Of Overhauling & Giveaways!

Sunday, April 17, 2011

My ‘O’ word is overhaul – verb – to examine or overhaul; noun – an act of examining and repairing. I’m in the process of overhauling a manuscript I thought was finished. Weeks ago, I got a critique that forced me to do some rewrites, although I resisted for a while. But you know what? The most important step was that first one. After I took it, editing didn’t seem all that hard and the story’s better for the reconstruction that’s been going on these past three weeks.

Words to the wise: Don’t overhaul your novel simply because someone tells you to do it; only you know the story you want to tell. The time for a rewrite is when you are convinced it will make your book better. Only then will you be able to refine and polish until you have something you can be proud to say you wrote.

David Baboulene is my guest this week. His article below explores whether character and plot are one and the same thing.  Do remember that if you follow this blog and leave a comment on this post, you're eligible to win a copy of The Story Book. You can't afford to pass up David's generous offer at the end of his article. Go check it out now!
Not many people even like the thought of the okra, but it’s a vegetable that goes well with codfish. The codfish is boiled and then combined with steamed okra, onions, peppers and tomatoes. This ‘meat’ dish is eaten with green bananas, dumplings and other ground provisions. The slime in the okra is a turn off for some.

The ortanique was discovered in Jamaica in the 1900s. It’s a hybrid – a combination of the sweet orange and the tangerine – and classified as a tangor. It is extremely sweet and the variety grown in Jamaica has no seeds.
A cluster of Ortaniques

Character and Plot - One and The Same Thing..?

If you are like me, you are unlikely to understand the next two paragraphs, but by the end of this article we will visit them again and hopefully you will understand them and your life will be all the richer for it and you will love me. Here we go, then:

Plot is character, and character is plot, because as soon as a character takes a meaningful action, his action is driving your plot (whether you like it or not). Conversely, as soon as an event happens which elicits a meaningful reaction from your character, then his true character is developing in the eyes of the audience (whether you like it or not).

Note that it is not the event which reveals a player’s character, but his reaction to the event. The action he takes defines his character. Similarly, it is not the event which drives the plot (as you might expect), but the action taken by the character that defines the event, and drives the plot.

Confused? Let’s step through some explanation, and then come back to these paragraphs at the end and see if we have got anywhere.

Action without character
Let’s look at what happens if we separate plot from character. There are three levels of action without character, each with increasing subtlety.

1.       At the blatant end, we have an event with no character involvement whatsoever. Lightning strikes a tree in a remote forest. So what? It’s not a story because no reaction is required of an emotional protagonist. This is not a story. This is a screensaver.

2.       In the middle ground, we have an ‘emotionally detached’ action. If you watch the news and see that someone was killed in New York, the event is meaningless because you are not emotionally connected with the individuals on the news.

If we increase the known character, we increase the emotion: say we find out that John Lennon has been shot in New York. This is a person we ‘know’; we have been through his Act l and Act ll, and now relate to the tragedy at climax. Look at the emotion on the faces of the friends and relatives of the deceased in New York as they experience the same death, but on a different level of emotional involvement.

3.       The most subtle example of action without character actually happens rather a lot in stories that fail to grip. A character takes an action, but it is not a meaningful action, because there is no dilemma riding on his decision to act. If the character is, say, Luke Skywalker, we know he will ‘decide’ to kill the next stormtrooper to come round the corner, and the one after that, and the one after that. Sure, his life is under threat, but that just serves to make his decision to kill even more obvious. His decisions involve no dilemma, so we learn nothing about his true character. However, if the next representative of the Dark Side to come round the corner is also... his father, suddenly he has meaningful decisions and difficult choices with severe consequences. Can he kill his father? Can he risk not killing his father? Now his decision is meaningful... and we in the audience cannot move until we know what he is going to do...

Character without Action
From the opposite end of the argument, let’s say we are shown a man. So what? Until he does something, we don’t know anything about him. Let’s dress him up as a policeman. OK, so now we have some characteristics as our brains overlay stereotypical presumptions about what makes up ‘Policemen’, but beware: this is still an individual without character.

Characteristics are just the wrapping. We don’t know if this person is courageous, extrovert, alcoholic, cowardly or a good father. We don’t even know if he is a criminal or not! Only his actions can reveal these things. When he is faced with a difficult decision - say, to risk his own life to save someone else’s, that is when we will find out about his true character. What he does will define him. And guess what: what he does – the actions he takes - instantly becomes the plot (whether you like it or not).

A player’s character is defined only by his meaningful actions
The plot is defined only by the actions taken by the players

Writers are taught to define their characters in isolation. They also have a plot they have mapped out to the finest detail. They then find that the way the character wants to behave, if he’s true to himself, is not helpful towards a plot which needs a different behaviour to drive it believably. The story is compromised from the outset because the character is not credible in taking the actions the plot demands.

Considering either plot or character in isolation from the other will trip you up, because whichever you consider will drive the other whether you like it or not. The practical point is that we effectively have to develop both plot and character at the same time and as the same thing. Join them together. Don’t think about ‘plot’ and ‘character’. Think about the two as one story made of Character Behaviours.

Stories are about character behaviours. What characters do is who they are and what characters do is what happens.

When your writing has this unity of character and plot, your stories will burst into a third dimension of power that comes from consummating their relationship. And you’ll know it and feel it when it happens, and you’ll never write without it again. So, do those first two paragraphs make sense now?! I do hope so!

If not, contact me and I will send you a free chapter from The Story Book on this – or any other topic of your choosing.


David works as a story consultant with training and development organisations, aspiring and established writers and producers. He is giving seminars on story principles throughout the UK and in Los Angeles in 2011 in collaboration with The Script Factory, Euroscript and other partner companies.

David writes extensively on his subject, including his monthly column in Writing Magazine and Writers' News.
Master the craft of story and truly understand how to make stories that grip and intrigue. The Story Book includes invaluable new thinking on subtext, plus insights on story success from an impressive group of collaborators.

Another guest post by David Baboulene at Rachel Morgan Writes

Do share your comments and/or questions with David. One lucky follower who comments will win a copy of The Story Book.  The winner will be announced on Saturday, April 23, 2011.


  1. Would you mind if I linked to this in my post tomorrow? I'm doing "What Not to Do With Your First Draft" and think this is a great example of what TO do!

  2. No problem at all, Gina. Feel free!

    Thanks, Donna. David is to blame for all this good stuff. :D

  3. This is so true about revising. We need to weigh the effect the rewrite will have and how much it changes what it is meant to be. Great information on the guest post. Thanks.

  4. Some interesting stuff here on book revision. Thanks... but I'm afraid I'm one of those people who can't bear Okra. It's definitely to do with all that slime in it.

  5. Wonderful post. Plot and action mean more when we care about the characters.

  6. Great stuff. So glad I hopped on over!

  7. Quick note to thank you, Joy, for allowing me to be part of your wonderful blog and for the kind words in these comments.

    Do get in touch if you need to know anything else, and I do hope to visit again sometime!


  8. This is a wonderful post J.L. I will come to read it in its entirety when I get home from hols and am not using my silly little netbook.


    L'Aussies Travel A-Z Challenge O is for Outback

  9. I love this whole post. I really do. Character is plot--I get it. I've always felt that. I don't think you can truly separate the two--unless you want your writing to suck.

    I agree with the revising as well--don't do it because one person said so. I always get several opinions and then the tie goes to me. I do HOWEVER have a couple of crit partners whose suggestions and advice I really, really consider. They are my "ideal readers". If it doesn't work for them, then I go right back to the drawing board. I've never been steered wrong by them--it works for me. My MS is always better after.


  10. Have fun, Denise!

    Angela, loved David's article too. I undertake an overhaul when I see the light and know why I'm doing it. Never before. :)

  11. Hi, J. L., stop by my blog, I gave you an award.

  12. Thanks, Elizabeth. I shall come by. Thanks!


Don't be shy, I'd love to hear what you think.