Examining Styles – Plots and Characters

When we think of style, we think of prose, don’t we? We think about how we use certain words, or phrases to form a certain style. It’s in the state of mind, it’s in the description, it’s in the dialogue. Right?

What if… what if style was more than that? What if style encompassed every part of a book, from the words in it to the story it tells?

Today, I’m back to examine more styles. This time, however, I’d like to focus on two areas where style is usually never talked about: Plot and characters.

The Style of Plots

Who knew? Who knew that there could be style in plots? Aren’t plots just… things that happen because of a conflict? Where is the style in that? Sure, maybe the villain is classy and the protagonist has no style, but that isn’t exactly… stylistic choice. That’s just happenstance and the fact that words have various meanings.

The style of a plot is found in its archetype. As I’ll talk about in a minute, the same thing is found in characters. You see, there is always another plot similar to the one you want to write. Always. They’re probably not identical (unless plagiarism is involved, in which case someone needs a talking to about intellectual theft), but they are similar. They fit the same archetype.

Some archetypes include “the heroic quest”, “man who learned better”, and some other phrases I’m sure you’re familiar with. These archetypes are not clichés. They’re styles. The most interesting thing about the style of plots is this: your plot style is constantly changing. While all style choices you make are fluid, plot style is far more versatile and prone to erratic change than any other type of stylistic choice.

You see, plot style is dependent on the story. It’s an amorphous creature that is constantly changing. And that’s okay. In fact, it’s good that your plot style changes. If it didn’t, people would get tired of reading your books. Not because they’re boring, but because they’re all similar. Using various plot styles keeps away the doldrums of identical plots and stories.

So. How do you become aware of your plot style? And how do you use it to make your personal style stronger?

First, boil your plot(s) down to the simplest it (they) can be. One or two sentences. It doesn’t have to encompass all of the story, just the main plot. Ignore the subplots, or do them separately. The main plot. Then, go online somewhere, and find a list of plot archetypes. Match it up. Find yours.

Second, exploit the strengths of your archetype and shore up the weak spots. No plot archetype is perfect, but all of them have strengths. Use the strengths, and borrow from other archetypes to get rid of the weaknesses. Flip some cliché plot elements, stir in some good characters and ta-da!

Your plot style.

Stylish Characters

No, I’m not talking about a villain with class or a protagonist who wears only designer clothing.

Ew?

I’m talking about the archetypes you use in your writing. I’m sure you’ve noticed that you use similar characters in different stories over time. Sure, each individual is (or should) be different, but their overall type is similar to others you use.

It’s a trend I’ve noticed. Across all of their books, authors like to pull from the same pools of character types over and over.

That’s fine.

That’s… good, actually. It’s writing what you know. It’s using what you can write well to make a good story. Good. Go you. Well done, keep it up.

However, varying what type of character archetypes you use can vary the style you write. Try writing a character type you’ve never written before. I won’t list all the types here, because there are great lists out on the internet, but I encourage you to find a list you like. Use it as you create characters. Don’t make the straight out archetypes (they’re a little cliché done that way), but borrow parts from all of them. Make new archetypes, if you want.

The characters you use influence your style. After all, they’re the ones doing the things your words say, and sometimes they’re even the ones saying the words you write.

That’s power.

Book Review – The Raven King

It’s been a while since I’ve done a review of any kind, and even longer since I did a book review. That’s in part because books take a while to read when you’re in college, especially leisure reading.

Today, however, I’d like to return to this idea of reviewing to talk about a book that came out last year that I got for Christmas and read and have thoughts on for you.

And to tell you the truth… I don’t know what those thoughts are.

The Raven King

Before I begin, I’d like to explain what this book is, for those who didn’t know. The Raven King is the fourth and last book in the Raven Cycle by Maggie Stievfater. I’d try to sum up the book with a synopsis of my own, but I’m too lazy so I’m just going to borrow the synopsis from goodreads and leave it at that:

“All her life, Blue has been warned that she will cause her true love's death. She doesn't believe in true love and never thought this would be a problem, but as her life becomes caught up in the strange and sinister world of the Raven Boys, she's not so sure anymore.”

I… suddenly realize that this book sounds super sappy and like a romance novel. It’s actually really not. It’s a paranormal/urban fantasy slice-of-life about English mythology, but set in modern day Virginia.

It’s about these kids looking for the Raven King, and it’s very character-based. So character-based, in fact, that it’s hard to really say what it’s about because the books are more about who than what.

Well… I may as well start telling you why I don’t know what my thoughts are on this book, even though I have them.

First Thought: What An Aesthetic

Whenever I think of this series, I think of that word: aesthetic. While I think that word is quickly becoming overused and underappreciated, it really is the best word to describe them. Maggie has a way with making her words and her sentences flow in such a way that the reader can’t imagine it being said any other way. It creates an aura that extends beyond the pages of the book. When I put the book down, I continued to feel the emotions she’d created for hours after I stopped reading.

That’s power.

It’s the power of repeated elements and styles that were unexpected and original, but welcome and exciting.

Since I’d already read the first three books, I was deeply invested from page one. I knew these characters, I cared about the story goal and the themes. It made them live.

Second Thought: Where Is This Going?

One of the downsides to this book?

It has no drive.

Sure, there are stakes, and there is tension and plot and character development, but… what’s making all of that happen? Only one of the characters has any true motivation, and the rest are there because? They’re in love? They’re friends? They’re bored? They just wanted to go to the store but ended up having to purchase a demon from a crazy lady?

To be honest, any of those motivations could have been applied, but I didn’t really seem them happen.

The characters just… did things; the plot just… did things.

While it was all beautiful and amazing and I really do love this book (at least the characters), I don’t know why. It just… happened.

Third Thought: I Love Magic

This book has one of the most interesting magic systems I’ve ever read, which is weird coming from me, because I love structured magic systems and this one has… well… no structure.

There’s so few limits defined for this magic system that literally anything can happen. Dreams coming out of dreams? Sure. Demons? Sure. Old dead kings coming back to life? If you can find them, why not. Psychics? By the dozen, all female if you please. Spirits and ghosts? All over the place. Telepathy, telekinesis? Why not. BEING A LITERAL WIZARD? Well of course.

At the same time, however, it’s so limited. The magic itself is amazingly powerful and unlimited, but here’s the deal: Maggie makes her characters the exact opposite. She made her magic incredibly powerful, and then made the users of it incredibly weak.

Not like… wimpy, simply weak.  They have so much power at their fingertips, but they’re too inexperienced or too human to use it to that full potential.

It’s brilliant.

I’d have to say that the characters and the magic system are the only real reasons why these books have intrigued me for so long. The plot? Only occasionally interesting, when there’s a new twist (usually involving a character more interesting than the real twist). The setting? Only interesting when it becomes a character in and of itself because she describes things so. Freaking. Beautifully.

Fourth Thought: Was That… Worth It?

In the end, the one thing that’s been being built up, alluded to, and outright stated through all four books finally happens. The Big Event. The Moment You’ve All Been Waiting For.

Etcetera.

And then…

To avoid spoiling things, I’ll sum it up in this: it happens, and then… doesn’t?

I don’t really know how to describe it without spoiling it, but basically there’s a moment where something happens that could be Dues ex Machina, except you can’t quite call it that. See, the story has built up the thing that happens in such a way that I should be able to say “okay sure, that can totally happen and not be Dues ex Machina, yeah”.

Except…

I shouldn’t have to.

Not in this instance.

Because, in the end, this specific instance makes me wonder: why did I read this? Nothing physical has changed, and nothing really mentally has changed, either.

The only real change?

A few relationships. Characters who didn’t know each other now do. Characters once in a particular type of relationship with each other are now in a different type of relationship.

In a way, it mirrors a lot of daily occurrences. Nothing huge changes. Just a few relationships.

Maybe that should be enough. Maybe I shouldn’t care this much.

Or maybe I should.

Maybe I should be desiring something more, something stronger, something meaningful.

Final Thought

Did I enjoy this book?

Yes.

Did I love this book?

Yes.

Did I think this book was worth it?

Yes.

Why then, did that last thought end so… negative? I kinda sound like I don’t particularly care for the book.

But I do.

That, you see, is the power of relatable characters. The power of making your readers care and be so deeply invested that they’re willing to hang on for the final ride.

So let’s ask a few more questions:

Do I think The Raven King is a good book?

Sort of.

On a scale of 1-10?

Like a 6.4 (on average, I consider a GOOD book – one I’d read again – a 7-8, for reference).

Do I recommend this book?

I recommend the first three first. Of course. But seriously. Read the first three, and then this one. You’ll understand how I feel.

Review – Passengers

The day after Christmas, I went and saw a movie. I went in not expecting too much: interesting CGI shots, quality special effects, Christ Pratt being Christ Pratt, and a slightly cliché love story.

When you watch the trailer for Passengers, those are the things you expect. It looks like your average science-fiction thriller about a spaceship that breaks down at the tiny cast has to save it. Simple enough.

So. Is that what it was about?

Well…

Yes and no.

What’s in Passengers?

I could summarize myself, but instead I looked around and found the plot synopsis on IMdB to be more than sufficient for what I wanted to do here, so have a quote direct from them:

“The spaceship, Starship Avalon, in its 120-year voyage to a distant colony planet known as the

"Homestead Colony" and transporting 5,259 people has a malfunction in two of its sleep chambers. As a result, two hibernation pods open prematurely and the two people that awoke, Jim Preston (Chris Pratt) and Aurora Dunn (Jennifer Lawrence), are stranded on the spaceship, still 90 years from their destination.”

Sounds pretty basic right? I mean, Avalon? Homestead Colony? Hibernation pods? The only two who wake up are a boy and a girl?

We know everything that’s happening, now don’t we.

This isn’t a spoiler because you learn the exact same things from the trailer, but here’s the deal: there are cliché moments in this movie. There are your average romantic plot twists between the two characters, and there are the moments of interesting CGI and visual effects. We do receive the expected dose of scientific, space-travel mumbo-jumbo. We get everything you’d expect to get from the trailer.

The thing is… the movie doesn’t end there.

The Big Risks of Passengers

I don’t want to spoil this movie for you, so I’m going to attempt to explain what made this movie actually a good movie in a way that gives nothing away.

Basically, the directors and writers took a risk. They took the risk of alienating their cast from one of the two main characters to propel us into deep themes. One of the characters makes a choice: an awful choice, one that is driven by so much internal conflict and doubt and reluctance that the audience wants to scream at them: “DON’T DO IT” (someone in my theatre actually did…). But they do, and the consequences are hidden beneath a layer of lies.

Lies, of course, can never be kept forever. They get out eventually, and when they do… oh, the results are spectacular.

This movie took that risk. There was a chance that they would mess up, that the audience would just despise the character for making that choice, instead of realizing that… hey, we might have done the same thing in their place.

It paid off. The whole risk paid off in a way I never expected to find. It wasn’t a huge twist, because they built it up and I saw it coming, but at the same time… goodness what a thing to see coming. I didn’t see it coming walking into the theatre, or at the start of the movie, but when they started giving us hints… I begged them not to do that. That was an emotional experience I didn’t expect, but I’m so pleased that I received it.

Another big twist: this isn’t a movie about technology. Sure, there is technology and one of the characters is an android and one of the characters is an engineer. There are robots and spaceships and spacesuits and technical terms and warning sirens, but they aren’t the focus.

This is a character-driven movie set in a dying spaceship.

The Big Risks Not Taken

There are, however, moments in this movie I wished the director and writers had gone a step further. They could have, and quite easily. I, as an audience member, was willing to go to the furthest step of those moments. I wanted those sacrifices and conflicts to play out to a natural end.

Instead, we got a bit of dues ex machina and a bit of a cliché twist at the end of the climax. As a slight spoiler: death seems to be irrelevant nowadays in science fiction and it makes me mad.

The denouement was actually quite pleasing, after they got past not taking that risk, but I still felt a bit unsettled by it.

So many risks had already been taken. They took the risk of their audience hating one of their two characters. They took the risk of their audience never connecting to another character because he had such a short character arc. They too the risk of using an android as a mentor character, when computers aren’t very good at giving advice. They took the risk of using clichés to propel the best parts of the story forward.

Why not this one?

I’d experienced a rollercoaster of emotion from a movie I thought was going to be all visual effects and dramatic sound score. I was ready and willing for them to take this final risk. The risk that would tie it all together in a wonderfully emotional way.

Instead?

They played it safe.

It turned out okay.

Happily ever after.

Yay.

The ending wasn’t bad, because they then took another simple risk at the very end, but it wasn’t good either. This ending twist meant little to me because they’d let me down in the big moment just before.

The Power of Emotion and Risk

Was Passengers a good movie? Well… yes, I think so. It took those big risks I talked about. It fulfilled my expectations and then said “hey, look at what else I’ve got for you”.

Is Passengers worth seeing? Certainly. It’s an emotionally-grounded film. There are lessons to be learned here. Unfortunately, some of the lessons are “what not to do”s, in addition to the “what to do”s.