SciFi and Fantasy Book Club discussion
Members' Chat
>
Event based or character based?
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Phillip
(last edited Apr 10, 2019 12:01PM)
(new)
Dec 01, 2018 01:21PM
I just came from my local writing group where we had a discussion on character-driven plot (1-2 POV characters, many intimate details on the same people) and event-driven plot (far more characters, multiple POVs, less time with each). Let me start by saying that there are countless good examples of both. I'm curious if people here feel one is PREFERABLE to the other? Most in my group liked character-driven stories with minimal characters. That way the reader can really get to know them. I was in the minority in liking an event being the focus. This takes more characters, but I think readers are smart enough to handle it. When it's all said and done, I prefer the span of ASOIAF over the intimacy of The Hunger Games. Thoughts?
reply
|
flag
I can’t comment on either of those two but I think I prefer character-driven plots. I love character studies and literally read and watch things with just one or a few characters, like a chamber play. I like introspection and love getting under the skin of characters. But I have of course read dreadful stories like this and I’ve also read great event-driven stories so a lot comes down to the writing I guess.
That depends on the type of novel and the mood I'm in. That said, it's hard to like an event based novel if there aren't any characters I like.But I don't mind long, complicated novels contemporary or classic, and read Charles Dickens who often has many characters, although that's not all I like to read. As long as there is a solid core.
In addition, I think you can have a character driven novel with many characters as long as the protagonist and only a few others play the largest roles. I can't think of an example off the top of my head, but I know I have encountered this before.
When it comes to scifi, that also varies.
I believe that the best kind of story will have a few main characters with good depth to them, mixed with an interesting event-driven plot. A story with well developed characters but in which next to nothing happens may be okay for a romance story, but would be a snooze-fest for most other genres. In reverse, a plot full of twists and action will be wasted if there is nobody worth mentioning present to drive the action. Take for example a book about naval battles. You may have big guns thundering, missiles going off and ships exploding and sinking, but if your characters are like emotionless, anonymous robots, then your 'thriller' will sink pretty fast. If you have a charismatic, full of fire captain in charge but the only thing that happens is the two fleets simply watching each other for the length of the book, then I would bail out pretty early.
I'm a concept person. I want a book that's concept driven. I won't take a second look at a book unless the concept is provocative enough to catch my attention. It won't hold my attention without a central character that is unusual enough to keep me reading, and a complex plot that doesn't feel predictable and keeps me guessing. In other words, I want it all.
Shomeret is right, the original question is false. In science fiction I want it all, of course, but especially I want a focus on Ideas. I want the What If and the Sense of Wonder.
Character-driven plot and event-driven plot are just two methods out of many that can be used to present a story. A mixture of character driven and event driven is just another format. A few characters bringing the reader along for a ride through a story has always been a popular format. For a while now it has been extraordinarily popular. One can write a story using any format they want to, the problem is being able to get it in front of the audience that like that particular format. The reading audience has never been bigger for any format, but getting a story out to where the target audience can see it can be quite difficult with all the works being published nowadays.
Using a very popular format means less advertising effort is needed to find the audience. One still has the problem of getting the story out in front of all the stories so the audience can see it.
It's a difficult balance to strike. Too much "naval gazing" and the reader can lose interest. Too much action and the reader never connects with the characters. The thing you're really looking for is various forms of conflict. I think it was Patterson who said it's all about a series of questions and answers. The ah-ha moments. Create a question for the reader, then find an unexpected place to answer it. But you will have needed adequate character development for it to have the desired impact.
Both. I want to read about interesting people doing interesting things. Do you really know a person if you see them in only a few common situations? Push them out of their comfort zone, and you might see a different side, hidden depths, change.
Brian wrote: "It's a difficult balance to strike. Too much "naval gazing" and the reader can lose interest. "This is true. By the third boat I’m ready to call it a day.
Trike wrote: "Brian wrote: "It's a difficult balance to strike. Too much "naval gazing" and the reader can lose interest. "This is true. By the third boat I’m ready to call it a day."
Oops. This is why I have an editor.
Like Shomeret and Cheryl, I would also add in concept/world-building as a key element. My general rule of thumb is that a good story needs to have a lot of depth in at least two of the three (character, events, or concept/world) to really work for me. Only a very talented author can focus on just one and still write a story that I love. Between events and character, I would say that my preference is usually for character.
Character for me. If I can't connect/relate to the MC then it won't be a favorite and/or memorable enough.
Robert McKee, Story, argues that plot (action) and character are two sides of the same coin. If you change one then you inevitably change the other. Another analogy is to think of the plot as the train that carries character as the cargo. If capital 'S' Story is about character in conflict and the change that results, then there is no separation into plot-driven or character-driven stories.
Shomeret wrote: "I'm a concept person. I want a book that's concept driven. I won't take a second look at a book unless the concept is provocative enough to catch my attention. It won't hold my attention without a ..."I don't think a concept-driven story is by default either an event-driven or character-driven story.
For example, I think all Philip K. Dick novels are both concept and character driven. The concept is what the characters are exploring or reacting to. We see the world and the concept through their eyes and their actions. The book is ultimately about the concept, but only as reflected through the main character(s) experience. Dune is the same way: high concept seen through the experience of the main characters.
Examples of event driven novels (in Science Fiction since that's about all I read) would be books like Asimov's Foundation Trilogy or Olaf Stapledon's 1930 First and Last Men, which is a SF history of the human race from "now" until its end. Those are also concept-driven works. But it's the flow of events, rather than the characters, which are the main focus. The characters are all pretty much bit part players, coming into and going out of the story as their small roll waxes and wanes.
The difference is HOW we're presented the concept. Is it through the eyes and actions of a set cast of characters? Or are the characters all a transient group, involved only for their certain part in the greater story?
If you know old movies, then look at The Longest Day, the classic WWII D-Day invasion flick with a cast of a thousand, but a movie without a main character. Every actor in it has a bit part. That's an event-driven story.
Mod
I don't think either is superior--as others have said, it's about the ability to build a connection and bring us along for the ride, whether that's mostly internal or if it's a rollercoaster of a plot.
I wonder if this relates to gender at all. Women definitely seem to prefer character-centric stories over event-centric ones.The vast majority of the audience for reality shows that feature relationships (the various Housewives of X, marriage shows, etc.) are women, while men tend to watch event programming (sports, history, building/crafting shows, etc.).
That’s not me saying this, that’s how the demographics break for those genres. Similarly we see that sort of dichotomy in fiction when it comes to genres like Romance versus TechnoThrillers, and those are pretty definitively character versus event.
Mod
The vast majority of the audience for reality shows that feature relat..."
I think there are a lot of confounding factors that would make this explanation reductive :)
you mean more women than men watch Survivor, Amazing Race, Pickers, American Chopper, Deadly Catch, Gold Rush Alaska, Iron Resurrection, Ted Nugent's hunting show, Car Masters, Shifting Gears, Men at Arms: The art of War, Race Night, Mater at Arms, Ice Roads, Shut up and Dribble, etc. There's even a whole channel devoted to reality hunting shows
Mod
no problem, sweeping generalizations bother me a bit, hence my replyto go back on topic, an evetn driven book would be most of George R.R. Martin's recent short stories set in the Games of thrones world. They're boring and seem to be more a recitation of events with no characterization involved at all. I need both events and character driven combined together. If I can't get a sense of at least the main character and some of their thought processes, it's boring.
Mod
Character and events are equally important. Without the event the character will not meet or be defeated by whatever challenges them.
If I had to pick, I'd say character is more important. I'd rather read something with compelling characters who do nothing than something where lots of crazy stuff happens to people I don't give a crap about. But obviously I'll only be happy if the book has both.
I think I prefer event-driven plots, in general. Spindle's End is one of the exceptions, but that is mostly because I loved the setting and the narration. The characters are fine, but not my favorite part.The original post mentions ASOIAF having an event-driven plot, which surprises me. I never made it through the first book, but that's because I got bogged down in the early chapters -- I just wanted a bit more narrative drive for such a long book. It seemed very character focused.
And I can definitely get invested in the characters in an event-driven plot; Tolkien is the obvious example here. Even his secondary characters get some great character moments.
it seemed pretty intimate to me - you pretty much knew what was driving most of the main characters. I liked the realism of the characters in that series
I really like amazing characters who are involved in events and do lots of stuff. If I don’t like the characters I don’t give a flying fig what they’re doing but by the same token amazing characters who don’t do anything much bore me to tears. Just finished Mark Lawrence’s Book of the Ancestor series and it had it all. Brilliant characters and lots of events and action for them to get their teeth into. Perfect.
Yep Red Sister, Grey Sister and Holy Sister. As well as a short story between 2 and 3 called Bound that you can get on kindle. It's about time you checked them out. Mark is an amazing writer.
Red Sister was a group BotM in December 2017. Mark Lawrence did a Q&A with us.
SciFi and Fantasy Book Club
Books mentioned in this topic
Red Sister (other topics)Spindle's End (other topics)
Story: Substance, Structure, Style, and the Principles of Screenwriting (other topics)
