One of the ideas that I have tried to instill in my creative writing students' minds is that the intrigue of conflict lies not in the problem itself, but in the complications that make the conflict difficult to resolve. Is this a proper way of thinking about the issue? Some feedback would be helpful, because I know hoe to think about conflict when I am writing, but it seems to be missing something when I teach it.
Posted by pixydust (Member # 2311) on :
Examples always help me. Give them a good example of a conflict to resolution, and then a poor example with a weak conflict and resolution.
Just a thought, I'm no teacher.
Posted by CoriSCapnSkip (Member # 3228) on :
Robert Newton Peck said it is "pig simple." "It is two dogs and one bone."
Posted by mikemunsil (Member # 2109) on :
Try getting the kids to come up with the complications, so that they become more involved in the lesson.
"See, there's this big white dog, see? And he has a bone. And there's this other big brown dog, and she wants the bone, see?
Now, why can't the big brown dog just go grab the bone?"
Then duck as the ideas come flying. Depending upon their ages the suggestions could get pretty obnoxious.
Posted by Survivor (Member # 213) on :
Because of the big white dog.
See, if it were just a dog here and a bone there, the resolution would be obvious. But if you have two dogs, then the resolution is difficult, involving much complication.
Providing real complications is really that simple. Also, a unified complex of complications (another dog) is more compelling and believable than a host of smaller, unrelated complications (say...a bunch of fences and hedges).
If you're looking for a different way to say "complications that make the conflict difficult to resolve", then just use different words. I like the antagonist model myself, because it gives you another dog rather than a bunch of uninteresting obsticles. The antagonist doesn't have to be human or even sentient, it simply has to be equal to the protagonist so that overcoming it is a real battle.
Posted by wbriggs (Member # 2267) on :
You might think not of "conflict," but of "struggle."
If John is continually sniping at Mary, that might form a conflict (at least for Mary!). But you can struggle without having a conflict: struggle internally, or struggle with a situation (surviving the blizzard, e.g.).
If someone is trying to accomplish something, and it's uncertain if he'll succeed, and he really cares, I'd say that's a good struggle.
Posted by krazykiter (Member # 3108) on :
Try pointing out the difference between conflict and obstacles.
This isn't technically correct, but I like to view conflict as the overall situation in which the protagonist is involved. Obstacles are story elements that lie between the protagonist and the resolution of the conflict (successful or not) that we, as writers, use to reveal our protagnist's character to the reader.
Posted by arriki (Member # 3079) on :
Concflict is also, your mother wants you to take out the trash. How many ways can you evade the task? How many ways can your mother force the issue?
Posted by djvdakota (Member # 2002) on :
I think I'd say that the conflict itself is less important than the struggles required to resolve it. THAT is the backbone of any story. The introduction of the actual conflict passes quickly, but the resolution of it takes the rest of the story.
