Tuesday, February 1

Decisions, Decisions: Character Choices That Matter

By Janice Hardy, @Janice_Hardy

Making a decision is one of the most important things your characters will ever do. Readers turn the page to see what happens next, and decisions are all about the "next." But there's a catch.

They have to care about the outcome of that choice.

Should I have the eggs or the cereal? is a choice, but no one is going to stay up late to see how that turns out. Because the other half of choosing is the fear that you're making the wrong choice.

Now, here's where it gets tricky.

That fear is the reader's fear, not so much the character's. Sure, the character will have their own concerns, but what makes that choice matter is how the reader feels about it. If they care about the outcome of that choice, that choice has stakes for them as well as the character. If they don't care, no matter how important that choice is to the character, it won't have any stakes. This is why those exciting action situations where the protag's life is in danger often fall flat. You know the protag isn't going to die. They might be scared out of their wits, but you know they'll be fine. Nothing they do then matters because there's no consequence to those actions.


Friday's post sparked a question about stakes. I said a man choosing between two great women wasn't real stakes. The reader asked if the man cared about those women, and one of them would get hurt, and he might wonder if he made the right choice, wasn't that something at stake? Did both choices have to have to be bad?

This is a question worth delving into more, especially since romance plots of this type are critical to so many stories of all genres.

If that choice is a core conflict choice, then it should have major consequences to it. If the entire book is about that choice, there has to be high stakes. If the choice isn't that important to the overall story, then no, the stakes don't have to be that high and the outcome can have lesser consequences. (But honestly, if the outcome doesn't matter, why have it in there in the first place?)

It's not that both choices have to be bad. Both choices should have a consequence that matters on a larger scale. If the choice between those two women (or two anything of this type of choice) has no consequence aside from hurting someone's feelings, the stakes aren't high enough to carry a whole story. Because that isn't a choice readers are likely going to care about without something else going on in the story to carry the book.

One of the big romance choices right now is The Hunger Games Katniss vs Peeta or Gale. Readers were rabid to know who she was going to pick. By all accounts, this is exactly the "bad example" situation I said not to do, right? Two great guys, one girl having to choose.

But step back.

If the book had started with Katniss in a love triangle with those two boys, would you even care? I doubt it, because there are no stakes in choosing one or the other. It's the conflicts her relationships with those boys created that made you care about her choice. It's not just hurting Peeta's feelings, it's hurting those feelings after manipulating him and faking a romance to stay alive. How he reacts to that choice has the potential to affect a much larger problem in the book. Every choice Katniss made had ramifications. The book was more than just "which boy does she choose?"

On its own, a choice between two good things with no consequences for making that choice is probably not going to hold your reader's interest. As a subplot, or in conjunction with an internal conflict, it can be an effective choice and provide higher stakes. But only if it has the potential to cause trouble for your protagonist. And this is the key.

If hurting one of those women was all the consequence the protag had to worry about, so what? Harsh as that sounds, after some grieving she'll go on with her life and find a much better guy than this jerk (grin) As for the man, nothing bad is going to happen to him for breaking her heart. It's not going to hurt him in the long run, even if he does feel bad about it for a while.

If, however, the woman was so upset she killed herself, that's a pretty serious consequence to his actions that he'll have to carry around the rest of this life. If she decided to make his life miserable in revenge, that would cause him trouble. If the woman he dumped was his new boss's sister, he might be in a world of hurt at that new job. It doesn't even have to be that overt. It can have more subtle ramifications for the protag. It can cause emotional troubles, it can make him so guilt-ridden it keeps him up nights and causes a ripple effect.

Consequences create high stakes. Whatever the choice, it should have the power to adversely affect your protag in some way, even if that problem is down the road some. That consequence might not even happen, but the potential for it should be there.

From a purely plotting standpoint, choices that don't cause trouble are wasted opportunities. The whole point of a book is to show someone overcoming adversity to win. If there's nothing to overcome, there's no point in the winning. Just look how many fans leave a sporting event before the end when it's clear what the outcome is going to be. There's nothing left to lose, so seeing the win doesn't matter.

19 comments:

  1. I'd agree entirely. Fiction comes in many forms, and while the type we're talking about here we expect to be easy-reading, a kind of escapism, it does still need the frisson of potential failure to hold the attention.

    The subject makes me think of roleplaying, in which a player may well not want a character to die, but needs to believe they might to bring the game alive.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Great post, Janice. I especially like the way you ended it with the sports analogy! Excellent points, all of them.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Porky: Totally. If you don;t feel you're gong to die at any moment the game isn't as much fun.

    Juliette: Thanks :)

    ReplyDelete
  4. This was an excellent explanation! It makes complete sense to me. Thank you so very much for posting this.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Ah, that makes a lot of sense. And you're right, if the choice isn't going to have any ramifications, why is it there? I'll have to use that as a choice-test.

    ReplyDelete
  6. That is such a good way of looking at it. Thanks a lot for putting it in this perspective.

    :-)

    ReplyDelete
  7. I swear, the more I read your posts about stakes, the more I 'get it'. You'll make a writer out of me yet.

    And I second Chicory, asking whether the choices a character makes has (negative) ramifications is a good stakes litmus test.
    - Sophia.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Deborah: Most welcome :)

    Elizabeth: Happy it helped

    Chicory: It's a good test for almost everything in a novel, really. What does it do by being there?

    Misha: Anytime ;)

    Sophia: Good to hear! Nice to know the blog is helpful.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Re: love triangles in particular, though I won't call anything out by name, this sort of explains why one romance fell flat to me. (Probably not the one you're thinking of!) When it was introduced, the female protag said she loved one boy, but was being forced together with another, and... there was never any real stakes attached to either choice, and as readers we never saw much of why she wanted one and not the other. So yeah, totally flat. (In fairness, it also wasn't the main plot of the book, but that can also be said of the Hunger Games, too, and you point out how well that was crafted!)

    ReplyDelete
  10. I very much agree about not worry about the protagonist dying. I see it done so much and I think, really? There's still half a season left!

    Awesome blog! Thank you so much!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Another post I'm going to have to store away for later use. Excellent.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Becky: I have a bit of a love triangle planned for the next book, and I've been putting a lot of thought into how to make it interesting. Ideally, I want readers to flip back and forth over which is the better choice same as my protag :)

    Mallory: That's one of my TV pet peeves. That's one of the things I like about Gray's Anatomy. They kill off and get rid of characters just enough that you worry when a favorite is in trouble.

    Paul: Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  13. You're so quotable: choices that don't cause trouble are wasted opportunities.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Thanks! I'm always taping "things to remember" type quotes on my monitor so I guess I've started thinking in those terms now.

    ReplyDelete
  15. First of all I want to just say that I stumbled across one of your posts when searching for how to choose a title. That was four hours ago, but I'm still here because the little links to other articles that you sprinkle everywhere are too tempting to resist! So I may never leave my desk again or write another word but you know. (The hardest part is the posts all get me so fired up about writing, but part of me would still rather click that next intriguing link, and that part wins!)

    Anyway, I'm wondering if anyone can help me on this. I'm writing a historical fiction right now, and one of the sub-plots is sort of a love triangle I guess you would call it, except that Miles, my protagonist, is only in love with Honora (better known as Honey May) and is oblivious to the fact that Bridie (short for Bridget, and my other viewpoint character) loves him, despite how many times she helps pull him out of the constant messes he gets himself into. In fact, he pretty much doesn't even think of her as a girl, just a buddy. So for him there isn't a choice to be made, really. But there are stakes because he is going to end up really, really hurting Bridie later on (as usual, not even realising that his actions affect others) and since he relies on her so much, you can see where there would be ramifications.

    My problem is, I don't think Bridie would stop helping him or plot revenge or whatever. She loves him so much that in many ways she is content to just be his friend and help him as much as she can. I know that's bad for the story, but it's who she is.

    What should be done, or should something be done? Again, this is a subplot, and the bit where he actually crushes her heart to pieces is near the end of the book, where it's starting to dawn on him that his actions (surprise, surprise!) have an effect on people's feelings. Any advice would be good. (Sorry if this was all confusing, trouble is I hardly know what exactly it is that I'm asking.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Welcome! Good to have you :) Glad you've found so much helpful info.

      If that's how Birdie would act, let her act that way. It's her choice to love him even if he never acknowledges it, and she's suffer the consequences of that (and "suffer" can be many things). If crushing her helps him grow as a character, then that's her role. Maybe her unconditional love is what finally helps him, and the sad thing is he still crushes her, even as he learns from her.

      He might not have a choice to make regarding her, but he'll have other choices to make about her. Such as he'll chose to act in a way that hurts her, even if he doesn't see it. She's his friend, and his choices likely reflect that, even though she feels differently about him.

      If readers see Birdie's POV, then they'll know how she feels. So when Miles does things to hurt her, they'll likely feel her pain. So his choice will matter even if he has no idea how they affect her.

      Does that make sense?

      Delete
    2. Thank you so much for your advice! Yes, it makes a lot of sense, and I really appreciate your taking the time to help me out on this. I think I really understand my characters and story better having heard it expressed from someone else's viewpoint.

      Thanks!

      Delete
    3. Most welcome :) I'm always happy to help, even if it sometimes takes me a little time to reply.

      Delete