What is more important, the writing or the plot?

[Dirt Man]

The reason their called short stories is because they're short in length...

So, my question to my august colleagues in the Author's Hangout is "Is it profitable to model short story style and plot develpment after the style of full length novelists?"

In a word: No. Which is why you'll often see me write something like; Merideth is the kind of woman who makes fairy tale romance a hobby, and considers mud wrestling for diamonds a profession. It gives the reader instant depth to Merideth's character.

As Always
I Am the
Dirt Man

 

[MathGirl]

Re: scaring me...

Diane-
Honey, you're scaring me... your post was so solid... are you okay?

IMHO I think that Jeffrey Archer and Roald Dahl are two modern authors that have managed to be successful with this genre... I haven't read any Stephen King short stories, so I don't know whether his writing should even be looked to as a template for short story writers.

So, my question to my august colleagues in the Author's Hangout is "Is it profitable to model short story style and plot development after the style of full length novelists?"

b

Dear BKeeney,
I know. It scares me, too.

Joe Landsdale is a contemporary master of the short story.

I'm not a writer, but I don't think the pace of a short story could be sustained through a novel-length work. It seems that the short story is an art of its own.

One of King's newer short stories is one of the very best I've ever read. The guy who's alive but about to undergo an autopsy. Interesting sexual twist at the end. About the time Stephen King becomes humdrum, he comes up with something like that.

Hope you're feeling better each day, BKeeney.

Diane

 

[KillerMuffin]

The sexual act by its very nature has a beginning, development, climax, and a resolution, so does a description of two people making love qualify as being "plotted"?

No.

The sexual act, by its very nature, has no inherent conflict. You can't have a "plotted" story without conflict.

A plot is a pattern of the action--the action is defined by the conflict. In writing, there are a few highly identifiable phases. The introduction of the conflict, the spot where the conflict gets to the point where it's got to be dealt with, and finally, the spot where the conflict is dealt with.

A description of two people making love is just descriptive narrative--one of the most boring types of prose on the planet.

The question that everyone is wrasslin' with here isn't is writing or the plot more important. The answer is obvious that both have equal importance.

The question we're all barking about is "How important is actually plotting your story to your writing?"

Different kettle of fish. The answer to that lies in your intended market. dr. m writes great BDSM smut, but if he wants to get a Pushcart prize, he's going to have to do more work and give his plots power. Yes, contrary to all the spouting, dr. m has plots in his stories.

Most people who click open a story in these parts would get pretty cheezed if the plot got in the way of the money shot.

Why is plot important? Plot is the series of events that happen to the characters. If nothing happens to characters, they aren't going to develop. Why is conflict important? Unless you're dealing with things like rocks, your characters will never develop if they don't have obstacles to overcome.

Take the average BDSM story. slave tests her master by disobeying. Conflict.

Take the average first-timer story. The main character wants to have sex but is either afraid/ugly/or is moral bound to wait until marriage. Conflict.

Take the average incest story. Family member wants to fuck family member, but societal taboos and legalities make them fight or hide the attaction. Conflict.

Back to the BDSM story. Master punishes slave until she learns who's boss. Rising action culminating in a crisis.

The first timer story. The virgin finds/is presented with someone to have sex with and they fall into bed. Rising action culminating in a crisis.

The incest story. Family members just can't resist the temptation and they fall into bed. Rising action culminating in a crisis.

Back to the BDSM story. Slave vows undying devotion to Master and swears to never disobey again. Climax.

The first timer story. The virgin finds out sex is fantabulous. Climax.

The incest story. Family members figure out that fucking each other is much better than some silly taboo. Climax.

Back to the BDSM story. They fall asleep in each other's arms. Resolution.

The first timer story. They fall asleep in each other's arms. Resolution.

The incest story. They either fall asleep in each other's arms or someone gets pregnant with the perfect healthy, incestuous child. Resolution.

No plot? Pshaw. There is a difference between a plotless story and a story that hasn't been actively plotted by the author. You don't have to sit down and figure out the particulars to plot, most people around here just sit down and type and let the plot take care of itself.

Does this mean that people who pay not attention to their plotting write badly? Nope. What it does mean is that people who pay no attention to their plots have weaker stories. Why is that? Because the plot is how you develop character. The character faces a conflict and then does something with it.

You can't escape that simple fact. You can describe and describe and decribe until your reader gets bored to pieces with your descriptive narrative. You show the reader what kind of person you character is by giving them events to live through.

Life is not plotless. It seems that way at times, but it's not. Think of every major event in your life. Think of the minor obstacles you overcame. Did they change you? Yes. The essence of a story plot. A story is not the whole of a person's life--a story is a slice of a person's life.

You face obstacles every single day. You don't want to go to work. Do you call in sick or go? Your children are hungry, but you're on a writing roll. Do you stop or do you write? Guess what. That's part of the plot. You have major obstacles you overcame in your life and they changed you somehow. Guess what. That's a complete plot.

Sorry to rain on your parade, but there it is.

There are plotless stories. So called experimental writing where characters move through life and never actually do anything. Those are far more rare than most of us "plotless" persons have implied.

So, to answer the question. Yes, plot and writing are equally important.

No, you don't have to plot your story to write well.

No, you don't have to plot your story to have a plot.

No, you don't even have to know what a plot is to have a well written story with a plot.

Should you pay attention to it? Depends on the market. If you're writing to get people off at Lit, don't worry too much about it. If you have aspirations for non-porno publications, start paying attention to it. Does this mean outline everything down to the last detail? No. However, having some idea about what you want your character to do and how it will affect them will tighten your plot and give it more power.

I claim that unless one is a master writer (sorry, there are no Stephen Kings here), doing a little work on your plot is necessary to develop a character in such a way that it impacts the reader.

Does this matter at Lit for the average porno story? Nope. Does this matter in non-porno publications? Yep. With the exception of experimental works.

To finish with a smidge of advice. If you want to improve your writing itself, pay attention to plot. If you want to improve your ratings at Lit, pay attention to sexual descriptive narrative. What you do with your stories, your writing, and defining your goals for your writing is up to you.

 

[Pookie]

Re: Re: Re: What is more important, the writing or the plot?

I agree that life is not pre-plotted.

I was talking to Bridget earlier today and told her that after I posted the above last night that I knew I was wrong.

Most of us do plot/plan our lives. For example, I have plans to finish my under-grad degree, get my masters degree, arrange my wedding, etc. I have specific steps to achieve many of those events. Many people when they are very young plan their lives right up to and through their retirement.

Life doesn't usually turn out exactly the way we plan it, but neither do many of our stories either. But we do typically have some type of plan in some type of detail. Those with better plans tend to come the closest to achieving their plans too.

Pookie

 

[NorthwestRain]

Three cheers for Killermuffin,
hip hip-

 

[MathGirl]

H,H,H

Three cheers for Killermuffin,
hip hip-

Hooray!

 

[gauchecritic]

I agreed with almost everything else in your post KM, as I read it I realised that my stories although never plotted etc but I must and do disagree intensely with the first line;

No.

The sexual act, by its very nature, has no inherent conflict. You can't have a "plotted" story without conflict.

The sexual act almost by definition is a conflict. Of wills, of intent, of sex, of power of taste. Every time you (or I or anyone) has sex there is a leader and a follower, there is compromise, there is angst, there is distraction and although not every time but classically there is foreplay, coition and orgasm.

If there isn't let me assure you, you're not doing it right.

Gauche

 

[dr_mabeuse]

KillerMuffin

Two things that instinctively get my back up are (1) rules and (2) being told that you must follow them.

I'm aware of the conflict idea of plot. There's also the "quest" theory of plot (every story is a symbolic quest) and the "change" theory of plot (every story is a story of a character's change) and I'm sure there are others too. But I think like most theories of art, these things come after the fact and are intended to be used in analysis of fiction rather than in constructing it.

You submitted a story to the first round of the Critic's Choice (and won, I might add) that as I recall was basically a woman's letter to a former lesbian lover telling her of the new lover she had found. It was a very good story, and I especially remember the sex scene as being wonderfully done. But I would be hard pressed to find the conflict in that story. The narrator vs her feelings for her former lover? The narrator vs. loneliness?

In any case, when you sat down to write that story, I'm sure you didn't first come up with an idea for a conflict and then fill the rest in. You saw something you liked in the dtory and filled that in.

"On the Road" (Kerouac again) is the story of two guys driving all around the country in the 50's, getting high and goofing around. While there are little conflicts in the scenes, the book has no underlying "central problem". It's basically a travelogue, and what makes it very worth reading is Kerouac's very original take on everything he sees and his reckless and breathless style of writing. He's intoxicated with everything he sees and hears and that gives everything a terrific sense of excitement and discovery.

Same is true of Hunter Thompson's "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas", which also has no apparent conflict. It's a description of a drugged out time in Las Vegas, but it's mainly observational and very funny.

I also have to jump in with Gauchecritic and say that the sexual act is naturally dramatic. I don't know if you want to say there's a conflict there or what; I just know that when two people make love there is natural drama and there is a story there.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that you shouldn't use anything as the be-all and end-all of writing. Or rather, it's okay if you want to do that, but I prefer to keep my options open.

---dr.M.

 

[TheEarl]

Dr_M: I have never read Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, but I don't think I'd be impressed with it. IMHO every book has to have some form of conflict. If there's no conflict and everything goes smoothly for the main character, then where's the story?

KM's letters story was something different: It wasn't really a story, more a collection of descriptions. Very coherent and very well done, but not really a story.

I agree that you shouldn't be forced to write solely from a conflict, but, unless you're writing something that doesn't require a story, you should really ensure that you have some in there somewhere.

The Earl

 

[KillerMuffin]

dr. m, you're not exactly right on how much importance I place on plot. I say that it's equally important as writing--not this be all end all. You say that it's not important at all. Sexual description is where it's at for you. You know what? That's fine. That's you. You can plot a story without thinking about it. You might be shocked to find out that most people can't--even those that think they can. On any given week--on stories that I get past the first paragraph on--I hand out most of my rejection letters due to failure in the plot to deliver what the writing promised. Great descriptive narrative is no substitute for plot. Just like plot is no substitute for great narrative. It works both ways. There is no be-all, end-all involved. Though, you might check out your own posts with the phrase "Be-all, end-all" in mind.

I read a tremendous lot. When I get past the first page; I find that when the story doesn't satisfy me, it's usually due to failure in the plot to deliver what the writing promises.

Most people--particularly around here--concentrate on the art of writing to the detriment of learning to master the mechanics. Both are involved and neither can be ignored. Telling beginning writers with aspirations beyond Lit to not worry about plot because it's not important is not doing them any favors because, quite frankly, it is.

That's not saying that they need to rigorously follow the Marshall Plan for Plots or some other super-duper plan to make a great plot. All I'm saying is that writers should pay attention to plot in a way that works best for them.

For myself.

All of my writing starts out as conflict and evolves from there. I know three things before I ever sit down and type. Who my character is, what my character's is going to do, and how my character is going to be affected by that. Protagonist, conflict, and climax. Everything else can be rewritten without much effort. Losing Pieces of You, the letter story, started out very simply. A woman who can't let go of her past lover meets someone new. Conflict: self v. self. Her inability to let go juxtaposed with her letting go and embracing someone new. Even you noticed it. I had two goals in that, one was subtlety the other was to write a second person story in a way that didn't alienate anyone.



Gauche, thanks for the backhanded insult. It was cute.

Sex has no inherent conflict. Sex does not have the intellectual wherewithall to be distressed when faced with an obstacle. A conflicting event is not a conflict until someone has a problem with it. Sex, having no brain, let alone a body, cannot have a problem. The people fucking can have the problem, but you know what? They're having sex, sex is not having them. Since sex has no inherent conflict sex is not inherently a "plotted story". The rest is a tossup depending on the talent of the writer.




These are just my professional opinions. Since people seem to want to get offended over them, here's a disclaimer. These are just my professional opinions. Take any offered advice or ignore it. Whatever works best for you. No one here is making you do anything you don't want to do.

 

[Dirt Man]

Well said Muffin...

Plot, and good writing go hand in hand in any successful story be it short, or novelistic. The best ingrediants for any story is to have some dramatic conflict resolved by the climactic finish. The twists and turns of plot is what makes a story interesting to the point of causing the reader to have to keep reading or die of anticipation. Some writers do plot without thinking about it, others plan it out to the nth degree, still others beat it to death in the process. Others are more subtle in their approach, but it's there nonetheless. In erotica or porn depending on how you personally think of it, the conflict can be the sexual act itself culminating from events earlier in the story, or it can be the climactic ending resolving the conflict in the story. However I have yet to see how a sexual act can be the plot itself. But hey, there's the challenge, write one.

As Always
I Am the
Dirt Man

 

[Octavian]

a challenge?

Originally posted by Dirt Man

However I have yet to see how a sexual act can be the plot itself. But hey, there's the challenge, write one.

The real challenge will be reading it!

Octavian

 

[hiddenself]

Gauche and dr.M. -- I agree that, in real life, a sexual act almost always implies some degree of conflict. But writing is not real life. If you don't put a sexual act in context (ie, with decent plot background), if you focus on the act as an isolated stand-alone scene, you'll end up with an almost invariably extremely boring story. I think KM is right on about the balance between art and mechanics. You need both. The second requires work and lots of people are too lazy to bother with it. The first is often a gift and lots of people pretend to have an abundance of that talent (almost always not true) and that it's going to carry the day. Not so.
hs

 

[gauchecritic]

I think like most theories of art, these things come after the fact and are intended to be used in analysis of fiction rather than in constructing it.

I also have to jump in with Gauchecritic and say that the sexual act is naturally dramatic. I don't know if you want to say there's a conflict there or what; I just know that when two people make love there is natural drama and there is a story there.

---dr.M.

Whoo hoo I not only got a mention, but an agreement from The Doc. (The next sentence is NOT backscratching.)

To point up and confirm the Doc's point about analysis (even though I've said this a while ago in another thread and no, I'm not just name dropping);

Whilst at college I attended a lecture by the author Barry Hines (A Kestrel For A Knave [made in to the film Kes]) I put this very point to him, ie do you consciously include all the things that are found in your work when analyzed. His simple answer was "No"

However, I'm not saying here that it can't or shouldn't be done I suppose what I'm implying is that lots of writers (here at Lit anyway) use them subconsciously, obviously there are lots of other authors here at Lit who don't use them at all.

Gauche, thanks for the backhanded insult. It was cute.

I'm sorry you found that insulting KM it was humorous aside to end that paragraph, that's all. Once again, even in your follow up paragraph

"Sex has no inherent conflict. Sex does not have the intellectual wherewithall to be distressed when faced with an obstacle. A conflicting event is not a conflict until someone has a problem with it. Sex, having no brain, let alone a body, cannot have a problem. The people fucking can have the problem, but you know what? They're having sex, sex is not having them. Since sex has no inherent conflict sex is not inherently a "plotted story". The rest is a tossup depending on the talent of the writer."

it appears that you are divorcing an "act" from the "actors" to win the point. Sex is an event, you say so yourself, therefore there have to be participants for it to exist, hence conflict, quest, change or whatever.

Please don't take this personally KM I just enjoy a good arguement.

And I am, after all's said and done

Gauche

 

[Pookie]

it appears that you are divorcing an "act" from the "actors" to win the point. Sex is an event, you say so yourself, therefore there have to be participants for it to exist, hence conflict, quest, change or whatever.

I don't see how a descriptive narrative of two or more people having sex can provide any conflict in itself. Describing a blowjob, fucking, anal sex, etc. is just that ... a description of an act. Now, add the participants, define their characters, create a setting for the characters, specify a reason for them to be having sex, etc. and then you can develop the conflict in the story, using sex as an instrument for that purpose.

IMO, sex is not conflict. Sex is one of many instruments in a story used to create or promote conflict.

Just enjoying the discussion,

Pookie

 

[NorthwestRain]

Dr. Marbeuse

I don't believe KM is after any point scoring here. She has already made the point that 'experimental' fiction may not need to work with a plot, although the writer must be well practiced in writing with a plot before attempting to write without one.

On the subject of 'Fear and Loathing' I feel the book is jam packed with conflict, both inner conflict and with his lawyer who comes on the trip with him as well as with the mind-altering drugs they are consuming providing many layered conflict.

Kerouac's novel, 'On the Road' i pretty much agree there is v. little conflict and I found the book to be both tiresome and lacklustre because of this. I struggled through it and quite enjoyed the ending trip to Mexico, but overall I feel it's fairly over-rated as both an experimental and 'beat' generation story.

Apologies to sound somewhat confusing, but I'm doped up on opiates from post-op.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I'm not anti-plot. I'm anti-rules. I just hate to see artistic freedom curtailed by any canon of rules and have a knee-jerk reaction when someone says "you can't do that" or "you have to do this". I understand that that's not what KM was saying, but i reacted as if it were.

I myself happen to be more impressed by creative and skillful use of language and imagery than I am by a clever plot, but that's as far as I would stick my neck out in the matter, and that's just my own personal preference. I'm not saying it's right or wrong.

I've done highly plotted stories, and I've written pieces that are no more than descriptions of sex acts. I'm really not interested in whether others find that they have plots or conflicts or whether they're considered "vignettes", "descriptions", or "stories". All I know is I wrote them and they seemed worth writing about to me. They had a natural interest and drama and I think they're worth reading, more or less, or I wouldn't have posted them here.

All this talk about plot and style is all very left brain (is that right?), by which I mean it's all very analytical and rational. When I write, it's all right brain; very intuitive and automatic. When I go back and revise I'm usually more analytical, but really I tend to trust my intuition. If it reads right to me, then I don't care what theory or the rules say.

I would be interested in seeing a link to a story with a poor or unacceptable plot, however, just so I could see what we're talking about here.

---dr.M.

 

[wildsweetone]

...and this is where i put the link to my stories so that all and sundry may let me know i have weak plots. lol ...too late, i've already been told. it hasn't stopped me writing yet.

we're all different, we all write differently. why should it matter which is more important between the writing or the plot/ting? isn't it the end result that counts? if the end result is wonderful, does it matter how it's achieved?

anybody ever heard of Katherine Mansfield? i'm told she wrote scenes... a famous author who had no plots in her published books? man they must have been screwy back then to publish stuff like that.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Just found this. It's from Norman Mailer's new book of old essays:

"Working on a book where the plot is already fully developed is like spending the rest of your life filling holes in rotten teeth when you have no skill as a dentist."


---dr.M.

 

[Madame Manga]

I write stories to find out what will happen in them, because I am never truly sure when I begin where they will go. Even if I think I am, I always turn out to be wrong--if it has turned out to be a good story. Only my mediocre stories turn out exactly as I envisioned them. Most of my progress as a writer over the last eight years or so has been in letting my stories write themselves, instead of limiting them to my ideas on hand.

But I am also big on plot, according to various of my writing friends. Their styles tend to the poetic vignette filled with gorgeous language. I admire those and often enjoy reading them, but I can't write them. No matter how fuzzily I start, the threads start tying themselves together, the structural members go up as if by magic, and I have a plot.

This can be a curse, IMO. I have read (and written) many stories in which the ends were tied up too tightly and the design was too inflexible. Too much plot excludes the readers like a locked door; all they can do is peer in the windows as spectators. They cannot mentally walk in and join the action when they can sense it is all preordained. The characters become puppets instead of people. There must be a sense of fluidity and surprise in any story for it to come alive.

There is the real struggle, at least for me--I have to be able to prevent my ego from propping up the house and shouting directions to everyone inside, and have the faith to let it stand and operate on its own. Otherwise, it's all about my pride in making everything behave according to my wishes. The story will never surpass my limitations if I don't make room for anyone else in there.

It's only the rarest of geniuses that make perfect structures: both light and imperishably strong. I don't expect to achieve that. But I can aim there as an ideal.

MM