In fiction, adversity reveals character. Nothing is more tedious then a story where the protagonist isn’t challenged and isn’t forced to change.
Yet, lots of beginning writers pull their punches. They like their main characters too much to hurt them. This is why I often congratulate writers when they get tough and create real losses. No pain, no gain in the realm of fiction.
So, I was surprised when I read a piece where circumstances tortured a character. He was beaten in every encounter, and his life became more hopeless with every scene. He was completely a victim. And that, it turns out, is as tedious as having a protagonist who always wins.
Perhaps there are readers who don’t react as I do. I know that I am much more of a fan of a ball game where the lead keeps changing and the outcome is in doubt right up to the end. My father, on the other hand, loved it when his team crushed its adversary.
I'm guessing—based on what succeeds commercially—that a story with a fair fight is what most readers and audiences prefer. We want to worry for our protagonists and we want to see them grow.
This doesn't mean that it's a mistake to have most scenes end with the protagonist in worse shape. But power shifts—even if a character goes from advantage to better advantage or disadvantage to worse disadvantage—can be engaging and revealing. Generally, I tried to have three to five power shifts per scene. And, until the very end, I like the protagonist to find that both failure and success worsens his or her problem.
This does not rule out David and Goliath fights. The odds don’t need to be even, but it’s helpful if the little guy has a chance. If you give your protagonist a slingshot to fight the monster, at least he or she is armed. And it's OK to have the rock miss its target. It makes for a stronger story if the outcome is in doubt. Giving readers and audiences reasons for hope (even if it ends up being dashed), can keep people interested in the battle. If they worry about the protagonist, they’ll hang around to see what happens next.
As for the revealing part… a heroes can fail and keep their dignity. Their attempts can show intelligence and creativity. If they fail because they won’t cross lines of virtue, they have shown their true selves in ways that engender empathy and affection. And if they don’t give up even as they suffer, we recognize something special— courage.
If there is a happy ending and a villain, there is likely to be creative humiliation of the character who has been a thorn in the protagonist side throughout the story. This can nail down the lesson and delight the audience our readers. But there is a danger.
It’s usually a bad idea to have the protagonist revel in the adversary’s defeat. Cruelty is not attractive. To have a character you side with turn out to be a bully makes for an uncomfortable ending. In fact, a kind gesture toward the villain at the end often proves the merit of the main character. It justifies all of the investment in time and emotion, which is satisfying.
This is not to say that it’s impossible to write an excellent story that isn’t a fair fight (though it would be tough to pull off commercially). As I was thinking about this, I thought of how Ferris Bueller goes from victory to victory in Ferris Bueller's Day off. Is it just wish fulfillment? Was the movie aimed at people like my dad who love overwhelming successes? I don’t think so. The character I worry about is Ferris’s friend, Cameron. Even as Ferris wins, I’m on edge about the doom Cameron seems to face. For all the fun Ferris has, I stay engaged because Cameron is suffering, because his well-being is at risk.
No comments:
Post a Comment