[cutiepie] fluffy, big eyes, pawwwws [super relatable] sleeps all day and in the weirdest places, doesn't care about anything other than sleep and food, doesn't judge anyone, no negativity, spirit animal of depressed teenagers tbh
Recently I rewatched the original Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy (if you haven't noticed from my latest posts), and it really holds up: complex and sophisticated plotting, iconic characters with sturdy arcs, and nuanced themes about honor and freedom.
This trilogy did so many things right. It's no surprise it was a huge hit. (Do they even make movies like this anymore?)
While I could go on long about everything that it does right, today I actually want to zoom in on what I consider its weakest element: Davy Jones's Locker.
This is one (1) scene in the whole trilogy, but it's always felt off and just . . . weird to me. To the extent that it sort of taints my memory of the last film (which, revisiting it again, is actually quite well written).
Don't get me wrong--I get it's meant to be weird.
But it's weird in the wrong way.
It's weird in a weak way.
What could have been a major opportunity to add depth and dimension to the series' themes, and to Jack's character . . .
. . . is nothing but a strange, delusional 8-minute experience that actually could be cut without really affecting the story.
And that's the main problem. It's not doing enough.
Yes, it did what it needed to on the plot level: The point of the scene is to show Jack trapped, slipping into madness in Davy Jones's Locker. It does that.
But it doesn't do that in a resonating way.
Really, if that's all it's doing, the filmmakers could cut the scene and simply show the crew arriving at the Locker to interact with a delusional Jack. (Though I don't quite like that idea either.)
Watching this film again, I realized, on a subconscious level, I always look forward to Davy Jones's Locker because it's a fate Jack spent the whole previous installment trying to avoid. And now he's trapped there.
I also think I subconsciously look forward to it, because it's a scene loaded with opportunity--because this is where we see (or could have seen) Jack in his most vulnerable state. It's begging to be used to develop character and explore the themes.
But instead, we get a (basically filler) madness trip--one that's trying to be comedic yet doesn't quite deliver--and some rock crabs that don't carry enough significance beyond helping move the ship (yes, I get they relate to Calypso. . . . They aren't terrible, but . . . )
Not as satisfying.
Let's go over what could have been done differently, and maybe it will help you with your own less-than-satisfying scenes. . . .
The bones of storytelling are character, plot, and theme.
And the best ideas for your scenes, are going to be those that hit on at least two--or preferably all three--of those.
When you understand that, you can produce more meaningful scenes (and stories).
Digging into Character & Theme to Revise the Scene
One of the most important aspects of any main character is his wants. His motives.
If you've followed me for a while, you may know I refer to this as the "abstract want."
The abstract want (or wants) exists behind nearly every major concrete goal the character pursues in the plot. (Or it should.)
Katniss wants to survive and save others. That's why she aims to win the Hunger Games. That's why she volunteers to take Prim's place and risks her life to save Peeta.
Luke wants to become, or be part of, something great. That's why he plans to go to Academy, become a Jedi, rescue Leia, and destroy the Death Star.
To add depth to a character, it's often a great idea to dig into this abstract want: What does it mean to the character? Why does fulfilling it matter? And how come the character has it in the first place?
In Pirates of the Caribbean, Jack's abstract want is to live free, preferably forever (as I wrote about somewhat recently). This is why he wants The Black Pearl back, and to be its captain, in the first installment. This is why he wants to avoid Davy Jones and the Kraken in the second installment. And this is why he wants to replace Davy Jones in the third installment.
Every major concrete plot goal Jack has, ties back to being free (and alive).
And so do many of his minor ones. ("You will always remember this as the day that you almost caught Captain Jack Sparrow.")
Also noteworthy is that in the first installment, it's said that The Black Pearl symbolizes freedom.
So, having a scene where Jack is trapped in Davy Jones's Locker, with The Black Pearl, would have been the perfect opportunity to explore his abstract want more deeply.
Instead of slipping into madness and envisioning copies of himself on The Pearl, it would have been more meaningful to delve into why freedom matters so much to Jack, and even better, why he has that want in the first place.
Often there is a key backstory (referred to as a "ghost" or "wound") that typically explains the origin of the abstract want.
For example, the reason Katniss wants to survive and save others, is because her dad died and that left her family starving; and after Peeta saved her by throwing her burned bread, she determined she was going to be a survivalist and save her own family.
While Jack's backstory of being marooned by his crew (as told in the first installment), relates to losing freedom (he's trapped on an island, without the Pearl), it doesn't explain the origin of his abstract want (since he wanted freedom via The Black Pearl before that). I don't consider that a flaw, but the Locker would have been an amazing time to go further back into Jack's past and reveal why freedom is so important to him to begin with.
The reason he's trapped in the Locker, is because he made a deal with Davy Jones to raise The Black Pearl (and himself) out of the ocean, so he could be its captain for 13 more years.
That's how much freedom means to Jack. He's literally willing to sell his immortal soul (in addition to working 100 years on The Flying Dutchman) to have 13 years of freedom.
That's a big want.
The trilogy does hint at other aspects of his past, like how he refused to deliver people in the slave trade, and that's why Beckett branded him a pirate in the first place. The writers had the right idea in giving Jack this backstory, as it's ripe with the concept of freedom (vs. bondage). But this is mainly left in subtext. Again, not an innate flaw.
But again, wouldn't it have been great if the film had delved more into that while Jack was in the Locker? Maybe his experience with slaves is what led him to value freedom so highly to begin with.
Or, maybe that was one moment in a whole string of moments that defined his desire. Maybe his abstract want has origins even further back. Maybe as a child, he was somehow trapped, and feared he'd somehow become a slave.
Maybe instead of just having a bunch of copies of Jack in the Locker, we should have had Jacks from different parts of his past--maybe different parts of when he felt trapped. Jack who was marooned. Jack who was imprisoned. Jack who was punished for helping the slaves. Jack who was trapped as a boy.
Surely that would drive Captain Jack Sparrow mad.
The scene would have been so much more interesting if Jack had been haunted by his past. And if the Locker was an opportunity to compound the concept of being trapped.
Naturally, one of the main themes of this film is freedom (vs. bondage): Jack wants to get out of the Locker, Will wants to free his dad, Barbossa wants to release Calypso, and Beckett wants to capture (and kill) all pirates.
So this would have made the film feel more thematically resonant as well. But there are other options too.
The main theme of the whole series explores what it means to be honorable (vs. dishonorable). The nuance (and irony) comes from the fact that pirates, like Jack, ultimately end up being the most honorable. Despite all the (selfish) piracy they engage in, when it comes down it, they're more honorable than Beckett and his men.
And the reason Jack ended up in the Locker at this specific point in time, is because he chose to be honorable, rather than dishonorable, at the climax of the previous film.
Jack could have fled to land and saved himself, letting his crew die, as he'd planned.
But when it got down to it, he couldn't--he came back and saved them.
(. . . before Elizabeth--of all people--betrayed him. . . .)
So this moment in the Locker could have also tapped into the theme of honor (vs. dishonor). It could have questioned if honor was worth it, because look at where it got Jack. Being trapped is likely Jack's worst fear, since it's the opposite of his deepest desire.
For the pirates, the concept of honor comes from keeping the code. Later in the film, we learn that Jack's father is the strict keeper of the code--outright killing a man for even suggesting they don't follow it.
The writers could have delved into that--Jack's relationship with his father, who had always been strict in honoring the code, even when Jack was a young boy. "And look, dad, look at where it [honor] got me!" Jack might've yelled, while wasting away in the sand.
Symbolism & Imagery
But let's say, for some reason, the writers didn't want to do any of that. This is an adventure film, and maybe they didn't want to lean into that directly. They could have worked with more symbolism, tying into character and theme that way instead. The Black Pearl symbolizes freedom, and it's trapped in the Locker. Sure, we get a little bit of symbolism with just that--it's a ship stuck on sand, and it's too heavy for Jack to move.
But there could have been more.
We don't need the rock crabs. Or if we do (to show Calypso helping move the ship), they should have been sea turtles instead--ya know, the creatures that were rumored to free Jack off the island in the first place?! Maybe they should have been used to move the ship (and if we wanted to be silly, with ropes of human hair too 😜).
Or, there could have been more imagery related to being bound--other ropes, chains, cuffs, or bars--driving Jack crazy. Maybe he keeps getting stuck, trapped, or bound somehow.
And rather than these things seemingly randomly moving the ship, Jack should have had a thematic epiphany that apparently led to that, or he should have done something that seemingly caused that to happen (even if it's really revealed it's Calypso later).
In his hallucinations, Jack stabs himself in the heart. We get a brief line about that, but it's not very thematic. If it had tied into one of the themes more, that image would have landed better.
We also get some weird stuff with him eating a peanut, laying an egg, and moving closer to a goat. It's meant to be funny, but it's not very meaningful. Interacting with sea turtles would have been much funnier, since it would have been a callback to the first film. And I get the peanut is meant to emphasize the lack of food . . . but it would have been better if instead, the filmmakers emphasized a lack of rum . . . since that's what he had when trapped on the island, and it was a drink that Elizabeth tied to honor vs. dishonor in the first film (i.e. with a little more work, rum could have been made into a thematic symbol).
Heck, I would have settled for imagery related to Elizabeth "haunting" him--since she's the one who betrayed him, by pretending to reward him for being honorable. Or even traumatic flashbacks of Davy Jones, Jack being eaten by the Kraken, or Jack arriving in the Locker.
That would have aroused more sympathy, for me.
Really, this scene could have been used to emphasize Jack and his vulnerability so much better--rendered in a way that made the audience feel something deeply.
Unfortunately, though, it does little in the way of that.
Now, you would think, based on this post, I positively hate this scene--I don't; it's just a huge missed opportunity.
Yeah, it gets its plot job done.
But it misses out on character and theme.
Regardless, though, this is still a great trilogy.
And despite this post, it's easy to forgive it for fumbling one scene.
Nonetheless, I thought this was a good opportunity to illustrate what character and theme can do for a lackluster scene.
Story isn't just about plot. It's also about character and theme.
If you find a scene lacking luster, you might want to try digging there.
this actually perfectly demonstrates the transitive property of memes: you can replace a meme piece by piece until it only structurally resembles the original, and it is, in fact, the same meme.
It also ties neatly into the simplest version of the formula for getting people emotionally engaged with your characters: or how to build the moment in which your character starts moving from their initial state to the state in which they'll start changing their own lives.
First, you figure out the one important thing the character believes that they're wrong about. There's usually a core misperception that they haven't examined. Once they're forced to engage with it, it'll start to change everything about their perception of the world they're inhabiting and/or the people in it.
Then, as V.E. says, you identify the character's great desire and their great fear: the thing that character wants more than anything, and the thing or situation that terrifies them, and that they'll go to any lengths to avoid.
And having identified these two objects or situations, you build a situation in which the two forces will be in close, direct opposition to one another... then drop the character down in between them, and squeeze. Those two opposing forces become the jaws of a vise... and you crank the vise more and more tightly closed until the character has no choice but to acknowledge those opposing forces, and start (even in a small way) to deal with the pressure being exerted and push their way through.
This does not have to be, initially, a great climactic moment. In fact, it works better if it's not. It's more effective if your character has a brief low-intensity brush with these conditions-in-conflict early on. That way, when your big resolution scene comes along about two-thirds or three-quarters of the way along through the story arc, you'll have set up a resonance between that earlier hint or intimation of what's to come, and the really big blowoff. Your readers will recognize the resonance—the throb of tension between the two occurrences, like the vibration of a plucked string—and will find satisfaction both in the true resolution having been partially telegraphed earlier, and in how it's now being experienced and resolved in full.
This approach also allows you to set up more minor resonances between the realization of the conflict and its final resolution. These can serve to bind the structure of the work more closely together: to make it look (and be) less like a series of loosely strung-together plot events, and more like a unified whole, in which ripples of story business flow backwards and forwards, interpenetrating and influencing one another, and hinting at the big one to come.
But none of this can happen until the paired and opposing what-do-they-most-desire, what-do-they-most-fear axes have been defined. So that's a subject it's smart to spend some while thinking about (and for all your characters, not just the major ones), to be sure you're getting it right.
It's not unusual to get the wrong answers, or merely superficial ones, while you're still working out what's actually going on with the characters. So take your time. Eventually you'll find a set of answers that feel unquestionably right... and you can then nail those down in your notes and get on with making the kind of "good trouble" for your characters that will see them made complete.
Hey, so, I started doing a writeup a week ago about how to get character voices in your fanfic to sound “in character,” in response to a comment from a new writer I was beta-ing for.
I’ve been told this is a thing I do well.
As someone who studied dialogue extensively for a theatre degree, I tend to do this reflexively now, and I don’t write out each individual step. But I put some thought into how I might break down the process if I was new at it and looking to get better.
I don’t think it’s actually that different than an actor studying character accents, except as a writer you’re breaking down meaning rather than sound.
Let’s take a look at what makes dialogue unique to a character. I’m gonna list these as bullet points first, and then I’ll suggest some exercises to explore these aspects of speech.
Most important aspects - focus on these first
Vocabulary - the words they use. As subset of this:
Complexity of words, which can include:
Syllable length
Likelihood to be used in casual conversation - a character can be very smart and still use very informal language.
Cultural touchpoints
Culture can include pop culture references - think Tony Stark’s nicknames for everyone, i.e. “Point Break” and “Underoos”
How in or out of sync the character is with the story’s setting with regard to both time and place - are they from a different country or era of time than their peers?
Important - Check these out if you have time
How likely the character is to speak their mind vs. change the subject - this could be for any number of reasons, from fear to duplicity
Amount they say / Introvertedness / how reticent they are - This is somewhat related to the above point, but not necessarily, and should be researched from different angles. Subverting a topic is not the same thing as being afraid to talk about it.
Different ways of speaking with different characters - this could be a function of story (i.e. how a character who is captured speaks to their captors as opposed to friends) as well as pure Code Switching
Deep cuts - Advanced aspects of speech
Fluency in the language they are speaking
Accents - You do not have to write a character in an accent, i.e. spell the words differently to show the accent, if you don’t want to. It really depends on the piece (usually how light hearted or humorous you want it to be) whether you do or not.
Okay, this is all well and good, you say. But HOW do I incorporate this into my writing?
Dialogue analysis exercise
Find five (or more, but at least five) representative lines from your character’s canon dialogue.
If they don’t speak, don’t have five lines, do the best you can. (I imagine other forms of communications can probably also be analyzed in this way, but I’m gonna focus on dialogue for now.)
These are going to be your key phrases. They need to be from canon and they need to be words that really show off who your character is.
Say the words out loud. Read them again and again. What do they sound / feel like?
What is the average syllable length? How many long words do they use?
Do any words jump out at you as archaic? What about modern pop culture references?
What is a different way they could have said this? Write some alternate versions of this phrase and figure out WHY the character didn’t say it this way instead. What is the difference between the canon dialogue and the alternative? Try to be as specific as possible. It’s as important to know what they wouldn’t say as what they would.
Look up any of the more complex words and find some similar ones, with a similar level of complexity. Use a thesaurus you trust and possibly also Wordnik. If your character doesn’t use ANY complex words, reflect on that. Why? What’s their reason? How does that fit with the rest of their personality?
Think of some other characters from other pop culture pieces who speak in a similar way. It doesn’t have to be 100% the same, but if it can help your ear get used to some new-but-different phrases, it’s enough. You’re training your brain to speak like the character. Start to sort phrases they would say from ones they wouldn’t. How do these two characters differ?
Now that you have worked thoroughly through your key phrases, start to imagine these lines said in something other than the original context. What if they were said to a different character? WOULD they even be said? What would change? What would happen if your character was scared / hurt / overjoyed / sick?
Finally, after all that, write some NEW dialogue for your character, either as practice, or right into your fic draft. Keep using your key phrases as a guide and go back to canon as much as you need to! You can do this!
After all of this, you should feel significantly more confident in writing that existing character into your story. Huzzah!
If you found this at all helpful, reblog and / or leave me a note. I’m curious to hear what you think.
This is good advice, and here’s an added suggestion for practicing: write a story entirely with dialogue between two characters. It should be possible to tell who is speaking without needing dialogue tags or descriptions. If you find yourself thinking “but a reader will get confused here!” you go back and make it sound more like them.
things you can do when you don't know how to end a scene
Pick a fun line of dialogue and just cut it there. End the chapter or plonk in a scene break and move on.
Interrupt whatever's going on. You can customize the interruption to the genre of your fic, but it could be as simple as a phone call or a knock on the door or as complex as a parachuting velociraptor wielding a machete. Now your characters have to deal with *that* instead of wrapping up whatever they were doing before.
Find a parallel to another character who isn't there and use that as a transition to write about them in *their* scene. Two characters are mourning the end of their relationship? Smash cut to another character looking at a photo of a lost loved one. Character is in an angst spiral over a decision they need to make? Switch over to someone staring at a coffee shop menu in confusion.
Change the perspective. There's a fight going on and you're tired of writing it? Well, now you cut to a character on the other side of the wall who can hear some weird noises. They can choose to investigate or ignore, as you see fit. You don't want to write smut but your characters are making out pretty heavy now? Their roommate in the room next door decides now would be a great time to take the dog for a walk.
Get to a moment of tension and just... stop. End the chapter. Congratulations, you just wrote a cliffhanger. You can pick up the next chapter at any point you want (conveniently getting you past the tricky thing you weren't sure how to write). Bonus: you might have people yell at you in the comments 😈
Ending a scene early is a great way to get yourself out of a block. Conveniently, it's also an interesting way to write a story.
i have turned it into a letterboxd list: good films that are free on the internet archive!!!! Each film is linked in the notes on letterboxd. this will be continually updated so it's a good link to save if you want to keep up!
KEN RUSSELL FILMOGRAPHY FREE ON INTERNET ARCHIVE (INCLUDING A CUT OF THE DEVILS CONTAINING THE RAPE OF CHRIST SCENE). KEN RUSSELL MOVIES AT NO PRICE ALL IN ONE PLACE.
too many stories about turning yourself into a monster as a metaphor for pretending to be something you aren't and losing yourself in the process. not enough stories about turning yourself into a monster as a metaphor for choosing to openly embrace yourself even if it's strange to other people
any time the conclusion of the story is "and then he turned back to normal because what really matters is being true to yourself and being loved for being who you really are: a boring human" i hear a spongebob boo-womp in my head. can you tell i'm autistic by the way
More stories about the things that you’ve been through were what fundamentally changed you, and that perhaps the desire to return to your original shape is no longer present once it’s offered, because your harrowed insides match your outsides, and perhaps you’ve realized you’ve a power to help protect yourself and others in your monstrosity that was absent when you were human.
Voice = What the Character Talks about + How She Says it
But even with knowing that, it can be tricky to actually get ON the page. Here are some dos and don’ts:
Avoid:
- Always Sentence Structures (gets rigid and repetitious fast)
- Dominating Emotions that Undercut the Story (If you are writing in a voice where the viewpoint character almost always sounds calm or relaxed, that can possibly take tension out of the story)
- Relying too Heavily on Accents (it's better to sprinkle in a few regional phrases here and there)
- Stock Voices (Once in a while you run into a character voice that sounds like a hundred other character voices of that genre.)
Do:
-Regularly Use Point 4 POV Penetration (write in the deepest POV)
- Utilize Comparisons (Similes and Metaphors) (What your viewpoint character chooses to compare something to will tell us a lot.)
- Slightly Deviate the Inner World from the Outer World (We all think and experience things that we don't share. In fact, some of what we think and experience is in direct contrast to what we show the world.)
- Add Lines that Speak to Worldview (watch for opportunities to slide in a worldview your character has about something that comes up.)
I want to write a book called “your character dies in the woods” that details all the pitfalls and dangers of being out on the road & in the wild for people without outdoors/wilderness experience bc I cannot keep reading narratives brush over life threatening conditions like nothing is happening.
I just read a book by one of my favorite authors whose plots are essentially airtight, but the MC was walking on a country road on a cold winter night and she was knocked down and fell into a drainage ditch covered in ice, broke through and got covered in icy mud and water.
Then she had a “miserable” 3 more miles to walk to the inn.
This book already exists, sort of! Or at least, it’s a biology textbook but I bought it for writing purposes:
It starts with a chapter about freezing to death, and it is without a doubt the scariest thing I’ve read in years (and I read a lot of horror fiction).
immortality as theft (you have to steal life from something else) immortality as parasitism (there is something else inside You that is keeping you alive and you become less of yourself more and more the longer it stays in you) immortality as violence (everything is trying to kill you because everything is supposed to die and the universe will always try to find a way to right the wrong that is You) you understand
#at least once a month I think about that one post about laminating a paper towel#and how that makes it immortal but also forever prevents it from fulfilling its true purpose#yes you will live. but at the cost of everything that makes you You
I’ve been thinking more in depth about Pinch Point 1 lately, and have been wanting to expand the basic concept on my blog. The term “pinch point” originates from 7 Point Story Structure. A pinch point relates to the antagonistic force, and it’s what you might imagine: It’s the equivalent of the protagonist getting pinched by the antagonist. It might be a small pinch or it might be one that leaves a nasty bruise. Whatever the case, it reveals to the audience that the antagonist is a legit force and foe.
Most stories will actually have multiple pinch points, but in 7 Point Story Structure (and its variations), there are two pinch points that are critical: Pinch Point 1 and Pinch Point 2. These are simply beats that show the audience the power of the antagonist. Pinch Point 1 comes about halfway through the first half of the middle–or perhaps better said, about 37% into the story. Pinch Point 2 comes about halfway through the second half of the middle–or perhaps better said, about 63% into the story. But of course, the percentages are just guidelines.
I like and appreciate the concept of pinch points because it puts emphasis on the antagonist. In contrast, some story structures don’t acknowledge the existence of pinch points, making it easier for the writer to overlook necessary antagonistic beats. But regardless of what story structure you prefer, every story should have the critical two pinch points–Pinch Point 1 and Pinch Point 2–even if you are “blind” to them.
Let’s talk about Pinch Point 1 in more depth.
Pinch Point 1
Must have …
By definition, Pinch Point 1 must relay the power of the primary antagonistic force(s) to the audience.
If the antagonistic force has already been introduced, this moment heightens the sense of pain, pressure, or tension and reveals the antagonist to be worse or “more” than what we gleaned prior.
If the antagonistic force hasn’t yet been introduced, then this is his/her/its introduction.
Doesn’t have to …
Almost always, the critical points in a story feature the protagonist: Plot Point 1 (the inciting incident + the protagonist’s choice to go on the journey), the Midpoint, Plot Point 2 (the “Dark Night of the Soul” lull + the “Rewarding” final turn), and the climax.
Pinch Point 1 is different because while it often does include the protagonist in the scene, it doesn’t have to. It must relay the power of the primary antagonistic force(s) to the audience. This means it can be in a scene that doesn’t contain the protagonist.
In The Hunger Games (film version), Pinch Point 1 happens when Seneca is talking to President Snow in a rose garden. President Snow implies to Seneca that he will need to keep a tight leash on Katniss. He will need to control the Games so she doesn’t get out of hand. This reminds the audience that the odds are stacked against Katniss, and to take it a step further, the Gamemaker is prepared to throw deadly obstacles her way with a press of a button–in fact, he’s being told to by the nation’s president.
Additionally, the primary antagonist doesn’t actually have to be present either, but their presence is somehow there. The pinch point could come from the antagonist’s henchman who is acting on the antagonist’s behalf, or it may simply come from another character telling the protagonist about the antagonist.
In Spirited Away, Pinch Point 1 happens when Chihiro meets up with Haku, who takes her to see her parents (who have been turned into pigs). Haku tells Chihiro more about Yubaba (the antagonist) and what she can do. He explains that Chihiro’s parents no longer remember being human, that she could get turned into a pig too, and that Yubaba controls people by stealing their names so they can never leave the bathhouse.
Should have …
When we relay the power of the antagonist, it usually entails revealing the stakes. Pinch Point 1 should probably convey the stakes. Stakes are potential consequences that can fit into an “If … then … ” statement (even if they aren’t worded that way on the page). To learn more about them, check out “How to Write Stakes in Storytelling.”
In The Hunger Games example above, it’s conveyed that if Katniss gets out of hand, then Seneca will have to mortally harm her with the press of a button.
In Spirited Away, Haku warns Chihiro that if she’s found here, then she could be turned into a pig, and if she forgets what her parents look like, then she won’t be able to pick them out from the other pigs, and if she forgets her real name, then she’ll never find her way home and be stuck working for Yubaba forever.
If the stakes related to the primary antagonist were introduced earlier, they will escalate in Pinch Point 1, like we see in our examples. We already know Katniss could die. But knowing that Snow and Seneca plan to have her on a tight leash, ups the ante. Likewise, we already know Chihiro doesn’t know how to get home and has to watch out for Yubaba, but knowing that Yubaba can forever force her to work at the bathhouse if she forgets her real name, takes things to another level.
If the antagonistic force is being introduced for the first time, then we’ll likely get a sense of what he/she/it means for the protagonist (stakes).
The protagonist has a goal, and we know the antagonist will be in the way of that goal. Pinch Point 1 will probably at least imply a potential outcome (stake) that could happen (i.e. have the odds even more stacked against Katniss, being stuck working at the bathhouse forever).
Seeing something threatening is effective, but implying that something has the potential to change an important outcome related to the protagonist’s goal is even more effective. If the purpose is to show the antagonist is a legitimate foe for the protagonist, then that probably means conveying how the antagonist has the potential to affect outcomes, even if that is only hinted at.
Pinch Point 1 will convey how it will be even harder for the protagonist to get his goal.
Probably reveals …
If the antagonistic force is an entity that can think for itself, chances are that Pinch Point 1 will reveal a motive.
If no clear antagonistic motive has been revealed yet, this is probably the latest moment it can come into the story. Otherwise, the story will start feeling “off.”
Now, with that said, it may be that the protagonist or audience comes up with a motive that is inaccurate. For example, in a mystery, the characters may not know the true motive until the end of the story (heck, they may not even know the true antagonist until the end of the story), but they will likely still come up with a possible motive.
In many stories, the antagonist’s motive will be revealed before this. It’s possible Pinch Point 1 adds another motive or deepens/strengthens the motive, but the story usually needs a sense of a motive by the end of Pinch Point 1.
If you are working with an antagonist that doesn’t think for itself, you can still imply a potential course for the antagonist–for example, the characters might discover the predicted course of a tornado or the heroine might learn the expected progression of her disease. This concept does overlap with stakes, because it’s looking at potential outcomes, but basically, there is a sense of what the antagonist “wants.”
As a possible motive for the antagonist becomes clearer, often the protagonist’s motive and goal are sharpened, specified, and/or refined. For example, it was Chihiro’s goal to get home–but how does she really do that? Pinch Point 1 gives her more specific goals (remember which pigs are your parents, don’t forget your name) that play into her overarching goal.
Likely includes …
Similarly, Pinch Point 1 will likely provide new insight into the protagonist’s journey and what he is up against. Or, as K. M. Weiland says it, it includes “new clues” as to what is going on.
If the protagonist is present, then this means he will begin to better understand the opposing force, and while he’s still “reacting” to what’s going on, he’s now having “realizations” about what this journey is possibly going to entail. As Weiland states, “In itself, the First Pinch Point does not reveal the true nature of the conflict to the protagonist. Rather, it foreshadows it by providing a peek at facts the protagonist has barely grasped as yet.”
Chihiro has been thrown into a new world with dangerous forces and is barely getting a handle on the situation she finds herself in. Haku’s words to her about Yubaba allow her a “peek” of what she’s going to be dealing with, even though she doesn’t totally understand everything yet. She’s having realizations about what her journey may entail, but hasn’t yet “found her footing.”
Additionally, according to C. S. Laken, Pinch Point 1 will likely draw attention to the protagonist’s weakness, flaw, or misbelief. This may be THE flaw/weakness/misbelief (i.e. the anti-theme/lie in a positive change arc), or it may just be something the character needs to improve on (perhaps particularly in a positive steadfast arc). We’re seeing the antagonist is formidable, and we’re seeing the protagonist may not yet be capable of defeating the force. After Haku tells Chihiro about Yubaba, Chihiro starts crying. She hasn’t yet learned how to face this new world (which is a metaphor for her inability and unwillingness to face her new neighborhood and school in the real world).
Often starts a trajectory for …
For a while now, I’ve felt like Pinch Point 2 kicks off a trajectory that takes us to the climactic moment of the middle and the subsequent lull, Plot Point 2.
But lately I’ve been realizing that often Pinch Point 1 kicks off a trajectory that takes us to the Midpoint–something that K. M. Weiland has already talked about.
Pinch Point 1 provides a “peek” of the power of the antagonist, and usually at the Midpoint, the protagonist will gain a greater understanding of what’s “actually” going on–the true nature of the conflict. Likewise, Pinch Point 1 often touches on a motive for the antagonist, while the midpoint often reveals the bigger motive of the antagonist. (Though this is all generally speaking of course.)
Pinch Point 1 usually leads to the protagonist having realizations about the situation and main conflict. They don’t have a full grasp of what’s going on, but as they are having realizations, they are able to start making somewhat more informed decisions. They have some idea of the stakes and motive now, but it’s not the whole picture. As they move forward with these things in mind, they’ll naturally come into the Midpoint–a significant event or revelation that will fully swing them from reacting to becoming proactive (because they’ll then understand the true nature of the conflict).
Ready to take Pinch Point 1 to the next level? Hope these things help!
Oh, this is really neat, this is the same thing they did in Sh! The Octopus in 1937 to do this transformation scene. In black & white, the color of your light can hide makeup, then all you have to do is flip the color, and the audience just sees the difference in the light levels, but cannot see the color shift. The quick explanation for why this works is the blue makeup absorbs red light, looking very dark when only red light is present, but also looks about the same as relatively fair skin when only blue light is present. Same goes for the colors the other way.
shot deck is a massive database of film shots searchable by grading, tod, shot type, characters and content! Studying from films really helps improve your values and composition as the shots are usually very carefully constructed! It helps you find ways to maintain realism while still packing mood and narrative into your work!
master paintings! I recommend the orientalists like Jean Leon Gerome in particular their environments had great compositions and throw around a ton of colour and light! I like the modern artists Craig Mullins and Richard Schmid also, as there is so much impressionist lost detail and simplicity yet the environments feel so real.
The 1960s era disney background artists like eyvind earle are a masterclass in stylisation and simplification and make a wonderful choice for studies. (That being said modern disney visdev artists like Nathan Fowkes are just as fantastic to study for the same reason)
architectural photography can be a great resource too- I love to look for work by urbEX people!
thumbnailing and comp studies- trying to break down a photo into as few values as possible and still have it be readable- this really helps train your brain in the relationship between light exposure and local value.
Im begging you if doing it in colour is too hard to start with just do it in black and white!!!!! Greyscale painting is an essential step in learning to paint and understand lighting scenarios!! Colour is hard!!!
there is no substitute for going outside and doing some plein air painting- really looking first hand at how the light effects different materials and objects, how it bounces around, what edges your eye naturally loses in certain lighting scenarios. Just go outside and draw and try to notice stuff.
for characters:
figure studies!!!! from life if you can but if you cant there are a ton of great resources out there- personally I love croquis cafe and posespace, but if you can afford it (and are interested in intense anatomy study) then scott eaton has a site called bodies in motion which is fantaaaastic. I think by now everyone knows nyx and senshistock, I also use a lot of grafit studio photorefs to study more complicated poses!!
Master studies (again). I particularly like to study the work of John Singer Sargent, Joaquin Sorolla, Edwin Austin Abbey, Alphonse Mucha (his le pater compositions are out of this world), any of the New Rochelle artists (e.g rockwell, tom lovell, those 1950s illustrators REALLY knew their shit).
I literally have a resin skull on my desk that I've used to do quick studies with different lighting, just 10 mins a day back when I was doing it and it levelled up my skill a lot!.
Material studies are essential to leveling up your character painting!!! Look at fur, look at metal, look at the way something embroidered reflects light vs tooled leather!!
gesture studies! Look at a dynamic pose and see how you can exaggerate the motion in away that captures the sense of movement. This is tricky to start with but its really worthwhile especially when you combine it with other exercises. Mixamo is a cool library to look into for this kind of thing as you can pause and rotate the models in the middle of their actions!
breakdown the work of artists you admire- it's ok to study other living artists (and try to reverse engineer how they are making their decisions) it's a very effective learning tool! Really figure out what it is about that persons workflow you like, and how you might incorporate that element into your own. Obviously, dont post studies of living artists work!
The most important thing is that when you do a study you go into it knowing what you want to learn. Dont try to do everything at once! It's ok to focus on the muscle structure and not give a damn about the gesture. It's ok to focus on the texture of the fur and completely ignore the characters face.
The best way to keep doing studies is to find refs you like- things you are interested in and that capture your imagination! Follow your curiosity and remember that just a tiny little bit a day makes a huge difference.
Gunna take a sec to recommend the tutorials of Devin Korwin. He talks about how to study and how to breakdown art fundamentals in a way that is at once both very advanced but also digestible. I highly recommend his pdfs!
This is one of the most reblogged things I've ever posted, so I just wanted to say that I'm always happy to answer asks relating to learning art, art studies and signposting to resources.
I'm currently working on a very large (free) google doc/pdf that focuses on what the fundamentals are, how to recognise which ones you need to improve on (how to triage your art, basically), and how to get the most out of studying. To that end I'm always keen to hear what people would like help with most!
It is my fervent belief that anyone can teach themselves art. That plateau you are stuck on? Every artist hits it, usually multiple times. It sucks. Hating your art sucks. Your eye will always improve before your skillset and that's the worst, most horrible truth about art. You will always be chasing a 'better version' of your art that you will feel like you can't reach. You gotta learn to love the grind- find the joy in being a dumb cat chasing its own tail in the bathtub.
There is no art mountain you can't overcome if you know where to start climbing.
i wish i was a cat a.k.a. meet Sammy and Applepie @relatablecutiepie - Tumblr Blog | Tumgag
