I had a terrific time preparing this for the 2020 StoryMakers conference. A number of people in the session wanted the slides. Here they are.
If you have questions, feel free to ask them in the comments or click the contact link above and send me an email directly.
Good luck!
Here they are!
Please feel free to click the contact me link above and shoot me an email if you have questions.
One of the most important things I ever learned about telling stories was in Orson Card’s weeklong boot camp where we “workshopped” stories by doing zero workshopping. Zero critiques. In fact, critiques were verboten.
Instead, Card asked us to simply provide a report of what he called the three grunts a reader makes when things aren’t working–where it was boring, unclear, or didn’t ring true.
We were to provide a report of our reader reaction, including parts that really entertained or interested us. NOTHING more.
He compared it to going to the doctor. We were to report our “symptoms.” The writer’s job was to diagnose if it was an issue and prescribe a remedy, if any.
Doing that with 19 stories over three days was amazing. It totally opened up what story was about. And taught me what beta reading was all about. One of the most insightful writing experiences I’ve ever had.
Nowadays when I read, I try my best to simply report. And that’s it. If, afterwards, the writer wants to brainstorm ideas together, that’s fine. But I don’t ever want to diagnose and prescribe because there have been too many books that didn’t work for me that delighted tons of readers. My critique or advice would have been exactly the wrong thing.
All I can do is report my reaction. And then think about what would have fixed it for me.
Kristine Rusch recently wrote a great article about this and other things called “Writing by Committee” in which she suggests a list of things authors need to be successful. Give it a read. I think she makes a lot of good points.
And a few I disagree with. She is quite forceful about writers not acting as first readers. I think that’s bunk. And she says as much in the comments. If a writer can give a reader response instead of a critique, that’s as helpful as a non-writer giving a reader response. I also disagree that you have to toss something and start over if it doesn’t work. If it’s fundamentally broken, sure. But many times a small adjustment gets you back on track. Finally, yes, a story has to be surprising. At the same time, you had better deliver the type of experience you promise your reader. And that’s all defined by genre. You can’t promise your readers a thriller and deliver a romance. That only leads to irritated readers. I believe you have to consider your audience. But these are all quibbles. The article is great.
BTW, please note I used “storyteller” in the title. I did that on purpose. More and more, I find I’m not interested in writing. “Writing” doesn’t seem to convey what I’m after. However, I am interested in telling cracking stories.
Okay, I lied. I was going to get into idea generation techniques, but decided to do one more short post on development objectives. Actually, I suppose this is a technique.
In the last post, I said one of the main objectives of your initial story development is to have the story to come to life in your mind. I explained that the best method I’ve come across up to this point for making that happen was to focus on developing the 6 core parts. Then I explained in general what I’m shooting for when developing those parts at the outset of a new project.
You can use a number of different types of documents to capture your thoughts on those 6 core parts. You might end up with a rough two-page sketch of the story. You might write brief character bios of some sort. You might bullet the general steps of the plot. Maybe you create a map. There are a lot of types of documents you can use to capture what you’ve developed. And often the creation of those documents not only captures what you’ve developed, but helps you develop the parts in the first place.
I want to suggest a “document” that will help you capture and develop the essence of your story setup.
This is ONE tool. It is not THE tool. There are many ways to capture the essence of your story. There are many tools that can help you clarify your thinking. But I think this is a good one because it forces you to get right to the core of your story and clarify it in a compact manner.
An idea that’s core and compact has great power because it focuses the mind.
There are so many things to juggle when writing a story that it’s easy to get lost in the weeds. I’ve found I become so much more productive when I know the core situation that’s driving the story.
There are a lot of things that drive reader and author interest. There might be a thematic question, fascinating characters, genre stuff (chase scenes, romantic scenes, scare the soup out of you scenes), humor. One of the main things that rivet readers to the page are the hopes and fears they have for our characters.
A reader’s hopes and fears are driven by presenting:
That’s the core of the story setup. As David Howard puts it: “there is one basic dramatic circumstance: somebody wants something badly and is having difficulty getting it.”
Of course, stories provide a lot of delights that require you to do more than define the person and the thing they want. But the setup is at the heart of a lot of what readers go to story for. Part of the initial development of a story should focus on helping you clarify this central dramatic situation.
So here’s a tool to help you do that. I read about it years ago in Dwight Swain’s Techniques of the Selling Writer, which was written in 1965. Swain calls it the “Starting Line-up.” I read about another version of the same thing more recently in Dan Decker’s Anatomy of a Screenplay written in 1998. He calls it the “Story Line.” The hugely published romance writer Leigh Michaels calls it a “Framework” in her On Writing Romance: how to craft a novel that sells. The agent Donald Maass calls it the “premise of a novel” in an interview published in Agents, Editors, and You by Michelle Howry. Jim Butcher calls it a “Story Skeleton.” Let’s look at each of these variations.
Swain asks you to include five elements:
These are to be cast into two sentences.
Here are his examples.
John Storm
Sentence One
- When humans suddenly begin to grow to twelve-foot height [situation],
- John Storm [character]
- tries to find out why [objective].
Sentence Two
- But can he defeat the traitors in high places [opposition]
- who want to kill him [threatening disaster] in order to make the change appear to be the result of an extraterrestrial plot?
Irene Boone
Sentence One
- Lonely, frustrated, and tired of living in a home where she’s treated as an unpaid servant [situation],
- widowed Irene Boone [character]
- wants to marry widower Frank Dawes [objective].
Sentence Two
- Will she lose this chance for happiness [threatening disaster]
- because her selfish sanctimonious daughter, Connie [opponent] accuses her of immorality?
Dale Boulton
Sentence One
- Sick of the conformity and hypocrisy that go with his highpaid job, and with a modest life income assured [situation],
- Dale Boulton [character]
- decides to retire ten years early, to go live on a shanty-boat and poke through crumbling river ghost-towns, in fulfillment of a boyhood dream [objective].
Sentence Two
- Can he make the break successfully, when his hostile wife, Sandra [opponent],
- fights him all the way and, finally, threatens to have him declared incompetent [threatening disaster]?
Decker requires three components:
You can add other components—other characters described by an adjective or other important events or decisions. He prefers you start with a “when.”
Here’s an example.
When a booksmart savings and loan bailout accountant takes over the business he is assigned, he discovers it is a bordello and teams up with the Madame using his business skills to fend off a hostile take over and save the business.
Another.
When a blood thirsty killer and his gang are coming to kill him, a strong-willed, decent cop must fight them over the objections of his pacifist bride who will leave him if he does.
Another.
When he is given a factory full of doomed Jewish workers, a greedy, opportunistic Nazi deceives his taskmasters to save them.
Another.
After a tornado carries her off to a strange land, a spunky teenaged girl must face a series of challenges to get home.
More.
When his blundering uncle throws their building and loan company into insolvency, a despairing small town banker with low self-esteem has to find a way to save the bank.
Michaels suggests four elements in her framework, although she doesn’t stipulate a specific form.
This definition summarizes the four crucial basics that make up a romance novel:
- A hero and heroine to fall in love
- A problem that creates conflict and tension between them and threatens to keep them apart
- A developing love that is so special it comes about only once in a lifetime
- A resolution in which the problem is solved and the couple is united
She then lists a number of questions to help an author think about those four elements. The document that could capture this is a summary of the answers to those questions.
Donald Maass was asked what he looks for in a query or pitch. Like Michaels, he doesn’t specify a form, but does include some basic elements.
I’ll tell you exactly what I need, and I can get this information after just a few questions.
First of all: What type of novel are we dealing with here? Mystery? Mainstream? Young adult?
Second thing: Where and when is it set? Contemporary? Historical? Magical place? A real place?
Third: Who is the main character?
And lastly: What is the basic problem that the character faces?
Those things wrapped up together are the premise of a novel, and I know right away if it’s the kind of work I handle, if the idea sounds original, if the main character is sympathetic, and whether I care about the problem. That’s all i need. If all those things are a go, then I want to read the work. It’s as simple as that.
Most authors might perceive this as additional pressure. It’s exactly the opposite. What is means is that their job is much, much easier than they think.
If you think about a query, this is something that should be contained in a few short paragraphs.
A reader drew my attention to a short essay Jim Butcher wrote on this subject. I thought it was excellent. Here’s Butcher:
The story skeleton is a description of the main plot of your book, broken down into its simplest elements. . . The story skeleton (also called a story question) consists of a simple format:
*WHEN SOMETHING HAPPENS*, *YOUR PROTAGONIST* *PURSUES A GOAL*. But will he succeed when *ANTAGONIST PROVIDES OPPOSITION*?
For instance, look at Storm Front. (Yes, I’ll use my own books as examples, because I’m just that way. 😉 Also, I’m more familiar with them than I am with almost any other writer.) Storm Front’s story question:
****************************
When a series of grisly supernatural murders tears through Chicago, wizard Harry Dresden sets out to find the killer. But will he succeed when he finds himself pitted against a dark wizard, a Warden of the White Council, a vicious gang war, and the Chicago Police Department?
****************************See! It’s oh-so-simple! Almost to the point of looking ridiculous–and I have no doubt that some of the people reading this article will think that it *is* ridiculous. They’re wrong. 🙂 This is a fundamental description of the core conflict in your tale–and stories are all about conflict.
Go read his whole essay.
Did you notice any similarities in the examples above? Character, inciting event, problem, goal, opposition. Let’s go back to the core of story I listed.
Written even more succinctly:
I like the idea from Swain and Butcher of projecting us forward using a question. I like the idea from Decker and Butcher to use “when” to state the inciting incident. I also like adding in the character adjectives. I like Michael’s and Maass’ focus on problem. But I also like flexibility. My version uses key elements of the others as guidelines, keeping it simple and core by limiting the statement to 90 words.
Here’s one for The Incredibles.
Bob is a frustrated retired superhero, living a boring life as an insurance claim processor. When he gets an offer to do illegal superhero work on the sly, he decides to take it and pursue a double life, even though he’s forced to lie to his wife about it. But his dream job employer is actually trying to settle and old score and kill him. Will he lose his family when he’s drawn into a showdown with a super villain that has him outmatched?
In many longer works there are often more than one story running. Sometimes the main character has an external conflict and an internal one. Or maybe a related subplot. Sometimes other characters have related B, C, D, and E story lines. In Curse of a Dark God, for example, I have at least eight story lines that I have to braid into each other. To keep them all straight, I found it very helpful to list out the five elements for each. The goal isn’t to make these into slick marketing tools: they’re to help me focus my efforts. However, I find that when they include all the elements, they have great power to pique my interest.
Here’s one of the “inner” conflicts of Curse.
Talen has escaped the clutches of the Mother, but something is growing inside of him. When he begins to hunger after the Fire and soul of those around him, he realizes he’s not all human. Will he be able to resist the growing and overpowering desires, or will he become the very thing he’s fighting against?
Here’s one of the related “outer” conflicts.
The Mother of Mokad wants Talen—to make him into a thrall or devour him. He escapes the first attempt to capture him, but will he be able to shake the Mother’s powerful hunter and his dreadmen now that he and his sister are on their own?
Here’s a third story line in the book, the big external plot.
Argoth is trying to build up an army of sleth that can free mankind. But the Mother of Mokad sends her Guardian to exterminate every last one of them. Will Argoth be able to defeat Mokad’s vastly superior army, especially when the Guardian has infiltrated his ranks?
But Argoth has another plot line for the reader to worry about.
Argoth damaged his son. Nettle’s condition is growing worse. A foreign Divine offers to heal Nettle in exchange for Argoth’s allegiance. Will Argoth betray those around him and save Nettle? Or will he let his son die and lose him to the perils in the world of the dead?
Here’s one of Sugar’s.
When Sugar sneaks behind enemy lines to retrieve some items her mother left for her, she’s given the opportunity to learn a powerful lore and use it to scout for Argoth’s army in the world of the dead. But each time she uses it, she comes closer and closer to death herself. Will she be able to survive as she’s asked to serve in more and more dangerous situations?
Here’s her inner conflict. I wanted to develop a moment of dilemma for her just as I did Argoth.
Sugar wants to keep her brother Legs safe. But as Mokad’s army arrives, it becomes apparent Argoth doesn’t have a chance. She and her brother might not survive. Sugar’s been learning the lore with a handsome and battle-hardy loremaster who saves lore users who have become true sleth. When he asks her to sail with him and his crew before it’s too late, Sugar has to decide if she will flee and abandon her friends or stay and fight and risk losing everything in this world and the next.
Now you see why it’s virtually impossible to write such a book with so many story lines in the normal 100,000 words. And why I question my sanity in trying to write it.
Anyway, there’s much more to writing a fascinating and compelling story than capturing a story setup, but I’ve found that working on stating the simple core of the story clarifies many things for me and makes me much more productive. I developed a short statement of all my story setups early on in the writing.
There are a number of ways to capture the story setup. Let me suggest you give one a try. And if you aren’t to the point where you have enough material to capture a story setup yet, that’s fine. That’s what development is for.
One last note. If you want to read an expanded description of how one writer develops story ideas, read Write Away by New York Times Bestselling author Elizabeth George. I loved the book.
Miss Snark was the pseudonym of an agent who I believe was Janet Reid of the JetReid Literary Agency. When she was incognito, Snark had a blog. On her blog she’d often invite people to submit their story statements used in queries to hook editors and agents to ask for more. These entries were called “Happy Hookers.” Snark would rate them on her crap-o-meter, sometimes giving comments and suggestions. Let me suggest you read 50 or 100 of those hooks.
As you’re reading, look at Mrs. Snark’s comments. But more importantly, note the hooks that excite you and the ones that don’t. Because, frankly, Snark is just one person with one person’s tastes. In this exercise, you’re not trying to figure out what she likes. You’re trying to see what story elements work for you. So don’t be dissuaded by her tastes. Identify the hooks that interest you and the ones that don’t. Ask yourself where they were unclear, unbelievable, or boring. After you’ve done a few, you’ll start to see story patterns and ways to capture your own story setup that will be useful to you.
For more in this series, see How to Get and Develop Story Ideas
This is not a Democrat thing. This is not a Republican thing. This is a Budgeting for Morons 101 thing. I think anyone who is sent to Washington needs to pass a test. The test will have two questions.
Can you pass it?
Question 1. Fill in the blank. Use your incredible subtraction skills to solve this equation: 2 – 5 = ?
Question 2. Short answer. Let’s say you don’t have enough money to purchase everything you want; what do you do?
Question 1.
The answer would be -3 (yes with the little dash thingy in front of it). If you fail this, your name is taken off the ballot. I know it’s harsh. You’re a good person, but you’re just too dumb to be trusted with my money. Please repeat the first grade and run for office again later.
Question 2.
If you say borrow the money, your head gets painted orange so everyone knows you have brains that operate on the same wattage as a citrus fruit.
If you say print the extra money, your head gets painted orange and then you go to jail for plotting to steal everyone else’s money by devaluing it.
If you say, “Contact the Russians, they’ve got a source,” we send you to Russia to work in Siberia digging rocks.
If you say, “But I had to spend more than I had because everyone else was doing it and they might be mean to me and not vote for my proposals,” then we assign you to follow a colony of lemmings in the Norwegian tundra for seven years. It’s okay. Lemmings are very cute.
The correct answer is you either (1) reprioritize, spending less on something else so you can spend more on the thing you really want, (2) eliminate waste in your operations so you have more to spend, or (3) go without, especially when it’s not your money to begin with.
A possible fourth answer is to go to the American people and make a business case for a new tax. The tax cannot be voted on until it has been presented to the American people, and they’ve been given 18 months to review the pros and cons. You cannot use government funds for your dog and pony show to sell the tax. Then the people, NOT you or your cronies, vote on it. It must receive 70% of the popular vote in each state to pass. If it passes, the funds collected by that tax cannot be used for any other purpose than the one stated when it was passed.
No, it’s not hard, but it actually kind of is because the numbers that are reported are so big they don’t mean anything. And the words are sometimes all mixed up. For example, is “deficit” the same as “debt”? When Congress says they’re passing a bill to reduce the deficit, does that mean we’re actually starting to pay down the debt?
The Romney people recently created a chart that makes the numbers immediately understandable. I love this chart. It’s simple and straight to the point. Anyone can see what the current numbers show our very smart representatives in Washington are doing.
Our leaders have a MORAL responsibility not to spend more than they take in. I don’t care what party they belong to–if they don’t have the brains or the morals to use our money wisely, then they should not be able to play with it.
Our leaders should not have the ability to raise tax rates or create new taxes. They have abused the priviledge of raising taxes on our behalf. They now should lose that priviledge completely. But the fact is they never should have had that duty in the first place.
Business learned this long ago. This is why it’s standard procedure to separate duties. It is always a VASTLY DUMB idea to have the same person collect the money, deposit it, authorize payments, and make the payments. It INVITES fraud, abuse, and error.
It’s clear that it’s also an equally dumb idea to have the same people in government levy taxes and then spend that tax money. But we knew that. The founders used the idea of separation of duties when they set up our government in the first place. They just called it “separation of powers” instead. The problem is we didn’t separate the duties enough.
Our leaders should NOT have the power to levy taxes on us AND spend our money. We need to separate the duties, reserving the duty of establishing taxes to the people. If our representatives have a really nifty idea they want a tax for, they need to take the business case to the American people as described in answer four to question two in the Big Hairy Test above. And the American people can then vote on it.
And now I’m off to Lowe’s to purchase some orange paint.
There are a number of great science fiction and fantasy authors who feel that the Hugo awards have become irrelevant because the folks voting–only those who are members of Worldcon–do not represent science fiction and fantasy fandom.
Brad Torgersen describes it with this Venn diagram.
But this is not only about the fact that the voting block is not a statistically valid sample of fandom. It’s also a campaign against what Larry, Brad, and many others see as a politically correct shibboleth in parts of the publishing community that they feel short shrifts authors who do not toe the liberal political line.
Two years ago, Larry Correia decided to give this issue a lot of attention. He did this by asking his fans to purchase a Worldcon membership and then consider a list of authors he thought were very good but didn’t necessarily reflect the prevailing values of the traditional Worldcon audience. Last year he repeated the effort and created a shirt-storm (I like that image so much better than the one that includes flying poops). This year, Brad is carrying the banner. Read Larry’s post Sad Puppies 3: The Slatening? to see this year’s slate of alternative folks and a summary of why these guys are doing this.
I’m friends with Larry and Brad. And I do not like the Should Police coming out and telling me I should or must include more X in my stories and less of Y, whatever that X and Y may be.
But, I’m wondering if storming the Hugos is the right way to do this.
Yes, the Hugo award has a lot of brand equity. But must the Hugo represent fandom?
Is Sad Puppies attempting to storm the castle and force upon Worldcon something Worldcon members don’t care for?
Let’s go back to the original issue that Sad Puppies is trying to shine a light on.
Reader Kim wants more of X and less of Y in his or her books.
But instead of saying, “Geez, where in the crap do I find books with more of X and less of Y?”
Instead of trying to get with a bunch of folks and saying to suppliers, “Hey if someone would write more of X and less of Y, we’d buy it! Look at this market that’s dying for product!”
Instead of developing the More X and Less Y website dedicated to helping readers who like that find their books.
Instead of that, Kim says, “Gosh darn it! All books should have more X and less of Y. And if they don’t, they’re, they’re, they’re bad, and bad for you, and probably make kids smoke! And we should make all stories conform.”
And the mandated “should” is where things get all tangled up. That should is what Sad Puppies is speaking out against.
So instead of trying to stomp out differing opinions or requiring all authors to write stories with some allotted amount of XY content, would it not be more productive to simply work with our wonderful free market to try to create a new silk road (or pave the existing one fit only for camels) that connects readers who like XY stories with authors who are happy to write them?
I think it would.
At the same time, this same argument could be applied to the Hugos. Instead of trying to force Worldcon members to change their ways, why not let them like the stories they like, but create a fresh new award that seeks a broader base? It would require work to build its brand equity, but maybe that’s a more effective long-term strategy.
It’s kind of like the New York Times best seller list. There are many problems with that list, including, but not limited to, the fact that it can be gamed. But instead of trying to change it, USA Today came up with something much better. Yes, “NY Times Best Seller!” still has huge brand equity. But USA Today is gaining on it. And as the market learns more and more about the difference between the lists, USA Today’s will only grow in luster.
I suppose it’s true that you sometimes do indeed need to storm the castle. And maybe this one needed some barbarians to show up and sack it. But I wonder if it’s time to pivot. I’m wondering if in this case the best long-term strategy wouldn’t be to simply build an armored division of M1-Abrams with air and sea support and make the castle irrelevant. Maybe this is something to think about for next year.
Comments are closed.
Thank you for a marvelous presentation at Storymakers! It was terrific! Such a specific way to look at how to raise tension and the stakes in a story and keep readers turning the pages. Just bought your book BAD PENNY, too! Thanks again.
Glad to hear you found it useful, Kimberley 🙂
Your presentation on this was riveting. I haven’t read your books, but if they’re anything like your presentation style, I’m in! Thank you for making the PDF available, too. Great stuff.
Terrific. So glad to hear you enjoyed the presentation.
Thank you for making your presentation available. It was one of the most helpful I attended.
That’s excellent to hear.