Comments on: Michael Kimball Guest Lecture #4: Story and Plot

By: The best HTMLGIANT posts as chosen by you the readers of HTMLGIANT or at least some of you | HTMLGIANT

Wed, 07 Mar 2012 05:49:59 +0000

[...] Guest Lecture #4: Story and Plot [...]

By: bark » In search of stolen legs…

bark » In search of stolen legs… — Thu, 13 May 2010 12:05:23 +0000

[...] been revisiting Michael Kimball’s craft note on plotting because I’m stuck on some work. I appreciate how he summarizes the variety of driving forces [...]

By: Erin

Erin — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 18:27:45 +0000

Your example is from Harry Potter. Your two other phases are really just part of the rising action.

By: Erin

Erin — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 18:27:00 +0000

Your example is from Harry Potter. Your two other phases are really just part of the rising action.

By: Erin

Erin — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 18:27:00 +0000

Your example is from Harry Potter. Your two other phases are really just part of the rising action.

By: jesusangelgarcia

jesusangelgarcia — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 03:01:04 +0000

man, this is good. I need to sit w/ this for a while. so many perspectives…

coming from a poetry background, it took me a long time to get comfortable w/ plot. john hawkes also fucked me up w/ his notions of a novel w/out characters, plot, theme, etc., and I still think I’m like the classic russians: I start w/ an idea I want to explore and let plot and characters develop around that.

one of those vonnegut quotes has been taped to my monitor for years, as is its capsule version: ACTION = character.

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about the narrative arc (those diagrams) and that start-near-the-end concept. but then, how much exposition/background is needed for clarity before jumping onto the high tension wires? still thinking on that… (and I like moving around in time… ya know, past-present-future existing always in the now… so flashback, so-called, can’t be avoided, can it?)

thanks again, michael. this may be the juiciest one yet.

By: jesusangelgarcia

jesusangelgarcia — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 03:01:00 +0000

man, this is good. I need to sit w/ this for a while. so many perspectives…

one of those vonnegut quotes has been taped to my monitor for years, as is its capsule version: ACTION = character.

thanks again, michael. this may be the juiciest one yet.

By: jesusangelgarcia

jesusangelgarcia — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 03:01:00 +0000

man, this is good. I need to sit w/ this for a while. so many perspectives…

one of those vonnegut quotes has been taped to my monitor for years, as is its capsule version: ACTION = character.

thanks again, michael. this may be the juiciest one yet.

By: Tommy Dee

Tommy Dee — Sun, 21 Feb 2010 00:57:34 +0000

Indeed, our ideas about plot and structure do continue to change, collectively. For instance, the 5phase structure to which I refer is merely a creative and logical extension of the classic Greek Tragedy paradigm, and a necessary one I might suggest. All the same dynamics are in play, but consider what would happen if two more ‘phases’ of action were added to the tragedy structure past the point of the denouement. That changes everything. Suddenly the denouement is no longer the end of the story. So what should follow the denouement? In reference to Mr. Baumann’s comment above, it is not a formulaic extension (strictly speaking). It’s not to suggest a story formula as does Joe Campbell. Rather, it is to suggest a question and a logical assumption that answers it. If the tragedy paradigm were extended then what would come after its denouement?
We might consider dias ex machina in that some intervening force comes in to change the conclusion, but we have to ask ourselves, does that really work?
Not really, no, even as dias ex machina was popular with operatic composers in the 18th century. Our ideas and innovations continue to change, collectively, until we find something that works.
For instance, if dias ex machina does not work then that means a ’4phase’ approach in general might be less than effective. The Greek Tragedy being 3 phases (beginning, middle and end) and then to add the dias ex machina onto it, creating 4phases of storytelling.
As innovated and instigated by Gen. Lew Wallace (circa 1876) what does work is to use 5phases of storytelling, where the fourth phase is something of a mini-Greek-Tragedy, a tragedy in capsule form, if you will, of rising story, peak and falling story which also ends in a denouement, but in a very short span, very condensed. The denouement at the end of this mini-tragedy of phase four PIVOTS the story into the fifth and last phase of the story, which consists of the ‘main event of resolution; and the finale of the story, which is followed by the final conclusion.
Thus, the Greek Tragedy paradigm makes up the first 3 phases of the story. The fourth phase is another tragedy in capsule form, the failure of either an end-game strategy or a counterattack strategy, and the denouement which punctuates this phase serves to PIVOT the story into the final phase.
Here’s a classic example, one of literally thousands. In the novel and film, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone, the third phase (the classic Greek Tragedy form) ends with Harry, Ron and Hermeine having survived the Dark Forest to realize that (him who shall not be named) is not dead, but lives in spirit form, and would have killed Harry then and there in the Dark Forest had he the full opportunity to do so. The denouement is that Harry, Ron and Hermeine realize that Dumbledor has been mysteriously called away, and that Snape is going into the ‘secret chamber’ to procure the sorcerer’s stone that very night, which will bring him who cannot be named back into full living form!
Okay…that sucks! They must act! They must take it upon themselves to counter Snape’s attempt to get the stone.
Phase 4 (the counterattack) rises through success in a gauntlet of sorts, and then peaks as they come into a giant chessboard where the destruction of the chess pieces is for real. They must play Wizard’s Chess to gain access to the secret chamber. The falling story ends where Ron sacrifices himself so that Harry can complete the checkmate and enter the secret chamber for the final showdown with Snape. The denouement at the end of this 4th phase is where Hermeine realizes about the value of friendship, even as she knows that Harry must go on alone.
The 5th phase is, in the secret chamber Harry encounters (him who cannot be named) in a final confrontation for possession of the sorcerer’s stone.
Is this genre fiction? Yes, it is.
Does JK Rowling invent this structural form? No, she does not. She is simply aware of its effectiveness.
Structural formats for stories are a study in being effective as a storyteller. The advantage of a 5phase approach is that innovations of the classic Greek Tragedy paradigm are what holds up the ‘great big middle part’ of a novel length story (or a film), and the concluding portions of the story are told in two additional phases, not merely one additional phase, as with dias ex machina.
The basis for the employment of this technique lies in the assumption that the author is building the story toward a finale of conflict resolution. This is typical of genre fiction, where pure literary fiction (as a non-genre) may not be operating on that basic assumption.
Perhaps then a purely literary approach might be where the author is working on the basis of having no structural assumptions at all. One might wonder as to the effectiveness of such an approach while still admitting to the fact that ‘effectiveness’ itself might be one of the assumptions that such an author is seeking to avoid.
In the end result it’s all storytelling, but when we ponder a means of effectiveness on which to build a story to tell then that begins our exploration of plot and structure. To ganer the 5phase approach from successful authors is simply to accept it as a means of being an effective story builder.

By: Tommy Dee

Tommy Dee — Sun, 21 Feb 2010 00:57:00 +0000