the Wind? Why did the author decide to give the protagonists in these stories a pair of theoretical iron-hot shoes? [image error]What was the point? Was it just to break the hearts of readers and make them feel betrayed for investing all this time and attention into the character?
Probably not. If that was their only reason, then they’re a terrible writer (Not to mention person).
But allowing for the benefit of the doubt, what would be their good reason, and how can we know when to apply it in our own stories?
There are two endings to any type of story, and we see them to best advantage in Shakespeare’s brilliant two categories: The Tragedy and the Comedy. (All his Histories can fit into one of these two categories)
[image error]
A comedy ends in rejoicing, marriage, and the promise of a bountiful future.
[image error]
A tragedy ends with death, suffering, and general doom and gloom.
COMEDY
Every story has a protagonist, a main character. It is the job of the protagonist, throughout the story, to overcome the internal and/or external dangers that come their way. Sometimes they overcome them through brawn, sometimes wits, sometimes unflinching goodness, and sometimes just pure good luck.
All of those reasons are legitimate and popular methods of storytelling.
[image error]
Luke Cage uses brawn. Adrian Monk uses wits. Emma Swan uses goodness. The three stooges use luck.
These stories explore the meaning of good fortune, and how we can achieve it. Often, the main character begins without believing in the benefits of his/her force for good. They think they are destined for unhappiness, and don’t know how to use their inner strength. The riveting nature of the story is how he/she learns to accept and grow, until they are a major force to be reckoned with, and can overcome great evil.
TRAGEDY
Sometimes, however, their inner strength is not enough, or they are not able to grow enough to harness it. This is where fallen nature comes into play.
[image error]I watched The Informant the other night, a movie wherein Matt Damon plays a man helping the FBI to uncover illegal activities inside his company. However, about half-way through, the story takes an unexpected twist. We discover that, although he has been helping to uncover legitimate corrupt activities and thinks of himself as a hero for doing so, he has been stealing 11 million dollars on the side all along.
And he doesn’t see himself as a villain.
This is significant. We realize that he was actually an evil force all along, and his refusal to see it results in the FBI turning their attention away from the first crime and entirely onto him. He finally ends up in jail because he refuses to see that he was in the wrong.
This is a tragic ending.
The Informant involves an internal evil that Matt Damon’s character was unwilling to defeat. There are a few stories, however, which are fewer and far between, in which there is an external villain the protagonist cannot conquer.
This rears its head in plays, mostly, such as Shakespeare and Aeschylus. There are very few films that deal in this genre.
This particular evil is almost always Fate. Any evil can be overcome, the story tells us, unless Fate is against us to begin with. We cannot see it, feel it, or get our hands around its throat, so our lives end miserably because Life/Fate/the gods had it out for us in the first place.
Tragedy is either about refusing to wage inward battles, or losing battles against fate.
So there you go! This is the difference between a happy ending and a sad. Did I miss anything? Did I leave out a genre? Love to hear your thoughts in the comments!
RECAP
Comedy endings are about people who overcame all obstacles, inward and outward, and have a hopeful future because of it.
Tragic endings involve either the protagonist’s refusal to accept their weaknesses and seek to overcome them, or else involve intangible Fate destroying them from the outside, no matter what they do.
October 2, 2018
Transfer
In my blue jeans and tan boots, with my blonde hair pulled into a neat ponytail behind dark glassses, I found myself deposited out of Union Station and blinking in the bright twinkling lights of Chicago.
Encountering one Christmas tree building after another, all lit from base to tip, I walked the three blocks to Ogilvie.
[image error]Union Station is old and under renovation, so that it’s impressive build is shrouded in an ugly cloak right now.
But Ogilvie!
This station’s open, curved entrance, full of reflecting glass and white painted steel, steals my breath.
[image error]It’s an amazing thing – architecture. We take it for granted, walking next to it in the street without even noticing. Not stopping to think about how it got there, the history behind it, the intricate workings inside.
But now I stop to think.
All those loads of metal and wood and natural materials stacked together to support staggering weights.
Sometimes, I marvel that a scale, a tiny little object, can hold me.
But I’m nothing compared to a normal house on a thin foundation.
And what about a skyscraper?
Nothing forces us to stop and consider more readily than a skyscraper, with its steel intertwining arches soaring to the heights. [image error]
I lean against a high cafe table and admire it. But soon, as usual, I’m overthinking.
It’s a modern fad, of architects, builders, and business people, to show off the bare bones of a structure, to seek to elicit this reaction of admiration from us. This praise to the feats of man! And it works. It did in the days of the cathedrals, and now it works in the days of a connected world: airports, train stations, business structures that tower to the sky like Babel. [image error]
What a monumental achievement of man! What a hero of the world! What a remarkable certificate to his ability.
They think they’ve discovered all the natural wonders of the world – the Grand Canyon, Mount Everest, the frigid caps of the north. As the world has been conquered and the earth seen, there is naught left but to build our own wonders.
My heart clenches and I frown in frustration.
Why, when I look upon magnificent structures of humanity, after the first flush of admiration has cooled, do I feel such cynicism? I want to admire, respect, and feel uplifted as the architect intended. But I feel only shame at the hubris of man, and despise those who made the structure. Is this a fault inside myself, separate from any intent of the architect, that makes me feel ashamed? Or could it be another modern fad, the one about respecting nature, living in harmony, and not condescending in our arrogance to “master” it?[image error]
Maybe I’ve bought into both fads somehow.
In my mind, my rational part, I believe in a unity between mastery and respect, but what does that mean?
A waiter interrupts my musing to tell me he has to bring in the tables and chairs to lock up, and we smile at each other. He wishes me a good night and bids me stay safe.
I descend to the lower levels below the exposed beams, where once again, enshrouded in covered structures, I take architecture for granted. I sit down at empty tables and reflect.
In our democracy, the word “master” has taken on a derogatory connotation. But it was not so originally. A master, a good master, is not a micromanager or a slave driver. He does not force things to work against their nature.
When I stop to think about it, the true meaning of “master” relates to one who works in harmony with others. Ultimately, he is the guiding force behind a group of people. He brings them together for the benefit of their endeavors, to help them to achieve the greatest results of which they are capable. He connects them.
This is a true master. It is the mastery of which we as human beings, with intellects and a will to work, can relate to the world. We are not meant to dominate, we are meant to nurture.
Relieved, I return to admiring the magnificence of humanity’s achievements. The first step toward harmony with the earth, I think, is not to tear down’s humanity’s achievements in my mind, but for me to understand and live the true definition of “master.”
Shame never constructed anything.
[image error]Bidding farewell to Ogilvie, I board another achievement of man and leave the towers of the city behind me in the night.
