Writing Treatise IV. Tale Formulas, Expectations, and Frames
IV. Tale Formulas, Expectations, and Frames
These exist with a lot more depth then people perceive. Tale formulas are incredibly studied and detailed into their tiniest components.
For example: A.117 C948.4 N731.1.1.F. 250; R13.4. S262.0.1.
It is the tale formula for the classic Japanese Kitsune Fox cycle where a young man meets a young girl. She ends up being a fox with multiple tails and eats his liver HAAAWWWTT!!!!.
There are many tale formulas.
For what we are concerned about
the string of letters and numbers are not important. Just know that there are
deep layers in the stories we tell; they are shaped in connections, and the
audience knows those connections. There is nothing new under the sun. Thousands
of years of human civilization and storytelling have shaped audience. The last
70 years, give or take, have had an increase in stories; mass produced
stories. Audiences in the digital era
are bombarded with stories by the media and the market everywhere they go. To
put it aptly, audience knows stories well. Audience is trained to know stories
and they know when a formula does not pan out, especially a common tale
formula. So in this way, you are
opposing audience and their senses with your story. This is a chink in the
rhetorical triangle. This problem is why
you one must know your work and two respect your audience. This is the great
balancing act of your tales.
You do have your free
will. The audience is trained, but not omnipotent. As long as you are not
writing to a classical tale formula it is ok to break it. Just always remember
that balance or else you lose audience or the story. As already discussed
audience is sharp on architype and character.
Readers are set up with prexsiting notions and thus have expectations to
fulfill from the plethora of material they devour. It is a difficult balancing
act. The more you play to this the more the audience may feel comfortable or
may feel bored. The more you stay away from tale formula audience may have
nothing to stand upon, but the more fair twists and turns may seem original to
the minds of audience. So, this is the balancing act. The audience expects
certain things to be as they are: a hero to be a hero, a villain to be a
villain, a magical sword or creature to be magical, a monster to be a monster.
When you don’t apply these elements in the correct manner it is where an
audience can become very miffed. Tropes are tropes. What makes a trope standout
from being a trope is what is done with it. This is what breaks audience
expectations, how a character or thing comes to life in the tale formula in a
new, yet repeating way.
Simple tale formulas: Occam’s razor,
simplicity works best often times.
Beginning, Middle, and End
The classic three point formula, the three acts. Tons of authors and how tos espout about this formula and I will not waste much time with it. This is what the audience expects the most. The most concrete formula starting with an actual beginning, having a middle, and an actual end is straight forward. The point of bringing this up? You do not need to do this at all, but in doing so the story still needs a beginning and end. Pretty much it will need to start somewhere and end somewhere. It can start at its end, and end at its beginning, Medias res (in the middle of) is a completely fine place for a story to start too. There is a time and place for things and that is the struggle of form.
ABT (and
but then):
The American English mind
is insanely trained for this. Movie trailer voice guys like to follow this
formula.
It is an organized logic of following action. There once was a prince and he was selfish, but the witch turned him into a frog ,then he was left in a pond awaiting true love’s kiss. See, it just flows event to event. Now of course we do not need the actual words and, but, and then to make this click. Thinking in the pauses of the flow: event and event are introduced, event interrupts, and then statement is then executed. It works well and sets up audience, but at the same way becomes a trap in limiting itself and the possibility of happening.
Create a problem, and resolve the problem (However, I argue the rule happening aka action and reaction):
If nothing is happening then you are boring your audience. Something must happen for events to happen whether plot majorus or plot minoris, or not plot at all. In the simplest form plot moves because problems happen and the problem is resolved. However, I feel this leads to things being rushed, overbearing, overshadowing, too much, etc. It also overtakes slowness, scene of peace; things happening to move a story do not have to be a problem and its resolution. It can simply be things happening. The line between nothing happening and something happening is in the mind’s eye. In the universe there is always something happening; dust, noise, microorganisms, itchy chins, etc. This is how you move plots along even if it is not attached to plot. How you get yourself out of dialogue chains. There is always an action and reaction happening in the universe. Learning to express this may be the golden ticket out of a jam.
Ultimately understand you are writing a book. Not a comic, not a movie, not a video game. These things are different mediums with their own way. There is the truth that they all have to be written in some form beforehand, but as mediums they are not the written story. When you try to write stories as these things you lose the medium and the work falls apart. So learning mechanics, pacing, tension, description, etc. all aids the story in its form.
Complexity of the dance:
Inversions:
An inversion is flipping a
tale formula upside down. It should never be done in a fairytale, myth, or
legend. These genres inverted cease to be the stories you want. One must always
become cautious with the choice of inversion. There must be a definite purpose
beyond the inversion itself being an inversion. Inverting something affects all
things as everything is connected. So ask yourself the serious question why
invert that part of the formula? Why change that end place? Why invert that
trope or character? Often signs will point to not inverting. Be careful with
them or they will niff audience and undo the work.
Layered:
Simple stories often work best, but there can be a more powerful story in the layers of interweaving stories. In reality everything has its story. We only have limited time and space to tell the story of everything. So it comes down to finding the stories that matter most for the story we are telling.
This comes into two forms:
Plot majorus:
The is big plot of the
work that the audience wants resolved the most and will gain the most from the
resolution of conflict upon the stories end. This is the plot that is stamped
on the back of the summary. The problem
with plot majorus is it can overshadow reality to the point of the ridiculous.
They can build plot holes if left unchecked. They are a strange lot with a big
why does the audience actually care about it, yet it is the most direct link to
them caring about plot from an audience selling point. The smaller and minor
the plot majorus is the more grounded and felt with it can be in those
connections, but the less spectacular it becomes. However, this is an argument
that perhaps the smallest of things are the most spectacular of them all.
Plot Minoris:
Are little things that stack up
and create the work. Sometimes they are attached to place and sometimes to
character. Audience would still like these resolved, but we cannot have
everything resolved in reality. At the same time these minor plots help move
the stories along, create relationship between characters and plot, etc. It
comes in thinking of their weight in the world. It is easy to accidently make
these points become plot of coincidence. Avoid this by having plot minoris
simply not be something to get place to place or character to character, but
having far reaching connection to place and character. Pretty much all the plot minoris should
coexist to create the work and aid the plot majorus. This is where you build
the foundation to build the plot majorus as they are tied to character and
world.
So these come in layers and you need to think about the layers and their relationships
of the work.
No Nos:
Just a list of things for your benefit:
Plot of coincidence is always breaking the barrier of suspension of disbelief. Sometimes the plot works out things being at the same time and same place. Always double check though that your plot movements have arrived to this place on its own accord; which is not forced. Plot points should not exist to get people just from point A to point B. Characters should not just exist to get people and plot point A to point B, etc.
Mystery:
Mystery should not exist
as the plot itself. Mystery attracts audience, but it does not itself a point
make. The reveal of mystery should not be the resolution of conflict. The
solving of mystery is often not as expressive as one thinks. It can be a downer
or a question of why is it a big deal in the work itself. Mystery works best as
plot minoris than majorus. Think of plot separate of mystery and how you can
deliver it alongside that mystery.
Why we are wasting time?:
There is something I call
the Scoobey Doo chase in fiction. It is where characters just run around the setting
doing nothing whether if it is running from an antagonist, trying to finish an
objective, or find something. In this case they usually end up in similar
places. Think of the necessity of scene and the reason this chase has gone on.
Why have they not faced the antagonist yet?
Each place they go should have a purpose. The character’s should rarely
go back being chased. Don’t waste your audience’s time.
Needing something for needing something for
needing something:
See the above. Usually the thing needed is information. The
audience though knows the information already over the characters. The characters
have yet to figure out the information. This is tied to the above, but pretty
much the characters are looking and constantly trying to find information to
find something or someone as if this is the entire plot. This is not the plot,
this wasting of time. Get the audience the information they need and move on.
Whys and construction of Formula
This has been greatly requested by readers and it is difficult to assert why and how to use a particular thing. A lot of this seems a la priori knowledge. However, perhaps it is not the case. I will do my best here to jot certain aspects to perhaps aid in such an endeavor.
Why use first person:
You wish to convey to audience a single characters inner most thoughts and emotion, a more lived action and reaction in the world that they live. It is good for unique worlds, world traveling stories, transformation stories, traveling stories. You give up good world and action description to depend closely on this character.
Why use third person:
You wish to convey world and many characters
to an audience. It allows for quicker happening, but the audience will not get
the depth of character thoughts and emotions. You will have to struggle with
trying to have to show these naturally without interrupting flow or seeing
fake. However, the audience will get the larger picture.
Why use second person:
Why are you doing this unless you are writing a choose your own adventure or erotica stay away from this perspective. It breaks the 4th wall and thus the rhetoric between audience, text, and yourself.
Why use past tense:
The audience actually reads past
tense as happening reflectively reading. It is strange and backwards to what we
perceive, but this is a natural occurrence in the minds of an English audience,
thus past tense should dominantly be used.
Why use present tense:
You have a frame to reflect the past. Usually done in first person or in narration; there is a shift in perspective that allows for this. Else you lead to goofy grammar and telling to your audience. Pretty much, if you do not have a good reasons don’t touch this thing with a 10 foot pole. Though, very unreliable narrators could be good for this. Present tense has its place, but you need things to make it work, a connector to make it run correctly. Without such a connector you are shooting yourself in the foot.
Why use a narrator:
You have a need for someone to
tell the story or you are writing humor. Whether if it is in journal fragments,
memory, a different time, oral storytelling the narrator exists to create
frames. There should be an in story audience or object of frame for this frame to
exist if not comedy. Else it is weird for a character to be talking to no one.
Many fail in this regard because their excuse is out of comedy the character is
talking to the real life audience. However, there is no audience they are
actually taking to creating disruption between audience, text, and author, and
a big logic hole.
Why use a Frames:
Framing is hard.
Frame is a story layer in
the story: pretty much a story on top of the story. You need to temporally
shift time or place in a story. You have someone needing to tell the story. You
have different conveying stories. You have many layered stories. You have
characters that perceive things differently (children, insane people, people
out of place or time, etc.) This frame serves to add more depth in its layers
to a story.
Think how and why you need to do and use one of these things. It goes far more then preference that many writers spat about.
Back
to the rhetorical triangle; everything has its purpose.
So on one hand is the character layer:
Who are your characters, why are
you following them, who are you following, when are you following? If you have
many characters and no main character, then you probably should not be using
first person. You need to decide an organization. I recommend shifting a
character every chapter or find good chapter transitions to switch characters
on. Using chapter headings for place can help too. What does a frame reflect about character?
The second layer:
Setting: How can a frame or
narrator reflect setting better than in a normal running state? What does a
frame reflect about setting?
The third later: Time:
Frames shift time. If you are
using a frame time and its difference affect audience. Frames can be very good
if the story goes over a long period of time and a great distance. This helps
organize things and helps audience take a breather and digest the scope easier
and be reminded of things. It creates connections. It also can help support a
character who is unreliable or weirdly different in their perspective in the
work. Time is the great equalizer after all.
The 4th layer: Plot:
Plot may be added by frames and narration or hindered by it. It is a simple question really. Is it appropriate for the plot? Does the plot need frame? Is it a long plot taking many many years? Are the characters connected or separated from the plot? Does the plot happen in many places?
So that’s all it is asking questions. Does book plot consisting of Characters + setting over time =? This is the equation you are thinking with.
