Overthinkings

Let me overthink this through…

I’ve never met an idea I couldn’t overthink. Thank my glorious neuro-spicy brain, generational anxiety, or the well developed imagination that keeps me churning out thoughts day and night. Welcome to a peek inside my head.

Overthinkings: Flooding the Plot with Chekov

The first time I watched Bullet Train I was blown away, not so much by the plot—it’s fine—but by the imagery. Every scene is filled with oddities that individually are so distinct that they must have meaning to the plot, right? Some do. The wild part is that many are just there to be red herrings or background art. 

It reminds me of when the rapper Eminem marched hundreds of bleached blond doppelgängers into an auditorium while singing The Real Slim Shady. There were so many possibilities, where was he going to pop up? 

I am calling this technique Flooding the Plot with Chekov. (Remember his gun rule?) Recently I watched the tv show, Daybreak, and they used the same level of imagery to muddle the predictability. While the show was far from narratively perfect, episode after episode I was pleasantly surprised by connections that had been set up and disguised very successfully. 

All this is well and good for visual mediums, but can we as narrative authors pull off this level of Flooding? 

I don’t know. 

On paper we are limited to words and descriptions. When someone writes As Alice wandered by the pond a yellow goldfish glinted in the sunlight that danced over the surface of the water. There is a good chance that goldfish is important, especially if a few chapters later we see it again. “Oh no,” Alice cried to the yellow goldfish. “If only Gerald hadn’t been drowned!” 

Generally, something should show up three times if it is important to the plot: once to set existence, another to remind the readers that it exists, and then at the climactic moment. The yellow goldfish smiled to himself and released a few bubbles toward the surface. Alice stared, mesmerized, and began lowering herself into the pond, soon to be another of his victims. 

Ideally there are other suspects, or plausible reasons for the spate of drownings that we have seeded as well, but in the end the reader should throw up their hands and realize, Of course it was the psychotic goldfish!

The problem with Flooding on paper is that good Flooding is done in the background; on paper, there isn’t a lot of background. Setting descriptions get bogged down by excessive details, and dialogue can feel convoluted and bulky if it strays off topic. 

“Oh Ferdinand, your eyes are like chocolate chips in a melting cookie. It’s so special that you remembered my birthday today, especially as that very distracting parade is going by with a man in a bunny suit. Your lips are so soft Ferdi; are you using a new variety of chapstick?”

Given the right character—especially one who is scatter brained or distractible—this kind of dialogue could work? 

Yeah, of course I can come along to the party. Wow, look over there at the guy in the bunny suit, you don’t see that every day. Get me a blue raspberry slushy on your way over would you? And a couple corndogs? Oh did I tell you my sister got out of prison yesterday? I sure hate her boyfriend, yeah, he’s planning on moving in to the garage…”

Another tactic is to give the character a very active internal dialogue. 

“Sure,” I agree, my mind racing with thoughts of anything but the upcoming party. Dear gods! Why are Ferdinand’s lips so slimy? Is that a disease? Has he been eating blue raspberry slushies or is he hypothermic? Huh, is that a man in a bunny suit? I guess Easter is coming up. 

The biggest hiccup with Flooding is that the human brain likes patterns. We know as readers that if something feels specific on the page that it is likely to be important at some point. So if you mention something over and over and then in the end it isn’t relevant to the plot, it makes the story feel unfinished, or like there are bits of plot dangling around like slobber off a bulldog. 

So will Flooding work on the page? I still don’t know, but I hope you’ll give it a try this week. Write a scene with lots of specific details then skip ahead in the story and write the climactic scene. See how you feel about it. Happy Writing!

6 hours later…Well. I just finished my first book for my Friend Recommendation Summer Reading Series and was it ever timely! Dungeon Crawler Carl by Matt Dinniman. It is about a guy and his ex-girlfriend’s cat as they make their way through the first part of a D and D style dungeon as part of an intergalactic reality tv show. This book masterfully Floods the plot with so many potentially important items and characters—and utilizes them in interesting ways—that I read the book cover to cover and was delightfully surprised time and time again.

Evidently the answer is yes. 

Look for my review on Dungeon Crawler Carl next week!

Character Psychologist: ACEs

In my workshops I always tell people that characters’ flaws should be rooted in backstory. There is a scientific reason for this. Childhood experiences shape a person down to a cellular level. Adverse Childhood Experiences can cause life long physical and emotional health issues. 

In her book the deepest well: Healing the Long-Term Effects of Childhood Adversity, Nadine Burke Harris, M.D. lays out her research on the topic of ACEs, and how to heal from them. Now, if you are writing a character with a flaw stemming from childhood trauma you don’t want them totally healed—there wouldn’t be much of a story in that—but knowing where the trauma stems from and how to fix it over the character’s arc is a handy tool to have in your writing belt.

So what are ACEs?

Adverse Childhood Experiences don’t fit neatly on a list, but some of the common ones are

  • Experiencing violence, abuse, or neglect.
  • Witnessing violence in the home or community.
  • Having a family member attempt or die by suicide
  • substance use problems in the home
  • Mental Health problems in the home
  • Instability due to parental situation
  • Instability to household members being in jail

I pulled this list off the CDC website ( https://www.cdc.gov/aces/about/index.html ) and they go into far more detail about ACEs than I will—from a medical perspective. 

While experiencing a single ACE isn’t a guarantee to turn someone into a career criminal, an accumulation of traumas puts the child at risk for mental and physical issues later in life; higher risks of continued victimization in relationships; and significantly higher risks of illegal behavior resulting in legal interventions. Essentially, ACEs are a determinant of future bad behavior: not all traumatized people become criminals, but all criminals are traumatized people. 

And what do we do with ACEs now that we know what they are?

First and foremost, write them into your characters. Not all antagonists need to be orphans or have belt marks on their backs, but something caused them to make their choices. 

One of my favorite antagonists in my own writing is based off the historical figure Ann Toft. Ann happens to be my 10th great grandmother and was the first female business mogul in the American colonies, way back in the 1670’s. She came over as an indentured servant, struck up with a married scoundrel who build her a plantation, gave her three illegitimate daughters, and helped her become the second largest landholder in Virginia colony at the time. 

Ann owned her own ships as well as another plantation in Jamaica. She was a slave holder, but gained most of her land through headrights—or the importation of more indentured servants—who she then made work for her (even extending the service of those who got pregnant). Soon after her much older paramour died she quickly married a merchant, had a son, and then is dead in her early 40’s. 

When turning Ann into a character in my books it was easy enough to pick out some ACEs in which to root her flaws. 

  • By 15 she had left her home in England and come to the colonies, presumably alone.
  • By 17 she is the mistress of a wealthy and important man several decades older.

Well off people don’t become indentured servants. In the mid to late seventeenth century a term of indentured servitude was generally seven years, and then you left with some cash and a set of clothes on your back. Seven years paid your way across the ocean. Now Ann was often referred to as “the most beautiful woman in the colonies” which likely didn’t make her life easier before she fell under the protection of Edmund Scarborough. 

There are few historical records of the details of Ann’s life outside of several court proceedings and ownership documents, largely because most historians didn’t know what to do with the concept of a rich, independent, mistress of one of the founders of Virginia. It wasn’t until the last forty years or so that anyone credits her as Scarborough’s mistress at all, even though they shared three daughters with his last name, and he built Gargotha—her Virginia plantation—then gifted it to her. 

So at fifteen (as closely as I can figure) Ann is either court ordered or voluntarily transported to the colonies, and within two years is pregnant and living the high life—sort of. Her benefactor was a violent and volatile man to those around him, who ignored any sense of propriety at the time, AND regularly got into legal trouble with ultimately no consequences because his brother was aid to the King back in England. 

This tells us something else about Ann: she was a survivor. Not only that, she managed to thrive—off the backs of others—in an almost impossible situation.  This isn’t uncommon with people who have experienced ACEs. They learn to observe and pivot. They read people. 

In my books, Ann is charismatic and makes everyone feel special; she is an astute business woman who uses her money to invest far into the future; she marries as it is convenient to further her plans. Ann also has a fear of losing her beauty because it is the one thing she feels that keeps her safe. Security is her ultimate desire because a lack of financial and familial support led to her first trauma. 

All of this makes Ann a very easy character to write. Her moral compass, her decisions, her “line” all stem from the question long term, will this contribute to my security? She backstabs, wheels and deals, and builds bridges as rapidly as she burns them but because her actions are rooted in a constant there isn’t that chaotic feeling that can sometimes appear in antagonists’ story lines. 

May is mystery month, and every mystery needs to have a perp. Try creating that character with some easily pinpointed ACEs. They may or may not show up on the page—it depends on how sympathetic you want your audience to feel for the antagonist—but you knowing will create a nice round foe for your detective. 

Happy Writing this week! Check out Nadine Burke Harris for some great info on ACEs and how to heal. And thank you to Pepper for the book recommendation! And finally, a picture of Moss at his violin recital.

Overthinkings: Characters of Mystery

In the first of our May Mystery posts we discussed plotting out our story. Today we are delving into building our characters. What sets apart a character in a mystery from that in say a romance or thriller? 

Historically, our protagonists have been imbued with curiosity and a love of puzzles. They are driven to find explanation and order in chaos. They are highly intelligent—unless a combination of luck and incompetence are played for satire or comedy—and often all of these attributes combined make relationships difficult. 

Most mysteries are plot centric, with the character arc happening as a result of the plot rather than the character arc being the plot. In the 1990 classic Caroline B. Cooney novel, The Face on the Milk Carton, protagonist Janie must discover the truth about her past. Through her discoveries (spoiler alert: she was kidnapped and grew up with parents not her own) Janie stops being  the spoiled girl she is in the beginning of the novel. Much of the plot revolves around Janie uncovering the clues that lead her to making a hotline call at the end of the book—think 80% uncovering clues, 20% having feelings and reactions about those clues. 

In non-teen fiction mysteries the 20-40% of B plot/character personal life and development often revolves around relationships and how the protagonist is bad at them. A character doesn’t have to have dysfunctional relationships—I love a romantic ally—but remember they can’t be “good” at everything. In real life the same qualities that make us strong in one area make us weak in another. I have nearly perfect pitch which makes me fabulous in a choir, but the same gift makes me hypersensitive to noises like crunching tortilla chips—one of my husband’s favorite snacks.

Gail Bowen has some wonderful exercises for building characters in her book Sleuth, and I won’t cheat you out of discovering those for yourself, but I will share this quote “Let your reader come to know your characters the same way we come to know people in our lives: by their words, by their actions and reactions, by what they say and what others say about them.”(75)

Our characters should be round enough to be compelling to those they come in contact with, on and off the page. 

Bowen goes on to suggest to give your protagonist an ally or sidekick. I don’t know of many detectives who don’t have support team. Traditionally, the sidekick sees the flaws of the protagonist but loves them anyway. I think I prefer things to be a tad more complex. It is too easy to have a sidekick that feels flat because they lack goals or desires of their own. 

Make sure that your Watson is benefitting from following around Holmes. Maybe they have an attachment disorder, maybe they are getting paid, maybe it is fame or notoriety they seek. Blind love or unflagging adoration is bad for tension; if a sidekick is benefitting from the situation it means there is a cost-benefit analysis happening. As the protagonist makes life more difficult, there is a potential for them to lose their sidekick. That potential for loss is what may (or may not) finally motivate the protagonist to change. 

And finally, we have our antagonist. 

Antagonists should mirror the protagonist. A good antagonist brings out the worst in the protagonist and shows what a few different choices might lead to. 

And that’s what I’ve got for you today. It’s been a long week at the end of a long month but let’s keep on writing! Again, get a copy of Sleuth; it is well worth the read. 

Something went wrong. Please refresh the page and/or try again.