Why stories follow patterns

ByJohn Brown

There is a lively discussion on The Passive Voice about Kris Rusch’s recent blog post which challenges the use of the term “churn out” to describe writers who write quickly. In the comments, someone said that folks also use “formula” or “formulaic” as a pejorative. Another commenter said that in computer design, they use design patterns, and suggested that’s probably a better word. Here’s my response.

Design pattern is right.

The people who decry familiar patterns are those that completely misunderstand one of the main purposes of fiction.

Readers go to fiction to have an emotional experience–thrill, horror, dread, falling in love, mirth, wonder, wish-fulfillment, etc.

Those emotions are not created out of nothing.

They’re not created haphazardly.

They are generated by a specific . . . pattern.

1. You receive some stimulus–from your environment or your own thoughts or something you’re lead to think, such as via a book.

2. You make an assessment about what’s going on and what might happen in the future and how that impacts you or someone else. There are two assessment systems. One is incredibly quick. Almost subconscious. The other is a bit slower. You can read about them in Daniel Kahneman’s Thinking, Fast and Slow and Jenefer Robinson’s Deeper Than Reason. Robinson even relates the science to fiction.

3. If the assessment says it’s something that will affect you or someone you can sympathize with, you feel an emotion. The emotion focuses your attention. For example, if there’s a mountain lion stalking you, you don’t want to forget she’s there. It also prepares you to act–to pursue something desirable, avoid something that’s not, etc. It also writes that emotion on the face to communicate it to others to solicit help or warn (we are social animals).

Okay, so certain cues or assessments are required to produce certain emotions. If the cues aren’t there, the emotion doesn’t arise.

Certain stimuli lead to an assessment that there’s a threat. Other stimuli lead to assessments that there’s an opportunity, for love, money, sex, security, etc.

Suspense, surprise, and curiosity have all been studied in experiments. There’s a certain structure required for each. If you take the same story, but simply change the structure, you end up with different reader effects. See more here.

This means that a reader who wants to feel the experience of falling in love is going to have to be guided through the pattern of cues that produce the assessments that lead to the emotion.

There are lots of variations in the pattern that will work. But we can’t give a reader the pattern for horror and expect them to feel romance.

Duh.

You can’t give a reader a downer ending and expect her to feel joy.

Again, there are certain delights readers are going to certain genres for. Folks read romance after romance precisely because those romances do specific things to them. And they want to experience them again and again.

For example, one thing romance readers love is the joy of a happily-ever-after (HEA) ending. So if that’s what they’re looking for, then that’s what the product must provide for them to be satisfied. We follow patterns, but change them enough so that the reader doesn’t get bored.

So, yeah. Patterns. It’s like the very essence of what we’re doing.

We are all working with patterns, whether we know it or know. And the sooner we learn what the general patterns are for the type of story we’re trying to tell, which could also be called the type of experience we’re trying to provide, the quicker we gain control over our writing.

Share

Similar Posts

  • Writing tips from Best Seller Debbie Macomber

    ByJohn Brown

    I saw this today and thought of the assignments I give in my workshops. Look at what this hugely popular writer did to learn and focus her craft:

    1. Knew what she liked and followed HER passions (she knew what rocked her).
    2. Took 4 books she loved and broke them down to look for patterns she could use. This is exactly what Bernard Cornwell did (link at bottom).
    3. Identified what it was she wanted to deliver to her readers. I believe her four words were “Provocative,” “Relevant,” “Creative,” and “Honest” (form follows function).
    4. Notice also how much she loves plot turns (story cycle–surprise and conflict).

    What a delightful interview. I’m going to pick up a Macomber and give her a go. Anyone have a recommendation on a title?

    Share

  • How Inequity and Deservingness Propel Readers Through Story

    ByJohn Brown

    Inequity and deservingness are two of the main factors that keep readers reading. If we want to write killer stories, we need to know how they affect readers. A few years ago I wrote an essay on this and thought it probably too technical for most folks’ taste. But I passed it on to a recent attendee of the killer workshop and he found it helpful. In fact, when he watched Pride & Prejudice shortly after reading the essay, he saw how these factors dramatically affected his rooting interest. So I’m thinking others will find it useful as well. 

    In order to understand it you must first read George Saunders’ short story “The Bohemians.” You’ll find it here in The New Yorker, January 19, 2004. It would probably be rated PG for some profanity.

    Now if the story doesn’t pull you in, stop reading. Because the essay probably won’t make any sense to you. You’ll only be able to understand it if the story works for you. But if it does, then ask yourself what the main character’s problem was and what drew your interest? Then read my essay, “How Inequity Evokes Reader Interest.”

    Please note “The Bohemians” does present a character with a problem, and the story cycle applies, but not in the straight-forward manner it does with most stories. BTW, if you’ve ever read Patrick Rothfuss’s excellent Name of the Wind, you’ll see inequity is what shapes the story there as well. If you haven’t read it, I recommend you give it a go.

    I’ll be interested to see your responses to Saunders’ story, my essay, and/or Rothfuss’s novel.

    Share
  • |

    New Workshop: How to Write a Story that Rocks

    ByJohn Brown

    Folks, the first tentative schedule for Life, The Universe, & Everything (LTUE) has been set. For the past few years I’ve been teaching a 2-3 hour workshop called “The 3 Things You Must Learn To Write Killer Stories.” I think I must have taught it over 15 times in different venues. Hundreds have attended and said they loved it.

    However, this year I’m going to be doing something different. I’m developing a new two-hour workshop called “How to Write a Story that Rocks.”

    I’ll be teaching it Thursday evening, February 11th from 5 PM – 7 PM at LTUE at BYU. It’s FREE and open to all.

    What I found was that a lot of new aspiring authors get lost in mountains of rules. But great storytelling isn’t about rules. They try to form stories with word counts, chapters, and weird plot diagrams. But stories aren’t about those things. They have a hard time knowing what to write next because they don’t understand how story works. In fact, some don’t know how to start at all. They just flounder in their piles of zing. Finally, even if they can get a bullet outline, they have a hard time turning that into a scene.

    So what we’re going to do in this workshop is this.

    1. I’m going to bring in some ideas for character, setting, and problem. We’re not going to generate from scratch as we’ve done in the past because I want to get to the next steps.
    2. Then I’m going to teach you how to go from idea to outline–we’re going to do it together, and you’re going to learn exactly how to know what comes next 
    3. Then we’ll go from outline step to scene sketch.
    4. Then from scene sketch to draft.
    5. At every step I’ll be pointing out key story development concepts and principles

    When we finish, you should be able to:

    1. Identify the essential story objectives and story development questions–get these right and the rest doesn’t really matter. This will include the HANDFUL of key things you need to worry about and develop with character and plot.
    2. Develop more likeable and interesting characters
    3. Develop more powerful story concepts (call it premise, problem, situation, whatever). Once you get this the story writes a lot of itself.
    4. Explain the real Story Cycle. Not Campbell’s mumbo-jumbo hero’s journey. Not the three, five, seven, nine acts. Not Freytag’s diagram. Story.
    5. Explain what it means to “move a story forward,” “increase the stakes and tension,” “complicate the plot,” “complicate the motive” and how that’s done using surprise, conflict, motive, and problem. Included in this are “turns,” “rugpulls,” and “reversals.”
    6. Use the Story Cycle concepts to generate a story bullet outline and take a bullet step idea and turn it into a scene.
    7. Explain the creative principles that help you generate stories more easily.

    Larry Correia will be there as well. So I’m expecting this to be a very helpful workshop. I’m going to do all I can to make it as good or better than the first.

    Share

  • Indie thoughts: being realistic

    ByJohn Brown

    I know a lot of authors who are trying indie publishing. Some are doing fabulously well. Most are not. I’ve talked to a lot of folks wanting to indie publish. Very often they have stars in their eyes, even though the vast majority of books don’t sell well. But does that mean indie publishing is a pipe dream?

    Here’ is a perspective I agree with from Hugh Howey.

    The fact that self-publishing provides better chances doesn’t mean great chances. The fact that self-publishing can be less frustrating than the query-go-round and the delays inherent with traditional publishing doesn’t mean that self-publishing is frustration-free.

    Read more on Howey’s site. And here’s another by Dylan Hearn. With the Hearn post, I don’t know where he’s getting the “average book sells 100 copies” data. I don’t think that’s accurate. But his intent is to tell authors to have modest expectations, and I think having modest, realistic expectations is the most helpful way to approach this.

     

    Share

  • Is 90% of everything really crap?

    ByJohn Brown

    Whenever you talk in speculative fiction circles about quality writing you will inevitably hear someone cite Sturgeon’s Law.

    Theodore Sturgeon, a science fiction writer, defended science fiction against critics of the genre who said that 90% of science fiction was crap by saying that 90% of everything–film, literature, consumer goods, etc.–was crap. Therefore, pointing out that 90% of science fiction is crap is ultimately uninformative because science fiction conforms to the same trends of quality as all other artforms do. So neener neener neener.

    The problem with this “law” is that it isn’t a law. It’s not something discovered through rigorous testing and careful evaluation of data. In fact, no testing was performed. It’s an opinion, but “Sturgeon’s Opinion” lacks the authoritative power needed to silence the critics. 

    Unfortunately, while citing the law may be a good way to give the literati what for, it’s a terrible way to think about books. I say this because we often mistake “poor quality” with “it wasn’t to my taste.” By doing so we mislabel diamonds as dirt.

    How can this be? The answer is in the true nature of quality.

    The business world has spent many years and much treasure trying to understand what quality is. I think writers and readers can benefit from the paths they’ve blazed. I found a great summary of quality on Wikipedia.

    Business has tried to define quality in a producer-consumer context, with the following variations:

    1. ISO 9000: “Degree to which a set of inherent characteristic fulfills requirements.”[2] The standard defines requirement as need or expectation.
    2. Six Sigma: “Number of defects per million opportunities.”[3] The metric is tied in with a methodology and a management system.
    3. Philip B. Crosby: “Conformance to requirements.”[4][5] The difficulty with this is that the requirements may not fully represent customer expectations; Crosby treats this as a separate problem.
    4. Joseph M. Juran: “Fitness for use.”[5] Fitness is defined by the customer.
    5. Noriaki Kano and others, presenting a two-dimensional model of quality: “must-be quality” and “attractive quality.”[6] The former is near to the “fitness for use” and the latter is what the customer would love, but has not yet thought about. Supporters characterize this model more succinctly as: “Products and services that meet or exceed customers’ expectations.”
    6. Robert Pirsig: “The result of care.”[7]
    7. Genichi Taguchi, with two definitions:
      a. “Uniformity around a target value.”[8] The idea is to lower the standard deviation in outcomes, and to keep the range of outcomes to a certain number of standard deviations, with rare exceptions.
      b. “The loss a product imposes on society after it is shipped.”[9] This definition of quality is based on a more comprehensive view of the production system.
    8. American Society for Quality: “a subjective term for which each person has his or her own definition. In technical usage, quality can have two meanings:
      a. the characteristics of a product or service that bear on its ability to satisfy stated or implied needs;
      b. a product or service free of deficiencies.”[5]
    9. Peter Drucker: “Quality in a product or service is not what the supplier puts in. It is what the customer gets out and is willing to pay for.”[10]

    The common element of the business definitions is that the quality of a product or service refers to the perception of the degree to which the product or service meets the customer’s expectations. Quality has no specific meaning unless related to a specific function and/or object. Quality is a perceptual, conditional and somewhat subjective attribute.

    What does this mean for writers and readers?

    It means that your audience defines quality. But your audience is never all of those that read. It’s only the narrow segment that reads for the type of experience you’re offering.

    It means that a story can be of the highest quality, but you still may not like it. You might even hate it.

    It means that Sturgeon’s Law is, no disrespect intended, crap.

    All writers should consider NY Times best-seller Tess Gerritsen’s experience writing for two different audiences.

    I’ve had too many smart and well-read friends like stories I do not. I’ve loved too many stories that others could not. I’ve seen too many stories I couldn’t read more than two pages of picked up by editors and find audiences. And the tales of editors passing up on stories that some other editor picked up and which became mega-sellers are legion. 

    Quality has never been an absolute. The truth is that while I enjoy many stories in a variety of genres, a lot of what’s published is not to my taste, but it’s still very good.  

    A more accurate statement of Sturgeon’s Law would be something like “90% of what’s out there isn’t to my taste.”

    For readers this means we need to be careful to distingush between something that doesn’t work for the audience it’s intended for and something that simply doesn’t work for us. For writers this means we need to write the best story we can and then avoid pressing it onto the wrong audience. And when we do get a bad review, we need to figure out if it’s the quality of the story or just a matter of taste.

    Share

  • Work hard for 45 minutes, then take a break

    ByJohn Brown

    My first semester in college I earned a GPA of, ta dum, 0.68.  How do you earn such amazing grades? Well, I’ll tell you: the super secret strategy is to get an F in everything except ballroom dance. In that you get an A.

    I couldn’t squeeze any juice out of my textbooks, but I sure could fox trot.

    And I wasn’t partying. Dope and beer bongs were never for me. I wasn’t skipping class. I was lugging this huge valise around with every textbook I had. I think it weighed something like forty pounds. I was stitting in classes looking studious and taking notes. Well, except for physics which started early. 7:30 a.m. if I recall. What kind of a nut job takes a class at 7:30 a.m.? I did. I tried really hard to stay awake. I know I saw the professor shoot a gorilla with a tennis ball once. But the rest of the time I was in la la land catching z’s.

    A 0.68, and I was in the honors program.

    Obviously, I didn’t know how to go about learning. I’m glad the university didn’t give up on me. They put me on probation and told me I had to take a class on studying. A class on how to take the reponsibility for learning into my own tentacles. A class that shared techniques that actually helped.

    One of the techniques was taking breaks. You were to work hard for 30 or 45 or 50 minutes and then take a break. Why? Well, because studies had shown that someone who, for example, was going to study for two hours could learn more by taking a ten or fifteen minute break in the middle than someone who worked the whole two hours.   Spending more time on studying actually meant you learned less.

    I’ve found this method applies to more than just reading textbooks.  It also applies to writing. My practice is to set a time for 45-50 minutes. My goal is to write as hard and fast during that period as I can. To be totally focused on the task at hand. And then, when the timer dings, to literally get up out of my chair, walk about, and take a break. Then come back at the top of the next hour and start another 45 minute session.

    But I’m not the only one doing this. A lot of folks use this method. Author Annie Bellet writes about her use of it in The Quest for Productivity and shares some of the reasons why it helps her. Read what she says there. If you haven’t done a 45/15 or 48/12 session, give it a go. See if you don’t actually get more done in less time.

    Oh, btw, as for my grades, not only did I NOT drop out (or get kicked out) and become a hobo living in a trailer by the river, I ended up getting a 3.8 in my masters of accounting program. I think it’s safe to say I figured that school thing out. 🙂

    Share

6 Comments

  1. John,

    I love this post, very insightful overview of how patterns affect readers and why we writers need to be aware of them.

    I’ve been writing fiction for a number of years. Starting in 2008 I’ve taken a number of very helpful workshops and classes on the craft of fiction, including Kij Johnson’s 2 week novel outlining class at the Center for the Study of Science Fiction in Lawrence. Kij talked about appropriating what she called “spines” from existing stories to utilize them in our own stories. Your post shows why that works.

    Recently rewatched 2014 Heist movie, The Art of the Steal. Not only is it a highly entertaining movie, it’s a very clever example of the heist pattern: what’s the target/mark, planning for the heist, the execution of the heist, and the aftermath.

    Of course the writer-director of the film put his own spin on it, but the movie gave me the satisfaction I enjoy from watching a great caper unfold. Patterns, this I will keep before me and internalize as I work on my next novels. Thanks!

  2. Boy, Johnson’s “21 Monkeys and the Abyss” was sooooo good. I bet her course was awesome. And 2 weeks! Was that 80 hours? Or two evenings a week apart?

    That “appropriating spines” idea is exactly what I’m talking about, although that’s a cooler and creepier name (grin).

    And your example of THE ART OF THE STEAL is a good example. Heists are a certain type of problem and require a certain general series of events to tackle. And because we want to be in suspense and anticipation, there are certain things, cues, we have to give the reader as we roll it out.

    BTW, I’m reading Brandon Sanderson’s STEELHEART. So many parallels to his MISTBORN. Another heist-type story. And yet different.

  3. John,

    Her course was awesome! It ran over two weeks, from Sunday evening until the second Friday. There were eight of us students. Each of us submitted the first three chapters of our novels and a 5-10 page outline. We spent the first week workshopping the outlines, and the second week workshopping our revised outlines. Evenings were spent working on brainstorming the revision our novels in a group setting, with Kij and her assistant Barbara usually on hand. Kij calls this process “fishbowling.”

    I liked it so much when I got back to Oregon I formed a new writers group with three other authors. Not a critique group, but a brainstorming and support group, what Dale Carnegie called a “mastermind” group. I’ve been in my share of critique groups over the years, and they can be invaluable, but this is a whole different kettle of very inspiring fish, so to speak (grin). It has made a huge difference in my writing and mindset.

    Looking forward to reading Steelheart by Sanderson!

  4. Interesting. When you get more time, I’d be interested in hearing more specifics about how one of these are run, and how it’s different than a critique group.

  5. Hi John,

    Here’s a rundown of the brainstorming/fishbowl method for a writers group. It seems to work best with four members. In Kij Johnson’s class we had eight students, but the fishbowl sessions usually ran anywhere from one on one up to three or four writers brainstorming.
    We use this technique for brainstorming an outline, or world building, science fictional or fantasy ideation, and even for a revision outline. The author types up the outline, his/her notes, and any questions about the material she’d like the group to consider, emailing them out a few days beforehand to give the others time to read and reflect.

    The day of the meeting the author might use a white board to capture notes, draw diagrams, ETC. In Kansas we used big sheets of butcher paper and laid out post-its on them, to show plot arcs, world building details ETC.

    The group then asks the author questions, throws out ideas, and the author does likewise. This is a very organic, back and forth process. We’ve done it with world building, with bare outlines and detailed ones. It’s a perfect process for discussing the characters, their motives and any places where the logic of their actions seems to be astray, missing, or just doesn’t seem right.

    The author decides what to use out of this, and can call for a follow-up “fishbowl” if needed.

    This is the process in a nutshell. Feel free to drop me a line if you need more info or have more questions.

    Best,

    Dale

  6. Aha! So it’s not so much a critique or feedback session. It’s more of a facilitated development session where questions direct the idea generation and everything is captured as you go.

    You know, I used to do meeting facilitation. This goes right along with a lot of what I learned there. It’s interesting how powerful it is to simply capture what folks are saying on a board or sheet up front so it’s visible. Having that info in front of you, instead of disappeared into the ether, seems to always produce more and better insights.

    Thanks for sharing this!

Comments are closed.