The boy inside the pit.

A man is struggling to find the motivation to make something of himself. So he has a dialogue with a friend.

A: "I'm having a hard time right now. It's difficult to find the motivation to make something of myself. I feel like I'm in a situation where to get better I need to already be better, if that makes any sense.."

B: "Umm.. try and explain it a tad more clearly."

A: "Hmm... Well, imagine being stuck in a pit, a deep pit and you can't climb out of it but thankfully there's a ladder. The only problem is the fact that the ladder is still at the top and not within your reach.

 There's this lever that can bring the ladder down into the pit, within your reach and so you can finally get out of the pit, but.. the lever is on the ground... next to the entrance of the pit and there's no way for you to get to it from the bottom. So to be able to get out, you already have to be out, that is what I mean when I say to get better, I need to already be better.

Make sense now?"

B: "Alright, I get the point now. But let's start talking specifics, so you're unmotivated and to be in a state in which you have motivation to live and be a better you, you need something that requires you to be motivated in the first place, work hard and obtain said something.What is that something? What is it you need to get your motivation? Or what you think you need rather.. "

A: " Well, I always thought it would make me happy if I was not alone. If I had someone who loved and cared enough about me to give me value. Value is arbitrary isn't it? The value of something is whatever someone is willing to pay for it right? So if someone cares about me and wants me that means I have value. Do you agree?"

B: "Can't you give yourself value somehow?"

A: "How?"

B: "What if you thought of yourself as another person. There's you and then there's yourself. So you could convey value upon yourself. Do you follow?"

A: "So you're saying that I should see myself as 2 people? The conscious me, the one that critiques me, that is proud of me or dissappointed in me and the one who suffers or thrives at the hands of the conscious me?"

B: "Yes."

A: "I'll have to try that.."

B: "Yes but for now, let's figure out one more thing. How did you find yourself inside the pit tho?"

A: "Now that's a good question.., a question for which I'm not sure I have an answer. Let me think for a moment.

Well one possibility is that I put myself in the pit."

B: "Why would you do that?"

A: "Perhaps I was frustrated with the way things are and the fact that I didn't have what I wanted in order to be motivated and so I behaved like a child throwing tantrums who holds his breath until he passes out.., or in this case jumps in a pit."

B: "You're one weird child then."

A: "Haha , I suppose I am. I am a grown up mature-immature child."

B: "If that's the case it seems like the only option for you is to live in that pit and start growing up so that you can one day reach the top of the pit and finally get out."

A: "That does make sense.But.. why?"

B: "What do you mean why?."

A: "I mean why do I want out of the pit? What's out there that's so good that I should make the effort to grow up and climb out?"

B: "Are you comfortable in the pit?"

A: "No."

B: "Do you think you would be more comfortable outside of it?"

A: "Yes."

B: "Well then, what's the logical course of action?"

A: "I should try and get out.."

B: "Why?"

A: "Because life is better when I'm not stuck in the pit.

But wait a moment, there's another option. I could take my own life so that I don't have to suffer anymore inside the pit."

B: "Why would you do that?"

A: "Because it would be hard work to get out of the pit and I'm sure I will want to give up at some point. If I take my life, I won't need to work so hard, I could rest."

B: "What do you remember of the world outside of the pit?"

A: "I remember many things."

B: "Let's try and gauge whether or not the world outside of the pit is a place you want to be or not, based on your memories."

A: "Well, I have pleasant memories and unpleasant memories.I'm not sure what the ratio is tho."

B: "I'm not sure the ratio is as important as it seems. What's important is the following question:

Is experiencing the pleasant parts of life outside the pit worth the risk of experiencing the unpleasant parts  and the work that it would take to have the chance to do so?

In other words. Is there something that you are really looking forward to doing, a place where you really want to be, someone you really want to meet? Would those desires compensate for the hard work it would take to satisfy them and the risk of suffering that the outside world brings? "

A: "Yes. I think so."

B: "Then taking your own life would be a poor choice don't you think?"

A:"I agree."

B: "One more thing tho, we haven't asked one other important question."

A: "What's that?"

B: "Are you even capable of getting what you want? Are you smart enough, strong enough, do you have at your disposal the things which are necessary to get what you want?"

A: "I think I am definitely smart enough and if I can convince myself that this is the way I am supposed to continue in this life, I'm sure I'll have the strength and If I have the strength to not waver in my commitment to this path I'll be able to get everything I need."

B: "So what's the conclusion? What is the boy inside the pit going to do?"

A: "He's going to grow up."

Author's Note

This is my first time posting anything and I'm not that sure of what I'm doing, I purposely did include a vivid description of anything. Please just say whatever comes to mind, I'm trying to learn.

Reviews

[JayG]

Well, you did ask, so...

" I'm trying to learn."

Try to think of one single profession where you learn to do it by trying to do it with no more knowledge than our schooldays gave us? You left school knowing that you weren't ready to write a script, work as a journalist, or perform surgery. Why should writing fiction be any different?

"Let me approach this a obliquely. Think of yourself in a room. Someone runs in, saying, “Did you hear? You won the million dollar lottery!”

Is your response to reply with something like, “Wow!” Or would the exchange go more like:
- - - -
“Hey Charlie,” Sam called, as he came into the shop. “I just heard that you won a million dollars in the lottery!”

“What?” Charlie stared for a long moment, mouth hanging open, trying to decide if Sam was pulling his leg, and if not, if what he heard—or thought he heard—matched what Sam actually said. Won the lottery? Impossible.

“Yeah,” Sam said. “I heard it on the radio on the way over. Congratulations...can I have a couple thousand?”

Three times, Charlie tried to respond, only to stop as the words refused to come. Sure, he’d bought a ticket. Everyone did. But who expected to win? What Sam claimed was so unexpected, so out of the blue. that the only thing he could think of to say was, “Are you…sure? Did they say the winner was Charlie Lovett…of St. Louis?”
- - - - -

See the difference? What you’re presenting is emotion-free dialog, where people immediately respond to what was said. They don’t stop to digest what was said; no stop to think; no change of expression or tone; no internal reaction; no rephrasing. They just lob dialog up and back like a softball.

When you read the piece you place the needed emotion into the words. You change expression as the character would, tap a finger to your lip in thought, as you imagine the protagonist doing. You PERFORM the story. But the reader can’t because they have no clue of who they are as a person, or what led to the conversation. To hear what the reader gets, and why this approach cannot work, have your computer read this aloud.

For all we know, you’re oozing talent from every pore. But it’s untrained talent And, a talented writer with no training, and one with no talent are pretty much equal, because talent is unused potential until it’s trained.

And here’s the important thing: ALL professions are acquired IN ADDITION to our schooldays skills. And since Fiction-Writing is a profession…

So it’s not a matter of how well you write, or of talent. It’s that you’re missing the skills the pros take for granted. And that’s fixable. The techniques of fiction are no harder to learn than the nonfiction skills we practiced with all those reports and essays, but they must be mastered. And, if you are meant to write the learning will be fun. If not? Well, you’ll learn something important. So it’s win/win, right?

The library’s fiction-writing section is filled with books on the subject, so give them a try. And while you’re there, keep an eye out for the names Dwight Swain, Jack Bickham, James Scott Bell, or Debra Dixon. They’re gold.

Jay Greenstein
https://jaygreenstein.wordpress.com/category/the-craft-of-writing/the-grumpy-old-writing-coach/

[RogueBlender]

Thank you! I appreciate you taking the time to write this! I think you make a valid point so I'll try to fix these mistakes in the future. Could I ask what you thought of the content itself tho, if that makes any sense? Like taking abstraction from the fact that the dialogue is very plain and there is no description that conveys emotion. Did you think it was interesting? Did you find it childish? Did you think it was shallow? I would love to know what you thought of it, even if it's negative. Again thank you for the help!

[JayG]

• Could I ask what you thought of the content itself tho, if that makes any sense?

And there, in a nutshell, is the second big problem hopeful writers face. They think the plot is what matters.

It's not. Plot is the framework.The events that make it up are the thing the protagonist reacts to. And story happens, it's not talked about.

Plot is history, a parade of facts. And have you ever run to the closet to dig out a history book for the fun of reading it?

Think of a horror story. If I presented you with the facts, and the knowledge that the protagonist feels terror, would that make you afraid to turn out the lights? Of course not, because facts are devoid of emotion. And it's emotion we read fiction for. We want to be made to care. And NOTHING in the writing techniques our schooldays gave us can do that.

Fiction, with a vastly different goal from that of the reports and essays we learned to write in school, requires a different methodology.

Here's the point: If the reader closes the cover before the end of page one, who cares how good the plot was? No one will see it. Ideas are easy. We have one member here who posts plot-idea after plot-idea, presented as a synopsis. We get as many as five a week. But no one comments on any of them, because there are facts, but no story.

I know it's not something you want to hear, but just as we had to learn to write reports, writing fiction requires the skills unique to that profession, developed over centuries.

[RogueBlender]

" I know it's not something you want to hear, but just as we had to learn to write reports, writing fiction requires the skills unique to that profession, developed over centuries."

Don't worry, I'm not bothered, lay it on me, as I said I just want to learn so there's no problem.

Once again, what you say makes sense, I never really taught the the plot was easy to create but you are right, the framework for the plot is where the difficulty lies, but still you didn't answer my question. I understand that the plot is not the most important but it can still be either good or s**t or somewhere in between perhaps. So what did you think of what I wrote? Feel free to be as harsh as you would like.

Thank you again for taking the time to reply to me, I appreciate your honesty and knowledge.

[JayG]

• I understand that the plot is not the most important but it can still be either good or s**t or somewhere in between perhaps.

Your "plot" is two people talking about things for which the reader has no context. Look at the opening as a reader must:

• "I'm having a hard time right now. It's difficult to find the motivation to make something of myself. I feel like I'm in a situation where to get better I need to already be better, if that makes any sense.."

Someone unknown says he or she is "having a hard time." Given the reader's knowledge at this point it could mean the person has lost their job, is a student having problems in school, is being harassed, or any of a million things. So as read, this places effect before cause, as a reader views it. Clarifying, even a line later, cannot retroactively remove confusion.

When the reader goes on they learn that the statement referred to the unknown person "making something of themself." What can that mean to a reader who doesn't know even the gender of the speaker? Of more importance, why should the reader care?

This entire opening statement is someone unknown complaining about something unknown. Perhaps, were we to know who we are, where we are, and what's going on, this would have meaning for the reader. But as it's read in its present form, the one being talked to has context to make it meaningful. The one speaking knows, too—as do you. But shouldn't the one it was written for know?

In writing, context isn't just important. It's everything. Without context we have only words in a row.

A great writer can make you weep with the story of taking out the garbage. A good one will make you keep writing till, "the end." The average hopeful writer is rejected in a paragraph.

Writing, after all the years we've spent learning, practicing, and doing it, seems intuitive and obvious. But the skills we perfect are those of the nonfiction writer. Great for reports, essays, and history books. But when have you heard a history book called a "page turner?"

The entire purpose of fiction is to entertain the reader by giving them an emotional experience, not in informational one. The reader must enjoy the act of reading on every page. So the moment it feels like studying, or reading a history book, is the moment they stop reading.

As E. L. Doctorow put it: “Good writing is supposed to evoke sensation in the reader, not the fact that it’s raining, but the feeling of being rained upon.”

So if your writing is entertaining enough to make the reader WANT to turn the page, and you do that on every page, the plot—which can only be appreciated in retrospect—isn't either the thing that sold the reader on buying it, or the reason they kept turning pages. We remember the protagonists and how they captured our attention. We remember how much we worried about them. We rem,ember how they responded to the challenges the plot presented. We remember intense scenes. The plot? Not so much.

Simple truth: If we can't convince the reader to say yes to picking it up in three pages or less we wasted the time to write the rest of it.

So job-one is learning how to hook the reader. As with every other profession, it's all in the
"becoming."

[RogueBlender]

Alright. Thank you for the advice, much appreciated.