Story Structure Round-Up

So, a little less than a year ago I did a series of blog posts on story structure, examining a few different archetypes. I only recently (um...) wrapped that series up, so I figured now would be as good a time as any to give you a round-up of those posts, so you can see them all in one place. So, here you go! If you're interested in outlining, the Hero's Journey, Joseph Campbell, story structure, Dan Harmon, feminism, or especially all of the above, then you should check out the following:

1. Dan Harmon's Story Structure (my personal favorite of all the structures I've examined)
2. Joseph Campbell and the Hero's Journey
3. Kim Hudson and the Virgin's Promise (Part I)
4. The Virgin's Promise (Part II)
5. Stephen King's Writing Advice (a review of On Writing)
6. Analyzing Frozen using The Virgin's Promise and The Hero's Journey

While I'm sure this won't be the end of what I have to say about story structure, I think it makes a pretty good start.

FROZEN (and the Virgin's Promise)

I know it's been a while, but I've been meaning to examine the structure of the Disney film Frozen within the framework of the Virgin's Promise (an altered version of the hero's journey I discussed...um, almost a year ago...yikes!). So, without further ado...

~

Frozen is an interesting film in that it has two central protagonists: Elsa and Anna. Both sisters have
their own arc and journey. At first, I assumed Elsa's arc would resemble the Hero's Journey, while Anna's might be closer to the Virgin's Promise. For some reason Elsa seems a more active, perhaps even a more masculine character (there's gender bias at work, folks), so I figured hers would be the Hero's Journey. But when I tried to hash it out that way, I just couldn't make it work. I then tried fitting both of their arcs into the Virgin's Promise, but it still didn't gel--Elsa and Anna's stories are just too different. Finally, I found something that worked: Elsa's arc as the Virgin's Promise, while Anna's as the Hero's Journey.

Let's look at Elsa's arc first. Oh, and in case you're wondering, yes, spoilers follow.* (But if you haven't seen Frozen by now, I can't imagine you actually care.)

ELSA

Elsa's Dependent World mainly consists of Arundel and her parents; she is dependent upon them for material survival, of course, and for protection. But she also depends heavily on social convention (apparently people with crazy elemental powers are frowned upon). She also craves love and acceptance, and she depends upon Arundel for that love and acceptance. And, later, she is dependent on the imposed security measure of "conceal, don't feel."

Price of Conformity: The first three segments of the Virgin's Promise are sort of all thrown at us within the first five minutes of the movie, and kind of in jumbled order. Elsa has two major prices to conformity: the first that, as a princess, she naturally lives with restricted boundaries, but the second and far more important happens after the incident while she and Anna are playing: Elsa must conceal, not use her power, and she must spend time isolated and away from her sister.

Opportunity to Shine: This happens when Anna and Elsa wake up early and Elsa uses her magic as they play together. Elsa is using her magic for good, she is bringing joy to her sister, and the moment is pure and genuine until Anna is hurt in the process.

Dresses the Part: Elsa fully realizes the meaning of "conceal, don't feel"--she completely isolates herself from her sister and her Arundel. She is doing what she thinks she needs to do, what her parents have instructed her to do in order to stay attached to her dependent world. But, of course, she is not happy doing it.

Secret World: Elsa attempts to please everyone--her parents by hiding her power, her kingdom by playing the part of future Queen, etc.--except herself.

No Longer Fits Her World:  After the coronation, when Anna asks Elsa's permission to marry, Elsa can no longer contain her power; she literally can no longer fit in the world she has been trying to make for herself, and she is Caught Shining--her power is revealed for the whole Kingdom to see.

Finally, Elsa Gives Up What Kept Her Stuck in the iconic song "Let it go."

But both of her Kingdoms are now in Chaos: her old Kingdom of Arundel is suffering a crisis of succession and wondering what on earth happened to it's Queen, and later her new ice kingdom comes under attack by Hans' men.

When Elsa fatally wounds Anna, she Wanders in the Wilderness. This is her moment of doubt, where she wonders whether all the changing she is going through is worth it.

Chooses Her Light: This segment is embodied by two moments: first, when Elsa escapes the prison in which Hans placed her, knowing she can no longer continue to use her power and remain in her old kingdom--her dependent world--as she knew it. And second, later, when Elsa realizes she can use another form of her power--love--to save Anna.

Re-Ordering/Rescue: Anna saves Elsa from Hans, while the other Lords watch from the balcony. Elsa is rescued from without and reconnected in a positive way to her kingdom as the Lords watch her heal Anna.

Kingdom is Brighter: The people of Arundel realize that Elsa is a better person--and ruler--when she embraces her power, and Elsa finally finds her place, both with her magic and ruling her kingdom, as she and everyone she loves skate around on the little ice rink she has created.

Fits in pretty well with the Virgin's Promise, if you ask me! Of course there are some slight deviations in the order of things, and the arc is certainly open for interpretation, but that's the way all stories should be--none should fit into the premise perfectly.

~

Now, let's look at Anna's Hero's Journey.

ANNA

Anna's story begins a bit later than Elsa's: her Ordinary World is basically described in the song "Do  You Want to Build a Snowman?" She lives a somewhat lonely life in her family's castle, isolated from her sister and the rest of the kingdom.

Anna has a few different Calls to Adventure. In the first rendition of "For the First Time in Forever" the castle doors are opening and she'll get to interact with real, live people. That's a call in and of itself--Anna is given a reason to change something. Another call happens when she meets Hans and he proposes to her. Perhaps her most important call is when Elsa's public use of magic causes her to flee, and Anna is faced with the decision of what to do next. (This use of magic could also be deemed a Supernatural Aid that get's Anna out the door and on her adventure.)

When Anna leaves her castle and ventures out into the now-wintery kingdom to find her sister, she Crosses the Threshold.

Anna's Road of Trials consists of finding winter clothing, meeting Kristoff, fighting off the wolves, meeting Olav, and hiking to Elsa's palace. These conflicts and meetings are what begin to forge Anna into the hero she needs to be by the end of the story.

Anna's Meeting with the Goddess occurs when she finally reaches Elsa, with the reprise of "For the First Time in Forever." This could also be deemed a version of Atonement with Father when Elsa reacts the way she does, and one of her shards pierces Anna's heart. (Other versions of Atonement with Father in Anna's journey could be her meeting with the troll rock people thingies, or when she finally reunites with Hans only to discover he does not love her after all and has betrayed her and her sister. Incidentally, those encounters could also fall into a "Part 2" of the Road of Trials--see what I mean when I say this is fluid?)

Anna's Apotheosis occurs a bit later, when she manages to save Elsa from Hans' sword, sacrificing her own life. Her Ultimate Boon, in turn, is the "true love's kiss" she receives from Elsa that saves her (this could also be deemed her Rescue from Without).

Finally, Anna Crosses the Return Threshold when she returns to her Kingdom, having changed her perspective on the world, love, and life in general. She is now the Master of Two Worlds with the Freedom to Live as she sees fit. She and Kristoff, of course, get together, Anna is reconciled with Elsa, and they all live happily ever after.

~

Frozen really is a great film, and it's protagonists fit the Hero's Journey and Virgin's Promise story structures in clear, but interesting, ways. Not only that, but the film does a great job of weaving the two arcs with one another, allowing significant parts of one major arc to compliment and sometimes juxtapose with significant parts of the other arc (a topic for another day, perhaps). Anyway. This stuff is kind of fun to think about, and hopefully it helps you understand what I'm talking about when I talk about story structure.**



* I highly recommend you read my previous articles about the Virgin's Promise and the Hero's Journey as context to this examination. It'll help a lot, I think. So, here's some links!
The Hero's Journey
The Virgin's Promise Part 1


** In fact, I've been thinking about the recent film Interstellar and how Matthew McConnaughey's character arc is actually closer to the Virgin's Promise structure than it is to the hero's journey. Something I may go into more detail later.

Kacy Catanzaro is amazing.

Speaking of strong women...

Why "Strong Female Characters" Aren't Enough Anymore

If you haven't read this article about how lazy writing is destroying the 'strong female character' stereotype (which became flawed when it became a stereotype to begin with), you should check it out. Like, now. And if you're doing any kind of creative work, you should ask yourself the questions   posed at the end of the article. They're worth asking.

Tasha Robinson, the author of the article, states that

"Strong female character" is just as often used derisively as descriptively, because it's such a simplistic, low bar to vault, and it's more a marketing term than a meaningful goal. . . . It's still rare to see films in the mainstream action/horror/science-fiction/fantasy realm introduce women with any kind of meaningful strength, or women who go past a few simple stereotypes.

Now I've been a "strong female character" (how about SFCs for short?) advocate for a long time, but there is a lot of truth to Robinson's statement. Many of us (authors, filmmakers, screenwriters, fans, readers, you name it) have become so obsessed with creating SFCs that we've forgotten why we wanted to make them in the first place--or, on the more sinister side of that coin, we attempt SFCs because that's what the market tells us to do, or that's the best way to reach a certain demographic, or whatever.

Unfortunately, SFCs have become as much of a stereotype as the stereotypes they were meant to combat. But it's the fact that SFCs even exist--that I have to create an acronym for such a term in the first place--that is the real problem. Because strong women existed long before SFCs were ever coined. Strong women have led nations, fought wars, survived crazy things, and died for what they thought was right. But, for some reason, we've shied away from portraying such women with even a fraction of the zeal with which we portray strong men in film, literature, and TV. Are there great films/books/etc. that portray SFCs? Of course there are. But (1) those works are far too few, and (2) the creators of said works are constantly bombarded with questions along the lines of "why do you create such strong female characters?"

Let's think about that question for a moment. "Why do you create such strong female characters?" Can anyone else see something off here? Why do we ask these creators why they make such SFCs when we could just as easily ask the great masses of people who neglect to give their female characters strength, intelligence, personality, leadership skills, wit, or any meaningful part of the story in general why they don't write SFCs? Do you see the disconnect there? Do you see the glaring inequality implied by that question?

Creating SFCs isn't about making women into men; women can have physical strength, to be sure, and can even act like men and have other masculine qualities and that is great and there is a place for those portrayals in fiction. But women can also be powerful through their intelligence, their sexuality, their strength of will, their cunning, their femininity, the sheer strength of their presence, and just about any other attribute you could come up with. That's what writing SFCs is about--or, at least to me, that's what it should be about. It's more than giving women equal screen or page time; it's more than making sure women kick bad-guy ass every once in a while. It's giving women--and men, believe it or not, because we can value and look up to women, too--female characters to admire, to aspire towards, or even to question and study and analyze.

Look, don't take my word for it. Listen to what Joss Whedon has to say about the whole thing--in fact, a lot of this blog post is drawn from what Whedon says about equality and "strong women characters" in this speech. Jump to 2:05 to hear him start talking about his responses to the "why do you write such strong women characters" question. His responses are some of the best I've ever heard.



Is the SFC movement broken? I don't know. It does seem to have lost perspective. I still think it's silly that it has to even be a thing to begin with. But that's what's so crazy: it does have to be a thing. Because the way things are now is not cool. It isn't right. So I can say that I, at least, am going to continue writing female characters, and they're going to be strong*.

* And, in this case, strong may refer to any and/or all of the following (pilfered from the OSX Dictionary App):
strong |strôNG|
adjective (stronger |ˈstrôNGgər| , strongest |ˈstrôNGgist| )1 having the power to move heavy weights or perform other physically demanding tasks: she cut through the water with her strong arms.• [ attrib. ] able to perform a specified action well and powerfully: he was not a strong swimmer.• exerting great force: a strong current.• (of an argument or case) likely to succeed because of sound reasoning or convincing evidence: there is a strong argument for decentralization.• possessing skills and qualities that create a likelihood of success: the competition was too strong.• powerfully affecting the mind, senses, or emotions: his imagery made a strong impression on the critics.• used after a number to indicate the size of a group: a hostile crowd several thousand strong.2 able to withstand great force or pressure: cotton is strong, hard-wearing, and easy to handle.• (of a person's constitution) not easily affected by disease or hardship.• not easily disturbed, upset, or affected: driving on these highways requires strong nerves.• (of a person's character) showing determination, self-control, and good judgment: only a strong will enabled him to survive.• (of a market) having steadily high or rising prices.• firmly held or established: a strong and trusting relationship.3 (of light) very intense.• (of something seen or heard) not soft or muted; clear or prominent: she should wear strong colors.• (of food or its flavor) distinctive and pungent:strong cheese.• (of a solution or drink) containing a large proportion of a particular substance; concentrated: a cup of strong coffee.• (of language or actions) forceful and extreme, esp. excessively or unacceptably so: the government was urged to take strong measures against the perpetrators of violence.

An Inward Spiral (Or: The Virgin's Promise, Part Deux)

Warning: It's probably a good idea to check out Part 1 where I talk about the Virgin's Promise in general before you read this post. Just sayin'.

While the Hero's Journey is traditionally a circle, the Virgin's Promise is better described as an inward-moving spiral. "Female heroes," Christopher Vogler states, in the "Forward" to The Virgin's Promise,

seem to move towards the center of a series of rings that represent the different levels of female relationships [...]. Then they may return through all those levels, unwinding the spiral, applying what they have learned at their center to each set of relationships.

The inward spiral hearkens back to the central dichotomy between the Hero's Journey and the Virgin's Promise: Heroes are concerned with external circumstances and their place within them (mythology); Virgins focus on the internal, developing self-worth and self-hood (folklore). The Hero's Journey progresses into the deep unknown and back up again; the Virgin's Promise spirals ever inward.

This idea of an inward spiral fascinates me, but I've yet to find in the book or on the internet a diagram that graphically demonstrates it (I have the e-book version of TVP, maybe there's a diagram in the print version?). So I played around with it on my own, and came up with this:

Yay! Another hand drawn diagram! I'm sure you're all overjoyed
to have such constant access to my artistic skills.

I think the inward spiral works out quite well on paper. We begin with the Dependent World in the upper middle of the circle, and progress clockwise through the Virgin's Promise until we reach stage nine, Kingdom in Chaos. At that point we reverse directions, and while the diagram doesn't represent this, my thinking is that from Kingdom in Chaos until the final stage, Kingdom is Brighter, the Virgin progresses back outward, "unwinding the spiral" as Vogler puts it. That said, I also like the visual of Kingdom is Brighter at the center of the circle; it gives the cycle a nice cherry-on-top sort of feeling.

There's other neat stuff, too. You'll notice that the stages are now organized into spokes, according to this diagram. That isn't on accident. The "northern" spoke contains Dependent World, Secret World, Kingdom in Chaos, and Kingdom is Brighter. The association between these stages is obvious: they're all part of the relational triangle between the Virgin, the Kingdom/Dependent World, and the Secret World. This spoke is largely external in nature.

Price of Conformity, No Longer Fits Her World, and Re-Ordering (Rescue) make up the eastern spoke. This spoke is generally internal, in contrast to the northern spoke. Each of these stages deals heavily with the Virgin's personal value (how she sees herself) and personal authority, or power.

The southern spoke consists of Opportunity to Shine, Caught Shining, and Chooses Her Light. The theme of light here is unmistakable. Like the eastern spoke, this spoke is mostly internal, and deals with the Virgin's pursuit of her Dream, and her connection with what I'm calling her "Inner Goddess" (which has ties to Harmon and Campbell, but I'll get to that later*).

The western spoke contains Dresses the Part, Gives Up What Kept Her Stuck, and Wanders in the Wilderness. This spoke, like the northern spoke, is mostly external, and deals with the Virgin's outward energy, change, transformation, and sacrifice.

This version of the inward spiral splits the Virgin's Promise into the three-act format I gave it yesterday quite well, too. The first ring contains Dependent World, Price of Conformity, Opportunity to Shine, and Dresses the Part--Act I, or what I've deemed Discovery.

Act II, or Growth, follows the second ring of Secret World, No Longer Fits Her World, Caught Shining, Gives Up What Kept Her Stuck, and (to cheat just a little bit because it's technically on the third ring) Kingdom in Chaos.

Act III, Fulfillment, finished the third ring with Wanders in the Wilderness, Chooses Her Light, Re-Ordering (Rescue), and Kingdom is Brighter.

Pretty cool, no?

Now, let's talk about Dan Harmon's story structure just for a moment. Yesterday I mentioned briefly how the Virgin's Promise can still follow Harmon's structure, with one or more of the thirteen stages fitting into each point of Harmon's YOU, NEED, GO, SEARCH, FIND, TAKE, RETURN, CHANGE circle. That is definitely true. But one of the cool things about Harmon's structure (and most story structures in general, as far as I know) is that it is (they are) fractal* in nature. Harmon encourages us to

think of each of the 8 steps as consisting of 8 microcosmic substeps. [...] I'm not recommending that you sit there with a compass and a calculator breaking down your story to the point where every 4 second line of dialog consists of 8 syllables and tells the story of a sentence, but it's possible and sometimes "going there" can help you make decisions or get unblocked. ("Story Structure 106: Five Minute Plots")

Essentially, each of the eight points in Harmon's story structure can be divided into eight more points of the same distinction, and so on ad infinitum. The same principle applies to the Virgin's Promise; while the thirteen stages of TVP fit into Harmon's eight points, you can also break it down into each act, as it were, and this inward spiral demonstrates that very well. Check it:

Another awesome visual aid. Word to ya mammz.

Modified version! If you remember Harmon's structure, you'll remember that a key point is the protagonist's descent into chaos, unconsciousness, and the unknown (see "Story Structure 102" to refresh your memory). The same applies to the Virgin's Promise, but on the microcosm level. The top half of the diagram represents life, consciousness, and order, while the bottom shaded area represents death, unconsciousness, and chaos. The northern spoke and it's stages occur, on a micro level and to varying degrees, in areas of order and consciousness for the Virgin. The stages on the southern spoke, obviously, occur in chaos and unconsciousness. The eastern and western spokes represent liminal spaces where the Virgin discovers a NEED and then GOES into and RETURNS from chaos, having CHANGED. Really, it works out. Read Hudson's description of each of the stages in TVP; each one fits quite nicely into these spokes, these acts/rings, and this pattern of descending into the unknown and coming back changed, somehow.

I geek out about this kind of stuff, guys. I think it's awesome.

Anyway. So there's kind of my personal touch on the Virgin's Promise, as seen through a Dan Harmon-ish lens.

My story structure series isn't over yet, though--I'll be applying the Virgin's Promise to a recent movie or two in the near future, among other things, so keep your eyes open for that!



* And by later, I apparently mean I'll get to it in a later post...

** Not only is "fractal" one of the coolest words in the English language, but it is a fascinating concept as well, especially in relation to story. And will surely be the subject of a post on my blog, one day...

The Virgin's Promise (Part 1)

I mentioned when I crash-coursed through the Hero's Journey that there were some bits I didn't entirely appreciate--mainly the stark lack of female perspective in the Hero's Journey cycle. Now, to be clear, that doesn't mean that women cannot experience the Hero's Journey, or that there aren't thousands of countless "Heroine's Journeys" out there, because there certainly are. But the Hero's Journey itself has an inherently masculine structure and terminology (and to be quite honest, Campbell's Hero with a Thousand Faces got a little too misogynistic for my tastes at times). Well, I researched feminine perspectives on the Hero's Journey, and finally found a book that captures what I was looking for: Kim Hudson's The Virgin's Promise* (hereafter referred to as TVP).

Why a Feminine Perspective?

Christopher Vogler, who wrote The Writer's Journey (which is essentially a "Campbell for Dummies Writers"), also wrote the foreword to TVP. While he considers the Hero's Journey to be a gender-neutral cycle, he sort of explains the need for a book like TVP:

There is more than a drop of testosterone in the assumptions and specifics of the Hero's Journey, starting with that word "hero." [...] When I started lecturing about the Hero's Journey, many people immediately assumed I was talking about male action heroes, superheroes, traditionally male military heroes, etc. Women would say "Fine, I get it about the man's journey to go out and conquer something, but what's the woman's journey?" ("Forward," TVP)

While I definitely think the Hero's Journey is gender-neutral insofar as both males and females can take on the role of the "hero," I myself have felt the absence of alternate views and journeys**, mainly from a more internal, emotional perspective. I'm also a self-proclaimed feminist (or pro-feminist, whichever you prefer), and while I consider the Hero's Journey valuable for stories as well as life in general, I think the view is incomplete and, basically, biased. The Virgin's Promise provides that point of view I've been missing. Of course, while TVP demonstrates an archetypal (there's that word again) feminine cycle, male characters can take a spin on that cycle just as easily (that is a super-weird mixed metaphor...). Just like the Hero's Journey, the path applies to any gender.

Mythology vs. Folklore

Interestingly, while the Hero's Journey is largely derived from mythological archetypes, the Virgin's Promise takes shape from folklore. While there are many differences between myths and folktales, the chief distinction for our purposes is this: fairy tales focus on self-worth and self-hood, while myths concentrate on themes of place in the world and obligation. The Virgin (which is, of course, the term Hudson uses for the protagonist of the Virgin's Promise cycle) aspires to answer questions regarding her own self-knowledge and place in the world, independent of what everyone else thinks of her, while the Hero concerns himself with survival in the world at large and overcoming the fear of death ("Fairy Tales and Myths," TVP).

That bit about mythology vs. folklore is one of the lynchpins of the Hero's Journey vs. the Virgin's Promise, so remember it. That said, let's get into the nitty-gritty.

So What is the Virgin's Promise?

Like the Hero's Journey, the Virgin's Promise outlines a protagonist's passage from one state of being to another, and how that change affects the world around her. The Hero has a goal he must accomplish; the Virgin has a Dream she must realize. The two structures are similar, of course, but the details can be very different. Hudson outlines thirteen main points in the Virgin's Promise. Because I'm a sucker for symmetry, I've taken the liberty of splitting those thirteen points into three different "Acts," similar to the Departure, Initiation, and Return Acts of the Hero's Journey. For the Virgin's Promise, I chose Discovery, Growth, and Fulfillment. Those terms seemed to denote the type of journey the Virgin undertakes most accurately. So, the thirteen points are as follows:

Act I: Discovery:

1. Dependent World - While the Hero begins in an Ordinary World, the Virgin begins in a Dependent World which provides everything the Virgin needs (or thinks she needs) as long as she adheres to certain rules (the Dependent World can be a parental figure, a friend, a lover, a career, or pretty much anything). This is the main obstacle, the antagonist, which keeps the Virgin from realizing her Dream; it may be an outside force in her Kingdom, or simply a belief in the Virgin's mind which keeps her attached to the Dependent World.

2. Price of Conformity - The price the Virgin pays to stay attached to her Dependent World. Hudson describes it as "the suppression of the Virgin's true self" ("Stage Two: Price of Conformity" TVP). The ultimate price, of course, is the Virgin's Dream--she has to pay the price of not realizing her Dream in order to stay attached to the Dependent World.

3. Opportunity to Shine - The Virgin sees an opportunity to temporarily pursue her Dream, without any real consequences or effect on her Dependent World. She takes this opportunity, proving that she can, at least in theory, realize her Dream.

4. Dresses the Part - Once her Dream goes from her unconscious mind to her conscious state of being in Opportunity to Shine, the Virgin will never be the same. She makes a permanent change to her demeanor and/or appearance to demonstrate the intense changes occurring within her. Hudson discusses four common metaphors for this phase of the cycle: "Becoming Beautiful," "Receiving a Physical Object," "Participating in a Fashion Show," and "Undressing" ("Stage Four: Dresses the Part" TVP).

Act II: Growth:

5. The Secret World - Having experienced the beauty and excitement of her Dream, the Virgin now attempts to please everyone (including herself, which is a significant step--her own needs and wants were never on her to-do list before) by continuing to participate in her Dependent World, the Kingdom, and her new, Secret World. What she thought was a one-time thing in Opportunity to Shine now becomes something much larger, but something that the Virgin still believes is manageable and reconcilable with her Dependent World. A constant fear that the Virgin's Secret World will somehow be discovered and outed by the denizens of her Dependent World plagues this phase of the cycle.

6. No Longer Fits Her World - The Virgin realizes that she cannot juggle her Secret World and her Dependent World forever. She must choose between them, and more and more she realizes she cannot live without her Secret World.

She is defining her own values and claiming her own personal authority. There is a growing discomfort with going back to the Dependent World and angst about having a Secret World. ("Stage Six: No Longer Fits Her World" TVP)

The Virgin often becomes reckless, confused, attracts attention to herself, or declares the task too hard. She narrowly holds on to her Secret World, but now realizes the impossibility of satisfying both worlds.

7. Caught Shining - Hudson explains it best:

At this point in the archetypal structure, reality hits and the Virgin must face the fact that she cannot keep her two worlds separated any more. The Secret World and the Dependent World collide and the feared consequences manifest. The Virgin often finds herself punished, shamed, or exiled. ("Stage Seven: Caught Shining" TVP)

The Virgin's Secret World is no longer secret, and this inevitably has a cost. The reason she is Caught Shining could be any number of the following: she grows too big for her Secret World, her circumstances change, she is recognized by her Dependent World, or she may be betrayed. Either way, the result is the same. The Virgin must now choose between her two worlds, or the choice will be made for her.

8. Gives Up What Kept Her Stuck - The Virgin now understands she must let something go, allow it to die, in order to fully realize her Dream and make it her reality. She faces grief and harsh realities, here; it is perhaps the most difficult phase of her journey. She may fear being hurt, or fear losing those who love her, but she makes the choice to do it anyway, because she finally understands that if her Secret World does not become her reality, she will never truly live at all. The Virgin transforms from being passive, servile, small, or nice, and becomes rebellious--she finally recognizes that she does not have to accept others' dreams over her own. Hudson calls this

the major turning point in the psychological growth of the Virgin. It is also one of the most difficult to clearly express and the key to the deeper meaning in the story. ("Stage Eight: Gives Up What Kept Her Stuck" TVP)

9. Kingdom in Chaos - Like a pebble thrown into a still pond, the Virgin's decision to Give Up What Kept Her Stuck creates a ripple effect felt throughout the Kingdom. The denizens of the Dependent World, intent on keeping things as they always have been, do all in their power to suppress the Virgin's newfangled ideas and keep the order they've always known.

Act III: Fulfillment:

10. Wanders in the Wilderness - Confronted by her Dependent World, the Virgin must now make another choice: fall back into line, as her Kingdom insists, or pursue her Dream to the end.

The Wanders in the Wilderness stage is a test of the Virgin's conviction and it is her moment of doubt. She is faced with an opportunity to demonstrate her growth and no longer accept a world that requires her to be smaller than she can be. ("Stage Ten: Wanders in the Wilderness" TVP, emphasis added)

The night is always darkest before the dawn, as they say, and Wanders in the Wilderness is the Virgin's darkest night before she finally...

11. Chooses Her Light - Again, Hudson says it best:

In Chooses Her Light, the Virgin decides to trust herself and pursue her dream or passion, whatever happens. This is the last stage of her transformation and a joyous climax to her story. She would rather shine than be safe or maintain order. ("Stage Eleven: Chooses Her Light" TVP, emphasis added)

At long last, the Virgin reveals her true self to the Kingdom. Reactions vary, but ultimately don't matter to the Virgin's progression. What does matter? She has finally made the decision to live her Dream. 

12. Re-Ordering/Rescue - Now that the Virgin has no Secret World--she lives openly--she challenges her Kingdom to keep up with her and accept her vision of life. Hudson emphasizes two aspects of the Re-Ordering: acknowledging the Virgin's worth as she fulfills her dream, and "reconnect[ing] the Virgin with a community" ("Stage Twelve: Re-Ordering [Rescue]" TVP).

13. Kingdom is Brighter - The Virgin and her Kingdom are finally reconciled, and a new order is established. Both the Kingdom and the Virgin are better off for the Virgin's journey. The Virgin's process creates a chain reaction that transforms the entire world around her:

When the Virgin is loved for who she believes herself to be, rather than because she is meeting the expectations of others, she has moved from knowing conditional love to unconditional love. This type of love creates a strong and meaningful bond between the Virgin and the kingdom. Unconditional love then spreads to other members of the kingdom. ("Unconditional Love Binds the Kingdom" TVP)

So, there you have it. The Virgin's Promise, in a nutshell. I certainly suggest you check out the book for the full story; Hudson does a great job of explaining each of these stages in context.

What About Dan Harmon?

We can't forget about him, can we? Certainly not. What I appreciate about Harmon's structure is that, at least in my opinion, it applies just as well to the Virgin's Promise as it does the Hero's Journey. Check it:

Dependent World = YOU
Price of Conformity/Opportunity to Shine = NEED
Dresses the Part = GO
The Secret World = SEARCH
No Longer Fits Her World/Caught Shining = FIND
Gives Up What Kept Her Stuck/Kingdom in Chaos = TAKE
Wanders in the Wilderness/Chooses Her Light/Re-Ordering (Rescue) = RETURN
Kingdom is Brighter = CHANGE

I'll go into more detail on how the Virgin's Promise relates to Dan Harmon's theories on story structure, but that will have to come in a later post. This bit has already gone on too long--so if you've stuck with me, Congratulations!--you're awesome. Stay tuned for more on the Virgin's Promise, story structure, and awesome stuff in general.




* On something of a side-note, jumping into TVP right after Campbell's Hero was a bit of a culture shock. Campbell's prose is so intellectual and harvardian (yaleish?), reading the two back-to-back made Hudson's writing seem sort of grad-school-y in comparison (and yes I definitely mean grad-school-y, not grade-school-y, in case you think that's a typo...). Which doesn't mean her writing was bad by any means; in fact, while Campbell's prose had a tendency to bore me to tears or lose me in intellectual aphorisms, Hudson's was concise, to the point, and easy to follow. So while Hudson may not sound as smart as Campbell (and let's be honest--who does?), her writing was much more accessible. Vogler's The Writer's Journey would actually be a great in-between read, I think, to transition from Hero to TVP.

** Terminology plays an important role here: while The Hero's Journey and The Virgin's Promise can constitute completely different paths, many of the specifics can sometimes seem almost synonymous. While this is far from the case (similarities between the two structures exist, certainly, but they are ultimately two very different paths), the distinction is often most clearly demonstrated by terminology.

No Story Left Behind (or: My Thoughts on The Book of Mormon Girl)

I know it's a bit early to call, but The Book of Mormon Girl by Joanna Brooks may be one of my favorite reads of 2013.

The book is honest.  That's really what it comes down to.  What makes it even more applicable to me is that, well, it is so freaking applicable to me.  If I read an honest book on Islamic culture, I'm sure I would appreciate the sincerity there, but there's just not much for me to relate to, for obvious reasons (I'm not a Muslim).  I am, however, a Mormon.  In fact, I'm a liberal, progressive, feminist* Mormon, which seemed to be a key demographic of the book's audience.  The Book of Mormon Girl was particularly refreshing to me because it was being so honest about things that I craved to discuss honestly.  Making sense, much?

The book essentially chronicles Ms. Brooks' childhood as a "root beer" in a land of "cokes"--an adequate metaphor for growing up as a Mormon in a land of people who aren't Mormon--and then goes on to relate her experience with the LDS church as a feminist, intellectual, and progressive liberal.  Her assessment of the culture and overall feel of "growing up Mormon," with CTR rings and pioneer ancestors and relatives in Utah and the Osmonds and everything is uncannily accurate.  She gives special attention to her own faith throughout the book, talking about doubt, about how her faith was sometimes shaken or undermined, and about how, despite all of these things, she never quite lost faith in and love for Mormonism.

And she went through some pretty trying times.  As a middle-class white Mormon guy, just the perspective of growing up female in the LDS Church was eye-opening.  There were issues I never considered, growing up, that all of my Mormon friends-who-were-girls had to deal with.  I like to think that I've begun to be more aware of those issues in the last few years, and hopefully in many ways I have, but this book proved that I (and the LDS membership as a whole) still have a great deal to learn in that arena.

It was fascinating to read about her perspective on the "September Six" and the events surrounding that little controversy.  In the early 1990s, BYU fired a handful of professors.  Many of those professors, along with a few other liberal feminists in the Church, were also excommunicated.  I remembered hearing about the infamous "purging of the English department" during my undergraduate and graduate degrees, in whispered corners from other students and off-hand allusions from professors, but was always very frustrated at everyone's (including my own) inability to talk about the controversy openly.

Hearing Ms. Brooks discuss her association with the experience was eye-opening and fascinating.  She didn't receive any specific Church discipline for her progressive beliefs (at least not that she specifies in the book), but rather felt a constant worry that she might lose her membership in the Church she had grown up in, the religion she had loved, simply for voicing her own beliefs:

Mormons like me found ourselves in the grip of a terrible turn in Mormon history, in the grip of a fear provoked in part by the strength of our Mormon feminist vision:  a fear of the full, glorious, strange, and difficult humanity of our Mormon past. . . . It took a decade to come to terms with the fact that the Church we loved had declared us its enemies.

She imposed on herself an exile of sorts, during which time she stayed away from the LDS Church, mostly, it seems, out of fear of being shunned (if not excommunicated) for her unorthodox beliefs.

Ms. Brooks doesn't pull any punches when it comes to discussing LDS history.  Many Mormons might find the way she discusses Mormonism offensive; I don't believe that's true.  She says it best herself:

These are the unspoken legacies we inherit when we belong to a people:  not only luminous visions of eternal expanses of loving-kindness, but actual human histories of exclusion and rank prejudice.  We inherit not only the glorious histories of our ancestors, but their human failings too, their kindness, their tenderness, and their satisfaction with easy contradictions. . . . We inherit all the ways in which our ancestors and parents and teachers were wrong, as well as the ways they were right:  their sparkling differences, and their human failings.  There is no unmixing the two.

The LDS Church is made up of people, and people, as a general rule, screw up.  Often.  All the time, in fact.  Ms. Brooks is simply honest and up front about that fact.  And as honest as she is about Mormonism's dark times, she's just as honest about it's bright points, both of history and of doctrine.

Lest I paint the book a little too brightly, let me be clear:  I didn't think it was perfect.  Her raw, unrefined but truthy writing style was certainly atypical.  (Actually I really appreciated her writing style as well...again, refreshing.)  Oh, here's a critique:  I was never quite clear what the situation was with her exile.  It seemed self-imposed, but I wasn't sure if there were other factors behind it (other than her association with some of the September Six and some of the LDS Church's declarations around that time period).  I would have appreciated a bit more clarity on how she got to the point where she considered exile, as well as how she decided to come out of it.**

But really I don't have many bad things to say about this book.  And I think, again, it comes back to honesty.  "I grew up in a world," she says,

where all the stories I heard arrived at the same conclusions:  the wayfarer restored, the sick healed, the lost keys found, a singular truth confirmed.  And an orthodox Mormon story is the only kind of story I ever wanted to be able to tell.

But these are not the kinds of stories life has given me.

Every Mormon carries with them a bundle of stories like a suitcase of family secrets. . . . Sacrifices we refuse to believe God would ask of us.  Stories of loss that do not end neatly with restoration and stories of leaving that do not conclude with the return home.

In the world I grew up in it was not okay to tell unorthodox stories.  We did not hear them in church.  We did not read them in scripture.  But sooner or later they break through to the surface in every Mormon life, in every human life, in every life of faith.  I am not afraid of them.  Because this is the story life has given me to tell.

After two and a half decades of trying to decide what to do with these types of stories in my own life, I'm finally learning to not be afraid of them, either.   That's one particular lesson I hope I never stop learning, and one that I pray the membership of the LDS Church picks up on, as well.  We need those unconventional stories about Mormons.  We need to hear that people aren't perfect, that they screw up, and that sometimes they come back from that, but sometimes they don't.  Those stories are in our scripture, but they seem to have lost their way into our culture.  But books like this one --and hopefully many more things like it--are helping to bring those stories back.

One final caveat:  while this is a great book, I don't think its the most informative source to learn about mormonism.  Mormon.org, or the Book of Mormon itself (the actual book, not the musical), would probably be the best references for something along those lines.  But, if you're looking for one person's experience with the LDS religion and culture (especially if you're interested in how progressivism, liberalism, and feminism could possibly have a place in said culture), I highly recommend The Book of Mormon Girl.***



*  Or pro-feminist, depending on your particular brand of feminism.

**  Of course, some of these experiences of hers may be of a sort that she doesn't feel comfortable to share publicly (perhaps they're too sacred, perhaps they're too embarrassing, perhaps...who knows).  But even if that's the case, I would have appreciated some hints in that direction.

***  Also, if you're interested in more about Joanna Brooks, I recommend one of her sites, Ask Mormon Girl.  It's a fascinating advice blog that attempts to answer some of those difficult questions--at least from one woman's perspective :-).

The War on...er...um...who are we fighting, again?

Some of you may have come across this article by Suzanne Venker over at that bastion of media respectability, Fox News.  If you haven't, you might want to check it out.  In the article, titled "The War on Men," Ms. Venker proposes that one of the reasons so many men are opposed to marriage these days is because of...well...because of women.

"I've spent thirteen years," Ms. Venker states,

examining social agendas as they pertain to sex, parenting, and gender roles.  During this time, I've spoken with hundreds, if not thousands, of men and women.

So she's establishing her credibility.  That's great, especially the stuff about examining social agendas and writing three books (which she mentions earlier in the article) and so forth.  But here's me being nitpickish, and I just can't help it.

Apparently she's also spoken to hundreds--maybe even thousands--of men and women.

WOW!  I'm amazed.  Except I'm not.  Admittedly, I assume she's saying that in the context of the "examining social agendas" thing, but come on.  I don't know if speaking to a lot of people qualifies anyone for much of anything.  Except, perhaps, speaking with more people (?).  Did she speak with these men and women in a professional context?  What kind of sample are they?  Gah.  Anyway.  This isn't even what I want to write about, but let me just say I'm not that impressed.

Back to her words:

I've accidentally stumbled upon a subculture of men who've told me, in no uncertain terms, that they're never getting married.  When I ask them why, the answer is always the same.  Women aren't women anymore.

Ok.  Women aren't women anymore.

Huh?

Does she mean that women aren't what men expect and want them to be anymore?  They aren't what society tries to pigeonhole them into being anymore?  Or is there some other angle she's getting at, here?  Because, um, anatomically, I'm pretty sure women are still...women.  Stephen Colbert did a great bit on this, so check that out--I don't want to step on his toes (and couldn't if I tried) or beat the subject to death (and mix a lot of metaphors).

But anyway, there's the crux of her article.  Women want to get married, and men don't want to get married, and, largely, that whole conundrum is the women's fault.

Personally, I see some fundamental problems with this thesis.  First of all, since when, exactly, is men not wanting to get married a new thing?  I'm pretty sure Og and Zog, the caveman and cavewoman, struggled with the same issue.  Zog wanted babies.  Og wanted to go out with his pals, Urlp and Frederick, to see who could lift the largest rock.  Zog, seeing as how she was the one who did all the cooking, cleaning, and hunting to boot (What did Og do, anyway?  Lift rocks with his friends, I guess.  Oh, and start wars.  There's that.), threatened to withhold any and all sexy-fun-times unless Og stuck around to spend some quality time and give her a bouncing baby or three, or eleven.  So Og shouts down the cave complex to Urlp and Frederick, letting them know the big boulder-hefting competition is off, they'll have to try next weekend.*  It's a tale as old as time**, not the revelation Ms. Venker makes it out to be.

The modern Og and Zog.

Now, one thing Ms. Venker does get right is that women have changed quite a bit.  Good on you, Ms. Vanker, I think that's a fairly accurate statement, although it might be slightly more accurate to state that the way women are treated has changed quite a bit, but still.  Way to...oh.  Wait.  Actually, according to Ms. Venker, the gist of this change consists of women becoming angry and defensive.  Again, this is something I just don't see.  I'm sure Zog could be just as angry and defensive as any woman today, just as I know for a fact that most women today are actually quite pleasant and graceful.  Doesn't seem like much of a change to me.  In fact, Ms. Vanker's entire article seems to do little more than perpetuate generalities and stereotypes that have existed for centuries, wrapping them up in sort-of-shiny, kind-of-new wrapping paper, and throwing them right back into the face of feminism.

Ahem.  Anyway.  She said this other thing that I found a bit wonky***:

The so-called rise of women has not threatened men.  It has pissed them off.  It has also undermined their ability to become self-sufficient in the hopes of someday supporting a family.  Men want to love women, not compete with them.

First of all, let's be honest, the "rise of women" (which sounds more like a planet of the apes movie than anything--come on, people, let's work on our nomenclature) has threatened men.  Some men.  And, sure, it's probably pissed men off, too.  Some men.  But, by and large, I actually think that men, and society as a whole, are better off when women are treated as, well, anyone else should be treated--meaning respect, kindness, and all that jazz, as well as letting them choose to do whatever they want with their lives, whether that's running a business or running a home.  Some people (and I won't restrict this category to just men) may indeed be pissed off and/or threatened by women suddenly filling high-level positions in businesses, or doing better in school than men, or voting, or working while a man takes care of the children, or whatever.  And those people are entitled to their opinions.  But I don't think that's a reason to blame men's lack of matrimonial desire on women.

And the whole "love women, not compete with them" thing...that may be true, too, but probably only because men are scared to death of getting their butts handed to them.  Just another reason for men to pick it up a notch and give these uber-women a run for their money.  (Now, Ms. Venker did come out and say she actually meant that "husbands" don't want to compete with "wives" in the workplace, which I suppose makes a modicum of sense.  Look up modicum in the dictionary and you'll see what I mean.)

Now, is there some truth to Ms. Venker's article?  Sure.  I'm sure the thousands of men and women she's talked to have genuine concerns about this issue.  But I think she spins it too far--it seems more of a reactionary piece to elicit backlash more than anything (in which case, I suppose, she's got me there!).  But you know what?  She can say what she wants, I can say what I want, and we never even have to confront one another about it.  That's what's so great about America.  And the Internet.

Finally, let me contextualize:  I'm a married man, and I'm supremely happy about that.  My amazing wife happens to be the main breadwinner in our family at the moment, and I'm proud of her for that.  She's intelligent, capable, enjoys what she does for work and--get this--is freaking good at it.  I'm not angry or defensive about our situation, and neither is she.  Will that be our situation forever?  Probably not.  But if it is, I, for one, won't be terribly upset.  We compliment each other pretty well, she and I, and I think that is one attribute among many that makes us pretty adaptable to whatever situation comes our way.





*  True story.  Think I saw it on the history channel or something.

**  What, you thought Beauty and the Beast was the only one?  Don't be ridiculous.  Now, when it comes to songs as old as rhyme, I'm pretty sure there's just the one.

*** Okay, she said whole lot more stuff that I found wonky, to say the least.  But this post is already expanding far beyond its humble beginnings, so I'll hold my tongue.