Plot driven vs. character driven

I want to make a confession. I really don't know the difference or if there's much difference between plot-driven and character-driven works. Sure, I know the definitions that are out there. And I know there have been discussions here on this topic, but when I'm reading or writing I never think about this. I do think more about the plot while I'm writing. I'm big on lots of stuff happening. But, at the end of the day, I would probably classify my work as character driven if I had to pick one.

I see literary journals say they publish character-driven stories. I've never seen any publication (including genre pubs) say they want plot-driven stories. Never. Why is that?

I guess I don't really understand the difference. I don't think it really has to do with internal or external factors affecting the character(s). And I don't think it has to do with any certain type of character arc or plot structure. I say that based on reading both literary journals that publish so-called character-driven work and genre publications that don't say anything about this sort of thing. I think we've been kind of led to believe that to believe that genre means more plot-driven.

Is there really a divide? I'm not so sure there is. A good story is a good story and doesn't skimp on character or plot. And in a good story I'm not so sure it's easy to make this kind of distinction. What do you guys think?

 

Plot driven is a story about how a character gets from A to B.

Character driven is a story about how a Character gets from a to b.

Simple!

(while not specifying plot driven precisely, I have read guidelines that pretty much equivalate and I tend not to submit)

 

I think the distinction is silly and it won't tell me anything about the story.

This could be a case of poor verbiage: is 'character driven' a roundabout way of signalling more internal conflict? That would at least make sense as a request: "We're looking to publish stories that focus on internal conflict."

 

Characters drive the plot, and plot drives the characters.

 

But what does that mean "drives the plot?" Honestly, I don't get that. Character and plot should be as one to get a good story, I think. I don't really separate the two as a reader or writer.

 

So, if you write character-driven stories, how did you come to that conclusion? I've been published by places that say they want character-driven stories which means at least some of the time I do too. But I don't think I would ever use that term exactly to describe my writing. Mainly because I'm really not sure. I mean it probably is, right? But then it's a little funny because when I'm writing I'm focused on the plot than I am the character. I guess I sort of think of it as the character is already there and if I just write a good story it will show what the character is made of.

Can you quote or paraphrase what was in that publisher's guidelines where they indicated they want plot-driven stories? I curious because I don't remember seeing anything like that. Maybe it would help me understand what this plot-driven thing really means. Because, to me, plot-driven seems to indicate or could imply that something in lacking on the character side. And the fact that I've never seen anyone in publishing really use the term. I'm not saying no one does. I just haven't seen it personally.

 

It is silly, isn't it?

I'm not sure a story would have to have an internal struggle to classify as character driven. I mean everyone in the world has internal struggles, but I don't think you ever want that to overshadow the plot.

 

Okay, I feel like I should admit that although I am very big on plot and stuff happening I really like to do on a subdued and mundane level. That's probably what makes it literary fiction. But that's more of a style or POV thing. I mean can any story in third person omniscient be a character-driven story? Think about if there is no main character, but instead characters given equal weight in a story. Can you have a characters-driven story?

 

So perhaps the distinction is more important for stories that are, shall we say, less good? Plenty of stories do skimp on characters, after all. Dan Brown's novels come to mind; Robert Langdon is just a personalityless puzzle solving machine who follows the bad guy's clues without ever making a serious decision. And on the other side, there's no shortage of navel-gazing character studies that never really go anywhere. And honestly, I can't even say those extremes are really bad - even I enjoyed some of Brown's books despite their ridiculousness, for instance.

I really think the terms are better used for the writing process than for finished work. I'm definitely a plot-driven writer: I tend to start with an idea and mold my characters to fit the story I want to tell. If I do a good job, then the final story feels like it's the natural result of the characters making their own decisions, but if I miss something then the characters can feel like they were plugged into the wrong story. And I know other writers work in the opposite direction, starting from their characters and an initial situation and then writing out what they think those characters would do, wherever it takes the story. And there's plenty of room in-between the extremes.

As for the idea that genre fiction leans towards plot-driven work, some of that is just a long-lingering leftover from the pulp days. Even the classics from that era tended to have paper-thin characters; most of Asimov's robot stories were just logic puzzles solved by human characters who could be summed up as "competent spaceman number 1." I'm sure the filler stories that nobody reads anymore were even worse. Genre fiction has gotten considerably more sophisticated since those days, of course, but I think it's still easier to get away with mediocre (though not poor) characterization if you have an interesting concept. People call SF the "literature of ideas" for a reason.

 

I've got to admit my recall is poor even for places where I do submit. I know I've seen submission pages stress that they're looking for a story where there's structure, sometimes specifying they want a dilemma the character must overcome with growth and resolution. That all to me sounds like a templated story outline into which a character drops in to put a face to the events. I'll keep a more measured eye out and make reference when I see it again.

I was thinking of opening a thread on what people here consider a story- i.e. what are the essential elements that comprise "story". I might piggy back on this one, seeing s it is a related topic, though emphasise it's not argumentative, just interested in what writers on the forum prioritise when writing. These things often turn into some pursuit of winning an argument, which is ridiculous when there's space (however tiny and remote) for all kinds of perspectives and approaches.

It's been pointed out to me repeatedly that my compositions don't qualify as stories, as such. Not a lot happens in many of them, so there may be a point. I still try to write something interesting or otherwise engaging. Is it a story? Does it matter?

Personally, I have a strong aversion to some advice that's given about essential ingredients for telling a story, particularly the idea of character arc. The hero's journey in particular, the idea of growth through adversity, galls me. That may be because it's the one that, in real life, is presented most often and, in real life, is facile and superficial and, well, utter bollocks. Of course people can change, the addict can get clean, the character can find god or lose god, the idiot can learn or whatever. Often times, the change is modification of behaviour rather than identity. I struggle to appreciate a story that reaches a sound resolution at the end. I prefer it just a bit messy, the end is just a good spot to stop for now, but that miserable shit is still a miserable shit, the coward only an accidental hero but still cowering, the hero is strutting around wishing he was in someone else's story. It can come across a bit trite but some publications say they want a unique perspective, something only that author could write, and that's what I look for too, with a command of language (not always florid, sometimes very simple phrasing is exactly what's needed).

Just to muddy the water a little more, character isn't necessarily confined to the people or creatures that populate a story. The narrative style has character. The plot has character. The cover, by which the content should be judged, has character. When I see character-driven, I see it as reference to how each of these concepts (apart from the cover, that's just a joke) is also presented, coming down to what is often termed "voice". Does that hold (muddied) water?

 

I get the impression that you like to defy convention in your work. That is your choice since it is your work.

I will say this on writers that want to defy convention. To do so successfully you need a firm grasp on the Rules of the conventions, before you can defy them effectively.

I would suggest reading Lisa Cron's "Wired for story". I will let the books description give you a better idea than I can.
"Imagine knowing what the brain craves from every tale it encounters, what fuels the success of any great story, and what keeps readers transfixed. Wired for Story reveals these cognitive secrets--and it's a game-changer for anyone who has ever set pen to paper."

Your approach is also governed by your end goal, in your writing. If it is just for your own enjoyment convention doesn't matter. If like some here your goal is to be published then conventions will play a larder part in your approach.

 

There are various 'stories where nothing happens' approaches I'm aware of, including milieu and idea stories, and what I've heard called a 'situation' rather than a story.

Milieu and Idea are both parts of Orson Scott Card's breakdown of story types he calls MICE—Milieu, Idea, Character and Event. In the 20th century character stories have come to dominate almost exclusively, but in earlier times any of these were completley viable. They still are, but attitudes have shifted strongly toward character growth such that even many publishers don't seem aware of the other types, or don't appreciate them because of the widespread shift in public tastes toward character.

• Using the Mice Quotient to Plot Your Novel

Some kinds of stories (where nothing seems to happen) are called Situations rather than stories because there's no traditional character arc or plot resolution. They can still be entertaining or educational or many other things that people value stories for and always have. Again, if you go back and read the classics, many of them don't have these closure devices that have become so popular in modern times. Apparently Stephen King writes a lot of Situations. If you can grab readers the way he (used to), you won't be getting rejections because there's no standard plot resolution or character arc.

• Stories Vs. Situations: How To Know Your Story Will Work In Any Genre

I also understand it's much more common in British stories to use some of these non-standard (today) techniques and devices, such as a narrator just musing and observing life and making some interesting statements on society and people along the way. That's not so popular in the US anymore.

 

Thanks for the tip about the book. But I do have to say that I don't think I'm defying convention. I said earlier that I don't really see the separation of character and plot also as a reader as well as a writer. Also, I do write for publication and have been doing so for a number of years. My failure to believe a story is either plot-driven or character-driven has not hurt me in terms of publishing. I don't see this as any sort of writing rule. I actually think it would be ridiculous if it was.

Let me ask you this. Do you think believing or realizing your work if plot-driven or character-driven has helped you as a writer and if so how? This question is more aimed at everyone here. Because I'm sort of thinking these terms might cause more problems for a writer than help them out. Honestly, just curious.

 

2 more alternatives I just remembered to traditional character-driven story would be the Picaresque and Episodic story.

• picaresque novel @Britannica
• How to Write a Successful Episodic Plot

 

That's not how I see it, not defiance so much as working it out with what works for me.

True, if defiance is the impetus.

Yeah, I think I've made this point previously.

Who knows what those Brits will get up to next (though I would expect, without evidence to cite unless I have to, that non-conformity isn't limited to British writers).

Rather than bounce this stuff around, I'd be more interested on both your takes on the OP. What draws ye in to a piece of writing, a character that's interesting or is it more focus on what might happen next, the progression of the story's plot? Obviously, the whole thing can't simply be separated like that, but where do your priorities lie when reading or writing?

 

Ok, sorry I wasted your time and mine.

 

?

 

Please do let me know if/when you see this again, either here or a DM. I am curious to see how a publication would phrase this.

I think you should start a separate thread on this. Not because I mind anything about it being posted here, but I think it is a topic big enough to get its own discussion. Plus, it's always a good thing to have more than one active discussion going on at once.

When you say things like narrative style and such have character I don't disagree with you, but that's more like saying it has personality and/or some sort of flavor. I'm just saying I don't believe those things really make or define something has being character driven vs. plot driven.

 

Here's a new one I came across on a Duotrope listing. This publication wants "voice-driven" stories. What the hell is that supposed to mean? Don't all our works have a narrative voice of some sorts? Can't it be argued that just about any strong piece of writing is somewhat voice driven? Do we really need another term here that (to me at least) is vague and unnecessary? This term does nothing to tell me what they want. Sure, I can read their stories to find out what they're publishing (which I believe is important when submitting), but I think I'm going to skip this one. The term "voice driven" is even more ambiguous than character or plot driven. They would have been better off just saying they wanted stories with a strong narrative voice, but I kind of think that's a given for any publication and not really what's driving a story.

What do you guys think?

 

I meant defying convention as in going against the conventions. Nothing more than that.

 

I tend ro experiment with different techniques as I hone my craft. For something character focused I have found for myself, the approach from Story Genius, again Lisa Cron, works for me. Taking that kind of deep dive into the characters in a story, has parts of the story writing itself.

Everyone has to find what works for them, which is why I read as much as I can find and experiment.

 

It seems like the 'driven' has become invisible to them through overuse, to the point that they don't know when it doesn't make sense to use the word.

I think it is as simple as them wanting a strong narrator in this case, something very stylized.

Typically a narrator is also a character, so character-driven as a request would be the same thing. By deduction then, they must want a strong, omniscient narrative voice! Haha, probably not.

 

From what I understand, plot-driven stories focus a lot more on what is happening to the characters and the world; the journey to stop the evil Dark Lord, the galaxy-spanning conflict between two star nations, the hero taking on the gangsters. Character-driven stories, on the other hand, focus more on the internal growth of the characters; the protagonist overcoming his traumas and fears, or managing to get over his depression and become happy again, or abandoning his fear of commitment, etch.

Personally, I prefer stories that blend both elements. I would find a character study of an average joe who deals with his inner fears terribly dull but I also wouldn't want to read a space opera where none of the characters stand out and have only the barest and most cliche of characterizations. I like stories where things actually happen and there is a plot, but the characters who participate in this plot evolve and grow as persons.