# Putting the Pieces Together



## Altamont (Jun 16, 2010)

Hey there y'all; I haven't seen many posts lately on the Bloc, so I thought I might start my own thread to engage in a little discussion as well as possibly help me through ,my own artistic struggles.

So here's the deal: I'm currently developing a short story that's been milling about in my head for a few months now; it'll be the first original fiction I've written in a long while.

It's called "Dust" and is something of a post-apocalyptic western-type tale concerning a nameless fox and a small town located in the midst of the ruins of the Mid-West. I have a (hopefully) intriguing plot, interesting "set pieces" and a viable emotional core.

My problem is tying them all together with what I believe to be the most important element of the particular type of story I'm trying to tell: Characterization. The main character, the fox, is static in the worst way. I mean, it'd be fine if he were a nameless Deus Ex that the other characters revolved around, but I plan on focusing more stories on him, and I want to establish an enigmatic but empathetic character.

So here's how the title comes in: How do you guys go about tying together the various elements of story in your work, putting the pieces together? Is there something like narrative style, plot, or characterization that ties your works together, and if so how do you go about doing that?

Or if not, is there even an element to your writing that stands out as prominent? Is it more of a "sum of its parts" deal?


----------



## sunandshadow (Jun 16, 2010)

Does the MC have something tragic or unfair in his past to brood over?

Is it going to be in first person or third person?  Because in first person I do a lot of my character development in introspective interior monologue, but third person it's more body language, tone of voice, dialogue, and the character's reactions to what others say and do.


----------



## DJ_KFX (Jun 17, 2010)

Hm, I like the environment already that the story is set for.
Are you intending this to be a collection of stories? or is it just one story with a few different threads?
Characterization will be important (obviously) but I think you can let the unfolding of the story be the means by which you "build" your MC.
It probably would make it better if you kept the details of the MC unclear (except maybe description), only giving out tidbits as the character interacts. Like Sunandshadow stated, it might depend on how you want to write it (1st or 3rd). In this particular instance I would lean more for 3rd POV.

Lately, in my biggest story I have been using character interactions to drive the plot and build the characters. In retrospect I could have probably gone a different way to make more "sturdy" characters, instead of having to look the whole story to get a good picture of who they really are. But the story has a lot of emotional elements to it so it kind of goes hand in hand. I use the emotional bonds between characters (from their actions and interactions) to keep all the strands tied together.

But in your case, you might could actually use the setting/environment to tie everything together. Like characters being thrown into the same situation forcefully and having to work things out, them vs. dire situation, etc. Hope this helps?


----------



## Altamont (Jun 17, 2010)

Yeah, he has a goal that he works towards, kind of a force that propels him across the wastelands. And as far as inter-connectedness...

I kind of think of it like Sherlock Holmes, or a television series. The stories are all more or less self-contained, but they all focus on this MC and his journey across the wastes. There'll be certain recurring characters, and a kind of loose character arc, but I want them to be able to stand alone.

And you guys are right, th 3rd person perspective makes body language, reactions, etc ideal. I guess what I was originally struggling with was exactly how much should I develop this MC in the first story, you know? I want it to be clear that he is not a static character, but I also want his character to be constant enough to hold together a series of eleven or so stories.

I'm planning on doing a series of eleven stories focusing on four characters spread across the same fictional universe, but that's another story entirely.


----------



## sunandshadow (Jun 17, 2010)

Steadfast characters (as opposed to those who go through a major personal change) are often problem-solvers.  Detectives, matchmakers, adventurers like Indiana Jones, McGyver, and James Bond, etc.


----------



## panzergulo (Jun 17, 2010)

Altamont said:


> Hey there y'all; I haven't seen many posts lately on the Bloc [...]



That's because everybody is here. Well, not everybody, but anyway, I'm surprised how active that forum is compared to the Bloc... in Bloc, I remember we have had many occurrences when a day or two have went past while nobody has posted anything new. In that other forum, there is usually about a dozen new posts every morning...

But yeah, to your question... If you're trying to write a character-driven story, the story is as strong as the character. A static character isn't necessarily bad, in a short story, if they have interesting enough personality. Usually in good stories the main character is somehow changed because of the experiences they have, but you can write interesting short stories with a static character too. They will look more like slice-of-lives, but at least to my experience they work just as well when writing short stories.



Altamont said:


> [...] I want to establish an enigmatic but empathetic character.



Does he necessarily have to be empathetic? I have a couple of non-empathetic characters and my readers love to hate them. I have one psychopathic wolverine who kills because of habit and my readers love to hate him. Although, he goes through a certain transformation as the story goes, but my readers are still arguing if it's all superficial or not. And I have one emotionless lynx who has turned his homicidal tendencies into a profession, being a bounty hunter/contract killer/hitman/assassin or whatever suits him best with each job. I have even went so far that I tell his stories in first person... and my readers seem to really like the character. Even if he is an emotionless killer with questionable morals.

So yeah... there you have it. That was my two euro-cents. Hopefully you find this informative.


----------



## Volpino (Jun 17, 2010)

Just a quick thought...  If you want to keep your fox nameless, each viewpoint is going to present it's own problems. In first person, while it might make sense to never refer to one's self by name, it can get a little tricky on the internal dialogue. You almost have to create a conscious reason for making that kind of separation and that will mean more repetition in future stories. 

   Third person is actually more simple in some ways, because while you can dodge the name issue more easily outside the character's head, you have deprived yourself of a means of referring to the character. Instead of having Joe, Joe Fox, Fox, the fox, the red fox, the red furred wonder, etc... you've eliminated the first three options. Similar to the problem with first person, you have to have a reason that either no one asks his name, or that he gives as a standard response. Both are asking for more that has to be repeated in each story.  

    Back in my college rag days, I saw a few stories that used the nameless character concept. None of them worked. People place a lot of weight on names. The closest I can think of in published works is the first book in Roger Zalazny's Amber series. This breaks many traditional rules and pushes some literary limits, so I'll never say that a nameless character is impossible to pull off. I'm sure there's some I've just never read. It just creates problems that I would rather not deal with as a writer/editor.


----------



## sunandshadow (Jun 17, 2010)

Personally I think giving a character a common name which doesn't have strong connotations, or a nickname that's obvious from his appearance or describes his main personality trait accomplishes the same thing as not naming him.


----------



## M. LeRenard (Jun 18, 2010)

I think the ideal is to make all aspects of the story work with each other in meaningful ways.  Not so much just a sum of its parts as a gesalt, which is to say, more than the sum of its parts.  When everything works together (plot, characters, setting, etc.), that's what you get.
As for the character being static, in my experience, this problem goes away if you stop thinking about it.  Maybe that doesn't sound like good advice, but really, if you write him in a more reactionary way, he'll naturally become more dynamic.  You know.  Have a baseline personality at hand, but when you get to an unusual situation, just have him do the first thing you think of, and then build on and on from there.  I guarantee that with that method, he'll change.  Maybe too much, but that's something you can always go back and fix.


----------

