Have you heard the term “High Concept” before? It’s something that typically comes up a lot in queries and the discussion thereof. Really, all it means is that if you have a “High Concept” novel, you’ve got a really good, creative idea for a story. I’ve seen this term a lot on agent blogs where the agent in question will write “I am really looking for a good, high concept novel.” Which means “I’m looking for a good idea.”
No shit. Really? Agents like good ideas? So that’s what I’ve been doing wrong all these years, I’ve been sending agents bad ideas. I really wish somebody had told me sooner. Thanks agents, that’s ever so helpful.
Smarminess to agents aside, having a high concept, or good idea for a plot, is just common sense. But here’s where I’m sure I’m going to piss some people off and get gasps of amazement and shock: the plot isn’t the most important thing.
That’s right I said it.
Let me clear something up before I go on: story and plot are not the same thing. The story is everything: the plot, the characters, the language, it’s all of it, the whole mess. The plot is the series of events that move the story forward from point A to B to C or possibly Z to Y to X if you’re into the whole flashback thing or whatever.
And plot is vital to a good story, but I don’t think it’s the most vital. Which is funny, because as little as a year or two ago I would have said “Plot first!” and beaten anyone who disagreed into a red pulp.
So what is the most vital then, in my own obscure, humble opinion? It’s character. Who’s riding this crazy plot train? Are they the ones steering it?
If a character or set of characters is interesting or engaging enough, I will happily read a story about them going to the grocery store and buying eggs. However, if characters are boring, flat, and unrealistic, they could be on a mission to save the universe from Satan and his alliance of aliens robot ninjas and I couldn’t give a shit.
Let’s look at The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night Time by Mark Haddon. It’s a very simple story about a boy trying to figure out who killed a dog, and then later trying to find somebody. There is no high action aside from him getting on a train by himself, and he’s never in any serious danger. But the protagonist’s voice is so real, so engaging, and so wonderful that I, and many, many others, were sucked right in until the end. I finished it in a day I was so ensnared by Haddon’s character.
Now, look at something like The Revenge of the Shadow King by Derek Benz and J.S. Lewis. It’s got mythical creatures ripping into our world, poised to eat up humanity and make things generally terrible for people everywhere, but I didn’t give a damn the entire time because the characters are laughably bad cardboard cut-outs of the worst Saturday Morning cartoon I ever watched as a child. I was totally apathetic about what was going on in the books because the characters were stupid, boring, and cheesy in the worst way.
Now I know comparing these books is like comparing apples and oranges (and Haddon’s book isn’t even for the YA market either) but it illustrates my point: excellent characters will carry a relatively ordinary plot, but shit characters can’t save even the most thrilling of escapades.
I’ve got my claws out now and I’d love to rip into Benz and Lewis some more, but I’ll save it until they push out their next inevitable Grey Griffins series turd.
There’s the risk of writing a story that has nothing but character, and in which nothing happens, and those sorts of stories do exist. While I still value character more than plot, I will always hold plot up as another key component of any story. Characters are enriched and even more engaging when the events occurring around them are extraordinary. It’s fun to see what a well-fleshed out character will do when you throw a brain-sucking alien at him or her, or put them in the middle of the third world war, or something even more grandiose. I’d still be okay with watching good characters go to the store, but if the choice is between those same good characters going for groceries or fighting off super villains, my choice is obvious.
I’ll go into this more later, I’m sure, but that’s the bare bones of part of my writing philosophy for now. Take it as you will, internet.
2 comments:
I think there is a difference between "high concept" and "plot" or just a good idea as you put it.
You could have a great idea for a mystery novel, but it's still just a mystery novel. The high concept version of the mystery novel is the mystery told from the point of view of an autistic boy. That's the high concept.
Yes, he's a great character. But the idea, the concept, is what probably made it originally appealing to the agent.
I agree with you that character is more important than plot, but I don't think you can dismiss the idea of high concept. Coming up with a great high concept for your book or movie is one of the hardest things to do, and it's why agents are always looking for it.
My understanding of "high concept" is that it's more than an idea or a story or a plot. I really think that what most people mean by high concept is something that will translate well to a movie or other medium (TV). And not just any movie. ATONEMENT, despite the fact that it was made into an acclaimed movie, is not high concept.
I recently read STORM: THE INFINITY CODE by Emma Young. It's high concept: three genius kids who are sorta spies with high tech gadgets who go on an adventure to save the world. Not excessively original (and I'm not a fan of the writing) but as you read the book, you can see the movie in your head. Sparse prose (has to be in order to keep the octange-driven story moving forward), doesn't dwell on internal struggle of the protagonists, will sell movie rights even before the book hits shelves.
High concept. (And, yes, the characters in most high concept pieces are cookie cutters that you've seen before.)
At least, that's what I think of when I hear "high concept." I also tend to think, "Great idea, I'd sure love to see what would happen if you handed that over to a WRITER."
Post a Comment