On archetypes and story arcs

On the night of Monday October 13th I attended a seminar presented by Dr. Ian Irvine (the academic, writer and poet from Bendigo, not the fantasy writer and marine scientist from Sydney) which focused on story archetypes - plot structure, characters, et cetera - with reference to The Writer's Journey: Mythic Structure for Writers by Christopher Vogler.

According to Vogler, a typical narrative structure breaks down into a series of "story beats", or sections in which a turning point takes place:
(1) Ordinary World/"Cage" - a challenge the main protagonist faces, a "cage" to be broken out of or an upset in the equilibrium which must be corrected;
(2) Call to Adventure/Herald - the protagonist is called to action, change is coming;
(3) Refusal of Call - the main protagonist is reluctant, feels like he is not up to the challenge, so he decides to stay with the status quo as long as possible, "not me";
(4) Meeting the Mentor - the character who entices the protagonist on to action, advises how to go about it;
(5) Threshold - test ("are you up to it?"), crossing into the "Extraordinary World", the adventure is beginning in earnest now; motivation may even change;
(6) Tests, Allies, Enemies - tests, meeting or gathering of allies, identification/explanation of the Enemy/main antagonist;
(7) Approach - the point of no return;
(8) Ordeal - the moment right where despair and defeat loom, the whole journey seems dead, or the Lair of the Monster;
(9) Reward - externalisation of what the main protagonist has learned;
(10) Road Back/Journey Home;
(11) Resurrection;
(12) Return Elixir.
(Somewhere in amongst the last few points is the ultimate victory or otherwise, often the dramatic catharsis that provides the healing mechanism, the restoration of the equilibrium).

A typical narrative contains several archetypes, such as the protagonist (the main character, usually the "good guy" or hero/heroine, but not necessarily good or bad), one or more allies (usually but not necessarily friends, they just happen to be on the same side), the antagonist (usually the "bad guy" or villian; not necessarily good or bad, but is by definition working in opposition to the protagonist) and the femme fatale/homme fatale (whose motivation is to distract the main protagonist from the objective, if not destroy him/her, typically with a sexual element). Other archetypes mentioned were the herald (the one who declares a change is coming), the trickster (credited as representing the road to the unconscious, though often also representing humour) and the shapeshifter (whose defining characteristic is transformation or metamorphosis) and any of these three archetypes can be interchangable or one and the same. The love interest is also a frequently occurring character that wasn't mentioned, though this character may be either an ally, a femme/homme fatale or any of the other archetypes.

These archetypes were traced back to the gods from various polytheistic pantheons, particularly the Greco-Roman tradition, though also referencing the Nordic and even Sumerian ones. Of course, these gods provide us a colourful variety of characters, good, bad and otherwise, each with their own quirks and traits. God as we know Him in the monotheistic, Judeo-Christian tradition is loving and benevolent, occasionally vengeful but never without just cause, and He is the acme of authority, integrity, love and wisdom; He is perfect. The gods from the polytheistic traditions, on the other hand, tend to be far from perfect. Despite their superpowers and immortality they were flawed in one way or another and very human, therefore perhaps a little more relatable.  The Norse god Odin (or Wotan as the Germans called him) was a wise and just ruler, but his Greek counterpart Zeus was petty and cruel and irresponsible (shagging anything with a pulse and leaving it to others to deal with the consequences), the "petty and cruel" part being applied to the Greek gods in general. Across the pantheons we see archetypes that come up time and again in various narratives throughout the centuries - the warrior/fighting man (Aries/Mars, Thor), the hedonist/party animal (Dionysius/Bacchus), the antagonist (Hades/Pluto, Seti, Loki), the lover (Aphrodite/Venus) and so on.

Ian went on to say that we each come into this world a tabula rasa or "blank slate", ready to be written upon. According to Jung and others we're pre-programmed to react to our environment, circumstances, et cetera in a certain way depending on the individual, thus each of us could be any one of the archetypes mentioned. We each have our own story arc, which starts with a negative polarity and ends with a positive.

Having been a student of Ian's I found him to be an animated and engaging speaker with an intimate knowledge of his subject matter and a broad scope of reference. As usual I came away feeling smarter and conscious of having learned something and broadening my mind. In addition this knowledge can only help with one's literary pursuits.

"Chat with Lansky" - a possible scene for my novel Breaking Point

Being in the re-write/editing stage for my novel Breaking Point, I have had some flashes of inspiration. However, the following I'm not sure whether to add, whether it adds to the story but felt it worth writing down and speculating on no less (and Meyer Lansky I chose because he was a big mucker in the New York Underworld in the 1940s):

Frank and Al walked into the club and saw him sitting at the table, a small man with a long nose, too much lip and not enough chin but one impressive head of thick black hair. They recognised him in an instant.
“Meyer Lansky,” Frank said as he and Al approached his table, producing their badges as they did. “Detectives Roebling and O’Malley, NYPD.”
“How can I help you, officers?” was the affable response.
“We’d like a word with you, Mr. Lansky,” Al added.
“Sure,” he smiled, and asked his companions to give them some space. “What is it you want to discuss?” Lansky asked when the detectives sat.
“You’ve no doubt heard about the shootings in Harlem recently,” Al said, “and we were wondering how much you know about it.”
“I know that Leo Killeen and his sons have one or two friends in Harlem, and four white guys and one schvartz catchin’ some lead in Harlem does seem fishy, but what’s it got to do with me?”
“Is Nathan Zimmerman a friend of yours?” Frank asked.
Lanksy’s face soured. “That skin-poppin’ schmuck? He’s nothin’ to do with me.”
“Wasn’t he associated with your good friend Charlie Luciano for a time?”
“He approached us both lookin’ for work, and we told him we had nothin’ for him. I sensed somethin’ about him was a little off, and Charlie said to me he was a hophead, so we want nothin’ to do with him. You can’t trust a guy like that.”
“So you wouldn’t have sent him after Leo Killeen or any of his family or associates?” Al asked.
“I regularly do business with Mr. Killeen, he’s a friend of mine, he’s a mensch, and so was Martin.”
“‘Mensch’ means he’s a stand-up guy, a good man, a man of honour and integrity and strength,” Al explained to Frank. “I have Jewish friends,” he then said to Lanksy.
“I was gonna say, I’m impressed by an Irishman who speaks at least some Yiddish.”
“Well, where my people come from, ‘mensch’ just means ‘man’,” Frank said.
“I thought you might be German, Detective Roebling.”
“Yeah, but don’t worry Meyer, I think Hitler is a complete arsehole too, and so does my son who’s fighting him.”
“And I hope your son comes home in one piece Detective Roebling.”
“Thanks Meyer.”
 “And Detective O’Malley, I wish your brother a speedy recovery.”
“Thanks.”
“And just so you know, Martin Killeen was a friend of mine, as is his father, and your brother, and if it was in me to have someone killed young Vincent would have gone unharmed, he was just a kid, and as you’ll attest, Detective O’Malley, you never give an Irishman just cause for revenge.”

What do you all think?

Thoughts on Characters

Characters - vital elements of pretty much any story.  Their thoughts, words and actions drive the plot along.  

For some writers - and indeed some readers (or viewers, in the context of a movie, play or television show) - a character can seem very real; a character may endear himself/herself to the audience to such a degree that there'll be an outpouring of grief at their demise, just as though they actually existed in real life, and I've heard a few writers say "I no longer have control over what he does - he has a mind of his own".  (Indeed some characters may be real-life people - all of them (at least theoretically) real, in the context of non-fiction).  For some other writers of fiction the protagonist tends to be the writer projected into a certain situation, plus whatever changes to the physical constitution, personal background, etc the writer considers appropriate.

How does one come up with characters?  What is the genesis of the characters in a given narrative?  In a conversation on this very topic I had with a friend a while ago, we were more or less of the accord that the protagonist tends to be based on the writer in some way (though naturally there are exceptions to the rule), and indeed all significant characters contain at least a piece of the writer in one way or another.  I can honestly say that, at least in the novels I'm working on, at least a couple of the heroes have been modeled on me (albeit with some changes) and in Breaking Point a few of the heroes and anti-heroes contain elements of me.  In my other project (tentatively titled "Memphis") the heroine Lucy was modeled on a friend of mine who had the overall look reminiscent of a flapper, but at the same time looking like the girl next door; however, Lucy no doubt contains at least one or two pieces of me, or at least my ideal woman.  I'll admit it, my villains tend to embody that which I despise or detest, which is why my chief antagonists are narcissists with a cruel streak, and also tend to be cowardly and treacherous, and know how to turn on the "poor me, nobody understands me" act.  I think I can safely assume that it's the case with a lot of writers (but I welcome intelligent, constructive feedback on the subject).  

Needless to say, the characters have to be believable, and the more engaging the better.  Indeed, to write a character that arouses strong feelings in the audience - a hero or heroine or even anti-hero that inspires love or a villain that inspires loathing - that would be something.  Even having the reader understand the protagonist and thus sympathising is a sign you've done something right.  As long as there's depth to the key characters, and believability, this is achievable - what world they're living in, where they came from, how would they act or react in this situation (and in comparison to how you or I might behave) and so forth, plus that something which the reader can identify with.

Further Thoughts on Sex in Literature

Something a friend said in response to my previous post got me thinking a little more about this topic.  She said that she would love to read scenes that are realistic, "awkwardness and randomly inappropriate humour and all".  I guess the best example I saw of this was in Ben Elton's This Other Eden, in the scene where Max Maximus is engaging in break-up sex with his soon-to-be-ex-wife.  Ben goes into detail, and I always got the impression that it is deliberately awkward and that neither party is all that into it (I'd have to wonder about anyone who would have found it erotic at any rate).  In this instance it works perfectly, because it is what it is: an awkward, half-hearted, obligatory shag between two people going through the motions.  And if that was what I was aiming for, then I probably would do something like this.  Otherwise, yeah, generally best left to the imagination, unless one is writing erotica, in which case the awkward moments and so forth would have to go (as more or less stated previously).

Thoughts on Sex in Literature

I guess since my teens this has been an interest of mine in one way or another and to a greater or lesser degree, or at least on and off.  Indeed, I have had some interesting conversations and heard some interesting and insightful opinions on the subject over the years, and never more so than in the last few months or so.  

And it's no coincidence that such discussion has followed the release of the notorious 50 Shades of Grey and its two sequels by E.L. James.  It's possible that even in my lifetime these books would have run afoul of the censors for their graphic and detailed if sterile descriptions of sex of a decidedly sado-masochistic nature, and in the misandric 1990s it would have gone down like a lead balloon.  (Though at least one of my classmates would have been on 50 Shades like a fat kid on a box of donuts had it been available circa 1996).  I personally have only taken in bits and pieces of it, but of all of the opinions and reviews I've read and heard not one of them has been positive, which kind of prevents me from rushing out to get my hot little hands on a copy.  Take out the BDSM and what we have is an account of an abusive relationship.  Plus, John Flaus made the observation that the woman who wrote it must be a narcissist because the sex scenes are just graphic descriptions with no emotional engagement.  The blurb described 50 Shades as romance/romantic, but if I've understood the romance genre correctly it's more interested in the emotional engagement, the feelings, than in the physical side and especially graphic details; in addition the genre tends to steer well away from sexual relations which may be considered paraphilic or transgressive or perverse, and condemns abusive relationships.  Also, it started life as Twilight fan fiction so what does that tell you?

What is coincidence is that I've recently read I, The Jury, Mickey Spillane's first novel to feature Mike Hammer.  It was indeed a rather racy book, especially for 1947, and between the violence, the nudity and the pretty obvious hints of sex it was pretty much guaranteed to upset the stuffed shirts and prudes. And yet remarkably he didn't go into graphic detail regarding the sex - though he couldn't have either because it would never have got past censorship, which was much tighter in those days - he just dropped very obvious hints and left it to the reader to figure out what was going on.

Personally I like the way Mr. Spillane did it - the obvious hints of what's about to happen, is happening and has happened, though leaving it to the reader's imagination, refraining from spilling every carnal detail even after he was allowed to do so - and I figure some things are best left to the reader's imagination.  For example, while Bryce Courtenay did a great job of writing a beautiful, cosmic love/sex scene between his hero and heroine in one of his books I don't know if I could do the same - how do I convey the idea of the hero and heroine coming together physically, emotionally and spiritually through revealing the physical goings-on without degrading or profaning it?  Alternatively, if the relationship between a given couple is toxic, and if sex between them is creepy and degrading I like to think the reader will get the idea without a graphic description and would prefer not to have their face rubbed in it.  And well, what one person finds erotic another person might not, not to mention that in real life the first time tends to be awkward, or at least has one or two hiccups which doesn't translate so well when trying to convey beautiful intimacy between two people who love each other, or even if (as a writer) you're not interested in that stuff, you just want to make the reader happy in the pants it kind of upsets the mood a little.  At this time I'm not interested in writing to get people hot and bothered.

The Story so far (working title "Memphis")...

I have made a fair degree of headway with my current project and (at least I trust) it's coming together quite nicely.  For the most part the plot's developing along the lines I initially envisioned - the clear-cut dichotomy of good and evil, the Fall in Act One followed by the Redemption in Act Two, plus all the other happenings which help flesh the whole thing out, and even a little subversion of some elements of the noir genre (e.g. the "femme fatale" who in this case isn't) while remaining true to others (the lost souls who populate these pages, particularly the main protagonists).  One deviation from the initial rough sketch is that Dorothy (Hank's wife) has turned out to not be fixated on materialism at all.  Far from it, she's a good Christian woman, indeed is almost a Christ-figure, her death playing a big part in the redemption of the sinners, the salvation of the lost souls (Hank and Lucy).  Otherwise, it's fleshing out as planned.

Words and Music

Music: the most popular facet of the arts, with the possible exception of cinema.  It is also potentially the most commercially viable, the most subjective and at times the most hotly contested.  It is also the most versatile, not only in terms of genre and sub-genre, arrangement, et cetera, but also in terms of context and application, be it as a soundtrack to a movie or television show, advertising jingle (okay, bad example!), or something to listen to during times of labour or recreation, even passion, or indeed while drawing, painting, sculpting or writing.

Naturally, personal tastes vary, ditto the personal significance for each person.  When his schedule allowed, my father liked to sketch, his inspiration fuelled by airs composed by the likes of Tchaikovsky and Vivaldi.  Some writers also swear by classical music, such as Isobelle Carmody and James Ellroy, the latter being a huge fan of Beethoven.  Stephen King, on the other hand, seems to be more eclectic (according to one account I read, he even listened to Eminem!).  Whether it's because classical music tends to be unfettered by words I'm not sure, but if it works, it works.

For me personally, it depends on where I'm at, but it's often as much about getting into the right headspace, the right mindset, feeding the inspiration.  

As much of my fiction has been set in mid-twentieth century America I've sought out music from that era to help immerse myself in that given time.   For example with my first novel Breaking Point I indulged in a fair bit of The Inkspots, Billie Holliday, Ella Fitzgerald, Frank Sinatra and whatever else people might have listened to in New York in 1943-44, while with my current project, which is set predominantly in the South in 1929-34 I've been getting right into a rich and broad pallet of pop, jazz and folk music (including blues and country) from the 1920s and early '30s including artists as diverse as Duke Ellington, Rudy Vallee, Josephine Baker and The Carter Family.  Again, it's part of immersing myself into the era I'm writing about, even picking out a good song to help flesh out and add colour to and even echo the context of a given scene (or even the entire narrative), getting myself into that headspace (though I doubt I'd do it if I didn't enjoy it).

Having said all that, I have written certain stories or even parts while listening to music which may have been totally anachronistic but helped put me in the right headspace.  For example, when writing the crucial murder scene in Breaking Point I was listening to The End by The Doors - a tad anachronistic I know but it fit because let's face it, it's a rather violent song therefore fitting given that I was writing a decidedly violent scene (though I had All Or Nothing At All by Frank Sinatra playing in that particular scene).  I've also gotten a fair bit of mileage out of Johnny Cash's Murder compilation while writing various crime shorts and even longer projects.  Anachronistic or not, if it feels appropriate and helps with the headspace or at least the inspiration it's completely appropriate.

So, to all of you writers and artists out there, what makes up the soundtrack to your creative pursuits?