Action scenes…
The minimalist writing technique I use applies to action scenes as well as it does to other writing elements when constructing your short story, novella, or novel. Often called hard-boiled in the detective literature, it means adding just enough detail so your reader can participate in the creative process and form his own picture of the action taking place. The key words of course are “enough detail.” Goldilocks says not too little and not too much, but just enough. But what is “enough detail”?
First, you have to state who the participants are. Even if it’s Detective Joe fighting a mysterious stranger, you have to say his opponent is a mysterious stranger. Second, you have to say who is doing what to whom. He did something to him can be confusing—generally speaking, the reader knows these are different people, but which one is Detective Joe and which one the mysterious stranger? Third, strong action verbs are better, the correct verb must be chosen for each action, and cause and effect must be logical. Hit, for example, is often too generic. Is the hit a slap, punch, stiff arm, fist to the windpipe, etc? Fourth, use internal dialogue carefully. Detective Joe won’t hesitate and think about using his left or right fist—he’ll probably just react.
While most of my books have action scenes sprinkled through them, when I wrote Rogue Planet I carefully studied novels containing battle and swashbuckling scenes because almost the whole book marches from action scene to action scene, with only a wee bit of respite. In brief, some stories have a lot more action than others. When the scales are tilted to action, the author better work a bit more on getting it right. That depends on the readers, of course—it’s all subjective—so I should say, getting it right for most of the readers, many of whom read a lot and aren’t too forgiving about major gaffes.
Rather than take examples from my books, though, let me consider a true life incident that was on the news recently. A perp allegedly tried to steal some things in an NYC deli, got into a fight with the employee, and then dashed out. A sixty-nine-year-old woman was standing in his way. Cut to the endgame: the old woman is in the hospital with a brain hemorrhage. I want to focus on the action in between that I didn’t describe.
The news reporter and I both saw the same video of this terrible incident. No one has said it, so I’ll say it right upfront: the perp should be tried for second-degree murder because he caused the brain hemorrhage that still might kill the woman but will forever change her life. (None of this “alleged” crap when you can see him on the video do what he did.) What I’ll discuss is the less important distinction between the reporter’s description and my own. Remember, reporters are writers too.
“He hit her in the face and knocked her to the ground,” says the reporter. No, she uses the wrong action verb—it was a slap. He slapped her in the face—the hand is clearly open. And no, there aren’t two actions—it was only a slap. Maybe I’m nuts, but I hear an implicit “then” between “and” and “knocked.” “Knocked her to the ground” also implies there was a second blow. While the victim’s head hitting the sidewalk clearly caused the brain damage, the slap didn’t cause the fall—it was her recoil, the surprised reaction to the slap, justified under the circumstances. The victim isn’t Jason Bourne. She leaned too far back, lost her balance, and fell. That doesn’t excuse the perp, of course—he’s still culpable—but my description is the better one.
In her defense, maybe the reporter didn’t see the video, but I’d be surprised she’d make such a “live report” (her talking was only live, of course) without seeing the video (a recording, of course). Maybe she should have just shown it and let us come to our own conclusions?
So, the slap was the cause of the fall, and the fall was the cause of the brain damage. That straightens out the issues of cause and effect. It also changes the action verbs hit and knock to slap and fall, which are more precise and stronger (“fall” isn’t always a strong verb, but it is for an elderly person!).
That pretty much cleans up the report. First, you know who the participants are—the perp (a man) and the victim (an old woman). We don’t even need the names because of the sex difference, and it’s easy to keep the participants in the action straight. Second, we know who is doing what to whom, in my version, not the reporter’s, because she gets “the what” wrong. Third, by changing hit and knock to slap and fall, we’re opting for stronger verbs, choosing the right verb for each action, and making cause and effect logical.
Maybe the right way for a writer to describe an action scene is to imagine a video in one’s mind and describe the essentials (if she saw the video, the reporter failed there). “He hit her in the face, and she fell to the ground” covers the essentials. Maybe “He slapped her in the face, and she fell to the ground, striking her head against the sidewalk” is better. “He slapped her in the face, and she fell to the ground, striking her head against the sidewalk, and she’s now in Bellevue with a brain hemorrhage affecting the left side of her head” might be even better if the last details are important (one of your main characters is an ER doctor at Bellevue, for example). I’d probably chop up the last long sentence into two short sentences, by the way, as follows: “He slapped her in the face, and she fell to the ground, striking her head against the sidewalk. She’s now in….” Short sentences are better in action scenes.
The reporter’s description of the action also shows why eyewitnesses aren’t very reliable. She gets the endgame OK (by the way, the victim is still in the hospital, as far as I know—the media rarely follows up on victims, only perps), but you generate a different picture in your mind about what happened from her description—at least I do. In this case, the difference isn’t enough to change anything when the perp goes to trial, but the prosecution should forego the reporter’s description and let the video roll in silence. Most people on the jury will get it right when they see the video.
Writing action scenes takes practice, just like many elements in writing. Dialogue, characterization, back story, narrative, and many other elements of writing fiction might come naturally to a writer, but I’m willing to bet that practice writing them will always improve things.
***
Free PDFs for the asking: see the “Free Stuff & Contests” webpage. Also, Angels Need Not Apply is available on Smashwords.
In libris libertas!
