# Master Class: The MRU



## Kyle R (Jun 9, 2012)

This is fiction writing at the most fundamental level, though it's also an advanced level of instruction.

Welcome to your Master Class!

Like addition, knowing how to write stimuli and responses, in the correct order, will give your fiction a well-crafted feel that compells the reader forward.

I'm going to be using third person for examples, but the technique is the same for you first and second person writers as well.

For those who don't know who *Dwight Swain* was, he was a celebrated author and writing instructor. In his book _Techniques of the Selling Writer_, Mr. Swain laid out an approach he used to construct fiction in building-block fashion that is taught today in creative writing classrooms around the world.

He called his formula the *MRU*, which stands for *Motivation-Reaction Unit*.

The concept is simple, though how you use it can be as advanced as you like: for every motivation, your character will have a reaction.

A motivation is something external to the character. The reaction process, according to Mr. Swain, moves through four stages: 

Feeling, Thought, Action, then Speech.

To note: Swain's use of the word "Feeling" applies to any response, emotional or physiological, that happens without conscious thought. So getting frightened would be a feeling, so would jerking your hand away from a hot stove instinctively. Both happened in the first level of reaction: the level before thinking.

An example of the MRU in action:

*Motivation*: Lightning flashed in the sky.

*Reaction*: His throat clenching (*Feeling*), Adam was suddenly aware of how dire the situation was becomming (*thought*). He quickly tugged on his raincoat (*Action*). "I don't know if this boat can survive another storm," he said, softly.(*Speech*)

I'm going to switch over to Jack Bickham's terminology here, who was a student of Dwight Swain and an author and writing instructor himself. He altered the terminology though the method is still the same (however, easier to grasp); from here on we'll refer to the MRU as *Stimulus, Internalization *and *Response*.

A basic example of stimulus, internalization and response is:

_Outside the door, a low growl was heard. A chill crept up Lizzie's spine. "Did, did you hear that?" she asked.
_
Stimulus, internalization, and response.

The stimulus is external to your character. The internalization is what goes on inside your character. The response is what your character physically does.

*Stimulus *and *Response *are easy enough to understand.

Anything (anything!) that is not done by your character is a *stimulus*. A tree falls. Another character speaks. A car explodes. These are all stimuli.

Anything your character physically does, anything that can be seen on camera or stage, or by the other characters, is a *response*. You character sighs, yells, jumps up and down. All responses.

*Internalization *is the feelings and thoughts of your character. Frightened, worried, thinking about options, remembering previous events. These are all internalizations.

The internalizations can be broken down further, into two: *Emotions*, and *Thought*.

So as a reminder, the full order:

1. *Stimulus*

2. *Internalization *(Emotion, Thought)

3. *Response*

It's important to remember that the internalizations are in direct response to the stimulus.

If the stimulus is a dog barking, your character should respond internally (internalization), then externally (response). But both internalization and response should be in regards to the stimulus.

It would be strange to write something like:

The doberman snarled and lunged at Chloe, its teeth bared, its jaws gnashing, its bark hoarse and gutteral. Chloe felt giddy with excitement. What could her new birthday present possibly be? She smiled and gazed longingly at the clouds.

Hopefully none of you would ever do something like this! But I'm using it as illustrative point. The order of the MRU is correct: *Stimulus *(doberman), *Internalization *(excitement, wonder), *Response *(smiling, gazing). However, the internalization and response have nothing to do with the stimulus!

More correct would be something like:

The doberman snarled and lunged at Chloe, its teeth bared, its jaws gnashing, its bark hoarse and gutteral. A surge of adrenaline jolted through Chloe. She had to make a decision, and fast! But which door? Her wide eyes darted back and forth between the two handles. Her teeth were clenched and her hands were shaking. She could hear the dog closing in fast. There was no time! She had to choose! But which door?! With a shriek, Chloe grabbed the doorhandle to the right and yanked the door open. She threw herself through it and slammed the door just as the dog reached her. The beast slammed into the door like a sledgehammer and scratched furiously against the wood, howling in frustration. In the darkness, Chloe shuddered uncontrollably. She tried to calm herself, down. _It's okay, _she thought, _i__t can't get me now. I'm safe._ She swallowed hard and forced herself to look away from the thudding door. Slowly, cautiously, she explored her new surroundings, running her hands along the cool stone tiles.



Now, on first glance you might think, "Well, what the heck! That's so much text. I don't see where the MRU is!"

Two things to know. You don't need one sentence per component. It could be any amount. Secondly, that paragraph has several MRU's strung together. I wrote it intentionally like that to show how they can be used.

Here's the breakdown:


*Stimulus:* The doberman snarled and lunged at Chloe, its teeth bared, its jaws gnashing, its bark hoarse and gutteral. 

*Internalization:* A surge of adrenaline jolted through Chloe. She had to make a decision, and fast! But which door? 

*Response: *Her teeth clenched, her hands shaking, Chloe's wide eyes darted back and forth between the two handles. 


*Stimulus: *She could hear the dog closing in fast. 

*Internalization: *There was no time! She had to choose! But which door?! 

*Response: *With a shriek, Chloe grabbed the doorhandle to the right and yanked the door open. She threw herself through it and slammed the door just as the dog reached her. 

*
Stimulus: *The beast slammed into the door like a sledgehammer and scratched furiously against the wood, howling in frustration. 

*Internalization: *In the darkness, Chloe shuddered uncontrollably. She tried to calm herself down. _It's okay, _she thought_, it can't get me now. I'm safe._

*Response: *She swallowed hard and forced herself to look away from the thudding door. Slowly, cautiously, she explored her new surroundings, running her hands along the cool stone tiles.

Notice how MRU's naturally link together to form a seamless narrative?

Some tips to remember:

You don't need internalizations. You can simply have Stimulus, Response, in occasions where thinking isn't needed or logical (fast-paced action, for instance). But internalizations help the reader identify with the character more, and pull them into the story.

Your *Stimuli*, *Internalizations*,and *Responses *can be as basic and simple, or as elaborate and complex as you like. A few words, or several paragraphs for each, it's your call.

Don't feel bad if this seems very complicated and difficult to grasp. It took me a while before I fully comprehended it. But now I consider it an indispensible tool in my writing.

Some choose to ignore the MRU while writing and only think about it when editing. Some choose to disregard it completely. However you choose to use it (or not use it), I hope you found something useful in this thread!

Questions or comments are of course welcome!

Cheers!


----------



## garza (Jun 9, 2012)

Why not just tell the story? I'm asking, because to me as a journalist relatively new to trying to write fiction, the melodrama in the examples seems, well, rather lurid. The system, indeed, looks to be aimed toward creating the oh-my-god-we're-all-going-to-die! style of writing.


----------



## Sunny (Jun 9, 2012)

Oh I feel so embarassed. I had my one sentence from my one story, exactly like this: 

The doberman snarled and lunged at Chloe, its teeth bared, its jaws gnashing, its bark hoarse and gutteral. Chloe felt giddy with excitement. What could her new birthday present possibly be? She smiled and gazed longily at the clouds. 

;0)

Just kidding of course!

This post was so great! Wow. You really do help us out on this site, you know that? Well, if you don't - you should!

I love your helpful posts, and I think a lot of people likely do, even if they don't take the time to say so. So, I will. 

Thank you! I really enjoyed reading this, and it definitely helps to understand the structure of what I'm writing. I'll be even paying attention to MRU because of this. 

Again, thanks for your time KyleSmiles! ;0)


----------



## Kyle R (Jun 9, 2012)

garza said:


> Why not just tell the story? I'm asking, because to me as a journalist relatively new to trying to write fiction, the melodrama in the examples seems, well, rather lurid. The system, indeed, looks to be aimed toward creating the oh-my-god-we're-all-going-to-die! style of writing.



Well, the value of the MRU, to me, is the balance given to one's writing by reminding the author of the _Internalization_ component, and how useful it is with revealing, and developing, your character.

Consider, for example, something like:

_There was a hint of spice in the air. He sniffed and sighed.
_
In many stories, this is perfectly fine and natural.

But looking at it in the context of the MRU, you would notice the Internalization has been skipped. Adding it in:

_There was a hint of spice in the air. The scent brought him back to his childhood, to afternoons spent in the kitchen watching his mother dice tomatoes and Italian sausages. He sniffed and sighed.

_In my opinion, this greatly enhances the character development and also, the reader engagement. 

Some writers naturally use MRU's without even being aware of the process. Others don't, though, and they may benefit from knowing what the naturals do.

The example of Chloe and the dog was definately over the top, I agree.  It was just something off the top of my head, for illustrative purposes. But the MRU can be used with whatever style of fiction you choose to write (if you wish to). 


Meeshmash (Sunny) - Glad you liked it! I better see some MRU's from you or I'mma kick your butt. ;P


----------



## Sunny (Jun 9, 2012)

KyleColorado said:


> Meeshmash (Sunny) - Glad you liked it! I better see some MRU's from you or I'mma kick your butt. ;P



Well, Lyle.. let me just say this... 

Pfffft... good luck tryin'! 

But, just because I like what you wrote so much... the next story I write, I am gonna use this, and I am gonna bold the words that show I did pay attention to your class - and then, and then! I expect a gold sticker. Thank you very much! ;0)


----------



## Jon M (Jun 9, 2012)

I dunno. This is a little too much like fiction-by-the-numbers for me. 

Does anyone actually think about this stuff while writing the first draft?


----------



## Sunny (Jun 9, 2012)

Jon M said:


> I dunno. This is a little too much like fiction-by-the-numbers for me.
> 
> Does anyone actually think about this stuff while writing the first draft?


I can't say I have _before. _But, really; I'm willing to try anything to make myself a better, stronger writer. I think this it could work (and likely does for a lot of people), and I really want to try it, too. Maybe it doesn't stick after I try, and maybe it doesn't work for me, but you know what? Maybe it does, and maybe it just makes me that much better of a writer. Learning anything about writing, and the different techniques that are used are always helpful. Maybe you don't pick up and use everything, but maybe there will be that one little piece that like, and you use, and you advance your skills that much more.

I'm definitely going to write using the MRU, and see if it helps me. Hopefully it does, and if it doesn't, well.. I tried something new. ;0)


----------



## garza (Jun 10, 2012)

This seems best suited for first person or omniscient point of view. I don't want to write that way. I want a character to show himself or herself through what they do, what they say, or what others say about them. As a journalist of the old school I would never try to guess what is inside a person's head or offer any personal interpretation of their actions or speech. As the creator of a character I know what a character is thinking, but I want to reveal that through the actions of the characters in the story. In my story 'The Man Called Changsai' we know what the boy, Aron, is thinking as he looks at the policeman near the end, but only because Changsai has explained the boy's actions to the Englishman earlier in the story. No emotion shows on Aron's face. I've tried first person a few times, as in 'Ralph', and find it less satisfactory than the objective point of view. That's just me.


----------



## Robdemanc (Jun 10, 2012)

I found the post interesting and see your point.  I just noticed I started a scene off with what may be internalization only.  I don't see anything wrong with that because I think the stimulus is implied and the response of my character is to do nothing because there is nothing he can do.   But what you wrote here will be useful to me now as I am starting another rewrite of an old project.


----------

