Setup/Payoff & Chekhov's Gun | Writing Suspense
Вставка
- Опубліковано 12 тра 2020
- I'm discussing the dramatic principle of Chekhov's gun, and more broadly setup/payoff, red herrings, and the rule of threes. Essentially explaining/offering tips on how to effectively and thoughtfull set-up important threads in your books!
Add THE IVIES, my YA thriller featuring competitive college admissions & murder, out in 2021, on Goodreads! / the-ivies
+OTHER PROJECTS+
Support NovelTea Show on Patreon! We're launching a podcast, with your support. / novelteashow
+BUY MY BOOKS+
Add THE STARS WE STEAL (Jane Austen + The Bachelor, in space) on Goodreads: / the-stars-we-steal
Buy BRIGHTLY BURNING from Book Depository (ships worldwide!): www.bookdepository.com/Bright...
Buy BRIGHTLY BURNING on Amazon: www.amazon.com/Brightly-Burni...
Get Brightly Burning on Audible.com! www.audible.com/pd/Brightly-B...
+LINKS+
Goodreads:
/ brightly-burning
Twitter:
/ alexadonne
Instagram:
/ alexadonne
Newsletter Sign-Up:
alexadonne.com/newsletter/
Website:
alexadonne.com/
Wattpad:
www.wattpad.com/user/alexadonne
+FILMING SPECS+
Camera: Canon t6i
Mic: Rode VideoMic Go Light
Lighting: Limo Studio Soft Kit
Editing Software: Pinnacle Studio 22 - Навчання та стиль
Alexa's serving knowledge and looks like always. Such an author-queen. 👑
I would add that it's also good to sort of introduce the "gun" in camouflage so that it sort of seems like just an incindental detail--like the berries in The Hunger Games are just one of many ways the kids can die, so it doesn't immediately register to the reader that they are specifically important.
It also has the added effect of making it seem like the characters have multiple items to choose from so the 3rd act implementation can make the characters seem more clever for noticing it or using it in a certain way instead of making a different choice.
When you started talking about a movie that uses this technique I was like "Signs! Signs! Please say Signs!" I freaked out when you did! Alexa I have never felt closer to you lol
To give a visual reference, the movie "Knives Out" does this quite clearly, with knives. Won't spoiler, but if you've watched it it's probably the easiest example.
@@ramsesoliva8680 Indeed!
i would say that the best example is back to the future, since it's bacically the whole plot
This lady has inspired me to write my own books
The rule of threes is what I needed to bring my story together. Alexa, you rock.
My favourite examples of this all come from Edgar Wright movies. He doesn’t let a line, joke or detail go to waste. The most literal example is in Shaun of the Dead, when at first Shaun and Ed disagree about if the gun in the Winchester is real, only for it to come back and get used in the final act
Signs is my favorite movie!! (Along with The Village.)
I love them both too! the village gets such a bad rap but I love it
That eye shadow compliments that shirt PERFECTLY; you're stunning! :) Also, I love the Chekhov's Gun trope/device (and your videos); I was so excited to see this upload!
I just finished re-reading The Hunger Games last week in anticipation of the release of the Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes this month, and I was so impressed by Collins' mentions of the nightlock berries throughout! Perfect example!
I’m leaving this comment for later payoff
The suspense is killing me
I LOVE your dual eyeshadow
Hahah, I loved this one. "That cat tail would be important in the 3rd act."
literally about to write the scene introducing the gun today. your timing is spooky but excellent.
If you are still looking or soliciting topic ideas the AND BUT THEREFORE framework is another tripple in storytelling.
The Portkey is also an example of Chekhov’s gun in Goblet of Fire!
Yes! Just about to re-read the Hunger Games and I’ll be peepin that foreshadowing
I have a story where ravens, or raven motifs, keep appearing throughout the story, but it's only with a BIG reveal in the third act you realise WHY these ravens have been appearing, and what...or more importantly who...they've been pointing to
NOS4A2 is a book with a great use of Chekhov's gun. The payoff isn't a huge part of the main plot (just one fight scene around the middle), but the Chekhov's gun IS AN ACTUAL MODEL OF CHEKHOV'S GUN! It's a paperweight on the desk; it was absolutely amazing.
what happens?!?!
@@belletoro3100 The paperweight of the Chekhov gun model is used in a fight sequence as a weapon
Thank you so much for this! Super helpful!
Honestly the first time I read Goblet of Fire I was so lost when the twist was revealed. On subsequent readthroughs it was great but there is SO much detail in that book that unless you were just taking it super-slow (and honestly what HP fan ever did when a new book dropped) there was so much going on it was easy to miss.
But what about a postmodern crime novel where the protagonist talks about a gun for three pages and it never comes up again for the rest of the novel? It would be a cool premise since it would be playing with reader expectations. Without going into spoilers, I have to say that I really liked what "Knives Out" did with the Chekhov's gun principle.
That’s true, it probably would mess with their expectations, but that’s not always a good thing, and it seems as though that could be a bit frustrating and unsatisfying for the reader. I’ve seen books that do that on accident but to the same effect and it always feels aggravating because your wrong, your time seems wasted, and this cool pay off that you thought was going to happen, doesn’t.
This is the exact thing I've been working on in my third draft right now--making sure that I am introducing things to the reader BEFORE they're important. I really felt that the foreshadowing was so well done in The Stars we Steal (your only book I've read so far)!
Thanks for making this concept so fast and easy to understand! I love watching your videos, they always inspire me to get back to writing :)
I finished reading "The Stars We Steal" and loved it! Even though it was a romance, I could see how your next book is going to be a Thriller. There was a lot of mystery threads and what you talked about in this video in that book.
The reverse definition of Chekohov's Gun (if it happens in Act 3 it must come up in Act 1) is so simple but so genius. The original definition can imply that anything you mention, almost no matter how small, must have some kind of payoff (which has always bugged me about the principle). Reversing it keeps everything more focused--if it's big enough to 'go off' in Act 3, it should be set up in Act 1.
(Though even then it's best not to take it too literally, as you can very much set something up in the first half to pay off in the second half, not strictly Act 1 and Act 3).
It is Hitchcock's bomb under the tea table! That's how we learned it in film school :)
My favorite example of Chekov's Gun is Fullmetal Alchemist Brotherhood. It's literally an anime made only off Chekov Guns. Won't say more because spoliers. To everyone who writes and likes anime, watch this video, then watch FMA Brotherhood with this video in mind.
One of the things I find about some chekhov's guns is that they're kind of a promise to the audience. The silver letter opener in dog soldiers springs to mind.
a couple who are out camping in the scottish highlands in the prologue are getting all lovey dovey and the lady gives her man a solid silver letter opener. I knew enough about werewolves at this point to know about the aversion to silver thing so I had a hunch this would have to be relevant at some point or the story wouldn't have brought it to our attention.
I just realized that Vertigo is one example that really does the Chekhov's Gun very well.
You make me laugh so much. I enjoy your videos, but then you throw in comments like the cat tail 0:23 and I'm hooked. I want to watch more and more. You deliver every time.
I love your videos! Thanks for making them
Thanks for the alternate view. I am about halfway through my thriller/mystery 1st draft and like the way to get out of dead ends in narrative this provides. I would love to see more videos on revising thrillers for pace and consistency.
Rule of three (or 5) is also a design principle as well as a writing and speech principle. Love your advice and also - girl, your skin is amazing!! ;)
And with this advice I know how to fix my first novel...
As always, Very good video
Neat, this is a literary concept I've heard of but always wondered the definition of.
Thank you for explaining these. I do almost everything "right" instinctively but knowing the terminology makes me feel exra bad ass 😎😎😎
One thing I’ve always been torn about is the idea of character fears, and that is should you give your character fears even if they won’t play a part in the story later? Like you make a couple fears play into the story, but not all of them.
I'm re-reading Harry Potter now, and while I love all the books, Goblet has such reread value because so many pieces payoff so nicely in the last 5 chapters. If nothing else, I encourage people to reread the chapter where Harry overhears the conversation between Snape, Filch, and Mad Eye - it's extremely satisfying to read, knowing how the book ends.
You look very fresh today! Love how flowers and eye shadows look together)
Good example for Rule of three: Spies in disguise (the kids movie?) The main character/viewer is encountered with pigeons tree times before he gets turned into one himself :D
I'm almost finished with my first draft of a new novel... and I did most of this without planning it! How fun
Thank you!
this is incredibly helpful
You are wonderful 👏
The new thumbnails?? 😙👌🏾 A subtle change but they look so good!
my favorite example of chekovs gun was one of my first ever books as a kid: Goosebumps Welcome To The Dead House. There was a tree mentioned in the first part and they essentially say the tree looks like it's about to fall on it's own. It's then used in the last part to shed light on the zombies who crumple in the light.
I remember being a kid reading this and being so amazed at the power of a simple tree mentioned in the first few pages and the execution of it all.
That being said, how would the rule of three work across multiple books? Assuming I have four books, and the item given to the main character in book 1 chapter 1 doesn't become important until the end of book 2.
I _knew_ you'd mention Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire!
I never thought I'd be writing a "murder" mystery, romance, court drama... yet here I am! I'm excited to checkout your thriller/mystery advice videos
As a trekkie, I always think of Chekhov's gun being a phaser
Oh, speaking of dangerous herbs and plants.. Poison Ivy from Batman and Robin has the same taste in makeup and style! That's it, I'm going to watch this movie now! (I believe it was Uma Thurman's role that I'm recalling) Anyway, Ivy's is such a marvelous story!
Siuzanna Vyshneva MARVELous. Haha.
It’s like a typical episode of Law and Order SVU
The character is afraid of falling in love. He falls in love in act 3 lol
This is hilarious! 💯😂
Hello! I have a question on the rule of three's. Can the book mention it any three times throughout the plot, or does it have to be mentioned at least once in every act (assuming that we're following a three-act structure)? Would really appreciate answers on this! Thank you so much! Absolutely love your content!
@Abiya Syed ooooh thank you for this!!! hehe
American Gods by Neil Gaiman is an impressive example. Everyone and everything mentioned is mentioned for a purpose.
Okay, I can't believe I'm admitting this because thrillers and mysteries are kinda my thing, but this is the first time I've ever heard of Chekhov's gun. *cringe* Yet I love what you said about working from the story's end backwards. I always work to close that circle in my mind and for the readers. Great explanation and tips.
I have a question. If I have book 1 I plant the seed, in book 2 remind that seed and then book 3 pay it off. Is that okay?
Woah this what I need. Thank youuu
Ps: I just know how to pronoun that checkhov's gun from this video. 😅
I just finished a book where much of it was just padding that had nothing at all to do with the plot and resolution. Like a lot of details about the investigating detective's family. I actually paid money for it too, because some of the stuff I've been reading lately from Kindle Plus has been tripe. At least it cost me less than a movie, but I did wonder why I spent all that time reading things that didn't matter.
When you mentioned Harry Potter I thought you were going to say the whole thing with scabbers and how we always know he was missing a toe etc and then how that comes to play in the third book, that’s one of my favourite examples of set up that just seems like a random detail
Another brilliant one. Honestly JRK is just brilliant at mysteries.
Yes absolutely. I love how she builds these worlds rich with details, and you never know how or if certain ones may carry more significance than you expect later on
I definitely prefer the idea of the reverse Chekhov's gun to the actual Chekhov's gun, because sometimes there's an object that's there for background and nothing else, and also because it keeps readers on their toes. :)
When is a good time to tell your characters backstory to get the twist going? Would you rather want to figure it out as you read before getting there. Or would you rather know what’s happening knowing your characters don’t know ? What sounds more interesting to you guys 🤔
The most well written setup and payoff I’ve read in recent years was in Brandon Sanderson’s Mistborn trilogy, having to do with a certain piece of jewellery belonging to one of the main characters (no spoilers but if you know, you know)
This is off topic to the video but do you have any advice to those with ADHD trying to write?
In addition to Mad Eye's flask, the Chekhov Gun of establishing portkeys and then making the trophy a surprise portkey was s t a g g e r i n g
I think even a romance can profit from this. Conflicts should be foreshadowed as well or else they are often pretty random.
What are people's opinions on Foxface? Did she eat the berries on purpose?
My only question about Chekov and guns is... what kind of security chief doesn't know that firing an unauthorized phaser would set off an alarm?
I good example is the diary in harry potter =).
Are you aware of Hitchcock's response... or did you bring it up in red herrings? He said if you're going to have a gun on stage, stab someone in the back.
haveing something apear before it gets importent prevents it from feeling cheap and out of nowhere later.
I was sevearly pissed when in a book a character could just suddenly heal for that was needed to prevent the life threatening would of another, that was addet for drama, from haveing consequences . . .it was just deus ex machina for there is nothing that even hinted that could be a thing.
Another author established early one, that resurection is a thing that can happen with sidecharacters so it did not feel just like plotarmor when a maincharacter got revived.
Even just mentining that someones father is a hunter can be setup to make it logical that they later use a rifle successfuly . . . it was not spelled out, but beeing close to someone who uses one at least creates the opportunity for them to teach you . . .
when suprising the audiance with a skill a character has, do some kind of set up so it makes sense why they have it and why they did not use it before. If there is a gun in the first act, give it a reason to be there in the first place and it is not used earlier on. Just think those things through
Soo... where's the cat?
I'll disagree on Harry Potter. I found it very predictable.
Why?
The book started with Voldy in a sort of grotesque baby form and Wormtail was the nanny, and they killed a Muggle.
Then we supposedly get the new DA teacher and oh, he's always drinking from that flask. Hmm... That must be an infiltrated death eater taking polyjuice potion.
If it were a teacher for another subject other than DA, maybe, but by book 4 we were all conditioned to expect the DA teacher to be a sidekick of the evil forces. Lockhart wasn't a death eater but he wasn't on the good side either. Lupine was a good guy but so happened to be a werewolf, which means...conflict. It's always the DA teacher. Absolutely predictable.
I'm surprised you call that a masterclass.
How old were you when you read these books? I was a teenager and so, no, dramatic formula was not obvious to me. I've never met anyone who hated GoF for this reason?
@@AlexaDonne I didn't say I hate it. I have many reasons to dislike the entire series (blind monsters, the endless fixing of his glasses, Seamus Finnegan's pyromania as an allegory for the IRA in the 90s, her lack of understanding on the psychology of abused and orphan children, I could go on). I just said this was predictable.
I read the books in my early 20s, and I had no knowledge of writing formulas back then. I studied other stuff.
It's true that this is a series for kids, but I don't know, I sense I still would have found it a bit obvious as a kid.
I watched the first movie when it came out, and I knew Quirrel was the "bad guy" all along. How? He acted all stupid and stammering all the way. The "disabled" villain trope anyone? I know this way too well from real life.
I can't call her books a masterclass. She has her merit, and she made a lot of people grab books and read, which is great, but that's where it ends for me.
Signs? That old movie with the aliens? I thought it did a great job building suspense, only to ruin it. Again, and again, and again. Very disappointing movie. Interesting concept though.