Argh!

[clarentine]

Have just realized one huge limitation on personal-level plot stories: the reader has to care about what's at stake in the little personal-level plot.

::cue much gnashing of teeth::

Comments

[eseme]

Oh no!

*hands over chocolate*

[clarentine]

I was so out of sorts, even chocolate was not helping last night. So I went to bed, which was probably the best thing I could have done. *g*

[stillnotbored.livejournal.com]

If the reader is attached to the character and cares if they live or die, the plot will matter too.

Really. :)

[clarentine]

::snugs::

[mnfaure.livejournal.com]

*nods* And, as the author, I think it is impossible for us to judge the care factor. We can never sufficiently divorce ourselves from the work to read our characters with a stranger's eyes and emotions.

And even when you make one reader care, will it work for another? Thank goodness for beta readers and their differing opinions, right? :D

Back to what you said about personal-level plot stories. I'm not sure that I was ever truly a fan of stories that focused primarily on the Greater World picture, the Good vs Evil, and I do know that when they are done poorly*--full of cliché and flat characterization--there is nothing that can frustrate me faster. Without a fresh take and engaging characters that go beyond the stereotypes, those stories seem too overblown; I can't relate to what is going on. I can't suspend belief and invest myself in the characters as they struggle through the plot-by-numbers.

However, if, as you said in a previous post (which I meant to respond to and forgot!), you have the Bigger Picture looming in the background, and you concentrate on the characters and their day-to-day struggles, the smaller things that matter to them, you are more likely to strike a chord with me. We can all relate to personal politics, people jockeying for position and affection, our homes under threat from sources great or small. And because we can relate so easily, we are more readily invested in a story that focuses on issues using a scope we can grasp. So to me, the limitation (or risk of not obtaining the reader's sympathy) is actually greater in stories that have Great Kingdom-and-Continent-Spanning Stakes.

I came to this realization some years ago after reading Robin Hobb's Farseer Trilogy. In those books, there is the threat and the reality of the Red Ship raiders; there is a kingdom at stake; but at the heart of it all is Fitz's story. He's out there, and he's struggling to make things happen. The majority of his battles stay on a personal level. After I read Hobb, the fantasy candy I was consuming before became too cloying.

Oy, look at me go. Anyhow, to wrap this up, I feel where you are coming from, and I don't think you should despair because a) you are a terrific writer with fantastic prose, b) you see a possible limitation and you are concerned about it. Realizing can be said to be half the battle, no?

[clarentine]

Philosophizing on the issue is exactly what I need - bouncing it off the inside of my own head is only so effective, so thank you.

(That, and taking a giant step away from the WIP, and going to bed before I do something I'll really regret. *g*)

This morning, while walking the dog, I was trying to find parallels in other genres and understand how those stories made readers care. We have a nation on the verge of civil war, a leader who's dying, an heir who must convince the rest of the powerful men that he's got what it takes to lead. All of that's the big picture; it happens whether we pay attention or not. And then we have this protag who, in the previous story, walked away from what had been his home and could never be home again. Outcast, feared for what he can do, all he emotionally wants is a home...but that's not plot.

The difference between plot and not-plot, to me, is that plot is the protag taking action. Sure, I can have events washing over him and him reacting. That's what I'm fighting against in the current rewrite, anyway; my earlier Angst Queen instincts were all about the reacting to overwhelming pain. But that's not what I want to do, and I don't think it's what makes a good story.

So, here's the outcast and feared protag. Big events are happening. Currents are moving around him. All he wants is a home. What I need to keep my focus on, I think, is that, in order for him to *have* that home, he has to take a stand, shield that heir, make use of the effects of being hated and feared. I *think* that's plot.

Or at least I hope it is.

(It's also the makings of a great Western, but we won't go into my juvenile appreciation for the outcast or my extensive collection of spaghetti Western soundtracks. *g*)

[footlingagain.livejournal.com]

What Miq said :D

There are lots of reasons why readers care for the people in personal-level plot stories, lots of reasons why they don't. You can only do what works for you.

Personally, I'm much more inclined to care about the book as a whole if the people are engaging - not necessarily likeable, just real and involving.

[clarentine]

Real and involving, I think I can do. Just look at all those people who groaned every time I posted new bad stuff happening to Josh over at novel_in_90! *g*

Plot remains my real hang-up. I suppose every writer has at least one. One of these days, I may even come to terms with mine. *g*

Thanks.

[footlingagain.livejournal.com]

Just look at all those people who groaned every time I posted new bad stuff happening to Josh

I know - I was one of them! And bearing in mind the number of cunning pitfalls that you set for him, I'm sure plot will work itself out naturally.