Why This is Good

Describing the clothes the character wears often says much more about who the character is than any other physical or personality trait.  Whether or not the clothes contrast with what others are wearing, or is completely trendy and in style speaks volumes about who someone is.

No one chooses whether they have green eyes or brown, we’re born with certain genetic traits that determine our looks, but we wake up every morning and choose what we wear, and how we wear it. Clothes say a lot about our lifestyle, income level, how much we value our appearance, or don’t value our appearance, and this says a lot about who we are and where we are in life.  A frazzled mother with three screaming kids probably doesn’t worry about what she throws on before going grocery shopping. The fact that she is sloppily dressed and possibly wearing mismatched socks reveals how busy and stressed she is. Looking sexy is not her top priority right now, and we can get this sense by simply looking at what she wears, without knowing any other detail about her life.

At the same time, an impeccably dressed, perfectly manicured mother of three may give an impression that she has a nanny and doesn’t ever allow those kids to play outside or get dirty. Teenagers express themselves through their clothes, whether they’re trying desperately to look older or cooler, fit in, or look like they don’t care what anyone thinks and are above worrying about appearances. We know without being told that someone dressed in expensive designer clothes is most likely has money, or serious credit card debt, and someone in a navy or gray suit and a mildly patterned tie probably works for a conservative company, while someone in baggy cargo pants and a holey t-shirt and flip flops may have a less structured work environment.

From Erin Brokovich by Susannah Grant, “…in the middle of this pedestrian normalcy, a pair of impossibly high spike-heeled pumps struts out of a shop. So high it hurts to look at them.”

Without having to say it outright, we know that Erin without is alluring, maybe bordering on a bit trampy and tacky. The shoes show us she confident, a bit provocative, and probably attractive.

From Back to the Future by Robert Zemeckis & Bob Gale, “MARTY McFLY, 17, a good looking kid who has an air of confidence just shy of cockiness. He’s wearing a silver Porsche jacket, and like most typical modern day kids, not a stitch of his clothing is without some brand name or form of advertising.”

Again the clothes tell the story, by showing us that Marty is a typical kid, probably into sports cars, definitely trying to fit in and look cool. He’s not an outsider or a geek, as his clothes are in line with what everyone else is wearing. The writers also noted he was confident. This character trait is something we can see, and it has to do with who he is as a person. It doesn’t matter whether he has brown, blonde, or black hair, or if he is tall or short. We know he’s good-looking, confident, and dresses in trendy clothes. This tells us what he’s like without limiting casting. It allows us to create a picture in our heads of what the kid is like, and gives producers reading the script the flexibility to imagine casting several different actors.

In Legally Blonde by Karen McCullah Lutz & Kristen Smith, Elle is described based on how she looks, but in a way that speaks volumes about who she is “…passing toned, waxed, tanned legs in pink Prada pedal pushers and a pair of perky boobs encased in a spaghetti-strap top – until we finally reveal a magnificent head of long blonde hair and a sweet, beautiful face. This is ELLE WOODS”

Here the writers noted the hair color, because, obviously in this case it is vital to the character. But they spent more time detailing her body and her outfit because the clothes tell us so much more about her. Reading this description is much more interesting and visually impactful than if they had instead said: “She is attractive, takes care of herself, is well-groomed and popular.” We get so much more out of the visual details. The waxed, tanned legs, the revealing, designer clothes, the perky boobs. All of this shows us, without telling us that she is popular, wealthy, and probably superficial.

In Chinatown by Robert Towne, Gittes is introduced by noting his clothes: “He looks cool and brisk in a white linen suit despite the heat.” This conveys much about his personality, that he’s confident and cool. The other character in the room is sweaty and sloppily dressed. Our hero, by contrast, is relaxed and suave. These minor details are a vital part of the character, telling us the essence of who he is with a few short words, and without relying on hair color, body type, or any other limiting details.

In Schindler’s List by Steven Zaillian “Oskar Schindler – salesman from Zwittau – looking almost reputable in his one nice suit.” This tells us that he is not really be reputable, and that he may be a bit of a swindler or a con artist. He only has one nice suit, so we know that he is not wealthy, but that he puts on airs and possibly uses this suit to impress and get people to do what he wants. He is probably persuasive and popular, but also worried about how others see him. He values what people think and makes sure they think he is more successful than he is.

When you’re out and about, observe what people are wearing and note what your immediate impression is based solely on this. This is one of the primary ways we judge strangers who we have never spoken to and know nothing about. Note what you think of someone based on their outfit, and you can use these observations to help choose the right look for your characters based on what you want their clothes to mean about who they really are.

If you’ve decided to hunker down, enjoy your leftovers, and stay away from the mall madness today, you can still get in the spirit of things with one of these movies about shopping.

Clueless-A great movie with enough clothes to keep the most die-hard shopaholic satisfied. Cher’s unique method of trying on clothes and amazing closet and outfit will leave you jealous of her unlimited clothes allowance, especially if you enjoy 90s fashion.

Confessions of a Shopaholic-A light, easy romantic comedy, it’s sugary sweet and cutesy, and it will make you think twice about paying for anything by credit card.

The Devil Wears Prada-The dark side of fashion, this movie is full of great clothes, and if you’ve ever been an assistant, or just had a horrid boss, you’ll appreciate Meryl Streep’s performance.

13 Going on 30- Jennifer Garner wakes up to her amazing closet full of shoes and bags that would make a girl of any age drool.

Shopgirl-Despite the name, this movie has little to do with shopping, but I still absolutely adore it, and it does start out with our hero working in Saks.

Clerks-Okay one non-girlie movie for the list. A hilarious look at what life is like for those poor people stuck behind the counter. If you are going out shopping today, have compassion, retail can be an awful job. Be nice, be patient, don’t write a check, or pay with twenty dollars in change (this actually happened to me once), hang your clothes back up and clean up after yourself while you’re shopping.  If you happen to work in retail, I feel your pain, I’ve been there, for five years at the same store, and I know how much dread the Christmas season can bring. And yes, the salespeople will make fun of you, so be nice.

After enjoying your turkey (or tofurkey) dinner, enjoy one of these Thanksgiving movies. I hope everyone has a lovely holiday and remembers all they have to be thankful for.

Home for the Holidays-Hilarious, intelligent take on coming home for the holidays. If your family isn’t perfect, or they just drive you nuts, you’ll enjoy watching someone else’s pain. This movie is witty and sarcastic, but not so bitter that it will upset your post-feast stomach.

Miracle on 34^th Street-Technically, a Christmas movie, but it begins with Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade. This movie is so warm and fuzzy, perfect to get you in the mood for the upcoming holiday, it will make you believe in Santa all over again.

Dan in Real Life-Also not technically based around Thanksgiving, it does center around a family gathering, so close enough, and it’s a great movie. As he proved in Little Miss Sunshine, Steve Carrell is a good actor whether doing comedy or slightly more serious films.

Other Thanksgiving movies: Planes, Trains, and Automobiles, Pieces of April, Hannah and Her Sisters, What’s Cooking.

Romantic comedies almost always involve deception of some kind. This ups the stakes for the hero, because telling the love interest the truth is often the only way they can win their love, but at the same time it puts them at risk for losing their love, because the love interest fell in love with the deception.

One of the clearest examples of romantic comedy deception is in Some Like it Hot, Tootsie, and Mrs. Doubtfire. All three involve men pretending to be women to escape the mob, get work as an actor, and get closer to his kids, respectively. They cannot win the love of the women they want without revealing that they are men, but in doing so, they risk losing the very women they seek to woo.

If Shrek finds out Fiona turns into an ogre at night she fears he won’t love her, but, if she doesn’t reveal this she can never be truly loved for who she is. In Return to Me, Grace is afraid that if she tells Bob about her heart transplant-that it was his wife’s heart-he’ll be upset and unable to continue their budding relationship. In Confessions of a Shopaholic, Rebecca can’t let anyone know that she is actually in serious debt herself, or she will lose her job writing for a financial magazine and giving out advice on how to avoid the very predicament she finds herself in.

In While You Were Sleeping, Lucy can’t let the Callaghans know she was never really their comatose relative’s fiancé, because if she tells them they’ll think she’s a crazy stalker (which she kind of is) and will kick her out of their family. If she doesn’t tell them, she can never be with her true love, Peter’s brother Jack. In Maid in Manhattan, Marisa can’t reveal she’s not the socialite Christopher mistook her for without risking losing him, but if he doesn’t know who she really is, he doesn’t really love her.

If Ann reveals to Joe that she is really Princess Ann, she won’t get the uninhibited Roman Holiday she yearns for, and he’ll treat her differently, only trying to get a story rather than getting to know her as a woman, not just a princess. If he tells her he knows who she is, she will be angry and he will lose his story.

Without deception, characters could date, fall in love, and get married, and we’d have a very boring, though much more realistic, story. The use of deception gives the characters motivation, helps keep them apart long enough to sustain a story, but also performs a very important function, it helps the hero undergo a character arc and reveal the theme of the movie. In Roxanne, (based on Cyrano De Bergerac- a classic romantic comedy involving deception, Shakespeare’s As You Like It being another good example), C.D. uses Chris to woo Roxanne. He’s too insecure to tell Roxanne how he feels, and that all the romantic words Chris has spoken and written were his own, but until he reveals this, he will never win Roxanne’s love. His character arc is one of learning to be confident in himself, despite his big nose, and until he is able to do this, he will never have the love he yearns for.

If it isn’t deception on the part of the main characters, romantic comedies must employ other means to keep the characters from getting together too quickly and making the story too short and boring. It’s often other circumstances, such as familial or societal expectations-as with the countless variations on the star-crossed lovers theme-every remake of Romeo and Juliet, obviously, but also movies like My Big Fat Greek Wedding, Harold and Maude, The Notebook, and Brokeback Mountain (I realize those last two are only romantic and not comedies, but you get the idea).

Other times you’ll find one character is in love with or at least involved with someone else, which helps to delay things and keep the story going, as in My Best Friend’s Wedding, 27 Dresses, Sabrina, When Harry Met Sally, Dan in Real Life, Wedding Crashers, and The Wedding Singer . These stories still involve deception, as the hero has to find a way to break up the relationship, or at least convince their love interest that the person they are with is no good, without looking selfish by revealing that they want the love interest for themselves. If Claire finds out that John was just a wedding crasher, he’ll have no chance of stealing her from her jerk of a boyfriend, but if he doesn’t tell her, she will never know who he really is.

Deception, when used properly, is a valuable device that can improve your romantic comedies and give the hero an arc that reveals your theme. The use of deception aids not only to the romance, but the comedy and offers a creative, interesting way to keep your heroes apart long enough to make things interesting.

I realize this post comes a little late,  but I resisted the Twilight phenomenon for as long as I could. Partially because I tend to be a bit of a literature snob and didn’t want to get involved in such a trendy book series, and partially, because I’m at least 12 years older than the target demographic of the series. But, like Edward, I could only resist temptation for so long, I really wanted to see what all the fuss was about. I ordered the books on Amazon (so I wouldn’t have to face the checker at Barnes and Noble judging me for my immature purchase), and started reading.

(If you took even longer than I did to get involved and don’t want the ending spoiled, please stop reading now!)

I finished Twilight quickly, and while my sarcastic side was rolling it’s eyes at all the angsty-teenage romance that is like crack for teenage girls, I also had to admit it was a good story, full of suspense and romance. That, along with the fact that it was at about a fifth-grade reading level, meant that I finished the 400-odd page novel very quickly.

Now it was time to get to the movie. It’s a shame that I waited so long, because while reading, I wasn’t able to envision my own versions of Bella and Edward, but instead had to picture Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson, who were well cast, I guess, I just wish I could have judged that for myself. It’s one of my favorite parts of watching adaptations-analyzing casting. I was curious how the screenwriters would be able to adapt such a dialogue-heavy, melodramatic book into a movie and keep it dynamic and visually interesting, when the bulk of the book involved Bella and Edward talking to each other in rather boring locations-her bedroom, a meadow, and their cars.

I was pleasantly surprised with how good the adaptation was. First off, a defense of adaptations. No real fan of a novel ever thinks the movie was as good as the book. It’s a given. Because no movie can ever get as far inside the character’s thoughts and minds as a well-written book. Reading a book is personal, it’s just you and the page, you create the story in your mind and therefore feel deeply connected to your version. The mediums are drastically different, and it’s important to realize this and judge an adaptation differently, not expecting it to move you in the same ways as the book.

This movie, however, was adapted very well. It changed a few small details, but they only served to make the story more exciting. The book completely lacks conflict during what would be the second act. The two get together so soon and are instantly professing their love. The only conflict is the tension created by ever-present danger that Edward might kill Bella at any moment. But, like Bella, we trust he won’t. With nothing else hindering their love, and Edwards super-human abilities making it much easier for them to sneak around and spend time together, they are able to lounge around and bask in the glow of their love endlessly-in the book.

The movie upped the stakes right away, by introducing the danger and the conflict early on. The three evil vampires that show up much too late in the book-causing the central conflict and the exciting climax of that story-are out and about very early in the film. This creates anticipation, a sense of danger, and gives Bella’s father something to do besides watch baseball. Most of the endless pillow-talk scenes were shortened, combined, and moved outside, giving the film a dynamic, visually stunning look that the book didn’t have, or need. Scenes, revelations, and events were combined, allowing the adaptation to progress quickly enough so that it wouldn’t have to be a seven hour saga that it would have been if they had remained completely faithful to the book. These changes did not take anything away from the story but enhanced it, and made it more visually impactful, a better fit for the screen.

Small changes, such as giving Bella the goal of going to the bookstore to find a book on vampire legends in Port Angeles, not just aimlessly wandering, made the scene in which Edward rescues her from the gang of would-be rapists much more interesting, and puts Bella in charge as an active hero. Taking the dinner scenes out of their home and into the diner worked well to show-since the film couldn’t tell as the book did-how painfully strained Bella’s relationship with her father was, and it gave them a chance to interact with the townspeople so that we could see (rather than be told) how big of a deal it was to have a newcomer in Forks, and how scared everyone was over the “animal attacks.”

Overall I’m quite impressed with the adaptation. Certainly this wasn’t the best film ever made, and it’s success is due mainly to the popularity of the books, but I always give writers enormous credit for a successful adaptation of a book, and in this case, a very challenging book. If you think adaptation is easy, try writing one, and watch the film Adaptation, to give you a glimpse into how difficult successfully translating one medium into another can be.

While it’s important to make the goal personal, often by involving the hero’s friends and family by putting them in jeopardy, it’s also vital that the hero stands to lose something extremely valuable should they fail. The stakes should be literal, or at least emotional, life-and-death.

If the hero has nothing big to lose, the movie will not be that exciting. We need to feel that if the hero fails in achieving their goal, something devastating, either to them or to humanity at large, will occur. In some genres this can be literal life-and-death for the hero. If Ripley doesn’t stop the Alien it will kill her.  Other times, the hero is working to save another person, or group of people, as in Schindler’s List. If Schindler doesn’t outwit the Nazis, his workers will be sent to concentration camps. Epic, action adventure, science-fiction, or superhero movies often involve the hero saving the world and humanity at large, as in Star Wars, The Terminator, Transformers, Armageddon, or The Lord of the Rings. In I Am Legend, (spoiler alert) if Neville doesn’t get his antidote containing blood to Anna in time, there will be no hope for what remains of the human race.

Literal life-and-death stakes aren’t always plausible, or necessary. Often times failing to achieve the goal will mean emotional life-and-death, or a life not worth living. If Andy doesn’t succeed in getting out of Shawshank, he will face emotional death and a lifetime of imprisonment, which, although he would still be alive, would not be worth living. If David and Jennifer can’t bring color into the black-and-white world of Pleasantville, life would still go on, but it would be the bland, dull, stagnant life that would not be worth living after the town’s residents had glimpsed what a real life could be like.

If Dorothy can’t find the Wizard and get back home, she’ll be stuck, unhappily, in Oz forever. If Woody and Buzz can’t get to the moving van in time, they’ll be abandoned, alone, and not living the lives they cherish with Andy. While the stakes are not life-and-death, they are nonetheless vital to the hero’s happiness and emotional well-being. If the stakes were lowered and the heroes were pursuing something less important, the story would be less powerful. If Dorothy was ambivalent about going home and couldn’t care less whether she ever saw her Aunt and Uncle again, we wouldn’t care whether she made it to Oz or met with the Wizard, and neither would she.

Love stories use emotional life-and-death. Failing to win the love of the other character will mean emotional death for the hero. If Noah cannot get Allie to marry him, he will never be happy, and at the same time, if he cannot get her to remember, even for a moment, who she is and what their love story meant to both of them, he will be devastated and she will be stuck in her Alzheimer-induced fog. If Phil cannot get Rita to love him, he will not only lose her and face emotional death, but he will be stuck in a life not worth living, reliving Groundhog Day forever. If Harry and Sally can’t eventually get together, they will never find happiness and continue to drift in and out of unfulfilling relationships. Neither will die, but their love lives and emotional well-being will.

Basic screenwriting teaches you that a hero must have a goal, and his or her pursuit of this goal and the obstacles they face constitutes the story. It is vital to the emotional impact of your story that the hero’s goal is something personal. It needs to be more than just a mindless quest. This is why even superheroes given the task of saving the world often have their friends, families, or loved ones put in jeopardy. Watching Spiderman rescue Mary Jane is much more emotionally engaging than watching him save nameless innocent civilians.

The goal is always personal in a love story-the hero is trying to win the love of someone and so they are personally involved in seeking their own happiness. Heroes of action-adventure stories, as well as thrillers and suspense movies need a little more craft on the part of the writer to make sure their goal is personally involving and thus elicits emotion from the audience. This is often done, as in superhero movies, by putting the hero’s own family or loved ones directly at risk. They are being held hostage, or are in that building with the bomb in it. Sometimes, however, that device doesn’t work for the story, and the writer must come up with another way to make the quest intensely personal for the hero. Clarice’s wound still haunts her, and the only way she can silence the lambs is to find the killer and stop him before it’s too late. She doesn’t know the girl being held captive, and if she were simply a flat, one-dimensional detective with no vested interest in solving the crime other than her generic sense of duty, this story would not have been as fascinating and emotionally impactful as it was, and it would not have been a success. If the girl had just happened to be Clarice’s long lost sister, the story would have felt contrived, phony, and more than a little melodramatic.

Other times heroes are pursuing a more abstract goal that doesn’t involve saving someone’s life. It can involve uncovering corruption, revealing or stopping a conspiracy, or successfully holding up a bank or stealing jewelry. In all of these cases, the most effective films make these goals personal by involving the hero on a deeper emotional level than simply their need to succeed. Jerry Maguire works hard to get his business up and running throughout the movie, but the success or failure of his career becomes more personal and that much more exciting when it ties into his developing relationship and his love for Dorothy as well as his genuine friendship with Rod, who becomes more than a client.

When Marty goes Back to the Future, it isn’t just for fun or to stop some random event from hurting other people, it is to make sure that his parents meet and fall in love so that he can be conceived. The quest is infinitely personal as his own existence hinges on his success.

In The Last Samurai, Algren grows close to the people who take him in, and grows to care deeply about them and their livelihood. Their quest becomes his as he is emotionally involved in their lives on a deeper level than a mercenary would be. The Goonies don’t just want to find the treasure because it’s cool and they’re bored, they are desperate to save their very homes and the neighborhood they love.

The heroes of the Lord of the Rings are on a quest to save the world from the dark forces bent on domination, but Aragorn and Frodo have others in their lives who they feel a personal need to protect and save. It’s not just about saving the world being the right thing to do, it’s about saving their loved ones and their homes that makes them care enough to go on such a hopeless mission.

In talking about creating character sympathy, there are rules, techniques and devices we can use, but there are also simple, intuitive ways to create a likable, sympathetic hero. But there is also a very practical, intuitive way to create sympathetic heroes that will captivate and engage your audience.

Think about your closest friends. What about them makes you like them? What drew you to them initially, when you first met? Some friends were set-ups from your childhood-your parent’s friends, cousins, kids in the same class and school. You may have become your friend just because of proximity. There are other friends that you probably met as an adult-through work, through other friends, in college. What attracted you to them? What made these people stand out, regardless of how you met, and kept you in touch? What about them made you want to nurture and sustain a friendship? Having things in common is good, but you have things in common with a lot of people that you don’t become or stay friends with. You’ll maintain relationships with your friends because they are likable. Think about why.

Write down the names of your five closest friends. Next to each name, write where or how you met them. Then describe your first impression of them. Did you like them when you first met or did your connection grow slowly? If you did like them right away, what was it about them that was attractive? Was it the way they spoke, the passion they had for a certain subject or cause? Was it because they seemed powerful, didn’t care what others thought and broke the rules, encouraging you to push the limits? Was it because they were funny? Think about why you liked them enough to want to keep spending time with them.

After the initial meeting, what was your second impression? What did you think the next time you saw them? What made you decide to continue pursuing the friendship instead of letting it go, like you have with other people you have met? Did they say something you really agreed with? Were they so nice to the waiter when you had lunch that you knew they were a genuinely sweet person you wanted to get to know? As in dating, when you meet friends, you decide whether or not you want to continue being their friend based on behaviors you observe and how they make you feel.

Next think about why you have remained friends with each person. Were there times where you drifted apart? What brought you back together? Often times we lose touch with friends or family and are brought closer after a tragedy.  As with a character in a story, you may have worried about your friend or felt they were in jeopardy and been compelled to reconnect because of that. If you’ve been friends with someone consistently for a long time, think about why they have stayed a constant in your life, while other people have come in and out. Why do you admire them and want to spend time with them? These qualities are the types of traits you can instill in your characters and most importantly, in your hero. Even if your hero is unlikeable, or not that nice of a person, there needs to be something seductive about them that makes the audience interested in them, makes them want to spend time with them the same way you want to spend time with your friends.

When writing scene descriptions, there are three basic elements that you should always include. Without these three things your reader is left without a clear picture of what is going on, making it difficult for them to visualize the story in their heads. Anything that confuses the reader, takes them out of the story, or makes the story seem less real and vivid makes the reader enjoy your story less, and thereby decreases your chances of selling your story.

What it looks like-Your slugline will tell us briefly where we are-a diner, a classroom, a battlefield, and whether it is day or night. This alone is not enough, and I often see writers relying on the slugline alone to convey what the scene looks like. But while one diner could be a busy 50’s throwback, alive with customers, bright shiny vinyl booths and Elvis blaring on the jute box, another could be cold, dim, with aging, faded décor and tired, sad customers. A classroom could be bright and warm, with rich wood paneling and beautiful desks in a prestigious prep school, or a run-down, dirty cell, with bars on the windows and graffiti on every battered desk, or anywhere in between. A battlefield could be tense on a bright sunlit morning as two armies face off, or raging with battle, as soldiers fight for their lives and men fall to the blood-soaked earth only to be trampled on by the next wave of infantry, or it could be quiet and misty, as medics pick through the bodies looking for survivors, swatting flies and shooing vultures from the carcasses.

Descriptions of what the scene looks like give the reader a picture in their mind, and tell them where we are, what this place is like, and reflect the theme. The type of scene tells us where this movie will go and what we can expect. A run-down inner city public high school classroom promises a different type of movie and different characters than a fancy, expensive private school setting. If you only tell us it’s a classroom, the reader’s mind will pick the closest recollection they have of a generic classroom-whether it’s their own or the last one they saw on TV or in a movie, it will take away the uniqueness of your film, and they may picture something completely different than what you did, than what is appropriate for the story. This not only makes your script seem more generic, it can be jarring, if, for example, the reader is picturing this cold, desolate, run-down diner in their head, and all of the sudden reads about a bubbly waitress on roller skates popping bubble gum. This will take them out of the story and confuse them and draw attention to the fact that they are reading a poorly written story.

It is essential that you describe new settings in brief but vivid detail the first time we see them. When we return to the diner, the classroom, or the battlefield, you only need to note any changes, perhaps the diner is now quiet and dark as the owner wipes down the counter and closes up, or the classroom is strewn with crumpled papers and debris after the kids have left for lunch. Don’t neglect to describe any setting, no matter how small, even if it’s just with a few words. And don’t be redundant and repeat the information in the slugline in your description. If you wrote INT. CLASSROOM-DAY do not begin the action description with: “We’re inside of a classroom during the day.” Sounds ridiculous, but it’s something I read constantly.

Who is there-This is a step writers frequently neglect, and it is very confusing for the reader. It only takes a few words, but it is essential to tell us who is in the scene. As a reader goes through your script, they picture the events in their mind. Your words guide their imagination and tell them what to expect. If you leave out crucial details like this, we readers are surprised and confused, and worst of all, taken out of the story and reminded we are reading. After telling us what the place looks like, tell us who is there. Which main characters, obviously, but also the background people and extras that lend credibility to the scene. In the diner we’d probably have other customers, a waitress or two, maybe a short-order cook in back, the owner greeting people as they came in. If you don’t mention that these people are there, the reader won’t necessarily fill in the blanks the way you intended. Or worse, they’ll imagine a diner full of people, when in your head it was important to the story that there were only two people in the whole place.

What they are doing-As you describe who is in the scene, let us know what they are doing so we don’t picture them just standing around staring blankly. This lends credibility to the scene, and is important to the plot. Tell us that the teacher is sitting at the desk reading, the students are coming in and sitting down, or reading diligently, or making out in back. If we don’t know what everyone is doing when the scene opens it is not only difficult to picture it can often be confusing when they start to speak. If we know the teacher is pacing in front of the classroom, it will make sense that he starts to lecture, and tells those two in the back to get a room. Without telling your reader what your characters are doing, they are left with flat, generic imagery that fails to convey the story in a realistic way.

Everyone who has ever taken an English class has heard the old writing advice that you should write what you know. This sounds logical enough, but taken literally, it is incredibly limiting. Most of us, by definition, are average people leading average lives. Writing only what you know makes it seem as if we can never use our imaginations to create new worlds, bizarre situations, or characters who do things we would never dream of doing. This is obviously not true, as successful writers have always written about both their everyday, known lives, as well as impossibly amazing realities no one had ever dreamed of before. Without expanding our writing parameters to include any and all possibilities, we are limited to a very dull set of stories set in the present or very recent past.

Some writers should take this advice literally. There is no shortage of stories about people’s everyday lives, and many of the most touching emotional dramas and poignant portraits have come from real-life experiences and writers simply recalling things that have happened to them. But if you grew up in the suburbs of Chicago and were born in 1983, you aren’t limited to that geographical location and that 26 year time period.

As I touched on in my post about research and fact-checking, if you do your homework, you are free to write about anything you want. Write about a historical time period you love, just make sure you get your facts straight and don’t accidentally feature your characters using a device that wasn’t invented yet. Write about an imagined fantasy world that you have created, just be consistent and make sure you outline how this world works.

You can and should still write what you know in terms of your character arc. Of course you can try to write about a character with experiences nowhere near your own, but the best stories, no matter where or when they are set, are about emotional experiences and thematic elements that the writer understands on a deep level. Your story may not take place in Chicago in 1992, but if you experienced, say your mother dying in childbirth, you can use your experience-what you know-to write a poignant portrayal of someone in post-World War II New York whose husband died in the war. The experience of loss, survivor guilt, and the feeling of being abandoned are consistent with your own experiences, regardless of the setting.  Maybe you’re an expert on breeding miniature schnauzers, because your family did that. This might make a boring movie, but if your character has a dog, it should probably be a mini schnauzer because you’re familiar with the breed and can more realistically portray what they are like. You may not have lived in rural France, but traveling there and researching about daily life there will give your setting credibility nonetheless. As you write down your ideas and develop outlines and stories, you’ll find that you know more than you realize, and you can use your experiences to craft compelling characters whose decisions, motivations, and character arcs are realistic and believable, even if the world they inhabit is something you have never seen.