Touching on the theme of fellow blogger/writer-in-training T.S. Bazelli’s writing prompt for last week, I’ve been thinking on the importance of emotion in what we write. Perhaps that’s why this quote jumped out at me.
The good writing of any age has always been the product of someone’s neurosis, and we’d have a mighty dull literature if all the writers that came along were a bunch of happy chuckleheads.
Neurosis, itself, is a bit of a loaded term, implying mental disorder, irrational behavior, and bizarre phobias. But I think there’s something to be learned from the deeper implications of Styron’s quote, here. And that’s that a simple, happy, unchallenged life provides little by way of grist for the writer’s mill.
The raw materials of the writer’s craft are, first, words, and second, emotions. Emotions are the stuff of human beings, and insofar as a writer can capture emotions with words, then a writer has the ability to create characters that are compelling and engaging. And that’s not a feat easily done.
The point suggested here is simple: it’s easier to write about emotions when you’ve felt emotions. And a good story – a story with compelling characters and a compelling plot – is a story in which the characters are not always happy. Characters in such a state of that by implication have no challenge, no urgent need, no impetus with which to drive the story. The fuel of the story is the character’s dissatisfaction, regret, pain, confusion, uncertainty, fear, love, obsession, passion, hunger. Necessity, they say, is the mother of invention. Need is the mother of plot – a character has to have an unmet need, and a character with an unmet need is a character with a complex emotional response.
So chew on that for a while, as you contemplate the midbook lull… what need leaves your character unfulfilled? How does she or he feel about that?