Make the Introductions, Josh

There are a number of benefits afforded to extended and long-term narratives. The benefit is felt more strongly in the written word than in movies as far as series tend to go, frequently because of a singular author. Of course moving from the page to the screen can pass on those benefits. I have discovered a really nice benefit while writing the posts for the On Dark Rhoads™ blog that I did not anticipate, as much as it makes sense. I can introduce concepts, characters, and any idea I might like to add into the narrative at any point, without getting straight to the point of why it is there. I can hint at its importance, or I can say nothing and just let it stand. Silence on the point can add its own mystique as well. Then I can come back to it when the time is right and the savvy readers will know they've seen it before and have the kind of aha moment that just wouldn't occur or be possible any other way.

This kind of foreshadowing is really appealing from this side of the process. It may not be quite so exciting for the reader, especially previous to the reveal. I just recently introduced a pretty important element to Josh's story in just such an offhand way. I'd like to think that it is mysterious too. People will read it and tell themselves that this simple, almost innocuously boring update has meaning that is not readily important, otherwise why is it there. The question then becomes can I, or any author in a similar situation, have superfluous posts? The answer must be yes. For starters, the idea of a red herring is reliant on giving information that is not actually important, at least to the true advancement of the story's main conflict, and to the characters beyond the time that it has proven false. By the way, the revelation was that Josh does vote for the hidden-evil political party.

Mood: dramatic.
Music: Street Justice by Twisted Sister and Top Jimmy by Van Halen.

Or get MP3s.

Buy these at Amazon.com Click Images to Buy CDs

Or get MP3s.

Conflict-à-trois

After last week it's time for a conversation about three-ways. It's one thing to say that they are complicated, that they change the nature of the story. The first decision is always who are the three sides. Answering this helps to open up the other questions like which two sides will come together to deal with the third. That is if any of them come together. It happens most of the time, but it is not a requirement. Whether or not two side with each other one will always mess up the plans of at least one of the other two sides, if not both of them. It all comes to down to the other huge question of what are the goals of each side. The goals may be deeply ingrained in the whom of these three characters or groups. Or it may be just of matter of what they are willing, or unwilling to do.

As complicated, or straightforward, as the conflict may be there may always be a fourth matter of complication. The three-way conflict struggles in the directions afforded those possible outcomes without the affect of any outside influence. An outside influence throws the whole dynamic into a spin. Although allegiances may form and break up, or shift based on the actions of one or more of the sides, they do not shift as fast or as easily when there is an external impetus. Each party of the conflict will try to manipulate events to their advantage, but some events are adjustment proof. They can't be planned for. They may not be of help to anyone. They may even be immutable and only worked around. There are different events that can be like this.

Disasters are the first example of an immutable event that cannot be avoided. It may be used to advantage by any of the characters or groups if they can be predicted. Plans are foiled or need serious revision if an unplanned for disaster strikes. Such disasters could be weather related, seismic, or even smaller scale such as a fire. Depending on the setting and pre-planning a disaster might even be a weapon in one side's arsenal. This is especially true of fire, bombings, avalanches, and the like. Of course even false indications of such a disaster can be a tool to use. Fake bombs or threats, false tidal wave warnings, or even pulling a fire alarm throw a wrench into someone's plans. As almost always, the possibilities are endless.

Mood: feisty.
Music: Porno Star by Motley Crue and Slick Black Cadillac by Quiet Riot.

Or get MP3s.

Buy these at Amazon.com Click Images to Buy CDs

Or get MP3s.

Two Shades of Good

Conflict is not always between good and evil. Sometimes the most gripping or poignant conflict is between people who both think they are doing the right thing. Keep in mind that a lot of villains believe they are doing the right thing. Very few of them believe themselves to be evil. They get downright confrontational if anyone suggests they are doing evil. This does not include the masses of selfish users and takers who flaunt the law simply because they do not think it applies to them or plain do not care if it does, until they end up incarcerated. No, this is about the evil masterminds, when they're not delusional or caricature take over the world types, who want to mould the world into the vision they have for it. This is about the despots, the mafia don, the cult leader, and the countless others who are not introspective enough to see the harm they inflict.

To reiterate, and it may be a matter of opinion--it certainly isn't something to be overused without cause and enough originality--the most exciting conflict, with great impact and resonance is between two forces for good. Some of the excitement is in-built just because it's different. Some of it is because it's harder to decided for which side to root. There is also the matter that the cost and results are different depending on which side is victorious. The audience--been a while since it was said but the audience could be readers of your short story, novel, comic book, or role-playing game or your video, movie, TV show audience--will pick a side and a significant number of them will decry the other side as being in the wrong, if they don't go so far as to equate them with villains. This is true even if there is a three-way conflict including a definite evil person or group.

The three-way conflict gives the most flexibility in crafting a sinuous, whether that is convoluted or not, plot. The sides can play off of each other, go for outright manipulation of each other, and generally get in the way so much that not a one of them can reach their goal. The potential to derail all of their plans could lead to a disaster that none of them wants to see. This in turn will cause one or more sides to reverse course to some degree, switch sides, or pull out--this will be common among the villains who can just try again later or do without that particular victory. The dynamics of the conflict can change dramatically, turning heroes into villains, and turning expectations entirely on their head. The best thing to do in creating one of these conflicts is to make it so that there is a painful decision/aspect to one of the good sides confronting the other good side.

Mood: scrupulous.

Music: Peace Sells by Megadeth and Distant Skies by Stratovarius.

Or get MP3s.

Buy these at Amazon.com Click Images to Buy CDs

Or get MP3s.

Goal in the Bottom of the Ninth

It is time for a bit of a change in gears. The next few weeks or so the focus will shift toward role-playing games again. This is not to say--as is frequently said here--that what will be discussed is any less relevant to plotting a novel or writing a screenplay. All of these items, and all narratives really, share certain things in common such as plot, settings, and types of characters. This definition of character is as far as their place in the setting, in the society they were born into, and/or the society they adopt as their own. It informs and involves their profession. The other definitions of character are almost exclusive of this and need not change significantly from setting to setting. Only the actions they bring about change, not the motives behind them in the different settings.

The quantities that will be discussed involve modifications or elements of certain settings that change the nature of the game. They change the way plots and conflicts are resolved over the long term across multiple encounters. From role-playing games to stories these game-changers affect the timeframe under which the story progresses. They affect the level of tension in the story. At the same time they bring to the story different things in place of the lost tension. When conflict is altered it has a ripple effect that carries over beyond how combat is done. At the military level some of these changes will affect the strategic planning and materiel management. Others will have an effect on the motives behind going to war and the willingness to do so.

Much of the way a society handles itself and the traditions they involve themselves in come about because of their militaristic habits. At the least, military inventions and procedures trickle down because of the required innovation to constantly one-up the enemy and the sense of duty and efficiency required by any good army. Those two are just such a potent combination. At the same time that combination is pretty rigid and doesn't allow for much variation so of course it can only be one part of the necessary equation to create a society, or number of societies. The variations, the differences, from one group to another group are where a lot of friction comes and where conflict is developed. So it is that next week begins with the first look at one of these game-changing elements.

Mood: mellow.

Music: Paint It, Black by The Rolling Stones and Chariots of Pumpkins by John Carpenter.

Or get MP3s.

Now at Amazon.COM NOT CA. Buy these at Amazon.com Click Images to Buy

Or get MP3s.

Arches Better than Stereos

Stereotypes may be overused, misused, and maligned. However when there is enough about them that is true why wouldn't they still be of use? The answer is that they would. However, they may do their work under the auspices of the different closely related word, archetype. What is the difference between the two? Well it is a matter of degree in the amount of thinking put into using the qualities being ascribed to the group/person who is a stereotypical or archetypal representation of others. A stereotype is shallow, possibly inaccurate, often negative or deprecating, and at the worst clichéd. The last of these really makes a mess of stereotypes, and into which archetypes are much less prone to fall. In other words shallow clichés are bad, deeply thought out archetypes are good.

The use of archetypes falls into two different camps as far as this discussion. The first is obviously archetypal characters. In horror these can be archetypal monsters. There are vampires, werewolves, zombies, constructs (like Frankenstein's monster), devils, and ghosts. These are in addition to normal people archetypes such as the gentle giant, the strong silent type, the loveable rogue, star crossed lovers, traitors, manipulators, abusers, and such. There is some crossover with types like the reluctant monster who, human or inhuman, is driven, or more likely provoked, to do evil and wreak havoc by others who figure him or her for the stereotypical monster. The part to remember of course is to maintain the character as an archetype and not stereotype it.

The other camp of archetypes are the archetypal conflicts, or plots. There are considered to be four of them with variations possible, but not held separate. These plots can even be combined in the same story line--perhaps even best used in pairs. They are defined as man versus himself, man versus man, man versus nature--the fourth is sometimes questioned whether it counts--and man versus society. Society doesn’t actually act on its own but via proxies, hence the debate. A lot of variations come from man versus man with the opposition being inhuman, such as supernatural beings and technological human approximations ranging from artificial intelligences to robots of myriad kinds. Of course the supernatural may take the place of nature, and technology of society.

Mood: relaxed.

Music: Chains Of Misery by Iron Maiden and Molly's Chambers by Kings of Leon.

Or get MP3s.

Now at Amazon.COM NOT CA. Buy these at Amazon.com Click Images to Buy

Or get MP3s.

Freedom Fries and Liberty Measles

The points of view to which people ascribed to are often strange things open to change at the fickle drop of a hat or the frightened switch of political winds.  There are a few historical examples of this that were as swift a change as a fad and lasted just as long before otherwise fading into obscurity.  These changes fall under the scope of propaganda and fit in all friendly-like with nationalism of the dark stripe that shares a bed with rank racism.  The case is made in defending choices like these that the opposed lack patriotism, morals, and make even their grandmother's sick.  Side with them or with the so-called enemy, no fence sitting is allowed.  Of course such cowing is never seen as such, and the possibility that it is an overreaction is entirely outside the possibilities of reality.

These points of view changes hinge on transferring ideas, or exchanging them.  A 2003 political disagreement with France, for instance, led American Congress to force menu changes to include items such as 'Freedom Fries', and 'Freedom Toast'.  They could not do away with such iconic foods as such, but the name could certainly be changed.  A rose by any other name would smell just as sweet.  A similar backlash against Germany around WWI led to some people renaming Dachshunds as 'Liberty Dogs' and talk of cases of 'Liberty Measles'.  To untangle the need to change the names from the impression that these are good, wholesome, American things was impossible.  It was convoluted logic to rename the measles rather than use it to lay blame, but the initial base logic was specious to begin with.

The measles example is indicative of the length that was gone to in distancing things.  Changing the name altered its perceived origination and excluded the discoverer's and the disease's heritage.  It also protected any fine, upstanding citizens from the stigma of contracting something from somewhere else, no doubt--in the view of ignorance--from someone who was not so fine or upstanding.  Us versus them paradigms take many forms beyond just these two examples.  They colour and taint perceptions and twist reality subtly.  When they are not so clear, so easily spotted, they can be put to good use to create conflict and tension between characters in plots and settings.  Or in the alternative they can provide otherworldliness to the most mundane of scenes and peoples.

Mood: drained.

Music: Desert Rain by Iced Earth and Ashes to Ashes by Blind Guardian.

Or get MP3s.

Now at Amazon.COM NOT CA. Buy these at Amazon.com Click Images to Buy

Or get MP3s.

Anatomy of a Horror Setting #3-4: Cybernetically Enhanced Horror

I have personal experience with cyberpunk horror. My first consideration was not deciding why put horror into a cyberpunk story. The base storyline was in place and the main characters were set. A strong sense of urgency was missing though. The story needed punch. Oddly enough the sense of overpowering dread was lost with the level of hopelessness and desperation that the story had. What it needed was a shot in the arm, something to kick the horror up a notch. That horror boost came from the sense of security mentioned last article. It came not just in shattering that greater security than a modern setting held. The danger, the fear in facing the horror of such a plot and antagonist was actually heightened by grounding it versus the best that science and ballistics could offer.

The science fiction nature of the cyberpunk milieu allows for the characters, and the reader, or viewer, with them to share a moment of dawning terror without stepping over the line into the usual impossible odds ethos of Lovecraftian horror for example. The horror is greater because it is less of a man vs. nature conflict. It takes away the resignation that the end is inevitable. It leaves room for hope. Hope that is then crushed. The horror is kept fresh and within arms length. It is much more satisfying to pit characters of skill and power against something that ultimately terrifies them than it is for the everyman. That which frightens the usually fearless, or appals the morally bankrupt, is something with which to be reckoned. At least this is true with the right set up and the right situations.

It is easy to slip away from the horror into a more action-oriented mode where the importance is placed on survival more than dealing with the cause and coping with the fear elicited by the situations. The conventions of cyberpunk can be used to add different layers of horror. The dystopian nature, moral grey areas, and the tough choices arrayed before the protagonist can be bent to psychological horror. Good and evil are strained and skewed. The cultural commentary brought to life by the dark science can be darkened further by the horror elements added. Greater depth, and nuance, is possible when adding cyberpunk’s essential layer of man vs. himself conflict, and setting that against or in contrast to the external conflict. Personal horror of oneself could even in itself be a goal.

Mood: retro.
Music: Better by Guns N' Roses and Toreador II by Apocalyptica.

Buy these at Amazon.ca Click Images to Buy