
Plot Devices: Deus Ex Machina or Chekhov's Gun?
Plot Devices:
Deus Ex Machina
or
Chekhov's Gun?
----Original Message----
"What are your thoughts on Good Deus Ex Machinas? I find them hard to pull off realistically in a plot." -- Puzzled Writer
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A Deus Ex Machina is when the Hero doesn't find the solution to the story's problem. The solution is handed to them, or taken care of, by someone or something far more powerful.
From TV Tropes:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A Deus Ex Machina is an outside force that solves a seemingly unsolvable problem in an extremely unlikely (and, usually, anticlimactic) way. If the secret documents are in Russian, one of the spies suddenly reveals that they learned the language. If the writers have just lost funding, a millionaire suddenly arrives, announces an interest in their movie, and offers all the finances they need to make it. If The Hero is dangling at the edge of a cliff with a villain stepping on his fingers, a flying robot suddenly appears to save him.
The term is Latin for god out of the machine, and has its origins in Greek theater. It refers to situations in which a crane (machine) was used to lower actors or statues playing a god or gods (deus) onto the stage to set things right. It has since come to be used as a general term for any event in which a seemingly fatal plot twist is resolved by an event never foreshadowed or set up.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Good Deus Ex Machina only happen when they've been set up to happen all along and were simply overlooked--which means they're not really Deus Ex Machina...
--They're actually a Chekhov's Gun.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"If you say in the first chapter that there is a rifle hanging on the wall, in the second or third chapter it absolutely must go off. If it's not going to be fired, it shouldn't be hanging there."
— Playwright Anton Chekhov (From S. Shchukin, Memoirs. 1911.)
Thornton Reed: "Take this, Dag."
Dr. Rick Dagless M.D.: "What is it?"
Thornton Reed: "Something that might come in handy."
— Garth Marenghi's Darkplace, "[i]Scotch Mist"[/i]
"Honestly, what kind of situation would require the use of a pair of fake arms and a remote-controlled wheelchair? Only, I imagine, a completely ludicrous one!"
— Father Ted
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Example:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
At the beginning of the horror flick, the sheriff says he's gonna cruise by later that night to keep an eye on the troubled teen watching over the huge creepy mansion--because said teen is known for painting Graffiti.
Back in the big empty house, the radio and the TV blast out "Crazed Killer on the Loose in our area! Be on the look out...! News at Eleven."
Creeped out, the kid calls a few of his friends over to keep him company.
His friends try to get him drunk enough to graffiti the house.
Eventually, the kid decides, "Why the hell not?"
Right at that moment the monster strikes! It terrorizes the troubled teen and kills off his friends. Blood! Guts! Mayhem! Screaming...!
Finally, the monster corners the kid on the roof with no place else to go.
Out of nowhere, a police helicopter shows up to rescue the kid.
-- Deus Ex Machina?
The copter door swings open and it's the sheriff. He wasn't just keeping an eye on the kid, he was also watching out for the crazed killer that had been all over the news for days.
-- NOT a Deus Ex Machina -- a Chekhov's Gun! This was set up to happen from the beginning. However, this works even better if....
Before the kid can get up on the copter, the monster finds a way to drag the helicopter down from the sky.
With the judicious use of a can of spray paint and a lighter, the monster's eyeballs are fried goo. The kid makes his escape straight into the REST of the cops heading up the road.
The cops shoot down the crazed killer and the kid goes on National Television saying how Graffiti saved his life. The End
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
An example of a Chekhov's Gun that LOOKS like a Deus Ex Machina can be found in the closing scene to Final Fantasy VII where the heroes tried everything to save the world, but failed. Suddenly, the world saved itself using the Life-stream--the power that had been the focus of the story's main problem since the story's opening. This Deus Ex Machina power had been there from the very beginning, yet had been overlooked making it in fact, a Chekhov's Gun.
However, an even better ending came with Dirge of Cerberus, where one of the least understood characters in the Final Fantasy VII cast proved to have had a monumental power sleeping inside him all along--that was again, overlooked.
Getting it on Paper...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you really want to use a Chekhov's Gun, it helps to think of a story as a Circle. It should End where it Began with the main problem at the beginning of the story being the last problem solved. This means you need to have the Solution to that main problem present at the beginning of the story--preferably in the opening scene, but discounted, or not thought of as anything special.
By the way, most Fairy Tales and Fables tend to have a Circular plot pattern -- ending where they began.
Enjoy!
DISCLAIMER: As with all advice, take what you can use and throw out the rest. As a multi-published author, I have been taught some fairly rigid rules on what is publishable and what is not. If my rather straight-laced (and occasionally snotty,) advice does not suit your creative style, by all means, IGNORE IT.
Category Story / Tutorials
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 120 x 120px
File Size 16.9 kB
Listed in Folders
Actually, the idea is NOT to foreshadow with it--that would give it away, but to make it look like it's just a random thing that just happens to be there. The idea is to make it so unnoticeable that it comes as a complete surprise--the kind people smack their foreheads over.
Deus Ex Machina are all too easy to write, and usually kills a story. Checkov's Guns are more tricky, but so much more rewarding when they've set up nicely.
However, even Checkov's Gun can be anticlimactic, if they are brought up poorly. I've read that in several stories, where what would have been the climactic ending scene came out quite flatly, and, I must say, deceptively, because of a poorly done Checkov's Gun.
However, even Checkov's Gun can be anticlimactic, if they are brought up poorly. I've read that in several stories, where what would have been the climactic ending scene came out quite flatly, and, I must say, deceptively, because of a poorly done Checkov's Gun.
Chekhov's Gun is my FAVORITE technique! They're all over my stories. In fact, I never put anything in my stories that ISN'T used later. Although I do love making people think it'll be used for one thing when in fact it's used for something completely different!
However, even Checkov's Gun can be anticlimactic, if they are brought up poorly.
Absolutely. Any techniques takes practice to do well--especially this one.
However, even Checkov's Gun can be anticlimactic, if they are brought up poorly.
Absolutely. Any techniques takes practice to do well--especially this one.
All stories should have a good Chekhov's Gun element, since that's what makes it unique enough for the reader to keep reading.
Agreed. However, sadly, not all stories are good--published or not.
Should the Chekhov's Gun resolve the story, though?
Why not? It's how Mysteries typically end--and most Adventures and almost all Sci-Fi's and Horrors.
Agreed. However, sadly, not all stories are good--published or not.
Should the Chekhov's Gun resolve the story, though?
Why not? It's how Mysteries typically end--and most Adventures and almost all Sci-Fi's and Horrors.
Actually, Superman IS a God-mode Mary Sue--or rather a Marty Stu. The original author openly admitted it! (Damn it, I can't find the article that refers to it! Sorry.)
I'm not to sure if I would be able to properly pull off a Checkov's Gun in a story.
It does take a bit of practice, but it's not That hard to do. It's as simple as planning the Ending before the Beginning.
I'm not to sure if I would be able to properly pull off a Checkov's Gun in a story.
It does take a bit of practice, but it's not That hard to do. It's as simple as planning the Ending before the Beginning.
*evil grin* Yes, it could!
-- My 'ferret' story Bombs Away features both. Almost all the secondary characters--including the ferret--were a Chekhov's Gun. What happened to the main character was pure Murphy's Law. Cheating Girlfriend > a Dangerously Magical Gadget > an incomprehensible manual > BOOM.
See?
-- My 'ferret' story Bombs Away features both. Almost all the secondary characters--including the ferret--were a Chekhov's Gun. What happened to the main character was pure Murphy's Law. Cheating Girlfriend > a Dangerously Magical Gadget > an incomprehensible manual > BOOM.
See?
I like the idea behind Chekhov's Gun. The principle that nothing should be included unnecessarily is definitely a rule that more people should follow in general.
Also, Deux Ex Machina characters are something I really hate. Including somebody as a repetitive 2-dimensional 'saves the day' tool is so boring! Most often they're mary sues which instantly makes my bile rise. Have you ever watched the Resident Evil movies? The main character Alice is the worst example of this that I've ever seen! I mean, I understand that she's the lead and therefore -must- play heroine, but stuff like manifesting telekinesis and other supernatural powers out of nowhere is incredibly lame.
Also, Deux Ex Machina characters are something I really hate. Including somebody as a repetitive 2-dimensional 'saves the day' tool is so boring! Most often they're mary sues which instantly makes my bile rise. Have you ever watched the Resident Evil movies? The main character Alice is the worst example of this that I've ever seen! I mean, I understand that she's the lead and therefore -must- play heroine, but stuff like manifesting telekinesis and other supernatural powers out of nowhere is incredibly lame.
I like the idea behind Chekhov's Gun. The principle that nothing should be included unnecessarily is definitely a rule that more people should follow in general.
I agree 100%.
Also, Deux Ex Machina characters are something I really hate. Including somebody as a repetitive 2-dimensional 'saves the day' tool is so boring!
We definitely agree on this point. Where's the Character development? Where's the ANGST?
Have you ever watched the Resident Evil movies? The main character Alice is the worst example of this that I've ever seen!
Actually, the worst ever is the comic book hero: SUPERMAN. They had to invent Kryptonite to take him down a few pegs BECAUSE he was too damned powerful. He ALWAYS saved the day--leaving nothing for any of the other characters to do, but be Victims.
I agree 100%.
Also, Deux Ex Machina characters are something I really hate. Including somebody as a repetitive 2-dimensional 'saves the day' tool is so boring!
We definitely agree on this point. Where's the Character development? Where's the ANGST?
Have you ever watched the Resident Evil movies? The main character Alice is the worst example of this that I've ever seen!
Actually, the worst ever is the comic book hero: SUPERMAN. They had to invent Kryptonite to take him down a few pegs BECAUSE he was too damned powerful. He ALWAYS saved the day--leaving nothing for any of the other characters to do, but be Victims.
I like the idea behind Chekhov's Gun. The principle that nothing should be included unnecessarily is definitely a rule that more people should follow in general.
I agree 100%.
Also, Deux Ex Machina characters are something I really hate. Including somebody as a repetitive 2-dimensional 'saves the day' tool is so boring!
We definitely agree on this point. Where's the Character development? Where's the ANGST?
Have you ever watched the Resident Evil movies? The main character Alice is the worst example of this that I've ever seen!
Actually, the worst ever is the comic book hero: SUPERMAN. That had to invent Kryptonite to take him down a few pegs BECAUSE he was too damned powerful. He ALWAYS saved the day--leaving nothing for any of the other characters to do, but be Victims.
I agree 100%.
Also, Deux Ex Machina characters are something I really hate. Including somebody as a repetitive 2-dimensional 'saves the day' tool is so boring!
We definitely agree on this point. Where's the Character development? Where's the ANGST?
Have you ever watched the Resident Evil movies? The main character Alice is the worst example of this that I've ever seen!
Actually, the worst ever is the comic book hero: SUPERMAN. That had to invent Kryptonite to take him down a few pegs BECAUSE he was too damned powerful. He ALWAYS saved the day--leaving nothing for any of the other characters to do, but be Victims.
So, would you actually encourage a Chekhov's Gun where character hadn't encountered it before?
In layman's terms: In the story I'm writing, a particular item (I won't say what the item is, because spoilers) is casually mentioned as part of the scenery at the start of the first chapter; we are then introduced to the character who eventually uses it, but only discovers and uses it at the very end of the last chapter (again, I won't say how). Would that be a good example of Chekhov's Gun, or a bad example? I could re-write it so that he's introduced to the item earlier on, but thinks nothing of it, if that serves as a good enough solution.
In layman's terms: In the story I'm writing, a particular item (I won't say what the item is, because spoilers) is casually mentioned as part of the scenery at the start of the first chapter; we are then introduced to the character who eventually uses it, but only discovers and uses it at the very end of the last chapter (again, I won't say how). Would that be a good example of Chekhov's Gun, or a bad example? I could re-write it so that he's introduced to the item earlier on, but thinks nothing of it, if that serves as a good enough solution.
Comments