#writing conflict

[coffee-stainedwriting]

Fight, flight, freeze, fawn

When someone has adrenaline, they react with one pf the following four responses. If you want to write realistic characters, consider which they would do and then include it in your writing, even if it's very minor, it makes a big difference.

Fight; In an attempt to overcome the complication, the person fights back. Whether this is physical, emotional or spoken, the aim is to best the problem and be on top.

Flight; In an attempt to overcome the complication, the person flees. This can be physical (running from a predator) or mental (stop thinking about the problem). This reaction aims to put distance between the person and the problem.

Freeze; In an attempt to overcome the complication, the person stops their previous action. This can be physical, to avoid being seen or mental, like their thoughts or words stop. The freeze reaction aims to conceal themselves from the complication.

Fawn; In an attempt to overcome the complication, the person attempts to appease. The fawn reaction aims to avoid conflict, physically (talking to complication) or mentally (passing things off)

Keep in mind; sometimes their reactions aren't successful.

Thanks for reading, have a good day!

[ahb-writes]

Writing Problem: The Scenes Are Void of Meaningful Conflict

Problem: The Scenes Are Void of Meaningful Conflict

Solution: Character growth and story arcs don't occur in isolation. Conflict-guided scenes and conflict-guided storytelling, more broadly, open the narrative to moments in which the characters are continuously tested to validate their knowledge, skills, or relationships.

To drive the story forward with measured purpose, focus on building, developing, and testing a character's desires. If necessary, implement story or relational dynamics to economically assess, judge, and curate a character's failure (and the consequences thereof). Conflict needn't be grandiose; writers must be in tune with the different levels, types, and intensities of conflict that drive their story. Conflict should be multifaceted.

Writing Resources:

A Few Words About Conflict (Glimmer Train Press)

Conflict Thesaurus (One Stop for Writers)

6 Secrets to Creating and Sustaining Suspense (Writer's Digest)

Emotions in Writing: How to Make Your Readers Feel (Jericho Writers)

The Primary Principles of Plot: Goal, Antagonist, Conflict, Consequences (September C. Fawkes)

How to Master Conflict in Young Adult Fiction (Writer's Edit)

Failure, Conflict, and Character Arc (Writers in the Storm)

❯ ❯ Adapted from the writing masterpost series: 19 Things That Are Wrong With Your Novel (and How to Fix Them)

[physalian]

On writing a double-sided argument

If you’re trying to write a story where there’s multiple arguments/philosophies/POVs going on, and there isn’t supposed to be a clear winner that the audience is supposed to root for, I think one of the best things you can do—and this is just from experience with other people, haven’t tested it yet with my betas—is to have every side diminish the other into one correct but unfair assumption, ignoring all other traits.

Having one or more parties in the debate be complete nonsense with no leg to stand on won’t have your audience thinking they’re anything other than a willful idiot.

I’ll use my WIP as an example, Eternal Night's TBD sequel.

Side A: Mortals are uniquely brutal and bigoted toward each other, basing their entire lives on superficial prejudices and love nothing more than tearing each other down in the perpetual climb to the top.

Side B: Vampires are unchanging, petty, and arrogant, throwing their weight around and subjugating mortals to feed themselves when there’s plenty proof of concept that cohabitating with willing mortals, or surviving off animals is doable, they want to be superior, so they become slavers.

—

Why Side A sees it the way they do:

Person 1 was enslaved to mortals already as a vampire (in this world slaving goes both ways and that's kinda the whole point) and has seen mortals be particularly brutal to vampires knowing that they will survive any torture done to them, and any living conditions, being treated with less respect and care than livestock.

Person 2 is biracial, and in their village, it was life or death that they could successfully pass, and they watched their parent get humiliated and butchered by the town who only saw them for their skin and hair.

Basically, these two have legit cause to think the way they do, and Side B can’t refute their claims, because these things did happen and do still happen, but Side A refuses to see mortals as above their basest monstrosities, when it concerns ever sharing a world.

Why Side B sees it the way they do:

Person 3’s sheltered life constantly on the brink of starvation or hypothermia is directly caused by vampires triggering a winter apocalypse on half the planet, destroying the environment and sending their people deep underground for 300 years. Even today, vampires have every advantage, and still maintain what they see as a bitter, petty, useless grudge against mortals who can’t hope to stand up to them anyway.

What Person 3 refuses to see is Side A’s proven track record of providing stability and protection, a thriving symbiotic society, wells of knowledge that were never recorded, and simply that they are still people, many of whom did not choose to be here, whose only way out is intentionally getting themselves killed.

—

Basically, neither side is totally wrong, but most importantly, neither side is totally right. Both are only seeing the worst of each other, but that worst is a valid and paramount concern, not to be dismissed lightly.

Choosing sides is inevitable, but I really want it to come down to the characters’ own flaws and refusals to learn, rather than either’s philosophy itself being their downfall, because it needs to be a character-driven conflict, not lore and world history.

A “listen you’re both right and wrong here but this guy went too far trying to win this argument and now here we are with a mess to clean up” kind of thing.

Does that make sense?

A lot of times I’ll see stuff where you have Heroes vs Strawman, where the other side’s argument is weak at best and nonsensical at worst, seeing patterns where none truly exist. They’re wrong just because. They think the way they do just because. It doesn’t matter, you’re siding with the heroes anyway.

Heck, this can also be used to equalize lopsided love triangles where there’s the clear winner and then the delusional loser who hasn’t figured it out yet.

[secondhandsorrows]

The Deal with Character and Plot: Which is More Important?

All stories have characters and plot.

Sometimes as writers, however, we pour all our focus into one of these aspects, overshadowing plot in favor of character, or getting too caught up in plot and leaving character for last. Really, both are the nuts and bolts of story — they work in unison, thriving in tandem. Without the other, the story just falls flat. But, there’s a little something that is the glue between plot and character.

So what is this glue?

That, my friend, is conflict. 

Conflict is the glue that brings together these two aspects, creating balance and making a compelling and engaging story. All good stories have conflict.

It’s helpful to remember that plot is the sequence of external events in a character’s environment  that get the ball rolling, whereas character give a window to the internal, the emotional. Internal conflict is often of the character’s own making: a secret motive, a battle of emotions, the opposing want versus need, the dissatisfaction in their life, the indecisions or hesitations. 

A character tends to get affected by the external events. A messy divorce may lead to one character’s depression before they finally motivate themselves to get a new date, going through multiple failed attempts until they meet their second-soulmate. A character getting a new job may catapult them into —what was supposed to be a fresh start— a waking nightmare as they try to navigate their unfair, demanding workplace. 

With these two examples, we can pinpoint their internal and external conflicts. In the first, we have the character’s external conflict of a heart-breaking divorce and the struggles of moving out and getting the papers settled. As for the internal conflict, this character goes through bouts of depression, wondering if she’ll find anyone for her, before finally getting encouraged to get back out into the dating pool once again, helping her to discover that nothing is too-late or at the end of road.

For the second example, the external conflict is the character navigating their new environment, driven up the wall from tedious work and snobby coworkers, but they can’t leave because of *reasons*. Their internal conflict, in turn, is their dedication as to not quit coupled with their eventual desire to climb the ladder of success. 

We can start to see here that there’s a clear cause-and-effect relationship between the external and internal: one cannot exist without the other. How a character might see the world can impact their relationships and other external factors, such as their environment. Similarly, external events can prompt a character to react or spark inner conflict that they have to deal with in one way or another.

I hope this is helpful. Thanks for reading!

[byoldervine]

What Is Your OC’s Internal Conflict?

Internal conflict is key to writing a character-driven story and helping readers emotionally connect to your characters. The external conflict would be, say, the Hex Squad defeating Emperor Belos and the Emperor’s Coven, but the internal conflict would be Amity breaking away from her mother’s influence, or Willow rebuilding her self-worth after years of bullying broke it down. It relates back to their personal journey of self-growth as they conquer their inner demons rather than an external force

If it helps, feel more than free to comment or reblog to share your own characters’ internal conflicts

[everythinginthefckinworld]

Wow that's nice ☺️

Are you more focused on writing your next book—or actually making money from the one you already wrote? And how will you feel if you started making money with the one you have wrote

The stories I have on Wattpad aren't finished yet. And I'm 17. I don't have the resources to publish yet. But I can't make money from unfinished work. I am working on several ideas too.

[monstersandmaw]

How would you write a conflict with more than two factions? Good faction vs. Evil faction kind of seems too simple and overdone. Any tips on adding different groups clashing over different ideals but each ideology having its own pros and cons?

Figure out what the source of the conflict is. Where does it stem from? What are all the details of the event/reasoning?

Your characters don't have to know all the details, and you don't have to write it into the story, but you should probably know them so that you can see how it can be misinterpreted by all the parties and from all angles.

Was it an honest mistake, or did someone seek to get the upper hand by doing something sneaky/'wrong'?

What information about the truth are the various parties missing?

Is one party manipulating another to gain the upper hand over both? At what point (if at all) do the others realise this?

Is it a pointless, generational issue, à la Montagues and Capulets?

Do some factions get along better than others? Is there hope for reconciliation?

I guess you have to think how your characters/factions think, and examine the 'why' of it.

[tinyreviews]

Writing Tips: Conflict, Tension, and Suspense

Conflict:

A struggle between opposing forces, propelling the narrative.

Forms: Character vs. character, character vs. self, character vs. environment.

Example: "Avatar: The Last Airbender" - Aang’s quest to oppose the Fire Nation’s war of conquest propels the plot.

Tension:

Definition: Emotional strain from unresolved conflicts or challenges.

Build-up: Simmers beneath the surface, creating a constant undercurrent.

Example: “The Hunger Games” - In the early stages of the Games, the ambiguity of Peeta’s intentions give rise to tension between Katniss and him.

Suspense:

Definition: Anticipation of an impending event.

Nature: Heightened state of excitement or anxiety.

Example: "Murder on the Orient Express" - Revelation of the murderer kept a mystery until the end.

Relationship between Conflict, Tension, and Suspense:

Conflict drives the narrative, creating obstacles for characters.

Tension arises from unresolved conflicts, building through anticipation.

Suspense is similar to tension in that both are the anticipation of a happening. Tension is defined. We know the conflict, characters, and stakes involved. Suspense is vague. We know something is about to happen but we usually do not know what, or how, exactly.

Imagine tension as a taut string connecting a character to unresolved conflict. The conflict acts like a force, pulling the character through the plot.

Imagine suspense as a character, well, suspended in open water. They face unknown dangers, such as a potential monster, storm, or rogue wave. We are aware that something bad is about to happen, but not exactly what.

This is part of my Writing Tips series. Everyday I publish a writing tip to this blog.

[fated-mates]

Sarah's conflict class starts tomorrow!

It's a two hour workshop followed by a month of discussions, exercises, a round table with Sophie Jordan, Angelina M. Lopez, and Christopher Rice, and a chance to pick Sarah's brain about her craft.

The class runs 10/6-11/13. Everything is recorded and available for the full month.

Learn more.

[plotting4intuition]

Writing realistic conflict through flawed characters

One thing I learned about characters from writing Harry Potter fanfiction is this: I can always understand where the person I am writing is coming from.

James Potter and Sirius Black don't go around asking: who can I be the meanest to today?

Severus Snape doesn't go around thinking: how can I be evil today?

Whoever's point of view I was writing, be it Peter, Sirius, James, Remus, Severus, Lily - the characters always believed they were in the right and doing the best thing they could in that moment. (Even if they could later realise they could have acted differently.)

Why? Because their flaws blind them or in some way make them incapable of acting the perfect way in all situations / their flaws invite conflict between one another.

James and Sirius are both very anti-dark magic, something we see in Sirius during the series (stemming - in part- from his dislike of his family) and we are told the same about James. They think Severus therefore deserves the lessons they give him - using his own spells against him, humiliating him etc. They are vigilantly by nature, due to a privileged upbringing and in Sirius' case a likely distrust of authority figures.

Severus, on the other hand, is likely intensely curious by nature, and is seeking power from magic, given how powerless he is at home. He doesn't necessarily view dark magic as evil in itself. He also desperately wants to belong, something that makes him vulnerable for influences from his house, especially when he is being alienated by other houses, particularly Gryffindor - curtesy in part of Sirius Black and James Potter. It doesn't mean he takes things lying down. The boy was oppressed and abused by his father, and he is NOT going to suffer the same faith here, so he will fight back.

These interpretations don't have to align with yours. That's not the point of this post. It's not one of the endless Severus Snape vs James Potter discussion. This post is about how the characters are all driven by their own understanding of reality, shaped by their backgrounds and capabilities.

I am not claiming JKR is the best writer out there for this, but writing fanfiction allowed me to understand concepts such as operating within a bounded maximum capacity, writing flaws and writing conflicts, in a way that I never fully understood when I was coming up with my own characters before.

[ahb-writes]

Writing Problem: The Conflict Is Inconsequential, Flash-in-the-Pan

Problem: The Conflict Is Inconsequential, Flash-in-the-Pan

Solution: Many authors struggle to contrive meaningful conflict such that it either shapes or speaks critically to the trajectory of the characters it touches. Conflict is not a consequence or a corollary of scheme or impulse; conflict should develop as the story develops and grow as the character dynamics grow.

Explore character through conflict by reinforcing their goals and their perceptions (of reality), as well as the plausibility of maintaining either. Use conflict to reveal blind spots, biases, or fears. Conflict doesn't narrow the possibility of who characters are, or what the story might convey; conflict opens characters (or readers) to new methodologies, new stakes, and possibly new goals, as a result of enduring or overcoming the fracas in question. Conflict adds depth.

Writing Resources:

Conflict Thesaurus (One Stop for Writers)

Need Compelling Conflict? Choose A Variety of Kinds (Writer's Helping Writers)

How to Draw Readers in Through a Character's Choices (Writers Helping Writers)

Exactly How to Create and Control Tone (September C. Fawkes; ahbwrites)

Are Your Conflicts Significant? (September C. Fawkes)

Tension vs. Conflict (Hint: They Aren't the Same Thing) (September C. Fawkes)

How to Write a Dystopian Story: Our Gide (Jericho Writers)

Plot Conflict: Striking True Adversity in Stories (Now Novel)

How to Use Central Conflict and Drama to Drive Your Novel (Now Novel)

❯ ❯ Adapted from the writing masterpost series: 19 Things That Are Wrong With Your Novel (and How to Fix Them)

[sarahmaclean]

This one is for the writers!

Before Romance Writers of America ... imploded, I think, is the right way of describing it? I gave my Mastering the Art of Great Conflict workshop almost every year at the national conference. Since the pandemic, I haven't given it in person, but last year, I gave it online, as part of a week-long discussion of how to plot, structure, and write conflict -- internal and external!

It was a big success, and people seemed to find it really interesting, so I'm doing it again next month!

The class will run the week of August 6, 2023 and include:

A live two-hour presentation on building and maintaining strong, believable conflict in storytelling (live, August 6 at 2pm et, recording available for 30 days),

A participant-only live panel of bestselling authors Amanda Cinelli, Adriana Herrera and Joanna Shupe, discussing the ways they build conflict in their books. Participants will be able to submit questions to the panel as part of the course (live, August 9, 7pm et, recording available for 30 days),

An optional discussion board where participants can ask me in-depth questions and discuss the content of the class. The boards will remain up after the class is complete for 30 days, so participants can engage as a writing community, and

A reading and resource list including all books and materials referenced in the workshop, provided by email and in the Discord community after the course.

Space is limited to 100 participants. To learn more and register, please visit my website!

[novlr]

"While there are many models for conflict, with disagreements on how many categories and subcategories exist to create the tension your story needs, I prefer to align with Aristotle and stick to the basic three (with updated nomenclature).

The only categories I need are Characters vs. Themselves, Characters vs. their Environment, and Characters vs. Others. Using Aristotle’s broad categories helps me simplify the process of selecting quality obstacles to boost conflict for my main characters."

[thepedanticbohemian]