Happy Holidays and Why I Say It

I write this greeting because I have friends from so many traditions that Merry Christmas isn’t appropriate for all, and how I am to know what holidays they celebrate unless they tell me?

Since there are 29 holiday celebrations between November 1^st and January 15^th, it makes perfect sense to be more inclusive with the “Happy Holidays” saying. How that is taking away from Christmas escapes me!

Whether you celebrate Hanukkah, the Winter Solstice, Kwanzaa, Saturnalia, Festivus, or any of the other seasonal holidays, I wish you a safe and joyous one!

See you next year!

Contrarian View of the Hero's Journey Character Arc

Full circle, from the tomb of the womb to the womb of the tomb, we come: an ambiguous, enigmatical incursion into a world of solid matter that is soon to melt from us, like the substance of a dream. And, looking back at what had promised to be our own unique, unpredictable, and dangerous adventure, all we find in the end is such a series of standard metamorphoses as men and women have undergone in every quarter of the world, in all recorded centuries, and under every odd disguise of civilization.

This quote by Joseph Campbell appears in The Hero with a Thousand Faces (first printing 1949), the metaphorical bible for those wanting to write a classic hero’s journey story. Campbell, an eminent mythologist, looked at myths going back in time and across cultures and noted a number of similarities. He explicated those in The Hero with a Thousand Faces as well as others of his works.

Campbell identified archetypes he noted in myths, which we added into our repertoire of tropes. Tropes aren’t so bad. They are shortcuts and signal character traits so we can focus on other aspects of story. A while back, on another of my blogs, I wrote two posts, Part One and Part Two, on how tropes make writing easier but not easy.

Stereotypes are the extreme end of tropes. Where is the fresh take? Unreliable narrators as in Gone Girl and Code Name Verity turn the hero’s journey into a non-predictable path. The danger with tropes and archetypes who must complete every step of the Hero’s Journey is falling into predictable and mediocre stories. Universality is a strength and a limitation.

Using Campbell’s description of the Hero’s Journey in myths became the chichi (pretentious and overelaborate refinement) thing to do when writing one’s protagonist, male or female. The fact that it didn’t quite fit every story structure or didn’t quite fit females who operate differently in interactions, didn’t affect the popularity of creating the Hero’s Journey positive character arc.

In reaction, I suspect, The Virgin’s Promise: Writing Stories of Feminine Creative, Spirtitual, and Sexual Awakening (Kim Hudson), was penned. What stage is your female character? Virgin, Mother, or Crone? Each has her journey, but the same female journey, like Campbell’s fell into identifiable stages:

Dependent world

Price of conformity

Opportunity to shine

Dresses the part

Secret World

No longer fits her world

Caught shining

Gives up what kept her back

Kingdom in chaos

Wanders in the wilderness

Chooses her light

Re-ordering (rescue)

The Kingdom is brighter

While the Hero’s Journey and the feminine journey make perfect sense to me when analyzing traditional literature (folk/fairytales, myths, and such), using them as a template for writing is not as easy. For me, anyway. I often felt I was force-fitting or having to retrofit to include all the stages.

This may be the most common arc in character development and change, but I’ve found these formulae restrictive. Does a character have to go through each stage? Are the stages appropriate in all genres? I can see the application in fantasy, but what about cozy mysteries? Does one need all of the stages?

I posit that not all of the stages are appropriate in every genre.

After all, Campbell was analyzing myths. I’ve never read that he thought the Hero’s Journey should be a template for writing stories. I wonder what he’d say if he learned his Hero’s Journey had become THE formula for writing character development.

Interesting read? Please share on social media. Here are some copy/paste posts to help.

Facebook: The positive character arc is most commonly tied to the Hero’s Journey. Is that always appropriate? Maybe not. http://bit.ly/2oO6szK

Twitter: The Hero’s Journey may not fit every positive character arc story says @Good2Tweat. Why not? http://bit.ly/2oO6szK

What is a Flat Character Arc?

K.M Weiland, author of Creating Character Arcs, has this to say about the flat arc:

… the flat arc is about a character who does not change. He already has the Truth figured out in the beginning of the story, and he uses that Truth to help him overcome various external tests.

In comparison to a positive change arc, the difference in a flat character arc’s Second Act is that the emphasis is not on the protagonist’s discovering and confronting his own inner misconceptions. Rather, the Second Act in a flat arc is where he will be discovering the Lie embedded in the world around him.

The Third Act is where we find arguably the greatest similarities between the flat character arc and the positive change arc, since in both types of story the protagonist will have a full grasp on the Truth by this point. The primary difference, of course, is that the protagonist in a flat character arc will have already been in possession of that Truth almost universally throughout the story.

Hmmm. Did that make sense to you? I had to read it a couple of times to get the gist. The “Truth figured out in the beginning”? The “Lie embedded in the world around him”? So, I kept reading other resources to find out more. As I read, I encountered additional phraseology that I had to puzzle out. Terms like “Crucial Element”, “Focus Element”, “Direction Element”, and more!

Weiland writes that “the fundamental principle of character arc is lie vs. truth.” The Lie the character believes and uncovers in a change arc is under the radar. It is a bedrock belief the character holds. “I’m worthless.” “I’m God’s gift to women.” And so on. That misconception is revealed and dealt with (the Truth), thus effecting character change. This Lie needs to be connected to the story organically. If the story problem and the Lie don’t connect, the story is not as compelling.

In the flat character arc, this doesn’t play out. There are still Lies and Truths, they just don’t affect the story solution substantively. Remember, the Steadfast Character knows the truth from the beginning.

It turns out that the flat character arc goes by many names and is the second most used arc for main characters. You might see it referred to as the “testing arc” or “Main Character Resolve”, or “Steadfast Character.”

It also turns out that the Steadfast Character tends to see the story conflict not as “me against the obstacle”, but rather views the obstacle as the problem by itself, apart from the Steadfast Character. The Steadfast Character moves elements around in the story to restore balance and is unaffected by the move of elements, though the story is impacted for the better.

Most antagonists in our books have flat character arcs. They are who they are. They have a job to do—disrupt the life of the main character—and they do it without changing who they are or seeking/gaining insight into themselves or others. We’re not surprised by the lack of growth of the antagonist, in fact. We expect it.

But many protagonists also demonstrate a flat character arc, and we’re fine with that in a deftly handled story. Think Kinsey Milhone, PI, the main character in Sue Grafton’s Alphabet mysteries. Kinsey knows who she is and what is True. There is little character change within and across books, but she uses her character traits to solve the crimes. Her moral compass is clear to her as are her talents. She gets ‘er done!

Dramatica.com, in their dictionary of terms, says a steadfast character “ultimately retains his essential nature from the beginning of the story to the end of the story.” They also go on to state, “There will only be one Steadfast Character in every story.”

That’s very directive, isn’t it? I wonder why that is the case. Maybe because conflict is not deeply developed when two major characters remain unchanged by events and circumstances?

Or the story conflict could be developed when the two steadfast characters are on opposite tracks. If one is on the right track, and won’t change but has to deal with someone on the wrong track, who also won’t change, isn’t that conflict enough? I wonder what it would be like to write a story flouting the “rule” of only one steadfast character? One would have to “win” (whatever winning would mean), so why not?

However, in that scenario, each Steadfast Character would have the Truth from the beginning and each have the Lie, so maybe that’s why it wouldn’t work. If both know the Truth, where is the conflict? Aaarrgh! See why I am still confused and working on this principle of only one Steadfast Character?

From what I’ve read, the Lie must be uncovered and discounted by the Truth by the end of the story. Maybe that’s not possible with two Steadfastians!

One important aspect of the Steadfast Character’s possession of the truth early on is the role of doubt. Perhaps the character isn’t 100% sure of the Truth or has trouble accepting the Truth to move on in life. Adding in doubt, even if fleeting, includes a new level of tension. Being open to questioning Truth is human and can result in second guessing or hesitating at critical moments in the story.

One important role for the Steadfast character is shis possession of the Truth inspires and props up others. Also, by the end of the story, though heesh may have had doubts or even wondered if the Truth were worth the battle, the Steadfast character will come out on the other side believing in the Truth even more strongly and support others in believing it, too.

The Steadfast Character sounds like a very interesting challenge, encouraging the writer to delve even more deeply than the positive character arc requires.

Have you written a flat character arc story? Tell me aobut it in the comments section.

Bloggers rely on readers. I would be very appreciative of shares to your social media outlets. Here are some copy/paste messages for easy sharing.

Facebook: What in the heck is a “flat character arc”? A “Steadfast Character”? Sharon Arthur Moore is still learning, too, and she wants to share her current understanding with you. http://bit.ly/2nOwfr7

Twitter: @Good2Tweat is learning about Steadfast Characters. Come see what she’s discovered. http://bit.ly/2nOwfr7

Writing a Negative Character Arc

Antagonists need not be the only negative characters in your novel. Sometimes your protagonist takes a downward turn. In fact, your actual antagonist may well be an example of a flat character arc (which is next week’s topic).

That’s because to be in a negative character arc, the character must devolve from one state to a more negative one. A downward instead of upward arc. But there must be change as in the traditional positive character arc, aka, the hero’s journey.

Anti-heroes may be an example of a negative character arc, if the anti-hero was transformed by events from a neutral or positive stance to a negative one over the course of the story. For example, Walter White, from the “Breaking Bad” television series, is thrust by circumstances into finding a way to provide for his family when he finds he is dying. The only way he can see is an illegal one, and it is a path particularly well-suited to his positive-trait talents. He shifts his focus from good to bad gradually, reluctantly (at first), until he becomes an evil hunted by the FBI.

Other instances might be a character—good, normal, Mr./Ms. Bland—who becomes a vigilante searching for revenge for one or more perceived injustices. The character devolves from a law-abiding one into a character who justifies shis behaviors as necessary to right wrongs. When one’s child is harmed, parental outrage can be turned to revenge-seeking. When a guilty character is released without punishment, an average character can be turn into a vigilante seeking justice.

One interesting way to portray the negative character arc is to make the character manipulative to the point where heesh is an unreliable narrator. Your reader doesn’t know whether to trust what heesh is being told. Are the character’s perceptions accurate? Is the character justified in pushing the envelope or even destroying the envelope? Is what heesh is doing as wrong as the wrong being righted? Is your villain convinced of shis own rightness even though the world views shim as wrong? Has heesh lied to shimself.

As a college student, I saw the film, Bonnie and Clyde. My friend and I left the theater and didn’t say a word to one another for a couple of blocks. For me, it was the first time I had recognized moral ambiguity. The good guys were brutal murderers of the bad guys. And were the bad guys really that bad? They were normal folks who turned to crime during the Depression when jobs weren’t available. I was stunned that the answer wasn’t clear as it typically was.

The devolution of Bonnie and Clyde had to be believable. Walter White had to see no other options. A deft touch is required to write a negative character arc, which is likely why most of our villains have a flat arc.

Some have written that the negative and positive character arcs play out the same way over the three-act structure. But instead of confronting shis greatest flaw/fear and overcoming it, in the negative character arc, the character succumbs to it and becomes even more evil/immoral/depressed. 

K.M. Weiland put it very well. “In a word, the negative character arc is about failure, and this becomes nowhere more clear than in the Third Act. If the positive change arc is about redeeming self and the flat arc is about saving others, then the negative character arc is about destroying self and probably others as well.”

Please share with your social media if you found this post helpful. Thank you!

Facebook: Writing the negative character arc is a challenging task but can result in powerful, resonant stories. http://bit.ly/2iovhMR

Twitter: @good2tweat says #Writing the negative #characterarc is a challenging task but can result in more powerful, resonant stories. http://bit.ly/2iovhMR