What do you think of when you think of an epic tale? Characters and the great changes they go through, for sure. But you probably first mention the concept.
·
Jaws –
Shark terrorizes coastal town.
·
Liar, Liar
– Lawyer forced to tell truth.
·
Home Alone
– Kid defends household singlehandedly.
·
Jurassic
Park – Dinosaurs brought back to life in our time.
These are all good-sized concepts. They all are accessible.
When I mention them, you know what I’m talking about. You “get it.” But a full
concept, one you can really run with, requires more. Being accessible is only one of five dimensions needed for a
great premise. Let’s look at each in terms of Jurassic Park.
Accessible: People need to “get it” without a long
explanation. Jurassic Park - Dinosaurs brought back to life in our time.
Surprising: A premise needs to reach beyond the
mundane. Bringing life back from the past in itself does not create a big
concept. Someone recently grew an “extinct” date palm from 3,000
year-old-seeds. Not epic. In
Jurassic Park dinosaurs are big. Literally. And they have captured our
imaginations since childhood.
Emotional: All good stories need a heart. The Odyssey
has a man trying to get home despite great challenges, but the heart of it for
me (and what leads to a great ending) is his getting home to his wife. Without
Penelope, it is not as epic. The park part of Jurassic Park ties it to
Disneyland and other places families gather. And sure enough, people (including
children) are in the park, and they are in jeopardy.
Question raising: Along the way from concept to full
premise, the ideas should make people curious enough to ask questions. People
will have a series of these that must be answered in the story or their
expectations will not be met. When Blake Snyder talks about “The Promise of the
Premise” in Save the Cat, this is what he is talking about. As a writer, the
premise stage is a good time to explore this. In addition, there is an
important question worth raising – the story question. What question will
people a reader or an audience member look to see answered by the end?
For Jurassic Park, there are a number of questions that come
to mind (and, indeed are developed in the story). How will you feed these
animals? How will you maintain control? How will you pay for such an enterprise?
What are the legal concerns? Will the animals escape control?
Of course, the story question in Jurassic Park is will the
characters we love survive?
Credible: You have to give people a chance to
willingly suspend disbelief. Some people cannot abide fantasy and science
fiction in any form. (Most men in the U.S. never read novels. They require
nonfiction.) Some people require elegant world-building, like Lord of the
Rings. For comic book fans, a spider bite might be sufficient. As for Jurassic
Park…
Crichton provides an elaborate explanation involving
blood-sucking insects, amber, DNA, and frogs. The movie actually includes a
short documentary (with, appropriately, a Disney-esque style). Crichton wanted
a large audience to swallow his premise. He also used that concern as a jumping
off point for research.
Digging in to learn more will create a strong foundation for
a big story. It will provide details that suggest plot points. (Using frog DNA
enables sex switching for the dinosaurs so they can reproduce.) Crichton
actually added another element to Jurassic Park, chaos theory. I don’t think he
needed that theory to make the story more believable (though it does). But it
became vital to his theme, which is “we cannot fully control nature.”
So, the premise for a big story needs to be accessible,
surprising, and emotional. It needs to raise a question. It needs to be
credible.
I’ll put these aspects to work on something new. I had a vision of
WaterMan, a guy who could seep through cracks, travel through drains, and
basically reduce himself to molecular scale, go through small spaces and
reassemble himself. As I consider this, I have a precedent, T-1000, the metal
guy from the future in Terminator 2. (Most ideas have precedents. If they are
not specific enough to raise a lawsuit, see if they develop into something
that’s truly yours.)
Accessible: Hmm. Hard to get this correct right off. Water-Man
doesn’t quite do it for me. SmokeMan? ParticleMan? I like the idea of leaks. If
fresh air can get to you, so can he. (Is it a draft? Or ParticleMan’s chilly
fingers?) Okay this still needs some work. For now, my sentence is “A man can
turn himself into a mist of particles, fit through tight spaces, and reassemble
himself at the other end.”
By the way, this is going from crazy to mundane, but accessibility
can be worked from mundane to crazy. Mundane: A teenage boy falls in love with
a girl. Less mundane. A poor
teenage boy falls in love with a rich teenage girl. Even less mundane. A poor
teenage boy falls in love with a rich teenage girl who has Down’s
syndrome.
Surprising: I think the idea of ParticleMan itself is
unexpected. Not a bad superpower for the comic book crowd, though I would like
a larger audience.
Emotional: A brilliant government scientist comes
home to find his family has succumbed to radiation sickness. (See the sad story
of Alexander Litvinenko.)
His home has been dusted with particles of polonium-210, and he knows he is
doomed, too. He transfers his mind
into his experimental project n animating self-assembling nanoparticles. Then
he seeks revenge. (I need to sort out an easy explanation of the science, but
the revenge part is what’s important here.)
Question raising: What if you could go through locked
doors? Turn water and natural gas lines into your private subway systems? And
what about your emotional life? Would you be lonely? Would you miss the touch
of others? Finally, how would your new powers make you both vulnerable and able
to take revenge? The story question would be, Will ParticleMan find and get
revenge on the people who killed his family?
Credible: The idea of memory metals has been around
at least since the 70s, and probably inspired T-1000. My glasses frames can be
twisted into knots and pop back. And self-assembling systems (where pieces come
together to create something bigger and different) are the subject of intense
research. Nanotechnology, of course, is a headline item, very similar to what
genetic engineering was when Jurassic Park was written.
Self-assembling nanoparticles? Not too much of a stretch. In
fact, I just googled that phrase, and I got over 58,000 hits. A lot of
opportunity for research and finding the sort of details that could make ParticleMan
a winner. (That’s good because this story is just beginning to catch my
imagination. Much more to do.)
Overally, the idea here is to explore your concepts across dimensions that will make it more enticing to an audience and that will suggest avenues for research. And more fun.
Great tips Peter! I like how you explained them and then applied them to an example--made it much more concrete and understandable.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Kourtney. This post was inspired by my students, and I always try to make class lessons example-rich.
ReplyDeletePeter