In fiction writing it is often the case that a character has a want, something that the character is aware that they desire to obtain or achieve and a need which is a psychological element that the character is usually unaware of that they require to become their better self.

Here are a couple of examples to illustrate my point. In JawsChief Brody wants to make his community safe, in particular to stop the shark attacks. His need is to overcome his terror of the water. He doesn’t go around in the story saying or even acting like this is a goal, but it is the character growth and evolution that makes the story satisfying. In Back to the Future Marty wants to ensure his parents meet so that he and his siblings will exist, but his need is to gain the self-confidence for his own artistic pursuits. (A need that was ignored the sequels.) Achieving his wants allows him to meet his needs.

It is important to have needs and wants cleanly separate goals. In the musical/fantasy Xanadu Sonny’s need and his want are precisely the same thing. He wants to be inspired to create original art and it is his psychological need as well. In addition to the film’s numerous flaws, this means that there can be no arc, no character growth for Sonny. If a character’s need is the same as their want, there is no change to the character when they achieve it. A static unchanging character is ultimately unsatisfying it is why the final shot in The Hunt for Red October is critical, only by seeing Jack asleep on a plane, having fully met his need to overcome his fear of flying can we appreciate his character’s growth and change.

When you create character to drive your stories think about their wants, the plot, and their needs, the story, are distinct things for fuller richer tales.

Running a little late this morning and so this post will be a brief one.

With my latest novel now off to a publisher and query letters off to new agencies it is time to turn my attention from my former Work In Progress to my next one.

I had two in mind, one the idea came quite recently and would be a direct sequel to Vulcan’s Forge as I had some rather intriguing ideas, at least to me, on the fall out of the vents of that novel and the larger ramification it had for the fictional setting as a whole.

The second is a more fleshed out novel about ‘no contact.’ A situation where aliens have arrived at earth but have no communication with humanity and one person who thinks she has fond to key to bridging the gulf between the humanity and aliens.

The ‘no contact’ idea has won out, principally because I see the arc of the entire story including the ending. It is a truism that I cannot write a story or even a decent outline until I know how it ends. Endings are critical. To me they are where plot, story, and theme unify. And so soon I will begin the pick-and-spade work of hammering out an outline for my next novel.

Saturday, I held the Zoom meeting and discussion for the beta readers of my most recent novel.

Beta readers for those who may not be aware are people who are willing to read a work that is complete but may, nearly always, need additional editing or writing to correct flaws that were invisible to the author.

The discussion was fruitful and represented a diverse set of opinions, some things worked for some and not for others, but there was enough commonality to give me some direction in edits, alterations, and revisions.

The most difficult element of the process is also one I consider to be the most vital; never defend the work.

As an author you will not be present when an editor, agent, or person skimming books off a shelf is reading your work. The work stands alone, and you cannot expand or explain or clarify anything. When beta readers have comments that something was missed, that it might have worked better if you had established this or explained that you cannot stop the feedback and point out where you did exactly that. Whatever it was you did it clearly did not work and defending your choices, your text, or your edits will not change that. Also, once you start defending it is very easy for the conversation to turn into attack and defend as people construct fortresses of logic for their position. At that point all valuable feedback has been lost. An author who is out to be ‘right’ about an interpretation has stopped truly listening. Defending is the antithesis of hearing.

It is hard to be defenseless. Author often are opinionated people and as such used to vigorously supporting their position but when it comes back to a reader’s feedback it is more important to remember that no honest feedback can be wrong it is what they person honestly took away from the work and if that’s not what you intended then it’s your job to diagnosis why and to fix it.

I am engaged in a regular writer’s group that meets twice a month and of course as a novelist I also solicit for beta readers for works in progress all of which gives me a prime perch to watch and hear people giving feedback on a writer’s work.

Now, there are plenty of different styles in how to give feedback, personally whenever possible I try to sandwich the critique as good stuff – stuff that didn’t work for me – and more good stuff. Opening and closing with things worked and that you like I think makes it much easier for the harder material to be heard and digested.

There is one approach that see repeatedly used and it’s not one that the critique is choosing but rather falls into without be actually aware of it that hampers giving good feedback, and that is wanting the story to be a different story all together.

Except for a few beta readers those giving feedback are usually writers themselves and there is often an unconscious attempt to mold the story being critiqued into one they would have written and that is not helpful to the author.

Say I am critiquing a story about a woman on the American Plains in the mid 1800s and it’s about her coming to grips with her sexuality and desires for women after the passing of her husband. Okay that is one story and one with lots of potential but if I come to author and suggest that it’s not exciting because there isn’t lots of combat with the local native tribes and it would be much more interesting if we had more characters from the cavalry involved then I am not critiquing the story before me but rather trying to get one written that I might write.

(Not that I have ever had a desire to write western fiction this is merely example.)

It is vital that even if it is not the kind of fiction you would ever write you keep in the forefront of your mind what story that writer is actually trying to tell and not the one you wish for. Critiques that fall into the trap aren’t bad or trying to sabotage the work they have simply fallen into a very natural but not helpful case of mirroring. They are thinking of the story they would write and not this one. Once you are aware and on the alert for this you can give much better critiques that will help your fellow writers.