Bill Conrad's Blog - Posts Tagged "plots"
Generators
I finally get to blog about my favorite topic: Generators. I have a 6.2-kilowatt, 120/240 Volt, 60 Herts portable generator. It starts like a dream and has never failed. Every day, I… Oh, wait. This blog is about writing books and stuff. Hmm. I should probably write about book generators.
A “generator” is a text list combined with a random number generator and rules. The first generator I ever came across was a National Enquirer headline generator. It used a list of popular names/events/situations and combined them into titles. Here is one such site:
http://www.rpginspiration.com/tables/...
I generated the following two headlines:
Mussolini Is Being Maintained Cryogenically for Nefarious Purposes
Incontrovertible Proof That the NSA Tried to Raise an Army of Dinosaurs
Quick and moderately funny stuff. I played with my National Enquirer headline generator on my Amiga computer for hours by adding to the database and creating new formulas.
In writing, I often use random name generators. They help me invent regular names, ethnic names, and exotic science-fiction items. How do I use this technology? Let’s say I want a new character name. I will click male or female and then get 10 names. If one pops, I use it. If not, I keep clicking until I do find one.
How does the name “pop?” Let’s say I want a mean male character. Here are 10 names I generated for this blog:
Laurence Rogers
Phil Fitzgerald
Mario Jensen
Calvin Barker
Joey Diaz
Shane Phelps
Joseph Hodges
Leon Rowe
Marcus Cobb
Russell Hoffman
Hmm. Shane Phelps sounds like a jerk. Of course, my four blog readers know that a name is just a name. The key is to have the mindset to think about that name and create a character with this mean mindset. Here is my favorite random name generator:
http://random-name-generator.info/
I use this site for ethnic and fantasy names:
https://www.fantasynamegenerators.com/
A small part of my writing requires inventing some piece of technology that does not exist. In the Star Trek writing universe, they call this technobabble. Here are a few “future scientific device” generators:
http://www.ds10.org/Database/babble.html
http://enneadgames.com/generators/gen...
https://www.seventhsanctum.com/index-...
https://www.scifiideas.com/technobabb...
The Multisynaptic Hyper Infuser is broken. Priceless.
You can generate an entire planet with graphics and detailed data:
http://donjon.bin.sh/scifi/world/inde...
While researching this blog, I found out about idea generators. At present, I have far too many ideas and not enough time to write them up. However, I still generated ideas for about an hour. Here are four:
https://www.portent.com/tools/title-m...
https://app.buzzsumo.com/content/web?...
https://blog.reedsy.com/plot-generato...
https://www.scifiideas.com/story-idea...
These tools are quite impressive, and many of the generated plots had meat. It makes me wonder how long before somebody will invent a book generator. Wait a minute. I hope nobody is working on that.
A “generator” is a text list combined with a random number generator and rules. The first generator I ever came across was a National Enquirer headline generator. It used a list of popular names/events/situations and combined them into titles. Here is one such site:
http://www.rpginspiration.com/tables/...
I generated the following two headlines:
Mussolini Is Being Maintained Cryogenically for Nefarious Purposes
Incontrovertible Proof That the NSA Tried to Raise an Army of Dinosaurs
Quick and moderately funny stuff. I played with my National Enquirer headline generator on my Amiga computer for hours by adding to the database and creating new formulas.
In writing, I often use random name generators. They help me invent regular names, ethnic names, and exotic science-fiction items. How do I use this technology? Let’s say I want a new character name. I will click male or female and then get 10 names. If one pops, I use it. If not, I keep clicking until I do find one.
How does the name “pop?” Let’s say I want a mean male character. Here are 10 names I generated for this blog:
Laurence Rogers
Phil Fitzgerald
Mario Jensen
Calvin Barker
Joey Diaz
Shane Phelps
Joseph Hodges
Leon Rowe
Marcus Cobb
Russell Hoffman
Hmm. Shane Phelps sounds like a jerk. Of course, my four blog readers know that a name is just a name. The key is to have the mindset to think about that name and create a character with this mean mindset. Here is my favorite random name generator:
http://random-name-generator.info/
I use this site for ethnic and fantasy names:
https://www.fantasynamegenerators.com/
A small part of my writing requires inventing some piece of technology that does not exist. In the Star Trek writing universe, they call this technobabble. Here are a few “future scientific device” generators:
http://www.ds10.org/Database/babble.html
http://enneadgames.com/generators/gen...
https://www.seventhsanctum.com/index-...
https://www.scifiideas.com/technobabb...
The Multisynaptic Hyper Infuser is broken. Priceless.
You can generate an entire planet with graphics and detailed data:
http://donjon.bin.sh/scifi/world/inde...
While researching this blog, I found out about idea generators. At present, I have far too many ideas and not enough time to write them up. However, I still generated ideas for about an hour. Here are four:
https://www.portent.com/tools/title-m...
https://app.buzzsumo.com/content/web?...
https://blog.reedsy.com/plot-generato...
https://www.scifiideas.com/story-idea...
These tools are quite impressive, and many of the generated plots had meat. It makes me wonder how long before somebody will invent a book generator. Wait a minute. I hope nobody is working on that.
When Plots Go Bad
Stories can be good, average, or bad. It is easy to categorize what we like or dislike. For example, a terrible story might be unbelievable, silly (when they should be serious) off-topic, or upsetting. However, some plots are bad and cannot categorize why.
Authors use many established rules to build remarkable stories—for example, the three-act story structure, the hook, or the dramatic conclusion. However, many marvelous stories do not contain classic elements, and I can dispel this mythical requirement with two words. Forrest Gump.
From a high-level view, this movie has nothing going for it. There is no classic plot, the romance is flawed, and the viewer gets hit by multiple untimely deaths. From a three-act, hook, and logical plot perspective, this movie is a complete failure. Yet, I loved that movie, and many other people would place this movie in their top five. (The book did not impress me, but that is a future topic.)
Let’s examine another movie, Avatar. It contains a three-act story with a hook and dramatic conclusion. Plus, the special effects, music, acting, and excellent premise which pushed the movie envelope. Also, the movie made lots of money, and many people loved it.
I was not too fond of the movie. Why? I could point out the underdeveloped characters, logic faults, implausibility, and blatant plot rip-off (Pocahontas.) However, that is not the core problem, and it took some time to put my anger into words.
My dislike stems from the movie demanding viewers to take on a mythical creature’s plight. To me, this felt like being forced to live with a hippie roommate. Do you know any giant blue beings who communicate through their tails? I do not either, which makes it hard for the viewer to relate to their struggle against invading humans.
How can writers prevent these issues? In a past blog, I discussed outlines:
http://interviewingimmortality.com/bl...
It occurred to me that it is possible to identify significant plot problems at the outline stage. How would I have changed Avatar’s plot? The movie should have started without humans and established a baseline. I would then introduce humans halfway through the movie. Then, the audience would see how badly humans treated the blue creatures. This plot would have been more dramatic and relatable. Perhaps a common foe would have been helpful.
Plots can go wrong when an author cannot analyze the big picture from the consumer’s perspective. My second book contained these issues. I had a weak beginning, one arrogant main character, and another weak main character. It took a year of editing to correct these flaws. In my sixth book, the outline revealed a fundamental problem. My plot lacked focus (the story drifted away from the core premise.) It took four months of tinkering to update the outline. Had I started writing without an outline, the book would have been a disaster.
What flaws should we try to identify at the outline stage? A plot must connect with readers, keep them interested, and leave them entertained. How does an author do this? My best suggestion is to look at the outline several times and ask for opinions. The author should not get feedback like, “Hey, you have a story about a race car driver. Where are the racing scenes?” “Why does the hero lose every battle? Heroes should win battles.” “What should I like in this character? He’s a jerk.”
Why don’t author’s see the issues ahead of time? We focus on the little things and cannot spot significant problems. The most common problem is creating a great story that the author enjoys but the reader hate. Looking into the mirror can be difficult.
Authors use many established rules to build remarkable stories—for example, the three-act story structure, the hook, or the dramatic conclusion. However, many marvelous stories do not contain classic elements, and I can dispel this mythical requirement with two words. Forrest Gump.
From a high-level view, this movie has nothing going for it. There is no classic plot, the romance is flawed, and the viewer gets hit by multiple untimely deaths. From a three-act, hook, and logical plot perspective, this movie is a complete failure. Yet, I loved that movie, and many other people would place this movie in their top five. (The book did not impress me, but that is a future topic.)
Let’s examine another movie, Avatar. It contains a three-act story with a hook and dramatic conclusion. Plus, the special effects, music, acting, and excellent premise which pushed the movie envelope. Also, the movie made lots of money, and many people loved it.
I was not too fond of the movie. Why? I could point out the underdeveloped characters, logic faults, implausibility, and blatant plot rip-off (Pocahontas.) However, that is not the core problem, and it took some time to put my anger into words.
My dislike stems from the movie demanding viewers to take on a mythical creature’s plight. To me, this felt like being forced to live with a hippie roommate. Do you know any giant blue beings who communicate through their tails? I do not either, which makes it hard for the viewer to relate to their struggle against invading humans.
How can writers prevent these issues? In a past blog, I discussed outlines:
http://interviewingimmortality.com/bl...
It occurred to me that it is possible to identify significant plot problems at the outline stage. How would I have changed Avatar’s plot? The movie should have started without humans and established a baseline. I would then introduce humans halfway through the movie. Then, the audience would see how badly humans treated the blue creatures. This plot would have been more dramatic and relatable. Perhaps a common foe would have been helpful.
Plots can go wrong when an author cannot analyze the big picture from the consumer’s perspective. My second book contained these issues. I had a weak beginning, one arrogant main character, and another weak main character. It took a year of editing to correct these flaws. In my sixth book, the outline revealed a fundamental problem. My plot lacked focus (the story drifted away from the core premise.) It took four months of tinkering to update the outline. Had I started writing without an outline, the book would have been a disaster.
What flaws should we try to identify at the outline stage? A plot must connect with readers, keep them interested, and leave them entertained. How does an author do this? My best suggestion is to look at the outline several times and ask for opinions. The author should not get feedback like, “Hey, you have a story about a race car driver. Where are the racing scenes?” “Why does the hero lose every battle? Heroes should win battles.” “What should I like in this character? He’s a jerk.”
Why don’t author’s see the issues ahead of time? We focus on the little things and cannot spot significant problems. The most common problem is creating a great story that the author enjoys but the reader hate. Looking into the mirror can be difficult.
Ockham's Razor
Ocham's razor, also known as the principle of parsimony or the law of parsimony, is the problem-solving principle that "entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity." Or paraphrased as "the simplest explanation is usually the best one.” Unfortunately, this phrase gets misused or overused by people trying to impress others.
In real life, things get complex, but there are often root causes or essential viewpoints to explain an issue. For example, if a person’s car does not start, the reason can be as simple as running out of fuel. Many would consider this to be a simple case of Ockham's razor. Yet, the issue could be an esoteric programming issue in the engine computer that can only be replicated on cold days when the car is traveling down a hill. Side note: Yes, complex issues like this are possible. Here, Ockham's razor does not apply, and perusing “simple solutions” can distract the team from solving the problem.
A big problem occurs when Ocham's razor gets applied to human behavior. Why is John upset? Because he misses his daughter. This seems logical but humans are complex and have many motivations, including money, power, survival, belongingness, fear, achievement, or affection. Even a boring human has a vast number of directions. We do not sit in an empty room all year long and think about one thing.
Let’s create a situation. A famous actor passes on a role which makes the news. An average person watches the news and becomes depressed. Why such a powerful reaction? That unimportant story, combined with other issues, may have pushed the person into a dark place. Outsiders, and perhaps the affected person, might not even know about the depression source. Modern humans are subject to a vast wave of information, feeling, social interactions, challenges, news, friends, coworkers, characters in media, books, and finances. Narrowing down a single root cause is difficult, and often, multiple issues are to blame. Plus, humans need entertainment and sometimes make random important decisions without motivation or reason.
And now, the actual issue. How does Ocham's razor apply to writing? Readers enjoy easy-to-understand characters and straightforward plots but dislike undefined motivation or poor logic. However, they also need to be entertained, and simple plots or flat characters are no longer acceptable.
A good story should have a moment where it is clear what is going on and the reasons behind a character’s actions. However, readers also like mystery and suspense, so there must be a careful balance.
An author needs to place themselves in the reader's perspective and write something that a reader can distill down to an Ocham's razor moment. The result will be powerful (because it is easy to comprehend), and the story will stick within a reader’s mind. Another way of looking at this is to understand that readers and viewers cannot read an author’s mind. They only have what authors present before them to understand, which is a perfect example of what the distillation concept behind Ocham's razor should represent.
In summary, Ocham's razor is another tool for an author. Perhaps it could be considered a perspective. One could even apply Ocham's razor to this very blog. I stuck to one topic and kept my readers focused. Adding some random story at this point would have messed up the ending.
In real life, things get complex, but there are often root causes or essential viewpoints to explain an issue. For example, if a person’s car does not start, the reason can be as simple as running out of fuel. Many would consider this to be a simple case of Ockham's razor. Yet, the issue could be an esoteric programming issue in the engine computer that can only be replicated on cold days when the car is traveling down a hill. Side note: Yes, complex issues like this are possible. Here, Ockham's razor does not apply, and perusing “simple solutions” can distract the team from solving the problem.
A big problem occurs when Ocham's razor gets applied to human behavior. Why is John upset? Because he misses his daughter. This seems logical but humans are complex and have many motivations, including money, power, survival, belongingness, fear, achievement, or affection. Even a boring human has a vast number of directions. We do not sit in an empty room all year long and think about one thing.
Let’s create a situation. A famous actor passes on a role which makes the news. An average person watches the news and becomes depressed. Why such a powerful reaction? That unimportant story, combined with other issues, may have pushed the person into a dark place. Outsiders, and perhaps the affected person, might not even know about the depression source. Modern humans are subject to a vast wave of information, feeling, social interactions, challenges, news, friends, coworkers, characters in media, books, and finances. Narrowing down a single root cause is difficult, and often, multiple issues are to blame. Plus, humans need entertainment and sometimes make random important decisions without motivation or reason.
And now, the actual issue. How does Ocham's razor apply to writing? Readers enjoy easy-to-understand characters and straightforward plots but dislike undefined motivation or poor logic. However, they also need to be entertained, and simple plots or flat characters are no longer acceptable.
A good story should have a moment where it is clear what is going on and the reasons behind a character’s actions. However, readers also like mystery and suspense, so there must be a careful balance.
An author needs to place themselves in the reader's perspective and write something that a reader can distill down to an Ocham's razor moment. The result will be powerful (because it is easy to comprehend), and the story will stick within a reader’s mind. Another way of looking at this is to understand that readers and viewers cannot read an author’s mind. They only have what authors present before them to understand, which is a perfect example of what the distillation concept behind Ocham's razor should represent.
In summary, Ocham's razor is another tool for an author. Perhaps it could be considered a perspective. One could even apply Ocham's razor to this very blog. I stuck to one topic and kept my readers focused. Adding some random story at this point would have messed up the ending.
A Day to Die
Last night, I started watching the movie, A Day to Die, starring Bruce Willis. After ten minutes, I stopped. They loaded this terrible film with plot holes, character flaws, physics mistakes, improper media (public) reactions, and a lack of common sense.
The experience made me want to ask the screenwriter, “Why are you trying to tell this awful story? Aren’t there enough ‘mega cop goes rogue’ stories? Did you show the script to a friend to get their honest reaction? Have you ever spoken to a police officer to understand their job? The police do not issue missile launchers! So what the heck went through the movie executive’s minds? Films still cost money? Right?” I wished I had not wasted those ten minutes.
Yet, there is another perspective. I am a small-time author who does not have a team of advisors. Who selects my book and blog topics? Only me. How do is select a topic? I write stories and blogs of a type that I would like to read.
Therefore, it is logical that the screenwriter of A Day to Die enjoyed unrealistic police movies. However, I think there is more to it. A talented writer will step back and ask themselves, “Is this a good story? Is there some aspect to hook a reader or viewer?” My guess is that many people messed with a good script, resulting in terrible “group results.”
Have I ever made a writing mistake this big? Well… Sort of. For 30 years, I have been thinking about a story. When I started my writing adventure, I planned to make this my fourth book. Actually, I envisioned a big-time movie. However, this project never got off the ground.
The main character (modeled around a “spirited” version of myself) gets rich by exploiting the banking system. Readers would consider this character to be arrogant and selfish. To put it into simple terms, his only positive aspect was intelligence. However, for 30 years, I did not figure this out. Then, one day, I thought about writing priorities and making this story into a book. As I envisioned the entire plot, I realized readers would not like this story. What’s worse is that I would not want to read a book of this type. Bummer!
Why did I think positively about this story for so long? From my perspective, a bold character overcame all odds by making intelligent decisions. So… He uses his mind to get rich, and this mental edge allows him to act like a jerk. Fortunately, I saw the issue before wasting a lot of time.
It is a shame that so many people put effort into A Day to Die. There are so many fantastic stories that they could have worked on. What an excellent non-fiction story to make into a blockbuster movie? Six WWII German prisoners escaped from American prisons. Easy money.
It is super important to take a step back and reevaluate our path. Sometimes we have to make course corrections, firm decisions, or stay the course. Unfortunately, everybody involved in A Day to Die failed to take this critical step. Yet… I read a few positive reviews about this film. Hmm. What were the fans thinking? Perhaps the police secretly issue rocket launchers. But that is a topic for a future blog.
The experience made me want to ask the screenwriter, “Why are you trying to tell this awful story? Aren’t there enough ‘mega cop goes rogue’ stories? Did you show the script to a friend to get their honest reaction? Have you ever spoken to a police officer to understand their job? The police do not issue missile launchers! So what the heck went through the movie executive’s minds? Films still cost money? Right?” I wished I had not wasted those ten minutes.
Yet, there is another perspective. I am a small-time author who does not have a team of advisors. Who selects my book and blog topics? Only me. How do is select a topic? I write stories and blogs of a type that I would like to read.
Therefore, it is logical that the screenwriter of A Day to Die enjoyed unrealistic police movies. However, I think there is more to it. A talented writer will step back and ask themselves, “Is this a good story? Is there some aspect to hook a reader or viewer?” My guess is that many people messed with a good script, resulting in terrible “group results.”
Have I ever made a writing mistake this big? Well… Sort of. For 30 years, I have been thinking about a story. When I started my writing adventure, I planned to make this my fourth book. Actually, I envisioned a big-time movie. However, this project never got off the ground.
The main character (modeled around a “spirited” version of myself) gets rich by exploiting the banking system. Readers would consider this character to be arrogant and selfish. To put it into simple terms, his only positive aspect was intelligence. However, for 30 years, I did not figure this out. Then, one day, I thought about writing priorities and making this story into a book. As I envisioned the entire plot, I realized readers would not like this story. What’s worse is that I would not want to read a book of this type. Bummer!
Why did I think positively about this story for so long? From my perspective, a bold character overcame all odds by making intelligent decisions. So… He uses his mind to get rich, and this mental edge allows him to act like a jerk. Fortunately, I saw the issue before wasting a lot of time.
It is a shame that so many people put effort into A Day to Die. There are so many fantastic stories that they could have worked on. What an excellent non-fiction story to make into a blockbuster movie? Six WWII German prisoners escaped from American prisons. Easy money.
It is super important to take a step back and reevaluate our path. Sometimes we have to make course corrections, firm decisions, or stay the course. Unfortunately, everybody involved in A Day to Die failed to take this critical step. Yet… I read a few positive reviews about this film. Hmm. What were the fans thinking? Perhaps the police secretly issue rocket launchers. But that is a topic for a future blog.
Plot Holes
I recently watched the Disney movie Lightyear, which is a prequel to the Toy Story movies. It got dreadful reviews from both fans and critics. Yet, I still (mostly) enjoyed the film. What was the source of negative waves? The story depended on complex space (physics) concepts, and the movie did not correctly tie into the previous films. Oh, and that minor issue. It did not use the original Buzz Lightyear voice, Tim Allen! What the heck! That was a big mistake.
When I watched the movie, these issues did not upset me (except the wrong voice!), but a glaring problem annoyed me. Since I began my writing adventure, I have become more observant (critical) of plots. In one pivotal Lightyear scene, the commander canceled the flight program (the main plot) with a poor explanation. “I like laser shields.” This giant, poorly framed decision forced Buzz Lightyear to take reckless actions and was supposed to be funny. Unfortunately, this left the viewers asking, “Why did you do that?” The answer is that the writer made a choice (in their mind, reasonable) to make an entertaining movie. Not a brilliant move.
Such glaring story faults are called “plot holes.” A classic glaring example occurred in the Lord of the Rings movie. This epic trilogy follows a long journey where the heroes encounter many adventures. However, viewers point out that at the story's beginning, the characters could have simply flown on top of the eagles to their final destination (saving 6 hours of movie watching). The reason is partially explained in the book, but there is still a plot hole.
Am I guilty of writing plot holes? So far, I have not discovered a large plot hole, but yes, I have intentionally made a few. My biggest occurred in my third book (which is moments away from going on sale!). The heroes spray “knockout gas” into a building air conditioner intake to disable the bad guys. This is the plot apex and a critical point in the action. I know there is no such thing as knockout gas like you see in the movies. While the book explains the existence of “knockout gas,” that is not the primary issue. Most readers know that building air conditioning systems do not have open air intakes. Oops.
When writing the book, I was aware of this flaw, but I continued with the full knowledge that readers may dislike this plot hole. Why did I make this reckless choice? At the time I started, I was unfamiliar with outlines. This tool would have allowed me to see the big picture. Thus, I would have been able to see the problem in advance, evaluate the impact, and then determine a more realistic solution.
However, let us remind ourselves that life is not always realistic. People often make silly, un-logical, stupid, intentionally wrong, vindictive, or random decisions.
For example, a company I used to work for closed down an entire division (costing the company money) because the division did not make enough profit. They were about to release a new technology that customers were ready to buy. So… the division was making money and was about to make a lot more money. Plus, they had to pay even more money to shut the division down. How about selling the division (profit) or spinning it off (long-term profit without effort)? Nah!
This was an actual event that cost several people their jobs as opposed to a fictional story. Now, a bunch of imaginary eagles not flying passengers does not seem noteworthy. Yet moviegoers still complained.
Sometimes, writers get stuck in a corner. I knew that using an imaginary air vent was risky, but still took it. Now, with more experience, I would have been able to see the issue in advance and correct it.
Do my blogs contain plot holes? Fortunately, blogs do not have a plot. Instead, they contain something even better! Mistakes, oversights, poor continuity, lack of content, missed references, inconsistencies, incomplete thoughts, unnecessary (or lack of) explanations, vague connections, logical faults, and abrupt endings.
When I watched the movie, these issues did not upset me (except the wrong voice!), but a glaring problem annoyed me. Since I began my writing adventure, I have become more observant (critical) of plots. In one pivotal Lightyear scene, the commander canceled the flight program (the main plot) with a poor explanation. “I like laser shields.” This giant, poorly framed decision forced Buzz Lightyear to take reckless actions and was supposed to be funny. Unfortunately, this left the viewers asking, “Why did you do that?” The answer is that the writer made a choice (in their mind, reasonable) to make an entertaining movie. Not a brilliant move.
Such glaring story faults are called “plot holes.” A classic glaring example occurred in the Lord of the Rings movie. This epic trilogy follows a long journey where the heroes encounter many adventures. However, viewers point out that at the story's beginning, the characters could have simply flown on top of the eagles to their final destination (saving 6 hours of movie watching). The reason is partially explained in the book, but there is still a plot hole.
Am I guilty of writing plot holes? So far, I have not discovered a large plot hole, but yes, I have intentionally made a few. My biggest occurred in my third book (which is moments away from going on sale!). The heroes spray “knockout gas” into a building air conditioner intake to disable the bad guys. This is the plot apex and a critical point in the action. I know there is no such thing as knockout gas like you see in the movies. While the book explains the existence of “knockout gas,” that is not the primary issue. Most readers know that building air conditioning systems do not have open air intakes. Oops.
When writing the book, I was aware of this flaw, but I continued with the full knowledge that readers may dislike this plot hole. Why did I make this reckless choice? At the time I started, I was unfamiliar with outlines. This tool would have allowed me to see the big picture. Thus, I would have been able to see the problem in advance, evaluate the impact, and then determine a more realistic solution.
However, let us remind ourselves that life is not always realistic. People often make silly, un-logical, stupid, intentionally wrong, vindictive, or random decisions.
For example, a company I used to work for closed down an entire division (costing the company money) because the division did not make enough profit. They were about to release a new technology that customers were ready to buy. So… the division was making money and was about to make a lot more money. Plus, they had to pay even more money to shut the division down. How about selling the division (profit) or spinning it off (long-term profit without effort)? Nah!
This was an actual event that cost several people their jobs as opposed to a fictional story. Now, a bunch of imaginary eagles not flying passengers does not seem noteworthy. Yet moviegoers still complained.
Sometimes, writers get stuck in a corner. I knew that using an imaginary air vent was risky, but still took it. Now, with more experience, I would have been able to see the issue in advance and correct it.
Do my blogs contain plot holes? Fortunately, blogs do not have a plot. Instead, they contain something even better! Mistakes, oversights, poor continuity, lack of content, missed references, inconsistencies, incomplete thoughts, unnecessary (or lack of) explanations, vague connections, logical faults, and abrupt endings.
Pride Is Bad
What is the light side of pride? That's when we work hard on something or are proud of our accomplishments. However, I wanted to focus on the darker side of pride. What is this? Let's start by defining what pride is not. A person does not do something because they have pride. Instead, they do not do something. A good example is not apologizing because we would have to face a person and admit fault. Taking this a step further, one would never say, "I hit you because I have pride."
We fill our lives with pride-motivated decisions, and these are not our proudest moments, but a person cannot be perfect. Dark pride is illogical, immoral, and often insulting. It holds us back, gets us into trouble, and makes others think less about us. But we have pride and still make those decisions.
There is another problem with dark pride that I wanted to write about. It makes a terrible story motivation. This is true of fiction and nonfiction. Let's make an easy example. While driving home, Tom is sleepy and accidentally dents his neighbor's car. The dent is small and will not cost much to repair. Tom can easily afford to fix the damage, but he remains silent about the incident. Why? He would have to face his neighbor and admit fault.
We all understand what is going on, and want to yell, HEY TOM, MAN UP! Just walk over, take responsibility, pay for the small dent, and all will be forgiven. But does Tom have a defect? Is he secretly a gambler and has no money? There must be a reason for his actions.
And there is the problem. A character must have an explained reason for actions. It is wrong to hope that readers will make the leap to pride. "Everybody understands what's going on. Why I did the same thing last week." Readers might think, "Oh, I get it. In the next chapter, Tom is going to go crazy." And when Tom does not go crazy, the readers will get angry. And remember that Tom is not crazy, yet pride is illogical.
There is some good news. I have come up with a trick to explain this common occurrence. I use the word "pride" to explain a character's motivation. "Tom crashed his car into his neighbor's car. The next day, he had too much pride to admit his mistake." That small addition is all that is necessary.
Yet, I have read many books where I did not understand the motivation behind a character's actions. I recall one book set in a fictitious world where two factions went to war. Why? One day, the leader simply declared war. Completely confusing. And I know people do all kinds of crazy things. Like going to war and then not retreating when victory is hopeless…
I have pride in my blogs. It is fun to write something, see the result and get reactions. But I never want my four blog readers to be stuck guessing because that would miss the point.
We fill our lives with pride-motivated decisions, and these are not our proudest moments, but a person cannot be perfect. Dark pride is illogical, immoral, and often insulting. It holds us back, gets us into trouble, and makes others think less about us. But we have pride and still make those decisions.
There is another problem with dark pride that I wanted to write about. It makes a terrible story motivation. This is true of fiction and nonfiction. Let's make an easy example. While driving home, Tom is sleepy and accidentally dents his neighbor's car. The dent is small and will not cost much to repair. Tom can easily afford to fix the damage, but he remains silent about the incident. Why? He would have to face his neighbor and admit fault.
We all understand what is going on, and want to yell, HEY TOM, MAN UP! Just walk over, take responsibility, pay for the small dent, and all will be forgiven. But does Tom have a defect? Is he secretly a gambler and has no money? There must be a reason for his actions.
And there is the problem. A character must have an explained reason for actions. It is wrong to hope that readers will make the leap to pride. "Everybody understands what's going on. Why I did the same thing last week." Readers might think, "Oh, I get it. In the next chapter, Tom is going to go crazy." And when Tom does not go crazy, the readers will get angry. And remember that Tom is not crazy, yet pride is illogical.
There is some good news. I have come up with a trick to explain this common occurrence. I use the word "pride" to explain a character's motivation. "Tom crashed his car into his neighbor's car. The next day, he had too much pride to admit his mistake." That small addition is all that is necessary.
Yet, I have read many books where I did not understand the motivation behind a character's actions. I recall one book set in a fictitious world where two factions went to war. Why? One day, the leader simply declared war. Completely confusing. And I know people do all kinds of crazy things. Like going to war and then not retreating when victory is hopeless…
I have pride in my blogs. It is fun to write something, see the result and get reactions. But I never want my four blog readers to be stuck guessing because that would miss the point.
Aquaman’s Explosions
At a young age, my parents explained how dangerous fire is and how water will quickly put it out. I am sure everybody reading this article had the same lesson and fully understands the relationship between fire and water. Yet… Some Hollywood movie makers had parents who skipped that basic message.
In December, I watched Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom. It’s not a fantastic plot, but I mostly enjoyed it. However, there was a glaring problem that angered me. The underwater battle scenes had massive explosions with giant orange fireballs. Umm, what?
It is possible to have an underwater explosion, and the result is a brief flash. Why? A fire requires three elements—fuel, oxygen, and heat. Being underwater rapidly removes all three, leaving smoky gas bubbles. Aquaman viewers saw incredible computer-generated explosions that lit up the screen.
Wait a minute. Movie audiences are supposed to get fooled. Harry Potter’s wand is imaginary, and the Star Wars Death Star cannot destroy a planet. It is all make-believe. There is even a name for it. “Movie Magic”
Yes, I know flaming explosions got added by computer artists to excite audiences, and we are supposed to accept this oversite. Yet, Fire + Water = No Fire That is cave-dweller grade logic. Ignoring such a fundamental law of nature is absurd.
Why did this one aspect of the film upset me? After all, the plot required many leaps. The whole movie was about underwater societies coming together. Then, the king of them all lived in a lighthouse, not the ocean. Somehow, he had a brother that fit into the plot. I bought into that illogical mess, but the massive underwater flames still got to me.
I know the film creators are under pressure to make something visually epic, and their choice to ignore physics should excite audiences. But let us not forget it is possible to create realistic underwater explosions. Filmmakers have been doing this since 1940s submarine movies. Technicians set off small explosives near models and filmed the result. Moviegoers see a yellow flash followed by grey bubbles. Simple, logical, realistic, and effective. Audiences watched those old movies and agreed that was how water and explosives worked.
I’m going to attack the issue from a different angle. Would it be acceptable for Harry Potter to use his wand to create a fire underwater? Could Luke Skywalker use The Force to do the same? What if Deadpool a lit cigarette? When he tossed it into the water, it would go out. Right? Yes, it would! But not Aquaman. No, he got permission to bypass common sense.
Of course, writers can play all kinds of games. Superman flies by, putting his hands up. Michel Knight talks to his car, Kitt. Scooby Doo solves mysteries. A road runner can run through a wall painted like a tunnel, while a coyote cannot. Doc Brown travels through time in a DeLorean. Wolverine had his bones replaced with metal. (How does he get through airport metal detectors?) Tony the Tiger even wants us to purchase his sugar-filled cereal.
So, we should give the filmmakers a break. Go ahead, light up some water. It is in the same category as Superman lifting a train. We all wish we could do that. Good job expanding our minds. Yeah, I am not buying it. Hey Aquaman. You, of all people, should know water extinguishes fire.
You’re the best -Bill
February 28, 2024
In December, I watched Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom. It’s not a fantastic plot, but I mostly enjoyed it. However, there was a glaring problem that angered me. The underwater battle scenes had massive explosions with giant orange fireballs. Umm, what?
It is possible to have an underwater explosion, and the result is a brief flash. Why? A fire requires three elements—fuel, oxygen, and heat. Being underwater rapidly removes all three, leaving smoky gas bubbles. Aquaman viewers saw incredible computer-generated explosions that lit up the screen.
Wait a minute. Movie audiences are supposed to get fooled. Harry Potter’s wand is imaginary, and the Star Wars Death Star cannot destroy a planet. It is all make-believe. There is even a name for it. “Movie Magic”
Yes, I know flaming explosions got added by computer artists to excite audiences, and we are supposed to accept this oversite. Yet, Fire + Water = No Fire That is cave-dweller grade logic. Ignoring such a fundamental law of nature is absurd.
Why did this one aspect of the film upset me? After all, the plot required many leaps. The whole movie was about underwater societies coming together. Then, the king of them all lived in a lighthouse, not the ocean. Somehow, he had a brother that fit into the plot. I bought into that illogical mess, but the massive underwater flames still got to me.
I know the film creators are under pressure to make something visually epic, and their choice to ignore physics should excite audiences. But let us not forget it is possible to create realistic underwater explosions. Filmmakers have been doing this since 1940s submarine movies. Technicians set off small explosives near models and filmed the result. Moviegoers see a yellow flash followed by grey bubbles. Simple, logical, realistic, and effective. Audiences watched those old movies and agreed that was how water and explosives worked.
I’m going to attack the issue from a different angle. Would it be acceptable for Harry Potter to use his wand to create a fire underwater? Could Luke Skywalker use The Force to do the same? What if Deadpool a lit cigarette? When he tossed it into the water, it would go out. Right? Yes, it would! But not Aquaman. No, he got permission to bypass common sense.
Of course, writers can play all kinds of games. Superman flies by, putting his hands up. Michel Knight talks to his car, Kitt. Scooby Doo solves mysteries. A road runner can run through a wall painted like a tunnel, while a coyote cannot. Doc Brown travels through time in a DeLorean. Wolverine had his bones replaced with metal. (How does he get through airport metal detectors?) Tony the Tiger even wants us to purchase his sugar-filled cereal.
So, we should give the filmmakers a break. Go ahead, light up some water. It is in the same category as Superman lifting a train. We all wish we could do that. Good job expanding our minds. Yeah, I am not buying it. Hey Aquaman. You, of all people, should know water extinguishes fire.
You’re the best -Bill
February 28, 2024
Play Stupid Games, Don’t Win Stupid Prizes
My house was constructed in 2007 on a small plot of land surrounded by other houses. The advantage of building on a small parcel is reduced price, but I lack room to play with big toys. Such as? Dump trucks, tractors, excavators, bulldozers, cranes, forklifts, pumps, generators, and graders. I love them all! However, the most significant piece of equipment I ever owned was a lawn mower, and I had to sell it because it took up too much space. Tractor? Ha! I could not even fit a tractor tire in my crowded garage.
The closest I get to owning big equipment is watching YouTube videos. These content creators buy, restore, fix, modify, and use their equipment for fun activities. I devote at least an hour daily to seeing what they are doing.
One of my favorite YouTube channels is Ants Pants. Andris lives in Estonia and works on all kinds of fun projects. I have determined that the attraction to reality shows involves the host’s personality. Some viewers are looking for drama, mystery, and macho goodness. I prefer down-to-earth people with watchable interests, and his channel fits my bill.
https://www.youtube.com/@Ants_Pants
You are probably thinking, “Hey, you normally write about books and stuff. What does a YouTube guy playing with tractors have to do with that?” I am glad you asked. Andris said something the other day that has been rattling around in my bonkers mind. “Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.”
I participated in my fair share of stupid activities as a kid. I rode my dirt bike without a helmet and used scraps of wood to jump over shopping carts. And my bike? It was so bad that I could still see the labels from the recycled beer cans it was made out of.
Fast forward to today. We know so much about safety, medicine, health, and physics. Plus, there are endless videos about poor decisions. Spoiler alert! Concussions have lifelong impacts. (That was a pun.) As a result, we instituted laws, quality controls, government department, rules, and lawyers to enhance safety. Yet, it seems now more than ever that people are doing stupid things. Why? To be famous, do something extraordinary, or relieve boredom.
I recall the precise moment when I became aware of this trend. Around 1995, I was watching an obituary on the local news. They had been following the antics of a local teenager who had become a minor celebrity. It started five years prior when his friend borrowed his father’s video camera to record a stunt.
The kid rode his dirt bike as fast as he could down the walkway of a three-story apartment building, jumped off the top-floor steps, and did a twist with the idea of sticking the landing on the railing of the second-floor steps. He came within inches of success and crashed hard on the cement below.
The friend submitted the video to the local news, and they interviewed the kid in the hospital bed. He confidently proclaimed something like, “I am a true champion! When I heal, I’m going to stick that landing!” A year later, history repeated with another spectacular video of him crashing and an interview. The following year, the kid crashed again. I was unaware of the first three crashes, but the news only showed the kid speeding toward the top steps on the fourth. They stopped the video because the resulting crash was fatal. I thought, “Man, that kid was an idiot. Why on earth was he so dedicated to doing something that dangerous?”
Today, the internet is full of videos where people intentionally do stupid things, but what does this have to do with writing? Pondering Andris’s statement made me realize that the main characters should never win stupid prizes. Let’s jump (another pun) in with an example.
It’s a teenage romance with a hard-core punk who wants to be the world’s best bike stunt bike rider. And the girl… Umm? Wait a minute. Is she going to fall (another pun) for a kid dumb enough to jump his bike off a three-story building? That story is a non-starter for everybody.
How about a coming-of-age story where the mother of the hard-core punk biker does not know what to do? Umm? She raised an idiot. How will readers ever sympathize?
The doctor who saved a brave child… Umm, no. The kid is a bonehead. Let’s hear the story of saving a normal kid.
The only salvageable aspect of this mess is a story about the kid who videotaped the biker. He could grow up to be a reality television producer—still, not an entertaining foundation.
Well, how do we fix the problem? People and characters will always engage in stupid activities, and authors should not avoid these flaws. My solution is to prevent the stupid prize. The kid sticks the landing. “Wow! That could have gone bad. I was a real bonehead and better make good decisions in the future.” Positive outcomes from stupid activities have a higher story impact (another pun). Essentially, I recommend riding above (a fourth pun) our foolishness.
What am I trying to avoid? What is the central problem? Readers like to cheer for the main characters and relate to their situations. They want something better than reality and empathize with success. Even in a horror story, the despicable villain has solid goals. Can you imagine Hanabal Lector crashing on a dirt bike? That would bring the story flow to a dead stop (almost a pun).
Am I guilty of not taking my advice? I only put this thought together recently, but I had a similar rule over the years. During story development and editing, I identified segments that read stupid. My solution was to delete them or rewrite them to read more intelligently. I felt this made a better story that readers had a better chance of relating to and enjoying.
My rule would unlikely make it into a writing guide or textbook because it falls into the “what a solid plot should contain” category. Still, I find exploring areas that cannot or should not be written about fascinating. Readers are a fickle bunch. We like what we like and will put a book down in a heartbeat for tiny reasons.
You’re the best -Bill
February 12, 2025
The closest I get to owning big equipment is watching YouTube videos. These content creators buy, restore, fix, modify, and use their equipment for fun activities. I devote at least an hour daily to seeing what they are doing.
One of my favorite YouTube channels is Ants Pants. Andris lives in Estonia and works on all kinds of fun projects. I have determined that the attraction to reality shows involves the host’s personality. Some viewers are looking for drama, mystery, and macho goodness. I prefer down-to-earth people with watchable interests, and his channel fits my bill.
https://www.youtube.com/@Ants_Pants
You are probably thinking, “Hey, you normally write about books and stuff. What does a YouTube guy playing with tractors have to do with that?” I am glad you asked. Andris said something the other day that has been rattling around in my bonkers mind. “Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.”
I participated in my fair share of stupid activities as a kid. I rode my dirt bike without a helmet and used scraps of wood to jump over shopping carts. And my bike? It was so bad that I could still see the labels from the recycled beer cans it was made out of.
Fast forward to today. We know so much about safety, medicine, health, and physics. Plus, there are endless videos about poor decisions. Spoiler alert! Concussions have lifelong impacts. (That was a pun.) As a result, we instituted laws, quality controls, government department, rules, and lawyers to enhance safety. Yet, it seems now more than ever that people are doing stupid things. Why? To be famous, do something extraordinary, or relieve boredom.
I recall the precise moment when I became aware of this trend. Around 1995, I was watching an obituary on the local news. They had been following the antics of a local teenager who had become a minor celebrity. It started five years prior when his friend borrowed his father’s video camera to record a stunt.
The kid rode his dirt bike as fast as he could down the walkway of a three-story apartment building, jumped off the top-floor steps, and did a twist with the idea of sticking the landing on the railing of the second-floor steps. He came within inches of success and crashed hard on the cement below.
The friend submitted the video to the local news, and they interviewed the kid in the hospital bed. He confidently proclaimed something like, “I am a true champion! When I heal, I’m going to stick that landing!” A year later, history repeated with another spectacular video of him crashing and an interview. The following year, the kid crashed again. I was unaware of the first three crashes, but the news only showed the kid speeding toward the top steps on the fourth. They stopped the video because the resulting crash was fatal. I thought, “Man, that kid was an idiot. Why on earth was he so dedicated to doing something that dangerous?”
Today, the internet is full of videos where people intentionally do stupid things, but what does this have to do with writing? Pondering Andris’s statement made me realize that the main characters should never win stupid prizes. Let’s jump (another pun) in with an example.
It’s a teenage romance with a hard-core punk who wants to be the world’s best bike stunt bike rider. And the girl… Umm? Wait a minute. Is she going to fall (another pun) for a kid dumb enough to jump his bike off a three-story building? That story is a non-starter for everybody.
How about a coming-of-age story where the mother of the hard-core punk biker does not know what to do? Umm? She raised an idiot. How will readers ever sympathize?
The doctor who saved a brave child… Umm, no. The kid is a bonehead. Let’s hear the story of saving a normal kid.
The only salvageable aspect of this mess is a story about the kid who videotaped the biker. He could grow up to be a reality television producer—still, not an entertaining foundation.
Well, how do we fix the problem? People and characters will always engage in stupid activities, and authors should not avoid these flaws. My solution is to prevent the stupid prize. The kid sticks the landing. “Wow! That could have gone bad. I was a real bonehead and better make good decisions in the future.” Positive outcomes from stupid activities have a higher story impact (another pun). Essentially, I recommend riding above (a fourth pun) our foolishness.
What am I trying to avoid? What is the central problem? Readers like to cheer for the main characters and relate to their situations. They want something better than reality and empathize with success. Even in a horror story, the despicable villain has solid goals. Can you imagine Hanabal Lector crashing on a dirt bike? That would bring the story flow to a dead stop (almost a pun).
Am I guilty of not taking my advice? I only put this thought together recently, but I had a similar rule over the years. During story development and editing, I identified segments that read stupid. My solution was to delete them or rewrite them to read more intelligently. I felt this made a better story that readers had a better chance of relating to and enjoying.
My rule would unlikely make it into a writing guide or textbook because it falls into the “what a solid plot should contain” category. Still, I find exploring areas that cannot or should not be written about fascinating. Readers are a fickle bunch. We like what we like and will put a book down in a heartbeat for tiny reasons.
You’re the best -Bill
February 12, 2025
