How to Develop Page 3
Religious rituals and weddings are some examples we might examine. I remember as a child at Mass there was an alabaster statue of the Virgin Mary with a missing nose. It had a stark white recess where the flesh-coloured nose should have been. This brought my focus onto other statues which made me quickly realize how these mass-produced icons were badly painted, poorly made and extremely unimaginative. The icon of the Virgin Mary with a missing nose stood there for years and yet the Catholic Church is huge on iconography. How could this particular church let this happen? It wasn’t poor. I never ever noticed a priest in that church with patches on his clothes. No member of the church ever bothered to fix or change the statue. It just stood there, untouched, and yet women and children especially would have prayed to it all the time; prayed to Jesus’ own mum and she had a white hole where her nose should have been. What did that say about the worshippers or the priests serving in that church? And no, it didn’t say that the church was full of blind people.
Anyway, there’s a story here. I can smell it, which is ironic considering it’s a story about a missing nose. The story could go something like the following. It would be seen from a child’s point of view. The child points out to his mother the unseemly sight of the missing nose. The mother tells him to shut up, believing somehow it’s a slander on the priest to point this out, or even on the Virgin herself. The story could build with the child’s growing indignation that nothing is being done about it; he thinks the Virgin is looking sadder every time he sees her without her nose and that she is calling on him personally to restore her honour. And every week he sees money going into the collection plate for the priest but none ever goes to the restoration of the Virgin’s nose. Eventually, with his indignation at bursting point, and to shame the adults into acting on behalf of the dignity of the Virgin, the child leaves a plastic nose at the base of the statue. What happens next? This ending is provisional. The priest catches him leaving the nose; but even after the boy explains why he left it, the priest still gives him a pompous dressing down. The priest tells him that the statue is just an image and that the spirit of the Virgin and the spirit of the worshippers are of greater importance. Nevertheless, when next at Mass the boy notices the statue missing and a week after that a new one of the Virgin with her nose intact. At this same Mass, the priest chastises the anonymous joker who left a thousand pounds of Monopoly (a board game) money in an envelope in the collection plate the week before. The boy had taken the priest’s advice to heart about the spirit being of greater importance and given generously of his Monopoly money.
See where some lateral thinking with the saying takes us. We start to see things from a different perspective, things we might not have otherwise even noticed or thought about, especially little things; but these little things may be actually highlighting something of significance and as writers we ought to keep our eyes open for such details because they are often quite revealing and often offering us up short story ideas. So, the next time you are at a wedding or a funeral, keep your eyes and ears open, and if it happens that it’s your own wedding or funeral, well, even more reason to pay attention as it would be simple bad manners to behave to the contrary.
ANALYSING ANOTHER SAYING
Let’s look at the next saying which is by the famous Oscar Wilde.
What is a cynic? A man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
This saying looks quite different to the last one. It is not written in the first person, it is not referring to anything concrete, it has no setting and the definition of a cynic seems vague and veering toward a stereotype. And where on earth is the potential for conflict? But if we look carefully, we will see its huge potential in offering us inspiration and guidance for our short story ideas.
First let’s just make sure we understand the message of the saying. Take the subject of marriage, for example. It isn’t so much that the cynic understands the actual monetary price of a marriage, but more to the point that he is very aware of the problems that marriage often bring, such as limits on individual freedom, the need to stay faithful, etc, and, of course, divorce settlements when it all goes belly-up. The cynic sees these factors as a very high price to pay for a marriage. In fact, he sees it as too high a price because he fails to see any value in marriage. The cynic isn’t one to understand why people still persist with it. Mutual support, deep and lasting love and friendship, etc., are mere abstracts to him that he thinks other people only believe in because they are deluded fools.
Now let’s analyse the storytelling elements.
The focus of the story seems to be on the cynic, but you could argue that it is on a character making a witty and clever observation on another character, even though it isn’t written in the first person. This is an important point to note because in one swift move we now have our first major character and he or she is intelligent, sharp, a keen observer of people and is someone who shows us in a compelling and witty way how to define the cynic. Just like that, we have two major characters for our story idea, one protagonist and one antagonist.
We also know something else about their relationship with one another. In fact, it may well be what defines their relationship in the plot of our story. This ought to be the case because this saying is just far too good not to use it to the fullest of its potential as a guide. We know that the observer is very critical of the character observed. Naturally, this offers us conflict potential.
The saying plays on the two words ‘price’ and ‘value’ to deliver beautifully on that famous Wildean wit and irony. The words manage to do this successfully only because the whole statement has a strong ring of truth about it. This trick or play with words also delivers on the twist. The irony and the twist often work very closely together.
Drama is conflict fuelled by the addition of moral choices. Despite the protagonist’s witty observation of the cynic, the criticism holds potential for dramatic depth because any mention of values edges morality onto the stage.
The theme obviously has the concept of cynicism at its heart. More specifically, the saying points to cynicism’s blindness in recognizing real value.
Setting isn’t important here.
IDEAS OUT OF WORDPLAY
Our saying offers us a great theme that we’ll grab with both hands: cynicism’s blindness in recognizing value over price. The saying also offers us two ‘anchor’ words to help us keep a sharp focus on the theme even as we expand it throughout the story. These anchor words will also help create the irony and the twist, just as they do in the saying. The saying’s anchor words ‘price’ and ‘value’ aren’t necessarily the words that we will use. But we will use two words that offer us the same powerful contrast.
One way in which we can search for our own anchor words, and also prompt ourselves for new ideas, is simply to play around with the words at our disposal. Let’s try it!
The saying is telling us that a cynic is someone who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
This also means that a cynic has no ability to recognize real value.
How else can we say this? What about cynicism makes us clever shoppers but poor lovers?
Not quite. Let’s try the following: A cynic knows the cost of the bricks and mortar but not the value of the relationship within.
Look how much the ground has shifted with a little bit of word play! In just a few short lines we have the beginning of what looks like a good idea. The last two statements are about cynicism in relationships. Our budding idea might revolve around someone who is cynical in love or friendship and so, as a result, fails to recognize the value of the relationship. This theme is hardly new, of course, but we have come to it from a unique perspective and this unique perspective is going to guide our hand throughout the story.
Now we have to work on the last statement because we need two strong anchor words and this line doesn’t yet give us those.
A cynic knows the cost of the bricks and mortar but not the value of the relationship wit
hin.
Let’s play around some more.
A cynic knows the price of a house but not the value of the relationship within.
Let’s think again of the anchor words ‘price’ and ‘value.’ We must replace them with two new words that will contrast with one another and in a way appropriate for the above statement.
… but not the value of the relationship within.
Let’s think of the relationship within the house as the home.
So our wordplay now gives us: A cynic knows the price of a house but not the value of a home.
A house is bricks and mortar and may cost millions and a cynic knows this perfectly well. A home is a healthy relationship within those bricks and mortar, yet the cynic assumes it is completely free as he fails to understand both the value of the relationship and the positive or nurturing cost involved in developing and maintaining it. But we know that a higher investment is necessary to make a home function than a house, though the value is not quantifiable. You could argue that the divorce statistics show just how high the nurturing cost is and how many fail to meet that cost. So for ‘price’ and ‘value’, here we will exchange them for ‘house’ and ‘home’.
Our word playing has helped formulate our ideas and vice versa and brought us to a strong position. We can now think of developing a story where our cynic, the antagonist, places great stress on the house itself and little or none on the home and our protagonist is someone who observes the cynic’s attitude and behaviour. We can use our new anchor words ‘house’ and ‘home’ to help us focus on the theme and deliver on the irony and twist. Conflict and drama should play a part in the story as the setting is the house to the antagonist and the home to the protagonist, which means that each has placed a different value on the same very important aspect of both their lives.
AN EARLY DRAFT PLAN
Let’s make the story third person, husband’s POV, with the conflict built around his emotional arc.
A cynical woman, who has made little emotional investment in the home (in her relationship with her family), has always believed a better house will make her life happier. The kids have flown the nest, and for whatever reason, she and her husband have just moved to a bigger and better house. Now she is in her element. The husband is relieved as his wife has never hesitated in the past to dump her general dissatisfaction and unhappiness on him and the children.
She points out where things should be placed, hung, laid, etc. in this new house. She comments on a damaged kitchen tile that needs to be replaced (Inciting incident). The husband can barely see the damage to the tile. He secretly sighs. She can find a tiny bit of damage in the tile, but not see the massive damage done to the home, the cracks and subsidence in their relationship.
As he watches her strut around the new house, swelling with satisfaction and pride, listing all the things that need to be done to make this house a truly liveable place, he reflects back to the other house in which they lived and in which she created quite a bit of emotional disruption to his and the children’s lives over the years. It wasn’t about the money or lack of it, he reflects, nor was it about the size of rooms or the type of wallpaper or the damn kitchen tiles. It was never really about any of that. It was about understanding what was of real value and investing your emotional self in that and not in the colour of the paint on the door frame. It was about understanding that the most important thing inside a house is the home and the home is your family. But he knew his wife; he knew she would never understand this simple thing. It was not in her psychological make-up.
She turns to him with a big smile. Yes, she is happy now. Certainly, she will no longer fill him with feelings of guilt about not providing her with a bigger and better house. But what should he do now with his own future? This big and great house meant little to him. What he always wanted and never had since his childhood was a small and simple home, for that is where his values have always lain. And now he felt free to go and look for that.
Even in this early draft plan, we can see the strong stirrings of character, conflict, theme, drama, irony and twist. We see how the anchor words pull the plan together, help focus the theme and help deliver sharply on the irony and the twist. The conflict is exposed through the husband’s thoughts and feelings and possibly tone of voice and body language. Dialogue will further highlight the conflict and ratchet up the tension (their conversation about the house) when contrasted with his inner dialogue (his reflections on the home).
ANOTHER IDEA
The following early draft plan could easily develop into a story of only a thousand words and with just two characters. Here we are going to keep the anchor words ‘price’ and ‘value’. Again, see how these anchor words help focus the theme and deliver on the irony and the twist. And yes, why not even include them in a working title: Price Versus Value.
Linda has just divorced Dave. She tells an acquaintance, Kate, that she let Dave keep an object he thinks is worth a lot of money. Linda laughs about this. She knows about objects and their value, she’s an amateur antiques expert. The object is expensive looking but practically worthless. Linda never put Dave right on this point and now she benefits from his ignorance. Linda is a practical woman who knows the world is a big and tough place and she has to do right by herself. She believes the only things worth salvaging from her marriage are determined by their financial worth. She has grabbed all the expensive stuff and Dave is left with a piece of worthless junk. Dave was always such a mug. Linda pushes the idea to Kate that Dave was always cynical and greedy, which was why he wanted to keep what he believed was the most expensive object in their lives; but she, being smarter, naturally came out on top. Linda adds that if the object was really worth anything she’d never have let him keep it.
Unknown to Linda, Kate and Dave had started a relationship after Linda and Dave had first split up. Back then, Dave had told Kate that he wanted this object to remind him of his relationship with Linda; that eight years of marriage must be worth something and that the object, bought in the earlier months of their marriage, reminded him of the better part of their life together. Kate had thought this object was going to sit between them in their new relationship as a warning that Dave was not completely over Linda. The object had always bugged her.
But Kate’s discomfort with the object evaporates as she suddenly sees it in a different light. What had seemed a potent symbol of a threat against her now makes her realize that Dave could never have really loved such a woman, and certainly, Linda had never loved him. She was just too cynical. Instead, the object now serves as a warning for Kate. Knowing the price of every object in a relationship and the value of none of them to the relationship is a sure sign of a failed relationship. Whenever Kate looks at the object from this moment on, it will remind her of that, not the opposite. She hopes Dave will never get rid of it now.
Let us think about the structure of this story, which can often be the key to a story’s success. Once Linda lets Kate know about this object, and in the story we can name the object clearly so that Kate knows exactly what she’s talking about, Kate’s body language can react subtly. The reader will see this change, although Linda will not. This is the inciting incident. From this point until we get inside Kate’s head, which shouldn’t come until near the end of the story, the tension and suspense will build as Kate’s body language reacts to Linda’s statements about the object. This way the reader knows that something interesting is going on beneath the surface and reads on to find out what exactly.
ANALYSING A THIRD SAYING
A man with no fear of women is a man with no ability to love one.
This one sounds cryptic. But let’s look closely at it! The saying points to the idea that anyone under love’s spell will have a healthy fear of its power. So, a man in love with a woman will surely have a healthy fear of her, too, as he, at the least, fears being rejected by her. Therefore, a man with no fear of women is a man with no ability to love one (for whatever reason). The saying is doing its usu
al job in throwing light on a phenomenon we would not have thought about or given voice to in quite this way, if we had ever thought about it at all.
Although not written in the first person, a witty, observant character might be making this observation, a person with some insight into the peculiarities of love. So we may well have one of our major characters here. The observed may be the antagonist. The possibility for conflict will grow out of the observation which may well be of a critical nature.
We have the words fear and love which are anchor words and will help create irony and the twist as the idea that love between a man and a woman cannot exist without fear seems both strange and humorous but also carries about it a ring of truth.
The theme pushes at a connection between love and fear. Other themes might evolve in the story.
The observation of the saying (which is possibly critical) holds potential for drama as morality usually creeps into actions involving love.
Setting isn’t important here.
Let’s see what sort of story ideas we can create out of this analysis.
AN EARLY DRAFT PLAN
Let’s imagine a third person woman’s perspective. She is in a relationship with a man she feels she can fall in love with but hasn’t committed to him completely yet as she feels something is not quite right between them. He never demonstrates the slightest animosity, grumpiness or jealousy toward time she spends away from him with family or friends. He tells her he loves her, and hugs, kisses and makes love to her spontaneously but still has a slight ‘coolness’ toward her.