So just what is Story anyway?
So I sadly have to accept that the quote I really want to put here to give my personal answer to that question can't go as a quote because I cannot attribute it. My google-fu fails me and to be honest it is probably an unfindable quote anyway as I saw it years ago on TV as part of an interview but I don't remember who was being interviewed, what show the interview was for or even the channel it was on. It really is too bad because it is my favorite quote about story.
As I said, it was a TV interview, of a scientist who managed to sum up story very well while being completely dismissive of it. He was talking about reading hard science fiction and nothing else because with the exception of what he enjoyed (and this I should point out is a good phrase to look for variations of to notice bias ;) so the next time some divides categories based on what they enjoy you should be very leery of it being accurate) the totality of literature boiled down to people with problems.
I love this phrase, "people with problems," as it really does sum up story fantastically in my opinion. Larry Brooks defines story as conflict which deserves kudos for being extremely succinct and generally correct but you know, conflict is conflict. You can have conflict without story. I admit you cannot have a story without conflict but it can be pretty low key and still work. And the phrase people with problems works better for me because it explains the tendency writing instructors have for making patently ridiculous pronouncements like, "Story is character," - no, no more than internal organs are a human, they are integral but they are not the whole... well... story XD - or, "Story is plot," -which again is giving a part the status of the whole, it's like having the body without the internal organs, doesn't work so well - or, of course, my favorites, "Character is Plot," and, "Plot is Character." Then why, o, wise one, are they separate categories? The problem with all four of these statements is the same, and is deeply related to many fundamental understandings in creative writing, creative writing instructors tend to pack their statements, they say things in shorthand, professional lingo you could say, but they do give these statements to amateurs who don't have the information to unpack the statements. Sadly this frequently leads to creative writing instructors that don't understand what they are saying either which means students who are pretty much doomed to misunderstanding.
So let's get back to our essential statement. A story is a person with a problem. Now I should be upfront and say this statement is still packed. It can't just be any person. The person in question must be the character in focus, usually called the Main Character or MC for short. Other things can have problems too but those are just complications, things beyond the essential. It also can't just be any problem. The problem must be difficult (comedy) or impossible (tragedy) for the MC to solve AND be essential for them to solve above and beyond any other problem they may encounter. They must care about it deeply because it is THE problem and as soon as it is solved, the story is over and you better wrap it up quick. The story can be short of course, which means you've got one direct problem, a few complications and then its over. But when it comes to long form fiction, the problem has to be enough to keep stymieing the Main Character all the way through, rearing its head again and again in variation and increasing strength, which of course gives you your plot. Pretty much everything that happens to your MC is the big problem itself in different guises (Main Plot line), another problem that somehow makes the main problem even worse and more complicated (Servicing Subplot line), something that illuminates the problem giving it more meaning and/or scope (Enhancing Subplot line), or something that illuminates the parameters of the problem by running completely contrary to the MC's solution (Contrasting Subplot line) which is generally pretty hard to show with the MC themselves so is usually reflected in a supporting character that stands in contrast to them.
That whole bit above by the way is a good indication that I am trained as a genre fiction writer. Something to be aware of. You can think of the importance of the person vs. the importance of the problem as existing on a spectrum. The more important the problem is, the more you are writing genre fiction and the more important the person is, the more you are writing literary fiction. You must always have both but one will also always be more important than the other and the difference in importance can be extreme at the fringes.
Speaking of fringes: the person does not have to be human by the way, they just have to read as enough like a person for the reader to identify with them. A great book for seeing how far afield you can go away from human is Raptor Red which doesn't have anything remotely human in it but you can still identify and sympathize completely with Red. Sympathy is why you need identification by the way. Because even if your main character is utterly loathsome and despicable and somebody your reader will love to hate (which is all fine) they still have to be able to sympathize with them as far as wanting to see them solve the problem. On the other hand if your MC is the nicest most lovable person in the universe but you can't really get in to wanting to see them solve their problem, the character will not work as your person. This pretty much requires the person to care about their problem because if they don't care, how is the reader going to. It also pretty much requires the problem to be understandingly meaningful, because if it isn't why would the person care. And believe it or not, even though there are plenty of other things that will make your person a much better character and more entertaining to read, that is all that is absolutely required. All your person has to do is engage the readers identification with themselves, sympathy for their suffering, and caring about their problem.
And there you have it at the basic level. Maybe a little over because I talk too much XD. Beyond that has a whole lot to do with the type of story you are telling and the format you are telling it in. But that's my definition of story, People with problems. It works pretty well for me. Hope it works for some of you, too. And for those of you who it doesn't work for but feel that you have a good grasp, I hope you'll share your own definitions.
