Working With A Formula

I’m currently reading quite a bit of Jules de Grandin, which means pulp at its finest. With the other pieces of pulp I read recently (see reviews for Secret Agent X, Jim Anthony, and The Black Bat … oops, spoiler, sweetie), I’ve also started to see the patterns in those stories and especially Seabury Quinn’s Jules de Grandin stories work after the same pattern, with some variations, every time. Is it bad to work with a formula of some kind?

First and foremost, every story follows a certain formula. You have an introduction (might be missing in a short story), you have a change, you build up tension through twists and turns, you have a black moment (when everything seems hopeless), then you have the big confrontation, and afterwards you tidy up (might also be missing in a short story). This is how storytelling works. This is the sequence we expect when we pick up a book, turn on the TV, or sit down in a movie theatre. So every writer who writes fictional works tends to work of a formula, anyway.

If, however, you want to produce work quickly (as Seabury Quinn did), you will keep much closer to a formula. Edgar Wallace did the same. The art is not to stray from a formula working for you, but to make sure to have enough variations and use the formula well. Essentially, every genre can be summarized in a formula of sorts and the closer you keep to that, the more the story will look like the genre in question. Yet, people who read a lot of stories from on genre will also quickly recognize such a formula, if it’s in use. If you keep very closely to it, they will realize it and know what to expect. You can fool with that, of course, by playing with the tropes in your story, by playing with the characters, by adding a few more unusual twists and turns.

It sounds boring to keep to a formula and you might produce something much more recognizable without, but if you need to produce something over and over again (as the pulp writers of old and the new ones), having a formula to apply to your work is very helpful. It helps you minimize the time you need to plot a story and the time you need to write it. You can easily produce a full novella of 20,000 to 30,000 words in a month that way (even faster, if it flows well). Over time, if you’re using a formula often, you will grow so accustomed to it and know it so well you can use it without having to think about it much.

Personally, as an unorganized writer, I can’t rely on formulas too much, since my stories are not finished when I start the writing process, but even I find them helpful to a certain degree, because they give me an idea where to go next while I’m writing. I just can’t use it to produce a story without having to wait for my own ideas to catch up with me.

What you should be weary of is coupling a formula with too many stereotypes. You might not find the time to flesh out every character for a new story, if you’re producing them quickly, but you should at least make sure the main characters are characters and not just the cardboard cut-outs known as stereotypes. A story relies on the characters as much as on what happens. In fact, usually the characters are really driving the story, because their strengths and weaknesses, their past, present, and future, their acquaintances make something happen. Therefore, stereotypes won’t get you as far as ‘real’ characters who have all of the above.

Tropes are also an interesting topic, especially if you’re trying to put a story together quickly. Tropes are, however, not only known to you as a writer, readers and other audiences who are familiar with the genre will also recognizes tropes which are used often. The art is not to eschew them or write them, but to write them well, to spin them in a different direction, to vary them enough so the reader can’t be too sure what to expect. Or to make them think they know where things are going and then to surprise them - but it needs to be done well. You can’t go too far when twisting and changing tropes.

But back to the formulas as a such. Looking down on writers who use them, especially when producing a lot of material, is looking not far enough. Yes, they will probably never write something unique and their stories might not stand the test of time, but the same goes for a lot of stories not written with a formula in mind. Few books have a staying power and few stories age well. Sometimes, it’s not the writing which makes them powerful (“Dracula” was written in a diary/file style which was dead already when Stoker started work on his book). Sometimes, it’s only very popular for a short time, only to disappear completely afterwards. Sometimes, it takes a while before people start to get interested.

As a writer, you should aim for the thing which all stories are meant to do: entertain the reader. Because that is the first and foremost thing any piece of fiction is meant for. Yes, you can experiment. Yes, you can try to leave the regular paths and see where it leads you. Yes, you can cross two or even more genres and work out something new. Yes, you can add a social comment. But first and foremost, your story should entertain the reader.

And that is where the formulas do their work well. They are creating an interesting story to write, a story which will have twists and turns, which will satisfy the reader with its end. And that is what a story should do, so do not look down on formulas. You don’t have to use them, but at the same time, you shouldn’t think them worthless or cheap. They have their uses.