[Writingworkshop] Stories

Samantha Weiss samweiss at MIT.EDU
Sun Mar 2 21:07:46 EST 2008


LOL. 

I'll...umm... get right on that.... 

Thnx Antony.

-S. 

> Whew!  I'm really glad we didn't end up in disputed-facts land.  It's
> one of my least favorite places to visit.
>
> And I'm willing to accept that Star Wars has a three act structure (as
> an aside, I think it and The Empire Strikes Back are the two of six that
> are worth examining for artistic merit).  However, using a movie doesn't
> help your case.  I explicitly sited movies as a place where three act
> structure is grafted on by hollywood producers.  To support your case, I
> think you need to site some significant and perhaps lasting works of
> literature.
>
> To really support your case, you might also want to site counter
> examples and show why those particular stories needed to deviate from
> the three act structure. 
>
> Of course, if you did all that, you might have enough for an MFA :-)
>
> Antony
>
>
>
> On Sun, 2008-03-02 at 03:51 -0500, Samantha Weiss wrote:
>   
>> Hey Antony,
>>
>> Sorry, yes. I had read your e-mail too quickly, responded only to 
>> "trilogy" in the broad sense, not to your LoTR question. My bad.
>>
>> I entirely trust everything you are saying about LoTR; I never liked it 
>> and don't know it well enough to respond without having it with me. I 
>> did jot down notes for LoTR while at Odyssey, so they would be in Rhode 
>> Island (my permanent, non college address) somewhere.
>>
>> Sorry I can't respond to LoTR, because now I'm curious. Just reading 
>> what you'd written though, Bilbo passing the ring to Frodo wouldn't 
>> count as an act because the main character, Frodo, isn't the one who is 
>> taking action. Whereas, yes, definitely, Frodo taking up the quest would 
>> totally be an act. Only when the main character takes action/makes a 
>> decision is it an act. (*Doesn't count if they are forced to do it*) If 
>> it's okay, I'm just gonna jot down the 3 act structure as I see it for 
>> Star Wars (IV), becuase there are 3 places that I see Luke taking 
>> definitive action.
>>
>> -S.
>>
>> Inciting incident: Luke gets holographic message, “help me Obi-Wan.”
>>
>> Character goal then becomes: to help Princess Leia fight Empire
>>
>> First attempt: Luke seeks out Obi-Wan they go to Aldaarran. 
>> Consequences: Aldaraan is no longer there and they are captured by Death 
>> Star.
>>
>> Second attempt: Luke saves Leia. Consequences: he finally becomes 
>> formally involved in the resistance movement, including the assault team.
>>
>> Third attempt: Luke fights in combat, uses his training to destroy the 
>> Death Star. Resolution: Luke and Han-Solo get rewarded.
>>
>>
>>     
>>> Samantha, 
>>>
>>> Your definition for act is so broad as to encompass almost anything in a
>>> story of any length.   Therefore, longer stories have more acts and the
>>> relationship to three or odd is imposed only from without.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> You use The Lord of the Rings again, but don't address the issues I
>>> raised against three acts for that work: viz, one novel of six books (as
>>> defined by the author) published in three volumes.  If you're equating
>>> volumes published with acts, I'd have to say that that makes your
>>> argument extremely week.  In no sense is this work a trilogy.  Since you
>>> call it one, I doubt even more your argument that this work has a three
>>> act structure.  
>>>
>>> Since you claim the structure for it, I'd like to know how the events of
>>> The Fellowship of the Ring fits into three acts.  I certainly cannot see
>>> it.  I count at least four acts in the first book of The Lord of the
>>> Rings (first half of the volume The Fellowship of the Ring):  The
>>> passing of the ring from Bilbo to Frodo;  Frodo taking up the quest with
>>> his friends; Frodo and company facing danger and finding allies; the
>>> success and failure of the black riders.  And at least four in the
>>> second book (second half of the volume The Fellowship of the Ring):  The
>>> fellowship forms and begins the new quest; Moria; Lorien; the breaking
>>> of the fellowship.  
>>>
>>> Now, I believe that an argument could be made that either of these two
>>> books in The Fellowship of the Ring is really three acts.  Book one:
>>> the passing of the ring;  the quest begins;  the quest ends in near
>>> tragedy.  Book two:  The formation of the fellowship;  the new quest;
>>> the fellowship is broken.  But, even if I do that, it's still not three
>>> acts. It's six.  
>>>
>>> This is how I perceive our discussion of The Lord of the Rings:
>>>
>>> Me:  Six isn't three (fact).  Published volumes don't make acts (fact).
>>>
>>> You: Six is a trilogy and therefore three acts (apparently ignoring
>>> previously stated fact).  The first book of the trilogy is also three
>>> acts (unsubstantiated claim).
>>>
>>> Me:  (Repeats previous facts).  Also, two isn't three (fact).  Two might
>>> be eight or six, but not three (claim with a (perhaps weak)
>>> justification).
>>>
>>> You: ?
>>>
>>> If what you put into that question mark indicates that we can't agree on
>>> the facts, then I will not be able to continue to discuss this topic
>>> with you.  I'm not asking you to concede my points, but no rational
>>> discussion can be had when the facts are in dispute. 
>>>
>>> If you can show me how you would graft three acts onto the two books
>>> that make up The Fellowship of the Ring I might very well concede your
>>> point that it has a three act structure (you would have to lay out a
>>> mapping as I did).  If you show me how you would produce three acts out
>>> of the six books of The Lord of the Rings, I probably wouldn't accept
>>> your argument, but I'd be willing to consider it and see if I could make
>>> sense of it (I don't think it's possible given the structure of the book
>>> and how it ends with a coda, but I'd be willing to listen - but only if
>>> you actually presented some sort of argument/mapping of action in the
>>> books to a three act structure).  If you continue to argue that The Lord
>>> of the Rings is a trilogy, then we'll never be able to discuss this
>>> because we can't agree on the facts.
>>>
>>> Antony
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, 2008-03-01 at 15:26 -0500, Samantha Weiss wrote:
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> Here, Antony--
>>>>
>>>> An act is an attempt to achieve a goal.  It can happen in a sentence, or 
>>>> in a paragraph, or in ten chapters.  (So when Chris's narrator got the 
>>>> escort/tux, that was an act).  The act ends once we see the resolution 
>>>> of the act.  (The narrators attempt was ineffective, because the other 
>>>> characters knew the escort.  Which leads to the next act, or the next 
>>>> attempt.)
>>>>
>>>> In trilogies, it is typical for each separate book to have a three act 
>>>> structure, and then for the overall trilogy to be, in and of itself, a 
>>>> sort of larger three act structure.  Each separate book in the Lord of 
>>>> the Rings can be broken down into a three act structure, though we only 
>>>> talked about the first book, and then of course, all three books can be 
>>>> put together as a three act structure about an attempt to destroy the 
>>>> ring.  Same with Star Wars, although again, we only tackled the first 
>>>> movie. 
>>>>
>>>> And you are right.  You can actually have a five act structure or a 
>>>> seven act structure, too.   There's more of an odd number rule. 
>>>>
>>>> -S.
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>>>> Thank you, Samantha.  I think this is a wonderful topic.  Not least,
>>>>> because it's sure to generate some controversy :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Two points for now:
>>>>>
>>>>> First, we need a definition.  What is an act?  What can/should/must
>>>>> happen for a piece of a story to be an act?  At what point does a scene
>>>>> become an act?  At what point does an act become something larger still?
>>>>> Is the three "act" structure recursive down to a scene?  A paragraph?  A
>>>>> sentence?
>>>>>
>>>>> In your examples you include The Lord of the Rings.  To me, that's very
>>>>> interesting because I do not see how you could possible tack a three act
>>>>> structure onto that book.  It is a novel composed of six books.  That it
>>>>> was published in three volumes was an artifact of the publishing
>>>>> industry of the time.  The individual books were too small to be
>>>>> published that way, and the complete novel was too large to be published
>>>>> as a single volume.  The three volumes are not three acts (or three
>>>>> novels, or three anything).  
>>>>>
>>>>> This leads to the second point.  We're pattern seeking creatures.  And
>>>>> we frequently find patterns even when they don't exist.  
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Why do bad things always happen in threes?"  
>>>>>
>>>>> "Because we start counting again after three."
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So, I'm wondering if some of the three act structures that are found are
>>>>> found because three constitutes some sort of pattern grouping thing
>>>>> inherent in the way we think.
>>>>>
>>>>> Antony
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 2008-03-01 at 13:39 -0500, Samantha Weiss wrote:
>>>>>   
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>>>> Thank you Antony--it's a meaningful discussion topic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I wanted to share thoughts on this, as I learned it at Odyssey, and as 
>>>>>> it is the most useful thing I've learned as a writer.  It was the 
>>>>>> turning point for me, when my stories started getting feedback (from Joe 
>>>>>> H. this fall, for example), that is "this is saleable." 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Definitely, as Antony pointed out, a story is about principals, not 
>>>>>> about rules.  The rule being the, "you must do it this way," and the 
>>>>>> principal being the "this has worked through all remembered time."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are all these competing theories about plot.  You hear:  "There 
>>>>>> are only 7 types of quintessential plots in the world" or "There are 
>>>>>> only 21 types of plot in the world."  These papers are published all 
>>>>>> over the place.  While I was at Odyssey, we studied piles of these 
>>>>>> theories, and most types of plots have this three act try/fail, 
>>>>>> try/fail, try/resolution structure.  Then we looked at those stories 
>>>>>> that have "made it."  We talked about some fifteen different stories 
>>>>>> from different cultures, stories older than the Bible, modern stories 
>>>>>> (Star Wars movie, Lord of the Ring)...  and broke them down. To my 
>>>>>> absolute shock, all but one of them fit three act structure to the tee.  
>>>>>> They were stories chosen at random by students.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So it isn't really a hollywood invention.  It's a quintessential human 
>>>>>> form that has been passed down from the dawn of time.  Which isn't to 
>>>>>> say that you can't break it, but that you should  have *reason* for 
>>>>>> doing so.  ("Anxious, inexperienced writers obey rules.  Rebellious, 
>>>>>> unschooled writers break rules.  Artists master the form" -McKee) 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So had done a piece about a student killing his teacher, and 
>>>>>> purposefully broke the three act structure, and did so because I needed 
>>>>>> to to deepen character.  And for that piece, I think it worked.  So I'm 
>>>>>> not set on three act structure, but I dont' see anything in Chris's work 
>>>>>> that makes me think it *shouldn't* be a three act structure.  He's 
>>>>>> trying to tell a story about a sick man who wants to get rid of the 
>>>>>> fever--that he has that goal means that as the reader, we are invested 
>>>>>> in him pursuing it.  Then, to be satisfied, we must see that there is a 
>>>>>> struggle, that he tries to pursue the goal and there are obstacles.  In 
>>>>>> the second story, we are invested in the narrator's struggle against 
>>>>>> McGrath, and when the story ceases being about that, the story feels 
>>>>>> diffuse and unfocused, at least to me. 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hoping that that might be useful.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -S. 
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     
>>>>>>         
>>>>>>             
>>>>>>> So, I'll start with the agreements this time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The opening is very strong.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That Erica knows McGrath must be foreshadowed, or it seems like a cheat.
>>>>>>> I think I mentioned it the first time I read this story: Erica needs to
>>>>>>> be trying to get to that party.  How you accomplish that, I'm not sure.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not sure why three is so important to Samantha, but I must disagree
>>>>>>> again.  A short story is not, nor should it be, a screen play.  Except
>>>>>>> for Erica knowing the Dean, I never had a moment were I didn't want to
>>>>>>> keep reading.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also, this is a genre story.  Dean McGrath is a monster, figuratively
>>>>>>> speaking, from the first page.  On page nine, we're told this is a
>>>>>>> horror story, even if we don't realize it.  What follows makes sense
>>>>>>> (except that Erica knows McGrath).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm really glad you're thinking of submitting this for publication.  I
>>>>>>> know you had some concerns about identities.  On that note, R___ is
>>>>>>> fine, but maybe Hogwart's should go (I can't think of a fictional
>>>>>>> graduate school of Alchemy, but that would be a better reference here).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, 2008-03-01 at 02:00 -0500, Samantha Weiss wrote:
>>>>>>>   
>>>>>>>       
>>>>>>>           
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>> Chris,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Pages 1 through 9 of your second story have me locked in.  It is 
>>>>>>>> marvelous, professional level writing, and the voice make it a joy to 
>>>>>>>> read.  The situation with the e-mail and the n=1 walks that line between 
>>>>>>>> being believable and absolutely fucking hilarious over the top, and I'm 
>>>>>>>> just loving it.  I love that your character has this clear goal, and 
>>>>>>>> then he goes and spends $2000 (first attempt) on the most amazing attire 
>>>>>>>> and an escort besides.  The dress and the geometry comments were 
>>>>>>>> particularly wonderful. 
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When I start to sense malevolence, the storytelling tone changes.  Then 
>>>>>>>> all of this stuff happens in rapid succession for no reason that I can 
>>>>>>>> tell.  It happens that he had called upon a werewolf to bring to the 
>>>>>>>> ball... unforgivable author manipulation in a world where we assume that 
>>>>>>>> most people are just people.  I wish there were some reason that he had 
>>>>>>>> to have contacted a monster, though I can't think of one offhand.  It 
>>>>>>>> happens that he sees McGrath at the same time as Erica starts to 
>>>>>>>> change.  It happens that everyone knows who she is  (this I think, must 
>>>>>>>> be cut from the story).  It happens that McGrath and Erica are not only 
>>>>>>>> involved but that she hates him so much that she's willing to try to 
>>>>>>>> kill him.  (This would only make sense if we see, in the phone 
>>>>>>>> conversation, your narrator explicitly tell her that he is using her for 
>>>>>>>> a tool of revenge against McGrath, and that that should be the focus of 
>>>>>>>> her evening.  If you go that route, then McGrath and Erica can't know 
>>>>>>>> each other before hand).  It happens that your narrrator is apparently 
>>>>>>>> the ONLY non-monster in a school where even the graduate students are 
>>>>>>>> monsters (if they aren't, then there is no way other faculty will turn 
>>>>>>>> into mosnters around him), but there isn't anything aprticular special 
>>>>>>>> about him to make that be the case.  You also slip into inappropriate 
>>>>>>>> exposition (Even MIranda treated us with a coolness quite unlike her, 
>>>>>>>> for example) instead of realized scenes (as when Erica and your narrator 
>>>>>>>> interact)--which is fine for unimportant scenes only.  That that moment 
>>>>>>>> that Miranda pushes him aside is a really important moment, though and 
>>>>>>>> we should see it.  (And other important scenes).  I would like to see a 
>>>>>>>> bit of the small talk between Erica and your narrator. 
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So I have two thoughts.  1)  My issue with structure is that the 
>>>>>>>> narrator has one attempt:  when he gets the prostitute and the nice 
>>>>>>>> tux.  Then everything else plays out around him like a movie 
>>>>>>>> sequence--he takes no part in it--and we see a resolution.  This is not 
>>>>>>>> good.  We need three attempts.  So if this were a nongenre story, for 
>>>>>>>> example,  (I am completely making this up, just trying to explain plot 
>>>>>>>> structure--this isn't even a suggestion) Miranda and McGrath know each 
>>>>>>>> other, clearly have had a thing for eachother, and your narrator is like 
>>>>>>>> WHAT THE FUCK I paid 2000 for this to not work, and then he kisses her 
>>>>>>>> or something (2nd attempt) to piss McGrath off...  See where I'm going 
>>>>>>>> with that?  There's a second attempt, brought about by a strong causal 
>>>>>>>> chain. 
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2)  I really think this is a non-genre story.  The genre element doesn't 
>>>>>>>> come in until the last line of page 12, in a story that only has five 
>>>>>>>> pages left.  That is way, way, way too late.  The genre elements either 
>>>>>>>> need to be there from beginning to end, or be hinted at much, much, much 
>>>>>>>> more strongly than just the comment about the period.  I also think you 
>>>>>>>> have two different stories.  A story about a man who brings a prostitute 
>>>>>>>> to a school ball, and a story about a monster ball. 
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Okay.  Attaching the manuscript so you can see my thoughts throughout. 
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -Samantha
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Writingworkshop mailing list
>>>>>>>> Writingworkshop at nealemorison.org
>>>>>>>> http://nealemorison.org/mailman/listinfo/writingworkshop_nealemorison.org
>>>>>>>>     
>>>>>>>>         
>>>>>>>>             
>>>>>>>>                 
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Writingworkshop mailing list
>>>>>>> Writingworkshop at nealemorison.org
>>>>>>> http://nealemorison.org/mailman/listinfo/writingworkshop_nealemorison.org
>>>>>>>   
>>>>>>>       
>>>>>>>           
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Writingworkshop mailing list
>>>>>> Writingworkshop at nealemorison.org
>>>>>> http://nealemorison.org/mailman/listinfo/writingworkshop_nealemorison.org
>>>>>>     
>>>>>>         
>>>>>>             
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Writingworkshop mailing list
>>>>> Writingworkshop at nealemorison.org
>>>>> http://nealemorison.org/mailman/listinfo/writingworkshop_nealemorison.org
>>>>>   
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Writingworkshop mailing list
>>>> Writingworkshop at nealemorison.org
>>>> http://nealemorison.org/mailman/listinfo/writingworkshop_nealemorison.org
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Writingworkshop mailing list
>>> Writingworkshop at nealemorison.org
>>> http://nealemorison.org/mailman/listinfo/writingworkshop_nealemorison.org
>>>   
>>>       
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Writingworkshop mailing list
>> Writingworkshop at nealemorison.org
>> http://nealemorison.org/mailman/listinfo/writingworkshop_nealemorison.org
>>     
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Writingworkshop mailing list
> Writingworkshop at nealemorison.org
> http://nealemorison.org/mailman/listinfo/writingworkshop_nealemorison.org
>   





More information about the Writingworkshop mailing list