One's Gotta Go: A Game

[Kristin B.]

I'm with Allisson and Gabi. Not a fan of the all powerful item.

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*]

Phillip wrote: "I agree. Everyone doesn't have to be related to everyone else. I think Han Solo literally knows every other Star Wars character at this point. "

Agreed

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*]

Kristin B. wrote: "I'm with Allisson and Gabi. Not a fan of the all powerful item."

Im reading a series right now with a super powerful item - so powerful it had to be broken into parts. But the item is so strong that most people cannot use it without going insane. So while the party is gathering the items, very few people - if any - can use it. Those who touch it for more than a few seconds have gone insane. Thus far only 2 people in 4 books have been able to wield it and one had the shielding of a god.

I'm kinda adoring this McGuffin.

[Allison, Fairy Mod-mother]

That's not a McGuffin, if it's actually important to the plot. McGuffins are usually items used to drive plot that aren't actually important to it. Or, similarly, that isn't important to the real climax. So, like, the Holy Grail in Arthurian legend, to use a beloved example. Or the super duper magical dude in Theft of Swords. Completely irrelevant to the actual plot, but everyone wants it anyways. Often used, if at all, to explain something tangential.

The test is "is the item interchangeable with something else of value and is the nature of the item irrelevant to the plot."

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*]

But...wouldn't the mcguffin then actually just be another form of dues ex machina?

[Allison, Fairy Mod-mother]

Sometimes! McGuffin is clasically like the briefcase in Ronin or Pulp Fiction, which is apparently SUPER IMPORTANT but you never know what it is.

The super-powered, super strong one is something that doesn't actually resolve anything in the story...it can sometimes be used in deus ex machina moments (which is my ultimate frustration with it) which has separate subtropes that are also irritating.

So, like the stone of Riva in the Belgariad is something I could have done without. The story of him taking the throne and learning magic had almost nothing to do with the stone, it was just there for a plot device/quest object/easy button for some of the less critical plot points.

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*]

Allison wrote: "Sometimes! McGuffin is clasically like the briefcase in Ronin or Pulp Fiction, which is apparently SUPER IMPORTANT but you never know what it is.

The super-powered, super strong one is something ..."

I disagree (about the Orb of Aldur). It's the only reason for the entire series, for the most part. It's also a Quest for the Important Thing but the Thing cannot be replaced. Belgarion's growth is important, too. But without the Thing, Belgarion wouldn't need to exist.

[Allison, Fairy Mod-mother]

But what does that thing do? That's the mcguffin-y bit. We NEED this thing because...because! Without it, this whole book has no meaning! What does it do? It...it makes people stronger! But not all people. Only people bonded with it, and frankly, they're already pretty ridiculously strong. What if the god had used a book instead of a rock? What is settled by this object? Does Belgarion get something new because he gets it back? Does the story end and all evil perish?

I love the Belgariad, and I don't think this is the most egregious example, I just knew it was one you'd have context for :)

Compare with the deathly hallows. They're sort of a mcguffin, but in wielding all of them, something happens that changes the outcome of the plot.

ETA so I stay on topic, I don't actually mind mcguffins in and of themselves. I do, however, think the super-powered ones are annoying because it seems to create more plot holes or provide fodder for deus ex machinas, and those I dislike. So, of the options Phil provided, that'd be the one I'd nix!

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*]

Allison wrote: "But what does that thing do? That's the mcguffin-y bit. We NEED this thing because...because! Without it, this whole book has no meaning! What does it do? It...it makes people stronger! But not all..."


Did you read the other series and prequels? Those questions are answered. But, some of these questions come up because of the editing/publishing process. The original work was 3 books, not 5. The next series was always intended to finish it up. Plus a lot was cut in editing but you can read more in the Rivan Codex (not recommended as it isn't a story but WIP notes, religious texts and historical world-building - you know, writers stuff)

Slightly spoilerish below but not TOO spoilerly if you want to read.

(view spoiler)[It is powerful enough to allow the carrier to spell his name in the sky with stars. It is a fundamental part of the creation of the universe. It used to allow any to touch it but Torak used it against nature. This caused it to disallow the touch of anyone willing to use it for personal use/gain. Exception: the decedents of Riva Strong-Grip. Not even the Gods can take it up again since it is stronger that the gods. In the end, it turns out that the Orb is one part of a stone that was divided as the universe was divided. Part 1 is the Orb and it traveled the world (allowing the Quest). Part 2 is Not-the-Orb and it doesn't show up until the 2nd series. But either way, they are the reason for the quest. The 1 person able to use both would rule the world and all worlds (hide spoiler)]

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*]

I guess, what I'm saying is...it's hard for me to see the difference between McGuffin and deus ex machina. If the McGuffin is just for power, then its deus ex machina... If it does nothing...its just window dressing...

If its important and we don't know why...maybe just bad writing?

[Allison, Fairy Mod-mother]

McGuffins are the the quest item that makes the plot. It's simple in heists and spy movies: they're the papers or the jewel or whatever. Need it! Why? Because! Doesn't matter!

Powerful object mcguffins are the same, they're just the vehicle used to propel a story, but I find personally they're often times used as an outside reason for something to happen (deus ex, like when the Book from Hocus Pocus shoots lightning at the witches to get the kids out of a jam) or create plot holes (why did nobody tell Dorothy about the ruby slippers when she first got them?)

[Pixiegirl105]

The McGuffins in my opinion along with deus ex machina the writer's way of going oops...I made this part too hard for my characters. "the characters look in the wall and thus is the exact object they need to cross the bridge." No effort. It's a shortcut to actual good writing. I actually stopped reading a book once because the main character was made too strong to the point the first antagonist they went after was an actual god in the book.

That whole Han Solo knows everyone in the Star Wars Universe now brings up a good question. Was he actually a bad guy? I mean it's pretty coincidental when he literally meets everyone. Though the same could be said for Chewy.

Honestly, I really have no opinions on this group but just wanted to put these two things out there. Lol.

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*]

Pixiegirl105 wrote: "That whole Han Solo knows everyone in the Star Wars Universe now brings up a good question. Was he actually a bad guy? I mean it's pretty coincidental when he literally meets everyone. Though the same could be said for Chewy. "

What do you mean? I mean, Hans Solo is more of a [class:]rogue than a bad guy, imo

[Pixiegirl105]

MrsJoseph *grouchy* wrote: "Pixiegirl105 wrote: "That whole Han Solo knows everyone in the Star Wars Universe now brings up a good question. Was he actually a bad guy? I mean it's pretty coincidental when he literally meets e..."

from Phillip earlier:
Phillip
5 hours, 28 min ago

Phillip Murrell | 265 comments
MrsJoseph *grouchy* wrote: "Intimate relationship between protag and antag. It gets olllldddd. I'm not too into McGuffins but...some of my favorite series are mostly based around locating said McGuffin."

I agree. Everyone doesn't have to be related to everyone else. I think Han Solo literally knows every other Star Wars character at this point.

So I was just supposing that maybe his knowing all the characters means that he's just manipulating everyone. Playing each side against the other. Lol...it was supposed to be funny but apparently fell flat. so never mind.

[Sandy]

McGuffin for me as well. It seems like it is a cop out. I don't mind where they are searching for some type of win the day thing - just don't want them to have to use it to win. Find it to stop the other guy yeah ok.

[Cheryl]

Gotta go with #3. In my experience it always feels like a gimmick, never feels authentic or believable that there'd be so much 'chemistry' or whatever that they'd forget everything else that had been important to them.

[Allison, Fairy Mod-mother]

One tense/POV has to go:

1. Third person omniscient progressive (He is tripping down the road when he sees her. She is smiling, she is waving, she is planning his doom.)
2. Third person omniscient, past tense (They walked onwards, neither knowing what the other was about to do.)
3. First person past tense (I had no idea what she was thinking.)
4. First person present tense (I smile at him and he turns to stone.)

[CBRetriever]

crud, now I gotta go look up what those are. American schools do not teach grammar and tenses very well. It's one reason I had trouble learning French, they'd say this is the

Subjonctif présent
or
Subjonctif passé
or
Subjonctif imparfait
or
Subjonctif perfect

and I'd be: "WTF is that" (much more politely of course), but I seriously have no idea of tenses in English and I received straight As and Bs in English.

I can find 1, 3, and 4. Maybe some examples of each? I feel clueless here.

[Allison, Fairy Mod-mother]

Good idea, Chessie! Edited for examples. Sorry, I guess my subconscious is feeling Gorgon-ly today.

[Sandy]

I agree number 2

[Jemppu]

Drat... I keep deleting my comment (Sorry, Sandy). Too late to think or start anything XD

But yeah, #2. Let's get rid of the default. Feels the most 'tired' of them: the most usual and unimaginative (from reporting to history books to "once upon a time").

[CBRetriever]

first person present for me. I've never been a big fan of 1st person, but have come to terms with it,

[DivaDiane]

Yeah, I’m not a big fan of First Person present tense. Especially if they flit from character to character. I find that disorienting.

[YouKneeK]

I don’t usually have much trouble adjusting to whatever tense/POV an author chooses to use. After a few pages, my awareness of the writing style fades as I focus on the story.

However, I do still get pulled out of a story if there’s too much head hopping, especially if the author doesn’t make it clear whose head we’ve hopped into and I have to pause to sort out what’s going on. I prefer the convention of one POV per section break (third person limited?). For that reason, I’d pick one of the third person omniscient options to go away.

Of those two, I’m not sure I’ve ever read anything in “third person omniscient progressive” style, but that seems like it could add some more distraction on top of an already distracting style, so I’d probably pick that one. I prefer more subtle styles that allow me to focus on the story without calling attention to themselves.

On the other hand, “third person omniscient, past tense” is used much more commonly so getting rid of that one might reduce the amount of third person omniscient in the world overall, which I would be in favor of. However, I wouldn’t want to lose already-written works in that style. I’ve read many things in that POV/tense that I’ve loved despite it not being my favorite style. I’d only want it to be a style that’s no longer available to be used going forward.

[Kristin B.]

I'm ok with losing first person, present tense. It isn't often done well. (Hunger Games being one of the only exceptions I can think of.)

[Melani]

Allison wrote: "One tense/POV has to go:

1. Third person omniscient progressive (He is tripping down the road when he sees her. She is smiling, she is waving, she is planning his doom.)
2. Third person omniscient..."

Oh, this is a hard one, I absolutely despise two of those and having to pick which one will never appear in fiction again is hard. So between 1 and 4, I might go with 4. It's the more commonly used of the two and it's always, ALWAYS used badly. I honestly can't think of a novel I've enjoyed that used present tense first person.

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*]

1st person present. Although damn near everyone does it nowadays, hardly anyone does it well.

[Bobby]

1. Third person omniscient progressive. I don't mind any of the others, but this one just seems weird to me. Maybe because I haven't read much with it so I won't miss it.

[Margaret]

Third person omniscient progressive? Is that really a thing? I'd be happy to give it the boot right away, since it comes off as really pretentious to me.

It's precisely because third person omniscient past tense is so common that I'd want to keep it. It's the style that doesn't call attention to itself, which makes it useful if you want to concentrate on something else in your writing. Getting rid of it would be like getting rid of white paper because you thought that was "boring"!

Of the others, first person present tense is the one I've heard people revile most often. :)

[Allison, Fairy Mod-mother]

I see progressive most often in fanfic, but it happens occasionally in books with "strong narrative voices"--when the narrator is a part of the story but not in it.

[colleen the convivial curmudgeon]

First person present tense. I'm not a huge fan of first person in the first place - (pun?) - and present tense also just generally bothers me, so this is a combination of my worst nightmare.

I'd probably be more inclined to hate third person progressive if I ever came across it in an actual book, though. Don't think that I have, and I don't read much fanfic.

[Cheryl]

I dunno, but I think omniscient of any sort tends to be used carelessly. I mean, it goes back to that dictum of 'show don't tell' in that we should be able to just watch the characters do what they do and not need info-dumps or explanations of thought processes, doesn't it?

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*]

Cheryl wrote: "I dunno, but I think omniscient of any sort tends to be used carelessly. I mean, it goes back to that dictum of 'show don't tell' in that we should be able to just watch the characters do what they..."


I like books with actual narrators rather than just following the character as the story.

[Phillip]

I'd gladly drop first person present tense. It reminds me of social media. "Look at everything I'm doing at all times, then give me credit for informing you!"

[Travis]

Phillip wrote: "I'd gladly drop first person present tense. It reminds me of social media. "Look at everything I'm doing at all times, then give me credit for informing you!""

Me too. I find the narrators in this POV to lack the perspective on their experiences that I so often value in fiction.

[Cheryl]

Well, that all makes sense. I retract my suggestion.
How's about 'they can all stay iff done well"- ?

[Stephanie]

First person present tense.

I can't think of any books I've liked which are written in this way. I don't much like present tense in general (I find it much harder to immerse myself in the story, writing often feels clunky to me) and I also prefer third person over first, although first person past tense can be bearable if done well.

[Beth]

I love omniscient! It's no longer in vogue, with third person limited in ascendancy. Third person omniscient progressive sounds terrible, though. -ing -ing -ing. That's my choice for the chopping block.

[Allison, Fairy Mod-mother]

In honor of it being Friday the 13, which horror character type's gotta go?

1. Clowns
2. Axe murderers
3. Poltergeists
4. Teenage girls with grudges

[Gabi]

Clowns, clowns! As a child I was mortally terrified of clowns ... don't ask what Stephen King then did to me.

[Allison, Fairy Mod-mother]

I just asked my spouse and he cracked me up so I have to share what he said.

"Uh axe murderers, hands down. Clowns are just trying to make a living. If we got rid of teenage girls with grudges we'd have basically no more teenage girls. And what was the fourth?"

"Poltergeists."

"Don't exist. There you go. Axe murderers are clearly the biggest threat."

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*]

Allison wrote: "I just asked my spouse and he cracked me up so I have to share what he said.

"Uh axe murderers, hands down. Clowns are just trying to make a living. If we got rid of teenage girls with grudges we'..."

I like the way your hubby thinks!

[Anna]

Allison wrote: "In honor of it being Friday the 13, which horror character type's gotta go?"

I wouldn't miss any of these. It'd be a harder question if you'd asked which one could *stay*.

(Clowns. Clowns could stay.)

[Michelle]

Clowns definitely; they scare the crap out of me. Then the next two. We'll just keep the creepy teenager.

[Allison, Fairy Mod-mother]

Michelle wrote: "Clowns definitely; they scare the crap out of me. Then the next two. We'll just keep the creepy teenager."

Michelle, why did you have to answer in the form of a plot hook for a horror movie? 😂😂

[Jemppu]

Get rid of clowns? Please, no. It (or King) I don't give a toss about, but the Joker movie is just coming out!

[colleen the convivial curmudgeon]

Axe murders. Sure, they're the most real life threat, but slasher flix never really appealed to me. I prefer a good haunted atmosphere and psychological f*ckery.

[Michelle]

Sorry, Allison! But really, creepy teenagers are much more doable for me. I'm a sissy about so many things, but being a mother of three adults, (not to mention grandmother to my soon-to-be NINTH grandchild!), I can handle teenagers. Sissified that I am, I avoid horror books like the plague. Ever since Pennywise the clown!!

[Allison, Fairy Mod-mother]

Haha! I just laughed that you did the classic "it's fine, they're just teenagers" bit that happens in all teen horror :)

Congrats to your growing family!!

[Gabi]

Michelle wrote: "... (not to mention grandmother to my soon-to-be NINTH grandchild!) ..."

OT, but that's so great! All my best wishes to your family.