Where do middling middles come from? I struggle with it myself, I know how I want to begin and end the story, but the middle somehow doesn’t seem „right“, and I feel like a lot of movies seem to struggle with meandering second acts as well. Where do you think that comes from?
Sorry my answer on this was delayed–this ask came during my grading period and then finals at the end of our semester. T_T
Anyway, middles…
To be honest, the core of the problem is probably thinking of the “middle” as a specific section of your story in the first place. We all know the montage: beginning, middle, end. But the truth is that while a story always requires a finite beginning and ending–it has to start somewhere and end eventually–what we think of as “the middle” is actually a vague, umbrella term encompassing everything from the moment your main plot starts rolling to the moment the story reaches its climax.
Rest under a read more:
Basically, this is the traditional plot diagram most of us learn in schools:
The problem with this is that it tends to create confusion about where the climax of a story is supposed to occur–looking at this, you might be tempted to think that the “middle” of the story should be an action-packed, important moment that really stuns the readers.
The truth of the matter is that the plots of most stories look a lot more like this:
The climax comes significantly later, typically only a chapter or two before the end of the book, and the “geographical” middle (i.e. page 100 of 200 total), instead falls somewhere in the area traditionally called the “rising action.”
So where do boring, poorly-paced middles come from? Why do people struggle to figure out what to put in their story’s “middle”?
Off the top of my head, I can think of two reasons people struggle with middles:
1. Misunderstanding what “rising action” means and how it should be constructed.
If I ask my students to define “rising action,” the answer I usually get is “A series of events that leads up to the story’s climax.” From a technical standpoint, this answer is correct–we have to get from the beginning to the story’s climax somehow, right?
But from a practical stand point, thinking of rising action as nothing more than “the events leading up to my story’s biggest moment” inevitably results in a stale, linear, and inorganic middle. If every action and moment from the beginning of the story to the climax all contributes to the same plot, the result is typically a robotic, uninteresting series of events where characters feel less like they’re acting for themselves, and more like they’re toy soldiers marching to the author’s orders–they’re being forced to jump through a predetermined set of hurdles to get to someone else’s goal, rather than being allowed to naturally change, develop, and exist outside of the story’s main conflict.
All too often, the writing thought process is: “I know where my story starts–Point A. And I know where I want it to end–Point B. Now I just need to get my characters from Point A to Point B!” And that’s… it. The sum total of thought put into the middle: just get from Point A to Point B.
But that’s not how human beings–and characters written by human beings–work. We’re not linear; we’re messy. We don’t take the right path every time. We backtrack. We get distracted. We’re often juggling more than one problem at once. We avoid conflict like the plague.
Reducing the middle of your story to a vehicle for getting characters from Point A to Point B denies them–and your readers–crucial opportunities for humanization, crucial opportunities to add depth and meaning to their plot, and in general limits realism and makes characters feel one-dimensional. If you’ve ever sat through a middle where you just didn’t emotionally engage with the characters at all, it’s probably because that middle was more focused on getting characters to the big climax than on allowing them to be “real” people or live for a second outside of the story’s single main conflict.
Okay, all well and good for me to say this, but how do you fix it?
Rethink your rising action. Even in the most basic and brief of plots (i.e. vignettes or short stories), rising action is never a single straight line from Point A to Point B. If you want your middle to feel realistic and engaging, let it reflect the behaviors and thought processes that real humans experience:
Mad MS Paint skills.
If you want your middle to be more than a stale Point A -> Point B, then fill it things that make your characters human: small, unexpected challenges. Chances to overcome lower-stakes conflict to learn new skills and enforce character growth. Fill in details of their life with flashbacks and side moments that help us readers better visualize and empathize with them. Let them make mistakes. Let them struggle to find the right way forward. Let them think about things other than the main plot absolutely 24/7.
It is true that events needs to ramp up as the story progress–the conflict needs to get more and more personal, more and more “threatening” or at least important to the main character (and therefore the readers)–but instead of throwing all your chips down on one massive climax, build in some smaller scale conflict moments throughout the “middle,” some tiny climaxes along the way, each one helping your character learn something new about themself, others, the world around them, yes, even the main plot…
Except when writing the shortest of short stories, just like real life, your plot should (usually) never present just ONE challenge to its protagonist. Every major event in our human lives is a complex, interconnected network of prior experiences and growth, trial and error, emotional baggage and interplay between people. That’s what good middles are full of. If you’re struggling to figure out what to put in your story’s middle, it’s probably because you’re so fixated on “Point A -> Point B” that you haven’t given enough thought to the complex journey in between. Don’t let your set-in-stone plans for the story’s “end” distract and limit you or your characters!
This is already really long, but I did say there were two possible problems with middles, so:
2. The climax happens prematurely. Don’t look at me, I didn’t pick the term.
Oftentimes a story seems to wander and lose focus before reaching its big climax, because of rising action that lacks depth and pizzazz. But the opposite problem can also occur: it’s possible for the rising action to be way too short, resulting in a climax that comes too early–closer to the geographical middle of the book–leaving a ton of space for falling action… But the author had nothing good to put there.
If you’ve ever seen a movie or read a book where there was an awesome, moving, incredible scene in the middle, and then it just seems to drag on and on before finally petering out with a whimper instead of bang, what’s going on is that the author jumped to the climax too early, with nothing solid or meaningful to fill in the gaps afterward. As a result, there are a bunch of included “here’s what happened after everyone went home” scenes, often with very little emotional pay-out, leaving readers wondering why the story is still… going… on… (And it’s usually still going on because the author had some epilogue idea in mind and realized they had to fill the gaps between the climax and the epilogue, see Problem #1 again.)
While it is possible to write stories where the main explosion of the conflict occurs in the dead-middle of the book/story (hell, you can even write stories where the major climax occurs FIRST), doing this requires you to shift the goalposts–it’s no longer a “character grows and, in time, overcomes main conflict and gets a happy ending;” instead, it’s “these characters experienced an intense conflict… now here’s how they handle and cope with what comes after.” When the climax happens earlier than “the end,” the focus of the story has to shift to really examining the aftermath, the implications and effects of the climax. Unless this shift occurs and the story becomes one of hurting, healing, and reflection after a massive conflict/upheaval, then we end up with a meandering second act that never packs the punch readers really want as the story winds down.
So like… don’t do this unless you really know what you’re doing, I guess? (Or you’re willing to fail until you figure it out, that works too…)
tl;dr: My tips for writing a good middle are:
1. Plan out several smaller scale moments of conflict, several “mini” climaxes/challenges for your main character to overcome as the story progresses. These smaller scale climaxes are excellent moments for your characters to learn new skills, gain more knowledge, or grow as people, which will then help build up to the major climax. Use these smaller scale “high points” to keep the middle feeling action-packed while also preventing the story from feeling like the characters are just robots marching from Point A to Point B.
2. When trying to plan out mini conflicts, think about A) what skills, traits, knowledge, etc. your character NEEDS to learn/develop in order to ultimately overcome the main conflict. What are some realistic and interesting ways for your character to gain these skills/knowledge/emotional growth, etc.? and B) In what ways can you involve other characters in this? These miniature moments of challenge and struggle are EXCELLENT places for clashes and connections between characters to grow and deepen.
3. Remember that characters are generally written by humans and should act like humans (seriously, even fantasy characters need to have a bit of humanization to them, or your readers won’t be able to care about their stories), so unless you REALLY have no spare space in your story, plan for mistakes, backtracking, misunderstandings, distractions, flashbacks, side plots, etc. Let your characters live and breathe in the middle–don’t mindlessly force them on a linear path towards your goal for them. LET THEM LIVE, GOD.
4. Unless you intentionally are writing a story about aftermath, recovery, or how people handle a traumatic experience, save the major climax for near the end of the story. Don’t put the moment of highest emotion and struggle and meaning in the dead middle of your book and leave yourself with five more chapters to fill and nothing but epilogue content to fill them with. Don’t be fooled by the pyramid–the climax in most stories comes in the last few chapters!
Phew, I think that about covers it. Hopefully this is what you were looking for.
