Exposition: How Low Can You Go?

Theatrical poster for Mad Max: Fury Road (2015). Fair use.
Theatrical poster for Mad Max: Fury Road (2015). Fair use.

This past summer, a phenomenon of cinematic glory crashed onto the big screen and took moviegoers everywhere by storm. Reviving a thirty-year-old franchise with all the action and visual effects of today, Mad Max: Fury Road impressed action movie fans all over the country with its stunning visuals, tough action heroes, and high-speed car chases across a futuristic dystopian landscape. Critics and fans alike lauded the film for providing a solid, compelling, and thoroughly exciting action movie. Among other things, one praise I heard of the film more than once was for how well it told a story and dived right into the action from the start without getting bogged down in too much exposition. In any case, many viewers began holding Fury Road up as the new standard of what action movies should be like.

Once I saw the movie, I liked it too. But I do intentionally say “liked” rather than “loved.” Now, I like fast cars, big fights, and visually appealing women as much as the next guy, so I certainly enjoyed the movie–but it still seemed to me that something was lacking in this film. As an English major (now an English teacher) and a lover of stories, I tend to be a big fan of well-thought-out plots and well-developed characters. So, while some of my friends praised Fury Road for being able to function successfully on so little exposition, I personally could have used a little more in that area. Despite the film’s many good points and overall fun quality, its sparse explanations about the details of the story or the characters kept it, to me, in the range of “good” rather than “great.”

And I thought I was the only one who felt like that, until, in a forum I’m part of, someone else called the film “an insult to dialogue and story craft” and “a 2-hour ADD music video” (and a heated Facebook debate ensued, as must always be the case with internet opinions). While such reviews seemed a little harsh for my tastes, I have to admit that I do see some truth in these criticisms.

Theatrical poster for Mad Max (1979). Fair use.
Theatrical poster for Mad Max (1979). Fair use.

Like I said, I’m a story guy by nature, so I may be biased and my standards may be a little higher than most. In fact, I can admittedly be quite the stickler for continuity. So much so that, before I went to the movie theater and watched Fury Road, I spent the summer tracking down the previous three Mad Max films from the ’70s and ’80s and watched those, in order, too. (Also, a friend had recommended them to me, so they were on my to-watch list for a while, even before I knew about the new one.) And the very first one did give me a decent amount of that exposition and character development that I like. It showed Max’s descent from an upright police officer in a corrupt world to a morally ambiguous antihero struggling for his own survival. It showed where he came from and how he got to where he was. Personally, this exposition helps me to appreciate the action more. If I’ve invested in the character a little bit and gotten to know where they come from, then I’ll care more once that character is thrust into a high-speed chase with cars and guns and explosions. Otherwise, if I don’t know the character quite as well, scenes like that tend to feel like mindless, over-the-top action, the sort that would make Michael Bay proud.

But the next three Mad Max movies, including Fury Road, seemed a lot less story-based to me. They usually fling Max into another adventure with some other group of people in this post-apocalyptic world, but they don’t provide much info on the society or the characters other than Max. And even Max’s character doesn’t develop much past where we left him at the end of the first film. Admittedly, Fury Road did have the compelling character of Furiosa, who I’d argue was really the heroine of the story and definitely wins the Strong Female Character of the film award. But, for a movie titled “Mad Max,” we actually got very little information about Max or where he came from. In fact, he didn’t even do much in his own movie; it felt more like he was just along for the ride on Furiosa’s adventure. I couldn’t help but wonder, had I not watched the first film first, would I even know or understand who Max was at all?

Furthermore, we never learned much about the film’s villain, other than that he’s a tough-looking bad guy who rules a dystopian civilization. Personally, I could have used just a few more details to help me care about the characters more and know where the story was going. It wouldn’t have to be much; just some well-placed verbal introductions at the beginning or scattered throughout the film to identify the characters and give me a little more insight into this world and the heroic quest. But Fury Road seemed rather sparse in that area.

If you’ve ever written a story before, then you’ve probably dealt with exposition, even if you didn’t know the official name for it. “Exposition” is what we call the setup of the story, the basic background details–who the characters are, where they come from, what the hero’s main plot or quest will be, and whatever other information will be necessary to understanding the story. Authors often give exposition toward the beginning of a story, but sometimes it can be spaced out or revealed over time to add suspense and dramatic effect. But, like most aspects of writing, exposition can be tricky to do well and there’s definitely a balance to be found.

Almost all stories need at least some exposition to get by and function in such a way that the reader understands them. However, too much exposition all at once can get tedious and boring. That’s why people have begun to complain about so many reboots and origin stories in superhero movies. It can feel like an “infodump” that detracts from the main action of the story, and it can easily lose a reader who isn’t invested already. Still, too little exposition can make it difficult for readers to get to know the characters fully or to learn about the world you’ve placed them in. It can really detract from those details that make your story and your characters unique.

So where should the line be drawn between exposition and action? How little is too little before the story gets lost in all the flashy visuals and the plot becomes largely generic and indiscernible? I admit that the standard is very subjective, and it often depends on the individual work, as well as the individual reader or viewer. But, despite the film’s several enjoyable qualities, I can’t laud Fury Road as being my ultimate standard for action movies, because I think it could have benefited a lot from just a little more exposition.

What do you think? Do you prefer stories with more or less exposition? What kind do you like to read? What kind do you like to write? As a writer, how do you balance the need for exposition with the main action of the story and keep the reader’s attention through it all?

Discuss in the comments below. Thanks for reading.

Drama versus Prose: An Overview and a Challenge

So, you’re a pretty experienced writer by this point, eh? You’ve done prose pieces? Short stories? Maybe even a novel or two? Not bad, not bad at all.

But if that’s you, then I’ve got a new challenge for you. Try writing drama.

Of course, this challenge won’t be too hard for you, because you’ve already mastered general storytelling elements such as plot and character development. The rest of it couldn’t be too hard at all, right?

Wrong!

Drama masksIn my last post I wrote about my recent experiences with writing children’s drama for my church. This time I’d like to talk more about the major differences between drama and prose–because, believe it or not, there are many, and being good at one does not necessarily mean you’ll be good at the other. In fact, as far as I’ve seen, in famous authors and aspiring ones alike, it’s relatively uncommon for one person to be really good at both prose and drama.

And before my challenges to you start to sound like I’m bragging about being such a great writer myself, let me level with you for a minute. I’m not good at both prose and drama, either. I consider myself a pretty decent writer when it comes to narrative prose, but I’m really not so great at writing drama.

“But wait!” you may ask. “If you’re not good at writing drama, then why were you in charge of writing drama for church recently, and even of subjecting innocent children to partaking in puerile performances of your poorly-penned plays?” That’s a good question that I’ll get to a little later.

For now I want to tell you a story, dating back three years or so to my undergrad years. I was an English major with a Writing minor, and I had already taken classes on creative poetry, fiction, and non-fiction. As an elective for my minor, I decided to take a class called “Writing for the Stage.” I had written church drama several times before and also had a little prior experience writing a (probably not very good) play for my high school theater senior project. Like I alluded to above, I probably thought that, as a master of prose, I would have an easy time with drama too. But, upon getting a ways into the semester, I realized a couple of things: 1) the class was mostly full of close-knit theater majors, so an English major like me was a little out of place, and 2) drama is an entirely different animal from prose, one which is not particularly my forte.

There may be many elements that differentiate drama from prose, but I’ll tell you about the one that I think tripped me up the most. In drama, you as the author can really only speak through dialogue and action. You have to do everything you normally do in prose–develop characters, flesh out the plot, etc.–but you must do it through only dialogue and action. An outside narrator doesn’t really have much of a voice to describe with words what is happening or what a character’s inner thoughts are like. And, for a wordy author like me who is used to the freedom provided by prose, condensing so much meaning into so few words is hard to do.

For example, my play’s protagonist was a very well-developed character. At least, he was well-developed in my head. I had a pretty specific idea of his backstory, his goals and motivations, his inner thoughts and feelings, etc. And, to me, he was a very sympathetic and relatable character. But, when we peer-reviewed each other’s plays in class, most of what I knew and felt about my character didn’t come through to my readers, because I wasn’t good at conveying it through limited dialogue and action. Everyone else, for the most part, saw my protagonist as distant, flat, and unlikeable, because they didn’t know him like I did and I didn’t do a good job of showing what he was like through this medium. (In hindsight, maybe I also shouldn’t have picked a protagonist whose personality was by nature secretive and guarded. That combined with my inexperience with the medium made it doubly hard for the audience to get to know him. But I digress.)

Hamlet“But wait!” you may ask. “Is all drama always so restricted in what it can show? Aren’t there some plays with narrators and characters who clearly explain themselves to the audience?” And the answer is that yes, there are. Dating back to ancient Greek drama and throughout subsequent centuries, it was very common for plays to have an outside narrator, often called the “Chorus” or some other entity. Later, in Shakespeare’s day, characters often spoke in asides or soliloquies, which was one character onstage speaking directly to the audience, often openly stating his or her own thoughts, feelings, and intentions. To me at least, that kind of direct writing seems relatively easy to do. But it’s no longer in vogue these days. In modern drama (or film, etc.), audiences don’t really take it seriously when narrators or characters explain the action to them so directly. It’s considered tongue-in-cheek or corny at best, and didactic or insulting at worst. No, the stage of today is not the place for long written descriptions of characters’ thoughts and personalities, but rather for quick dialogue and visual actions that should show what they’re like.

So, going back to my recent writings, maybe I should amend an earlier statement. It’s not that I’m horrible at all forms of drama. Like I detailed in my last post, I’m good at writing children’s drama. I’m good at writing the kind where relatively basic stock characters can speak directly to the audience and talk openly about what moral they learned today. I’m able to entertain, amuse, and educate a certain type or demographic of audience. But serious drama, for adults, with passion and pathos, nuance and skill? That’s a bit above my reach for now.

This is not to completely discount the genre or my experiences with it. Although I cringe a little when I think back to the play I wrote in stage-writing class that semester, the experience did help me to learn more about my strengths and weaknesses as a writer. And could I get better at drama if I tried? Yes, knowing what I now know about my limitations and the areas where I fell short before, I could probably get at least a little better if I worked at it more and practiced with that genre again. I just haven’t done so in a while, and I’m not nearly as comfortable in the world of drama as I am with prose.

But sometimes it’s good to get a little uncomfortable and challenge ourselves to try something different. So, if you’re used to writing prose, then I challenge you to try some drama as well. Write a short scene where all you can show between a few characters is dialogue and stage directions. Or, if coming up with one from scratch is hard, take a scene from a favorite book, or from a story you’ve written previously, and rewrite it as if for the stage. See if you can still develop the characters fully and make the plot just as clear without being obvious. Warning: you may get frustrated and find that it’s not as easy as you thought! Or you may stretch your creative horizons and learn more about your potential as a writer!

The Power of Parody

Hello! I’m Sam, and this is my first post for The Art of Writing. I’ve loved writing in many forms (stories, poems, or whatever I’m in the mood for) ever since I was little, and I still try to practice it pretty regularly to this day. When I’m not writing, I’m taking classes toward an M.A. in English, reading a whole lot, and secretly fighting crime in dark alleyways at night (but don’t tell anyone). If you like what you see here and want to read more from me, you can find my personal blog and more info here.

But now that I’ve introduced myself, I’m afraid I have a confession to make.

I’ve got to admit, I haven’t actually been writing much fiction lately.

It’s not because I don’t love writing fiction. I truly do enjoy it when I get to do it. I have several story ideas and novels in my head that I hope to finish writing and/or editing one day. But, for a variety of reasons, it seems that I’ve gravitated away from fiction in recent years to focus more on articles, blog posts, and other forms of shorter creative non-fiction (such as the one you’re reading right now). So when I was asked to contribute to a blog about writing fiction, I didn’t really know at first what I would write about.

“I don’t have much recent experience to draw from,” I said to myself. “I really haven’t been writing much fiction lately except for…except…”

This poster was created by Jef Castro of Entertainment Weekly, based on Patton Oswalt's monologue from Parks and Recreation.
Poster created by Jef Castro of Entertainment Weekly, based on Patton Oswalt’s monologue from Parks and Recreation

And then I remembered the one fictional work that I have been working on sporadically: a parody mash-up co-written with two friends, in which we basically decided to see just how many different fandoms and references we could combine and simultaneously poke fun at in the span of one epic tale (or trilogy). It’s a quirky, over-the-top, very tongue-in-cheek amalgamation of Star Wars, The Lord of the Rings, The Chronicles of Narnia, Super Mario Bros., Batman, Doctor Who, classic literature, and much, much more.

Now, being a blatant rip-off of quite a few other works, this story of course is not what most of us would call “serious” fiction, and it’s hardly “literary” by anyone’s standards. This supposed subpar quality is inherent to works of parody, or at least to people’s common connotations about them. But that’s no reason for either readers or authors to completely write off parodies as insignificant or juvenile. After all, any story, even a parody, still has to be good by a certain standard of judgment; it still has to conform more or less to certain criteria, adhere to common conventions of fiction, and accomplish what it sets out to do as a story.

For someone who hopes to write more serious or original fiction, writing a parody can be a good way to gain some easy practice. Here are a few reasons why:

  •  Tropes and conventions are exaggerated. Parody is a good way to explore and play with common tropes or conventions in fiction, since they’re intentionally exaggerated and ridiculed in parody. In fact, it’s not uncommon for some parodies to include metahumor and directly announce the plot points they’re following or the sort of work they’re poking fun at. If you’re writing a parody, you don’t have to be subtle; you can go over the top and be painfully obvious with plot points and character development. If you’re in the experimental stage of writing fiction, this overt use of story components may help you to more concretely map out the narrative elements that make up a legitimately good story.
  •  Parodies are fun, not serious. As mentioned above, nobody expects parodies to be brilliant, profound works of fiction that will endure in the canon of literature for generations. They’re inherently meant to be lighthearted and fun in tone and by nature do not take themselves as seriously as other works might. These qualities take a lot of pressure off of you as the writer! You don’t have to come up with something original or groundbreaking when you’re writing a parody; you can rearrange existing elements of a story, or combine those elements with your own ideas that may or may not be fully fleshed out yet. Overall, you can let loose and relax just a bit. You can write something just to write, or to get into the habit of writing, without caring overmuch about how good or literary it is. You have the freedom to try different things out and see what works and what doesn’t. You can just play around and have fun!
  • An illustration of Mark Twain, printed by the Washington Times in 1907, reprinting the Philadelphia Inquirer
    Illustration of Mark Twain, printed by the Washington Times in 1907, reprinting the Philadelphia Inquirer

    Parodies still carry some weight. Even though parodies are for fun and not “serious,” don’t make the mistake of thinking that they’re less important or worthwhile pieces of fiction, or that you can make a good one with just a halfhearted effort. An enjoyable parody isn’t just haphazard elements strewn together; it still has familiar characters and a functioning story with a beginning, middle, and end. It should also have a good amount of humor and wit, cleverly satirizing certain conventions with varying degrees of subtlety. Even classic authors such as Jonathan Swift and Mark Twain relied heavily on satire, on pointing out and exaggerating the flaws in institutions or certain types of literature. Well-made, entertaining parodies must do this to some extent as well. To use another example, I also wrote another parody in recent memory, a Christmastime poem blatantly imitating Dr. Seuss’s How the Grinch Stole Christmas. I largely filled it up with jokes, laughs, and cultural references, but I also based it on my own real-life experiences and tried to at least touch on a legitimate moral about the importance of family and fellowship. Even though it was lighthearted and fun, it wasn’t completely meaningless or devoid of serious significance. If you’re truly dedicated to writing fiction and serious about wanting to hone your craft and skills as a writer, then you’ll still put your best thought and effort and personal feeling into it at all times, even if you’re just practicing with a parody.

So, if you have the misfortune to be visited by writer’s block in the near future, or if you’re like me and you haven’t been able to find the opportunities for “serious” fiction lately, then I encourage you to try writing a parody of your favorite book, movie, or TV show. Figure out what sort of plot and character formula makes that story work, and play that up a lot in your parody. But also look for the flaws or ridiculous aspects in the work you’re imitating and be sure to exaggerate those for comedic effect. Consider what messages your use of satire will send, overtly or subtly, about the work or genre you’re imitating, or about life and the world as a whole. Don’t be afraid to play around and see what works for you, and as you continue to write, try to notice how your own storytelling style begins to develop and differ from that of the original author. Use this time and this opportunity to hone your skill and your own unique voice. And in the midst of it all, don’t forget to have some fun!

Plot Challenge of the Week

Some people manage to surprise me. I’m not a person who’s easily surprised by people, but some people manage to surprise me. I don’t generally use this blog to state my opinions about people (actually, I don’t think I ever have), and I haven’t used it as a forum to call people out. Don’t worry, I don’t intend to start now. However, sometimes, people manage to surprise me, and I’ve been surprised by someone tonight who I had hoped had learned a lesson. I was wrong. However, that isn’t what we’re here for, and it isn’t something I’m going to go into detail about. I’m just a little frustrated with a particular man at the moment. Anyway, you’re here for a plot challenge, and today I want you to write a setting based on the following picture:

425727

As The World Turns (in your novel)

Warning: Spoilers for Game of Thrones, Final Fantasy VII, and Orpheus (White Wolf table top game) all exist in this post.

I was playing Saint’s Row the Third when this idea struck me. I’ve thought it before, but never with such clarity.

Novels should be a point in time of incredible change. It’s that chapter in your history text book instead of a mere two paragraphs. It’s the story grandpa tells you about his grandpa, which you in turn will tell your grand kids. We still hear stories about how my four or five times great grandpa served under General Meade in the Civil War. Something incredible happened, and life would never be the same. While these moments are improbable, most people don’t read for the mundane. They read for the (believably) extraordinary.

I played a table top game called Orpheus. Or more so I read it and prepared a story and my group said it sounds boring. Neither here nor there. Anyway, the game was broken up into six books which were to make a movie set up. The movie set up, though shorter, works fairly well for any form of storytelling. I’m really only hitting the first and second step in this post.

Start your story with a norm. It doesn’t have to be a happy norm. In Orpheus you worked for an organization that fought ghosts. You started off as a human, a human who could do astral projection (naturally or with a drug), or a ghost. In Final Fantasy VII you start out as a mercenary with work to do. In Game of Thrones we get to see the Stark family in their natural habitat, along with a bit of a look at the natural order of the kingdom. Look at one of your favorite books, TV shows, video games, or any other story and try to find out what the norm is. There are obviously degrees of normal, whether it’s for the character or an entire nation, but you can get a pretty good sense of what is setting up the story.

Now change the world. Don’t love tap it. Don’t nudge it. Make us think you will do that. Convince the reader there is a plan and that we will ride that roller coaster. Set up plan after plan on how things should go and make us believe it will remain on those tracks. Then quietly place us in a car and side swipe us with a truck. Make sure we can see the truck out of the corner of our eye the entire time. Force us to realize in that moment that every single hint was there for us, but we were looking forward with such intensity we refused to look at the semi barreling at us ever so obviously.

In Orpheus, the company was destroyed by hired hands and you’re wanted by the feds. Prepared for another chapter of how I worked for this ghost hunter company, my jaw dropped when I read about how it all suddenly and violently changed. The hints were there, I should have seen it coming, but I just assumed nothing would interfere with my beautiful little path. In Final Fantasy VII you fall in love and wish to rescue a poor girl wrapped up with the corrupt government, a government you once worked for. The Starks are separated early on and their luck is never good. You watch a family get temporarily pulled apart to watch an honorable family get cleaved in twain over and over again.

Like free wallpapers? http://freepspwallpapers.wordpress.com/tag/cataclysm/
Like free wallpapers? http://freepspwallpapers.wordpress.com/tag/cataclysm/

Notice the theme of each of these; some form of exile. The world will never be the same either over all or for the main characters. Some decision has happened which completely alters the plans so carefully laid out. The village they lived in was destroyed (Jade Empire), the beloved family is kidnapped and used as blackmail (Red Dead Redemption), Enkidu is brought to fight Gilgamesh (Gilgamesh), Lancelot sleeps with Guinevere (King Arthur), and the list goes on. In a romance, the story might start with a divorce, a break up, a need to leave home for vacation, or some other push out of the nest. An action flick usually starts with a warrior, modern or ancient, realizing something is a lie and having to right that wrong. Obviously by blowing up everything.

The most important part of these alterations is they should bring real change to the world, not just something superficial. Using Saint’s Row to come full circle, this is what struck me about their world. When you start, it’s fairly benign. Sure you were just punched in the face by a rival, but it was local and small. You do lose your home and need to start over, but that change was small compared to how the world advanced. As time goes a paramilitary organization comes in and suddenly the fire power of law enforcement is significantly better. The story continues and martial law is brought down on one of the numerous islands so whenever you’re there, you start at a low wanted level. The bridges are brought up so you need to jump them to go anywhere. What truly kicked me in the teeth, though, was a green smoke which came from a small factory island. The island was suddenly zombie infested. It would always be that way. Each stage had irrevocably altered the landscape. I get in some genres this won’t work as drastically, but aren’t most of us sci-fi and fantasy writers? If we can’t completely alter our world, then what genre can?

Here is my challenge for you! Create a norm. Make up a character and some small setting, and come up with what a normal day is. It should still have some tension, though really all normal parts of life have it. Give them goals and desires. Once you have these goals, start coming up with how your character goes about obtaining it. Get him closer and closer to that end game, even if he only takes one of twenty steps. Now figure out how to make those goals nearly meaningless. Smash the character with some force that makes his goals nearly meaningless, or at least secondary. Remember, the world stops for no one. Keep it moving. Keep it interesting.

Plot Challenge of the Week

Admittedly, this probably isn't in New York. Still, who wouldn't want to drink there?
Admittedly, this probably isn’t in New York. Still, who wouldn’t want to drink there?

Well, I hope that all of you are having a wonderful day! So, welcome to June (I think I’ve said that before), and it’s time for a plot challenge. So, let’s get to it. You probably know the rules, but if not: I’m going to give you a few rules that your setting must fit into, and you create a setting that fulfills those rules. Feel free to create a setting that you intend to use with characters that you’ve created.

Your requirements:

1) Your setting must be a New York Bar.

2) Your setting must include multiple returning characters who take the position of regulars in the bar. These characters are as much setting features as they are people to interact with.

3) Your setting must include at least one point of potential conflict. This could be a conflict between two or more regulars, it could be a problem with the bar itself, or it could be an outside force intruding (say, a health inspector).

4) Your setting must include at least two stories and a basement.

Plot Challenge of the Week

So, I’m sorry that I forgot to post this on time. Let’s just say that I’ve had a long day. This week I’ve got something unusual, but it’s a challenge that you’ve done before. This is going to be something more challenging, and a little bit different. You’ve done several character challenges that focus on pictures, and you’ve done several setting challenges. This week, we’re going to combine these two type of challenges. I’m going to give you a single picture, and I want you to design your setting around that picture. Note that your setting should revolve around the location pictured, but it should expand beyond the location pictured. In other words, you should use the picture provided as an anchor for your setting, and build a full setting around it. Your picture is below:

(Photo Credit)
(Photo Credit)

Plot Challenge of the Week

tumblr_m1chn5VMc81rrb9iko1_500So, its the first Friday of the new year, and that means that its time for an all new plot challenge. Remember, the new year is a time for lots of new things! So, the rules for the new plot challenges: I’m going to give you a goal. Sometimes this will come with characters and/or a setting, and sometimes it will involve rewriting other things. So, you have to complete the goal using the tools that I provide you with.

Your challenge: Sit down and watch your favorite movie. As you watch, take some notes on who the character’s are, and how they are developed. Also take notes on some of the basic characteristics of the setting. What are the key setting features that cannot change? Once you finish use the same characters and basic setting features to create a plot in a different time period. For instance, if the movie is a fantasy movie, then change it into a Science Fiction movie; if its a Sci-Fi movie, then change it into a movie set in Victorian England; etc, etc, etc. One example of this Romeo+Juliet, which is a 1996 adaptation of Shakespeare’s play as a war between rival business empires in ‘Verona Beach’. Another example, and a better one over all, is Easy A which is a modern remake of The Scarlett Letter. While Romeo+Juliet altered a lot of things that didn’t need to be changed, and kept some things the same that really should have been, Easy A did an excellent job of identifying the aspects of the character and story that couldn’t change to keep the basic message, but changing everything else.

Have fun with this, and don’t be too worried if your adaptation doesn’t turn out so well. Romeo+Juliet didn’t turn out so well either. The goal here is to practice finding the things in a story that simply can’t change.

Plot Challenge of the Week

Just of thought for John’s study.

Well, we’re at the tale end of November for all of the NaNoWroMo people. If your one of them then I tip my hat to you, I’ve been too busy to write much of anything this month, and certainly not 1300 words a day. However, in honor of all of the NaNoWroMo participants, I want to put together a very special plot challenge. If you don’t know the rules for the plot challenge, they’re pretty simple: I give you a setting and some characters, and you come up with plots that make use of them. Feel free to add more characters, but you can’t change the setting (beyond the allowed parameters), and you must use the characters provided.

Your setting: 1) An author’s study. 2) Inside the author’s novel. The study should be fairly basic, though you are welcome to theme it to a fantasy setting if you want. The author’s novel can be about anything you want, and any kind of setting that you want.

Your characters:

1) John Michael Smith: The author of (blank) novel (in progress), John spends a lot of time working in his study. Something that his wife isn’t entirely happy about.

2) Audrey Smith: Audrey is John’s wife, and the mother of his three children (feel free to include them if you want). She was excited when John’s first novel was published, and even more excited when he was offered a deal for a second. However, lately John has spent more and more time locked away in his study, and less with her and the kids.

3) The Hero: The main character of John’s novel. The details of this character are entirely up to you, but he/she should be suitably heroic.

4) The Love Interest: This is the man/woman that the main character has feelings for. Again, the details of the character are up to you.

5) The Villain: The antagonist in John’s novel. The details are up to you, but he/she should be a dastardly person.

Plot Challenge of the Week

Okay, so this is going to be a very short, very easy challenge.  If you’ve been following along then you should have several characters, and a world with a couple of distinct countries, several cities, and a few random locations (at least), to work with.  However, we haven’t really touched on your story yet.  So today I want you to come up with a basic theme (the point of the story) and plot (what happens in the story) for your story.  A theme could be something like ‘good vs. evil’ or ‘true love wins out’. Your theme should be the basic driving point or idea of your story.  Is it action, romance, epic, etc.  Your plot could be something like ‘murder mystery’ or ‘epic battle to save the world’.  It should deal with what actually happens in your story to portray your theme.  The more specific your theme and plot the better, to a point.  For the moment keep both your theme and your plot under one sentence.  Try to be specific and relatively detailed in that sentence, but keep it a single sentence for each.