There are always two people in every picture: the photographer and the viewer. — Ansel Adams
By PJ Parrish
Got a lot on the brain today: So the time has come to talk of many things: Of slip-on shoes, Scottish ships and ceiling whacks — of cabbage-heads and kings.
Shoes? I have to decde whether getting a pair of Skecher slip-ons will make me look like I’ve given up and am content to slip into old bat-hood.
Scottish ships? I’m just glad Jamie and Claire are heading back to Scotland because the last season of Outlander begins soon and I miss the moors and half-naked men in kilts.
Ceiling whacks? I have to find someone who can repair my bathroom ceiling because the plumber poked a giant hole in it while trying to fix the toilet. (Don’t ask).
Cabbage heads and kings? Politics….nope. We don’t go there here.
But politics is my jumping off point today. I was reading a column by David Brooks the other day wherein he posed an interesting question about election campaigns that relates to us novelists: How do you keep an audience’s attention?
Here at TKZ, we talk often about how a book is divided into acts. We all know how crucial it is to capture a reader’s attention early and set up Act. 1. We all know how easy it is to get bogged down and lose our way in Act. 2. We all know how horrible it is to get to that Act 3 and realize we’re barreling toward a plot abyss.
David Brooks suggests campaigns have a similar structure. So he asked novelists and screenwriters, how they do it. How do they build momentum and keep audiences in their grip? The answers were illuminating.
Playwright David Mamet says that no one tunes in to watch information — they crave drama. What is drama? Mamet: “It is the quest of the hero to overcome those things which prevent him from achieving a specific acute goal.”
Screenwriter Aaron Sorkin tells us that a fictional hero, like a good campaigner, must be seized by a strong, specific desire and they need to face a really big obstacle. A hero/campaigner also needs a clear and compelling plot. Here is the threat. Here is where we’re going. Here is what (me, the hero) is going to do about it.
Brooks then cites Christopher Booker’s book Seven Basic Plots. Booker writes that there are only a handful of iconic storylines in fiction — and in real life.
- Overcoming the Monster.
- Rags to Riches.
- The Quest.
- Voyage and Return.
- Rebirth.
- Comedy.
- Tragedy.
He then links these plots to politicians, saying that a good politician tells a story about himself or herself. They create narratives that propell their campaign forward and help them connect with audiences. (Remember Mamet’s words: drama = good. information = boring)
Allow me one brief political aside: Brooks gives several examples of politicians who found their “plots.” For Ronald Reagan, it was rags to riches. For George W. Bush it was redemption: beating alcoholism and finding faith. Nixon, he suggests, saw himself as the classic David taking on the monster. (the establishment).
Likewise, as novelists, our protagonists need a life narration: They can’t know what to do (plot) until they know what their basic need is. (motivation). You, as a writer, can’t create a compelling plot until and unless you understand what your character wants, at her most basic level. (Hint: It’s not to solve the case).
Brooks wraps up his article by saying that politicians, like fictional heroes, can’t hold our attention unless they reveal something honest about their core. The hero cannot hold back. The hero has to let the reader into his inner self. He points to Obama as an arms-length overly-cerebral politician who failed to connect with voters — until he made his speech on race in 2008.
The novelist E.M. Forster said that there is only one overriding imperative in fiction: “Only connect.”
An audience — be it at a political rally or browsing in a bookstore — needs to feel a connection with the character, needs to understand what they want, needs to empathize with what they feel.
Which leads me to my last point.
You, as a writer, can’t find your audience, can’t connect with readers, until you find your own courage. Courage to do what? To open your an emotional vein and bleed a little on the page. Readers crave drama, not information.
I came across another article recently with this off-putting title: How To (Not) Think Of Your Audience As You Create. Click here for full article.
Don’t get huffy. It’s not as bad as you think. The writer was asking novelists and screenwriters who they wrote for — themselves or their audiences. All the respondants came down on the side of the audience. The one answer that most intrigued me, though, came from novelist Wiz Wharton, author of Ghost Girl and Banana. Listen to this:
Beginning writers often forget that rather than gatekeepers lying on the bones of aspiring authors, agents and publishers are also an audience for your work. Although the bottom line might be whether they can sell your material, they’re also looking for something that appeals to them on a heart and gut level, i.e. something they’re investing in personally. And I honestly don’t think it’s as simple as replicating what’s already out there. Yes, you should have a good grasp of structure and language and all those tools, but more than this, it’s the emotional truth of a project that will ultimately get you noticed.
One of the greatest joys of stories is how they vicariously allow an audience to rehearse emotional and physical scenarios, and when you write with truth you can take something specific and make it absolutely universal and resonant, whether you’re writing a Spartan epic, or a space western, or a domestic noir. Great ideas are everywhere, but it’s the authenticity of the world and its characters as seen through your unique voice and your unique perspective that’s going to make an audience stick around to see how things turn out.
I love that last part. Anybody can come up with a great idea. But it is the realness of your hero’s narrative — as filtered through the realness of your own life-plot — that captivates an audience.
Which leads us back to David Brooks. Cardboard politicians are a dime a dozen, cabbage-heads and would-be kings. The compelling ones? They’re rare. Like great fictional heroes, they hold our attention because they connect.
Write with truth. They will find you and follow.
Same with trial lawyers. The best ones understand that juries want to know the STORY, and who to root for or against. If a criminal defense lawyer reps a quite odious client, he makes the jurors into the “stars” of the show, e.g., the defenders and upholders of constitutional rights (which, actually, they are).
David Morrell talks about finding the “inner ferret” that gnaws at him to write the novel. AI knows not of ferrets.
That’s an excellent point about trial lawyers. I remember a case I sat on for jury duty wherein a teenager was accused of assaulting a cop. The defense lawyer did an excellent job of telling the young man’s life story. The cop’s lawyer — just the facts ma’am. We acquittted him because we believed him.
And yeah, I’ve heard David talk about that ferret! The first time, it was so moving, because I could relate to his point that the best fiction comes from somewhere deep inside the writer. Changed the way I thought about what I was trying to do.
My daughter had a ferret. Frank Burns. He didn’t gnaw away at anything. Just played the cuteness card. But I can see the need for some internal disturbance to light the writing fires.
Served on a jury once where the defense attorney had done a good job of showing us reasonable doubt. Until he put the defendant on the stand.
Took me a while to get the Frank Burns connection.
You instantly brought to mind that episode of MASH where the docs are teaching a small group of Koreans and Hawkeye had them all say out loud to Frank Burns: “You tell ‘im, Ferret Face!” I’ll never get that line out of my head as long as I live. LOL!!!!!!
Terrific post, Kris. It took me years to learn how to write a story that connected with readers, and finally summoning the courage to open that vein was a key part of it.
In contrast to having that courage and creating a character that connects with readers is what one of my writing mentors dubbed “avatar narrative. Avatar narrative is a writer creating a narrative which subconsciously evokes emotion for them, but which lacks any connection, tension, or emotion for the reader. Sensory detail helps move the writer away from creating an avatar, but writing a character that connects with readers is key.
Connecting is the point, and can result in a novel that affects a reader, in a good way.
Thanks so much for today’s post.
Avatar narrator, Love that. Really boils it down.
I live in a major swing state. I can’t leave my home without bumping into someone running for federal office. Sigh. Make it stop!
“One of the greatest joys of stories is how they vicariously allow an audience to rehearse emotional and physical scenarios, and when you write with truth you can take something specific and make it absolutely universal and resonant…”
I think readers want to “rehearse” those scenarios that are outside of their own experience, but it has to be coupled with authenticity. Otherwise, it’s not too far removed from AI.
(“ceiling whacks” – very funny!)
“But it is the realness of your hero’s narrative — as filtered through the realness of your own life-plot — that captivates an audience.”
VERY nice.
I am an incredibly slow writer, but I’m starting to think it’s not JUST chronic illness. I can’t write a scene until I have become the characters (yes, even Andrew), and lived through it so thoroughly I know where the light switches are.
Fortunately, my brain, when I read or listen to my own work, refuses to accept anything until it is literally a movie in there, in full Technicolor and Surround Sound. It catches all those little inconsistencies and won’t stop nagging until they quit interrupting the flow.