One of the things I have been doing in recent days is to re-read David Keirsey's Please Understand Me II about the Myers-Briggs system of personality typing. I go through various stages of using different personality typing to help develop my characters. Often I will go to ennegrams and occasionally astrology or birth order but I have used Myers-Briggs in the past.
Because Myer Briggs is Jungian based, it dovetails well with the Joseph Campbell/Christopher Volger theory on the hero's journey. Ennegrams are more Freudian based.
Switching things around helps to keep me on my toes. And I suspect that with this current wip, I will be using Jungian philosophy more to develop the characters.
There are two ways you can go about using Keirsey -- one is to create your characters and then use the personality test taken from the Point of View of the character to help determine the character's personality and how they would react in a given situation. Or you can chose one of the 16 personality types and mould your character around that. There are pros and cons to both approaches.
When you are integrating into a Vogler framework, then you also need to make sure you are aware of the archetypal role the character will be playing and how that role will effect the personality or vice versa. Every personality type can play every role but they will do so in a slightly different way as their world view is different. For example if a character has a Rational Architect type personality then they will approach the role of guardian of the gate in a different manner than if they have an Idealistic healer personality. Guardian of the gate is Vogler's way of saying that at some point along the journey, a character is going to point out to the hero all the problems they face and why they are not equipped for the journey. For example in Romancing the Stone, the publisher takes on this role when she tells Joan Wilder that she has problems negotiating department stores.
Anyway, I am enjoying going back and re-reading these things to see if I can polish up my characterisation. It is one of those things. Writing is not about standing still. You (or at least me) do not reach some magic plateau where all your skills are honed and you never need to think about craft again. It is always the polishing up of the clock face, practicing and relearning of skills so that you can use them better.
In other news:
Having had my dh decide to play a Christmas elf and do wrapping, we ran out of tape. The tape situation has now been sorted and I can make further inroads on the present mountian. Currently I am hoping that I have enough paper...The worst is when you suddenly discover a stash of things that you carefully hid away in the early autumn and then promptly forgot.
Showing posts with label Volger. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Volger. Show all posts
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Rereading crafts books --The Writer's journey
Because I remain ill, and unable to sleep due to this stupid cough, I have been rereading some of my craft books. Also i want to get a handle on this governess wip.
The Writer's Journey by Christopher Vogler is a book that bears rereading every so often. Some of elements are old friends, but sometimes, the words take on new meanings and twists. In other words, my own appreciation of the craft has grown enough to make me understand more of what he is trying to say, and to grasp the thoery behind it.
It can be helpful when planning a story to think -- which mask is each character wearing. Which archetype? Which role? And have I done enough to lift the character from the archetype and breathed life into them? Sometimes, the character has such a small part that is not worth it. Bit part secondaries by their very nature will be unable to display more than one or two characteristics. The time is better spent rounding and shaping the main characters. When you narrow your cast, inevitably, the number of masks each character wears increases. This adds to the complexity (or at least that is the theory).
But various threads are starting to come together in my head and this is good. I trying to figure out mentors and threshold guardians, plus shapeshifting.
I have also spent sometime writing my latest Dear Reader letter. This is for Simon Clare's story as I think the prelims will be next week. I am also redoing my biography. Some people think of Dear Reader letters as a chore but I enjoy them. I recently had a very letter from a reader who had been touched by the Dear Reader letter in Viking Warrior, Unwilling Wife. And that is what it is all about -- touching readers, connecting with them.
Anyway, hopefully this cold/thrachea infection will improve.
The Writer's Journey by Christopher Vogler is a book that bears rereading every so often. Some of elements are old friends, but sometimes, the words take on new meanings and twists. In other words, my own appreciation of the craft has grown enough to make me understand more of what he is trying to say, and to grasp the thoery behind it.
It can be helpful when planning a story to think -- which mask is each character wearing. Which archetype? Which role? And have I done enough to lift the character from the archetype and breathed life into them? Sometimes, the character has such a small part that is not worth it. Bit part secondaries by their very nature will be unable to display more than one or two characteristics. The time is better spent rounding and shaping the main characters. When you narrow your cast, inevitably, the number of masks each character wears increases. This adds to the complexity (or at least that is the theory).
But various threads are starting to come together in my head and this is good. I trying to figure out mentors and threshold guardians, plus shapeshifting.
I have also spent sometime writing my latest Dear Reader letter. This is for Simon Clare's story as I think the prelims will be next week. I am also redoing my biography. Some people think of Dear Reader letters as a chore but I enjoy them. I recently had a very letter from a reader who had been touched by the Dear Reader letter in Viking Warrior, Unwilling Wife. And that is what it is all about -- touching readers, connecting with them.
Anyway, hopefully this cold/thrachea infection will improve.
Saturday, February 23, 2008
On defining Romance
There was an excellent post on Romancing the Blog about the perceived problems with Romance as a genre title. Actually I do not have a problem with it. It is highly sucessful genre and one of the classic genres of the novel. Why mess with success? I love Romance. I love writing it and reading it.
Anyway I gave my definition of a Romance as a story where the growth of the emotional relationship between the two central protagonists forms the spine/core. I should have added AND there is an emotionally satisfying resolution at the end. But I didn't and that was a mistake on my part. Basically I know that the Romance genre operates on the archplot/classic design. Therefore it has a closed ending and must release all emotional tension built in the story by resolving the major plot. (It was one of the quarrels I had with Raintree Inferno -- it does not end until the third book and so major threads are left hanging.)
Another poster Virginia pointed out that there was another attempt at defining Romance:
This definition leaves a lot more “fudge room” (speaking about my definition) than the one Pamela Regis used in A Natural History of the Romance Novel (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2007). She defines the genre by eight necessary elements, one of which is that the book end with betrothal (or, at a stretch, the marriage) of the two protagonists. The chapter on “The Definition Expanded” requires eight “essential” elements:
Society Defined
The Meeting
The Barrier
The Attraction
The Declaration
Point of Ritual Death
The Recognition
The Betrothal.
Um... Pamela Regis has definitely been supping at the Christopher Vogler/Joseph Campbell table. She has basically taken the Hero's journey and given them slightly different labels. The hero's journey is
1. Ordinary World
2. Call to Adventure
3 Refusal of the Call
4 Meeting with the Mentor
5 Crossing the first threshold
6 Tests Allies Enemies
7 Approach to the Innermost cave
8 Ordeal
9 Reward
10 the Road Back
11 resurrection
12 Return with the Exlir
(p 14 Christopher Vogler The Writer's Journey)
I leave you to compare and contrast the differences.
Vogler's basic theory is that ALL good stories can be made to fit the Journey. It is a diadatic approach. You can make an arguement for it, but I think Regis's labels are far too narrow and miss the essence of the Romance's novel.
It is possible to start a romance novel with the two main protagonists already married/ or to have them married quite early on. The marriage of Convienance is a very popular theme. The Secret Baby theme or the non final divorce theme have also prove popular over the years.
Sold and Seduced for example starts with a forced marriage. It does not end in a betrothal. They are already married. It ends with a meeting of true minds and is hopefully emotionally satisfying. It is a Happily Ever After after all.
Basically, one has to wonder how many Romance novels Ms Regis read before she started doing her thesis.
I stand by my definition.
Anyway I gave my definition of a Romance as a story where the growth of the emotional relationship between the two central protagonists forms the spine/core. I should have added AND there is an emotionally satisfying resolution at the end. But I didn't and that was a mistake on my part. Basically I know that the Romance genre operates on the archplot/classic design. Therefore it has a closed ending and must release all emotional tension built in the story by resolving the major plot. (It was one of the quarrels I had with Raintree Inferno -- it does not end until the third book and so major threads are left hanging.)
Another poster Virginia pointed out that there was another attempt at defining Romance:
This definition leaves a lot more “fudge room” (speaking about my definition) than the one Pamela Regis used in A Natural History of the Romance Novel (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2007). She defines the genre by eight necessary elements, one of which is that the book end with betrothal (or, at a stretch, the marriage) of the two protagonists. The chapter on “The Definition Expanded” requires eight “essential” elements:
Society Defined
The Meeting
The Barrier
The Attraction
The Declaration
Point of Ritual Death
The Recognition
The Betrothal.
Um... Pamela Regis has definitely been supping at the Christopher Vogler/Joseph Campbell table. She has basically taken the Hero's journey and given them slightly different labels. The hero's journey is
1. Ordinary World
2. Call to Adventure
3 Refusal of the Call
4 Meeting with the Mentor
5 Crossing the first threshold
6 Tests Allies Enemies
7 Approach to the Innermost cave
8 Ordeal
9 Reward
10 the Road Back
11 resurrection
12 Return with the Exlir
(p 14 Christopher Vogler The Writer's Journey)
I leave you to compare and contrast the differences.
Vogler's basic theory is that ALL good stories can be made to fit the Journey. It is a diadatic approach. You can make an arguement for it, but I think Regis's labels are far too narrow and miss the essence of the Romance's novel.
It is possible to start a romance novel with the two main protagonists already married/ or to have them married quite early on. The marriage of Convienance is a very popular theme. The Secret Baby theme or the non final divorce theme have also prove popular over the years.
Sold and Seduced for example starts with a forced marriage. It does not end in a betrothal. They are already married. It ends with a meeting of true minds and is hopefully emotionally satisfying. It is a Happily Ever After after all.
Basically, one has to wonder how many Romance novels Ms Regis read before she started doing her thesis.
I stand by my definition.
Monday, May 28, 2007
McKee -- a final bit
I am going to end this short series on McKee by briefly going his principles of story design. This is the heart of the book and where he uses the most examples. He also explains things much better than I.
BUT what some people miss is the admonition at the start -- these are only tools to be uses AFTER you have your first draft, if the scene feels flat. They are not something you should be attempting to use consciously while you are writing the first draft of a scene.
When writing a story, the protagonist is a wilful being and has a conscious desire. He must also have the capacities to pursue this desire. In other words, he is proactive and has the chance of achieving the dream, He must be in end willing to pursue the dream in spite of all the obstacles and when the end comes, the audience must feel that this is truly the end. They can not imagine an action beyond it. In other words, at the end , your readers need to be satisfied with no real threads dangling. This does not mean that there will not be a sequel simply that there is an ending, there is closure.
Your reader may or may not find your protagonist sympathetic, but they must find the character empathetic. In short they must feel a bond of humanity with your main character. They do not have to like him or her very much at the start, but they do have to have that bond. That understanding. Likability is no guarantee of a bond. The reader identifies with deep character -- those qualities deep within the human psyche that only revealed when a character is forced to choose under pressure.
This is why the inciting incident -- the start of the story happens when the protagonist's life is thrown radically out of balance. When this happens, the protagonist must react to the incident. Her desire to restore the balance in her life makes it the spine of the story -- it a Romance the spine of the story is always the growth of the emotional relationship. If it is not, you don't have a romance as the main plot, you have it as a subplot. As I write romance, I have to make sure that the spine of the story is the romance, even if there are other major subplots and with the length of my books, there are always other major subplots. The spine is sometimes referred to as the monomyth or the quest. And here it is useful to have read Volger. Unlike Volger though he does not believe in three acts. he simply warns about the problems of having too many acts, as the climax of each act must surpass the act before it and too many climaxes can dull an audience.
After the Inciting Incident, the LAW of Conflict takes over: to wit NOTHING MOVES IN A STORY EXCEPT THROUGH CONFLICT. A turning point happens when a character is forced to make a choice -- a choice between good and evil or between right and wrong or black and white is no choice, even if it feels like one. True choice is dilemma. Things are not clear cut. Nothing is what it seems and everything has unexpected consequences.
The crisis moment needs to be a static moment.It freezes everything. It is the instant before the dam breaks. It must happen On Stage.
If a scene feels flat, then you can try to use scene analysis to discover the problem: 1.Define the conflict. 2. Note the opening value 3. Break the scene into beats 4. Note the closing value and compare with the opening value. It needs to be different (or else the scene has not moved the story forward) 5 Examine the beats and find the turning point. McKee then breaks down several movies including a scene from Casablanca (which happens to be one of my favourite movies)
Anyway, I think McKee is for those people who like to take apart rainbows, put them together and still believe in them. There is absolutely tons in the book. Little throw away comments, that make me go -- ahh, so that's why this and this has to happen. Hopefully I have convinced one or two to pick up the book and read it. However, writers' minds work in many different ways and what speaks to one writer will leave another scratching her head. And itf you can only take one thing, then take away this craft and the study of craft enhances talent. It does not diminish it.
BUT what some people miss is the admonition at the start -- these are only tools to be uses AFTER you have your first draft, if the scene feels flat. They are not something you should be attempting to use consciously while you are writing the first draft of a scene.
When writing a story, the protagonist is a wilful being and has a conscious desire. He must also have the capacities to pursue this desire. In other words, he is proactive and has the chance of achieving the dream, He must be in end willing to pursue the dream in spite of all the obstacles and when the end comes, the audience must feel that this is truly the end. They can not imagine an action beyond it. In other words, at the end , your readers need to be satisfied with no real threads dangling. This does not mean that there will not be a sequel simply that there is an ending, there is closure.
Your reader may or may not find your protagonist sympathetic, but they must find the character empathetic. In short they must feel a bond of humanity with your main character. They do not have to like him or her very much at the start, but they do have to have that bond. That understanding. Likability is no guarantee of a bond. The reader identifies with deep character -- those qualities deep within the human psyche that only revealed when a character is forced to choose under pressure.
This is why the inciting incident -- the start of the story happens when the protagonist's life is thrown radically out of balance. When this happens, the protagonist must react to the incident. Her desire to restore the balance in her life makes it the spine of the story -- it a Romance the spine of the story is always the growth of the emotional relationship. If it is not, you don't have a romance as the main plot, you have it as a subplot. As I write romance, I have to make sure that the spine of the story is the romance, even if there are other major subplots and with the length of my books, there are always other major subplots. The spine is sometimes referred to as the monomyth or the quest. And here it is useful to have read Volger. Unlike Volger though he does not believe in three acts. he simply warns about the problems of having too many acts, as the climax of each act must surpass the act before it and too many climaxes can dull an audience.
After the Inciting Incident, the LAW of Conflict takes over: to wit NOTHING MOVES IN A STORY EXCEPT THROUGH CONFLICT. A turning point happens when a character is forced to make a choice -- a choice between good and evil or between right and wrong or black and white is no choice, even if it feels like one. True choice is dilemma. Things are not clear cut. Nothing is what it seems and everything has unexpected consequences.
The crisis moment needs to be a static moment.It freezes everything. It is the instant before the dam breaks. It must happen On Stage.
If a scene feels flat, then you can try to use scene analysis to discover the problem: 1.Define the conflict. 2. Note the opening value 3. Break the scene into beats 4. Note the closing value and compare with the opening value. It needs to be different (or else the scene has not moved the story forward) 5 Examine the beats and find the turning point. McKee then breaks down several movies including a scene from Casablanca (which happens to be one of my favourite movies)
Anyway, I think McKee is for those people who like to take apart rainbows, put them together and still believe in them. There is absolutely tons in the book. Little throw away comments, that make me go -- ahh, so that's why this and this has to happen. Hopefully I have convinced one or two to pick up the book and read it. However, writers' minds work in many different ways and what speaks to one writer will leave another scratching her head. And itf you can only take one thing, then take away this craft and the study of craft enhances talent. It does not diminish it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)