I wanted to blather on about challenges today. Simple, basic challenges. Well, a type that should be simple, but still gets messed up sometimes.
That challenge is called choice.
We’ve all used or come across choice. As I said, it’s probably one of the easiest challenges a writer can create. Character A has to decide between two options (B and C). It’s s triangle.
Sometimes these choices are tough. Sometimes they’re not. Sometimes A is pursuing B, but it’s clear C should be the priority. Making the decision between B and C provides the conflict, the drama, and maybe even some comedy depending on how it’s done. There can also be an opportunity for some character growth in there.
You’ve probably heard of romantic triangles. It’s one of the most common ones out there. A is dating B, but then comes to realize C is their real soul mate. Maybe Dot is engaged to an antagonistic jock, but can’t help falling for the free-spirited caterer. The standard in most romantic triangles is that B is very clearly not the right person for A, while C is so blatantly right it’s almost frustrating.
Another common one is “work vs. family.” Will Wakko choose to spend the weekend with his family or working on the MacGuffin account? There are a few versions of this. Sometimes it’s family instead of friends. It’s usually work on the other leg, but it could be any sort of mild obsession or compulsion. Am I choosing my best friend or this treasure map? My pets or my new apartment?
Triangles are fantastic because they’re a very simple plot and framework that we can all immediately relate to and understand. They make for easy subplots in novels, and in short stories or screenplays they can almost be the entire story. This is one of the reasons we keep seeing them again and again and again.
However…
Simple as they are, there are still a few basic rules to a triangle.
Actually, that’s a lie. There’s only one rule. Triangles are so simple there’s just one rule to making them work.
We have a triangle because there’s A, B, and C. Three points. If I toss out one of these—let’s say B—then I’ve only got two points. That’s a line. Our structure is just A to C now.
Let me expand on the examples above…
Wakko is so obsessed with landing the MacGuffin account that he misses his daughter’s karate tournament, his son’s piano recital, and the anniversary party his husband arranged for their best friends. But Wakko keeps at it because this promotion will put him in a key position for the next account, and that’s the big one that’s going to put him in the corner office and change their lives.
The stress of all this is too much, though, and Wakko snaps. He screams at a client. When he’s called on it, he even yells at his boss and gets fired. But after a week at home with his kids and husband, he realizes this is where he was supposed to be all along, with his family. They may not be filthy rich, but the film ends with all of them happy together.
Or what about this one. Dot’s a painter-turned-graphic designer engaged to a square-jawed former quarterback turned TV producer. He’s crass, he’s mean to every waiter, and he undresses every woman he meets with his eyes—even when Dot’s right there with him.
Or what about this one. Dot’s a painter-turned-graphic designer engaged to a square-jawed former quarterback turned TV producer. He’s crass, he’s mean to every waiter, and he undresses every woman he meets with his eyes—even when Dot’s right there with him.
Then she meets their potential caterer, a free spirit who does watercolors and incorporates his talents into his food. They talk art. They talk careers. They have a casual lunch and talk more art. When Dot comes home early one night and catches her fiancé with his secretary (who he’s decided to marry instead for… reasons), she finds herself calling the caterer. And suddenly, Dot’s heart is fluttering like it hasn’t in years as she realizes this is the person she’s supposed to be with.
Do both of those examples feel a little… lacking?
Do both of those examples feel a little… lacking?
Y’see, Timmy, what happened in both of them was that character A never really did anything. Once B was eliminated, there wasn’t anywhere to go, story-wise, except with C. Character A didn’t make a choice, they just went with what was left.
Make sense?
B and C both have to remain valid choices. My story has to maintain that triangle up until the moment of choice. B can still be a bad choice, but A has to actively realize that and then decide to go with C instead. Once that’s happened, I can get B out of the picture, but not until then.
If not, ending up with C isn’t a triumph. It’s a consolation prize. Which I’d guess isn’t terribly satisfying for C.
If not, ending up with C isn’t a triumph. It’s a consolation prize. Which I’d guess isn’t terribly satisfying for C.
Or for the readers.
Next time…. Next time’s going to be golden, that I can promise you.
Until then, go write.