I’m in Florida, recovering from the last of the launch parties (I guess I can have a launch month) and working my tail off to meet my deadline for Secret Society Girl two. The party was amazing and I’ll be posting about it as soon as I have some pictures, but now I wanted to discuss a blog post that was a long time in coming.
There’s a very popular book out that I didn’t much care for. People keep recommending it to me, but it wasn’t really my thing. I’m not alone in this. For every person I’ve heard of who absolutely adores the book, I’ve met others who weren’t such big fans. This, of course, is pretty standard. Tastes vary. But in every conversation I’ve had where this book comes up, and I point out to the fan what I perceived to be its flaws, they don’t disagree with me. They just love it anyway. This has resulted in an intense analysis of what is really my problem with the book. In a case such as this, I wonder if it has something to do with the popularity? Is it sour grapes? No.
I think I’ve finally hit upon it. This book, like mine, has a core theme of “normal person caught up in an extraordinary situation.” I love these books. I love the superhero-type books too, but let’s leave that out of this for a moment. In these types of books, the normal person has two options: they can either let shit happen to them, or they can go out and do shit.
This book that I don’t care for is of the “let shit happen to them” variety. It’s a glorified tour through the extraordinary situation as seen through the eyes of the protagonist.
Once I started thinking of it in this manner I was able to understand what I didn’t like about a lot of classic stories. For instance, I was never all into Alice in Wonderland. Sure, I love all the crazy creatures, but I wasn’t a huge fan of Alice herself. Compare that to, say, Dorothy, who also found herself in a strange and wonderful world, but instead of being led about by the nose, actually went on a little quest.
My favorite Harry Potter book to date is the third one, Prisoner of Azkaban. In this book, Harry is very proactive. He makes all the choices that lead him to his climax, and when he messes up, he goes back in time and makes them again. In Chamber of Secrets, which was my least favorite until we hit number 5, at which point, all bets are off, you have a “hero” who basically stands in a room and waits for Faulkes (who might as well have been renamed Deus-ex-machina) to do everything for him.
I’ve been thinking a lot about point of view since I heard Emily Giffin speak at the RWA Conference. She is living proof about how important it is to pick the right character through which to tell your story. This is not a question of first person or third person. This is a question of what makes your protagonist someone interesting enough to put in this situation.
Agency is a very important concept in fiction. it comes from the Latin word “ago” which means “to do.” Story is what happens when your characters do things. Not when they watch things happen. When they do things. Plot happens because of a choice a character makes in a given situation.
When you have a very normal character in a very extraordinary situation, there is a strong temptation to just let things happen to her. Let her be swept along in the tide of all the extraordinary things. Let the extraordinary people around her start making her decisions for her. I guess it works, but for my money, the really unforgettable stories are when the ordinary person overcomes these forces and makes decisions for herself. Maybe they’re the wrong decision, but at least they’re decisions.
I’m currently rewriting a scene in SSG2 because the original formulation of the scene did not give Amy, my heroine, enough agency. She was mostly watching as others around her acted. My book is filled with strong, pro-active people. I don’t want them disenfranchised. But my heroine is my heroine for a reason. They can do things, but not to the extent that it will beggar my heroine of agency. If it does, she becomes a tourist in her own story.
Can you write the tourist stories? You bet, and some people will probably love them. But that’s not what I’m here to do.
24 Comments
August 13, 2006 at 2:57 pm
You’re right that what makes Amy Haskel such an appealing heroine is that she gets out there and mixes it up. She’s willing to make big mistakes. That’s why heroines like her serve as such nice alter egos for us–we can watch them take that step we might not, and see how it plays out.
August 13, 2006 at 3:58 pm
Very good point, Diana. Often I do let the plot sweep away the heroine. In fact, I didn’t even realize it until one of my editors told me to make my heroine more “pro-active”. You’ve reminded me again, thanks. =D
August 13, 2006 at 7:53 pm
*sigh*
sometimes it takes a cattle prod to remind the characters to take charge instead of simply reacting to the plot.
oh wait..maybe it’s me who needs the cattle prod.
no…I liked the first way better. Less painful for me *g*
Good post. Great reminder.
August 13, 2006 at 7:55 pm
I realized a long time ago that I don’t usually enjoy stories that happen TO somebody. I like to see the protagonist protagging!
August 13, 2006 at 9:16 pm
Hmmm…something that should have been a no-brainer for me that I never thought about.
Thanks!
August 13, 2006 at 11:31 pm
Okay, D. I know the book of which you speak. We spoke about it in ATL. And, you are totally right.
Agency is the element that keeps people engaged with the heroine. Her choices *matter* and propel the action of the story. Good analysis of a difficult to explain writing issue. We should all keep this is mind as we craft our heroine and scenes.
To wit: you smarty pants!! How could we not love you?
August 14, 2006 at 12:10 am
Diana, I’ve never quite thought about this topic like this…brava. You’re dead on. I now realize why a certain sequel book by a certain NYTimes bestselling author didn’t work for me when her first book did. The first book had a proactive heroine…the second one, not so much.
I know that I write proactive characters, but every so often a scene does steal them away that needs to be rewritten. Or whole books, as the case may be.
Excellent post!
August 14, 2006 at 12:54 am
Oh, Diana, excellent post!!!!
August 14, 2006 at 1:34 am
Gosh, I hadn’t thought of this. But now you say it, it seems so obvious.
Great insight. I’ll be using it in my current ms.
August 14, 2006 at 2:44 am
Wonderful insight and — with Amy as an example — I’ll definitely remember the importance of “agency.”
August 14, 2006 at 3:59 am
Thank you Diana for that post! It was very insightful! Here’s to hoping you have a speedy recover from all those parties!!!!:)
August 14, 2006 at 2:31 pm
Your post came at precisely the right time for me. I appreciate your insights!
August 14, 2006 at 3:10 pm
Definitely makes me think about why I do or don’t like certain heroines, as well as take a thoughtful look at my own work. I once had a contest judge call one of my heroines “an unappealing doormat.” So now I do my best to avoid that.
August 14, 2006 at 3:19 pm
Diana:
You’re killing me with not revealing what book it is!
Very interesting point. I struggle with this in my book because there is purposely a change as the book progresses–at the beginning the heroine is young and naive, and lets things happen to her, but by the end she completely takes control of her own life and own decisions. The events affect her so much that she has to change to meet them or be swamped.
This is hard because when agents read the first 30 pages, they only see the young/naive part. {SIGH}
August 14, 2006 at 4:09 pm
I think your post pretty much summed up why I didn’t enjoy The Nanny Diaries. I’m quite envious of you; whenever I analyze why I liked a book or not, seldom can I put it into words that makes any sort of sense.
Thank you for not making Amy a tourist.
And to note, I have heard from more friends who have now read SSG and really enjoyed it! Thought you might like to know it keeps getting serious props from readers.
August 14, 2006 at 4:40 pm
Great post Diana. And I want to know what the book is… e-mail me
August 14, 2006 at 5:01 pm
Oh please… Don’t we all want to know that book? LOL
August 14, 2006 at 5:19 pm
No, we’re not playing that game here. i just wanted to discuss Current Issues in Diana’s Craft Journey, not play Trash the Writer. There’s enough of that on Amazon to satisfy anyone’s needs.
August 14, 2006 at 5:30 pm
Thanks for elucidating for me why I never ‘got’ Alice in Wonderland either. I also gobbled up Wizard of Oz… your analysis probably holds true for Anne of Green Gables and why she’s such an enduring YA favorite. What little girl *doesn’t* want to stand up to the class bully (who turns out to be quite yummy once properly put in his place by said heroine…)
August 14, 2006 at 5:39 pm
Susan, I hear you on the trouble with your book…I once started a book that way and frankly, I had to go back and rewrite the entire beginning so that she was smarter and more capable, even if she was still young and a little naive. I had to identify with her and to do that, I had to give her more power.
Nowadays, I won’t read a book where the heroine starts off young and naive and then goes through growth UNLESS the author shows me — UP FRONT — that she is capable and strong in at least one area of her life. If I don’t have that, she (the heroine) isn’t worth my time and I won’t read the book.
I know that I’m in a minority…if everyone thought that way, chick-lit would never have taken off. But it’s funny because I’ve always gravitated toward chick-lit with older heroines, probably for this very reason.
I didn’t read THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA, but I saw the movie. Andy was naive and young, but she was also smart and strong and determined. If I read the book, I bet those qualities would have hooked me in.
August 14, 2006 at 8:57 pm
I just wanted to say THANK YOU, you’ve given me a major AHA moment about the current wip
August 14, 2006 at 9:09 pm
Julie:
[Nowadays, I won't read a book where the heroine starts off young and naive and then goes through growth UNLESS the author shows me -- UP FRONT -- that she is capable and strong in at least one area of her life.]
AHA! That’s an excellent point. I’ve been thinking I have to tackle the first 30 pages again anyway–so perhaps I’ll see if I can do this better. {s}
August 14, 2006 at 9:26 pm
Glad I could help. Voice of experience. I often think we don’t learn so much by writing as by REwriting. (So long as we don’t rewrite forever!)
September 9, 2006 at 4:41 am
Holy crap. THAT’S what’s been bothering me so much about my own story. My character is a tourist. This is fantastic, because now that I have the problem all neatly laid out for me, I know what to do to fix it. You’re the best!
And my most/least fav Harry Potter books are the same as yours too. Cool.