Bass
Nexus of the World
Yay! Animemoticons! ^_______^
Hero's Journeys
- Thread starter Bass
- Start date
Zombipanda
My Boom-Boom's mostly gay
Not to be a downer, but... I'd be less concerned about researching the "hero's journey" and more concerned with just telling a story and let the scaffolding develop from there.
Bass
Nexus of the World
I don't mean to be rude, but that is a very naive point of view. Stories do not exist in a vacuum. If you don't understand the conventions of a genre, the work will not only be haphazard, but they will be a cliche.
I've already done a lot of groundwork for the story which has shown me which genres I'm working in. I now intend to research those genres to get further ideas.
I've already done a lot of groundwork for the story which has shown me which genres I'm working in. I now intend to research those genres to get further ideas.
Dancanread
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2006
- Messages
- 1,638
Karate Kid?
ProjectX2
Don't expect me to take you with me when I go to s
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2004
- Messages
- 25,007
I think what Zombipanda means is to not get too hung up on the formula of the hero's journey and let the story unfold naturally.
Zombipanda
My Boom-Boom's mostly gay
I think Proj might be right.
I considered saying a few things but they all ended up sounding pretentious (and maybe rude), so we'll settle for that.
Last edited:
Bass
Nexus of the World
Well remembered. Both the 80s and the recent version. Good catch.
Again, this is somewhat naive. Letting the story unfold "naturally" without interference will only result in cliche. After all, what does it mean "naturally"? "Naturally" means that you just let it blossom out, pour forth from you. The idea behind this kind of ethos is that the writer inherently has the story pre-written inside them and any external information will only corrupt them, and that they should listen to their artistic instincts.
Instinct can be wrong, and there are very few Mozarts out there. The main reason I see story after story fail to work is due to a lack of self-awareness of the form, because self-delusion lets people write nonsense and pretend that it could work, and that they know more than their audience to make it work.
I can't begin to tell you how important research is to being a writer. If you don't know your story and its place in its genre with true authorship, what are the chances you'll make anything remotely original? Studying the form doesn't mean copying it.
I understand that you're not being pretentious or rude.
Zombipanda
My Boom-Boom's mostly gay
Oh, we'll talk about this.
Bass
Nexus of the World
Another story I hadn't considered; KIDD RADD.
Anyone remember that webcomic?
Anyone remember that webcomic?
Captain Canuck
The poster formerly known as captaincanuck65
while i mostly agree with everything else you said, i feel like following the formula is what may lead to cliché.
Not researching the genre and just writing a story may result in crap, but doesn't cliché result from overusing an idea?
Bass
Nexus of the World
Researching a genre does not mean "copy that genre". In fact, if you research a genre, you are less likely to use cliches because you'll actually be more aware of what the cliches in your genre are.
What's more, the "formula" of a genre is a list of conventions that can be applied, broken, bent, or ignored. You can do anything you want with the form of a genre, you can even mix them together, and indeed, genres adapt and evolve with society. But if you don't even know the form, how can you possibly know which conventions can and can't be played with, and to what extent?
Again, this is the naive idea that the creation of art is somehow mysterious and if you treat it mechanistically, you will only be robotic in your execution, but this isn't true. A good example is STAR WARS which used an enormous amount of research into its genre to create a genre-defining work. Over 30 years later, no one thinks that movie is cliche or formulaic. It is still the benchmark for action sci-fi. What's more, THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK is similarly designed but it has some key formal differences that set it apart from not only other works in the genre, but from STAR WARS itself.
The only way to avoid cliche is self-awareness of what you're doing. Cliches are what they are because they work. The first person to use it did so because it was the best choice. And that's why everyone copied them and that's how it became a cliche.
Here's a cliche: the villain has the hero at his mercy, and then he places him in a deathtrap, tells him his plans, thereby giving the hero time to turn the tables. That is a cliche as old as the genre.
But a key convention of action stories is "the hero at the mercy of the villain". This is an incredibly important scene, and the story will suffer if this scene is missing or handled badly. So the scene is a convention. But the cliche is that the villain monologues and gives the hero time to turn the tables.
But then look at the climax of WATCHMEN, in which the villain monologues his entire plan then explains that he already did it. Or the fantastic parody in AUSTIN POWERS with the ill-tempered sharks. Or the plot point of monologuing as it's brought up in THE INCREDIBLES. Alternatively, a movie like DIE HARD plays it straight, but the writer, aware of the cliche, doesn't have Hans Gruber monologue and instead, comes up with a brilliant way for John McClane to distract him with laughter. Or the brilliant "laser-table" scene in GOLDFINGER in which Goldfinger has no intention of monologuing and Bond has to dig deep to get out.
Each of those examples only exist because the writers studied the form, saw the cliche for what it was, then used their knowledge of the cliche to create fresh, new scenes that are defining, not of just the story, but of the entire genre itself.
The truth is, if you don't research, you will write formulaic, cliche stories.
What's more, the "formula" of a genre is a list of conventions that can be applied, broken, bent, or ignored. You can do anything you want with the form of a genre, you can even mix them together, and indeed, genres adapt and evolve with society. But if you don't even know the form, how can you possibly know which conventions can and can't be played with, and to what extent?
Again, this is the naive idea that the creation of art is somehow mysterious and if you treat it mechanistically, you will only be robotic in your execution, but this isn't true. A good example is STAR WARS which used an enormous amount of research into its genre to create a genre-defining work. Over 30 years later, no one thinks that movie is cliche or formulaic. It is still the benchmark for action sci-fi. What's more, THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK is similarly designed but it has some key formal differences that set it apart from not only other works in the genre, but from STAR WARS itself.
The only way to avoid cliche is self-awareness of what you're doing. Cliches are what they are because they work. The first person to use it did so because it was the best choice. And that's why everyone copied them and that's how it became a cliche.
Here's a cliche: the villain has the hero at his mercy, and then he places him in a deathtrap, tells him his plans, thereby giving the hero time to turn the tables. That is a cliche as old as the genre.
But a key convention of action stories is "the hero at the mercy of the villain". This is an incredibly important scene, and the story will suffer if this scene is missing or handled badly. So the scene is a convention. But the cliche is that the villain monologues and gives the hero time to turn the tables.
But then look at the climax of WATCHMEN, in which the villain monologues his entire plan then explains that he already did it. Or the fantastic parody in AUSTIN POWERS with the ill-tempered sharks. Or the plot point of monologuing as it's brought up in THE INCREDIBLES. Alternatively, a movie like DIE HARD plays it straight, but the writer, aware of the cliche, doesn't have Hans Gruber monologue and instead, comes up with a brilliant way for John McClane to distract him with laughter. Or the brilliant "laser-table" scene in GOLDFINGER in which Goldfinger has no intention of monologuing and Bond has to dig deep to get out.
Each of those examples only exist because the writers studied the form, saw the cliche for what it was, then used their knowledge of the cliche to create fresh, new scenes that are defining, not of just the story, but of the entire genre itself.
The truth is, if you don't research, you will write formulaic, cliche stories.
Last edited:
Ultimate Houde
UC's Resident Genetic Recombinator
When I write, I find myself following what I think that character would do in that situation I put them in. It's how I enjoy writing. I put lots of research into characters, research into the situation I plan to drop them in (Granted, I enjoy fantasy/sci fi, so mainly they get dropped into those type of situations) and then write out what happens to those said characters.
In fact, I had stopped writing my Blairwood saga for the reason I felt I was FORCING the characters to act in ways I didn't see them actually acting, and that's, to me, when the writing became cliche and formulaic and why I stopped.
And Willow I think is a good Hero Journey movie.
In fact, I had stopped writing my Blairwood saga for the reason I felt I was FORCING the characters to act in ways I didn't see them actually acting, and that's, to me, when the writing became cliche and formulaic and why I stopped.
And Willow I think is a good Hero Journey movie.
Last edited:
Bass
Nexus of the World
WILLOW! I've never actually seen it, but you're right. This also makes me think of CONAN THE BARBARIAN and KRULL. Good catch.
ProjectX2
Don't expect me to take you with me when I go to s
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2004
- Messages
- 25,007
What about Transformers (2007) and Star Trek (2009)?
Bass
Nexus of the World
I put the 2009 STAR TREK in my original list. Bay's TRANSFORMERS could be considered a hero's journey.
ProjectX2
Don't expect me to take you with me when I go to s
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2004
- Messages
- 25,007
Bass
Nexus of the World
Oh, those weren't Roman numerals. That was an acronym for... um... Xylophonic Incompetence. Because that movie really messed up with the xylophones? Yeah. No need to feel bad.
