On Writing and "Worst Things"

[desertvixen]

Villain or Inconveniencer?

Courtesy of daveamongus.

Which, in me, sparked an observation I’ve long since wanted to make. There’s a “best practice” in writing advice that I’ve heard so often it’s become a sort of truism, and that is: “Think of the worst thing that could happen to your character, and do that to them.” And my feeling, of course, is that that is a lie. The only time this actually works is the beginning of The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (and fails to work, in my mind, at the end of Mostly Harmless). Or, as we discussed, if you’re George R. R. Martin, who doesn’t just get away with doing incredibly horrible things to all or most of the likeable characters in his Ice & Fire books, but draws an NYT Bestselling audience along the way.

So maybe it is good advice.

Anyway, what we determined (and this probably works for Martin too, in other ways), is that there’s an unspoken addendum to the advice which is: …that allows the story to go forward. The worst that could happen to any given hero or heroine is a bit variable, but you could start with “death” and work your way down from there. Of course, there’s a genre of story where the hero is already dead, or dies shortly into the story, but generally there’s still some kind of final, ultimate doom that stands in nicely for death. Anyway, the list of really bad things is long before we generally get down to the horrible things that authors are realistically able to write for the characters and still have a story that anyone gives a damn about.

In reality, what we’re talking about is inconveniencing the hero. Set up enough of a stumbling block that they can’t keep stride, but not so much that it completely incapacitates. The key, and the skill in presenting these kinds of stumbling blocks is that they a) seem organic to the story, and b) that they have a solution, but not one with a resolution that’s visible from the moment the inconvenience appears.

And of course, I’m being flip about the inconvenience thing, but it’s one of those things that was neatly illustrated in the first Austin Powers movie. When he and Vanessa are captured, Dr. Evil (a true inconveniencer) places them in the typical “slow death” Bond-movie device. Scott, who is a true villain, suggests the guards just shoot them. But, of course, that would be the end of the movie. Dr. Evil’s solution lets the story go forward (and there is the visible resolution there, but that’s part of the comedy of the scene). A true villain has read the evil overlord list and doesn’t muck around. Fiction tends to be populated by inconveniencers , more than villains.

Which is fine. As readers, we tend to appreciate that the author bad guy isn’t going to massacre the hero and his buddies and their loved ones and pets and hometowns and so on in the first ten pages. There’s a sort of understanding there that someone (hopefully likeable) is going to be left standing at the end, even if it’s only Horatio, and the interesting bit will be in seeing them get there.

And of course, it strikes me with everything I say that you don’t do, you could write a story that does just that. Which is also fine. Done well, I’d love to read it.

I would add that it's also about change.  If you kill the character as a "worst thing", they can't change.

And in the George RR Martin books, I would argue that death is not necessarily the "worst thing" for the characters, it's usually just a topper.  You could make the argument that Ned Stark is one of the luckiest characters - he only gets executed with his own sword.  He doesn't live to see his children hunted down and used as pawns, doesn't see his eldest son murdered after being set up by someone taking advantage of him being a male with lust and honor (and having his body desecrated) , doesn't see his wife's naked body thrown in the river, doesn't see the destruction of his home by someone he had trusted.  He's just dead, not suffering like the rest of them. 

This "worst thing" idea also applies neatly to Regency romances.  What happens to start a lot of them is not the character being in danger of actually dying, but being in some way cut off from society - either they have been disgraced, or have no money, or have been condemned to a life of governesshood. They aren't usually in danger of dying, just in danger of being forced into an unhappy relationship.

DV

Comments

[betray802.livejournal.com]

I just bookmarked the Evil Overlord's List. You never know what will come in handy someday!

Also: don't kill the hero and try to replace him with a pale imitation of the original. They tried that with the "Fourth Season" of Airwolf, thinking that all anyone was watching for was the helicopter, anyway. Airwolf with Jan-Michael Vincent/Stringfellow Hawke lasted 2.5 seasons. Airwolf with Barry van Dyke/St. John Hawke was lucky to get one.

I would later adore Barry as Steve Sloan on Diagnosis: Murder, but he made a lousy Sinjin Hawke.

They made the same mistake on Beauty and the Beast when Linda Hamilton left. Diana Bennet was okay, but she wasn't Catherine. At least Dukes of Hazzard was bright enough to not kill off Bo and Luke, so that when Coy and Vance turned out to be a dumb move -- again with the "all anyone cares about is the car" mistake -- Bo and Luke could come back. I'm amazed Dallas lasted so long after the "Dream Season". (Thank you, Larry Hagman.)

The disconnect wasn't as obvious on Young Riders, because it was an ensemble cast, and the brought Noah Dixon in and established him as a solid character *before* they killed off Ike McSwain. As far as Tour of Duty, I went into that *knowing damn well* what the show was about, and *expecting* people to die. It still shocked me when Alex Devlin bought, though, and Purcell should have gotten someone killed while he was on heroin. (There's a good one-shot on the ToD page over at FF.net about Myron Goldman now being a Lt. Gen. in Iraq, and doing a mental compare/contrast or The War on Terror vs. Nam, especially when he runs into Doc Hock after all the years. It's titled 'Tour of Duty Iraq'.)

Anyway, I've rambled on long enough, time to FF the old Media Player until I can come up with something that's *not* a sappy country love song. I know I've got some Evanescence or something on this thing somewhere ... oh, or how about this!

Music of the Moment: Gunpowder & Lead by Miranda Lambert