Conflict question and maybe something about scenes and sequels....

[arianne]

In all of the "craft" books i've read, conflict seems to be the number one rule of any book. My problem is that I'm not quite sure how I would define "conflict" as such. There are examples in the books, but some of them are confusing.

Would a fight with a friend be conflict? Would giving someone the cold shoulder be conflict? Is holding a gun to someone's head conflict? Is there some kind of conflict that does not include weapons and/or fighting?

Often when I'm writing I don't think of conflict first. I write out the scene as it plays in my head and then sort of go back and try to find the conflict (this is pretty much the method of the detective who thinks he knows who the murderer is, finding clues to said person's guilt in every shadow and speck of dust: I really have no idea if what I call conflict is really conflict or just me thinking it's conflict)

This brings me a bit to scenes and sequels (Hello, JB!) I don't think of my stories in terms of scenes and sequels either. I don't, for example, think: someone crashed into Harry's car just as he was running away from the cops<end of scene--(denied!!), start of sequel> Harry felt shock jolt through his body as he began to feel pain in his head <emotion part of sequel>...<reasoning part of sequel>....etc etc. I usually just think, "someone hit his car, and he felt shocked, and then he realized he still had to run from the police" without all the <> bits.

Is there something I should change with my story thinking process? Any tips or advice?

[the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh]

If it works for you there's no call to change it.  Plenty of good writers give writing advice, and one thing reading a lot of that makes clear is that there are lots and lots of ways of writing good books.

[OZ]

From your mention of scenes and sequels I assume that you've read Jim's live journal. His definition of conflict is someone trying to keep your protagonist from obtaining his or her goal (not a direct quote but close). It could even be a caring but misguided friend that is trying to talk you out of what you are doing. All of those things you mentioned could be conflict but might not be. If the reason someone is giving you the cold shoulder to make you a social outcast which would then hinder or prevent you in attaining your goal then it could be conflict. If your fight with your friend is them trying to stop you from reaching your goal then it's conflict. Conflict does not have to refer to weapons and/or fighting.

As far as your thinking process goes if it's not working for you then adjust it but if it's working fine the way it is, I wouldn't change a thing. (The same thing Neurovore already said)

[the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh]

From your mention of scenes and sequels I assume that you've read Jim's live journal. His definition of conflict is someone trying to keep your protagonist from obtaining his or her goal (not a direct quote but close).

That covers the kind of plot that is often described as Man vs. Man, but one can, I reckon, get conflict also out of Man vs. Nature or Man vs. Himself.   

("There are only three fundamental plots.  Hamlet, Pride and Prejudice and Belisarius.")

[arianne]

Just curious...does everyone else start stories with conflict? Is it just me that's conflictly challenged?

[OZ]

I should have said someone or something that tries to prevent the protagonist(s) from reaching his/her goal.

[OZ]

It depends on what you mean by start. It doesn't have to be the first thing that appears but if there's not some conflict pretty early, you're probably going to lose your readers' interest. Again conflict doesn't always mean a fight.

[Zuriel]

Most of the time my first paragraph is a setup, and then by the second paragraph I'm into the conflict.

As a rule of thumb most stories start out with conflict, because you want to catch the reader’s attention by introducing your MC and what is happening as quickly as possible.  Then go back and fill in the details.

Every story is essentially about a problem/conflict/challenge and how the MC deals with it – either physically or internally - and then it needs to make the reader care, become emotionally involved.   And the sooner all this happens, the better.

One exception I've seen is where you're building a completely new and alien world and may want to describe it first...and this is ok, too.  Just depends on your story, really.

[OZ]

Yes. Some writers like to take some time to set the atomosphere before the story starts. For some reason I keep thinking about the Belgariad that spends the first few chapters talking about the farm and introducing characters. If the story is a quest, for instance, some time might be spent making the reader understand where the quest starts in order to provide greater contrast with where it ends up. It is easy to give too much information or not enough. Although you'll never make everyone happy, a good author develops a deft touch in providing enough to get the idea across without so much that the reader gets bored because nothing is going on. Even then it is often best to introduce some minor conflict just to keep things interesting.

[the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh]

Just curious...does everyone else start stories with conflict?

Not at all.  I find conflict tends to happen, but I usually start a story with either a key scene or a set of plot-central events, and work out from there.  (Characters usually come to me on a "what sort of person will make decision X in situation Y?" basis. I do not quite get how anyone can get a plot out of following a character around and seeing what they do, but lots of people get good novels that way.)

[the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh]

Most of the time my first paragraph is a setup, and then by the second paragraph I'm into the conflict.

I usually have what will appear to be a conflict in by the second chapter.  The central conflict, if there is only one, rarely shows up in the first 15,000 words.

As a rule of thumb most stories start out with conflict, because you want to catch the reader’s attention by introducing your MC and what is happening as quickly as possible.  Then go back and fill in the details.

Some stories want to start with hooks  ("It was the day my grandmother exploded... ") and others with nets.  Both forms are equally valid.

Every story is essentially about a problem/conflict/challenge and how the MC deals with it – either physically or internally

I'd really kind of dispute this one though, unless you stretch "conflict" and "essentially" far enough to be kind of meaningless. I can think of several successful genre stories that strike me as essentially about exploring a really cool idea or a really cool world, frex, and where the "main" character(s) is of secondary importance to that.

One exception I've seen is where you're building a completely new and alien world and may want to describe it first...and this is ok, too.  Just depends on your story, really.

But it's so much more fun a challenge to imply it.  (The difference, as Dave Langford once said, between three paragraphs of description of how the Gene Wars led to everyone being barcoded, and one line of your viewpoint character standing in line in a supermarket worrying about how many noses the barcode scanner's already been up today.)

[OZ]

I usually have what will appear to be a conflict in by the second chapter.  The central conflict, if there is only one, rarely shows up in the first 15,000 words.

This is what I meant as well. You don't have to introduce the main conflict right away. If you don't though it is probably helpful to introduce some other conflict like a hobbit being forced to provide provisions for a house full of visitors.

When it comes to writing, I have always found that there are no hard and fast rules. Some come close to being absolute by which I mean that there are few authors that have the skill to circumvent them but almost any rule that you hear  there is someone out there that has broken it and still produced a good book. If there isn't anyone that has successfully broken it yet, someone probably will. As long as the rules don't suffocate you though, most of them are probably good for a new writer that has not found his or her voice yet.

[LDWriter2]

I zipped by and came to a screeching halt when I saw this thread.

Personally I think of conflict as all the above. Almost everything that was mentioned in the various posts.


As to when conflict should start--depends on genre. Someone right before me basically said that rules are not hard and fast. I'm learning that. It's almost a case of they are and they aren't.

Many writers begin their novels with a long intro of the hero and the situation. One or two times the conflict is almost a surprise when it happens. Kinda like "I'm a rogue and I operate china shop--I sell only the best with a few trashy things thrown in for those who like that type of thing and don't have much money. My shop is in Atlantis-yes the sunken country it gets kinda wet at times down there. But I learned two centuries ago how to hold my breath for eight hours a day. Of course the soggy ghosts aren't very reliable customers but when they do pay its with 1,000 year old gold coins.  I live on the top floor of that hotel in the Middle East that looks like a sailing boat. I did the wonder a favor while he was building it so even though he won't admit to it I get to stay there rent free. He goes on and on and paged three, "that day I didn't have time to say hi to my favorite camel driver or Vegetable seller or anyone else on the Arab street. I was running very fast. You see a friend in Mu decided he didn't like me and is trying to kill me."

"fated' by Benedict Jacka is one of the newer ones that do that.

But other novels start with a sword fight as someone who at that moment picked up a sword he happened to discover in his big wheeled trash container. It was still covered with apple peels, rotten meat and coffee grounds but those two short guys with the strange Barbarian armor ran up to him and swung their triple bladed huge short handled Axes, Both spoke celtic with Germain accents who had voices like Curly from the three Stooges.


So in other words do it the way you want,

Oh a side note: An opening is the first 13 lines. You have that many to catch a reader, some say the first two.

Oh another Side note: notice I said "soggy ghosts". It was too close to the first wet to use that word again.   

[arianne]

It's beginning to sound to me as though conflict is what prevents the beginning from getting to the end...? For example, beginning: Frodo has an evil ring. End: destroy the ring! Everything in between: conflict! (Because if it was simply a matter of dropping the ring into the dustbin, there would be no need to write LOTR)

Does that sound right?

I had this sort of mental mixup where I thought conflict had to be related to fighting in some fashion, where one person does one thing and another person pushes back.

[OZ]

Your definition works for me. I suppose it could be fine tuned a bit but I think you have it. The only other thing to remember is that getting the ring into the volcano may be the major conflict in the story but there can be (and usually are) others as well. A common one is the romance that appears in many stories. It may not be essential to the central conflict but whether or not the main character gets the one that he or she is in love with often provides a secondary conflict in the story. I used this because it is so common but there are of course many others that can take place. I had a teacher once who taught that the true difference between a novel and a short story is not mere length but the fact that a novel should include in its length secondary (and tertiary, etc.) plot lines and thus secondary conflicts.