Like.

I guess we have to ask the question why are any of us doing this anyway? Why are we writing stories? Why not just live life? Are we writing for money? Hoping one day to make that million dollar sale? For me, learning how stories have been crafted over thousands of years is part of the joy of participating in the craft / gift of writing.

Writing is a gift. We can study it’s history, how others have done it, how teachers teach it, but ultimately, it is an art form. Ever since the humble oral tradition of fairy tales, stories have existed to empower us to overcome life’s obstacles.

None of us are under any obligation to follow rules. If we want to write a story where no one changes, we can do it. If we want to write a story where the world changes and not the hero, we can do it. We can write whatever we want!

However, the moment we start to work with producers and script consultants questions will be asked about the story with regards to its universal appeal, that is, how the hero, against all the odds, overcomes the obstacles of life put before her to live happily ever after.

Hollywood likes to produce films that do the same job as fairy tales: give the viewer tools and empowerment to overcome life’s obstacles. I think this is positive. None of us, however, in the free world, are obliged to write anything.

I end asking myself this question: why, and for who, am I spending this short life of mine writing?

Whoa. Val…
Ante said “IMHO”. He didn’t ask for a rant.

You’re saying ‘change is predictable’. So ‘no change’ is not? LOL

“Change is the foundation of any story”
ABSO-FUCKING-LUTELY.
If the hero doesn’t change, you better make sure the world does.

I like how Martin put it: “Either the main character changes, or s/he changes the world. For no change is no story, and no story is just chat…”

(BTW: Nobody in this thread struck me as being ‘full of themselves’.)

Change isn’t the foundation of every story. You’re only saying that because that’s what you’ve been told. Quit reading so many books on how to be a writer and JUST FUCKING WRITE ALREADY! That’s like asking a christian why they’re christian and they say, “Because that’s the way i was raised.” They don’t know WHY, they just believe because that’s always what they were told to believe.

The only ‘change’ Indiana Jones takes is overcoming his fear of snakes. BUT it’s not even a change because a TRUE change would be him not simply overcoming that fear for one moment but him liking being around snakes afterwards. Indiana Jones is NOT change, it’s him momentarily overcoming his fear of snakes, but that fear still remains after that moment. Just because you do something once doesn’t mean you are then changed by it.

Most horror movies don’t have character change, unless you consider the Pro’s instinct to survive being normal at the beginning compared to it simply being stronger at the end a ‘change.’

Mostly Comedies use the change gimmick, but that’s because it’s an easy gimmick that helps them near instantly develop characters and plot before they even start writing the story down on paper, and it’s also very predictable. A PERFECT example is Liar, Liar. Initial idea: a guy can’t lie for 1 day. Then expand it: make the guy a LAWYER (who are known for lying) who can’t lie for 1 day. WHY can’t he lie? Let’s give him a reason people can relate to: family ties. TThen throw Jim Carrey into the role, an actor known for making people laugh, and that’ll put the target demographic into those theater seats. But again, very predictable. We know instantly from the very beginning that Jim is a liar and before we even leave the gates we know that by the end the opposite of him will be true. Personally, and i don’t know about you, but i prefer to NOT know the ending to a story until i get there.

BUT the whole ‘change is necessary’ thing is just a bunch of bullshit that has been overused. Doing something and preaching something simply because you are told that’s how it is is just plain stupid. If character change is essential to every story as you’ve stated, that would make every story predictable and boring. Give the Pro a trait at the beginning and we’ll instantly know that the opposite will be true of them at the end. Therefor we can basically predict the story and what will happen to the Pro. And why? Because the author thinks change is the foundation of every story simply because that’s what they were always told, so every Pro they make in every story they write will be predictable. Look at their Pro at the beginning and we’ll know they’ll be the opposite at the end BEFORE we even read that far. The only other equation to that supposed ‘necessary’ change is Tragedy stories, and thus if your story is a Tragedy we’ll know that the defining trait of the Pro at the beginning will be intensified by the end instead of turning into its opposite.

Did Russel Crowe in Gladiator change? Nope. He was an efficient soldier and leader of men at the beginning, and he was still one at the end.

Does Rocky change in Rocky? Nope. Rocky was a fighter at the beginning and he was still one at the end. Yes, you can say, “Oh, Rocky thought he was a loser at the beginning and did not at the end. That’s how he changed.” Yeah, sure, if you consider every training montage of every Rocky movie a character change. But the truth is it’s a character who was a fighter at the beginning, he’s put through training to increase his fighting skills, then he used the those skills at the end. Physical change? Yes. Character change? No. Character change would be Rocky becoming a pacifist by the end of the movie and refusing to fight because he was a fighter at the beginning. Turning a fighter into a stronger fighter isn’t change, it’s GROWTH. There IS a difference.

And i can’t think of a single Conan story i’ve ever read where Conan has character change (and i should know, Howard is my favorite writer and i own every scrap of his writing i can get my hands on). Conan starts out as he is, deals with his problems as he does, and by the end he’s the same person. Yes he may have learned something new about such and such wizard or supposed ally or land or people, but learning something new doesn’t change WHO you are. It changes your skill set, but not your personality.

You can preach how much change is necessary all you want, but all that does it end up making VERY PREDICTABLE characters and stories. At the beginning your character doesn’t take life seriously, so we know they’ll take it seriously by the end. Same with a dumb character turning smart. A loner into a social person. A pushed-around geek into a confident and strong leader. You can take ANY trait, apply your supposed essential method of change, and predictably know how the character is going to turn out without even bothering to read the friggin’ story at all.

How many times have we seen the movie or read the story of the poor, battered housewife who finally kicks her abusive husband to the curb after she ‘grows’ more confidence??? Exactly. it’s been overdone to hell, and it’s cliche and boring as all hell.

Just because a few good books have used the character change arc well in their story does NOT mean it instantly becomes a rule that change is now the foundation of every story. Most ‘change’ is simply training a character undergoes, nothing more. Luke’s ‘change’ in the original Star Wars was simply that he trained to use the force, a skill he already possessed yet simply made stronger. A PHYSICAL skill. It doesn’t have to be some deep, underlying truth of life meaning so you can feel like the most intelligent, genius writer in the world…because you’re not and i’m not. Get over yourself, drop your ego and accept that being a writer doesn’t elevate you onto some higher plateau above everyone else where you are aware of some higher truth most others are not.

And i hope this offends you, because that way maybe, just maybe, you’ll get over yourself long enough to write a good story and worry about how much you are impressing everyone with your ‘genius’ writing theories later :-/

Change is foundation of any story, but it’s not necessarily a hero’s duty to change. It’s enough that initial situation is resolved/changed due to the action of the main character. IMHO

These ideas are not new so yes I agree with you.