A Quick Note on Narrative in Fiction Writing for the Novice Writer

 

 A Quick Note on Narrative in Fiction Writing for the Novice Writer

 

by Ryker J. Phoenix

 Narrative is a crucial element of any novel, providing the structure and framework for the story to unfold. At its most basic level, narrative refers to the sequence of events that make up the plot of a novel, but it encompasses much more than that. The narrative style, point of view, and voice all contribute to the reader's experience of the story and play a crucial role in shaping their understanding and engagement with the text.

Narrative style refers to the way in which the story is told, and can range from the straightforward and linear to the complex and experimental. Some novels use a traditional third-person omniscient narrator, while others employ a first-person or unreliable narrator, or even multiple perspectives. The narrative style can also be influenced by literary devices such as flashbacks, foreshadowing, and symbolism, which can add depth and complexity to the story.

Point of view is another important aspect of narrative, as it determines who is telling the story and how much information the reader has access to. A first-person narrator offers a limited perspective, as the reader only sees the events through the eyes of the protagonist, while a third-person narrator can provide a more objective view of the story. The choice of point of view can also influence the reader's emotional response to the story, as it affects their connection to the characters and their understanding of their motivations and actions.

Voice is the final element of narrative, and refers to the author's unique style and tone. A strong narrative voice can draw the reader in and create a sense of intimacy with the story, while a weak or inconsistent voice can be distracting and disorienting. The author's voice can also be influenced by the genre of the novel, with some genres such as romance or comedy emphasizing a more light-hearted and playful tone, while others such as horror or tragedy may require a more serious and somber voice.

In conclusion, narrative is an essential component of any novel, providing the structure and framework for the story to unfold. The narrative style, point of view, and voice all contribute to the reader's experience of the story and can shape their understanding and engagement with the text. By carefully choosing and crafting these elements, authors can create a compelling and unforgettable narrative that resonates with readers long after the book is finished.

Also see:

• How to Ground Your Reader with Story Setting

 

 More Quick Notes for the Novice Writer

Stephen King on the Craft of Short Story Writing (Video)

Stephen King on the Craft of Short Story Writing

 

 

5 Key Moments in This Video

 

From
00:03
The art of the short story
From
01:14
The novel is a quagmire for young writers
From
02:21
Short stories are a sliver of a novel
From
02:38
Short stories can balloon into novels
From
03:02
Three stories in Just After Sunset that are novel-length

A Quick Note on Settings and Atmosphere in Fiction Writing for the Novice Writer by Ryker J. Phoenix

 

 A Quick Note on Settings and Atmosphere in Fiction Writing for the Novice Writer

 

by Ryker J. Phoenix

 

When reading a story, the setting and atmosphere play a crucial role in immersing readers into a vivid story world. By creating a sensory experience for the reader, authors can transport their readers to a different time, place, or even universe. Setting and atmosphere are two literary tools that writers use to make the reader feel as though they are part of the story.

The setting is the physical location and time period in which the story takes place. It can be as specific as a city street corner in downtown New York City in the 1960s or as broad as a fantasy world inhabited by mythical creatures. The setting provides a backdrop for the plot and shapes the characters, influencing their behavior, values, and beliefs. But it’s not just about painting a picture of the location, it’s about using sensory details to bring it to life.

One way to bring the setting alive is to describe the sounds, smells, and textures of the environment. For example, describing the sound of waves crashing on the shore, the smell of saltwater in the air, and the feel of the sand between one's toes can transport the reader to a beach scene. By using sensory details, the reader feels as though they are experiencing the location firsthand.

Atmosphere refers to the emotional tone or mood of the story. It is created by the setting, characters, and plot, and it sets the tone for the reader’s emotional experience. A tense atmosphere will keep the reader on the edge of their seat while a peaceful atmosphere may lull the reader into a sense of calm. It is the writer’s job to set the atmosphere and bring the reader along for the ride.

The atmosphere can be created through the use of descriptive language, symbolism, and pacing. For example, describing a dark, ominous sky can set a foreboding atmosphere, while the constant ticking of a clock can create a sense of urgency. By using these techniques, writers can tap into the emotional state of the reader, leaving them feeling elated, scared, or even sad.

In conclusion, setting and atmosphere are crucial tools in bringing a story world to life. By using vivid sensory details, symbolic language, and pacing, writers can transport readers to a different place and time. When done well, the reader feels as though they are part of the story, creating a deeper and more meaningful experience. So, the next time you sit down to write, remember to harness the power of setting and atmosphere to create a story world that jumps off the page.

 

Also see:

• How to Ground Your Reader with Story Setting

 

 More Quick Notes for the Novice Writer

Actions and Subtexting by Randy Ingermanson | Advanced Fiction Writing

 

Actions and Subtexting

 

by Randy Ingermanson 

 

Advanced Fiction Writing

 

In the last article, I showed an
extended example of subtexting in dialogue, taken from
Robert Ludlum's novel THE MATARESE CIRCLE. When I wrote
that column, I reread the entire 500+ page novel
looking for the best example of subtexting I could find.

While reading it, I also found a terrific example of
using actions to add a subtext to dialogue. This month,
I want to show you that example.

Most of us have heard the cliche that "actions speak
louder than words." Usually, it's understood that the
actions are subconscious giveaways that undermine the
speaker's words.

In the example I'll show, the actions are very
consciously chosen to negate the speaker's words. Why
would Robert Ludlum want to do that? You'll see...

Some background on the scene is in order. KGB agent
Vasili Taleniekov is a man on the run. He's searching
for information on a shadowy international organization
called the "Matarese" which is trying to destabilize
the world using terrorists as pawns.

Taleniekov is on his way to visit an old girlfriend in
Leningrad on a brutally cold winter day. He hasn't seen
her in years, and he knows that if he's being followed,
he'll endanger her, but he must take that risk. Her
name is Lodzia Kronescha and she can help him find the
truth. He expects that she'll be asleep when he
arrives. It doesn't occur to him that the Matarese
might already know about  her.

Here's the passage we'll analyze:


He knocked on her door. Within seconds he heard the
footsteps beyond, the sound of leather heels against
hard wood. Oddly, she had not been in bed. The door
opened halfway and Lodzia Kronescha stood there fully
clothed -- strangely clothed -- in a bright-colored
cotton dress, a summer dress, her light-brown hair
falling over her shoulders, her sharp aquiline face set
in a rigid expression, her hazel-green eyes staring at
him -- staring at him -- as if his sudden appearance
after so long were not so much unexpected as it was an
intrusion.

"How nice of you to drop by, old friend," she said
without a trace of an inflection.

She was telling him something. There was someone inside
with her. Someone waiting for him.

"It's good to see you again, old friend," said
Taleniekov, nodding in acknowledgment, studying the
crack between the door and the frame. He could see the
cloth of a jacket, the brown fabric of a pair of
trousers. There was only one man, she was telling him
that, too. He pulled out his Graz-Burya, holding up his
left hand, three fingers extended, gesturing to his
left. On the third nod of his head, she was to drive to
her right; her eyes told him she understood. "It's been
many months," he continued casually. "I was in the
district, so I thought I would..."

He gave the third nod; she lunged to her right. Vasili
crashed his shoulder into the door -- into the left
panel, so the arc would be clean, the impact total --
then battered it again, crushing the figure behind it
into the wall.


Randy sez: Let's separate out the dialogue first and
see what it's saying on the surface:


"How nice of you to drop by, old friend," she said.

"It's good to see you again, old friend," said
Taleniekov. "It's been many months. I was in the
district, so I thought I would..."


Randy sez: This dialogue is so banal, it hurts to look
at it. This is the sort of dialogue your high school
creative writing teacher told you NEVER to write. But
the actions that come with the dialogue completely
subvert the words. And both Lodzia and Taleniekov
intend them to do exactly that.

We need a little backstory here. Lodzia has been
visited by an agent of the Matarese and questioned
about Taleniekov. The agent expects that Taleniekov may
come visit her, and if so, he tells her that she should
welcome him without revealing that she's not alone. The
agent intends to kill Taleniekov. So Lodzia has
consciously prepared herself to tip off Taleniekov with
actions -- actions that the Matarese agent won't know
are abnormal.

Let's spell out those actions in detail and see what
makes them work.

* Lodzia is wearing leather shoes at an hour when she
should be asleep in bed. Even before she opens the
door, she is communicating by her heel-clacking to
Taleniekov that something is wrong. The message that
she communicates to the Matarese agent is different --
he assumes that she has put on her shoes because she's
EXPECTING Taleniekov.

* Lodzia has put on a dress, even though it's bedtime.
And it's a summer dress, even though it's winter. The
visual message she is sending to Taleniekov is that
"something is wrong." Once again, the Matarese agent
gets a different message. The fact that she puts on a
dress tells him that she is planning on receiving a
guest. The fact that it's a summer dress, rather than
appropriate winter wear, escapes him, as it would
escape most men. (Lodzia tells Taleniekov this after
the big fight.)

* When Lodzia put on her dress, the Matarese agent
insisted on watching. She put up no protest, sending
him the message that she's a floozy sort of woman who
is planning on entertaining her gentleman friend.
(Lodzia explains all this to Taleniekov a bit later in
the scene.)

* When Lodzia opens the door for Taleniekov, she shows
no surprise at seeing him for the first time in five
years. Instead, her face is set in a rigid expression
and her eyes stare at him. This tells Taleniekov, once
again, that something is horribly wrong. The Matarese
agent, hidden behind the door, probably can't see her
face and eyes, but even if he could, they would tell
him only that she's expecting Taleniekov.

* When Lodzia speaks, her voice is flat and
expressionless, belying her words, which would normally
be spoken in a warm greeting. In technical terms,
Lodzia is using "paralanguage" to transmit a different
message than the words convey. The Matarese agent, as
it happens, is an Englishman with poor Russian, and
it's possible that he's not able to detect this
disconnect. But Taleniekov, a native Russian and a
long-time friend of Lodzia, picks it up instantly.
Lodzia is communicating with numerous actions that
something is very wrong. Yet her words themselves don't
communicate that. The only possible conclusion is that
a stranger is in the room who can hear Lodzia's words
but who can't decipher her strange actions as well as
Taleniekov can.

Taleniekov is the best agent in the KGB, and he
instantly reads this message and spots the stranger
through the crack in the door. He deduces that there is
only one man in the room with Lodzia. Ludlum doesn't
explain this deduction. He simply asserts that she is
telling him this. I'm not entirely sure how she's doing
so.

Taleniekov then does a bit of non-verbal communication
of his own, entirely at odds with his words, which are
just a repetition of Lodzia's own very prosaic words.
He pulls out a gun, which communicates to Lodzia that
he intends to fight. He shows her three fingers and
nods his head to his left to communicate what actions
she should take. These are pretty vague actions, but
Lodzia communicates back through her eyes that she gets
it. Ludlum doesn't quite explain how this works,
relying on the fact that Lodzia knows Taleniekov pretty
well and she's a KGB agent herself, so she should just
know what to do. 

In my view, the scene works pretty well. There are a
couple of unexplained points that are just glossed
over, but overall, the reader buys into it. 

Robert Ludlum specialized in superclever agents who
could read great significance into the smallest details
and instantly respond to the gravest danger. In this
case, he gave us a nice example of using actions to add
subtext to a lethally boring dialogue.

 

---

 

About The Author

Randy Ingermanson is a theoretical physicist and the award-winning author of six novels. He has taught at numerous writing conferences over the years and publishes the free monthly Advanced Fiction Writing E-zine.

 

 Randy Ingermanson Books at Amazon

 

More Advanced Fiction Writing

Subtexting in Dialogue by Randy Ingermanson | Advanced Fiction Writing

 

Subtexting in Dialogue

 

by Randy Ingermanson 

 

Advanced Fiction Writing

 

Broadly speaking, "subtexting" refers to that part of
dialogue which is left unsaid. You can write a dialogue
that is completely "on the nose" in which the
characters say exactly what they are thinking. But in
real life, people often leave a lot unsaid, either
because they can't say it, won't say it, don't know how
to say it, or don't think it's necessary to say it.

For your further reading on subtexting, check out the
book GETTING INTO CHARACTER by Brandilyn Collins.

This month, we'll look at an example of subtexting in
THE MATARESE CIRCLE, by Robert Ludlum. Ludlum is best
known for his Jason Bourne trilogy, but I like

THE MATARESE CIRCLE, better.

A little background on the book: THE MATARESE CIRCLE is
a conspiracy novel, written in the late 70s at the
height of the Cold War. At that time, spy novels
pitting a "good guy" CIA agent against a "bad guy" KGB
agent were common. (In some cases, the CIA guy was
"bad" and the KGB guy was "good.") But generally, both
the "good guy" and the "bad guy" were Xtremely
competent -- they were matched opponents in a battle to
the death.

THE MATARESE CIRCLE flipped those conventions around by
forcing an ultra-competent CIA man to work with his
sworn enemy, an equally talented KGB officer. The two
men had a shared backstory: The KGB man had once killed
the wife of the CIA man, who retaliated by killing the
brother of the KGB guy. But now, a worldwide conspiracy
is set to take over both the US and Russia, and both of
our uber-agents are marked for death by the
conspirators. Only by working together can the two
arch-enemies save the world. A good solid high-concept
story.

The following example features the KGB man, Vasili
Taleniekov. His task is to go back into Russia to smoke
out some information on the conspiracy. This is a tough
job, because he's a wanted man and his picture is
posted in every KGB office in Russia. The KGB is
claiming that Taleniekov has defected to the US and
should be shot on sight. In truth, he is a loyal
Russian intent on saving the Motherland from the
conspiracy.

Taleniekov enters Russia from Finland, using a Finnish
agent who believes he is American, and who has
therefore "helped" him by setting up a driver -- an
incompetent KGB agent who is currently an informer for
the Americans. The driver's name is Maletkin. Our man
Taleniekov must prevent Maletkin from panicking, must
persuade him to help gather the information, and must
find a way to get him hanged as a traitor.

Here then is the scene. I'll show it complete and then
analyze the subtexting. Taleniekov has approached
Maletkin's car while shielding his face, so Maletkin
has not yet recognized him. The scene begins with
Taleniekov leaning down into view and shoving his gun
in Maletkin's face.


"Good morning, Comrade Maletkin. It is Maletkin, isn't
it?"

"My God! You!"

With his left hand, Taleniekov reached in and held the
flashlight, turning it slowly away, no urgency in the
act. "Don't upset yourself," he said. "We have
something in common now, haven't we? Why don't you give
me the keys?"

What . . . what?" Maletkin was paralyzed; he could not
speak.

"Let me have the keys, please," continued Vasili. "I'll
give them back to you as soon as I'm inside. You're
nervous, comrade, and nervous people do nervous things.
I don't want you driving away without me. The keys,
please."

The ominous barrel of the Graz-Burya was inches from
Maletkin's face, his eyes shifting nervously between
the gun and Taleniekov, he fumbled for the ignition
switch and removed the keys. "Here," he whispered.

"Thank you, comrade. And we are comrades, you know
that, don't you? There'd be no point in either of us
trying to take advantage of the other's predicament.
We'd both lose."

Taleniekov walked around the hood of the car, stepped
through the snowbank, and climbed in the front seat
beside the morose traitor.

"Come now, Colonel Maletkin -- it is colonel, by now,
isn't it? -- there's no reason for this hostility. I
want to hear all the news."


Randy sez: In this short section, Vasili Taleniekov
accomplishes the first of his objectives -- he prevents
Maletkin from panicking.

Both men are in a very tight spot. Each is certain that
the other is a traitor to Mother Russia. Each distrusts
the other. Each would be better off with the other man
dead.

Yet Taleniekov is in complete control of the situation,
whereas Maletkin is sweating his socks off. What makes
the difference?

Two things. First, Taleniekov was first to recognize
the other man, so he's had the advantage of a few
minutes of preparation before their meeting. Second,
Taleniekov is a skilled agent, whereas Maletkin is a
plodding incompetent who has risen to second-in-command
at an obscure KGB outpost by reason of seniority.

These differences show up in their first exchange of
dialogue:


Line 1: "Good morning, Comrade Maletkin. It is
Maletkin, isn't it?"

Line 2: "My God! You!"


Randy sez: In Line 1, Taleniekov speaks calmly,
matter-of-factly, greeting Maletkin by name. The
subtext here is that "everything is normal." Taleniekov
knows full well that Maletkin is dangerous. The man
might try to ram him with the door, or pull a gun, or
try to drive off, or radio for help, or any number of
other obnoxious things. Taleniekov would then be forced
to shoot Maletkin, but he'd rather not. By speaking
calmly as if there is no danger, he actually REDUCES
the danger.

In Line 2, Maletkin says exactly what he's thinking. He
had believed he was picking up an American infiltrator.
Instead, he's picking up the famous Vasili Taleniekov,
who now knows that he, Maletkin, is a traitor. Rumors
say that Taleniekov is also a traitor, but . . . is he?
Maletkin can't know and he's terrified. His dialogue
carries no subtext.

In the next exchange, Taleniekov moves from words to
actions. Again, he moves calmly and deliberately, in
full control of the weak-minded Maletkin:


Line 3: With his left hand, Taleniekov reached in and
held the flashlight, turning it slowly away, no urgency
in the act. "Don't upset yourself," he said. "We have
something in common now, haven't we? Why don't you give
me the keys?"

Line 4: What ... what?" Maletkin was paralyzed; he
could not speak.


Randy sez: In Line 3, Taleniekov moves the flashlight
out of his eyes and then assures Maletkin that they are
both traitors. This reduces Maletkin's biggest fear --
that Taleniekov will expose him to the KGB. Then,
Taleniekov calmly asks for the keys. The subtext is
that Maletkin is in no danger.

In Line 4, Maletkin's jabbering makes it clear that he
is still out of control, but he is paralyzed into
inaction. Again, Maletkin's lines carry no subtext. He
is too much of a dullard to use subtexting.


Line 5: "Let me have the keys, please," continued
Vasili. "I'll give them back to you as soon as I'm
inside. You're nervous, comrade, and nervous people do
nervous things. I don't want you driving away without
me. The keys, please."

Line 6: The ominous barrel of the Graz-Burya was inches
from Maletkin's face, his eyes shifting nervously
between the gun and Taleniekov, he fumbled for the
ignition switch and removed the keys. "Here," he
whispered.


Randy sez: In Line 5, Taleniekov tells Maletkin exactly
what he's thinking -- that he doesn't trust him. But he
does it in a nice way: "You're nervous, comrade" -- and
again, his voice is calm and sure. The subtext is clear
-- "I am in control, even if you are just about to wet
your pants."

In Line 6, the gun provides Maletkin with all the
persuasion he needs. His fumbling actions make it clear
that while he is not in control of the situation, he is
also not going to do anything stupid. He's going to do
whatever Taleniekov tells him. This paragraph is so
nicely done that most readers will ignore the run-on
first sentence, which really should have been fixed by
the editor.


Line 7: "Thank you, comrade. And we are comrades, you
know that, don't you? There'd be no point in either of
us trying to take advantage of the other's predicament.
We'd both lose."

Line 8: Taleniekov walked around the hood of the car,
stepped through the snowbank, and climbed in the front
seat beside the morose traitor.

Line 9: "Come now, Colonel Maletkin -- it is colonel,
by now, isn't it? -- there's no reason for this
hostility. I want to hear all the news."


Randy sez: In Line 7, Taleniekov assures Maletkin that
they are on the same side and that it would make no
sense for either of them to try to take advantage. This
is a flat lie. Taleniekov intends to force Maletkin to
drive him to Leningrad, which will mean an awkward
all-day absence from his real job at local KGB
headquarters. Furthermore, Taleniekov intends to find a
way to get Maletkin executed.

In Line 9, Taleniekov picks up the dialogue in a
mock-friendly bantering tone that leaves no doubt that
he is in charge and Maletkin had better do whatever he
tells him.

I don't have space to show you how Taleniekov bullies
Maletkin into driving him to Leningrad. However, I
think it's worth showing a couple of lines a bit
further down, in which Taleniekov sets a trap for
Maletkin. They've been discussing the past few years,
and Taleniekov idly mentions that he once heard
Maletkin's name during a counter-intelligence
investigation. Maletkin responds fearfully:


Line 10: "Me? I was brought up?"

Line 11: "Don't worry. I threw them off and protected
you. You and the other man in Vyborg."


Randy sez: In Line 10, Maletkin reacts once again with
no subtexting, saying exactly what he thinks. He's
terrified that KGB has ever entertained the idea that
he, Maletkin, might be a traitor.

In Line 11, Taleniekov responds with a series of lies.
He implies that he, too, has been a traitor for some
years. He says explicitly that he protected Maletkin
from suspicion. Then he drops the bomb in an apparently
off-the-cuff comment: he claims that there is a second
traitor in KGB Vyborg, (where Maletkin works). 

Maletkin immediately reads the subtext of this claim --
knowing the name of another traitor would give him a
lot of power over that man. Maletkin will do anything
to get the name of that traitor. Taleniekov promises to
give him the name when they've finished their excursion.

In reality, there is no other traitor, and Taleniekov's
goal here is to get Maletkin to cooperate fully for
this mission and then to incriminate himself when he
returns to work. 

In the above example, we've seen an example of
one-sided subtexting. Maletkin's half of the dialogue
has no subtext. Taleniekov's half is packed full of
subtext. There's no question which half is more fun to
read.

 

---

 

About The Author

Randy Ingermanson is a theoretical physicist and the award-winning author of six novels. He has taught at numerous writing conferences over the years and publishes the free monthly Advanced Fiction Writing E-zine.

 

 Randy Ingermanson Books at Amazon

 

More Advanced Fiction Writing

A Quick Note on Dialogue in Fiction Writing for the Novice Writer by Ryker J. Phoenix

 

 A Quick Note on Dialogue in Fiction Writing for the Novice Writer

 

by Ryker J. Phoenix

 

Dialogue is one of the most essential elements of fiction writing. It holds the power to bring characters to life and helps readers feel connected to the narrative. It is through dialogue that the characters can express their thoughts, emotions and reactions to the situations they face in the story. This article will discuss the significance of dialogue in fiction writing and how it helps in the creation of a compelling story.

One of the primary functions of dialogue in fiction writing is to reveal the character's personalities, their relationships, and their motivations. The way a character speaks can tell a reader a great deal about them. For instance, if a character is prone to using slang or speaking in a vulgar manner, it can reveal their social status or background, their level of education or experience. Dialogue can also demonstrate a character's personality traits such as wit, humour, impatience, anxiety, etc. For instance, a character who makes humorous quips without thinking may be seen as irreverent, while another who pauses and reflects before speaking may be seen as introspective.

Furthermore, dialogue is critical in fiction writing because it brings a sense of realism to the story and helps readers feel connected to the characters. Dialogue can transport the reader into the story world and make them feel like they are part of the conversation. It can enhance the emotional impact of a scene by adding depth and resonance to the characters' emotions. Dialogue can allow readers to relate to characters, which is essential for creating compelling stories.

Dialogue in fiction is also essential for advancing the plot of a story. Characters speak for a reason, and it is through dialogue that actions take place. Dialogue can lead to revelations, conflicts, confrontations, and decisions, all of which move the story forward. Without dialogue, the story could feel stagnant, and the characters would never move beyond the opening scenes.

Finally, dialogue brings pacing and tension to a story. Good dialogue is snappy, terse, and full of tension. It keeps readers on the edge of their seats, wondering what will happen next. Dialogue can build suspense, evolve subplots within the main plot, and add richness to the story. It offers readers a break from long paragraphs of description and action and provides fresh voices, which invigorate a story’s plot.

In conclusion, dialogue is an essential aspect of creating good fiction writing. It reveals characters, advances the plot, and brings a sense of realism to the story. Dialogue is also a powerful way to engage readers, enhance emotional impact, and create tension. Writing good dialogue is a skill that writers can use to bring their characters to life and keep readers connected and engaged with the story.

 

Also see:

• How to Write Dialogue: 7 Great Tips for Writers (With Examples)

 

 More Quick Notes for the Novice Writer

A Quick Note on Types of Conflict in Literature for the Novice Writer by Ryker J. Phoenix

 

 A Quick Note on Types of Conflict in Literature for the Novice Writer

 

by Ryker J. Phoenix

 

Conflict is one of the major themes in literature, and it is essential for the development of the plot and characters in stories. Conflict acts as a catalyst, creating tension and suspense, and it helps to engage readers by generating curiosity about the eventual outcome of the story. There are various types of conflicts in literature, and understanding them is essential for analyzing and interpreting literary works effectively.

Man vs. Self Conflict is the most common type of conflict prevalent in literature. This kind of conflict occurs as a result of internal struggles that characters face within themselves. In such conflicts, a character's thoughts, feelings, fears and internal dilemmas are pitted against each other. In this type of conflict, the characters are presented with difficult choices and decisions, which they must make. For example, in William Shakespeare’s "Hamlet," the protagonist Hamlet's decision to take revenge on his father's killer is an example of a man vs. self-conflict. He battles his conscience and doubts whether he should go ahead with his revenge plans, or instead focus on getting on with his life.

Man vs. Man Conflict is another type of conflict found in literature. In such conflicts, two or more characters are in opposition to each other, resulting in intense competition or rivalry. This kind of conflict is often fueled by differences in values, beliefs, personalities, or goals of the characters. For instance, in Harper Lee’s "To Kill a Mockingbird," the main character Scout battles with Bob Ewell's daughter Mayella, who accuses Scout's father of rape, which he did not commit. Scout and Mayella are pitted against each other, and they both defend their sides vigorously, leading to a dramatic and intense conflict.

Man vs. Nature Conflict is also quite common in literature. This type of conflict typically features a character struggling with the elements of nature, such as weather, animals or illness. In this type of conflict, the character is in a battle against a natural force, which may act as an obstacle or an enemy. For example, in "The Old Man and The Sea” by Ernest Hemingway, the protagonist, Santiago, battles a huge marlin in the ocean for three days, leading to a win or lose situation for the old man.

Man vs. Society Conflict is another popular conflict in literature. In this type of conflict, a character is in opposition to the norms, values or traditions of society. This conflict often arises as a result of differences in class, culture, race, or gender. For example, in "To Kill a Mockingbird," Attie, the protagonist, faces societal pressures and prejudices as he defends a black man in court during a racially charged period in history.

Man vs. Technology Conflict is also becoming a more prevalent conflict featured in literature, with the advancements in technology present in modern society. In this type of conflict, a character struggles with a machine, device or computer system, which is often portrayed as a menacing force competing against humanity. This conflict is often used in Science Fiction literature, such as George Orwell's "1984," in which the protagonist, Winston, battles a futuristic society controlled by artificial intelligence.

In conclusion, conflict plays a significant role in literature, and the different types of conflict form the building blocks of various literary works. Understanding these types of conflicts is essential for analyzing and interpreting literature effectively. Whether it is man vs. self, man vs. man, man vs. nature, man vs. society or man vs. technology, conflict remains a powerful and necessary tool that creates the tension and suspense needed to keep readers engaged and interested in a story.

 

Also see:

• 7 Types of Conflict in Literature: How to Use Them (with Examples)

 

 More Quick Notes for the Novice Writer