The Role of Fantasy

I'm back with another exciting installment of a series based on The Anatomy of Motive by John Douglas and Mark Olshaker. I'm using the information to create believable antagonists. Today's post may also curl your toes or turn your stomach, so hang onto something.

Douglas says, "After interviewing a large number of serial predatory criminals, we were able to compile what we called a Sexual Homicide Motivational Model, organized according to the influences, both environmental and emotional, that seemed to determine the developmental course these men took throughout their lives and criminal careers: the factors that commonly contributed toward a motive to commit violent acts." 

You can't get away from the "ick" factor when delving into the minds of depraved individuals, but if you want to create a great antagonist, you need to know what makes him tick. It seems that fantasy is the key.

(This fantasy photo courtesy of freedigitalphotos.net. This is not the fantasy of most violent offenders, just so you know.)

Douglas says that 50 percent of the criminals he interviewed had their first rape fantasy between the ages of twelve and fourteen. That's not a typo, it really says between twelve and fourteen. He goes on to say that not every boy who fantasizes about rape will turn into a rapist or murderer. It is entirely possible they grow up to be law-abiding citizens with proper impulse controls. But adults who began fantasizing about rape at an early age, combined with the homicidal triad (see earlier posts), impulse control issues, and a need for dominating those around them can easily escalate into a violent offender.

The fantasy of your violent antagonist need not be sexual. Some offenders fantasized about overcoming the problems in their lives, the pain and failure that came as a result of their superiority and inadequacy (see earlier posts). This fantasy involves being successful and getting revenge on the people who hurt him, disrespected him, or held him back from his true potential. Sometimes these fantasies include humiliation, debasement, or physical harm that doesn't lead to death. Other times, torture and death is the only thing that will satisfy the offender.

*Alert - this next bit is downright gross! Skip this paragraph if you need to.* Douglas says that "79 percent of the men in our study reported what they described as compulsive masturbation, 72 percent said they were active Peeping Toms (or voyeurs), and 81 percent described active and regular involvement with pornography." Cause and effect can't be proven with pornography, but the statistic is what it is. Bad guys like porn. But even if they didn't have access to it, they'd still be violent offenders. Fetishism is another way offenders act out their obsessions. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) defines fetishism as involving, "the arousal of fantasies, sexual urges, or other behaviors from nonliving or nonhuman objects." Womens underwear is a classic example of a fetish. 72% of the men interviewed by Douglas admitted to having a preoccupation with some fetish during their formative years.

I feel the need to wash my hands now. But back to the point. "What is important to keep in mind in our examination of criminal motivation is the emphasis, preoccupation, and overall pattern of the sexual thinking or behavior." If it controls the offenders life, it's important to his profile because it will define how he handles his stressors. Use this when creating your antagonist. What are his fantasies? Are they merely for dominance over others, or are they sexual? Does he have control over them, or do they rule his life? Your antagonist will most likely have a background full of the distasteful stuff I put in the alert paragraph, but they don't have to come out in your book. If you're writing a cozy, you definitely want to keep that bit as pure reference for yourself. But it will be present in his background, dictating his actions, his thoughts, and his motivations. Don't skip this background just because it's distasteful. Unless it doesn't fit, of course. If your antagonist is a female, her fantasies will be completely different from those discussed in this post. But she will have them. 

I need to go hug my kids now. That was a rough one. Dare I ask for comments or questions?

-Sonja 

Superiority & Inadequacy

Welcome back to my series based on the book The Anatomy of Motive by John Douglas and Mark Olshaker. Douglas was a profiler for the FBI and used his vast experience with violent offenders to create profiles for use in law enforcement. I'm using the information from the book to create believable antagonists. Today I want to look at two warring factors found within most violent offenders: superiority and inadequacy.

(photo courtesy of freedigitalphotos.net)

Douglas says most violent offenders possess a feeling of superiority, grandiosity. "Societal mores were not meant for them; they were too smart or too clever to have to start at the bottom and work their way up, or to live by the normal rules that govern a relationship." The other feeling is inadequacy, "of not being able to measure up, of knowing they were losers no matter what they did. And since the first feeling generally made them unwilling to study, work, pay their dues… they often were inadequately prepared for a job or a relationship that would give a normal person genuine satisfaction. This just reinforced their outsider status."

What motivates these guys is a desire for control and power that will help them overcome their feelings of powerlessness. "Being able to manipulate, dominate, and control a victim, to decide whether that victim lives or dies, or how that victim dies, temporarily counteracts, for some, their feelings of inadequacy and… makes them feel grandiose and superior as they believe they are entitled to feel. In other words, raping and murdering sets the world right with them."

When creating your antagonist, keep these character traits in mind. Your bad guy will possess these same feelings of superiority and inadequacy. How he deals with them will help make him an individual (as opposed to a cardboard, two-dimensional bad guy). How does he manipulate and dominate those in his life? Is he passive-aggressive? Does he intimidate with his size? Does he use his vast intelligence to make others feel like idiots? Does his sense of entitlement mean he's a loner with no one close to him? Does he use physical violence or psychological abuse to get what he wants? Does he play the "loser" card and try to invoke pity from others? Answering these questions about your antagonist, then showing him acting this way in the story, will make for an exciting, unpredictable antagonist readers will love to hate.

-Sonja

Homicidal Triad

Welcome to the second post of this series based on the book The Anatomy of Motive by John Douglas and Mark Olshaker. Today's topic is the Homicidal Triad, or the three youthful behaviors that generally mark the background of a violent offender. I'm going to preface this post with a bit of personal commentary. There's a lot of "ick" factor coming up because, quite frankly, the whole idea of delving into the mind of a violent offender is going to be icky. So if you have a weak stomach or get creeped out easily, you might want to sit out this series. I hate to drive away readers, but this is going to be a yucky ride, my friends. However, there's a lot of excellent information in the book that writers can use to create awesome antagonists, so if you can hang onto your stomach, come along.

(Photo courtesy of freedigitalphotos.net)

Now back to the nasty stuff. "There are three youthful behaviors that together make up what has come to be known as the homicidal triad: enuresis (bed-wetting) beyond an appropriate age, fire starting, and cruelty to animals and/or smaller children." The authors are very clear to point out that not every boy who displays these traits will grow up to be a murderer or rapist, but the combination of those three traits was extremely prominent in their studies and suggested a pattern too likely to ignore. If you've got a boy who kills ants with a magnifying glass on the sidewalk, wets his bed frequently, and harasses his younger brothers and sisters, you've got the makings of a violent offender.

The authors go on to say that "serial killers are made rather than born… it is unquestionably true that some kids, from as early as you can observe them, are far more aggressive than others, have far poorer impulse control, are noticeably antisocial. That doesn't mean they're doomed to become criminals. But our studies…show that if you start out with a kid predisposed like this, throw him into a severely dysfunctional environment, and then don't do anything to intervene, you are pretty likely to come up with a violence-prone adult."

(On a side note, the author also says that while he can explain that type of violent behavior, he in no way excuses it. He's a big proponent of personal responsibility, and later in the book he discusses the choices that violent people make and their inability to take responsibility for their actions. It's always the fault of someone else. I will definitely cover this in a later post.)

Writers can use this homicidal triad to create a believable background for an antagonist--or just hint at one. Remember, the presence of these three traits suggests violent behavior to come, but doesn't necessary have to lead there. Feel free to play with that little tidbit if you've got a younger male character in your book, or a set of brothers. But back to the point. Odds are, your antagonist (if he's male) displayed these three traits in his youth. That would all be backstory, and would have to be delivered to the reader in a non-information-dump method, but you're clever enough to pull that off. 

One last note on this triad: it applies to MALES. The vast majority of violent offenders are males. When a female kills, it's usually for very different reasons, and the triad does not apply. Maybe I'll cover this in a later post, too. 

-Sonja

Behavior Reflects Personality

I'm reading an awesome book called The Anatomy of Motive by John Douglas and Mark Olshaker.

The tag line on the front says, "The FBI's legendary Mindhunter explores the key to understanding and catching violent criminals." This book belongs to my husband (he's a professional crime analyst and studies criminology in his spare time), so I don't have to worry about returning it to the library any time soon. The thing I love about this book is the potential wealth of information for writers of all genres. Suspense, Mystery, Fantasy, even Amish Historical writers could find something fascinating in this book to help create realistic, believable antagonists. I think I'll take my time studying the book and passing along some of the information I find.

One of the first things that stuck out in the prologue was this brief but powerful statement: "Behavior reflects personality." This sums up why men like Douglas and Olshaker can use their vast experience in dealing with predators/violent offenders to come up with incredibly accurate profiles. "Even though every crime is unique, behavior fits into certain patterns." Picking out the significant pieces of those patterns leads to knowledge about what's going on with a crime scene and answers question of WHY did they do this unspeakable thing. Knowing WHY and HOW leads to WHO. 

Writers can and should use this information when creating antagonists. While it's true that some people are just down-right evil and don't need any other motive beyond "I wanted to," most readers will demand a motive behind an act of violence.

When creating my antagonists, I work backward from the crime, which usually flows from the theme. For instance, one of my mysteries dealt with revenge as an act of love. It was basically the whole, "If I can't have you, no one can."  I didn't want to stick too close to that stereotype, so I had to add a twist or two, but that's a topic for another post. Back to the point. In my story, creating an arsonist for the antagonist wouldn't work. Nor would a rapist, or a spree killer, or a serial killer. My bad girl wasn't a sociopath. Immediately, the parameters of my story dictated what kind of person she wasn't, letting me fill in the interesting parts about who she was. There's a lot more to it than that (her background, her mental health, her relationship with friends/family, her choice of weapon, her choice of dump site, her personality traits, etc.), but her personality was reflected in the crime scenes, which led my detective back to her.

This stuff is fascinating to me. I have a feeling I'll be posting good stuff from this book for quite a while. Any comments? Questions? Examples to share?

-Sonja

 

Break-Taking

Most of my favorite writers hand out this free advice: "Write every day." Sometimes it's worded slightly differently, as in, "Set a word count goal for the week and make sure you hit it." The basic idea is called BIC: Butt in Chair. It's good advice. I try to make it happen every week. Like this:

 (This BIC photo courtesy of freedigitalphoto.net)

 

But sometimes it doesn't happen. I'm in the midst of a massive problem with my WIP (Work in Progress), and I haven't been able to think it through completely. I've got a handle on the problem, and know what needs to be done, but I'm not there yet. And today, instead of writing, I pulled up HULU and watched last night's episode of Dancing with the Stars. Do I feel guilty? No way! I have a sinking feeling if I'd sat down today to work on my story without knowing the direction I'm supposed to be going, I'd have gone in the wrong direction and written a bunch of words that I'd later have to delete. That wouldn't have been a bad thing either.

The point is, I made my decision and I'm not ashamed of it. However, if I make the same decision tomorrow, I'll probably regret it. That'd make Friday's word count goal pretty unobtainable. So I'll obey the BIC mandate tomorrow and get my problem fixed so I can continue writing. But when you need a break, don't feel guilty about taking it. Just don't take a really long one. 

-Sonja

A Peril of Plotting

I've admitted it before: I'm a plotter. I can't begin writing a story without knowing all the major pieces, especially the ending. In fact, knowing the ending helps me create the right character to play the part of hero.

But today I ran into a problem, and I'm fairly certain it has more to do with my linear thought process and elaborate plot than anything else. I got so excited about the ending, so in a hurry to get to that fabulous climatic scene, that I resolved too many issues too quickly. Now I'm sitting at 60,000 words and the climatic sequence has begun.

It's too soon. I didn't let the tension stew long enough, didn't let the hero suffer long enough in the trials and tribulations of Part 3 (The Attack), before moving into Part 4 (The Resolution).

So how do I fix it? I've got to back up and prolong the tension. I've got to let the hero suffer some more and delay his deliverance before he goes after the bad guy. There are plenty of ways to prolong suspense and tension in a story. I could...

1. Insert a ticking clock: something bad will happen by this time, and my hero is in a race against that clock.

2 Increase the stakes: now it's not just the hero who's in danger, but so is his lover, or partner, or best friend, or pet iguana. 

3. Insert an inability to take action: my hero knows what has to happen but is physically or psychologically incapable of doing what needs to be done.

4. Insert a new mystery: the hero knows what must happen, and knows he is capable of doing so, but then new information comes to him that negates all that positive "I can do it" stuff.

Is this problem unique to me, or have you ever run into this sort of difficulty while working on your first draft? I doubt I'm alone. Share your horror story in the comments section and tell me how you fixed it. 

-Sonja

Character Decisions

Writer Unboxed had an awesome blog post yesterday by Lisa Cron called "Does Your Protagonist Have Amnesia?" Check it out! It's about how your protagonist makes decisions based on his past and his motivations. It's a Must Read. Go now. Then come back when you're done and leave a comment.

 

-Sonja

It's Moving!

Posterous is closing, so my blog is moving. If you're following me on a feed reader, please update the url address so you don't miss any of my posts. You can find the new blog posts at sonjahutchinson.com or at sonjahutchinson.wordpress.com. The new site has a beautiful design with a banner photo my oldest son snapped while on a hiking trip. It's also got tags, comments, and all the other wonderful features you're accustomed too, plus a new list of blogs that I follow. 

Pop on over and leave me a comment. I love hearing from ya'll.

-Sonja

Pantsers vs. Plotters

Now that I've finished a fabulous series on plotting a great story, it's time to comment on the idea of outlining. I've mentioned this before, but there are two types of writers in the world: those who plot out the entire story before they begin writing (plotters) and those who do little-to-no planning before they begin writing (pantsers, as in by-the-seat-of-the-pants). I'm firmly entrenched in the plotters category. In fact, two weeks ago a great scene popped into my head that took place near the half-way point of my story, but I was only one-quarter of the way through the writing process. I figured I'd better write that scene out before I forgot all the good stuff I came up with. So I wrote it. Then I had to back up to the point where I'd left off and fill in all the stuff that took place between. Talk about anxiety! My poor linear brain is just NOT equipped to deal with non-linear writing. I wrote fast and furious to fill up the space and get that pre-written scene into chronological order with the rest of the story.

I have a pantser friend who has started to come around to my way of thinking (Dragonfallacy, that's you!). She now admits that she plots bits of her story before she writes. Sometimes she starts writing, then plots for a bit, then writes for a bit, then when she gets stuck she goes back to plotting. She admitted to me just today that *gasp* she frequently starts out with a scene at some random place within the first half of the story. She's *accustomed* to writing scenes out of order. I can't even begin to express how wrong that feels to me. It's like an architect trying to build a building without blueprints. Its like putting your socks on over your shoes. Its like putting mayonnaise on your peanut butter sandwich. It's Just Not Done.

(This "don't do it" photo courtesy of freedigitalphotos.net)

Yet I know people do it all the time, and they manage to get books written. Obviously, there's no right or wrong way. But there is a way that feels natural to me. I'll stick with it and not feel guilty that I can't stray outside the boundaries of my comfort zone to try someone else's way of doing things. I applaud my pantser friend for trying things my way. She found a nice common ground between the two that works for her. I personally think she may end up following rabbit trails that don't go where they should, so when it comes time to edit she finds herself deleting some unusable prose, but I haven't had any confirmation on my theory yet. And if she does, so what? The more writing you do, the better you get at it. Someone somewhere said it takes 10,000 hours of doing something to become an expert at it. If you put in your 10,000 hours and end up deleting some of those words, you've still put in the time. My friend and I have both put in a lot more than 10,000 hours, so I think we're doing dandy.

What about you, loyal readers? Are you a plotter or a pantser? Do you find yourself somewhere between the two? Can you write in a non-linear fashion without stressing out about it? Share your wisdom with the group.

-Sonja

Pantsers vs. Plotters

Now that I've finished a fabulous series on plotting a great story, it's time to comment on the idea of outlining. I've mentioned this before, but there are two types of writers in the world: those who plot out the entire story before they begin writing (plotters) and those who do little-to-no planning before they begin writing (pantsers, as in by-the-seat-of-the-pants). I'm firmly entrenched in the plotters category. In fact, two weeks ago a great scene popped into my head that took place near the half-way point of my story, but I was only one-quarter of the way through the writing process. I figured I'd better write that scene out before I forgot all the good stuff I came up with. So I wrote it. Then I had to back up to the point where I'd left off and fill in all the stuff that took place between. Talk about anxiety! My poor linear brain is just NOT equipped to deal with non-linear writing. I wrote fast and furious to fill up the space and get that pre-written scene into chronological order with the rest of the story.

I have a pantser friend who has started to come around to my way of thinking (Dragonfallacy, that's you!). She now admits that she plots bits of her story before she writes. Sometimes she starts writing, then plots for a bit, then writes for a bit, then when she gets stuck she goes back to plotting. She admitted to me just today that *gasp* she frequently starts out with a scene at some random place within the first half of the story. She's *accustomed* to writing scenes out of order. I can't even begin to express how wrong that feels to me. It's like an architect trying to build a building without blueprints. Its like putting your socks on over your shoes. Its like putting mayonnaise on your peanut butter sandwich. It's Just Not Done.

(This "don't do it" photo courtesy of freedigitalphotos.net)

Yet I know people do it all the time, and they manage to get books written. Obviously, there's no right or wrong way. But there is a way that feels natural to me. I'll stick with it and not feel guilty that I can't stray outside the boundaries of my comfort zone to try someone else's way of doing things. I applaud my pantser friend for trying things my way. She found a nice common ground between the two that works for her. I personally think she may end up following rabbit trails that don't go where they should, so when it comes time to edit she finds herself deleting some unusable prose, but I haven't had any confirmation on my theory yet. And if she does, so what? The more writing you do, the better you get at it. Someone somewhere said it takes 10,000 hours of doing something to become an expert at it. If you put in your 10,000 hours and end up deleting some of those words, you've still put in the time. My friend and I have both put in a lot more than 10,000 hours, so I think we're doing dandy.

What about you, loyal readers? Are you a plotter or a pantser? Do you find yourself somewhere between the two? Can you write in a non-linear fashion without stressing out about it? Share your wisdom with the group.

-Sonja

Pantsers vs. Plotters

Now that I've finished a fabulous series on plotting a great story, it's time to comment on the idea of outlining. I've mentioned this before, but there are two types of writers in the world: those who plot out the entire story before they begin writing (plotters) and those who do little-to-no planning before they begin writing (pantsers, as in by-the-seat-of-the-pants). I'm firmly entrenched in the plotters category. In fact, two weeks ago a great scene popped into my head that took place near the half-way point of my story, but I was only one-quarter of the way through the writing process. I figured I'd better write that scene out before I forgot all the good stuff I came up with. So I wrote it. Then I had to back up to the point where I'd left off and fill in all the stuff that took place between. Talk about anxiety! My poor linear brain is just NOT equipped to deal with non-linear writing. I wrote fast and furious to fill up the space and get that pre-written scene into chronological order with the rest of the story.

I have a pantser friend who has started to come around to my way of thinking (Dragonfallacy, that's you!). She now admits that she plots bits of her story before she writes. Sometimes she starts writing, then plots for a bit, then writes for a bit, then when she gets stuck she goes back to plotting. She admitted to me just today that *gasp* she frequently starts out with a scene at some random place within the first half of the story. She's *accustomed* to writing scenes out of order. I can't even begin to express how wrong that feels to me. It's like an architect trying to build a building without blueprints. Its like putting your socks on over your shoes. Its like putting mayonnaise on your peanut butter sandwich. It's Just Not Done.

(This "don't do it" photo courtesy of freedigitalphotos.net)

Yet I know people do it all the time, and they manage to get books written. Obviously, there's no right or wrong way. But there is a way that feels natural to me. I'll stick with it and not feel guilty that I can't stray outside the boundaries of my comfort zone to try someone else's way of doing things. I applaud my pantser friend for trying things my way. She found a nice common ground between the two that works for her. I personally think she may end up following rabbit trails that don't go where they should, so when it comes time to edit she finds herself deleting some unusable prose, but I haven't had any confirmation on my theory yet. And if she does, so what? The more writing you do, the better you get at it. Someone somewhere said it takes 10,000 hours of doing something to become an expert at it. If you put in your 10,000 hours and end up deleting some of those words, you've still put in the time. My friend and I have both put in a lot more than 10,000 hours, so I think we're doing dandy.

What about you, loyal readers? Are you a plotter or a pantser? Do you find yourself somewhere between the two? Can you write in a non-linear fashion without stressing out about it? Share your wisdom with the group.

-Sonja

 

Pantsers vs. Plotters

Now that I've finished a fabulous series on plotting a great story, it's time to comment on the idea of outlining. I've mentioned this before, but there are two types of writers in the world: those who plot out the entire story before they begin writing (plotters) and those who do little-to-no planning before they begin writing (pantsers, as in by-the-seat-of-the-pants). I'm firmly entrenched in the plotters category. In fact, two weeks ago a great scene popped into my head that took place near the half-way point of my story, but I was only one-quarter of the way through the writing process. I figured I'd better write that scene out before I forgot all the good stuff I came up with. So I wrote it. Then I had to back up to the point where I'd left off and fill in all the stuff that took place between. Talk about anxiety! My poor linear brain is just NOT equipped to deal with non-linear writing. I wrote fast and furious to fill up the space and get that pre-written scene into chronological order with the rest of the story.

I have a pantser friend who has started to come around to my way of thinking (Dragonfallacy, that's you!). She now admits that she plots bits of her story before she writes. Sometimes she starts writing, then plots for a bit, then writes for a bit, then when she gets stuck she goes back to plotting. She admitted to me just today that *gasp* she frequently starts out with a scene at some random place within the first half of the story. She's *accustomed* to writing scenes out of order. I can't even begin to express how wrong that feels to me. It's like an architect trying to build a building without blueprints. Its like putting your socks on over your shoes. Its like putting mayonnaise on your peanut butter sandwich. It's Just Not Done.

 

(This "don't do it" photo courtesy of freedigitalphotos.net)

Yet I know people do it all the time, and they manage to get books written. Obviously, there's no right or wrong way. But there is a way that feels natural to me. I'll stick with it and not feel guilty that I can't stray outside the boundaries of my comfort zone to try someone else's way of doing things. I applaud my pantser friend for trying things my way. She found a nice common ground between the two that works for her. I personally think she may end up following rabbit trails that don't go where they should, so when it comes time to edit she finds herself deleting some unusable prose, but I haven't had any confirmation on my theory yet. And if she does, so what? The more writing you do, the better you get at it. Someone somewhere said it takes 10,000 hours of doing something to become an expert at it. If you put in your 10,000 hours and end up deleting some of those words, you've still put in the time. My friend and I have both put in a lot more than 10,000 hours, so I think we're doing dandy.

What about you, loyal readers? Are you a plotter or a pantser? Do you find yourself somewhere between the two? Can you write in a non-linear fashion without stressing out about it? Share your wisdom with the group.

-Sonja

 

Pantsers vs. Plotters

Now that I've finished a fabulous series on plotting a great story, it's time to comment on the idea of outlining. I've mentioned this before, but there are two types of writers in the world: those who plot out the entire story before they begin writing (plotters) and those who do little-to-no planning before they begin writing (pantsers, as in by-the-seat-of-the-pants). I'm firmly entrenched in the plotters category. In fact, two weeks ago a great scene popped into my head that took place near the half-way point of my story, but I was only one-quarter of the way through the writing process. I figured I'd better write that scene out before I forgot all the good stuff I came up with. So I wrote it. Then I had to back up to the point where I'd left off and fill in all the stuff that took place between. Talk about anxiety! My poor linear brain is just NOT equipped to deal with non-linear writing. I wrote fast and furious to fill up the space and get that pre-written scene into chronological order with the rest of the story.

I have a pantser friend who has started to come around to my way of thinking (Dragonfallacy, that's you!). She now admits that she plots bits of her story before she writes. Sometimes she starts writing, then plots for a bit, then writes for a bit, then when she gets stuck she goes back to plotting. She admitted to me just today that *gasp* she frequently starts out with a scene at some random place within the first half of the story. She's *accustomed* to writing scenes out of order. I can't even begin to express how wrong that feels to me. It's like an architect trying to build a building without blueprints. Its like putting your socks on over your shoes. Its like putting mayonnaise on your peanut butter sandwich. It's Just Not Done.

(This "don't do it" photo courtesy of freedigitalphotos.net)

Yet I know people do it all the time, and they manage to get books written. Obviously, there's no right or wrong way. But there is a way that feels natural to me. I'll stick with it and not feel guilty that I can't stray outside the boundaries of my comfort zone to try someone else's way of doing things. I applaud my pantser friend for trying things my way. She found a nice common ground between the two that works for her. I personally think she may end up following rabbit trails that don't go where they should, so when it comes time to edit she finds herself deleting some unusable prose, but I haven't had any confirmation on my theory yet. And if she does, so what? The more writing you do, the better you get at it. Someone somewhere said it takes 10,000 hours of doing something to become an expert at it. If you put in your 10,000 hours and end up deleting some of those words, you've still put in the time. My friend and I have both put in a lot more than 10,000 hours, so I think we're doing dandy.

What about you, loyal readers? Are you a plotter or a pantser? Do you find yourself somewhere between the two? Can you write in a non-linear fashion without stressing out about it? Share your wisdom with the group.

-Sonja

Second Plot Point

This is the last post in this series, so you only have to put up with this bit of review one last time. Here goes: In his book Story Engineering,  Larry Brooks offers six core competencies involved in writing an excellent novel. Competency #4, Structure, has four parts: The Set-up, The Response, The Attack, and the Resolution. Within these four parts are some major milestones. The milestones within the structure are: 

The opening scene or sequence of your story;

A hooking moment in the first twenty pages;

A setup inciting incident 

The First Plot Point, at approximately 20 to 25 percent through the story;

The First Pinch Point at about the three-eights mark, or precisely in the middle of part 2;

The context-shifting Midpoint, at precisely the middle of the story;

A Second Pinch Point, at about the five-eights mark, or in the middle of Part 3

The Second Plot Point, at about 75 percent through the story;

The final resolution scene or sequence

 (This tent comes from freedigitalphotos.net)

The final milestone I want to discuss is the Second Plot Point. Think of the First Plot Point, the Midpoint, and the Second Plot Point as the three posts holding up a tent: two on the sides, one in the middle. If you don't position them correctly, the tent collapses. So be careful to put them in the right spot in the story, or the story will sag. The Second Plot Point (SPP) would be that side post on one end. 

Here's Brooks' definition: "the final injection of new information in the story, after which no new expository information may enter the story other than the hero's actions, and which puts a final piece of narrative information in play that gives the hero everything she needs to become the primary catalyst in the story's conclusion." That's a nice big sentence, and I'd hate to diagram it for English class, but it gets the job done. The SPP is when the story shifts into resolution mode because this new information enables the hero to complete the quest, solve the problem, save the day, etc. 

"It's when the final scene starts." This last piece of information revealed in the SPP needs to be powerful and meaningful. It's the last piece of the puzzle, the final ingredient, the biggest twist. Use it to delight your reader with a good old slap upside the head. Wake up the reader and make him notice that the ending is definitely in sight, and the hero will need to prove his hero-ness or die trying.

Sometimes "there is an all-hope-is-lost lull that occurs right before the Second Plot Point appears." It's not always necessary (The Da Vinci Code doesn't have one) but it's a nice place to add one more bit of tension before everything blows up. Feel free to create this lull, this sense of impending doom, to slow the pace before the frenzy of the final conflict.

The SPP separates Part 3 from Part 4 and falls around the 75 percent mark. In your 350-page novel, that would be around page 262. "The hero transitions here from attacking warrior to a hell-bent, selfless, heroic, and even martyr-like champion of all that is good. Or at least necessary in terms of solving the inherent dramatic problem at hand." The SPP "can deliver information that is not yet known or fully understood by the hero, but in such a case it still launches the final push toward the resolution." 

In The Da Vinci Code, the SPP comes when "Langdon, in his heroic wisdom, cracks the message hidden in the codex, which revealed every last secret to be had about the code Leonardo da Vinci had so cleverly hidden in his paintings. In other words, the point of everything." [Spoiler alert -- don't read the rest of this paragraph if you haven't read or seen The Da Vinci Code but intend to do so.] We also learn that the people who've been helping Langdon are, in fact, bad guys. The Teacher is behind everything, including the albino assassin. This is the last new piece of information Langdon needs to uncover the truth and find the Holy Grail.

That concludes my brief dip into an awesome book. Check it out from the library. You'll quickly learn that you need to own this one for your reference library and use it frequently. Mine's all highlighted with important pages dog-eared and sticky-note bookmarks poking out in strategic places. I've used this method to outline my last two novels, and I think they're my best works to date. I might even use this system to revamp previous novels. It's that good.

Comments? Questions? Requests for future series? I love hearing from ya'll!

-Sonja 

Second Pinch Point

In his book Story Engineering,  Larry Brooks offers six core competencies involved in writing an excellent novel. Competency #4, Structure, has four parts: The Set-up, The Response, The Attack, and the Resolution. Within these four parts are some major milestones. The milestones within the structure are: 

The opening scene or sequence of your story;

A hooking moment in the first twenty pages;

A setup inciting incident 

The First Plot Point, at approximately 20 to 25 percent through the story;

The First Pinch Point at about the three-eights mark, or precisely in the middle of part 2;

The context-shifting Midpoint, at precisely the middle of the story;

A Second Pinch Point, at about the five-eights mark, or in the middle of Part 3

The Second Plot Point, at about 75 percent through the story;

The final resolution scene or sequence

(This pinch is courtesy of freedigitalphotos.net)

Like the First Pinch Point, the Second Pinch Point is meant to showcase just how awesomely evil or powerful or determined the antagonist is. "The reader needs a reminder of the danger, the stakes and the implications, the unseen monster we know is waiting under the bed." This puts a bit more scary in this part of the book. Show the antagonist going after what he wants (which is in opposition to what the hero wants). You can either show this in the POV of the antagonist, or show a confrontation between the antagonist and the hero where the hero doesn't win.

The Second Pitch Point falls in the middle of Part 3 (The Attack), at about the five-eights mark. If your novel is 350 pages long, your Second Pitch Point will fall around page 219. That's a guideline, of course, so feel free to stray a bit from that target--you're the author, so you get to choose. Just don't stray too much.

In The Da Vinci Code, the Second Pinch Point comes a bit early, in Chapter 64. "The assassin clocks Langdon from behind, just as Langdon is opening yet another box containing a cryptic clue."  The assassin is the antagonistic force. "What better reminder of an obstacle, for both the hero and the reader, than having it hit you over the head." 

That was quick and easy, wasn't it? My next post will deal with the Second Plot Point. Please come back.

-Sonja

Book Review: A PLAIN DEATH by Guest Blogger Melody Steiner ((tag: book review)

Whatever it is about this book that makes it so relatable, so down-to-Earth funny, Amanda Flower should bottle it and sell it. Perhaps it’s the fact that this book takes place in rural Ohio, and I happened to live in rural Ohio for four years. Then again, maybe it’s because the main character, Chloe Humphrey is a born and bred city girl adjusting to life in a small town. Also like me. Or maybe it’s her interactions with her formerly Amish friends, innocent Becky and handsome Timothy Troyer—oh, wait. That’s not like me, although I did work at a hardware store frequented by the Amish for a couple of months before I moved out West.

Full disclosure: I’m a long-time fan and friend of Amanda’s, having read her India Hayes novels and the Appleseed Creek book before this one, A Plain Death. A Plain Scandal, the second installment in Flower’s Appleseed Creek series, begins with a dash of eaves-dropping, a hint of danger and, of course, a scandal. Chloe and Becky have new troubles: including a landlord who takes an inconvenient interest in restoring the old house and seems to have an equally inconvenient interest in Chloe; two jailbirds with a habit of harassing the Amish and Chloe; and, to further complicate matters, both Chloe and Becky (and even Chloe’s long-time friend, Tanisha) have ongoing relationship woes with their respective men.

While Chloe is unsure how to handle Timothy’s signals—she isn’t fully convinced he’s sending signals—a larger conflict brings the Amish back into her life. Someone is attacking members of their community and cutting off beards and hair, an insult of epic proportions to their way of life. Tension escalates when Chloe stumbles upon the corpse of one of the victims, turning her from Computer Technology guru into a P.I. for the Amish yet again. But there are voices within the Amish community that seek to stop Chloe from investigating the attacks and the murder, and hope to severe her ties to their community. As Chloe wrestles to piece together the evidence, searching for links among the victims while simultaneously fending off the advances and interference of her new landlord, it also becomes clear that a new bishop’s stringent regulations over the Amish might have more of an impact in their community than anyone has yet to realize.

The balance between mystery, hilarity, and romance is perfectly managed in this gem of a book. I found myself giggling during scenes where Chloe happens upon the most awkward of situations (again, me). The whodunit is compelling and kept me fastened to the book until the final page (I didn’t guess it!). As for the romance? Every gal should have a Timothy. The tender moments between them were heartfelt and sweet, and yet it never sidetracked into the mushy.

-Melody 

Melody Steiner works at an academic library as a circulation technician. In 2006, she graduated from a small private college in Ohio with a Bachelors of Arts in English. After she met and married her husband, they relocated to Seattle, WA. In March, 2011, she graduated from the University of Washington with a Master in Library and Information Science, aspiring to becoming a full-time librarian. Her hobbies include reading the latest YA series (recent favorites include Patrick Ness’ The Knife of Never Letting Go and Paoli Bacigalupi’s Shipbreaker), camping, and enjoying long walks with her best friend. Last November, they had their first little peanut—a rambunctious baby girl. In addition to adult science fiction, she writes fantasy and YA novels. She is represented by Nicole Resciniti of The Seymour Agency. You can find her at http://twitter.com/melody_steiner.

Midpoint

In his book Story Engineering,  Larry Brooks offers six core competencies involved in writing an excellent novel. Competency #4, Structure, has four parts: The Set-up, The Response, The Attack, and the Resolution. Within these four parts are some major milestones. The milestones within the structure are: 

The opening scene or sequence of your story;

A hooking moment in the first twenty pages;

A setup inciting incident 

The First Plot Point, at approximately 20 to 25 percent through the story;

The First Pinch Point at about the three-eights mark, or precisely in the middle of part 2;

The context-shifting Midpoint, at precisely the middle of the story;

A Second Pinch Point, at about the five-eights mark, or in the middle of Part 3

The Second Plot Point, at about 75 percent through the story;

The final resolution scene or sequence

(This median provided by my favorite free photos site, freedigitalphotos.net)

"A funny thing happened on the way to the ending of your story," Brooks says. "Everything changed. Right in the middle, in fact. A big fat unexpected twist." That's your Midpoint. He defines the Midpoint like this: "new information that enters the story squarely in the middle of it that changes the contextual experience and understanding of either the reader or the hero, or both." The hero or the reader suddenly learns something important. It could pertain to hidden information that the hero knew existed somewhere but hadn't found yet, or it could be something completely new. Whatever you chose, this new info adds weight and dramatic tension.

The Midpoint "changes things through meaning." It empowers the hero to move from Part 2 (The Response) into Part 3 (The Attack). Now the hero has enough knowledge to be proactive about his problem/quest. He knows who to go after, where to search, what to do next. "It activates new decisions, behaviors, and actions stemming from a new perspective."

The Da Vinci Code has two possible Midpoints, which I found a little amusing. The author knows which one of them is the true Midpoint, but it's murkier for the reader. In Chapter 51, Sophie and Langdon stop fleeing the cops/assassin and run toward "The Teacher"--the guy who can help them solve the mystery. The hero transitions from random running to direct attack. Then in Chapter 55, both the reader and the hero learn what the Holy Grail is all about. It's new information that completely changes the nature of the quest. It's a huge revelation. It explains why the church is so intent on stopping Langdon. 

These two revelations, packed closely together at the end of Part 2/beginning of Part 3, change the context of the story. The stakes are higher now, the quest is clearer, and the hero has a destination in mind for the final showdown. 

In your 350-page novel, the Midpoint comes right around page 175. Get as close to that as possible, make the revelation a big, juicy one, and your reader will love you and your story. Questions? Comments? Rants from the pantsers out there? I welcome them all.

My next post covers the Second Pinch Point. Here's a little hint: It's similar to the First Pinch Point.

-Sonja