I've always gone with the generic definition of plot as the main story, the general concept, the promise and delivery set up with word one page one and delivered in the 3rd act denouement. It's the central theme that all other story elements revolve around. I don't think the general idea around a main plot in a movie is all that different than in a novel, but with a novel you can probably have a lot more sub-plots? I'd love to read other peoples thoughts on this - because I think my view on the topic is very limited.

From EM Forster, whose "Aspects of the Novel" I read as a kid and have basically considered THE BIBLE for much of my life: ‘The king died and then the queen died,’ is a story. ‘The king died, and then the queen died of grief,’ is a plot. Meaning, stories are "THEN" -- as in, here's what happened. Plots are "WHY" -- as in, WHY it went down that way.

Plot is the series of events, the "what happens" in a story. More specifically, it's the series ot events that (ideally) engages the protag's weakness and need - that will ultimately allow them to become whole or leave them broken (e.g. tragedy). I am really looking forward to following along with the Quest. Even though I feel ready to type FADE IN, I know the time and tips/skills will better my story. Thanks for keeping us motivated and productive Scott!

> * How would you define plot? How the story unfolds. (So plot combines "what happens" with how the story is told.) Viktor Shklovsky's definition might be helpful: > "...we can consider (...) some terminology stolen from the Russian Formalist critic Viktor Shklovsky. Shklovsky distinguishes story (fabula) and plot (syuzhet) from each other by saying that story is a sequence of narrated events linked by time and causation, while plot is what happens when the story is told—there are almost infinite ways of telling a story, and the vast majority of them move the story farther from a natural or realistic sequence. Plot refers to the way a writer creates and sustains a structure, the way a narrative is arranged, the choices that are made, the style that is applied. In Energy of Delusion: A Book on Plot (translated by Shushan Avagyan), Shklovsky states that "Great literature tries to move away from storyline to plot." > "(...)I keep falling back on Shklovksy's idea that "Great literature tries to move away from storyline to plot," because I find it a useful distinction, a productive way to think about fiction. Readers will disagree about the degree to which specific texts are "great" or "literature" and the width of the gap between storyline and plot (and what value that width ultimately offers), but considering how the formula applies to certain works can lead to interesting insights." -- A Story About Plot, Matthew Cheney, in Strange Horizons magazine > How is plot different in a screenplay compared to a novel? A screenplay plot has to work within the time limitations and the structural conventions of a movie. A novel can be as long as you want and incorporate any kind of structural choices the novelist has the skills to pull off. There are also limits on the complexity most screenplays can handle compared to novels. Who was the director (writer?) who said screenplays tell the simple stories of complicated people? Grrr...I just read that quote yesterday; I'll come back with the attribution if I can find it again. ...which goes to what Lars writes above: "I don’t think the general idea around a main plot in a movie is all that different than in a novel, but with a novel you can probably have a lot more sub-plots?"

Sorry, I'm dead tired. What I meant to add before I got caught up in plot vs story and hit "post": I am thrilled to see The Quest launch (invite- and public editions), and I am really looking forward to the forums launching, too. Thank you very much, Scott.

I think that plot could be understood as the series of events that flow together in some direction(s). Direction could be anything like theme, goal (ex. "be funny") or even another event. Writer sets directions. If any event goes in wrong direction, it is out of the plot. Subplot = subdirections. Screenplay exposes plot via pictures. Novel exposes plot via words.

I love the fact that you're creating a whole forum for those of us on our own Quest. Thanks for the time and effort that has been put into all of this. Regarding plot, Echoing what was said above, I've always seen it as the "what happens" aspect of the story and script. I see the plot as the foundational structure the screenplay is built upon. I think it's analogous to the way that a screenplay is the foundation of a film. If the foundation is weak, then it can't hold up a screenplay or film, no matter how good the other parts are. I'm not sure where story concept fits into this metaphor, because without a good concept, a good plot won't do you any good...it'll just look pretty. Maybe it's a form over function conversation. The concept is the form, the plot is the function. Anywhoo, plot, to me, has a very solid conceptual structure...beginning, middle, end. It's also a learning tool....making sure you understand the basics of story before the major plot points occur. The plot makes sure you have the tools you need to understand the story. I think the main difference between the plot in a novel vs a screenplay is that for a film the plot has to be built upon itself - almost all parts have to be interconnected. It's rising straight up in a linear fashion and if one piece is weak, it can bring down the whole structure. A novel is more spread out, the pieces don't all have to be connected. This is why some shows like The Wire are called more novelistic in nature because not everything that's going on has to be connected at all times. I don't think you can get away with that in a 2 hour film...there's just not enough time. And of course this all reminds me of a great short film called Plot Device (it's been posted on GITS previously, but it's still worth revisiting) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKZfAQ7L_WM much fun.

Excellent comments, everyone. Let me add a few thoughts specific to screenwriting. When I say "Plot = Structure," the text of that is pretty clear: Since a screenplay is at the end of the day a manuscript used to produce a movie, there is a very real, tangible way in which it is about structure. A string of scenes, generally between 60-100, that both tells a story, but also serves as a blueprint for the cast and crew to shoot the movie. But there is some subtext within this 1st Screenwriting Principle and that is to immediately open up our minds to this reality: The screenplay universe is comprised of two parts: The External World and the Internal World. We may think of the External World as the domain of Action and Dialogue, what we see and hear. The Internal World is the domain of Intention and Subtext, we can can interpret and intuit. So much of what transpires in discussions about screenplays focuses on the External World. This is, I believe, one big reason why there is a constant critique in Hollywood about formulaic stories. Somehow if we figure out the plot, we've figured out the story, but in reality, that's only half the story. There is this whole other realm of the Internal World, basically the emotional plot of the story, that exists at every moment of every scene. We may think of it this way: There is the Physical Journey [External World] and the Psychological Journey [Internal World]. If we ignore the latter or only scrape at its surface, we not only run the risk of ending up with a formulaic script, we also find ourselves with thin characters and no emotional resonance in the story. So straightaway with this 1st Principle, I want to pivot the conversation toward character, reminding us that Plot is grounded in the Internal World, the emotional and psychological aspects of a story. Thus when we think of screenplay structure, it is not just plot points and sequences, it is that plus everything else that goes on 'underneath' the action and dialogue. You simply cannot have a great script without fully immersing yourself in both the External World and the Internal World. Hence the subtext of "Plot = Structure."

I have always thought of plot in terms of travel, as in plot a course. The plot, to me, is like what Scott mentioned with the external world--it's the who, what, where, when & a little bit of how. The story comes in with the why and the rest of the how. I look at how as incorporating tone & voice & perspective. Plot is your itinerary; story is the journey.

I try to think of plot as the things that happen to the character to make them change. Some of those things (especially the early ones) are triggered by external forces, but after a certain point the plot and the central character enter a feedback loop - the character reacts in a certain way to what's happened, their reaction causes a certain other thing to happen, which causes them to react in their own unique way... Etc. As far as plot goes, novels mystify me. Which is why I've only ever written one, I guess! I suppose screenplays rely more on plot to illuminate character - we see who the character is through how they act and react - whereas novels have internal monologue and other prose techniques to illuminate character. So that would suggest plot is less important in novels. Which in turn would explain why many films faithfully based on novels are not very good films. But beyond that, I dunno...

Whoa! This-is-a-revelation. I always thought the Plot was the 6 foot deep hole you put a character in to keep the story moving??? It's all a bit high brow for me...

I would agree completely with this. I think plot begins with one event happening and the protagonist making a decision based on that event. That decision leads them to event b and c and so on. The DECISIONS the protagonist makes reveals CHARACTER and the events cause their character to change. This metamorphosis is the story. Good plot does not equal a good story. Shawn Lawrence Otto has an excellent quote, "[...]I fell in love with screenwriting. It’s like story poetry, the most disciplined form of modern writing, where the story is most cleanly exposed and there’s a beating heart left there bleeding on the page, precious, holy and frightening.” Great plot, character, theme, what have you create story. I think that's the most eloquent, beautiful and succinct way I've heard someone describe story.

EM Forster famously defined story and plot as follows: ‘The king died and then the queen died,’ is a story. ‘The king died, and then the queen died of grief,’ is a plot. But what if the king died, and then the queen died of joy? Are we supposed to conclude that that's the same story but with a different plot? How is that helpful? Or even meaningful? As for 'Plot = Structure', I'm sorry, but again, what does that even mean? To take two obvious examples, if we straightened out the timelines of Memento and Pulp Fiction and presented the depicted events in chronological order, it seems to me we'd have exactly the same plots, but quite different structures. So in what sense are 'plot' and 'structure' supposed to be the same thing? And Scott, re your 3:38 post, I'm trying really hard to understand what you're saying, but I'm afraid this just adds to my confusion. You now seem to be talking about text and subtext, which seem to me to be entirely different things to plot and structure. I'm fine with the idea that text and subtext correspond to exterior and interior journeys, respectively. And I entirely agree that characters need to have an inner life or else everything will feel very flat. But how does this lead to your statement that 'plot is grounded in the internal world?' If you mean that the characters in a story have to act in realistically human ways, and that they need to behave as if they have coherent internal goals and fears and desires, then yes, sure. But again, what does this have to do with 'plot'? (Or structure?) And then you say: "structure [...] is not just plot points and sequences, it is that plus everything else that goes on ‘underneath’ the action and dialogue." So 'plot = structure' and 'structure = plot plus a bunch of other things'? I'm sorry to be so pedantic and dense, but I just can't get a grip on this at all. These two statements seem to be both circular and contradictory. (I also don't understand what you mean by the 'subtext' of plot = structure.)

Plot being structure and character, external and internal world, then Pulp Fiction Chronological and Pulp Fiction Non-Chronological are two different plots. Tarantino used that structure because it was the best way to develop character arcs (values, morality) and to enhance style and atmosphere. But you may consider plot in a more restrict way, like line of action and thus the plot would always be the same.

I forgot to clarify this: if Pulp Fiction was told in any other structure, we would perceive the story (specially the internal worlds) in a completely different way.

Hi Diogo, and thanks for your response. Yes, I came into this thinking that 'plot' meant something like 'the events depicted in the text' (or movie), while 'structure' referred to how these events were organized and presented (eg in what temporal order, whose POV, what gets omitted or included, concealed or emphasized, etc). But as you say, that's quite a restricted view of 'plot', and more to the point, it's evidently not how 'plot' (or 'structure') is being used here. (By 'here', I mean GITS /Quest.) OK, so you're saying that 'plot [is] structure and character, external and internal world.' This seems like a promising place to start, and by that definition, then yes, I agree that chronological and non-chronological Pulp Fiction would be two different plots. But I'm not entirely comfortable with that definition because to me, in its totality, the 'external and internal world' is basically the fabula. Whereas I think what's important for the plot is how the fabula - or 'raw story' - is processed and rendered onto the page. So I'd like to modify those terms and combine them with 'character' to end up with -- Plot consists of the text and subtext of what the characters do and say, plus the manner in which this information is organized and presented on the page. I can't help noticing that this is very close to how Scott defines 'structure'. Even so, I think it makes more sense as a definition of 'plot'. What do you think? Does that sound about right? Scott? In other words, 'plot' around here (ie GITS/Quest) basically just means 'syuzhet'?

I understand your point. You're trying to put together "fabula", "syhuzhet", "external world", "internal world" and "character". I'd say the fabula is, like you said, the raw material, comprehending both internal and external world. Fluctuations in actions and themeline. Not only "text and subtext of what the characters do and say" but also what happens around them, admitting the world of the story as an organic whole. Syhuzet is the manner in which we organize all this. This is my understanding. Now, while formulating theories, concepts are not always absolute. Different authors may mean different things with the same word. I can say fabula as I described above is plot and syhuzet is structure. But then, I can also say that plot is fabula plus syhuzet as I described above. And because I can also dilate the meaning of "structure", I can also admit structure is when fabula is shaped by the syhuzet and then it all comes together.

Diogo, that is absolutely true. And I do a lengthy analysis of the nonlinear chronology of Pulp Fiction here to suggest that at some level, QT orchestrated the narrative structure based on a kind of morality tale of two characters: Jules and Vincent. One of them achieved 'enlightenment' and lives. One of them turns away from 'enlightenment' and dies. So again, story structure based on the the story's characters.

Plot, at least in my understanding, is the essential scheme of story; the process by which the hero/protagonist moves from a situation that may be considered 'normal' or 'ordinary' through a series of consequential events of rising conflict to arrive at a resolution that gives the audience satisfaction. For a plot to be functional it needs to provide the ebb-and-flow that causes the central character to swing between positive and negative positions, which becomes more pronounced as it progresses. Some initial constriction at the beginning causes the character to take action or make a decision, this is then followed by a limited easing of the constriction, which is then followed by an increased constriction, leading to the most acute constriction, the crisis, which is then resolved. The functional plot operates in both novels and movies and is the structure that allows the respondent (audience or reader) to experience the emotional payoff of struggle. If the plot does not conform to structure, the respondent will feel as though the work does not represent the emotional reality of life. A plot cannot exist outside of character. It is the character's struggles, both internal (decisions) and external (actions), that are being mapped. In a novel the character's interior thoughts and decisions are more readily available to the respondent than in a movie where it is far easier to demonstrate a character's actions. The plot for a movie, therefore, needs to have 'space' for the character's actions to be driven by internal beliefs and motivations, thus providing a form of objective correlative for resultant actions that may not be necessary in novel form. Character drives plot, therefore in order to create a plot, a character needs to have an unmet need that they are striving to fulfil. But this unmet need requires physical, social and psychological dimensions so that it is understood by the audience. The plot for the writer is the way the character's growth is managed through struggles to meet the need -- both those aspects known to the character (the goal or objective, the problem they are seeking solution to) and those unknown to them (psychological and moral needs, the problems causing the problems). In the end, the writer wants to show the character has developed, grown towards a balance that manifests in the story community. Sometimes the character tilts further and further out of balance resulting in death (tragedy), but that death brings balance to the story community. Other times the character realises he/she is with the wrong person and the final twist in the plot connects the right two characters (comedy) bringing balance both to the character and the story community. While plot is driven by character, its effects are felt by the whole story community, each decision or action is felt in the circuitry of other characters and the circumstances of the story, which in turn affect the main character, showing the character where he/she is in the journey, whether it's a positive or negative polarity, and thus we get the idea of consequential events -- event 'D' can't happen if 'C' didn't, which can't happen if 'B' didn't ... and so on.

You've sold me on it, sarahkatelevy. I'm going to find myself a copy.

I missed Plot Device before, Mike. I especially love that he can't accept the woman and the proffered love until he's been tested by the many phases of the plot device--great writing. It reminds me of The Drama Button--and I wonder if The Drama Button was isnpired by Plot Device.

[...] Go On Your Own Quest – Week 1: Plot (gointothestory.blcklst.com) [...]

story is the food, plot is the teeth you need to eat it

a script is like a garden..you can say "I grew some food last summer and then I ate it." Not very interesting. Or you can lay out your "plot" for us. "I divided my garden into sections and grew this and that." A little more interesting, but not to gardeners. Or you can give details, I grew this and that-because-of where I live, because of the heirloom seeds I have, because my fav vege is susceptible to bugs so I planted petunias near it to keep the bug away...Now your story has characters, now it has teeth