Hi All: I got back late last night after taking my daughter back to Seattle after the long weekend. Woke up late this morning and have been playing catchup all day.
I noted Camille’s question:
Don’t you notice that in stories like P&P, for those who know the novel/film, ’scenes’ (ie goal, conflict, disaster) are subtle?
Chapter 16 describes a dinner party setting, which includes the ridiculous Mr. Collins who exists, as far as I’m concerned, for comic relief. As far as I can tell, the scene is primarily about Lizzie discovering something from Wickham that significantly increases her dislike for Mr. Darcy. If this is a ’scene’, her goal, as I see it, is to hang with Wickham. The next chapter moves on to another setting, where Lizzie and her sister discuss the new info and decide how much merit it deserves. Gripping stuff, I know. I bet you thought the next scene was Det. John Maclean stuffing Mrs. Bennet into a helicopter and flying it into the Lincoln tunnel.
My point—can I be honest guys? I want permission to explore the intricacies of human nature without feeling pressured to blow something up.
Randy sez: Shall we vote, folks? I vote that Camille can do this if she wants to. As for John McClane and his exploding helicopters, I vote for those too. A side note: in Die Hard 4, McClane shot down a helicopter using a CAR as the projectile. Ya gotta love a guy who can do that. It shows . . . character.
Now getting back to P&P, I don’t have my copy handy right here, but I’m assuming that’s the scene where Wickham reveals what a dastardly guy Darcy is, right? Well that’s a major disaster in the story. In my Three Disaster analysis of P&P, that is the middle disaster that ensures that Lizzie will hate Darcy forever.
One should not confuse “lack of exploding helicopters” with “boring.” Of course a scene may very well be boring and not have an exploding helicopter in it. I’ve seen it done. But a good scene can explode anything–a helicopter, a hippopotamus, or a hypocrisy. What you explode is up to you. Just make sure you give your reader a Powerful Emotional Experience in the process. 🙂
Tomorrow, we’ll start a new subject.
Darcy & McClane, my favorite heroes!
Both use whatever they have to save the day. One launches a car to destroy a threat—and of course, blows up a helicopter. (LOVE that scene!) Bruce, you’re branded for life, pal. And the other uses what he has, namely money and connections, to save the Bennet family reputation. Darcy, we’re proud of you, man. Sorry about your mother-in-law.
As a humble freshman (promotion ceremony to sophomore on 14 December)I vote for Camille.
In the past I have read scenes consisting of the goal, conflict and disaster, but, to my taste, utterly boring.
I have also read scenes that were hardly recognizable as such, but highly entertaining.
My point is, and this I have been taught during FICTION 101, that ANYTHING is fine, as long as it works.
I vote for Camille to write her scene without blowing up a helicopter, too. I think the key here is the “powerful” emtional experience. Tess Gerritsen mentioned something like this on her blog the other day. She said action can be boring. She’s right. If we don’t care about the characters, all the dynamite in the world won’t move us to tears.
Daan, congrats on your upcoming promotion!
Wow, what a great reminder, Pam!
I was recently exposed to such a novel. It had an interesting story world, and lots of disasters peppered consistently throughout. But the only character that actually engaged me died part way in, and it was just a grind after that. Wouldn’t have finished it if I didn’t “have to”.
We interrupt this post to bring you a personal sounding off:
*I finished Nanowrimo and now have a life again! Woot!
I vote that all scenes have an exploding helicopter… or at least a Zeppelin.
I admit it. I’m a nerd.
I’m envious that you finished nanwrimo! I am stuck at 36K.
There was an article in the NY Times yesterday that a study showed people with less empathy (mostly men) like stories that they know are completely fiction. The more empathetic types (mostly women) liked stories if they knew there was based on something true.
The debate could be a gender/empathy difference.