How do you know when you have a strong plot?

[Andrew E Mitchell]

This question may seem academic. But how do you know when you arrived with a sufficiently developed plot-line that moves the action along and will keep the reader turning the page?

[Kat Heckenbach]

Are you talking about before or after the writing of the actual manuscript? If you mean before, that is really tricky, IMHO. A book can have a very basic plot, and maybe doesn't seem like a lot in outline form. The key is to have situations arise one after another that keep the tension up even if the overall story is moving slowly. The example that pops into my head is Jurassic Park. There wasn't a lot of depth to the plot--it was pretty straight-forward, and fairly predictable. Most of the page-turning came from the intensity of each scene

Once the manuscript is written, you need an honest critiquer--preferably several. You want people who will tell you if the plot is dragging. I was lucky to have a few of those, and they all were in agreement as to what parts of the book needed to be ramped up. The way I knew I'd gotten things right was when they handed me the manuscript back and "apologized" for forgetting to edit because they were caught up in the story.

[Andrew E Mitchell]

The question is before the novel is written. I started out with an overall objective, theme and purpose and well developed characters. I did not come up with a classic plot that has an organic strength like the mystery of finding the dead body or some object appearing in the sky. "What is it or whodunnit?'. Your comment about creating situations that keep the page turning is a good one. As I hoped that a lot would write itself (in a matter of speaking) as I put the characters into difficult situations and then live through those situations through the characters. I've had some else tell me the same about having a few designated readers to give feedback, as well.

[Kat Heckenbach]

I just finished reading--for the second time--Stephen King's On Writing. He calls all of his writing "situational." He does not plot at all. He starts each book with a situation--a "what if" question--and lets the story just play out. Put the characters in a sticky situation and see how they get themselves out.

I found that the key word is "tension." Keep the tension up in each scene, regardless of the amount of action or plot movement. You can't just put the reader through an endless run of intense scenes, but you want enough tension running at all times to keep them interested. It will (and should) fluxuate, but there is a minimum.

I highly recommend On Writing, especially if you're not a plot writer. I do kind of both--plotting and situational stuff, but my books have a lot of mystery and subplot, so I have to outline to make sure I'm tying everything together.

Another book I've heard awesome things about is Plot and Structure by James Scott Bell. I haven't read that specific one, but I've read another of his books (Revision and Self-Editing) and it was very good.

[Kris Rhen]

I'll second Stephen King's On Writing. It's unapologetic on what makes a good story. He makes a good case of "telling the truth" also - characters will do what characters should do in a situation. If they're angry they may curse. If they are tempted, they may succumb. If they are struck, they will bleed. You know, that edgy stuff :-)

In terms of a strong plot - Perhaps one way to look at it is that all plots are strong until we write them weak. The difference in the end is in how it is told. When I relate a plot idea to someone (usually my wife), I can get goosebumps telling it and see her eyes light up - then I know it could be good. The challenge is getting it on paper good.

[Michelle Sutton]

I didn't like King's On Writing. It was too crass for me. The situation with the poison ivy was funny, though.

[Kris Rhen]

He's definitely crass - I guess that's a better description of what I termed "unapologetic" :-) I do find it interesting to read about the habits of other authors however, and relate them to things I've discovered about myself. One example from King is his author's note at the end of From a Buick 8, where he describes how the entire story came to him during a drive through Pennsylvania - interesting as I relate my own experience on my blog post What do lackluster board meetings and writer's block have in common?.

King's position on telling stories truthfully, however, lends itself to crassness - people are crass. The trick for Christian writers is expressing crassness without being crass.

[Kat Heckenbach]

You do have to get past the foul language and stuff. But what he says about writing is very true. I love how he talks about a story being like an archeological find and the writer's job is to unearth it bit by bit. And my favorite line comes when he's talking about symbolism and says that if you see a theme running through your book you should play up that symbolism, and that "you're a monkey if you don't." I don't know why, but that just struck me. :)

[Kris Rhen]

In the words of Dan Inosanto, "Absorb what is useful". I think that is true of any craft/art/skill. King can be boorish, but he's also done some correct things during his career to be where he is (besides beeing boorish :-)

I can't think of any book on writing I've read that I set aside saying "I didn't learn anything here." If there is even one nugget, then the scores of pages were worth it.

[Michelle Sutton]

Kat's got the answer in the "literary" bag. :) It's all about tension.

[Kat Heckenbach]

Thanks, Michelle! I have to give credit where credit is due--a friend who read an early draft of my book pointed out to me that during a few of the middle chapters there wasn't enough tension. The word struck like a gong with me! I realized that was exactly it, and since then my writing has tightened up SO much.

[Andrew E Mitchell]

Interesting . . . good feedback. It seems that a 'strong plot' is not so necessary if other attributes of your story are compelling all long the lines of 'tension' and '.situation'? I'll see if I can dig up the referenced books. Sounds like a good read.

[Mark Young]

I'm still new at this (just finishing my third, unpublished novel), but this is what floats around in my head when I sit down to write the opening scene. Primary characters are living and breathing in my head and on my character note cards. I see the general beginning, middle and end of the story, but not the entire journey. (I'm an advocate of a general outline of the story, so I don't get lost in my journey. This does not work for everyone).

My outline includes what Christopher Vogler describes as the three act journey--ordinary world, followed by the major crisis and climax (other lesser crisis and climax scenes create tension, but I need to have a primary Three Act journey in mind).

And, finally, I must feel excited about the world I've created, waiting to see how the primary character(s) survive, how they all come together. Unlike some writers, I cannot write by the seat of my pants. Story (plot) and characters are intricately tied together in my story world.I must be able to envision the overall picture, see how action and characters bring life to the page. Once I have these parts of the story in mind, then it is time to put it down on paper.