Plot Device: The McGuffin

[This is the first of what I plan to be a series explaining various plot devices used in fiction.]

There are many aspects of the nature and mechanics of writing with which even well established professional writers are unaware. It is a matter of some debate as to whether a writer needs to know what these are to be a good writer, but for myself, I find them fascinating, and I like investigating them simply for the sake of expanding my knowledge. Even so, I believe that knowing about them helps my writing, not only to create better plots, but also to avoid pitfalls that can trap unwary amateurs and beginners.

For example, there are two broad categories of important aspects of writing that make stories what they are. One is literary elements. These aspects exist inherently in fiction; they are well-nigh universal, and they appear as emergent characteristics in any work of literature. Examples include plot, theme, motif, protagonist, setting, narrator, and tone. The other category is literary techniques, also known as literary devices. Whereas elements are characteristic of the nature of writing, techniques are part of the mechanics of writing. They are aspects that writers intentionally use to tell their stories; essentially, they are important methods and tools. Though not universal, many appear in most stories. When used well, they can enhance a story, making it more interesting or profound, but if used clumsily, they can weaken a story to the point of rendering it inane or incomprehensible.

Among the many types of literary techniques available are plot devices. These are techniques whose only purpose is to advance, enhance, or maintain the story's plot. They epitomize the idea of how the way a technique is used can strengthen or degrade a story, because they are often misused, either through ignorance of their existence or inexperience of how to properly use them. They also display gradations of skill even when used correctly.

For example, the Ark of the Covenant is practically useless to the plot of Raiders of the Lost Ark, except when it's used as a deus ex machina (literally!) to save the hero and heroine; its only purpose until then is to impel Indiana Jones to acquire it before the Nazis do. In contrast, the One Ring in The Lord of the Rings is more than a mere plot device, because in addition to providing a motive for the adventure (though the real motive is to defeat Sauron), it also serves as a symbol of the lust for power, and it acts as a direct corrupting influence that threatens the success of the entire adventure.

In this and future posts, I make no attempt to instruct on how to use a particular plot device correct, because I am still trying to figure that out myself. Instead, I simply intend to state its existence and attempt to define and describe it. Hopefully, in doing so, I can make others aware of it and perhaps spur them to learn how to use it well.

One common plot device is the MacGuffin. It could almost be viewed as the quintessential plot device, because its sole purpose is to provide the motivating force for the characters in the story to pursue the actions that make up the plot. Essentially, without a MacGuffin, there would be no story. This doesn't mean that every story must have a MacGuffin; rather, it's to point out that it is the exceptional tale that doesn't.

Most MacGuffins are some specific object, place, or person, but they can also be more abstract, such as a general or basic desire for money, success, love, survival, or revenge. In other words, it is anything that spurs the characters to act. Since few stories do not have some kind of motivating force, nearly all stories have a MacGuffin by default. It is the one technique that could almost be an element.

There are two types of MacGuffins, weak and strong. The weak MacGuffin was popularized by Alfred Hitchcock, when he defined it as "nothing at all". By which he meant it was something around which the plot revolved, but whose specific identity was so unimportant that the audience didn't care about it. Basically, a weak MacGuffin has little or no affect on the plot beyond motivating the characters, and often there is virtually no explanation as to why the characters consider it so important. As such, it could appear once, at the beginning of the story, and then disappear never to return, or it could be mentioned but not actually appear at all until the end. It could be present throughout a story but only as a feature in the background, or it need not appear at all. The Maltese Falcon (pictured) is a good example of a weak MacGuffin.

I use the golden mushroom, in the eponymous story, as a weak MacGuffin to get Eile and Sunny into trouble. Other than it being needed by Mephitis the Apothecary to prepare her potions, I don't explain why the Girls refuse to forgo collecting it despite the danger. It makes an appearance at the beginning and end of the story, but plays no part in the events that occur in between. Its only purpose is to get Team Girl to agree to undertake a dangerous mission, but without it there would have been no story. (To be fair, the real motive spurring the Girls to succeed is to save the life of their feline friend, Shadow-stalker, but their desire for the golden mushroom brought that about as well.)

In contrast, a strong MacGuffin, as defined by George Lucas, should have a powerful influence on the plot, and the audience should care about it as much as the main characters. As such, it should appear early, remain throughout the story, and not go away until the conflict is resolved. R2D2 in Star Wars is a good example of a strong MacGuffin, though the One Ring in The Lord of the Rings is a better one.

In my story The Denver Walker , the alien berserker robot serves as a strong MacGuffin. Not only are Eile and Sunny motivated to destroy it before it destroys Denver, they must fight their way through its defenses and avoid being destroyed by its main weapon. As such, the Walker not only initiates the story, but plays an important role as the events unfold. Similarly, in my story Youthful Indiscretion , the Lament Configuration summons Pinhead and the Cenobites to Differel's manor house, and Dr. Mabuse uses it to figure out how to defeat them. It then reappears at the very end to serve as a future threat.

Another way of looking at the MacGuffin, as defined by Yves Lavandier, is as the secret that motivates the villains. Similar to the weak MacGuffin, the protagonist may not know what it is, but neither does he care, not even about why the good guys or bad guys want it. His only interest is in extricating himself from the trouble he finds himself in because of it. In this special case, he feels no need to find it, and in fact would rather avoid finding it so as not to get himself in any deeper. Whether or not he, and by extension the audience, ever learn what the secret is, is left to the discretion of the creator of the story. In a broader sense, Lavandier's definition would be that a MacGuffin is any justification for the story's conflict.

My story The Lions of Inganok makes use of a Lavandier MacGuffin. Medb doesn't care why the idol of Bast has been stolen; all she cares about is finding and retrieving it. Even after the villain tells her why he took it, the explanation plays no part in resolving the conflict. My story Oak Do Hate uses a modified version, in that at first Differel doesn't know how or why her people disappeared, but when she does find out she uses it to devise a plan to restore them.

A final form of the MacGuffin is the "plot coupon". Often used as a term of derision, it refers to a MacGuffin, usually more than one, which is needed to bring about the climax. This is different from a strong MacGuffin in that a strong MacGuffin is virtually a character in its own right, such that any change to the MacGuffin drastically changes the plot, whereas a plot coupon is a random object, wherein any random object could substitute with virtually no change to the plot. An example would be the Sivalinga stone from Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. Indie needs to possess it to succeed, but in the end any powerful sacred object could substitute without changing the story.

The plot coupon is especially prominent when a story has multiple MacGuffins, all of which are needed to bring the story to a climax. As one critic described it, such a story becomes little more than a scavenger hunt to collect them all and trade them in for the ending. Interestingly enough, the typical mystery could be described in this way, with clues forming the plot coupons. After all, the detective (or reader) can't solve the mystery until he has collected all the legitimate clues and separated them from the red herrings. He then "cashes" them in to acquire the solution. However, mystery clues are more like strong MacGuffins, because they have an influence on the plot, and changing any clue changes the solution.

My story No Torrent Like Greed (which I co-wrote with CJ Henderson), uses plot coupons. I could be generous with myself and call them clues, except the story is not a true mystery but more like a detective story. Ultimately, Thorner has no hope of getting himself out of the mess he's found himself in without discovering each coupon in its proper sequence. The only saving grace is that he doesn't need any of them to resolve the story's conflict.