First, off-topic, it’s October now, which means that the wedding for which I am maid of honor is in 23 days now. I have yet to plan the bachelorette party, buy various stuff (most importantly, a present… whoops!), write a toast, and figure out how to put on my makeup and walk in my shoes. Of course, in addition to all that, I also have some less important things to contend with (with which to contend), such as getting ready for Lich King so I’m not ganked the whole way to 80, and the IDPA match next week. The point is, posting will most assuredly be lightening up quite a bit throughout the entire month. Sorry, but we all have to deal with that “real life” thing every once in a while… which, admittedly, does not include WoW, but surely does the other two.
And that’s all I’ve got to say about that. So…
I love a good story. Frankly, it doesn’t (usually) matter what the underlying moral lesson is, or even if it has one, just as long as it’s interesting. I’ve read both The Chronicles of Narnia (well… most of them. I’ll get through Dawn Treader before the movie, at least) and His Dark Materials, and–to my recollection–enjoyed them both.
Now, there are many elements to creating a good story, and lacking too much in any of them can completely screw you over. All of these elements can be immensely simplified into two categories: plot, and storytelling.
Plot is somewhat more likely to be the one that kills you, and may be generally broken up into characters, events, and setting. My first semester of homeschool, I read How to Write a Damn Good Novel, which stated that characters were the most important aspect of any story. That point is one of the few made in there which I still try to follow closely ever since my realization that I’ve never once heard of any novel written by that guy. Characters–or at least protagonists–need to be two things: 3-dimensional (four, if you count the fact that they it’s best if they change throughout the story), and relatable. Unfortunately, the two don’t easily coincide. You make a character’s personality traits too specific, and only a small percentage of people will be able to find a piece of themselves in them. Alternatively, if you try to make the character fit in with everyone, they become extremely flat (or inconsistent, which can be just as bad). For example, Sex and the City was ruined for me because of this (and yes, I know I’m not necessarily the target audience for it). Not that it’s necessarily bad (even though it is), but I just had absolutely nothing in common with a bunch of women in NY who slept around a lot–past tense, because three of them somehow end up married–and see no problem with paying over $500 for one pair of shoes. On the other hand, even though I can’t really think of any specific examples right now, flat characters can make even the most interesting tale a snoozefest.
So, that’s pretty much why I always mention characters in my various reviews.
What was next? Oh, events, and I guess I’ll go ahead and throw setting in here, as well. These are probably the hardest possible things to screw up. Setting is pretty incapable of ruining a story, since it’s been pretty flexible almost since the beginning of storytelling. I speak, of course, of Aeschylus’s Agamemnon, where a trek took place from Troy to Argos within about one scene. It was negligible then, and The Orestia remains a highly-thought-of trilogy today. Events are better able to mess everything up, though they’re still very low on the ruination chain. The first way to use these badly is to basically have nothing happen; forgo the whole conflict->rising-action->climax->falling-action->resolution formula. Maybe it sounds a little closed-minded to say that a story will completely suck unless it follows “a formula”, but I honestly cannot think of anything worthwhile (or, really, at all) that didn’t. Thankfully, it’s not even a specific formula, so it really fits everywhere.
The other primary method is simply overused plot-devices; it just makes the whole thing too predictable. Perhaps it’s just a personal preference, but an ending that I can see coming from a mile away are just annoying. Happy endings, for example, are sort of the default resolution in our society. Now, that’s not to say I don’t like things ending well for the protagonists, otherwise I’d have a problem with Pirates of the Caribbean, Indiana Jones, Star Wars, The Mummy, Lord of the Rings, and various other favorites. I do, however, prefer something somewhat unexpected, which is probably why I’ve taken such a liking to tragedy and anything by Joss Whedon. Now, super-twists that make no damn sense whatsoever (Mr. Shyamalan…) are not quite what I’m talking about here. I mean atypical, yet realistic.
Yeah, stopping this right now.
The storytelling is basically the way in which that whole thing is presented to an audience. I was originally thinking that this portion didn’t really have sub-categories, but am beginning to amend that to make room for what I’ve dubbed, “micropresentation” and “macropresentation”.
Let’s begin with macropresentation, before I forget what I’ve characterized as being under that category. The primary ones I’ve come up with are the medium and information order.The medium, obviously, is the way a story is transferred from its creator to an audience, be it novel, movie, short story, TV show, stage performance, song, blog, interviews, radio program, and so on and so forth forever. Most stories can be adapted to fit, really, any medium, but most–if not all–fit best in only one of them, and you’ll occasionally come accross one that simply cannot logically be transferred from its original form (ex: The Silmarillion) (or its original form was terrible, but a later form is better. That happens very rarely, though). Using the wrong medium for a particular story can really screw you over bad. Unfortunately, it can be a little hard to tell which one is the best, but I suppose that comes with time or something.
Information order is basically what it sounds like: when you get what information. M. Night Shyamalan utilizes this to an extreme extent in all his movies by not telling you anything at all until the very end. Other stories are told by following both sides of the conflict pretty much from the beginning. Neither is really “better” than the other, but the wrong one for a particular plot can really kill you. You’re not going to tell the audience everything right away in a mystery, but neither will you withold information on what the protagonist is fighting against in… I don’t know; other kinds of stories.
Let’s move on: micropresentation. This is pretty much just all the little details of production; wording, acting, dialogue, etc. for ever and ever. Fortunately, these can usually pretty much be improved through time, practice, experience (with criticism, of course), and firing people who suck at their job (if it’s a multiple-person project).Granted, a talent for writing helps, but is by no means absolutely necessary for success (again, practice is key for it). However, that doesn’t mean there isn’t such a thing as bad writing–especially when it comes to dialogue–and it can most definitely ruin a great plot. If the presentation happens to be a performance, bad acting and the like can ruin the whole thing as well–I’m looking at you, Chorus members in the BBC’s production of Antigone who forgot your lines…
This actually wasn’t originally intened to just be ways stories are screwed up, but just information on stories and writing in general. Nevertheless, I think it works. Or, at least, it’s plenty long.