Conflict...Please explain.

My protagonists are usually very conflicted, and thus the main conflict of the text is often fueled by the inner turmoil the character feels towards the situation. For instance, I have a text that is at its core a good vs. evil conflict, but the main character is never really sure which side of the fence she belongs on.

Personally, I think that conflict should always have something of a personal tinge to it, but if the characters are deep and committed enough to what they are doing I think it doesn't become too much of an issue.

That's just my 2 cents No idea if it's right, but I hope it helped a little.

Yes. Stories are about people, and so the conflict should be personal (to those people), thus prompting the protagonist to make that choice:

Safety and survival of one's family: War of the Worlds, JAWS, Jurassic Park, The Incredibles, etc. etc.

Obstacles to one's values and sensibilities, love, patriotism (love for country), etc.: To Kill a Mockingbird, Pride & Prejudice, Saving Private Ryan, etc.

If it's not personal, then the stake is not high enough for the protagonist(s) to take action. If the character is going to be passionate and committed to something, it has to be personal at some level: Love for country must be tied to some personal affairs (family, lover, children, etc.)... at least to make the readers feel for the characters, that it's worthwhile.

For me, it helps to get really specific. Too often, the question "what's the conflict?" generates the answer, "the character is conflicted about what he's done in the past [or he's conflicted between wanting the girl and not wanting the girl, or something equally vague and purely internal]," and that's just angst or problems, but not conflict as it's meant in fiction.

So, for me, what I've learned (from Jenny Crusie's workshops) is to ask for each scene: who's the protagonist, what does she want, who's opposing her (the antagonist), what does he want, and why are they locked into the struggle (the stakes, why neither can just say "okay, you win" and go home). If I can answer those questions, the scene has conflict. If I can't, there's a problem.

Different people look at conflict differently, though. That works for me in ways that other explanations don't. Blame it on my left-dominant brain.

JD

Raphee said:

I was reading on Kristin Nielsen's blog that conflict should be personal. It should not be internal or aimed at something.
Conflict is the protag saying I MUST in reply to YOU CAN'T.

Now I also remember a thread by Uncle Jim where he wrote that conflict should be bigger than good vs evil. It may be the love of your country versus going to war. In this case the conflict is personal but there is a bigger idea behind it. It is not I MUST, YOU CAN'T.
There is internal struggle in this conflict.

What is your idea of conflict. Is it always personal.
When I mention Conflict here; it is the central conflict of the novel. Not the minor conflicts or complications.

Click to expand...

OK--let's break this down because there is validity to both sides.

First off, ANY MC's conflict is going to be personal to some degree. Even though he may be saving the world, there's someone she aboslutely hates involved in it. Keep in mind that Kristin Nelson (who is a very well-respected agent) specializes in women's fiction. She loves sci-fi and fantasy, but chick lit is her bread and butter. For that genre, conflict is most definitely internal, and I MUST, YOU CAN'T.

On the other hand, conflict in say--an epic fantasy has to be larger than internalized conflict, doesn't it? Who wants to read eight books about a MC's angst b/c his or her mommy wouldn't let him or her go play with the nice shiny sword in the closet? The very nature of epic fantasy demands a larger issue that ovewhelms any internal conflict the MC may have. Does the MC lose that internal conflict? No. But in an epic, all it can do is fuel the larger conflict.

The difference between the two POVs you mentioned in your OP is completely genre-oriented. This is all IMHO, obviously. Good luck.

Of course conflict can't be aimed at something, as conflict is something that occurs between two or more people or is internal. Most of my novels have internal conflict as I find it more interesting. I think it depends on the genre of fiction you write. In adventure, crime or sci fi etc. I can see the conflict as being more enternal, but in women's fiction, more internal. Of course, I could be all wrong and maybe that's why I've failed to get published.

Raphee said:

Thanks for all the responses.
What I understand from maestro is that while it has to be personal, conflict can also be internal.

In The Kite Runner; the conflict is internal. there is no Us versus Them.

Click to expand...

No Regular Afghanis against Oppressive Russians/Taliban?

Like other posters have said, even if a character is firmly committed to their cause, SOMEthing caused them to be so committed. That's a cause for some personal conflict.

The original blog post is here:

http://pubrants.blogspot.com/2007/06/status-doing-great-its-too-early-in-day.html

In case anyone was curious.

Internal conflict is inherently personal, but external conflict must also be personal in that the character must have a strong motivation for struggling against high odds and persevering through situations which might require enduring discomfort and making sacrifices.

Conflict between somebody trying to take your woman and kill your versus trying to stay alive and keep her is not enough?

Uh oh.

The characters have to have reasons for participating in the conflict, but they don't have to be internally conflicted about what's happening. I write fantasy/adventure and my characters have no qualms about going after what they want in most of the stories. Now if only the villains would quit getting in their way. . .

Sometimes I write an internal conflict subplot, or an internal conflict arises because of the dangers and costs involved in the external conflict, but the main conflict is always external. Is there something wrong with having characters who know what they want and go after it wholeheartedly?

Internal conflicts are what make your character flesh and blood real humans. Seldom do we just do something or feel something without weighing pros and cons or agonizing over something. PLOT is about choices your characters make, and if these choices are easy, then the story is weak. Tough choices mean internal conflict (to be or not to be)... and these conflicts would be very personal (to the character).

When there's no internal conflict, your characters would appear two-dimensional. If everything is black or white, then your story is shallow.

Too many internal conflicts (or lingering conflicts) might make your character dull or your story interminable: Make up your mind already. However, it can work if the internal conflict deals with a grand theme (love, for example) that is complex and not easy to resolve. Do take care not to dwell on the same internal conflicts -- let the externals (actions, events, external conflict) show these internal conflicts.

My characters are very internally conflicted - that's how I can show their personal struggles as well as growth. The plot is what happens to them, the internal conflict is how they deal and in what ways are they're changed by it.

I think the best conflict is internal - and even if there's external, easily identifiable conflict (wars or good vs. evil etc), where it matters is in how it affects the characters, how they feel about it - so it probably becomes internal conflict anyway.

Personally, I'm tired of MC's from broken families, with asthma, with claustraphobia, with "fear of the ice" (can't remember the name but it was a real phobia from a Koontz book) with aqua-phobia, with evil stepmothers, fat stepbrothers, ugly, lonely, angry...

I'm serious. It's so obvious in many instances, that the author just made up this background to give their MC more conflict.

It really annoys me.

Conflict that has too much of a direct relation to the plot seems contrived to me, and conflict that is completely arbitrary seems contrived too. Really, it seems like the only reason that Robert Langdon (from The Davinci Code) has claustrophobia is to inject some conflict. But it's unnecessary, there's plenty of conflict without it, isn't there? (Am I confusing a foible for conflict?)

And in Jaws, the whole aqua-phobia thing, I mean really...

Anyway, just my particular taste.

-Ziljon

Personally, I'm tired of MC's from broken families, with asthma, with claustraphobia, with "fear of the ice" (can't remember the name but it was a real phobia from a Koontz book) with aqua-phobia, with evil stepmothers, fat stepbrothers, ugly, lonely, angry...

Click to expand...

I don't mind it so much, as long as it's not overdone. But lately, I agree with you, it's been overdone. Now all we need is a book about some guy trying to save the world, while at the same time dealing with the trauma of his childhood, his fear of heights (and what'd'ya know, the final battle is atop the empire state building), his fear of little furry animals (sorry, Thumper, better tail someone else), his fear of small spaces and horse races and his fear of jazz music and his complicated childhood romance whose come back into the picture (while he's fighting the evil bad guy atop the building, sweating from his fear of heights, he's also wondering if he's still in love with this childhood flame or if he loves his new love-interest - but there are complications there too, her father hates him and he's conflicted about why.)

To sum up: there's also such thing as "too much" conflict, in my opinion.

You should remember that people will always give writing advice that worked for them. I don't conciously try to include conflict in any of my fiction. It just happens automatically because I know a story with happy people doing nothing won't be fun to read. As long as the conflict is something you know the reader will want to read about, you're on your way. You can please everyone who gives advice.

I'm glad I found this thread because this is a big issue I've been dealing with in my writing in the last few years. I seem to do fine with characters and I like seeing what they will come up with, but the issue of conflict (especially external) seems to be a big problem for me. This thread and the links you all gave really helped put it into perspective for me.

I agree that random conflict (aquaphobia and the like) that's put into a story for the sake of convenience rather than the sake of the story is totally unnecessary. I think the key for me is that whatever internal conflicts the characters have must be consistent with who they are.

For me, I think the ideal is a balance of internal and external conflict but I totally get that only internal conflict can get dull and pointless (which is the big problem I'm dealing with now). But I also think for some types of novels, external conflict doesn't have to be wars, etc. For example, I'm reading Sinclair Lewis's "Main Street" (old book...) and the story tells of a woman who married the doctor of a small narrow-minded Midwestern town and basically tries to put some culture into their lives. It's very intriguing (to me at least) because the external conflict is subtle (i.e., her giving a party with a Chinese theme, for example, to get some "culture" into it), or at least, not bombastic, and yet the reaction of those in conflict with her (basically, the whole town) makes me want to keep reading. That's the kind of conflict I'm looking to write in my books.

I have a novel right now that I'm working on where the MC is a woman living in a tight-knit neighborhood in San Francisco and working at a fried chicken joint and another character moves into the neighborhood - and opens up a pet shop for birds in the courtyard. Despite the fact that she wants to keep her friends (or who she thinks her friends are), she ends up befriending the woman and helping her when the others in the neighborhood try to get her to leave.

I'm curious, though - how do you balance conflict (external and internal) with character evolution and change? If you define conflict as a MUST in the face of a CAN'T, how do you account for goals/conflicts changing through the book as the character develops?

Tam

Maybe it would help to frame the question a little differently. What kind of inner life does the character have? In other words, what are the character's hopes and dreams? The conflict comes when those hopes and dreams are thwarted, and the character must decide how far to go to redeem them. I like Main Street too, and what kept me reading--aside from the scathing social commentary--was to see how Carol Kennicott, the doctor's wife, would react when she asked herself, "Is this it? Is this what life will be like forever?"

In my novel, conflict isn't as easy as good and evil. It's about the choice between the two when both of them are extremely flawed...it's about realizing that a totality of either won't work in the setting they're in, and the battle they're met with on either side when they strive to do the right thing, regardless of whether the "right" thing is seen as good or evil.

But really, I wouldn't worry much about deciding what your conflict SHOULD be. Conflict usually isn't hard to create. In any story you create, conflict usually pops right up. Don't think "is this right?" If it's a good story, it's a good story.

I think there's internal and external conflict in most cases - Examples that have been cited above:

Jaws: Chief Brody's conflicts are:
Internal - Fear of water
External - The shark itself, maybe even Quint to some degree

The Kite Runner: The MC's conflicts are:
Internal: To alleviate guilt he feels from allowing a friend to suffer
External: His travels from the west to the east; the Afghani culture which is now almost foreign to him etc etc.

I think if you look close enough, you'll find a case for both types of conflict. A book that covers this well is "Writing Screenplays that sell" by Michael Hague. Even though I write novels (sorry, a novel) I find I refer to it constantly as the lessons in it are applicable to any kind of writing, not just screenplays.