A Stanford Professor Breaks Down Characterization and Story

For those who’re an aspiring screenwriter, then storytelling and character are most likely fairly excessive up in your checklist by way of stuff you need to find out about. Now, I am not an enormous believer in needing movie college, however I do assume you most likely want a mentor. And that may be exhausting to seek out, however fortunate for you, there are many digital mentors on the market who give recommendation on-line. One such particular person is Stanford professor Richard Powers. He is the Pulitzer Prize-winning creator of The Overstory, one of the crucial praised novels of the last decade. However maybe Richard’s most spectacular ability is his character growth. Within the video under, Richard shares 40+ years and 14 novels’ price of perception on how one can write characters that readers can’t get out of their heads.If that sounds good, then maintain studying. Let’s dive in. Once I’m watching these “masterclasses,” I like to simply break down all of the stuff inside them. On the high, Powers dives into the tenets of story, Each story wants an engine, and that engine is battle. Powers breaks it down into three primary varieties you possibly can construct your total script round:Individuals vs. Individuals: The basic hero vs. villain, rival vs. rival. Suppose The Social Community.Individuals vs. Themselves: Your hero is their very own worst enemy. Their inside flaws are the primary impediment. Suppose Good Will Looking.Individuals vs. Surroundings: That is your hero towards a pressure of nature, a damaged system, and even the planet itself. It was once old-school, however now it’s again in an enormous approach with sci-fi and eco-thrillers. Suppose Youngsters of Males or Avatar.Understanding your central battle is like having a compass on your script. It defines your logline and retains your story targeted.From there, you possibly can construct characters out that may be on this world and who make sense on this story. The Character Onion: Peeling Again the LayersYou know, Shrek mentioned he was an onion like 25 years in the past, and I do not assume he received as a lot credit score as this Stanford man. However I digress. Powers desires to make an unforgettable character by treating them like onions. The outer layers are the surface-level issues—how your character clothes, the automobile they drive, their witty dialogue. However the actual magic is within the core. What does your character really worth above all else? Household? Justice? Survival?The perfect scenes, Powers explains, are if you put your character in a scenario the place they’ve to decide on between two of their core values. You pressure them into an not possible alternative. That’s the place the outer layers get peeled again, and the viewers will get to see who your character actually is beneath all of it. Discovering Your Character’s VoiceEver learn a script the place everybody sounds the identical? That’s as a result of the author hasn’t discovered the characters’ distinctive voices. To do that, you possibly can learn stuff aloud or you possibly can attempt to mimic an actor or somebody you need to write for. Powers suggests: Diction (Phrase Selection): Does your character use easy, direct phrases or large, tutorial ones? This alone can inform you the whole lot about their background and character.Syntax (Sentence Construction): Do they converse in lengthy, flowing sentences or brief, punchy fragments?After you resolve these items, you possibly can pull this onion aside and learn the way it sounds. Why “Real looking” Dialogue is Really Dangerous DialogueHere’s a paradox Powers makes use of that may change the way you write: dialogue that feels actual is sort of by no means really real looking.For those who recorded and transcribed an actual dialog, it might be a multitude of “ums,” “ahs,” repetition, and useless ends. It could be boring to learn. Powers argues that dialogue in a narrative is a device. It’s extremely stylized to do a selected job—reveal character, advance the plot, and construct stress. Each line has a function. It’s an phantasm of actual speech, and that phantasm is far more highly effective than the actual factor.I really assume that is most likely true, however real looking dialogue, to most individuals, simply means maintaining stuff not on the nostril. Constructing Rigidity That Grips Your AudienceOne of the core issues about storytelling is that it’s important to have stress. Nobody desires to look at the village of the completely satisfied individuals. Powers outlines a easy, four-part map on your story’s construction that works simply as properly for a two-hour film because it does for a 400-page novel:The Hook: Your opening scene. Seize the viewers and do not let go.The Exposition: Lay the groundwork. Who’re these individuals? What is the world? Do it shortly and get again to the motion.The Rising Motion: That is most of your Act Two. You systematically construct suspense, increase the stakes, and throw obstacles at your hero.The Climax: The explosive peak the place the whole lot involves a head.After that, you’ve got the denouement, or the “untying,” which is your decision. It is a basic construction as a result of it really works. It’s a roadmap for the viewers’s emotional journey.We observe this in screenwriting as properly. The reality is, there are many structural paradigms that work – the explanation most individuals do not succeed is that they only do not end stuff. That is possibly extra necessary than something you possibly can be taught on this video. For those who simply sit, write, and end, you’re going to get higher over time. Summing It All UpAt the top of the day, this interview is a masterclass within the structure of storytelling. It reminds you that writing isn’t some mystical artwork; it’s a craft. Do the work and you may be rewarded. By understanding these core rules—from the engine of battle to the artifice of dialogue—you possibly can cease looking at a clean web page and begin constructing a narrative that actually connects.Let me know what you assume within the feedback.