Let’s face it, mining for the best expression of emotions whether it’s body language, gut reactions, internalization or dialogue can be like panning for gold. A lot of useless grit is sloshed around before you hit pay dirt.
Picture this: You’re sitting at your computer; the sun is shining through the window and you’re feeling happy vibes.
Then scrolling to page 49 of your book, you realize you left a very angry Zelda stranded knee-deep in alligators at the office. Worse, because you, the writer are Zelda’s alter ego, you have to ditch your good day and feel what she feels . . . on paper at least.
At one of our OCC RWA chapter meetings, an actress spoke about conveying character types to an audience. Although female, her body slipped into the physical persona of a cocky young male. It was amazing to watch. She lead with her hips, took center stage, and mimed puffing on a cigarette. Her grin reeked male smugness. Instead of a young and attractive female, I saw a cock-sure punk,
What an actress does on stage is exactly what I want to do with the written word.
So where can a writer dig up these emotions? Once we know the emotion, to what degree should it be dramatized?
I did some research on methods used by actors and discovered their tools crossover to writers.
At Actor’s Exchange where actors, directors etc. exchange industry info, it was suggested that actors must first be aware of “all” facets of emotions. In other words, emotions don’t happen in a vacuum.
4 Basic Things A Writer Or Actor Must Know Before Conveying Emotion
What is the inciting incident that triggers emotion.
Identify the emotion.
What is the body’s physical/gut reaction to the emotion. [Not body language but how the emotion makes your body feel]
What did the face or body do? (body & facial language)
Now that we know what we need to convey emotion, how do we do it?
One method used by actors is called, The Methods or emotional memory technique of acting. This amounts to recalling personal emotions and what they felt like and then portraying that to the audience.
A second method for an actor is to portray character emotions by Accessing Physical Reactions To Emotions. Actors can bring themselves to the edge of tears by triggering a yawn which brings tears. This won’t work on paper but writers can access and write physical reaction.
BUT! There are drawbacks.
Both methods use personal, recalled feelings and reactions. They may not be in keeping with the personality of the character. (See my blog: Keep Characters True To Themselves)
Actor’s Exchange suggests that the best method to show emotion is to know the play/story, and the character.Duh! Sound familiar?
So here’s my version of how it works:
1] Be the character: Jump into his skin. The character is a combination of your experienced emotions, who the “character” is, his motivations and his situation.
One article I found, Acting Emotions by Elly A. Konijn called this a “double consciousness,” the remembered emotion is the writers/actor’s but they are aware of the character’s circumstance and personality.
2] Allow the story contents to “trigger” the emotions you need.
We all know and understand anger but there are varying degrees and ways of expressing it. The story’s content and the triggering event determine how a particular personality expresses an emotion.
Concerning anger you might ask questions like these:
Is the character merely irritated or are they in a full-blown, red-in-the-face rage?
Is this personality a show-all, tell-all, or are they withdrawn?
Does the emotion make them want to throw up or are they so tough, nothing much affects them?
Does the triggering event require a mind-blowing reaction or a minor blink of the eye?
Writers have to dig deep, find the gold and turn it into an emotional jewel.
For me, body language, dialogue and introspection are the easiest expressions of emotion. It’s the gut reactions that throw me. For this reason I’m including a list of possibilities. And yes, some examples cross over into the other emotional forms.
This list just scratches the surface so I hope you’ll comment and add some of your own ideas. Be sure to see the links at the bottom of the blog.
Emotion As A Physical/Gut Reaction
Links:
How To Monitor Your Emotions and Increase Emotional Awareness.While this site was focused monitoring your personal emotions and learning your triggers, it did have some interesting suggestions, including a chart that can be easily adapted to promote writer awareness of how emotions are triggered and expressed.
Portraying Emotion With The Body. This is another site for actors and it’s worth stopping in. This article says the actor must study physiologically and everything that happens to an individual when he experiences any given situation. If an actor dies of freezing to death his actions will be different than if he’s dying of say a gunshot wound. A list with helpful examples is given.
Actors’ Exchange: A font of information from people in theater. The link in the body of this blog takes you to the definitions I talked about. This link takes you to the main page.
Isn't it weird, where you find the ideas for blogs? I never miss Gene Lempp's Blog Treasures (and you shouldn't either)!
This week, I found another gem there: Catie Rhodes' Writing Lessons from Song Lyrics. Go check it out - she has a wonderful point - writers can learn a lot from lyrics. A lyricist only has a few words to paint a powerful picture. I find that shorter descriptions, well written, have more power. The most powerful descriptions are more than explanations of what something looks like, or feels like -- it can be both. What if you combine a description with how the character feels about the object?
Have you ever been reading a book, and been stopped still by a description that made you put down the book and think, "Wow, that's just how that feels!
I want to write that, more often. But how?
Not to be a Margie-pimp, but Margie Lawson's Empowering Character's Emotions taught me the mechanics. After that, I just played. I sometimes close my eyes while I type, trying to find the elusive words to capture the feeling.
Somtimes, the stars align, and I open my eyes to a sparkly, perfect description. I love doing that.
I'll swallow my nerves and share one of mine:
Fingers stole up the back of her neck, into her hair. He absently fisted it in his hand, and in that familiar tug, her world settled. Jimmy was home.
Here are some examples by authors much who are more accomplished at this than I.
“Music could ache and hurt, that beautiful music was a place a suffering man could hide.”
― Pat Conroy, Beach Music
“Her laughter was a shiny thing, like pewter flung high in the air.”
― Pat Conroy, Beach Music
“Walking the streets of Charleston in the late afternoons of August was like walking through gauze or inhaling damaged silk.”
― Pat Conroy
“It enclosed us in its laceries as we watched the moon spill across the Atlantic like wine from an overturned glass.”
― Pat Conroy, Beach Music
“When you love someone, you say their name different. Like it's safe inside your mouth.”
― Jodi Picoult, Handle with Care
Back on New Year's Day, many of you might have vowed to take your craft more seriously in 2012...before the world ends, of course. This resolution likely means more conferences and many, many more queries.
For those of you who have submitted before, ever wonder how an agent can ask for the first 20 pages and still reject our book? Did you ever wonder if the agents really read these pages? How can they know our book isn’t something they want to represent with so little to go on?
I mean, if they would just continue to page 103 they would see that the princess uncovers a whole underground movement of garden gnomes with interdimensional capabilities, and they wouldn’t be able to put it down. Right?
Wrong.
Back in the day before I wrote full time, I paid my dues doing a lot of editing. I have edited countless manuscripts, and today I am going to let you see the first 5-20 pages through the eyes of an agent or editor.Novel Diagnostics 101. The doctor is in the house.
I mean no disrespect in what I am about to say. I am not against self-publishing and that is a whole other subject entirely. But, what I will say is that there are too many authors who dismiss why agents are rejecting them and run off to self-publish instead of fixing why their manuscript was rejected.
Agents know that a writer only has a few pages to hook a reader. That’s the first thing. But agents also know that the first 20 pages are a fairly accurate reflection of the entire book.
Years ago, when I used to edit, I never cared for being called a book doctor. I rarely ever edited an entire book. I guess one could say I was more of a novel diagnostician. Why? Doctors fix the problems and diagnosticians just figure out what the problems ARE. Thus, what I want to help you guys understand is why beginnings are so important.
I generally can ”diagnose” every bad habit and writer weakness in ten pages or less. I never need more than 50 pages (and neither do agents and other editors). Why? Well, think of it this way. Does your doctor need to crack open your chest to know you have a bum ticker?
No.
He pays attention to symptoms to diagnose the larger problem. He takes your blood pressure and asks standardized questions. If he gets enough of the same kind of answer, he can tell you likely have a heart problem. Most of the time, the tests and EKGs are merely to gain more detail, but generally to confirm most of what the doc already knows.
The first pages of our novel are frequently the same. So let’s explore some common problems with beginnings and look to the problems that they can foreshadow in the rest of the work.
Info-Dump
The beginning of the novel starts the reader off with lengthy history or world-building. The author pores on and on about details of a city or civilization or some alien history all to “set up” the story.
In my experience, this is often the hallmark of a writer who is weak when it comes to characters and even plotting. How can I tell? He begins with his strength…lots of intricate details about a painstakingly crafted world. Although not set in stone, generally, if the author dumps a huge chunk of information at the start of the book, then he is likely to use this tactic throughout.
This type of beginning tells me that author is not yet strong enough to blend information into the narrative in a way that it doesn’t disrupt the story. The narrative then becomes like riding in a car with someone who relies on hitting the brakes to modulate speed. The story likely will just get flowing…and then the writer will stop to give an information dump.
Also, readers read fiction for stories. They read Wikipedia for information. Information does not a plot make. Facts and details are to support the story that will be driven by characters with human wants and needs.
Sci-fi/fantasy writers are some of the worst offenders. It is easy to fall in love with our world-building and forget we need a plot with players. Keep the priorities straight. In twenty years people won't remember gizmos, they will remember people.
Book Starts Right in the Middle of the Action
A lot of new writers are being told to start right in the action, and this tip is wrong...well, it needs to be clarified. We need some kind of conflict in the beginning to make us (the reader) choose to side with/like the protagonist. This conflict doesn't necessarily have to do with the main story problem (directly). I know some of you are a bit confused so let me explain a little.
Back in the day, when writers got paid by the word, they often started with the protag in the womb. Kidding, but barely. "Starting in the action", or in medias res,just means to start as close to the actual story as possible.
For instance, in Star Wars, we don't see all of Luke's growing up years on Tatooine. We begin the story just before the main antagonist's agenda intersects with his life and forces a choice--rise to adventure or grieve family and return to moisture farming?
The beginning of a good story starts with tension and conflict, but generally only hints at the problem to come.
For instance, in the Hunger Games we are introduced to Katniss and we get a glimpse of the hell that is her life and the burden she has of feeding her family. We feel for her because she lives in a post-apocalyptic nightmare where life is lived on the brink of starvation. Nothing terribly earth-shattering happens, but we care about this girl. So, when Katniss is chosen to participate in The Hunger Games--a brutal gladiator game held by the privileged Capitol--we want her to win, because that means a life of food, shelter and relative safety.
Suzanne Collins didn't start out with Katniss in the arena fighting the Hunger Games. That is too far in and is too jarring. We need time with Katniss in her Normal World for The Hunger Games to mean anything or this action would devolve quickly into melodrama. Even though in the beginning, she isn't per se pitted directly with the Capitol, she is pitted against starvation and depravity...which leads us nicely into the main cause of that starvation and depravity (the Capitol) and the solution to this life (win the Hunger Games).
Yet, many new writers take this notion of "start right in the action" and they dump the reader straight into the arena. The beginning of the novel starts us off with the protagonist (we think) hanging over a shark tank and surrounded by ninjas. There are world-shattering stakes and we are only on page 2.
This shows me that the writer could be weak in a number of areas.
First, she may not be clear what the overall story problem is, so she is beginning with a “gimmick” to hook the reader in that she is unsure the overall story problem will.
Secondly, this alerts me that the writer is weak in her understanding of scene and sequel novel structure.
Scenes are structured: Goal-> conflict -> disaster
So when a writer begins her book with Biff hanging over a shark tank surrounded by ninjas, two major steps in a scene have been skipped. Normal World serves an important function. It is part of narrative structure for a reason. Thus, when a writer totally skips some fairly vital parts and thrusts us straight into disaster, I already know the author will likely rely on melodrama from this point on. Why? Because that was how she began her book.
Book Begins with Internalization
Fiction is driven by conflict. Period. Writing might be therapeutic, but it isn’t therapy. When a writer begins with a character thinking and internalizing that is another huge warning flag of a number of problems.
Do you need internalization in a novel? Yes! But it has its place. Most internalization will be part of what is known as the sequel. Sequels transpire as a direct reaction to a scene. When a writer begins the novel with the sequel, that is a huge warning that, again, the writer is weak when it comes to structure. There is a definite purpose for reflection, but kicking off the action is not one of them.
Also, beginning with the protagonist “thinking” is very self-indulgent. Why do we as readers care about this person’s feelings or thoughts about anything? We don’t know this character. The only people who listen attentively to the thoughts, feelings, and disappointments of total strangers are shrinks, and they are being paid well to do so.
Now, give us (your readers) time to know your character and become interested in her, and then we will care. But, starting right out of the gate with a character waxing rhapsodic is like having some stranger in the checkout line start telling you about her nasty divorce. It’s just weird.
Also, like people who tell you about their abusive alcoholic father the first 30 seconds after you’ve met them, they likely will keep this trend of rudely dumping too much personal information. When the protagonist begins with all this thinking and more thinking…and more thinking, it is probably a bad sign for the future. Just sayin’.
Book Begins with a Flashback
Yeah…flashbacks are a whole other bag of beetles, but let's just say that most of the time they are not necessary. We do not need to know why a certain character did this or thator why a bad guy went bad. Again, that’s for therapy.
Did we really need to know why Hannibal Lecter started eating people for Silence of the Lambs to be an AWESOME book AND movie? Now I know that there was a later explication of this….but it was an entirely different story (and one that really didn’t do well, I might mention). We didn’t stop the hunt for Wild Bill to go on and on about how Hannibal’s family was slaughtered in the war and the bad guys ate his sister…and it worked!
Flashbacks often alert me that the writer needs time to grow. She hasn’t yet developed the skill to blend background details with the current conflict in a way that supports the story.
I’ll give you a great example.
Watch the J.J. Abrams Star Trek. We find out exactly how Dr. Leonard McCoy gets his nickname, Bones…one line. “Wife got the whole planet in the divorce. All I got left is my bones.” The audience didn’t have to have a flashback to get that McCoy’s divorce was really bad. That is a great example of a writer seamlessly blending character back story.
Flashbacks, used too often, give the reader the feel of being trapped with a sixteen-year-old learning to drive a stick-shift. Just get going forward, then the car (story) dies and rolls backward.
Also, sometimes, not knowing why adds to the tension. The Force was more interesting before it was explained. For more why over-explaining is a total story-killer that RUINS tension, I recommend a visit to my post What Went Wrong with the Star Wars Prequels.
There are three really great books I highly recommend if you want to work on your beginnings (and even learn to fix the problems that bad beginnings foreshadow). Plot and Structure by James Scott Bell, Hookedby Les Edgerton, and Scene and Sequel by Jack Bickham.
Many authors are being rejected by the first 20 pages, and because most agents are overworked, they don’t have time to explain to each and every rejected author what they saw. Thus, too many writers are reworking and reworking their beginning and not really seeing that their weak beginning is a symptom of larger issues.
It is like the pounding headache and dizziness that spells out “heart condition.” We can take all the aspirin we want for the headache, but it won’t fix what is really wrong. Hopefully, though, today I gave you some helpful insight into what an editor (or an agent) really sees so you can roll up your sleeves and get to what’s truly going on.
What are some novels you guys can think of that had amazing beginnings? What the Night Knows by Dean Koontz, Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins, Winter’s Bone by Daniel Woodrell are some of my favorites.
I know that I had to put down Next by Michael Crichton because it just went on and on without addressing a core problem. I was a hundred pages in and had no idea what the book was truly about, and had been introduced to so many characters, I had no clue who I was supposed to be rooting for (most of the characters were utterly unlikable).
What hooks you? How long will you give a novel before you buy it? How long will you give a novel you have bought before you put it down?
