Decisions and character
The decisive points of a story are decisive for a reason, it’s when the character made the decision to act!
What an epiphany that was! I felt like such a fool once I realised the weight of those words, and it wasn’t that long ago…
But it is a true statement. I’ve come to start viewing act finale/climax/turn’s as decisive points in the story. Obviously this leads more to a character driven story, where the major happenings cause the character to change their mind. But nonetheless I like it.
I read the gist of this idea in Tobias’ 20 Major Plots. It’s got some killer nuggets for sure, wisdom that passes quickly and disappears. Fleeting ideas that grasp like water. But the best bit is his view of story.
There’s only two.
Stories of the body.
Stories of the mind.
Mind-fucking-blowing. Think about it. And he’s riffing off of that from Dante’s Inferno. The stages of Hell and its levels.
I will in no way do it justice.
BUT…
That’s not why we’re here. We’re talking about decisions. And that’s the best thing for character driven work, it’s their mind that’s changing. But I figure you can marry the idea of a action driving plot and a character one by the understanding of decision. The driving of the climaxes and major scenes will always change a mind. Maybe the Uber character isn’t real after all? Maybe Superman isn’t so hard to write if you take away his powers? He’s a man after all.
What an unlocking screw.
Of course Robert McKee said this in Story too, but I guess I didn’t get it until I got it.
It’s interesting though that with writing and the craft, the more you learn the more tools you get. I think that maybe when we browse the writing section in any bookstore we see the ‘How to write…’, ‘The definitive guide to…’, and we think there’s only one way.
But in fact there’s may ways. There’s a way for every person. Because I can’t not think of Dan O’Bannon’s ideas of story and conflict without pairing it to the aforementioned theories.
The story is driven by conflict. Conflict is driven by the characters. The characters are driven by the decisions they make, or don’t.
Makes a little too much sense to me, know what I’m saying?
But it’s an effective tool because (I’ve crapped on a bit here), you can define the conflict anyway you want. You have your inciting incident, your setup/catalyst/Act 1 Climax, whatever you want to call it, and you’ve got the crux of what is going to play out in the next pages.
Whatever happens at the deciding point is a decision.
Well what constitutes the next parts? The next climaxes? The views to and for, against and with, the ideas evolving that initial decision that will ultimately lead to the ENDING.
I like it.
I guess it could be Answering the Call and all that. What matters is this chump of a writer understands it.
Which means everyone else can too.
Who’d a thought?
[image error]
