Overused plot themes, scenes, character types in fiction?

[Paisley]

My wife and I have been working on (in our heads only) a parody of "the New Yorker short story."

Please write this. I'd love to read it.

 

[Dr Doran]

Please write this. I'd love to read it.

I'm afraid its audience would be limited to people who have read New Yorker short stories for a decade or so ... no one else would "get" the joke.

 

[Diamondback]

I'd say the reclusive, disturbed loner with a past is toward the top of the "overdone cliche" list, and should be avoided.

And Sunny has some good advice about "getting inside the character's skin"--when I've tried to write fiction, the first thing I've done is work up a psych profile for the main character. (Granted, most of those have drawn heavily on my own warped psychology and thought processeslol, but...)

 

[Viola]

I think New Yorker Syndrome would go a long way towards explaining why 95% of what I read is genre fiction. Even in terrible sci-fi/fantasy/horror/westerns (and for every good one, six are terrible) something HAPPENS.

Or I just have low tastes. lol

-Viola

 

[Jack Scorpion]

I'd say the reclusive, disturbed loner with a past is toward the top of the "overdone cliche" list, and should be avoided.

Haha. Despite how true that is, I love that cliche! I'm always really attracted to that loner and while I don't particularly go for the same "reclusive, disturbed" image, I very often use the mysterious past device in my stories. I DO feel guilty when I do, though.

 

[Diamondback]

Jack, I am that loner--which explains why I don't write much fiction, and probably why I'm burned out on it. (OTOH, it explains my affinity toward "Mr. Clark" in Clancy's novels to a degree...)

 

[PastimeSteve]

Thanks all, good stuff.

Sunny -- I was wondering when you'd jump in... Thanks for your insight.

A couple of additional questions...

Do you all think authors go overboard with character names these days? Dirk Pitt comes to mind...sounds like an adult film actor.

Do you think fog is an overused metaphor for fear and uncertainty in books?

Steve

 

[Diamondback]

Steve, many do go overboard on char-names, but remember, Dirk was created back in the '60s...

 

[Story]

Very typically the stories concern these overeducated overprivileged well-off Manhattanite professionals in their 40s who are so incredibly au courant on everything it makes you sick; they have a circle of friends, all incredibly educated, they are terribly cynical and name drop cool bands while being also quite yuppish; in the typical story there is a party, a guy sees a girl who meant something once to him, then she tells him something and the story ends and you-the-reader are supposed to take something from that but you are not sure what.

You could throw a Stephen King curve ball into it, and have the scary-monster-that-reflects-their-sins-and-shortcomings (TM) eat them up like those cute little Hors d‚Äô?ìuvre platters.

 

[BegintheBeguine]

Thanks all, good stuff.

Sunny -- I was wondering when you'd jump in... Thanks for your insight.

A couple of additional questions...

Do you all think authors go overboard with character names these days? Dirk Pitt comes to mind...sounds like an adult film actor.

Do you think fog is an overused metaphor for fear and uncertainty in books?

Steve

There are actually odd names out there. Someone named Dirk Large worked on a film I was in.
No, I don't think fog is overused.

 

[Paisley]

I'm afraid its audience would be limited to people who have read New Yorker short stories for a decade or so ... no one else would "get" the joke.

Oh, I think the zietgiest is hip and ironic enough that people would appreciate a spoof of it. And pretentious people always make a good target for comedy. Funny how that which was counterculture is now mainstream and in need of a sendup.

 

[The Wolf]

Why does it only rain in a movie when it suits the characters mood?[huh]

Sincerely,
The Wolf

 

[Sunny]

I think New Yorker Syndrome would go a long way towards explaining why 95% of what I read is genre fiction. Even in terrible sci-fi/fantasy/horror/westerns (and for every good one, six are terrible) something HAPPENS.

Or I just have low tastes. lol

-Viola

If you do, so do I! Except I'd add mystery to that list, and take out fantasy/horror. And either I've probably got lower tastes or am pickier about authors, but I've read few, if any, terrible books in genre fiction. Of course I read little written past 1960, and most of those are either Agatha Christie or Alistair MacLean. :eusa_clap (I have read some Cussler and endure the terrible bits for the sake of stuff that HAPPENS and the MacLean references.)

Other thoughts.

(1) The "loner with a past" may be a bit overused and unrealistic. However, there does have to be a story involved - something has to happen. I was thinking about this after I last posted. It's possible to be too realistic. Perhaps this is part of the New Yorker Syndrome, or perhaps it's simply postmodernist writing that I don't appreciate. But the closer toward realism you get, the closer you get to losing your sense of Story. Real life doesn't occur in one cohesive plot, or even a series of episodes. Conflict has to come from somewhere, but in real life it's not usually resolvable within a couple hundred pages. The "loner with a past" brings the conflict in with him and may actually pay tribute to the unhappiness of real life, without having to spend actual Story time in developing it.

(2) Diamondback, you're now going to be "Mr. Clark" to me.

(3) Steve, how'd you know I'd get involved? I thought I was more anonymous than that. lol

(4)

You could throw a Stephen King curve ball into it, and have the scary-monster-that-reflects-their-sins-and-shortcomings (TM) eat them up like those cute little Hors d’œuvre platters.

Story, that sounds like a fine way to enliven the proceedings. :eusa_clap lol

(5) Re: Fog. I actually haven't come across fog very much, or not enough to remember it when I think on it. Certainly not enough for it to seem overused. The only example in my mind at present is Bleak House, and that's for legal fog, confusion, and waste, not fear and uncertainty.

(6) Re: Names. I love names. I'd say, avoid ridiculous names (of course you will), but don't think you have to be completely ordinary either. That has lately become a cliché, too. Consider the character's background most of all. Unless he's changed his name, it reflects his parents and family (more broadly, his background) and not his personality. It seems instinctive for writers to name their characters with appropriate names; but it simply isn't possible for most real people to have "appropriate" names!

In my first journalism writing course, the professor told us to never use synonyms for "said" in a news story. Among other reasons not to use it, the best was that "said" is practically a non-word when read. So far from grabbing attention, the eye skips over it; it leaves no impression. Names shouldn't be that anonymous, but they certainly shouldn't grab the eye every time they're in the text. A name is still primarily an identifier.

That said, it's so much fun to come up with "overboard" names. I like names that have denotations, connotations, good/bad sound to the ear, romantic (in the classic sense) back stories, namesakes, etc. My fictional writing was in the Tolkien world, and all of my characters needed made-up names in other languages, so I had more leeway there; still, I tried to keep them reasonable. The most poetic one was balanced with a logical and nearly-English nickname. Perhaps a good rule is to limit oneself to one "fun" element of naming. Think about yourself, your family, and your friends; how do "real" names sound, and where do they come from?

Hmm... for not having done a whole lot of writing, I can certainly dish out the advice.

 

[Jack Scorpion]

I enjoy coming up with names a lot. I especially enjoy coming up with all the different ways the character can be addressed (nicknames, included), depending on who is addressing him or her. If a character is named Donald James, I'd probably have other characters refer to him as Donald, Don, Donny, Mr. James, Mr. Jimmy, Don James, Donny Jimmy and The Godfather. I like throwing curve balls in there depending how well the other characters know him or how much of jokesters they are. In narration, I'd keep it uniform. Don, most likely. I like short, strong, easy to write names for 3rd person protagonists.

Creative writing teachers have told me only to use "said." And even to avoid adverbs with said verb. Well, they say to avoid adverbs all together.

 

[Sunny]

That reminds me of something. One of Agatha Christie's Poirot books was supposed to be a manuscript, with a prologue by another character. In that prologue, the point was made that the writer of the narrative sometimes called Poirot "Poirot," and other times "M. Poirot," and speculated on what that meant to the narrator. I read so fast that I almost never notice this type of variation, but since then I've been making more of an effort. The one I've noticed is in Dorothy Sayers' mysteries. Sometimes it's "Lord Peter," sometimes "Wimsey." Sometimes "Mr Parker," sometimes just "Parker." I haven't analyzed it, but no scheme or plan is apparent. Do you think there is a subtle plan there (as with Christie in that example, since she called attention to it), or do you think that Sayers' characters are so real that the variation is natural?

I know I use adverbs too much. I just love words and the color and exact meaning they provide. Makes for flowery writing, but it's not always easier to follow.

 

[Jack Scorpion]

That reminds me of something. One of Agatha Christie's Poirot books was supposed to be a manuscript, with a prologue by another character. In that prologue, the point was made that the writer of the narrative sometimes called Poirot "Poirot," and other times "M. Poirot," and speculated on what that meant to the narrator. I read so fast that I almost never notice this type of variation, but since then I've been making more of an effort. The one I've noticed is in Dorothy Sayers' mysteries. Sometimes it's "Lord Peter," sometimes "Wimsey." Sometimes "Mr Parker," sometimes just "Parker." I haven't analyzed it, but no scheme or plan is apparent. Do you think there is a subtle plan there (as with Christie in that example, since she called attention to it), or do you think that Sayers' characters are so real that the variation is natural?

I know I use adverbs too much. I just love words and the color and exact meaning they provide. Makes for flowery writing, but it's not always easier to follow.

I also use adverbs far too often.

I think there is a method at times. Different ways to address a character hint at different relationships between people, different types of addressers and even some undisclosed histories.

 

[PastimeSteve]

(3) Steve, how'd you know I'd get involved? I thought I was more anonymous than that. lol

lol Well, I've been following a couple of the "book to movie" and "what are you reading?" threads and I can tell you read a lot. You also remind me of a twice-removed cousin I haven't seen in years, but that's a whole different story...

To all: I'm really excited by the thoughts and exchanges in this thread. It has been a lot of fun to read, as well as enlightening; thanks everyone!

Steve

 

[Dr Doran]

Oh, I think the zietgiest is hip and ironic enough that people would appreciate a spoof of it. And pretentious people always make a good target for comedy. Funny how that which was counterculture is now mainstream and in need of a sendup.

This fact irks me to no end. There is a dumb bumper sticker that reads "subvert the dominant paradigm." But the dominant paradigm HAS been subversion since 1969. And by 2007, subversion for subversion's sake has become really, really boring.

 

[Diamondback]

This fact irks me to no end. There is a dumb bumper sticker that reads "subvert the dominant paradigm." But the dominant paradigm HAS been subversion since 1969. And by 2007, subversion for subversion's sake has become really, really boring.

So, how do we subvert a paradigm of subversion? Ever notice that the folks who said "Question Authority" when they've become the "Authority" that is being questioned?

Sorry, just struck me as funny.

 

[Dr Doran]

So, how do we subvert a paradigm of subversion? Ever notice that the folks who said "Question Authority" when they've become the "Authority" that is being questioned?

Sorry, just struck me as funny.

Don't subvert it. Go back to things that worked from the past (HENCE THE FEDORA LOUNGE) while keeping a rational perspective on new things that work.