# Themes!



## EmmaSohan

When you find a theme in your book -- what have you found?

When you develop a theme in your book -- what are you doing?

For full credit, you must supply an example.


(Extra credit. What is a theme? And, does a book have to have a theme)


----------



## shadowwalker

I just write. The readers let me know what the theme is (or are, actually).


----------



## Mutimir

I don't really find a theme in my book. I already have one planned out. Some themes I've used are ambition, love and friendship, and revenge.

Theme is definitely the foundation of each story I write. When I'm writing a scene I'm always considering the theme. So in terms of developing the theme, everything my character's must in some way tie to that theme in one way or the other. If it doesn't then it's just filler. 

Every story has a theme.


----------



## T.S.Bowman

shadowwalker said:


> I just write. The readers let me know what the theme is (or are, actually).



^That


----------



## Nash

shadowwalker said:


> I just write. The readers let me know what the theme is (or are, actually).



This is frequently the case with me. I am not proud of it xD

At least in my case, stories with themes laid down beforehand turn out better when I finish writing them. Like if you story's name is "Friendship is Magic", then the message of friendship being equivalent to magic would be made much clearer if major events and resolutions tied down to friendship. Although sometimes it's better to just free-write and let your words create a theme themselves 

And no, every book does not have to have a theme IMO. Sometimes, a light, random assortment of stuff can make a pretty good book (re: _The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy_, where there are all sorts of events and people which are pretty damn random). Though a more serious work would probably be better off with a theme.


----------



## Deleted member 56686

EmmaSohan said:


> When you find a theme in your book -- what have you found?
> 
> When you develop a theme in your book -- what are you doing?
> 
> For full credit, you must supply an example.
> 
> 
> (Extra credit. What is a theme? And, does a book have to have a theme)




Is this going to be on the final exam? :lol:


----------



## Jeko

> At least in my case, stories with themes laid down beforehand turn out better when I finish writing them.



I find the opposite. If I give myself a theme to work towards at the start, the scope of my creativity is limited. Perhaps it _feels _more effective, but the reader will surely have less room to manoeuvre. Thus, I only work with theme once the drafting is done; then I have something to work with. I can see the shape of the peg and work out the holes. Otherwise, I might be trying to put my round style into a square model.

While I also think stories don't need themes, they will always have them. Some reader somewhere will find one. What matters is what you intend and how that correlates to what is delivered; the success of your work can come from a large scale misunderstanding about theme. I don't think writers should shy away from this - it's part of the joy of storytelling.


----------



## Terry D

All you have to do is read the back cover of any book. Somewhere on it will be a statement, or comment about at least one of the themes of the book. Every book has a theme. One of the themes within _Hitchhiker's Guide_ is that even if everything seems random there is still an inteconnectedness to the universe. Authors don't publish books of random thoughts. They have something to say; it might be deep and personal, or it might be light and whimsical, but each book is saying something. That's where you find the themes.


----------



## Nash

Cadence said:


> I find the opposite. If I give myself a theme to work towards at the start, the scope of my creativity is limited. Perhaps it _feels _more effective, but the reader will surely have less room to manoeuvre. Thus, I only work with theme once the drafting is done; then I have something to work with. I can see the shape of the peg and work out the holes. Otherwise, I might be trying to put my round style into a square model.
> 
> While I also think stories don't need themes, they will always have them. Some reader somewhere will find one. What matters is what you intend and how that correlates to what is delivered; the success of your work can come from a large scale misunderstanding about theme. I don't think writers should shy away from this - it's part of the joy of storytelling.



Oh, how the process of writing varies from writer to writer!  

And I completely agree with you there. Even if you don't intend to have a theme, some reader will find one. 



Terry D said:


> All you have to do is read the back cover of any book. Somewhere on it will be a statement, or comment about at least one of the themes of the book. Every book has a theme. One of the themes within _Hitchhiker's Guide_ is that even if everything seems random there is still an inteconnectedness to the universe. Authors don't publish books of random thoughts. They have something to say; it might be deep and personal, or it might be light and whimsical, but each book is saying something. That's where you find the themes.



Ah... I guess I was wrong to use the Hitchhiker's Guide example, but I see what you mean. Honestly, I had not realised that before. But yeah, now that I think about it, I see your point


----------



## Bishop

I first just wrote my book and let it go. Then in my rewrites, I've been playing up elements I like, but not necessarily themes. I can see some themes in those elements, but I know the reader will make of it their own, so I don't worry too much about shoving meaning into places.

One thing I love most is flawed characters, and part of what I emphasize in my book is that no one person can complete any task, and in fact, the guy in charge screws it up the most, depending on his crew to stave off his knee-jerk instincts. There's probably a theme in that somewhere


----------



## tabasco5

I am always conscious of themes and include them in my stories.  Most of the time the theme is included deliberately - a story or character is built around it - but sometimes they evolve from the story itself.


----------



## EmmaSohan

So, is a theme of _The Scarlet Letter_ that people shouldn't commit adultery?

From the internet (http://fictionwriting.about.com/od/glossary/g/theme.htm): A theme is the central idea or ideas explored by a literary work. John Gardner puts it this way: "By theme here we mean not a message -- a word no good writer likes applied to his work -- but the general subject...

So the theme of _The Scarlet Letter_ is the consequences of committing adultery?

I admit that doesn't sound right to me.

Another theme is what it is like to live in 17th century Massachusetts?

I guess both fit the definition. I still don't like them.


----------



## InstituteMan

EmmaSohan said:


> So, is a theme of _The Scarlet Letter_ that people shouldn't commit adultery?
> 
> From the internet (http://fictionwriting.about.com/od/glossary/g/theme.htm): A theme is the central idea or ideas explored by a literary work. John Gardner puts it this way: "By theme here we mean not a message -- a word no good writer likes applied to his work -- but the general subject...
> 
> So the theme of _The Scarlet Letter_ is the consequences of committing adultery?
> 
> I admit that doesn't sound right to me.
> 
> Another theme is what it is like to live in 17th century Massachusetts?
> 
> I guess both fit the definition. I still don't like them.



I think the theme of _The Scarlet Letter _​is more along the lines of hypocrisy and judgment than anything as specific as adultery. At least, that is what I got out of it.


----------



## Bishop

EmmaSohan said:


> So, is a theme of _The Scarlet Letter_ that people shouldn't commit adultery?
> 
> From the internet (http://fictionwriting.about.com/od/glossary/g/theme.htm): A theme is the central idea or ideas explored by a literary work. John Gardner puts it this way: "By theme here we mean not a message -- a word no good writer likes applied to his work -- but the general subject...
> 
> So the theme of _The Scarlet Letter_ is the consequences of committing adultery?
> 
> I admit that doesn't sound right to me.
> 
> Another theme is what it is like to live in 17th century Massachusetts?
> 
> I guess both fit the definition. I still don't like them.





InstituteMan said:


> I think the theme of _The Scarlet Letter _​is more along the lines of hypocrisy and judgment than anything as specific as adultery. At least, that is what I got out of it.




Themes can be different things to different people, but institute nailed it with the traditionally taught one. It's about judgement of others and how society should treat personal affairs. There's things in there too about labeling people and societal treatments and scapegoats...

All of it wrapped in a terrible book.

Themes can also just be explorations of situations and concepts. There's no clean definition for something as subjective as a theme. It's kinda like trying to nail jello to the wall. You get some of it, but a lot just falls to the floor, and everyone reads differently with different experiences and every writer writes differently with different experiences. That's why I and a lot of other writers don't go in with a theme in mind, we just find some later when we've hashed out the majority of the text.


----------



## Jeko

> So the theme of _The Scarlet Letter is the consequences of committing adultery?
> 
> I admit that doesn't sound right to me.
> 
> Another theme is what it is like to live in 17th century Massachusetts?
> 
> I guess both fit the definition. I still don't like them._



If a theme doesn't sound right to you, then it's likely not a theme you're finding within the work. You may want to be, as IM suggested, less specific. Look at how these websites identify themes:

http://www.shmoop.com/scarlet-letter/themes.html
http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/scarlet/themes.html

Ultimately, they're just concepts we're familiar with - the theme doesn't include direction, but has direction through it established within the text. So rather than 'problems with the Puritan conception of sin', the themes are just 'sin' and 'the nature of evil', though the text demonstrates the former within those themes.


----------



## ppsage

We tend to forget that we are closer in time to Hawthorne than was he to the setting of _The_ _Scarlet Letter. _I think a great deal of his theme is humanizing and demythologizing the legalistic Puritan founders, whose influence was still great, but whose philosophy was much at odds with the transcendentalism he'd embraced.


----------



## thepancreas11

I've tried both: writing from a theme, and discovering a them within my work. To me, neither really fit the bill. When I wrote for a theme, I had a piddly story with a bunch of preachy characters. When I tried discovering one within, I had a random set of events that led to a wholly unsatisfying conclusion.

So now, instead of asking what my theme is, I ask, "Why these characters? Why today?" I learned that from taking some comedy classes, as corny as that might sound, but it works. Why should anyone care about this story? What does it say about society (to a lesser extent)? In the case of the Scarlet Letter, we care about the book because it demonstrates the evil that is hypocrisy. Focus more on that. Also, on what Cadence said earlier. Brilliant stuff.


----------



## EmmaSohan

Cadence, I read the first link. I didn't see that Dimmesdale's awareness of his sin made him a better preacher. ('His eloquent and powerful sermons derive from this sense of empathy") Did Hawthorne even say the sermons were good? I think he mostly emphasized how much people admired Dimmesdale, which -- I thought -- led Dimmesdale to feel even more guilty. I saw the book as showing the ravages of guilt.

The first link sounded brilliant and impressive. I can now write a kick-ass A+ essay on the themes in _The Scarlet Letter_. Until I actually thought about whether it was right or wrong, I also felt undermined as a reader. Is that what we try to teach high school students -- that they cannot read and understand a book?

In contrast, ppsage's comment made sense to me. I saw it in the book, but it helps me appreciate the book more to read it in words. And- -- scarily? -- I can say the same thing as him without using the word "theme".

Did Hawthorne see that theme and then rewrite his book to better express that theme? I'm not seeing it. Hawthorne had one of the best endings ever. If you see him as writing the book to make that ending work, a lot of the book makes sense.


----------



## Jeko

> Cadence, I read the first link. I didn't see that Dimmesdale's awareness of his sin made him a better preacher. ('His eloquent and powerful sermons derive from this sense of empathy") Did Hawthorne even say the sermons were good? I think he mostly emphasized how much people admired Dimmesdale, which -- I thought -- led Dimmesdale to feel even more guilty. I saw the book as showing the ravages of guilt.
> 
> The first link sounded brilliant and impressive. I can now write a kick-ass A+ essay on the themes in _The Scarlet Letter. Until I actually thought about whether it was right or wrong, I also felt undermined as a reader. Is that what we try to teach high school students -- that they cannot read and understand a book?
> 
> In contrast, ppsage's comment made sense to me. I saw it in the book, but it helps me appreciate the book more to read it in words. And- -- scarily? -- I can say the same thing as him without using the word "theme".
> 
> Did Hawthorne see that theme and then rewrite his book to better express that theme? I'm not seeing it. Hawthorne had one of the best endings ever. If you see him as writing the book to make that ending work, a lot of the book makes sense._



All the questions above are thing you answer for yourself, making your own personal experience from the book. Other people will probably answer them differently. That's the beauty of literature. 

I tend to go on websites like the ones I posted and disagree with most of the stuff on there. It helps nurture the individual critical spirit, which I'm going to need if I'm going to get into Oxford (I'm taking the entrance test on wednesday).

Ultimately, I see it like this: theme is not an answer. It's a question.


----------



## T.S.Bowman

> It helps nurture the individual critical spirit, which I'm going to need if I'm going to get into Oxford (I'm taking the entrance test on wednesday).
> 
> Ultimately, I see it like this: theme is not an answer. It's a question.



Spotted this amongst the other stuff. Good luck, Cadence.


----------



## EmmaSohan

1. Could themes exist prior to the book, like good versus evil, and then the book just addresses them? So my WIP has a sentence about good versus evil. (Perhaps when a battle between good and evil is fought with a sword, good has no advantage.) Does that mean this theme is in my book?


----------



## Bishop

EmmaSohan said:


> 1. Could themes exist prior to the book, like good versus evil, and then the book just addresses them? So my WIP has a sentence about good versus evil. (Perhaps when a battle between good and evil is fought with a sword, good has no advantage.) Does that mean this theme is in my book?



Yes.


----------



## Jeko

> 1. Could themes exist prior to the book, like good versus evil, and then the book just addresses them? So my WIP has a sentence about good versus evil. (Perhaps when a battle between good and evil is fought with a sword, good has no advantage.) Does that mean this theme is in my book?



In a way; you can have books address 'issues' through themes. The theme in this case would be morality.

Though no sentence can form a theme for the book; the theme has to be found throughout the work, like blood running through its veins. That or it should be in a sizeable potion, like a chapter, section, act, etc.


----------



## EmmaSohan

Cadence said:


> All the questions above are thing you answer for yourself, making your own personal experience from the book. Other people will probably answer them differently. That's the beauty of literature.
> 
> I tend to go on websites like the ones I posted and disagree with most of the stuff on there. It helps nurture the individual critical spirit, which I'm going to need if I'm going to get into Oxford (I'm taking the entrance test on wednesday).
> 
> Ultimately, I see it like this: theme is not an answer. It's a question.



So, I could see The Scarlet Letter as containing the theme of the punishments for sin? And I would be right? And I could teach it to my class and expect them to give that answer on the test?

Same for the opposite, that the theme of The Scarlet Letter is the good consequences of sin? (Which is what one of Cadence's links suggested.)

Cadence, don't you want to draw the line somewhere? Can I see the theme of The Scarlet Letter is the essential superiority of woman and the problems with a patriarchal society? (And teach that to my class, etc.)

- - - Updated - - -

Can 'How people deal with problems' be a theme?

Then that could be a theme in _The Scarlet Letter_. And _The Iliad_ and most of the books written since then.


----------



## Bishop

I'll just say right now: Anything can be a theme. Anything. The effect of maritime weather patterns on Missouri bricklayers can be a theme. How humanity deals with adversity can be a theme. It's all balanced between how the story is written and how the story is perceived.


----------



## Sam

Sometimes I listen to the A-Team theme. 

Does that count?


----------



## Bishop

Sam said:


> Sometimes I listen to the A-Team theme.
> 
> Does that count?



Still wanted by the government...


----------



## Jeko

> I could see The Scarlet Letter as containing the theme of the punishments for sin? And I would be right?



I don't know. You'd have to convince me, and yourself, that such a theme is present in the story.

I'd keep it all under the theme of morality, personally, because I like to leave themes open; it allows the reader to access said theme in the text more easily, leading to a more expansive discussion that can find the critical components of the theme without them being declared as limitations, or outside of limitations, in the first place.


----------



## tabasco5

EmmaSohan said:


> So, I could see The Scarlet Letter as containing the theme of the punishments for sin? And I would be right? And I could teach it to my class and expect them to give that answer on the test?
> 
> Same for the opposite, that the theme of The Scarlet Letter is the good consequences of sin? (Which is what one of Cadence's links suggested.)
> 
> Cadence, don't you want to draw the line somewhere? Can I see the theme of The Scarlet Letter is the essential superiority of woman and the problems with a patriarchal society? (And teach that to my class, etc.)
> 
> - - - Updated - - -
> 
> Can 'How people deal with problems' be a theme?
> 
> Then that could be a theme in _The Scarlet Letter_. And _The Iliad_ and most of the books written since then.



I personally see these examples more as subjects or motifs than themes, but that may just be semantics.  To me, a theme is an overarching concept weaving throughout the entire story that encompasses other subjects, symbols, actions, morals, motifs, variations, messages, etc.


----------



## Kyle R

tabasco5 said:


> I personally see these examples more as subjects or motifs than themes, but that may just be semantics.  To me, a theme is an overarching concept weaving throughout the entire story that encompasses other subjects, symbols, actions, morals, motifs, variations, messages, etc.



I feel the same way. 

Your average screenwriter will (from what I've seen) be able to tell you what theme is better than your average novelist. Theme (and learning how to use it) is a fundamental concept taught in screenwriting.

Novel writers sometimes lack this knowledge—possibly because a large percentage of novel writers are self-taught. Screenwriting, on the other hand, has to fit certain structural and formatting expectations, so most screenwriters need to spend a portion of their time learning the craft from experts—which is where they are introduced to the topic of theme and given instructions on what it is and how to use it in the story.

My advice is, if you want to learn about theme and how to use it, pick up some screenwriting books and learn from what they have to say about it. There's a lot of useful knowledge to be found on theme if you're willing to look for it. You might even discover you love screenwriting, as well! :encouragement:


----------



## EmmaSohan

Kyle R said:


> I feel the same way.
> 
> Your average screenwriter will (from what I've seen) be able to tell you what theme is better than your average novelist. Theme (and learning how to use it) is a fundamental concept taught in screenwriting.
> 
> Novel writers sometimes lack this knowledge—possibly because a large percentage of novel writers are self-taught. Screenwriting, on the other hand, has to fit certain structural and formatting expectations, so most screenwriters need to spend a portion of their time learning the craft from experts—which is where they are introduced to the topic of theme and given instructions on what it is and how to use it in the story.
> 
> My advice is, if you want to learn about theme and how to use it, pick up some screenwriting books and learn from what they have to say about it. There's a lot of useful knowledge to be found on theme if you're willing to look for it. You might even discover you love screenwriting, as well! :encouragement:



"A screenplay’s theme focuses on what the story is about, while the plot brings that message into focus with plot points, conflict and character motivation. Most stories highlight a lesson to be learned. Writing screenplays with a strong theme are a way for a screenwriter to explore a human condition, delivering the story’s meaning to an audience." (http://www.scriptmag.com/features/craft-features/identifying-theme-premise-plot/)

For me, _The Fault in Our Stars_ explores the emotional problems of having cancer, and John Green would be ecstatic if you took a good message from that. But I don't see him or the book focusing on any message. It seemed anti-message in style. And to me, that's okay.

Note also that according to Cadence, a message isn't a theme. ("Ultimately, I see it like this: theme is not an answer. It's a question.") Theme seems to be a vague word.

PlasticWeld has this really powerful short that can be analyzed really well in terms of themes, and that should guide his writing. I have a short that's just a horror story. If you can find a theme in my story, it probably had nothing to do with either writing the story or the reader's experience in reading it. Sometimes, a story is just a story.


----------



## Kyle R

EmmaSohan said:


> Theme seems to be a vague word.



It can be vague to some. To me, it's very specific: _theme is the important lesson the main character learns (or needs to learn) about life.
_
But, that's just my own definition of theme, which might contradict someone else's definition entirely.

I think it's a good idea to find the definition that works best for you and you alone—the one that best helps you understand it, the one that best helps you write.

This definition can be different for different people.

Whether it's a specific _"theme is this..."_, a vague _"theme can sometimes be this..."_, or an apathetic _"theme is irrelevant to me, I just write..."_, as long as it helps you be productive, I say go with it. 

Just as long as you don't let theme _get in the way_. :encouragement:


----------



## Sam

Every book has theme, but not all of them are intentional. I've had a number of readers tell me that one of the themes of _Dereliction of Duty _was "perseverance in the face of ostensible hopelessness", but I never intended that to exist within the story. 

That having been said, I think it's important to think about theme, in a general sense, but -- as Kyle says -- to not let it get in the way or get bogged down by it. The important thing is writing the story. Theme usually sorts itself out.


----------



## Morkonan

Sam said:


> Every book has theme, but not all of them are intentional. I've had a number of readers tell me that one of the themes of _Dereliction of Duty _was "perseverance in the face of ostensible hopelessness", but I never intended that to exist within the story. ...



That might be what's called a "Throughline" and not a "Theme." Though, it may come close to a "Theme", considering the word "hopelessness" requires the possibility of "hope." The question really boils down to "perseverance of what to what?"

A nice article on Throughlines, for those who wish: WD - Throughline


----------



## Terry D

Theme is not a complex topic. The theme of a book (and every book has one, or more) is simply what the book is about. Not the story-line, that's plot, but the concept which runs like a thread through all the action, dialogue, and narration. If you can't find a theme in a book it is because you are not looking for it, or ignoring it.


----------



## voltigeur

For me theme come as an epiphany while I am out lining and plotting the work. For example my current WIP

I wanted to do Historical fiction about the 80’s.

Had to find a beginning Middle and end for the period. 

Realized it could not be one book so found the 3 climaxes and figured out beginning middle and end for each book. 

As I worked through the process and researched the cover ups the theme emerged. 

“Things are not what they appear.” 

That sits in the back of my mind when writing scenes. It may not show up in a single scene but it will show up in a string of scenes.


----------



## EmmaSohan

I do not like the claim that every book has a theme. I mean, suppose a book had just one theme in it. The author could rewrite the book to avoid the theme, right? So, maybe we need to say that every book has 15 themes (so it is impossible to eliminate them all.)

Scene after scene in The Fault in Our Stars shows that humans can use language to communicate. Other scenes show that people do not like physical disabilities. If we all such broad goals like these, then we can probably find 50 themes for The Fault in Our Stars.

But now we are talking about broader themes than anyone every mentions. Green wasn't trying to communicate these themes. And the claim that every book has a theme becomes pointless, right?

To me, voltigeur talked intelligently about themes. We don't snicker because he only found one theme when there were 20. We don't laugh at his efforts to add a 21st theme. No, we have the notion that a book may contain a few themes of importance. From one website: "Spend a few years as a screenwriter, and writing a scene becomes an almost unconscious process. " That's not the same as saying that every screenwriter, even with no experience, automatically has scenes in any script." We think it is actually difficult to put a real theme into a script.


----------



## Newman

shadowwalker said:


> I just write. The readers let me know what the theme is (or are, actually).



_Interstellar_ is the big movie coming out this weekend.

The Nolan Brothers are not waiting for the millions of people who'll watch it to tell them what the theme is.

The writers decided the theme early on and wrote the story around it.



Mutimir said:


> Some themes I've used are ambition, love and friendship, and revenge.



These aren't really themes in the sense that writers mean when they talk about it.

The theme would be a statement which argues a point of view. There are reasonable examples here: http://www.education.com/study-help/article/theme/



Nash said:


> Sometimes, a light, random assortment of stuff can make a pretty good book (re: The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, where there are all sorts of events and people which are pretty damn random).



It's supposed to look random. It's supposed to look like stuff just happens.

But everything is there for a reason. Everything's intricately planned out.



Cadence said:


> If I give myself a theme to work towards at the start, the scope of my creativity is limited. Perhaps it feels more effective, but the reader will surely have less room to manoeuvre.



No.

It frees you up.

Because there's a relationship between the theme, who the characters are, the events, their arcs and so on.

It guides you. Helps you write stronger stories.

There's a reason writing rooms try to establish it early on.

It's reasonable to call it the invisible collaborator: http://www.storypros.com/Article_0209.html



EmmaSohan said:


> John Gardner puts it this way: "By theme here we mean not a message -- a word no good writer likes applied to his work -- but the general subject...



Theme is not the general subject.

It's perfectly reasonable to describe it as a message.

In fact, thinking of it as a message and asking yourself how to deliver that message helps you figure out how theme works.

(it's interesting to compare theme with message, lesson etc...but that's a deeper conversation)



Bishop said:


> There's no clean definition for something as subjective as a theme.



It's not subjective. It's an argument. A point of view.

The audience isn't subjectively saying what it is. The writer is objectively putting it forward.

Robert McKee calls it the Controlling Idea ( http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0060856181/ ); that's quite clean.



Cadence said:


> the theme doesn't include direction
> 
> rather than 'problems with the Puritan conception of sin', the themes are just 'sin' and 'the nature of evil', though the text demonstrates the former within those themes.



Theme does include direction, because it's, in essence, an argument, a point of view..

'sin' and 'the nature of evil' are not themes because there's no argument, no point of view.



Cadence said:


> I see it like this: theme is not an answer. It's a question.



Theme is very often framed as a question, which is always answered.



thepancreas11 said:


> When I wrote for a theme, I had a piddly story with a bunch of preachy characters.



All the great movies have a very specific theme and they're not preachy.

It's just takes practice because it's never done on-the-nose.



EmmaSohan said:


> 1. Could themes exist prior to the book, like good versus evil, and then the book just addresses them? So my WIP has a sentence about good versus evil. (Perhaps when a battle between good and evil is fought with a sword, good has no advantage.) Does that mean this theme is in my book?



"Good versus evil" is not a theme.

Themes can exist prior to the book. For example, "'beauty is only skin deep'" is not a very original theme but it's a theme. Now you write a story showing that.

"good has no advantage" is quite an original theme and would potentially make an interesting story.



Cadence said:


> Though no sentence can form a theme for the book; the theme has to be found throughout the work, like blood running through its veins. That or it should be in a sizeable potion, like a chapter, section, act, etc.



Sentences very often encapsulate the theme.

That's the essence of the thematic statement.



Bishop said:


> I'll just say right now: Anything can be a theme. Anything. The effect of maritime weather patterns on Missouri bricklayers can be a theme. How humanity deals with adversity can be a theme. It's all balanced between how the story is written and how the story is perceived.



No. Anything can not be a theme.

"The effect of maritime weather patterns on Missouri bricklayers" is not a theme.

It's got nothing to do with the audience's perception and everything to do with the writer's intent.



Kyle R said:


> My advice is, if you want to learn about theme and how to use it, pick up some screenwriting books and learn from what they have to say about it.



This shows you very specifically how a theme is responsible for every aspect of a story: http://kalbashir.com/THEME-Advanced-Worksheet.html



Terry D said:


> Theme is not a complex topic. The theme of a book (and every book has one, or more) is simply what the book is about. Not the story-line, that's plot, but the concept which runs like a thread through all the action, dialogue, and narration. If you can't find a theme in a book it is because you are not looking for it, or ignoring it.



It's not rocket science. But it's a specific technique / process that needs to be carefully understood. Jeffrey Katzenberg on how characters reveal facets of theme: http://www.wordplayer.com/columns/wp29.Deep.Thoughts.html ; but there's waaay more to it than that.

"simply what the book is about" suggests that you can write any story and the theme will be there. But no, the controlling idea determines everything about the story.


----------



## EmmaSohan

Sam said:


> Every book has theme, but not all of them are intentional. I've had a number of readers tell me that one of the themes of _Dereliction of Duty _was "perseverance in the face of ostensible hopelessness", but I never intended that to exist within the story.
> 
> That having been said, I think it's important to think about theme, in a general sense, but -- as Kyle says -- to not let it get in the way or get bogged down by it. The important thing is writing the story. Theme usually sorts itself out.



Hi Sam. Believe it or not, I rely on inspiration and feelings. But it helps me to try to understand things too. In my genre, I think (not positive) that the book is about a specific person with a problem. To use _The Fault in Our Star_s as an example, it is not about all kids with cancer, it is about Hazel and Augustus, two fictional kids with cancer. Is there something general there? Green to me seemed unusually ruthless is trying to eliminate any obvious meanings or messages or themes.

I know, I could be wrong about that too. It just doesn't seem to help to say that book (or books in my genre) is trying to express a theme, because that isn't what people usually mean by the word "theme".


----------



## T.S.Bowman

EmmaSohan said:


> Sometimes, a story is just a story.



Ho boy. 

I asked a question a while back that said pretty much the same thing. Why can't a story just be a story.

I was informed, quite adamamantly, that a story is NEVER just a story.

The thread is buried around here somewhere.


----------



## Bishop

Newman said:


> No. Anything can not be a theme.
> 
> "The effect of maritime weather patterns on Missouri bricklayers" is not a theme.
> 
> It's got nothing to do with the audience's perception and everything to do with the writer's intent.



Literally, according to the *Oxford English Dictionary*, a theme is just a subject of the composition. I went to school for four years where people put meaning behind books that often didn't have extra meaning. The Sherlock Holmes stories are not metaphors. They're just great detective stories. But people all over inject meaning and symbolism where Doyle probably meant for there to be none. As Freud said, a cigar can just be a cigar. Sometimes, an author just likes to play with a situation or concept. Stephen King talks about writing _Misery _just because he thought up the idea of "author captured by insane fan." Sometimes a story is just a story, and themes are much more a basis of reader response than author intent. Themes are in every story. Some the writer intended. Some they didn't. It's no big deal. To quote Stephen King: "I don't believe any novelist, even one who's written forty-plus books, has too many thematic concerns." (From _On Writing_) In the same section he talks about how every story is about _something_. That something being the theme, and that it's often injected by literature professors and others approaching it as "sacred cows". 

Yes. Theme is in every story. Yes. Theme can be anything. Mostly because readers can inject their own idea of what a theme was.

EDIT: Similarly, Mary Shelley's _Frankenstein _was written because of a challenge with friends (Mary, Percy, Byron...) as to who can write the best horror story. She never intended it to become a commentary on science's ethical and moral implications. But guess what readers did...


----------



## DanCaetta

EmmaSohan said:


> When you find a theme in your book -- what have you found?
> 
> When you develop a theme in your book -- what are you doing?
> 
> For full credit, you must supply an example.
> 
> 
> (Extra credit. What is a theme? And, does a book have to have a theme)



For me, the theme is the underlying subject of the book -- beyond the characters, the actions, the setting, the corporeal things happening in the book.  It's something the author wants to convey, and throughout the entire book all of those corporeal things happening add up to it.

(Spontaneous) plot vs. theme: 

Plot: a man is leaving his hometown tomorrow for the first time.  He's grown to hate his mundane small town and wants to start fresh in a big city.  Before he leaves, he has to go to a funeral.  It's the last thing before he gets on his flight.  When he gets there, the reader finds out the man is going to his own funeral.  The man looks down at the coffin at himself.  He see his (the corpse's) young, inexperienced fingers; his pretty, cleanly shaven face.  He states how he will miss him, but it was time for him to go.  He then leaves on his flight.

Theme: Rebirth, growth.  Death of the old.  Coming of age,  Etc.         

Themes are usually thought of before and then plot brings the theme to life, but it doesn't have to happen that way.  Plots don't always have to have a theme, I suppose.... however it's always fun to have an extra layer of goodness.  

Have you ever been surprised at a theme?  Almost like you psychologically implanted a theme thru your characters' actions?

- - - Updated - - -



Newman said:


> _... Im not bogging the site down with your entire post..._



Can I like this twice?  Because if I could, I would.  

I'm giving Newman's post a facebook thumbs up in my head.


----------



## Terry D

EmmaSohan said:


> I do not like the claim that every book has a theme. I mean, suppose a book had just one theme in it. The author could rewrite the book to avoid the theme, right? So, maybe we need to say that every book has 15 themes (so it is impossible to eliminate them all.)
> 
> Scene after scene in The Fault in Our Stars shows that humans can use language to communicate. Other scenes show that people do not like physical disabilities. If we all such broad goals like these, then we can probably find 50 themes for The Fault in Our Stars.
> 
> But now we are talking about broader themes than anyone every mentions. Green wasn't trying to communicate these themes. And the claim that every book has a theme becomes pointless, right?
> 
> To me, voltigeur talked intelligently about themes. We don't snicker because he only found one theme when there were 20. We don't laugh at his efforts to add a 21st theme. No, we have the notion that a book may contain a few themes of importance. From one website: "Spend a few years as a screenwriter, and writing a scene becomes an almost unconscious process. " That's not the same as saying that every screenwriter, even with no experience, automatically has scenes in any script." We think it is actually difficult to put a real theme into a script.



Just to reiterate what I pointed out in the other thread, John Green the author of The Fault in our Stars is quite open about the theme behind that book. Unless, of course you think he is lying. Oh, btw, if you write one theme out of a story, you'll be writing another in.


----------



## shadowwalker

Newman said:


> _Interstellar_ is the big movie coming out this weekend.
> 
> The Nolan Brothers are not waiting for the millions of people who'll watch it to tell them what the theme is.
> 
> The writers decided the theme early on and wrote the story around it.



And...? I stated that *I *don't worry about theme. I write a story, hopefully an interesting one. The readers can worry about finding a theme if they wish, and whatever they want it to be is fine with me.


----------



## Terry D

Newman said:


> It's not rocket science. But it's a specific technique / process that needs to be carefully understood. Jeffrey Katzenberg on how characters reveal facets of theme: http://www.wordplayer.com/columns/wp29.Deep.Thoughts.html ; but there's waaay more to it than that.
> 
> "simply what the book is about" suggests that you can write any story and the theme will be there. But no, the controlling idea determines everything about the story.



But that "controlling idea" doesn't have to be in place before the author writes the book. Many authors discover it after the first draft and work to enhance it. Others don't worry about it at all knowing that if they tell a good story the theme will be implicit. My point is simply that theme exists in every story whether it is designed into the piece from the start, or a product of the story-telling process. Hell, an argument could be made that the organization, and prioritization of a grocery list give it a theme (but let's not start making that argument, lol).


----------



## Jeko

> No.
> 
> It frees you up.
> 
> Because there's a relationship between the theme, who the characters are, the events, their arcs and so on.
> 
> It guides you. Helps you write stronger stories..



I think I understand my personal experiences of the craft better than you do. So yes, I do find it liberating, and no, I don't think preconception of theme makes my stories stronger. That's just the kind of writer I am; we all have different brains.



> Theme does include direction, because it's, in essence, an argument, a point of view..
> 
> 'sin' and 'the nature of evil' are not themes because there's no argument, no point of view



I took an ELAT yesterday (Oxbridge English entrance exam), and the extracts given in the paper were, and I quote, centred around a 'theme of journeys and journeying'.

In the past, they have been centred around themes of poverty, language and the way people speak, family relationships... do I need to go on?

One of the greatest institutions for teaching English Literature, Oxford University, assesses their prospective students through the inclusion of theme as a concept/subject, not a message or argument. The idea is to form the argument within the theme. I'm going to take their word over yours, since I, like many writers, enjoy the academic study of literature along with, and in comparison to, the creation of it.



> Theme is very often framed as a question, which is always answered.



Often with multiple answers that the readers have to debate; when critics disagree, the artist is in accord with himself.

Or the artist can choose to leave it open. Many do.



> Sentences very often encapsulate the theme.
> 
> That's the essence of the thematic statement.



There's a strong difference between 'form' and 'encapsulate'; a microcosm, for instance, does not create the wider picture; it requires it, and reflects it.



> But everything is there for a reason. Everything's intricately planned out.



Have you ever listened to chance music?

Sometimes the plan is for there not to be a plan. Organised chaos. Why else would Ginsberg have written poetry on drugs?


----------



## EmmaSohan

shadowwalker said:


> And...? I stated that *I *don't worry about theme. I write a story, hopefully an interesting one. The readers can worry about finding a theme if they wish, and whatever they want it to be is fine with me.



I read about the movie Newman mentioned. The screenwriter apparently considered theme much earlier than any writers have said, and cared more about it than writers seem to. Newman is using "theme" in a way different from book authors (note the disagreements), and he seems passionate about it.

And he's saying that viewers _like_ a movie theme. That made me pay attention.

I (1) thought about adding that type of theme to my WIP, (2) had an aversion to the idea, (3) realized there could be one thing like a movie theme, and (4) after wrestling with it, (5) added one sentence to my WIP, a sentence I love. Hopefully it is not a big theme (see aversion).


----------



## Bishop

Another thing to remember is that the majority of the masses have no understanding or idea of theme _especially _in film. My wife has high school seniors who don't know what verbs are, let alone have an understanding of theme. That's not to say they shouldn't be written with thematic intent--it's just something to bear in mind.


----------



## Jeko

> Another thing to remember is that the majority of the masses have no understanding or idea of theme _especially in film. My wife has high school seniors who don't know what verbs are, let alone have an understanding of theme. That's not to say they shouldn't be written with thematic intent--it's just something to bear in mind._



Yes; I'd say theme, for most readers of a story, is more of a feeling than a statement of analysis.


----------



## Kyle R

Newman said:
			
		

> _Theme does include direction, because it's, in essence, an argument, a point of view.._





Cadence said:


> One of the greatest institutions for teaching English Literature, Oxford University, assesses their prospective students through the inclusion of theme as a concept/subject, not a message or argument... I'm going to take their word over yours...



Theme is often taught as a thematic argument. 

To handle theme as if it were merely a concept or subject is certainly a way to do it. There's nothing wrong with handling theme in a vague way, but there is some inherent risk to it.

For example: "Love and money" could be considered a theme. It's a subject, a concept (made of two parts). But it also lacks an obvious direction. If you don't have an idea of what you're trying to achieve with that theme, you run the risk of creating an aimless dramatic structure.

Some characters would choose love. Some would choose money. There'd be no apparent triumph or failure in either choice, no punishment or reward. The message would be muddled. Readers might place your book down, unsure how to feel about what they've just read. Yikes!

"Love is more important than money," on the other hand, is a statement, an argument. A thematic argument. Presenting it this way (as a statement) provides the writer with direction. It hints at structure. 

Characters who gravitate toward love in such a story would experience their situations improving (rewarded for learning the thematic lesson). Characters who gravitate toward money would experience their situations worsening (punished for failing to learn the thematic lesson). 

Love=good and greed=bad would be the tone of the story, a tone established by the thematic argument.

Do we need to look at theme as an argument? I don't think it's a necessity. Some writers do perfectly well not even thinking about theme at all. Like Bowman said, sometimes a story is just a story, and that's perfect, too.

But I do like thinking of theme as an argument. It's how many experienced professionals teach it. By thinking of theme as an argument, the writer can structure their story with the argument in mind. :encouragement:


----------



## Newman

Bishop said:


> Theme can be anything. Mostly because readers can inject their own idea of what a theme was.



Clearly wrong.

For example, take Star Wars. If you were to say that the theme is "loneliness in the desert" well that's clearly wrong, that's clearly not what the story is trying to say.



EmmaSohan said:


> I read about the movie Newman mentioned. The screenwriter apparently considered theme much earlier than any writers have said, and *cared more about it than writers seem to*. Newman is using "theme" in a way different from book authors (note the disagreements), and he seems passionate about it.



It's not just the writer of that movie that cares about it. Millions of writers care about it. But Kyle is right in that screenwriters do generally seem to have a better grasp of theme (actually they tend to know what theme is but many still have a hard time knowing exactly how to execute). 

It applies to books too.

Not passionate so much as trying to put people on the right track.



Bishop said:


> Another thing to remember is that the majority of the masses have no understanding or idea of theme especially in film. My wife has high school seniors who don't know what verbs are, let alone have an understanding of theme. That's not to say they shouldn't be written with thematic intent--it's just something to bear in mind.



The audience may not understand it, but you as the writer should know exactly what it is and how to execute it.



Terry D said:


> My point is simply that theme exists in every story whether it is designed into the piece from the start, or a product of the story-telling process.



It's not an automatic product of the storytelling process. Plenty of rejected "stories" lack it.

Anyway, to really understand it, you really need to know how to work forward; know how to take a theme and execute it.



Cadence said:


> I took an ELAT yesterday (Oxbridge English entrance exam)



That means you're 17 years old.



Kyle R said:


> For example: "Love and money" could be considered a theme. It's a subject, a concept (made of two parts)



"Love and money" may have two parts but it's not a theme.

"Money" is not a theme.
"Money can't buy happiness" is a theme.

"Beauty" is not a theme.
"Beauty is only skin deep" is a theme.

Like that.


----------



## Bishop

Newman said:


> Clearly wrong.
> 
> For example, take Star Wars. If you were to say that the theme is "loneliness in the desert" well that's clearly wrong, that's clearly not what the story is trying to say.



Yes. This can be a theme of Star Wars. The Owens were moisture farmers, painting a futuristic vision of a world where colonization of planets is so desperate the this type of occupation must exist. And with it comes the isolation of living in the desert. Luke, the youth of the desert, yearns to escape it and be with his friends in the academy, despite the necessity of the role in colonization. Lars Owen tries to keep him there, knowing there's a greater good to be served by working that life. It's a syndrome of youth mingled with an extremist setting to portray... loneliness in the desert. So how am I clearly wrong?

That's not the only message of the film, certainly. But it's there. I'd also challenge you to look past film, because novels are infinitely more complex, and offer a much larger variety of themes in any single piece. A book like Neil Gaiman's _American Gods_ has a LOT to say. There's no one single theme that is the entire book. The story, frankly, is better than that. And that's only one very recent example. Moby Dick is not just about obsession. There's themes about loyalty, madness, the effect of naval life on man, man versus nature, nature's role versus societal roles, the burdens of command... all of it explored in ONE work.

You go on to say the audience might not understand theme, but the author must know how to inject it. Why? You give no examples or context for what you're saying. Case-in-point, you said that Cadence is 17 years old, because he's taking a college entrance exam. My uncle went to college when he was thirty. A neighbor of mine is fifty-three, and is back in school at a local state university. You're making an assumption that's also COMPLETELY irrelevant to the discussion. Age has nothing to do with this thread, period.


----------



## shadowwalker

Newman, might I be so bold as to suggest that when people disagree with you, it doesn't make them wrong or on the wrong track. It means, in this instance, that their experiences and preferences are different from yours and therefore they have a different perspective - which, I might add, you could actually attempt to understand before passing judgement. 

"I'm right and you're wrong" generally will not get you far in life. Just something to consider.


----------



## Kyle R

Newman said:


> "Love and money" may have two parts but it's not a theme.
> 
> "Money" is not a theme.
> "Money can't buy happiness" is a theme.
> 
> "Beauty" is not a theme.
> "Beauty is only skin deep" is a theme.
> 
> Like that.



Yep! I mention that same distinction later in my post. :encouragement:



			
				Kyle R said:
			
		

> For example: "Love and money" could be considered a theme. It's a subject, a concept (made of two parts). But it also lacks an obvious direction. If you don't have an idea of what you're trying to achieve with that theme, you run the risk of creating an aimless dramatic structure.
> 
> ...
> 
> "Love is more important than money," on the other hand, is a statement, an argument. A thematic argument. Presenting it this way (as a statement) provides the writer with direction. It hints at structure.



I'm a student of mythic structure, just as you seem to be. You follow the teachings of Kal Bashir. I follow the teachings of Blake Snyder, Chris Vogler, and Joseph Campbell. We're all pretty much in the same ballpark.

Our gurus may differ, but we both seem to agree that stories function best when the writer has a thematic argument in mind.

I've learned, though, that not everyone wants to hear about theme or how to use it. Not everyone wants to think about it. And that's perfectly okay, too. Everyone has their own method that works for them. 

_Teach those who want to learn—but don't try to convert those who don't._ Lately, that's been one of the biggest lessons I've come to learn.

:encouragement:


----------



## shadowwalker

Kyle R said:


> _Teach those who want to learn—but don't try to convert those who don't._



Wanting to learn is different from wanting to change. A person may want to learn about different religions, but that doesn't mean they want to convert to them - or need to.


----------



## Morkonan

A thought...

There's a lot of "redefining" going on in this discussion. 

We are not blind and a theme is not an elephant.

A theme is, as I believe someone may have already intelligently mentioned, just "shorthand" for human experience. There are plenty of human experiences out there that we are all fairly familiar with. They have all been written about, many times. In fact, everything has already been written. It's often our duty to walk down the same well-used trails, but with a different bounce in our step and a different tune on our lips. But, it's still the same darn trail... Sometimes, people decide to try to blaze a new one. If they're successful, they get an award. People throw awards by the bucketful at others who successfully hack out a new trail. Why? It provides us all with a new path to tread! For those who fail, though, they get left behind in the dark brambles; Lone voices shouting in the jungle.

There's a point when a discussion that centers around redefining something is no longer very useful. Morover, it gets confusing and people end up having to restate the same thing, just in different terms, over and over again, in some fairly hopeless, but noble, effort to be understood. Eventually, they'll restate the same thing so often that they're bound to make a mistake. Then, people pick that up and run with it, as if that mistake has the same value as anything else anyone has said. "Meaning" often gets diluted and focus is lost in favor of debating things that are thought as "new", but are actually just alternative restatements of the same basic stuff.

This is commonplace and it's the way such discussions evolve.

Almost every story imaginable is going to have some sort of "theme." It may not be intentional, but it's going to have one. Why? Because - Themes are shorthand for human experience. If you're writing about human experience, you're going to trip over a theme, somewhere.

More important than trying to redefine something that is already very recognizable, even to the uninitiated, I think something we, as writers, may want to think about is just how these "themes" get recognized as such. And, it may be a good idea to figure out how human experience ends up being common enough to qualify to be labeled with the shorthand of a "theme." We might also derive greater benefits we wondered "why" these things evolve as they do.

We live in a very dynamic world. Our ancestors did too, by the way. Can you imagine how the discovery and colonization of the "New World" rocked their boats? The collective ideas of personal "Freedom" and "Liberty" surely must have shaken up society, even if certain elements had been arguing about it in pubs for a few hundred years. We see a lot of books and movies that focus on the the theme of "Individual Liberty" as it applies to certain historical ages. But, it's not likely that the people of some of those times were greatly concerned with this sort of stuff. I don't see much point for a peasant to be overly concerned with Free Speech if they're too busy being oppressed by the violence inherent in the system... 

What about tomorrow? What "themes" will we see developing? Is it possible we'll see entirely new themes emerge from a human experience that seems to be rapidly evolving? Youbetcha. Though, they may only be slight derivations of a... theme. What? All of human existence has already been lived? There is nothing new to write about? Perhaps... However, that may not entirely apply to "Themes." Themes are shorthand for human experience and as human experiences changes, it could have emergent properties that yield new themes. Examples you require, yes? 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_in_the_Gray_Flannel_Suit

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_Space

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Devil_Wears_Prada_(film)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battleship_Potemkin

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_Quiet_on_the_Western_Front

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Nevsky_(film)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yankee_Doodle_Dandy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Dawn


Do all of these contain relatively "new" themes? Yes.

Do they all contain old, familiar, themes? Yes.

Does the presence of one deny the other? No.

Do themes sometimes incorporate other themes in order to yield something new? Yes.

Look at the subtle changes between "The Man in the Grey Flannel Suit" through "The Devil Wears Prada." There are old familiar themes, here. Most commonly in any character-centered story, there's going to be some form of "self-actualization" theme. It's so common that it's not even worth mentioning. More interesting is seeing how this idea conflicts with the new dynamics present in each of these movies/stories. We finally end up with a woman trying to compete in a very competitive industry with an entirely different culture than she is used to and having to make changes in her personal life as well as many sacrifices. Not so different from Tom, really, except for her lack of war experience.

In "All's Quiet on the Western Front" we get a very personal glimpse into the mind of a returning warrior. This is, somewhat, an old theme. But, we only see it as "old" because we're in a generation that has suffered through many mighty conflicts. Our streets are full of returning war vets from many different battlefields and this is exactly why this story, and others, was written. I don't know of many Roman or Greek plays that explored the depths of a soldier's mind like this or his return to a normal, plebeian, existence. Odysseus, it seemed, was quite happy bringing home a bit of righteous violence with him, even though it took awhile for him to actually get back home. But, what we're seeing here is more than just a soldier's life. It's one of the first popular stories that speaks somewhat to the rise of Nationalism and the all-consuming zietgeist of it that overflowed into successive conflicts. That's the world that Paul returns to. The rise of media importance in propaganda and Nationalism can be seen in some earlier features, like Battleship Potemkin, on through to the end of the list. Do these contain _old_ familiar themes? Yes. Do they incorporate relatively _new human experiences_ and pair or even contrast these with old themes? Absolutely.

What's the most basic "theme" you can think of? Likely, if you reduce many themes down to their most basic elements, you're going to end up with either a theme that incorporates "self-actualization" and the "search for meaning" or a basic theme of "conflict" of some sort. 

Starting with these sorts of very basic, very common, very well-respected themes, one can tack on more complex elements and, by doing so, can _recognize_ other themes as they emerge. A man who suffers from internal conflict is reintroduced to the real world and must conform in order to succeed while trying to define himself. Properly served up, it's "The Man in the Grey Flannel Suit." Reduced down to it's elements, and it's a story of internal conflict, external conflict and constrained struggle, and self-actualization. Those reduced component could be said to be included in all these movies/stories.

In a hundred years, what will the most popular themes be? Likely,if we're still mostly human, they're going to be just slight derivations of well-known themes. After all, if we're still human, we're still experiencing that and we will still have to write about it. However, if something "new" becomes a major part of our lives, you can bet that writers will be churning out books by the pound in an effort to comment on it or to illuminate it. This is, after all, one of the reasons for purposefully incorporating a theme in a story, isn't it? Isn't that why you, as a writer, would purposefully decide to write a story about ThemeXX? You've got something to say about it, right? But, what about all the other "themes" that happen to develop in your story? Are you commenting on them, too? Probably so - Themes are not born in a vacuum and they are not isolated things. Themes necessarily include a wide range of human experiences and these other experiences have common themes associated with them, as well. This is why people argue about what a writer may or may not have intended in regards to themes. The writer may not have intended to speak to a particular theme, but it was impossible to avoid stumbling over it in the course of exploring another! That is the "nature" of human experience. (Barring a few lonely solitary castaways who, even abandoned and alone, sometimes manage to trip over a theme or three.)

 But, more important than seeking to define and redefine exactly _what_ a theme is, for whatever reason, I think it's more important to know that true illumination only comes when you know _where themes come from_. They are all derived from human experience and you couldn't easily escape from them if you're writing about human experience, whether you intend to or not.

If you know what something is, you know _what_ it is. A lot of people have been focused on trying to plug a definition into what "themes" are. But, if you instead know _why_ they are what they are, you'll be able to recognize them, anywhere.


----------



## Jeko

> If you don't have an idea of what you're trying to achieve with that theme, you run the risk of creating an aimless dramatic structure.



Indeed; but this further shows that the aim is best left out of the theme. The intent of what to do with a gun is not part of the gun. The intent, direction, argument etc. is not part of the theme, IMO, but within it, caused by it. It cannot be a component if it is created secondary to the theme itself.

Though this is really just semantics, and ultimately doesn't matter. As long as you're working towards the right thing, you're probably going to use a lot of different words to the person sitting next to you even though you're talking about the same thing.

I like to think of theme _requiring _an argument; though who this comes from is up for debate.



> That means you're 17 years old.



18 yesterday. Though not necessarily, since any pre-qualification applicant would have to take it.

And irrelevant.



> If you were to say that the theme is "loneliness in the desert" well that's clearly wrong, that's clearly not what the story is trying to say.



I'd say loneliness/solitude is a strong theme of Star Wars, for Bishop's reasons and others. I wouldn't put 'desert' in the title of the theme, however, because the use of the desert is a component of the story that causes the theme.

What Bish was saying was that a reader _can _make anything into a theme; it doesn't mean they do.



> "Beauty" is not a theme.



It is in a number of classic texts, according to the university canon and what they teach on it.

I think a division of definition will help here - bring on Wikipedia!

'Themes can be divided into two categories: a work's *thematic concept* is what readers "think the work is about" and its *thematic statement* being "what the work says about the subject".'

'The *most common contemporary understanding* of theme is an idea or point that is central to a story, which can often be *summed in a single word* (e.g. love, death, betrayal).'

I have also read articles about 'major' and 'minor' themes.

Newman, you are talking about the thematic statement, which is a product of the thematic concept, or vice versa. Overall, however, theme itself can be summed up into a single word when we're talking about narrative.

Treating books like screenwriting all the time is, IMO, what contributes more to the rejection pile of literary history than any lack of understanding of theme can. We can make links, and I love to, but if we're saying that screenwriters' definitions work more effectively for a different medium than theirs than those that actually maintain the craft... that doesn't make any sense. People who write novels know more about writing novels. I'm going to give them priority.


----------



## ppsage

Sam said:


> Sometimes I listen to the A-Team theme.
> 
> Does that count?


Absolutely! A gang of talented renegades gets the job done when gov't can't? It's by far the most popular theme of the current literary era.


----------



## tabasco5

Morkonan said:


> A thought...
> 
> There's a lot of "redefining" going on in this discussion.
> 
> We are not blind and a theme is not an elephant.
> 
> A theme is, as I believe someone may have already intelligently mentioned, just "shorthand" for human experience. There are plenty of human experiences out there that we are all fairly familiar with. They have all been written about, many times. In fact, everything has already been written. It's often our duty to walk down the same well-used trails, but with a different bounce in our step and a different tune on our lips. But, it's still the same darn trail... Sometimes, people decide to try to blaze a new one. If they're successful, they get an award. People throw awards by the bucketful at others who successfully hack out a new trail. Why? It provides us all with a new path to tread! For those who fail, though, they get left behind in the dark brambles; Lone voices shouting in the jungle.
> 
> There's a point when a discussion that centers around redefining something is no longer very useful. Morover, it gets confusing and people end up having to restate the same thing, just in different terms, over and over again, in some fairly hopeless, but noble, effort to be understood. Eventually, they'll restate the same thing so often that they're bound to make a mistake. Then, people pick that up and run with it, as if that mistake has the same value as anything else anyone has said. "Meaning" often gets diluted and focus is lost in favor of debating things that are thought as "new", but are actually just alternative restatements of the same basic stuff.
> 
> This is commonplace and it's the way such discussions evolve.
> 
> Almost every story imaginable is going to have some sort of "theme." It may not be intentional, but it's going to have one. Why? Because - Themes are shorthand for human experience. If you're writing about human experience, you're going to trip over a theme, somewhere.
> 
> More important than trying to redefine something that is already very recognizable, even to the uninitiated, I think something we, as writers, may want to think about is just how these "themes" get recognized as such. And, it may be a good idea to figure out how human experience ends up being common enough to qualify to be labeled with the shorthand of a "theme." We might also derive greater benefits we wondered "why" these things evolve as they do.
> 
> We live in a very dynamic world. Our ancestors did too, by the way. Can you imagine how the discovery and colonization of the "New World" rocked their boats? The collective ideas of personal "Freedom" and "Liberty" surely must have shaken up society, even if certain elements had been arguing about it in pubs for a few hundred years. We see a lot of books and movies that focus on the the theme of "Individual Liberty" as it applies to certain historical ages. But, it's not likely that the people of some of those times were greatly concerned with this sort of stuff. I don't see much point for a peasant to be overly concerned with Free Speech if they're too busy being oppressed by the violence inherent in the system...
> 
> What about tomorrow? What "themes" will we see developing? Is it possible we'll see entirely new themes emerge from a human experience that seems to be rapidly evolving? Youbetcha. Though, they may only be slight derivations of a... theme. What? All of human existence has already been lived? There is nothing new to write about? Perhaps... However, that may not entirely apply to "Themes." Themes are shorthand for human experience and as human experiences changes, it could have emergent properties that yield new themes. Examples you require, yes?
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_in_the_Gray_Flannel_Suit
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_Space
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Devil_Wears_Prada_(film)
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battleship_Potemkin
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_Quiet_on_the_Western_Front
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Nevsky_(film)
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yankee_Doodle_Dandy
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Dawn
> 
> 
> Do all of these contain relatively "new" themes? Yes.
> 
> Do they all contain old, familiar, themes? Yes.
> 
> Does the presence of one deny the other? No.
> 
> Do themes sometimes incorporate other themes in order to yield something new? Yes.
> 
> Look at the subtle changes between "The Man in the Grey Flannel Suit" through "The Devil Wears Prada." There are old familiar themes, here. Most commonly in any character-centered story, there's going to be some form of "self-actualization" theme. It's so common that it's not even worth mentioning. More interesting is seeing how this idea conflicts with the new dynamics present in each of these movies/stories. We finally end up with a woman trying to compete in a very competitive industry with an entirely different culture than she is used to and having to make changes in her personal life as well as many sacrifices. Not so different from Tom, really, except for her lack of war experience.
> 
> In "All's Quiet on the Western Front" we get a very personal glimpse into the mind of a returning warrior. This is, somewhat, an old theme. But, we only see it as "old" because we're in a generation that has suffered through many mighty conflicts. Our streets are full of returning war vets from many different battlefields and this is exactly why this story, and others, was written. I don't know of many Roman or Greek plays that explored the depths of a soldier's mind like this or his return to a normal, plebeian, existence. Odysseus, it seemed, was quite happy bringing home a bit of righteous violence with him, even though it took awhile for him to actually get back home. But, what we're seeing here is more than just a soldier's life. It's one of the first popular stories that speaks somewhat to the rise of Nationalism and the all-consuming zietgeist of it that overflowed into successive conflicts. That's the world that Paul returns to. The rise of media importance in propaganda and Nationalism can be seen in some earlier features, like Battleship Potemkin, on through to the end of the list. Do these contain _old_ familiar themes? Yes. Do they incorporate relatively _new human experiences_ and pair or even contrast these with old themes? Absolutely.
> 
> What's the most basic "theme" you can think of? Likely, if you reduce many themes down to their most basic elements, you're going to end up with either a theme that incorporates "self-actualization" and the "search for meaning" or a basic theme of "conflict" of some sort.
> 
> Starting with these sorts of very basic, very common, very well-respected themes, one can tack on more complex elements and, by doing so, can _recognize_ other themes as they emerge. A man who suffers from internal conflict is reintroduced to the real world and must conform in order to succeed while trying to define himself. Properly served up, it's "The Man in the Grey Flannel Suit." Reduced down to it's elements, and it's a story of internal conflict, external conflict and constrained struggle, and self-actualization. Those reduced component could be said to be included in all these movies/stories.
> 
> In a hundred years, what will the most popular themes be? Likely,if we're still mostly human, they're going to be just slight derivations of well-known themes. After all, if we're still human, we're still experiencing that and we will still have to write about it. However, if something "new" becomes a major part of our lives, you can bet that writers will be churning out books by the pound in an effort to comment on it or to illuminate it. This is, after all, one of the reasons for purposefully incorporating a theme in a story, isn't it? Isn't that why you, as a writer, would purposefully decide to write a story about ThemeXX? You've got something to say about it, right? But, what about all the other "themes" that happen to develop in your story? Are you commenting on them, too? Probably so - Themes are not born in a vacuum and they are not isolated things. Themes necessarily include a wide range of human experiences and these other experiences have common themes associated with them, as well. This is why people argue about what a writer may or may not have intended in regards to themes. The writer may not have intended to speak to a particular theme, but it was impossible to avoid stumbling over it in the course of exploring another! That is the "nature" of human experience. (Barring a few lonely solitary castaways who, even abandoned and alone, sometimes manage to trip over a theme or three.)
> 
> But, more important than seeking to define and redefine exactly _what_ a theme is, for whatever reason, I think it's more important to know that true illumination only comes when you know _where themes come from_. They are all derived from human experience and you couldn't easily escape from them if you're writing about human experience, whether you intend to or not.
> 
> If you know what something is, you know _what_ it is. A lot of people have been focused on trying to plug a definition into what "themes" are. But, if you instead know _why_ they are what they are, you'll be able to recognize them, anywhere.



Not counting the wiki links, this post is 1516 words.  Impressive.


----------



## Bishop

tabasco5 said:


> Not counting the wiki links, this post is 1516 words.  Impressive.



Actually, for Mork, that's just "medium".


----------



## Newman

shadowwalker said:


> Newman, might I be so bold as to suggest that when people disagree with you, it doesn't make them wrong or on the wrong track. It means, in this instance, that their experiences and preferences are different from yours and therefore they have a different perspective - which, I might add, you could actually attempt to understand before passing judgement.
> 
> "I'm right and you're wrong" generally will not get you far in life. Just something to consider.



In this instance, there is a clear right and a clear wrong. And the distinction is helpful.

For example, take _Beauty and the Beast_.

Every schoolchild knows that the theme to _Beauty and the Beast_ is "beauty is skin deep" or "appearances can be deceiving" or something similar (the exact theme will depend on the exact version of the story).

It's not going to be "family" or "community" or "loyalty" or "crime" or whatever anybody wants it to be.


----------



## Folcro

Really weird, I was just going over this topic in my head maybe an hour before I found this thread.

A story consists of three components (as per my own personal reckoning): Plot, Characterization, and concept. Concept mostly covers the setting, but also the story's theme. Theme is begotten of the rest; it is the story's spirit. Does a story need a theme? I'm not sure if that's the right question... a story just has one. It might not be particularly prevalent (though I think the better stories usually have a strong one), but it is there. 

When I search for theme in my story, I find leadership to be a recurring element. I enjoy hinging my plot on the decisions my characters make--- what brings them to these decisions, and how they affect the lives of others.


----------



## Bishop

Newman said:


> In this instance, there is a clear right and a clear wrong.



There is no clear right or wrong in any aspect of writing. Or ANY art form, for that matter.

And there can be more than one theme to a piece, as I mentioned before. I urge you, or anyone, to find evidence to the contrary.


----------



## Jeko

> Every schoolchild knows that the theme to _Beauty and the Beast is "beauty is skin deep" or "appearances can be deceiving" or something similar (the exact theme will depend on the exact version of the story).
> 
> It's not going to be "family" or "community" or "loyalty" or "crime" or whatever anybody wants it to be._



That's because they're schoolchildren and don't know any better.

We, on the other hand, can appreciate more than one theme at once. If every story could only have one theme, literature would be a snooze-fest.


----------



## shadowwalker

Newman said:


> In this instance, there is a clear right and a clear wrong. And the distinction is helpful.



I suggest you re-read the last paragraph in my post - possibly even think about it.


----------



## Morkonan

tabasco5 said:


> Not counting the wiki links, this post is 1516 words.  Impressive.



A simple thing. I just put my hands on a keyboard and move my fingers around a little bit. 



Bishop said:


> Actually, for Mork, that's just "medium".





That's probably not far from the mark.


----------



## EmmaSohan

Kyle R said:


> "Love is more important than money," on the other hand, is a statement, an argument. A thematic argument. Presenting it this way (as a statement) provides the writer with direction. It hints at structure.
> 
> Characters who gravitate toward love in such a story would experience their situations improving (rewarded for learning the thematic lesson). Characters who gravitate toward money would experience their situations worsening (punished for failing to learn the thematic lesson).
> 
> Love=good and greed=bad would be the tone of the story, a tone established by the thematic argument.



This suggests that theme is communicated by repetition. I am taking Kyle out of context, and he had different goals, but.... I thought exactly the same thing.

But I am guessing this is not how they do it in a movie. Newman?

It's not how I want to do it in a book. It seems too sappy (or preachy).


----------



## EmmaSohan

To me, it is indisputable that Newman (and Screenwriters) have a different idea of theme than writers. (Just read the posts.)

The theme of this forum is, of course, how to write better. Do writers really care much about themes, as we understand them? (I let my reader find them, they can be anything, I can't write well when I use them, lack of definition and agreement on what they even are.)

Newman is promising a way to make our books better. But it's not if we use themes the way we think of them.


----------



## Terry D

Newman said:


> In this instance, there is a clear right and a clear wrong. And the distinction is helpful.
> 
> For example, take _Beauty and the Beast_.
> 
> Every schoolchild knows that the theme to _Beauty and the Beast_ is "beauty is skin deep" or "appearances can be deceiving" or something similar (the exact theme will depend on the exact version of the story).
> 
> It's not going to be "family" or "community" or "loyalty" or "crime" or whatever anybody wants it to be.



Of course those aren't themes in B&Tb, because that story isn't about family, or crime. But, if a reader saw a theme of 'maintaining personal dignity in the face of rejection and ridicule ' that would be viable. Even if it was not a theme intended by the author. Readers find unintended themes all the time. One could also sum up a theme in that story in a single word; acceptance.

Addressing your reply to my earlier post: Even bad stories, even terrible stories have themes. Bad stories are still written about something. That something is the theme.


----------



## Jeko

> This suggests that theme is communicated by repetition.



Of course it is. If the theme of 'beauty' or 'corruption' is only present on one page, you can't say it's the theme for the whole story. Maybe you can argue that it's in the story, but for a story to have a theme, that theme needs to come up throughout the narrative.

The theme of vanity in BaTB, for instance, exists because the story reeks of it from beginning to end. It's inescapable.


----------



## Newman

Kyle R said:


> Characters who gravitate toward love in such a story would experience their situations improving (rewarded for learning the thematic lesson). Characters who gravitate toward money would experience their situations worsening (punished for failing to learn the thematic lesson).



It's right, but it's kind of a background thing.




EmmaSohan said:


> This suggests that theme is communicated by repetition.



It's not done through repetition in book or film.

It's done through the construction of the story - who the characters are, the events they go through, their choices, the consequences of those choices and so on.




Terry D said:


> Of course those aren't themes in B&Tb, because that story isn't about family, or crime.



At least you're moving away from the idea that it can be absolutely whatever anyone wants it to be.



Terry D said:


> in B&Tb...But, if a reader saw a theme of 'maintaining personal dignity in the face of rejection and ridicule ' that would be viable.
> 
> One could also sum up a theme in that story in a single word; acceptance.



Not even close.

The story is not trying to say that at all.



Terry D said:


> Even bad stories, even terrible stories have themes. Bad stories are still written about something. That something is the theme.



Theme isn't "what the story is about." Theme isn't "that something."

Theme is "specifically what the story is trying to say." The story will be pretty much designed around that specific intent.




Terry D said:


> Even bad stories, even terrible stories have themes. Bad stories are still written about something. That something is the theme.



That suggests that you can ignore theme because it'll always be there, that you don't have to figure out how it works or how to execute it. Big mistake.


----------



## shadowwalker

:deadhorse:


----------



## Jeko

> Not even close.
> 
> The story is not trying to say that at all.
> 
> Theme is "specifically what the story is trying to say." The story will be pretty much designed around that specific intent.



How are you, a single, unique reader, any kind of authority on what any story is 'trying to say'? 

The entire history of literature is all about people disagreeing on what stories are 'trying to say'. What is the story of Genesis 'trying to say'? What is Shakespeare's Macbeth 'trying to say'? What is Waiting for Godot 'trying to say'? And don't all these stories transcend their cultural boundaries once they enter a new audience and context? Or do I have to pretend I'm a peasant while watching Macbeth, and an Israelite beneath Mount Sinai while I read the Ten Commandments?

I think the theme of this discussion is confusing 'theme' with 'moral', and thinking that all stories can be put under the umbrella of having an irrefutable message. Neither practice is healthy for a writer, IMO. Imagine if a reader tells you they got a different 'theme' from your work. If an author said to me that I'm 'not even close', I'd tell the author that they're in the wrong profession.

Newman, until you provide much, much more substantial evidence for your argument, nothing you're saying is going to help us.


----------



## EmmaSohan

What I meant to say is that writers think of a theme as occurring through repetition (which Cadence agreed with) and screenwriters don't think that way (which Newman agreed with).

Note also "the theme can be discovered after the book is written by the reader" (writers) versus "the theme is an integral part of the writing process" (screenwriters). As I understand it, the screenwriters think that viewers like a movie with a theme even if they never think about it.

If you take theme as a repeating message that is a generalization or moral (the writing view?), then many writers are not enthusiastic about putting it in their books. Reread the this discussion and note how many writers don't worry about theme when they write and are content to let readers discover a theme.

I am wondering how much theme, in this sense, is still a part of modern writing. Does anyone really use repetition or statement of a theme to increase the theme in a book? Oops, I did that once, but it was in the "About this Book" section and I explained why the story ended the way it did.


----------



## Terry D

Newman said:


> Theme is "specifically what the story is trying to say." The story will be pretty much *designed* around that specific intent.
> 
> That suggests that you can ignore theme because it'll always be there, that you don't have to figure out how it works or how to execute it. Big mistake.



Some writers start with a theme in mind, some do not. To say that a story will be "pretty much designed around that specific intent", or that to not do so is a "Big mistake" is accurate for the first group and dead wrong for the second. It is absurd to suggest that anyone 'must' do anything of the sort. I seldom begin a story with the theme in mind, and yet my readership seems pretty happy with the results. The same goes for a number of other published writers who have responded to this thread, as well as best selling authors like Stephen King and Lawrence Block who have said repeatedly that they start their stories with no theme in mind. 

There are only two absolutes in writing (IMO): Nothing get written unless you're writing, and anyone who tells you that you 'must' do something is wrong.


----------



## Kyle R

EmmaSohan said:


> Does anyone really use repetition or statement of a theme to increase the theme in a book? Oops, I did that once, but it was in the "About this Book" section and I explained why the story ended the way it did.



I do, yes.

My main character is hindered by an incorrect way of thinking in the beginning. This is her *flaw*.

In an early scene, someone tells my main character, "You know what your problem is? ..."

This is where *the theme is stated*, the lesson my character needs to learn.

My character, of course, ignores it—oblivious to her own flaw.

But the theme is there, and that's *the lesson that my character needs to learn* about life.

By the end of the book, my character has changed her wrong way of thinking and has become a better person as a result. She's learned the thematic lesson.

Take Pixar's blockbuster film, "Cars," for example.







In the beginning, the main character, Lightning McQueen, is a celebrity race car. He's fast, he's popular, and he's cocky.

But he has a flawed way of thinking: *he believes himself to be "a one man show."* He says out loud that he doesn't need anybody, that,* "It's all me, baby. I don't need anybody else!"*

That is his *flawed way of thinking*. He will need to learn a thematic lesson in order to be a better person.

Another character, a champion race car named Mr. King, tells Lightning, "You got talent. But you're stupid. *This ain't a one-man deal, kid. You need to wise up... You ain't gonna win unless you got good folks behind you.*.."

Lightning is being told that* life isn't about running solo. In life, you need family and friends.*

*This is the theme of the story.*

It's repeated, again and again, throughout the film:



Lightning's agent, Harv, *asks Lightning who his friends are*. Lightning can't think of a single one.
Guido and Luigi offer to help Lightning with his tires. *Friends offering help*. Lightning says, "Pass. No thank you."
Lightning makes a promise to Mater, and Mater tells Lightning that he's his new "*best friend*."
Miss Sally gives Lightning a place to stay, and Lightning, though difficult to say, tells her, "Thank you." Miss Sally is pleasantly surprised. *Lightning is beginning to appreciate having friends* in his life. He's beginning to learn the thematic lesson.

It continues throughout the second half of the film, as well. More and more, Lightning begins to see *the value of having friends*.

At the end of the film, Lightning competes in the big race *with all his friends* at his side. At the end, when he is offered his dream job of working for Dynaco, *Lightning chooses his friends instead*. 

He shows *he's finally learned the theme* of the story! 

And the movie ends with a happy ending (Lightning is rewarded for learning the lesson) by showing his new* happy life with his new friends* in the town he helped rebuild.

The story is built around the theme. 

Theme isn't the _only_ facet of the story, but it's a singular message "*LIFE ain't a one-man deal, kid. You need to wise up...*" that directly influences the plot. :encouragement:


----------



## Newman

^^^ Now we're talkin'  ; well done Kyle.

Again:

The theme is not what the reader sees. It is decided by the writer and the story is built to deliver it.


----------



## EmmaSohan

In both the book and film Kyle mentions, the lesson does not achieve theme status by being repeated (like two cars both learn that lesson), it acquires theme status by being developed.

This is important -- do you want to advise authors and screenwriters to repeat a theme or develop a theme?

In contrast, suppose you thought a theme of The Fault in Our Stars was *disability does not prevent you from being fully part of the human adventure*. The argument for giving this theme status would be that this is illustrated many times. No one argues that there the plot helps slowly develop this message. (Actually, people found unconvincing my argument that this is not well-supported by the plot). Same for *how terminally ill people are still human first and have the same wants and needs as healthy people,* the only support for this achieving theme status seems to be repetition.


----------



## shadowwalker

Newman said:


> Again:
> 
> The theme is not what the reader sees. It is decided by the writer and the story is built to deliver it.



Again:

_Sometimes_. Not _always_. Not _every _writer decides on a theme. Not _every _writer builds the story to deliver a theme. I don't give a rat's behind about determining a theme and writing the story to fit. I write a story. Period. I have had readers tell me about the wonderful/deep/surprising themes they've found, and my immediate reaction is always "Really? I did that? How cool!". 

But I suppose this will _again _go in one ear and out the other... :hopelessness:


----------



## Morkonan

Newman said:


> ..The theme is not what the reader sees. It is decided by the writer and the story is built to deliver it.



That can be, of course, true. 

However, it does not always have to be true. You can not avoid the possibility of other "themes" poking their head into your story if you're writing a story about human beings. We're full of them. Themes are shorthand for human experience and if you're writing about humans, which one almost always is, even if you're writing about animated cars, you are going to stumble into a wandering theme, here and there. You can't easily avoid it and its use certainly does not have to be intentional.

I do agree, however, that when we're talking about a story's "main theme" it's usually purposefully developed. It may not always be _intentionally_ developed as a "theme", though. The writer may not set out to intentionally develop a theme centered the "coming of age" theme, but, instead, may have just simply intended to tell a story about a young man joining the space-cadets. This is a natural "coming of age" moment, whether or not the writer chooses to recognize it as such. (I admit, it'd be difficult for a writer to ignore the "coming of age" theme immediately springing to life in their work, but I'm sure it does happen.) In some ways, it's not always possible to set "theme" and "story" apart from each other so distinctly. Themes may be completely unavoidable.

In my opinion, when we're discussing "interpretations", we have to acknowledge the fact that some things "just happen." "Themes" are defined as such because of their common association with human experience and they are going to be unavoidably associated with many human experiences whether that "theme" was intentionally developed by the author or not. But, when it comes down to what an author says their story is about and what themes they sought out, their word is sometimes all we have regarding their intent. If the Readers can't see that, then the author simply did their job badly.


----------



## Jeko

> The theme is not what the reader sees. It is decided by the writer and the story is built to deliver it.



This belongs to just one of the hundreds of schools of thought that make up the sphere of writing and literature. You'll be correct if you say that the theme _can _be decided by the writer and _can _be what the story is built around and _can _be limited to just that. Though I'd still argue that that goes beyond the scope of useful limitations on a writer's thinking and craft, but maybe that's just me.

Since the argument to the contrary would be impossible to argue, I'm going to leave it at that.


----------



## EmmaSohan

EmmaSohan said:


> When you develop a theme in your book -- what are you doing?



Most writers apparently do not do anything. But some do. Stephen King said he did. (Examples?)


----------



## TKent

I think this depends on the genre. I can't think of many literary novels I've read that didn't have pretty distinct themes.



> Most writers apparently do not do anything. But some do.



- - - Updated - - -

This is a great thread. For me personally, I specifically set out with a theme in mind when I started outlining my WIP. And in outlining, I had all kinds of ideas/themes whirling around in my head, to the point it was, and I want to make this point, and this point, and this point. Initially I didn't limit myself to one primary theme and just let things play out in the outline. But as the story/plot/outline developed, one stood out above the rest and became the central theme. When that lightbulb went off for me, it really focused my efforts in a way they hadn't been focused prior. I loved that moment, when all of the big ideas fell into place 

- - - Updated - - -

And one final comment, for me, figuring out how I am going to weave that theme into my story is as exciting as figuring out the clues to a mystery novel.


----------



## Terry D

EmmaSohan said:


> Most writers apparently do not do anything. But some do. Stephen King said he did. (Examples?)



What King does--according to King--is write the first draft with no thought of theme, knowing that one (or more) will form itself during the writing. During his second draft, he refines the theme he found, enhancing it.


----------



## Newman

EmmaSohan said:


> do you want to advise authors and screenwriters to repeat a theme or develop a theme?



I don't think those are the right words.

I think a safe way to put it is (and this doesn't do the complexity of the process justice at all):

Arcing away from or letting go of the negative position.



EmmaSohan said:


> In contrast, suppose you thought a theme of The Fault in Our Stars was disability does not prevent you from being fully part of the human adventure. The argument for giving this theme status would be that this is illustrated many times. No one argues that there the plot helps slowly develop this message. (Actually, people found unconvincing my argument that this is not well-supported by the plot). Same for how terminally ill people are still human first and have the same wants and needs as healthy people, the only support for this achieving theme status seems to be repetition.



If I get time, I'll watch it and get back to you as to what it is. 



shadowwalker said:


> Not every writer builds the story to deliver a theme.



Show me a successful story and I bet you I can identify the theme, or tell you what the writer has done which approximates theme.



Morkonan said:


> You can not avoid the possibility of other "themes" poking their head into your story if you're writing a story about human beings. We're full of them. Themes are shorthand for human experience and if you're writing about humans, which one almost always is, even if you're writing about animated cars, you are going to stumble into a wandering theme, here and there. You can't easily avoid it and its use certainly does not have to be intentional.



No matter how many other ideas are floating about, those won't be the theme. The theme will be the specific POV the story is trying to convey.



Morkonan said:


> The writer may not set out to intentionally develop a theme centered the "coming of age" theme, but, instead, may have just simply intended to tell a story about a young man joining the space-cadets. This is a natural "coming of age" moment, whether or not the writer chooses to recognize it as such.



Coming-of-age isn't a theme. It's a genre.

So they join the cadets where they undergo experiences which turn them from boys to men and underneath that there'll be a theme.

For example, in _Dead Poets Society_, they go to Uni where they undergo experiences which turn them from boys to men and underneath that there is the theme (probably Carpe Diem).



EmmaSohan said:


> Most writers apparently do not do anything.



You're sampling the wrong population. 



Terry D said:


> What King does--according to King--is write the first draft with no thought of theme, knowing that one (or more) will form itself during the writing. During his second draft, he refines the theme he found, enhancing it.



I wouldn't be surprised if someone found it on their 20th draft. The point is that you refine around it when you've got it.


----------



## shadowwalker

Newman said:


> Show me a successful story and I bet you I can identify the theme, or tell you what the writer has done which approximates theme.



I have no doubt you can identify what you believe to be the theme. That is what many readers do. Whether that's what the author had in mind, or whether the author had anything in mind, is a whole 'nother thing.

Tell me, are you this stubborn when working with betas or editors? 'Cause if so, that must be a real treat for them. :roll:


----------



## Morkonan

Newman said:


> ...No matter how many other ideas are floating about, those won't be the theme. The theme will be the specific POV the story is trying to convey.



That may be the central theme of the story, but that does not preclude other themes being present.



> Coming-of-age isn't a theme. It's a genre.
> 
> So they join the cadets where they undergo experiences which turn them from boys to men and underneath that there'll be a theme.....



What I wrote was: _"The writer may not set out to intentionally develop a theme centered the "coming of age" theme,..."_ I made the mistake of typing "theme" twice, but the intention was to show that a coming of age "story" was not a theme, alone, and there are a variety of different themes that can be worked into such a story.


----------



## Newman

Morkonan said:


> That may be the central theme of the story, but that does not preclude other themes being present.



Your point was about wandering ideas, about other ideas poking their head into the story.

You're suggesting that, for example, if a theme is "beauty is skin deep" then an idea floating around like "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" could also be a theme. 

That's not true. Because the construct is around "beauty is skin deep."


----------



## Jeko

> You're suggesting that, for example, if a theme is "beauty is skin deep" then an idea floating around like "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" could also be a theme.
> 
> That's not true. Because the construct is around "beauty is skin deep."



I think a better word for what you're talking about is 'thesis'. The various disagreements in this thread highlight your limitations of communicating on the subject of 'theme'. Use 'thesis', however, and your arguments will hold more weight.


----------



## K.S. Crooks

I have found that I go into  story with a theme in mind, whether it be survival, redemption or self-discovery. halfway through my writing another theme comes to life, one which supports the original but can also sand on its own. For a series there is usually an overall theme, yet each story has its own separate flavour.


----------



## Morkonan

Newman said:


> Your point was about wandering ideas, about other ideas poking their head into the story.
> 
> You're suggesting that, for example, if a theme is "beauty is skin deep" then an idea floating around like "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" could also be a theme.
> 
> That's not true. Because the construct is around "beauty is skin deep."



No, that's not what I'm talking about.

I'm talking about a "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" theme being a main theme, but with an emergent theme of "keep your nose to the grindstone" and "family is most important of all" finding their own appropriate places within the story.


----------



## EmmaSohan

K.S. Crooks said:


> I have found that I go into  story with a theme in mind, whether it be survival, redemption or self-discovery. halfway through my writing another theme comes to life, one which supports the original but can also sand on its own. For a series there is usually an overall theme, yet each story has its own separate flavour.



Can you give an example? TKent, can you give an example? I want to know what my choices are when I write if I want to enhance/develop/bring out/whatever a theme.


----------



## Newman

Morkonan said:


> I'm talking about a "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" theme being a main theme, but with an emergent theme of "keep your nose to the grindstone" and "family is most important of all" finding their own appropriate places within the story.



To qualify as a theme, the story must be constructed around delivering it to a conclusion.

If your "emergent themes" are not doing that, then they're kind of like unhatched eggs sitting there waiting for a story to come along and roll them out.

For example, in _When Harry Met Sally_, the theme is stated as "men and women can't be friends."  Now, there may be a ton of ideas in that story that you may want to call "emergent themes" but they're not really themes because the story is constructed around answering that specific question.


----------



## TKent

Hey Emma, in the Publishing area there is a sub-forum for queries. In it is a thread called "3 page synopsis for romance novel - approx. 1925 words." This is an example of how a theme of redemption is carried through my story. Key places the theme is carried through:

- Protagonist is an aspiring writer who doesn't really believe in redemption (or at a minimum, she doesn't trust that the idea applies to her). The stories she writes have doom and gloom endings without much hope. She has had a tough upbringing and has personal baggage with various reasons to question the idea of redemption.

- her writing professor in a senior novel writing class, is very curious about the lack of redemption in her stories and challenges her on this topic in various ways.

- she ends up falling for an online critique partner who she later finds out is her professor who she thinks is married. This challenges her slowly changing attitude about the idea of redemption in her stories.

- later she finds out her professor is not actually married and was drawn to her because of the lack of redemption in her stories. He feels guilt over the loss of his wife and child because the wife drove drunk and had a fatal accident after being told by the professor that he wanted a divorce. He was attracted to the protagonists stories because they struggled with the very thing he is struggling with. And ends up falling in love with her.

- Another small place it comes out is that near the end of the book, the protagonist has a short story accepted for publication and the acceptance letter says that despite her story dealing with a sad topic, she manages to end with a message of hope. which symbolizes her own internal change.

Anyway, a bunch of other stuff whirled around while outlining. 

There are some sub-themes/ideas that don't make it to the level of the synopsis but that did remain (so far..LOL). An example is the protagonist feels alone in the world (her parents are dead) and without a real family, she also doesn't trust people (she has every reason not to given her rough history), but through the story, she ends up in situations where she has to lean on her bestfriend, a girl in her class that she misjudges, and her landlady. She slowly changes in this area. A very late scene in the story is her birthday party which is attended by these three people, who have now become not only her friends but her 'family.'

Anyway, I didn't start out saying, the theme of my story is X. I started out saying, I want to write a story about a girl who doesn't believe in happy endings and meets a guy who is struggling but in his attempt to convince her that she has one, he figures out that he has one too. But the one thing I did say is, I want to write a story that says something that is important to me, and I want to craft the story in a way that the 'something' that I say, has a lot of meaning, and is weaved through the story in the way that I personally love in a story.

Not ACTUALLY sure that I am answering the question you asked, but hope this helps. The process is going to be different for each writer I'm sure.




EmmaSohan said:


> TKent, can you give an example? I want to know what my choices are when I write if I want to enhance/develop/bring out/whatever a theme.


----------



## EmmaSohan

Newman said:


> To qualify as a theme, the story must be constructed around delivering it to a conclusion.
> 
> If your "emergent themes" are not doing that, then they're kind of like unhatched eggs sitting there waiting for a story to come along and roll them out.
> 
> For example, in _When Harry Met Sally_, the theme is stated as "men and women can't be friends."  Now, there may be a ton of ideas in that story that you may want to call "emergent themes" but they're not really themes because the story is constructed around answering that specific question.



I am starting to really like this definition of theme. So if I write a short story with a message (like, we are destroying the environment), I can structure it around the message, making it my theme. And in a short story, probably everything in the story should work towards that theme.

But...

What if my short story is constructed around a topic (like what happens when a teen meets her biological father for the first time)? Everything contributes to that. Now is the topic a theme?

And what if I am just trying to create as much horror as possible? Really, no message, no issue (except if they help horror, and then they are there only for that reason). Can my theme be just horror?


----------



## Newman

EmmaSohan said:


> What if my short story is constructed around a topic (like what happens when a teen meets her biological father for the first time)? Everything contributes to that. Now is the topic a theme?



Topic is not a theme. Theme is the specific thing your story is going to say. For example, you might want to say "fathers aren't always what you expect them to be" or "sometimes it's better to accept the parent who nurtured you." See how each of those themes suggests differing sets of characters, events and scenes?  



EmmaSohan said:


> And what if I am just trying to create as much horror as possible?  Really, no message, no issue (except if they help horror, and then they  are there only for that reason). Can my theme be just horror?



Horror isn't theme.

You can have 200 pages of some weirdo slashing everyone in sight, but where's the story? As soon as you bring story into it, you have to start thinking about the meaning behind it all.


----------



## EmmaSohan

Newman said:


> Topic is not a theme. Theme is the specific thing your story is going to say. For example, you might want to say "fathers aren't always what you expect them to be" or "sometimes it's better to accept the parent who nurtured you." See how each of those themes suggests differing sets of characters, events and scenes?
> 
> Horror isn't theme.
> 
> You can have 200 pages of some weirdo slashing everyone in sight, but where's the story? As soon as you bring story into it, you have to start thinking about the meaning behind it all.



You are being consistent, thanks. My short story was about one teen and one father. I have no right or intention to generalize. I could say that some daughters will act the way my main character did -- but my main character is fictional. Somehow meaning gets into this, but now I really don't have much control. So, really, there's no message that I want to say. I think that's typical of many stories, including the infamous _The Fault in Our Stars_ (the book).

Horror. I try to create a character -- because you need that for horror. I used the trope "Bad things happen to good people." I don't want to send people that message, it's just good for horror. It has the message that people will do horrible things to survive, another message I don't want to send. It's there for horror. So, really, my whole story is structured around horror.

If you want to say my horror story would be better with a message/theme, I'm sympathetic. But in the first story, a message/theme would probably be wrong, it would drain the energy from the rest of the story.


----------



## shadowwalker

Newman said:


> To qualify as a theme, the story must be constructed around delivering it to a conclusion.



So then not all stories are written with a theme. Finally we can agree on something.


----------



## Morkonan

Newman said:


> To qualify as a theme, the story must be constructed around delivering it to a conclusion.
> 
> If your "emergent themes" are not doing that, then they're kind of like unhatched eggs sitting there waiting for a story to come along and roll them out.
> 
> For example, in _When Harry Met Sally_, the theme is stated as "men and women can't be friends."  Now, there may be a ton of ideas in that story that you may want to call "emergent themes" but they're not really themes because the story is constructed around answering that specific question.



So, you're saying there can only be one theme in a story?

If a subplot also develops a theme, it can't be considered a theme, since "there can be only one"?


----------



## Jeko

> To qualify as a theme, the story must be constructed around delivering it to a conclusion.



Where did you get this definition? You always come back to it, and ignore any possibility for flexibility on the issue, but you're argument has no foundation unless you can cite your sources.


----------



## Kyle R

I'm going to quote Michael Hauge here, as I believe he addresses both sides of this debate. (For those who don't know, Michael Hauge is a Hollywood A-List story consultant. He has been teaching structure, character arc, and theme to professional screenwriters and novelists for decades.)

This is from his acclaimed book, _Writing Screenplays That Sell_​:







Translation:

"In order to succeed in the plot, your character must first learn—and live in accordance with—the thematic lesson. As a result, your reader will vicariously experience an internal transformation, as well.

However, you don't _have_ to use theme if you don't want to. It's perfectly okay to write a story that engages the reader purely because of the plot."

:encouragement:


----------



## Newman

Morkonan said:


> So, you're saying there can only be one theme in a story?
> 
> If a subplot also develops a theme, it can't be considered a theme, since "there can be only one"?



Two main themes are common.

Subplots can carry theme.

The same principles apply, the story is built around delivery.




shadowwalker said:


> So then not all stories are written with a theme. Finally we can agree on something.



There's an expression:

"The difference between a good story and a bad story is a well developed theme."

Tons of stuff is submitted which is rejected or needs to be rewritten.

You need a thread discussing how strong theme can appear within a story when the writer is not thinking in terms of theme.

But all of that is beside the point I'm making: the notion that theme is "whatever the reader sees" is wrong.




Cadence said:


> Where did you get this definition? You always come back to it, and ignore any possibility for flexibility on the issue, but you're argument has no foundation unless you can cite your sources.



We're not writing a paper that has to be handed in at the end of term.




Kyle R said:


> It's perfectly okay to write a story that engages the reader purely because of the plot."



That suggests that you don't need character development.

I also think you have to be careful not to directly equate character arc with theme. It's a very interesting topic / relationship though.


----------



## Bishop

Newman said:


> But all of that is beside the point I'm making: the notion that theme is "whatever the reader sees" is wrong.



*There's an entire school of literary analysis that disagrees with you.*

I've studied literature heavily since high school, and while your theory that "whatever the reader sees is wrong" IS a type of thinking in an artistic setting, it's not the only one. There is no "only one". There is no "correct one". There's just different schools of thinking, that different people preach. It's basically the same as the choice of what cell phone carrier you go with. The choice is in each individual person's hands.

As I mentioned before. Mary Shelley wrote _Frankenstein _with no thematic intention, no intention at all aside from besting her writer buddies in a horror story contest. Now, it's considered a pinnacle of Gothic literature and one of the greatest explorations of scientific ethics--with a grave warning not to play God. All because readers and critics and literature students assigned it that meaning.



Newman said:


> We're not writing a paper that has to be handed in at the end of term.



No. But calling someone's ideas or methods "wrong" requires some form of evidence to back that statement up.


----------



## Morkonan

Newman said:


> Two main themes are common.
> 
> Subplots can carry theme.
> 
> The same principles apply, the story is built around delivery.



So, basically, what you're contending is that in order for something to be called a "Theme" in a story, it must be purposefully developed. Themes that may be recognized, but are not purposefully developed, would then be... what? Unrealized potential? Partially developed themes? Almost-themes?

A character buys a cheap car. It later breaks down while the character is on their way to work. He ends up taking a cab. There's the hint of "You get what you pay for" here. But, it's not fully developed.

A character is being chased by the police. They dart into a used-car lot and, with some fumbling and hurried explanations, buy a cheap car. The salesman laughs to himself as he's counting the money he just made. The character sputters out of the parking lot, amid a cloud of smoke. His trail is picked up by police, who notice the smoke billowing out of his cheap car. Pieces of the car fall off, the engine catches on fire, and the character drives it into a lake after the brakes fail. This is a full "You get what you pay for" "theme" since it's purposefully developed, yes? (A sub-theme, let's say.)


----------



## Kyle R

Newman said:


> I also think you have to be careful not to directly equate character arc with theme.



Arc and theme aren't the same, that's true. Though, they are intricately related.





_- Michael Hauge_


----------



## Jeko

> We're not writing a paper that has to be handed in at the end of term.



No, we're trying to work out where your views are coming from. That's practically impossible at the moment. Cite sources or no-one can access the advice you're giving.

We're certainly citing ours.


----------



## Terry D

Just tell the story.


----------



## EmmaSohan

Cadence said:


> No, we're trying to work out where your views are coming from. That's practically impossible at the moment. Cite sources or no-one can access the advice you're giving.
> 
> We're certainly citing ours.



I'm not sure what you are saying, Cadence. Newman's description of theme pretty much corresponds to a definition as used in screenwriting. No one is disagreeing with that, right?

And it seems useful for helping me write better. I am not sure how you define theme, but the "everything has a theme" and "let the reader find a theme" ideas don't really help me write. (Or appreciate a book, I think.) I want to know what screenwriters are doing, and what Kyle and TKent are doing. The "I'm not going to worry about it" notion doesn't help me. I mean, why would we use your definition if it wasn't useful?

The website you sent us to said, "Themes are the fundamental and often universal ideas explored in a literary work." Like human nature?

The website Newman sent us to said, "The theme of a story is the most important thing the author wants readers to understand. It's the author's thoughts about a general belief of how things are or how they should be."


----------



## shadowwalker

Newman said:


> There's an expression:
> 
> "The difference between a good story and a bad story is a well developed theme."



And where did that expression come from?

You keep stating opinions as fact and when others state their differing opinion you say they're wrong. Point blank wrong.

So, do you prefer to be called Yahweh or just plain God? And yeah, that's sarcasm. I get that way when discussions start circling the drain...


----------



## Jeko

> Newman's description of theme pretty much corresponds to a definition as used in screenwriting. No one is disagreeing with that, right?



Yes; we've agreed that his views exist as a popular perspective. His view that this is the _only _way to look at theme, however, is so far unsubstantiated, and that's what I'd like to see evidence for, as I've never come across an argument like his and would like to understand it.

If a screenwriting angle helps you write better, then you've likely come to better understand yourself as a writer. But discounting the other views of themes because they don't help you can damage your understanding of your readership, who may indeed enjoy themes that embody aspects of human nature. You don't have to consider them when writing, but accepting that a reader may see a theme where you don't intend it to be can help you work that theme into your novel during the editing process.

The reader finding the theme helps me write immensely because it takes it off the table during the drafting process, and promotes the fact that my work will always be appreciated beyond the bounds that my imagination sets for it, which increases my often chaotic creativity. That's just me, and a lot of other writers out there. Similarly, a lot of writers will find focusing on the 'thematic statement' far more advantageous to their craft. It comes down to a question of what you want to feel like you have control over. But no-one can ultimately control their readership; there will always be variation, and writers should, IMO, work towards using that for their craft.


----------



## Morkonan

Just an observation - A well presented argument that can stand on its own merits doesn't need outside source references to validate it. It would, however, require references if it insists that it reflects a popular view or is based on the validity of other interpretations. Some statements can stand alone and it's not a crime for them to do so. It's also not a crime to explain complex or misunderstood statements.


----------



## shadowwalker

Any opinion made with dictatorial authority needs backing up with facts and not just pointing to others who agree with that opinion.


----------



## Morkonan

shadowwalker said:


> Any opinion made with dictatorial authority needs backing up with facts and not just pointing to others who agree with that opinion.



I agree. I was only addressing a "well presented argument that can stand on its own merits." It's possible to mix such an argument in with the arguing of other points that may require further evidence or external references, though. 

(IOW - Part of an argument can sometimes stand on its own, but that doesn't mean it necessarily directly supports an accompanying argument that can not. I was only referring to the former type.)


----------



## Newman

Bishop said:


> There's an entire school of literary analysis that disagrees with you.
> I've studied literature heavily since high school, and while your theory that "whatever the reader sees is wrong" IS a type of thinking in an artistic setting, it's not the only one. There is no "only one". There is no "correct one". There's just different schools of thinking, that different people preach. It's basically the same as the choice of what cell phone carrier you go with. The choice is in each individual person's hands.





Morkonan said:


> a "well presented argument



I think the academic stuff is throwing you off.

There's no need for a "well presented argument" here - it's all well known and well understood.




Bishop said:


> As I mentioned before. Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein with no thematic intention, no intention at all aside from besting her writer buddies in a horror story contest. Now, it's considered a pinnacle of Gothic literature and one of the greatest explorations of scientific ethics--with a grave warning not to play God. All because readers and critics and literature students assigned it that meaning.




I doubt she wrote it without thinking about theme in some form or other.

I do know one thing for sure - any writer who gets the job of adapting it to a movie will think long and hard about the theme.




Morkonan said:


> So, basically, what you're contending is that in order for something to be called a "Theme" in a story, it must be purposefully developed. Themes that may be recognized, but are not purposefully developed, would then be... what? Unrealized potential? Partially developed themes? Almost-themes?
> 
> A character buys a cheap car. It later breaks down while the character is on their way to work. He ends up taking a cab. There's the hint of "You get what you pay for" here. But, it's not fully developed.
> 
> A character is being chased by the police. They dart into a used-car lot and, with some fumbling and hurried explanations, buy a cheap car. The salesman laughs to himself as he's counting the money he just made. The character sputters out of the parking lot, amid a cloud of smoke. His trail is picked up by police, who notice the smoke billowing out of his cheap car. Pieces of the car fall off, the engine catches on fire, and the character drives it into a lake after the brakes fail. This is a full "You get what you pay for" "theme" since it's purposefully developed, yes? (A sub-theme, let's say.)



You'll have a lot of scenes  - each one may say something in the side-effect-kind-of-way you're suggesting, but each scene and all the scenes will be constructed specifically to consistently make the larger point that is the theme.




Cadence said:


> we're trying to work out where your views are coming from. That's practically impossible at the moment.



If you can't get the principle of working around a theme from a simple Google search, then you don't need to study English Lit when you get to Uni, you need to study browsers and their search function. 

Kyle, TKent etc seem to get it.



Terry D said:


> Just tell the story.





Terry D said:


> What King does--according to King--is write the first draft with no thought of theme, knowing that one (or more) will form itself during the writing. During his second draft, he refines the theme he found, enhancing it.



You can't just tell the story. At some point you have to think about the meaning and purpose behind it all.

King doesn't just tell the story - he looks for the theme and builds around it.

And for anyone thinking that screenplays and books are different, well King's approach suggests they're not.



shadowwalker said:


> Any opinion made with dictatorial authority needs backing up with facts and not just pointing to others who agree with that opinion.



You should start a thread on some screenwriting forums with the title: "Theme is whatever the reader sees it as being." You'll be confronted a lot more directly and with a lot more colorful language than I am using.

I don't think you appreciate just how crazy a notion it is to a large part of the community.


----------



## Bishop

Newman said:


> I think the academic stuff is throwing you off.
> 
> There's no need for a "well presented argument" here - it's all well known and well understood.



There is if you're trying to tell us that our methods are incorrect. If it was so 'well known and well understood' then how come eight years of literary study yielded the opposite notion? The fact of the matter is that there are a hundred different schools of thought on theme, and to say that one is correct and another is not is like saying there's only one language spoken on Earth.



Newman said:


> I doubt she wrote it without thinking about theme in some form or other.
> 
> I do know one thing for sure - any writer who gets the job of adapting it to a movie will think long and hard about the theme.



While I wasn't there in the parlor with them when she was presenting it to the other writers, I can tell you that it was never intended to be the work it is. It was, for all intents and purposes, a spooky campfire story. Shelley herself alluded to that fact. Written for fun, its sole intention to give other writers chills.




Newman said:


> If you can't get the principle of working around a theme from a simple Google search, then you don't need to study English Lit when you get to Uni, you need to study browsers and their search function.



Yes. The internet is _always _correct. Even more so than major, accredited universities.



Newman said:


> You can't just tell the story. At some point you have to think about the meaning and purpose behind it all.
> 
> King doesn't just tell the story - he looks for the theme and builds around it.
> 
> And for anyone thinking that screenplays and books are different, well King's approach suggests they're not.



King says the exact opposite in his book _On Writing_. King has admitted his approach to theme is entirely in editing. He recognizes a theme after he's written the story in its entirety, and again states verbatim, that themes are "no big deal."



Newman said:


> You should start a thread on some screenwriting forums with the title: "Theme is whatever the reader sees it as being." You'll be confronted a lot more directly and with a lot more colorful language than I am using.
> 
> I don't think you appreciate just how crazy a notion it is to a large part of the community.



Screenwriting is not novel writing. They are not the same, nor will they ever be. I will not say one is better than the other, despite my fervently believing so, but to treat them the same is akin to treating vehicular repair the same as computer repair. Yes, they're both devices of a type, but operate in completely different ways.


----------



## Jeko

> If you can't get the principle of working around a theme from a simple Google search, then you don't need to study English Lit when you get to Uni, you need to study browsers and their search function.



I'm trying to work out if you like lowering the tone of discussions, or if it's just something that happens when you respond to someone who's asking for further clarification.

Either way, if your argument only comes from a simple Google search, then that's quite limited. I was thinking of throwing in the views of Pater on the relativity of literature in the 19th century, but talking about them requires more than just typing a few words into a keyboard and pressing enter. That places them a bit higher than this discussion.

I might make a new thread about them, then.


----------



## Morkonan

Newman said:


> I think the academic stuff is throwing you off.
> 
> There's no need for a "well presented argument" here - it's all well known and well understood.



There is absolutely a need for a "well presented argument" if you are trying to make one.



> You'll have a lot of scenes  - each one may say something in the side-effect-kind-of-way you're suggesting, but each scene and all the scenes will be constructed specifically to consistently make the larger point that is the theme.



No.

In cinema, that may be the case. You've got a couple of hours, max, to make a blockbuster. Twenty minutes and change if you're working the sandwich beat. But, a novel has far more "content" and much more complexity. There is a much wider canvas available. If you spend every scene in a novel banging away at the same theme, it's going to read like a ten hour episode of "Barney and Friends." No well-written novel is going to subject its Reader to ad nauseum presentations of twenty different-colored versions of the same theme. You can't treat the Reader like a preschooler unless you're writing for them.


----------



## EmmaSohan

He rides into town, marries her, and takes her on his quest. So there's a story of the events of the quest, interweaved with a story of them constructing a relationship starting from married strangers.

I don't want a theme in that! I don't want to say one part is more important than another, or there's something people have to do to have a good relationship. That would be like mapping the human genome and saying gene 14 was the most important. That would imply that mapping out genes 1-13 was  kind of a waste and that we can stop at 14. (Which would be exactly true if there was a specific goal, like finding the source of some hereditary disease.)

I found a message in that story! Yikes, I don't want a message, and I really didn't want that message. I wanted to be like Terry D -- I was just telling a story! But today I thought of a way to take the message out. I am happy.

In one book, I discovered that it had a theme and so I worked hard to take it out. I have been trying to get rid of the second theme in my current short story (without success).

So, to me, themes are dangerous. They aren't like humor or action scenes -- nice polite guests in my book. A theme starts to take things over, it changes how people see my book, in ways I usually don't want.


----------



## EmmaSohan

And yet... My main character does amazing things (no surprise), and interweaved with that is a story of how she got to be a person who could do that. That has a theme (or at least a repeating message,) -- we are what our friends give us. I like the theme. I'm not taking it out.


----------



## shadowwalker

Newman said:


> You can't just tell the story. At some point you have to think about the meaning and purpose behind it all.



Well, I've written quite a few stories without one iota of thought towards a theme. So, no, I don't have to think about the meaning and purpose behind it all.



Newman said:


> You should start a thread on some screenwriting forums with the title: "Theme is whatever the reader sees it as being." You'll be confronted a lot more directly and with a lot more colorful language than I am using.
> 
> I don't think you appreciate just how crazy a notion it is to a large part of the community.



I really don't care what people on screenwriting forums think. I'm not writing screenplays. I'm writing novels and short stories. So "the community" you mention is not one I belong to, or want to. They're entitled to their opinion - and _so am I_. Just one of those horrible things in life you'll eventually have to accept.


----------



## ppsage

Cadence said:


> I was thinking of throwing in the views of Pater on the relativity of literature in the 19th century, _...sic... _I might make a new thread about them, then.


If that thread had a reading list, what volume might head it?


----------



## Kyle R

EmmaSohan said:


> I found a message in that story! Yikes, I don't want a message, and I really didn't want that message. I wanted to be like Terry D -- I was just telling a story! But today I thought of a way to take the message out. I am happy.
> 
> In one book, I discovered that it had a theme and so I worked hard to take it out. I have been trying to get rid of the second theme in my current short story (without success).
> 
> So, to me, themes are dangerous. They aren't like humor or action scenes -- nice polite guests in my book. A theme starts to take things over, it changes how people see my book, in ways I usually don't want.



I think it's a unique idea (to intentionally remove theme from your writing), but I also believe it's risky. Theme provides unity, cohesion, and direction.

I think of theme like the key of a song. Usually, if a note is played out of key, it sounds abrasive. It sounds like a mistake. Done enough times, it sounds like the musician doesn't know what he's doing.

Readers, intuitively, get a sense of theme while reading. They develop a polarity, a mental compass, based on how the story is progressing. 

They identify what's good and what's bad. They decide what's right and what's wrong. 

They begin to get a sense for what the story is trying to say.

If you intentionally remove theme, you also risk losing this reader compass.

"This is a story that shows how love is worth fighting for," a reader will realize, in a story with such a theme. They will root for the character whenever she fights for love. They will feel concerned whenever the character encounters obstacles in that fight. They will cheer if the character conquers those obstacles in the end. 

The theme guides the reader, directs them. In a way, theme tells readers how to feel.

But in a story where theme is absent, mishandled, or intentionally avoided? The reader might find themselves thinking, "This is a story about.. um.. well.. I have no idea. I think it's about love, but maybe it's about guns. Or maybe it's about potato chips. I really have no clue. A lot of things are happening, but I don't know where it's going, or how I feel about any of it. I'm not really sure why, though. The writing seems good enough."

Yikes!

I don't know about you, but I'd hate for someone reading my story to think that way. 

Fortunately, I don't think this is something most writers need to concern themselves with. Generally, even those who write without theme in mind tend to recognize it in their work when it shows up.

Like a wave washing through the story, theme is a current that will be felt and recognized by most writers. Instead of resisting it, most will go with it. 

Often, this results in brilliancies. 

But _intentionally_ resisting that current? Intentionally abolishing theme? I think it's a fascinating approach (definitely a new concept to me) but I'd also be wary about it. 

In doing so, you might remove the very thing that your readers would have ended up loving the most. :grief:


----------



## shadowwalker

I think there's a difference between intentionally avoiding a theme and not worrying about a theme. In my stories, I don't think about a theme, and readers seem to find them (I say them because with a variety of readers comes a variety of ideas). But I don't _avoid _having a theme. I do think that writers can discover a theme (or start with one), and realize they don't want _that _theme - but I agree, I don't think writers should try to avoid one altogether. That's as much an artificial restriction as forcing themselves to use a theme just because they think they should, and neither story will be better for it.


----------



## Jeko

> If that thread had a reading list, what volume might head it?



I think it would more be a thread about relating a certain quote or view to our own perspectives on the craft; though anyone who can expand on the critic (I'm learning more about him as we speak) would be a great help.


----------



## Terry D

Newman said:


> You can't just tell the story. At some point you have to think about the meaning and purpose behind it all.



No. You. Don't. How many writers have to tell you they don't do this before you believe them? Your position on this is starting to look obdurate and more than a little foolish. You may believe it is best to focus on theme, and you have the absolute right to believe that, but that's not the case for every writer. Working, published, writers here have explained that. Denying their position does not negate it.



> King doesn't just tell the story - he looks for the theme and builds around it.
> 
> And for anyone thinking that screenplays and books are different, well King's approach suggests they're not.



King writes his first draft with no thought of theme, as Bishop mentioned. He finds the theme in subsequent drafts and works to enhance it. Most of his books are not built, or 'designed' around the theme (there are exceptions for him, as there are for most of us). It's been my position all along that theme exists within every story. Sometimes I will write a story with a strong idea of the theme. Sometimes I start a story based on a plot idea, or character, or even setting; hell, sometimes I start with a bit of dialogue that comes to mind. In those cases I don't worry about theme, because theme will be a byproduct of the story-telling process.

I don't care about screen writing techniques. I'm a novelist, and novels are different. Of course there are similarities, both are story-telling techniques, but each has different strengths and different constraints. Using screenwriting methods--including the focus on theme--may work well for some fiction writers, but it is not a prerequisite to success.


----------



## Terry D

EmmaSohan said:


> I found a message in that story! Yikes, I don't want a message, and I really didn't want that message. I wanted to be like Terry D -- I was just telling a story! But today I thought of a way to take the message out. I am happy.


 LOL If you want to be like Terry D (and I have no idea why that would be on anyone's wish list!) you would stop worrying about "taking out" the theme and be blissfully content with the knowledge that each story has a theme as a byproduct of plot and characterization. It is inevitable.


----------



## bookmasta

I'm surprised theme has carried on to such a lengthy debate. To me theme is a byproduct of the story itself, usually derived by the readers. So as to why there is six pages of posts on this topic has left me scratching my head.


----------



## Kyle R

bookmasta said:


> I'm surprised theme has carried on to such a lengthy debate. To me theme is a byproduct of the story itself, usually derived by the readers. So as to why there is six pages of posts on this topic has left me scratching my head.



Because some writers like to let theme develop on its own. Other writers prefer to choose a theme and write to it.

Some are more adamant than others.

To me, it's very similar to the whole "plotting versus pantsing" debate. :encouragement:


----------



## Terry D

Kyle R said:


> Because some writers like to let theme develop on its own. Other writers prefer to choose a theme and write to it.
> 
> Some are more adamant than others.
> 
> To me, it's very similar to the whole "plotting versus pantsing" debate. :encouragement:



The 'sides' will line up pretty much the same too. A person who spends a lot of time plotting a book will probably also concentrate on its theme during that stage. Another writer, one who lets the story grow organically (I dislike the term 'pantser'), will likely let the story's growth establish its theme.


----------



## Newman

Terry D said:


> Your position on this is starting to look obdurate and more than a little foolish.



You're being no less obdurate and foolish.



Terry D said:


> You may believe it is best to focus on theme, and you have the absolute right to believe that, but that's not the case for every writer. Working, published, writers here have explained that. Denying their position does not negate it.



Well, writing bought me a house. And I'm explaining this:

It's never been about whether you want to focus around theme or organically come up with the theme or whatever.

It's always been about this idea that "the reader decides the theme" - which is downright dangerous.



Terry D said:


> grow organically (I dislike the term 'pantser')



I can agree with that.


----------



## shadowwalker

Newman said:


> It's always been about this idea that "the reader decides the theme" - which is downright dangerous.



Why?


----------



## EmmaSohan

If you read Kyle's description of "theme" in the movie "Cars", it is a lot like how we handle the goal of a story. In a book -- the MC wants to get partnership in a law firm, but the reader can see this is a false goal and she needs a happier less-stressful life. Part of achieving the goal is just becoming aware of it. In "Cars", the MC doesn't want friends but the movie makes clear that he needs to get friends. Pretty much the same thing.

Then we get failures and successes and setbacks that move the MC towards the goal. (Guido and Luigi offer to help Lightning with his tires. Lightning says, "Pass. No thank you. Miss Sally gives Lightning a place to stay, and Lightning, though difficult to say, tells her, "Thank you." Miss Sally is pleasantly surprised. Lightning is beginning to appreciate having friends in his life.)

All that's missing from a normal story goal is that the internal goal has to be accomplished before the external goal can be accomplished. (Which sounds like an interesting idea to me.)


----------



## Morkonan

Newman said:


> ..It's always been about this idea that "the reader decides the theme" - which is downright dangerous...



I generally agree with that, as well. 

A story that is about what anyone wants it to be about ends up being about... nothing.


----------



## EmmaSohan

bookmasta said:


> I'm surprised theme has carried on to such a lengthy debate. To me theme is a byproduct of the story itself, usually derived by the readers. So as to why there is six pages of posts on this topic has left me scratching my head.



To me, that's like asking me why I want to learn about humor, why don't I just not learn anything and just write? Or romance, or action -- really, my books are better because I have learned how to handle both humor and action. In a way, the big question here is how you give meaning to your book. One of the ways is to give your book a theme. (And as I have oddly suggested, I sometimes remove a theme to improve meaning.)

And it helps me appreciate. I was thinking about achieving the inner goal before the MC can achieve the outer goal, and I appreciated Star Wars and Finding Nemo more. (The somewhat annoying final scenes now made more sense.)


----------



## shadowwalker

Morkonan said:


> I generally agree with that, as well.
> 
> A story that is about what anyone wants it to be about ends up being about... nothing.



That's not what's being said. It's acknowledging that, unless the writer is hitting people over the head with THE THEME, or insists they read his/her elaborations on What The Theme Is, readers are going to interpret the writing based on their own experiences. That's what readers do.


----------



## Pluralized

There's a big difference between hitting people over the head with it, and ignoring theme altogether in the interest of the story. I guess it boils down to what brand of literature we're talking about, whether fiction aimed solely at entertaining, like murder mysteries, romance stuff, mass-market paperback thrillers, or fiction aimed at having intrinsic value for an extended period. 

Seems to me, many of the books I've read that I can honestly remember the theme of, are classics, many of which literary works of beauty. Stories that purely entertain me as a reader, and are fast-paced escapism, I'm not so much looking out for theme. So applying the same logic as a generalization, it depends on what you're writing. And depends a lot on the ending, what kind of statement it makes.


----------



## Victor Anderson

A theme is, to put it very bluntly, the main meaning and plot points of a story. That is what you find, when you find a theme. _Crime and Punishment_'s themes were poverty, nihilism, and guilt.
When I develop a theme, I think about the main characters struggles, the circumstances, and events that I plan to have take place. That is assuming I didn't build the story around a theme. When I began writing my story, _Nos alio mentes, sine causa,_ I had intended its main theme to be the guilt of a criminal, depression, and the eventual insanity that plagues so many people in this world.
 I have already stated what I believe a theme to be, the main them and important plot points, and no. A theme, a book needs not. A book/story can simply share a, well, story without having nay themes. This is just my thoughts, a teacher would tell you different.


----------



## Morkonan

shadowwalker said:


> That's not what's being said. It's acknowledging that, unless the writer is hitting people over the head with THE THEME, or insists they read his/her elaborations on What The Theme Is, readers are going to interpret the writing based on their own experiences. That's what readers do.



Yes, they can interpret the writing based on their own experiences. That's something everyone does. I don't think that was what was being emphasized in that quote. Instead, there's a long-standing argument between the ideas of a Reader's interpretation of a work and the author's intent, or what could otherwise be generally acknowledged by two or more people as a correct interpretation, separate from _individual_ unique experience of the work by the Reader. What factors legitimize a particular interpretation of a work, the Reader's experience of it or the author's use of its components with focused intent? How much can we agree on, as individuals acting in concert, concerning what a particular work "says."

Imagine a situation in which the Reader is defined as being the final arbiter of theme. Imagine a Reader's friend asking them what a particular story was about. If they ask "So, what was the theme of "Goldilocks and the Three Bears"", what is the "reinterpreter" of the story's theme going to say? Heck, I dunno... They could say _"It's about love and loss, victory and defeat, and the meaning of life as defined by porridge."_ Would that be "correct?"

We do have to answer that question, don't we? I don't mean the question about "porridge", but, in this case, it's the question about whether an interpretation of a theme is "correct" or not. If we agree that there are themes and that they exist, we have to also agree that there are ways of identifying them. And, if we can identify them, we can establish that they have certain properties. Once that is done, not only can we identify a theme, but we can also establish whether or not a particular identification of a theme is "true." But, we can't say that "anything" can be a theme present in a story and that is what we would be saying if we maintained that identifying themes are entirely left up to the Readers. If "something" can be "anything" then it is "nothing."

Writing is communicating an experience to the Reader and these experiences are personal - They must be. No two Readers have the exact same "experience" of a story. There's all sorts of reasons for that, but the primary one is that we are not of one hive-mind. We're individuals and we have our own unique experience of the world. That means that there may be things an individual can identify in a story that has a unique application, something that they determine has a special meaning for them when the story's experience is applied in the much broader context of their life experiences. They may find something in that story, a unique association of different experiences, that gives them unique inspiration or insight. But, that is a personal experience and it's not one that is related to a broader definition of "theme." It may be that they gained insight or made an unusual association of things in the story that goes beyond any intent or even happenstance occurrence of intent made by the writer. But, that sort of interpretation of the story isn't something we can say is generally applicable to anyone else. It's not "theme." Does it have some sort of thematic quality to the person who experiences it, based upon their own unique interpretation? Sure. Can such a thing be agreed upon as a "theme" present in the story? No, not always. Could, if taken out of context, the elements identified by an individual Reader be used to purposefully construct a theme? Usually, yes. We are hard-wired for this sort of thing. But, that doesn't mean that everyone's wiring is the same nor does it mean that every identification of theme made by a Reader is "correct."

If someone states that there is a specific "theme" present in a story, can I decide if that is a true statement? If I can, then that means we have established a way to define "theme." However, if a Reader is the only true interpreter of theme and every Reader's experience is unique, as we all understand it to be, already, then I can not determine if someone's declaration of theme is true if it is unbound by the constraints of a _shared_ understanding of theme. And, if that was true, whatever a Reader declared to me was a "theme" present in a story would be irrelevant and meaningless.

One doesn't have to beat a Reader over the head in order to communicate a "theme." Most stories have themes built into them before they're even fully drafted. Some elements may come together in a story without the conscious effort of a writer in order to form a theme. That's a symptom of human experience, in general, and it's not something one can plan to avoid when writing about human experiences. Themes are shorthand for human experience and they're often going to find their way into a story, wanted or not. But, it's also possible to gently craft a theme into a story without beating a Reader to death with it. Most of the construction of theme can be done simply by writing about humans experiencing things.

If a Reader interprets a story based upon their own experiences, is that interpretation correct? Can we declare it to be correct? Can we falsify it?


----------



## Jeko

> It's always been about this idea that "the reader decides the theme" - which is downright dangerous.



Finally, something we can agree on. 

I write dangerously. So do many famous and aspiring authors. We're the ones who will make a difference. You can have your 'safe' views - a story has to be designed around a theme, a story only has one theme, the theme has to be the major message of the story,  etc. - and if they work for you, great. But I live for the thrills of literature; the chaotic, confusing nature of the monster that is the human mind and the way it interacts with reflections upon itself and others. That's what I'm often writing about, and that's dangerous, and that's why I leave theme up to the reader. So that their role in the manifestation of my narrative can be maximised.


----------



## shadowwalker

If an author - or anyone else - is going to think that there is a "correct" theme, then they must hit the reader over the head with it or by golly, those darn readers are going to actually think about the story and what it means to them! How dare they?!? Not to mention all those poor MFA professors who have the audacity to hold classes discussing themes in various books. I hope they got the author's memo...

In the end, it really doesn't matter one whit what the author intended as theme, or if they intended any - once the book is published, it belongs to the readers, and they will do whatever the hell they like with it. If the author can't accept that, they might as well shove that thing in the drawer and forget it.


----------



## Jeko

It's also a case of who your readers are. Saying that all stories are constructed around a single theme means that either your readers are all the same (which they're not) or only certain readers can access your theme (which is pretty stupid).

Take Shakespeare, for instance. A screenwriter of his day, he knew that many audiences would exist in front of his stage at once. Did he write some plays for some of them, and other plays for the others? Hardly; he wrote for both, as is, for instance, evident in the different layers of tragedy and comedy in Twelfth Night. Thus, he also wrote multiple themes into each play, accessible to the different audiences present.

Shakespeare is the prime example of a formulaic, prolific writer for the performance arts. Therefore, the idea that all stories are constructed around a single theme is contradicted by his plays that are clearly constructed around many.

Duality of narrative is also a good point to raise; what if there are two stories that make up the one? Must the two stories be constructed around the same one theme? Or can they each have their own major theme, and the relationship between the two themes be a powerful aspect of the overall narrative?


----------



## Kyle R

EmmaSohan said:


> If you read Kyle's description of "theme" in the movie "Cars", it is a lot like how we handle the goal of a story. In a book -- the MC wants to get partnership in a law firm, but the reader can see this is a false goal and she needs a happier less-stressful life. Part of achieving the goal is just becoming aware of it.
> 
> ...
> 
> the internal goal has to be accomplished before the external goal can be accomplished.


Yes! Now you're getting it, Emma! :encouragement:


----------



## Bishop

EmmaSohan said:


> All that's missing from a normal story goal is that the internal goal has to be accomplished before the external goal can be accomplished. (Which sounds like an interesting idea to me.)



Not necessarily; the external goal can be accomplished, and the character then realize their dissatisfaction and therefore, the internal goal. IE, all I ever wanted was to get into the law firm, but when I got there I realized I still wasn't happy.


----------



## Kyle R

Bishop said:


> Not necessarily; the external goal can be accomplished, and the character then realize their dissatisfaction and therefore, the internal goal. IE, all I ever wanted was to get into the law firm, but when I got there I realized I still wasn't happy.



Yes! It can happen in any order—the possibilities are endless.

The point is that the character begins the story being hampered by something negative (a belief, a way of thinking, or a way of living) that he/she needs to fix. Often the character doesn't even know it yet.



He's racist against asians, and can't forgive himself for killing an unarmed soldier in the past (*Grand Torino*). But his neighbor, a Hmong boy, is thrust into his life. In order to protect the boy from a violent gang, he needs to overcome his racism and find a way to forgive himself for what he did in the past.
She's a hermit author who is scared of taking risks (*Nim's Island*). But a fan of hers is stranded alone on an island. In order to save the girl, she will have to leave her apartment and go on the riskiest adventure of her life.
He doesn't believe himself to be anything special (*The Matrix*). But others believe in him, and their lives are at risk because of it. If he's going to save them, he will have to start believing in himself.

This isn't the _only_ way to write a story, but it's a powerful method that is taught and promoted in the world of screenwriting. I, personally, think it applies equally well to novel writing.

Hamper the main character with a flaw (a negative belief, mindset, or way of living). Use the plot (external conflict) to force the character to come face to face with their flaw. :encouragement:


----------



## Terry D

There is some value in comparing screenwriting to novel writing, but that value is not as great as many here seem to think, IMO. The finished product you see on the movie screen is, at the most, 30 to 35% the result of the work of the writer. Any emotion, any power, any _theme_ which comes through that screen is filtered through the interpretation of the actors, and, most importantly, filtered through the interpretation of the director. If that movie also happens to be derived from a novel, then the screenwriter has even less of impact on the film's theme.

On the other hand, a novel's themes are entirely dependent on the author's work (later an editor will get involved to some degree, but that's after the fact and seldom affects theme), and the reader's interpretation of it. Movie directors are renown for taking a screenplay and altering it to suit their own vision (talk about a reader seeing their own theme!). In a novel the author is writer, set designer, costume designer, director, special effects coordinator, gaffer, best-boy, and all of the actors. I'm not saying a novelist is better, or more skilled than a screenwriter, only that the jobs are very, very different, and comparisons between screenplays and novels are of limited value.

I've read a lot of books and I've seen many, many movies. I can only think of once when I said, "The movie was better than the book." I can think of several score of times when I said the reverse.


----------



## ppsage

While it's certainly true that theme development can be central to composing, I think writers can often write in a way which is thematically portentous without being explicit. I think writers can often do this without excesses of intellectual effort. I think this ability might be a component of writing talent, whatever is indicated by that disagreeable term. I think the character of the writer and of the work tend to shape the direction the portent impels its reader, perhaps as much as intention can. I think this shaping is more or less discernible, in the completed text, and I think certain generalizations about the character of the reader response could be drawn. I think there is in this process one of the secret attractions of art in general, however plebeian or however Gnostic the work happens to be.


----------



## Kyle R

Terry D said:


> There is some value in comparing screenwriting to novel writing, but that value is not as great as many here seem to think, IMO.



We might have to respectfully agree to disagree. 

Personally, I think understanding theme, and knowing how to use it when crafting a story, is valuable knowledge. 

Screenwriters talk about theme all the time. It's no mystery to them. It's nothing abstract or confusing or intuitive. It's a commonly taught element that comes with very specific advice on how to consciously apply it to your story.

I find this advice translates well when it comes to other forms of fiction. You can take the same knowledge and apply it to your flash fiction, short stories, as well as novels. 

Does that mean one _has_ to write like a screenwriter? No way! Write however you want to. Ignore theme if you want. Let it come about naturally if you find that works best.

Just know that, if you _do_ want to know more about applying theme consciously to your stories, screenwriting books are a great place to start. :encouragement:


----------



## Terry D

Kyle R said:


> We might have to respectfully agree to disagree.
> 
> Personally, I think understanding theme, and knowing how to use it when crafting a story, is valuable knowledge.
> 
> Screenwriters talk about theme all the time. It's no mystery to them. It's nothing abstract or confusing or intuitive. It's a commonly taught element that comes with very specific advice on how to consciously apply it to your story.
> 
> I find this advice translates well when it comes to other forms of fiction. You can take the same knowledge and apply it to your flash fiction, short stories, as well as novels.
> 
> Does that mean one _has_ to write like a screenwriter? No way! Write however you want to. Ignore theme if you want. Let it come about naturally if you find that works best.
> 
> Just know that, if you _do_ want to know more about applying theme consciously to your stories, screenwriting books are a great place to start. :encouragement:



Theme is no mystery to novelists and short story writers either. Theme comes from good storytelling regardless of the medium. My point is simply that in a movie there are far more contributors to the theme of the finished product than the writer. I'd sooner study how Cormac McCarthy developed his themes in The Road, than how Pixar did it in Cars. It's far more applicable to my writing.


----------



## EmmaSohan

Kyle R said:


> We might have to respectfully agree to disagree.
> 
> Personally, I think understanding theme, and knowing how to use it when crafting a story, is valuable knowledge.
> 
> Screenwriters talk about theme all the time. It's no mystery to them. It's nothing abstract or confusing or intuitive. It's a commonly taught element that comes with very specific advice on how to consciously apply it to your story.
> 
> I find this advice translates well when it comes to other forms of fiction. You can take the same knowledge and apply it to your flash fiction, short stories, as well as novels.
> 
> Does that mean one _has_ to write like a screenwriter? No way! Write however you want to. Ignore theme if you want. Let it come about naturally if you find that works best.
> 
> Just know that, if you _do_ want to know more about applying theme consciously to your stories, screenwriting books are a great place to start. :encouragement:




As Morkonan said, books are also longer than movies. (I tried to turn a 33K book into a screenplay and had to take things out.) So the ideas about theme might have to be adjusted to be used in a novel. (Morkonan: "If you spend every scene in a novel banging away at the same theme, it's going to read like a ten hour episode of "Barney and Friends.")


----------



## Newman

EmmaSohan said:


> the big question here is how you give meaning to your book



Exactly. You determine the theme of your story.

Follow that trail.


----------



## EmmaSohan

Newman said:


> Exactly. You determine the theme of your story.
> 
> Follow that trail.



Can I go themeless? I have a lot of meaning and messages. I don't want to say that one message is more important than another. I especially don't want one message pushing the others into the background.

So I don't build my book around one message. I don't intentionally repeat a  message, and usually they don't repeat.

I'm not theme-phobic. I love what TKent is doing, and someday I want to do what Kyle is describing. I worked hard on the theme of my last short story. When one message kept repeating itself, I let it, because it was a good theme for that substory. In one book, I say the deep theme-like topic.


----------



## shadowwalker

EmmaSohan said:


> Can I go themeless? I have a lot of meaning and messages. I don't want to say that one message is more important than another. I especially don't want one message pushing the others into the background.



Most stories will have a theme, regardless of whether the author concentrates on it or not. If nothing else, it develops with the story. Don't let a theme (or themes) get in the way of good story-telling and you'll be fine. As others have said, readers will be the final arbiters anyway.


----------



## Jeko

I understand that some writers don't want to leave theme in the readers hands, but that's inevitably going to be the case. You can't put a disclaimer after the contents page saying 'please don't think for yourself'; the reader will always act individually to the writer and to other readers. You'll get people finding what you didn't intend to put in there.

Writers can either try to fight this or welcome it. I prefer the latter, because it feels like I'm treating my readers more appropriately. But for something more streamliner, like commercial screen-writing often is, you might want to make things more definite. Either way, the joy of storytelling is that you'll always get more than you bargained for. There wouldn't be much point in spending years on a single story otherwise.


----------



## Morkonan

Terry D said:


> There is some value in comparing screenwriting to novel writing, but that value is not as great as many here seem to think, IMO. ..



The basics are the same, but the "specifics" are very different. We're in this thread arguing about "specifics." No wonder we're in a quandary between the two viewpoints. 

I've never seen a movie adaption that was better than a well-written book. I have seen a movie adaption that was better than a book that was not well-written, though. And, I've seen some very good movies that had very little to do with the book upon which they were based.

I think that only goes to further demonstrate that movies aren't books...


----------



## Newman

EmmaSohan said:


> Can I go themeless?



No. 

It's not just central to the story, it's what the story is  saying, delivered through the very specific construction of character,  plot, world etc.

All the great stories do it.




Cadence said:


> leave theme in the readers hands, but that's inevitably going to be the case.



Nobody cares what readers and literary analysts think.

We're talking about inserting meaning and message during the writing.


----------



## Jeko

> Nobody cares what readers and literary analysts think.



Put that under your blurb and see how many readers you get.

The whole art of writing is about what the readers think. You aren't going to have a good story unless it's communicated to them well enough. The process works like this:

Writer ---> writer's perspective ---> text ---> reader's perspective ---> reader. 

The end product rests with the reader. So if you consider them first, you're working towards what you should be working towards. How can you ever effectively convey a message without considering it's recipient?

Try not to say that 'everyone' thinks this and 'nobody' thinks that on a forum that celebrates the variety of its members; it weakens your perspective on an issue.


----------



## shadowwalker

Cadence said:


> Try not to say that 'everyone' thinks this and 'nobody' thinks that on a forum that celebrates the variety of its members; it weakens your perspective on an issue.



Not to mention credibility.

Writers are notorious for being annoyingly independent in their methods. The more people try to force them into neat little boxes labeled "You have to", the more broken boxes there are.


----------



## Newman

Cadence said:


> Put that under your blurb and see how many readers you get.
> 
> The whole art of writing is about what the readers think. You aren't  going to have a good story unless it's communicated to them well enough.  The process works like this:
> 
> Writer ---> writer's perspective ---> text ---> reader's perspective ---> reader.
> 
> The end product rests with the reader. So if you consider them first,  you're working towards what you should be working towards. How can you  ever effectively convey a message without considering it's recipient?
> 
> Try not to say that 'everyone' thinks this and 'nobody' thinks that on a  forum that celebrates the variety of its members; it weakens your  perspective on an issue.





shadowwalker said:


> Not to mention credibility.
> 
> Writers are notorious for being annoyingly independent in their methods. The more people try to force them into neat little boxes labeled "You have to", the more broken boxes there are.




After the work is completed, the theme, argument, point of view, conclusion and so on has already been set in the writing.

For example, the writers of _Casablanca_ are not concerned what you the reader / literary analyst interpret the theme to be.


----------



## shadowwalker

Newman said:


> After the work is completed, the theme, argument, point of view, conclusion and so on has already been set in the writing.



Sigh. Apparently you've never read the discussions here about themes, or listened/participated in live discussions of themes, and seen the wide divergence of opinions over any specific work. I don't know where you're getting your information (other than screenwriting groups, which are _not _novel-writing groups, and apparently don't offer their own citations for you to attribute), but someday maybe you'll understand that just because you believe it doesn't make it fact. Everything you say about themes being set by the author are directly contradicted by the way I write, by the way many others write. Does that _fact _not give you the slightest pause? How does one get to be that cocksure of these things? I've now gone past frustrated to fascinated. It's truly amazing.


----------



## EmmaSohan

shadowwalker said:


> Sigh. Apparently you've never read the discussions here about themes, or listened/participated in live discussions of themes, and seen the wide divergence of opinions over any specific work. I don't know where you're getting your information (other than screenwriting groups, which are _not _novel-writing groups, and apparently don't offer their own citations for you to attribute), but someday maybe you'll understand that just because you believe it doesn't make it fact. Everything you say about themes being set by the author are directly contradicted by the way I write, by the way many others write. Does that _fact _not give you the slightest pause? How does one get to be that cocksure of these things? I've now gone past frustrated to fascinated. It's truly amazing.



I agree with Shadowwalker in some ways, but not for theme.

1. When I write, I think about whether a message seems to be acquiring theme status. If I want the reader to think something is a theme, I write my book that way; if I want the reader _not _to think something is a theme, I write my book differently. I cannot always prevent someone from misunderstanding my book. But I try.

2. I agree with Newman that for something to be a theme, there has to be evidence in the book that the author intended to communicate that theme. Example: 'You cannot have joy with pain' occurs several times in The Fault in Our Stars, in prominent places. But the MC explains that it is wrong and calls it bullshit. Shouldn't that disqualify it as a theme?


----------



## Newman

EmmaSohan said:


> 'You cannot have joy with pain' occurs several times in The Fault in Our Stars, in prominent places. But the MC explains that it is wrong and calls it bullshit. Shouldn't that disqualify it as a theme?



Doesn't disqualify it. The MC can come round to believing it or it could be the end argument (which is not to imply that it's all about the MC, but lets just leave it at that for now).

Again, I haven't seen it. When I get a chance, I'll let you know what I think the theme is.

(the best way to understand theme is to reverse-engineer a lot of successful stories, which lets you see exactly what it is and the tools and techniques writers use for delivering it; obviously you have to experiment with writing around theme too).


----------



## InstituteMan

I usually try to write thoughtfully, but plenty of perfectly intelligent readers have missed themes I thought were obvious.

I sometime zip off a quick piece for fun or due to overwhelming inspiration; perfectly intelligent readers have found depth (and themes!) in these works that flatter me.

It seems to me if I write with a theme in mind and connect with readers, that's great. If I don't give theme a single thought but I still connect with readers, that's great, too. I am still experimenting enough that I don't have any magic formula, but I have enough experience to be pretty sure there isn't one. 

My advice: see what works for you. Try something new; stick with it if it works, try something different if it doesn't work. Themes are useful concepts, but they aren't the end all and be all of writing, either. The fun thing about doing this is that we get to play around.


----------



## EmmaSohan

Newman said:


> Doesn't disqualify it. The MC can come round to believing it or it could be the end argument (which is not to imply that it's all about the MC, but lets just leave it at that for now).



Exactly! We can look at the book and what John Green did, and maybe it will end up looking like a theme. But we are still looking at the whole book and can even argue about it. (In this case, there is only evisceration of that platitude.)



Newman said:


> Again, I haven't seen it. When I get a chance, I'll let you know what I think the theme is.



Good luck trying to make me happy. From one website about the movie: "With death comes sadness no matter when it arrives, but if we can live our lives to the fullest before that day comes and find joy in our time with others then we never really die as we will continue to live on in the memory of others." In the book, the MC hates the idea that Gus lives on on the memory of others. (Who do they think they are? God?)

And from Roger Ebert, "these iconoclasts (the main characters in the book) wouldn’t want their story to be told in such obvious and heavy-handed fashion." So the movie might have some theme (unfortunately?), but I am talking about the book.


----------



## shadowwalker

EmmaSohan said:


> 2. I agree with Newman that for something to be a theme, there has to be evidence in the book that the author intended to communicate that theme.



Then none of my stories have themes. Are they even stories then? What the hell did I write?!? Hmm. Readers sure seemed to like them - found those non-existent themes, too. Guess my whole audience is delusional.


----------



## Bishop

Newman said:


> Nobody cares what readers and literary analysts think.



Then never share you work. EVER. Because if you literally do not care what readers think? You're talking to a wall. That's it. You can design theme in your story, but if no one GETS that theme, then you've failed at the one thing you thought your story was doing. You want proof of why readers matter? Take a look at how _Mein Kampf_ was perceived by the public on the day it was published, versus 1944 when the Red Army marched into Auschwitz. Now, what Adolf was trying to say is meaningless, it gets viewed solely as a road map to insanity.

- - - Updated - - -



Newman said:


> When I get a chance, I'll let you know _*what I think the theme is.*_



I thought the audience didn't matter?


----------



## Newman

shadowwalker said:


> Then none of my stories have themes. Are they even stories then? What the hell did I write?!? Hmm. Readers sure seemed to like them - found those non-existent themes, too. Guess my whole audience is delusional.



Themes aren't whatever the audience sees. It's what the story is built around.

For example, in _When Harry Met Sally_, we know the theme is "Can men and women be friends?" You can see the story unfold around that question, because it's been developed around that question.

If someone said they thought the theme was "relationships are hard," that'd be incorrect. That's not what the writer developed the story around.

If you haven't built around a theme, then your story probably is best identified as themeless and probably some mixture of problem solving, plot and character.



Bishop said:


> Then never share you work. EVER. Because if you literally do not care what readers think? You're talking to a wall. That's it. You can design theme in your story, but if no one GETS that theme, then you've failed at the one thing you thought your story was doing. You want proof of why readers matter? Take a look at how Mein Kampf was perceived by the public on the day it was published, versus 1944 when the Red Army marched into Auschwitz. Now, what Adolf was trying to say is meaningless, it gets viewed solely as a road map to insanity.



I clearly said that, after the work is completed, what the reader / literary analyst interprets the theme as being is irrelevant. See the _Harry Met Sally_ example I've just given above. 



Bishop said:


> I thought the audience didn't matter?



Again, I said I'd help identify the exact theme the story was constructed around.

And it does have an exact theme. Not whatever anybody wants to see.


----------



## shadowwalker

Newman said:


> Themes aren't whatever the audience sees. It's what the story is built around.
> 
> For example, in _When Harry Met Sally_, we know the theme is "Can men and women be friends?" You can see the story unfold around that question, because it's been developed around that question.
> 
> If someone said they thought the theme was "relationships are hard," that'd be incorrect. That's not what the writer developed the story around.
> 
> If you haven't built around a theme, then your story probably is best identified as themeless and probably some mixture of problem solving, plot and character.



Well, again, you're using movies and I'm talking novels. But I'd like to know where you find out what the "real theme" is for these movies - whose theme do you accept: writer, director, actor, producer? Because I've seen each of those folks describe wholly different views of what a single movie's theme was about.

But yes, I have themeless stories with plot, character, action - all those things that make up a story. And my readers find themes that speak to them, which is what I enjoy. Readers who can find meaning in my stuff. The more readers can relate to my writing in that way, with that level of investment in my stories, the more successful I consider my work. Much better, IMO, than dictating what they should think, and definitely better than not caring what they think.


----------



## Jeko

> If you haven't built around a theme, then your story probably is best identified as themeless and probably some mixture of problem solving, plot and character.



But you said we can't go themeless.


----------



## EmmaSohan

shadowwalker said:


> But yes, I have themeless stories with plot, character, action - all those things that make up a story. And my readers find themes that speak to them, which is what I enjoy. Readers who can find meaning in my stuff. The more readers can relate to my writing in that way, with that level of investment in my stories, the more successful I consider my work. Much better, IMO, than dictating what they should think, and definitely better than not caring what they think.



Could it be that your readers find repeating messages that you were not aware of?

Or, could they be using the word theme as a fancy way of saying message?

What if your reader found a theme that you did not intend, and the reader didn't like the theme (and your book). Would you still be happy? I would probably be rewriting my book to avoid that. It's hard for me to believe you would not.

- - - Updated - - -

- - - Updated - - -



Cadence said:


> But you said we can't go themeless.




I think he just said that every _good _movie had a theme. This is opposed to the two main schools of thought (that every good movie has romance, and every good movie has a hot babe).


----------



## Terry D

You can write a vignette (maybe) without a theme. You can write a character description, or a bit of setting without a theme, but as soon as your narrative starts moving forward, developing, becoming a story, you will have a theme. Theme is in motivation. I don't care about how anyone wants to try and redefine theme with different verbiage. Theme is what the story is about. And if your story isn't about something then you are just writing to string pretty words together. That's not storytelling. If you don't have the reader in mind, then your writing is just a form of masturbation.


----------



## Plasticweld

Terry D said:


> If you don't have the reader in mind, then your writing is just a form of masturbation.



" I have never done that, but once while I was cleaning it, it went off."  


To me this is what  poetry is, a form of mental day dreaming.   


I am reminded of the line, from one of Woody Allen's movie's where one of the female characters complement him on his love making "I practice all the time by myself." 


Sometimes it's ok to string pretty words together!


----------



## shadowwalker

EmmaSohan said:


> Could it be that your readers find repeating messages that you were not aware of?
> 
> Or, could they be using the word theme as a fancy way of saying message?
> 
> What if your reader found a theme that you did not intend, and the reader didn't like the theme (and your book). Would you still be happy? I would probably be rewriting my book to avoid that. It's hard for me to believe you would not.



I write the best story I possibly can. I do not write with a "message" or "theme" in place, in my mind, with intent. What the readers find, what they call it, is for them. Once I put the story out there, it belongs to the reader and is their experience, not mine. They find _any _theme, it's not one that I intended - and if they don't like it, they don't like it. I don't write to order, and I certainly wouldn't rewrite a book because some readers found a theme they didn't like. And I would tell writers who do work with a theme not to rewrite because readers "misread" theirs, for the same reason -  nobody can please everybody.


----------



## Bishop

EmmaSohan said:


> Could it be that your readers find repeating messages that you were not aware of?



Absolutely, and they damn well should.



EmmaSohan said:


> What if your reader found a theme that you did not intend, and the reader didn't like the theme (and your book). Would you still be happy?



Yes. I'll warn you of something right now: There will be people that hate your book. For X reason, or Y reason, or this or that, they will _hate _it. To try and write your story into trying to please everyone because you want them to like you theme/story/idea is ludicrous. A) you won't be able to, and B) you're giving up what you want your story to be for them.

People will interpret your book in ways you never expected them to, I promise you that. That is not a bad thing in the least. People are colored by their own experiences and preferences when looking at any piece of creative endeavor, books, movies, paintings... I see a lot of depth and meaning in Escape From New York, because I love that film and its creative team. My wife thinks it's dumb, boring scenes of Kurt Russell running around East St. Louis. I see many themes in the work about individuality versus authority, thin lines between right and wrong, how Kurt Russell's hair should be in the Smithsonian... She sees John Carpenter whining about nihilism. We look at it differently because _we're different people_. If I had been in a concentration camp, Elie Wiesel's _Night _would have entirely different meaning for me.

So if people read my book and hated it, thinking I meant X in a place where I really meant Y? YES, I'd be happy. Because it summoned an emotional reaction. Positive or negative, my work resonated with them in some way. 



EmmaSohan said:


> I think he just said that every _good _movie had a theme. This is opposed to the two main schools of thought (that every good movie has romance, and every good movie has a hot babe).



I've never heard these two schools of thought. Or the first one, for that matter. Again, I've never even heard anyone aside from my drunk uncle telling me that "every good movie has..." junk. I like _The Thing_. He likes _Dumb and Dumber_. Trying to peg down a single element of storytelling that resonates with everyone is impossible. Trying to appeal to a lowest common denominator is even worse, if you ask me. If the goal is to make money and make everyone happy? Get out of writing and go become a masseuse. I hear the tips can be great.


----------



## Dictarium

Something I find rather interesting: Edgar Allan Poe hated didacticism in literature with a passion and wrote many essays on the subject. He believed it was the poet's (and writer's) job to raise questions, not give answers, and yet throughout his literature in an invariably pervasive way one can find threads of themes that're didactic in nature. From "The Raven" to "The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym" to "How to Write a Blackwood Article," one can find themes which convey apparent truths about the world, about literature, and about the self. Strong themes, too. Not flimsily drawn together threads which one may pervert into some sort of theme which is in no way actually present.

I love that, personally.

e: Personally, I love themes. I love the meticulous nature of literature. I love the planning and the over-planning and the insertion of allusions and the playing with figurative language and the setting up of themes and the linking of event-to-event to create a sense of poetic justice and poetic rhythm and the ability to dissect a work of fiction for weeks and weeks and the ability to write fifteen pages on fifteen words and polysyndeton (obviously) and style and mood and everything else related to the anatomy of Literature. It's my favorite thing about it. Narratives be damned; I like me a good theme.

It's sort of why I've drifted slowly from the idea of writing a novel (ha! as if I ever really tried that) to short stories to poetry. Poetry can be orchestrated from word to word and stanza to stanza and can have its meter, structure, scansion, and very being meddled with to bring out the greatest meaning possible. I can more effectively convey what's in my head when I can do it in both an explicit and implicit way with both the denotation of the words I write and the connotation of their form and function.

e2: 





Plasticweld said:


> "
> 
> Sometimes it's ok to string pretty words together!


 Again, this was Poe's view but I can squeeze themes and didactic meaning out of his poetry until the cows come home.


----------



## shadowwalker

Dictarium said:


> Again, this was Poe's view but I can squeeze themes and didactic meaning out of his poetry until the cows come home.



That's totally not allowed! :highly_amused:


----------



## Kyle R

Some of the best writers in the world apply theme to their stories.

Conversely, some of the best writers in the world allow theme to arise naturally.

Personally, I think both sides can learn from each other. I believe there's a middle ground, ripe with grand epiphanies about the art of story crafting, if only we would be willing to shed our own perspectives (if only for a moment) and step onto the other side of the fence to find it. :encouragement:


----------



## shadowwalker

Kyle R said:


> Personally, I think both sides can learn from each other. I believe there's a middle ground, ripe with grand epiphanies about the art of story crafting, if only we would be willing to shed our own perspectives (if only for a moment) and step onto the other side of the fence to find it. :encouragement:



I'm all for experimenting, trying new things, new methods, new ideas. I get my back up when someone says, "You can't do what you're doing." - and especially when they tell me my story won't be as good if I don't do it their way. That's pure BS.


----------



## Terry D

shadowwalker said:


> I'm all for experimenting, trying new things, new methods, new ideas. I get my back up when someone says, "You can't do what you're doing." - and especially when they tell me my story won't be as good if I don't do it their way. That's pure BS.



Those who say a thing cannot be done tend to be an irritation to those who are doing it.


----------



## Sunny

Terry D said:


> Those who say a thing cannot be done tend to be an irritation to those who are doing it.



I guess I have thick enough skin that I don't get irritated!


----------



## Bishop

Sunny said:


> I guess I have thick enough skin that I don't get irritated!



That's why your name is "Sunny"


----------



## Newman

shadowwalker said:


> But I'd like to know where you find out what the "real theme" is for these movies



With _Harry Met Sally_ the theme is well known. It's a thematic  question, the story's built around it, the writer told us. You can find  her discussing it in one of her many interviews.

If you turned up at her front door (sadly, she's passed away) with a  list of all the themes an audience thought her story was about, she'd  correct you and tell you exactly which one it was, because she wrote it.  There is only one - the one she wrote the story around. No other.



Kyle R said:


> Some of the best writers in the world apply theme to their stories.
> 
> Conversely, some of the best writers in the world allow theme to arise naturally.
> 
> Personally, I think both sides can learn from each other. I believe there's a middle ground, ripe with grand epiphanies about the art of story crafting, if only we would be willing to shed our own perspectives (if only for a moment) and step onto the other side of the fence to find it.



We're not talking about whether you apply it up front or find it organically.

We're talking about the idea that the theme is "whatever the audience sees it as being," which is plainly incorrect.




shadowwalker said:


> I get my back up when someone says, "You can't do what you're doing." - and especially when they tell me my story won't be as good if I don't do it their way. That's pure BS.



You're told that all the time:

You can't have a great story without character development.

You can't have a great story without plot.

You can't have a great story without a well developed theme.

Like that.

It's just that you think the theme is "whatever the audience wants it to be." Not at all. 




shadowwalker said:


> Well, again, you're using movies and I'm talking novels.



A story is a story is a story.

We are talking longer stories though, as in screenplay and novel length.




Cadence said:


> But you said we can't go themeless.



All great stories have a well developed theme.

I'm talking about great stories.



Terry D said:


> You can write a vignette (maybe) without a theme. You can write a character description, or a bit of setting without a theme, but as soon as your narrative starts moving forward, developing, becoming a story, you will have a theme. Theme is in motivation. I don't care about how anyone wants to try and redefine theme with different verbiage. Theme is what the story is about. And if your story isn't about something then you are just writing to string pretty words together. That's not storytelling. If you don't have the reader in mind, then your writing is just a form of masturbation.



I think here you're agreeing with me that the theme is not whatever the audience wants it to be.


----------



## Bishop

Newman said:


> A story is a story is a story.
> 
> We are talking longer stories though, as in screenplay and novel length.



Screenplays are FAR shorter than novels. I'm not talking about word count, either, I'm talking about scope. If you took the scenes and dialogue of most novels and tried to make a screenplay out of it, it'd be a very long film. Which is why so many people whine about the movies not being nearly as good as the books, because so much has to be cut out during the adaptation process. I'm not saying one is better than the other, only that novels very often have far larger scope and longer narratives.

I'm done trying to convince you about reader response on theme. The sad reality is that despite beating that horse to death, you're simply never going to accept it as even a possibility, which is tragic. There's a lot of depth of stories beyond one single intended theme. Some authors, God forbid, go in with two themes in mind, I know I did on my last novel. Others just ask questions, a-la Edgar Allen Poe (thanks, Dict!) and let the reader's perception go wild. It seems silly to me, for any storyteller to blind themselves to these possibilities and depths of narrative, and shut out all else. To ignore so much of the human experience captured in fiction for a single tagline of a morality lesson. You'll be locked into this mindset of one theme to rule them all... and we all know how that ended for Smeagol.


----------



## Jeko

> We're not talking about whether you apply it up front or find it organically.



No, Kyle is. He's moved past this matter and is refocusing the discussion on the scope that it was originally intended to have.



> All great stories have a well developed theme.
> 
> I'm talking about great stories.



No, you've been talking about all stories and that we can't write ours unless we centre them around a single message. You admit that right above your response to my post. That's what's been irking some members here; that you're saying there's only one mindset that will lead to strong fiction. You're saying that, in your opinion, they're inferior writers because of their view on theme.

Also, I find it confusing that you repeatedly reference When Harry Met Sally when the creation of that story was the product of two people, Ephron and Reiner, who were at odds with each other throughout: as an article in Entertainment Weekly puts it, 'Reiner believed men and women couldn’t be friends (because a man would always want to have sex with a woman), and Ephron believed they could (because she had male friends she wasn’t having sex with). They were both right, she says.' They each embodied Harry and Sally respectively in order to nurture this disagreement and turn it into fuel for the story itself. Ultimately, the story deals with both their themes, using a thematic question rather than a thematic statement.

The theme wasn't decided by a single writer; it was collaborated over, and there wasn't a common vision. As Nora puts it, 'movies generally start out belonging to the writer and end up belonging to the director'. So if you're going to support your opinion with a story, I'd choose one that doesn't get passed around from person to person. That includes most films.


----------



## Kyle R

Newman said:


> We're talking about the idea that the theme is "whatever the audience sees it as being," which is plainly incorrect.



_Notice that the stiffest tree is most easily cracked, while the bamboo or willow survives by bending with the wind.

Obey the principles without being bound by them. — _Bruce Lee


----------



## shadowwalker

Yeah, Newman, I'm also done with you and your obstinance. Good luck in the future, because you are _really _going to need it.


----------



## Newman

shadowwalker said:


> Yeah, Newman, I'm also done with you and your obstinance.



You're no less so, refusing to consider that theme is not up to the reader to decide. And constantly trying to pick holes in the pretty obvious point that it comes from the writer.

And your lot are driving the thread, not me.



Bishop said:


> locked into this mindset of one theme to rule them all...



Now, now...don't try and change it. I clearly mentioned that dual themes are possible. But they still come from the writer and not the reader.



Cadence said:


> refocusing the discussion on the scope that it was originally intended to have.



You're one of the ones that directed it towards this:



shadowwalker said:


> The readers let me know what the theme is





Cadence said:


> leave theme in the readers hands, but that's inevitably going to be the case.


----------



## InstituteMan

Let's discuss themes until the cows come home. Heck, if you are fond of bovine themes, there's even a Planet Money podcast just out about cattle rustling (spoiler: those cows don't come home). Let's not go all snipy at one another, though. It is perfectly okay to allow someone to be wrong on the Internet.


----------



## TKent

What? You mean everything on the internet isn't fact???? _OMG, this changes EVERYTHING..._


----------



## Terry D

Newman said:


> I think here you're agreeing with me that the theme is not whatever the audience wants it to be.



Not really. My position is that every book, or story, will have a theme, designed or not, and that the author has only marginal control over the theme the reader perceives. If the reader's perception aligns with the author's intent, great. But many readers will perceive something different, and that is their right as well as being inevitable. In the end, the reader (or audience) will interpret a work based on their own filters of education, experience, and personal philosophy.

It's also unproductive to try and make the point that 'great' stories are all built around theme. I could name a dozen stories I consider 'great' which were written with no thought of theme, but then you might disagree that they fit the definition of great. That's a quagmire waiting to be stepped in. If you want to talk about 'classic' novels, we could do that, that's a designation which is a bit more objective. In fact we wouldn't need to go any further than Charles Dickens. Most of Dickens' work was not designed around theme. In fact, since most of his work was serialized, he constantly rewrote chapters based on public feedback about the previous installment. He changed the story to fit the (Great) expectations of his readership, not based on theme.

My disagreement with your positions in this thread hasn't been so much about who owns theme -- everyone who comes in contact with a story has the right to interpret it as they wish (hence the phrase, 'perception is reality', our authorial abilities at mind-control can only go so far). Such perception may not be accurate, but it_ is valid for that reader_. My main disagreement is with your comments made early on that stories must be designed around a theme. Many are. Many are not. It's really that simple.


----------



## Dictarium

> _We're talking about the idea that the theme is "whatever the audience sees it as being," which is plainly incorrect._


The theme is whatever thing for which I can find sufficient evidence enough to prove to be present. You may not decide what it is. There will certainly be themes objectively not displayed in a text, but you cannot possibly account or all the ones a reader may find. However, if you write a novel which you intend to be representative of the idea that religion leads one to an unfulfilled life, and I find, in your text, evidence to the contrary, then the reverse can very well be a theme in the novel you've written.

Obviously you can't look at Lord of the Rings and find the theme that eating salmon makes one less human or taints the human experience because there is in no way sufficient evidence for such a claim. You can, however, find a theme that Tolkien in no way intended to be in his writing and, perhaps, seems, on the surface, to have no direct connection to the narrative so long as, as I say, you can find sufficient evidence.


----------



## Terry D

Dictarium said:


> Obviously you can't look at Lord of the Rings and find the theme that eating salmon makes one less human or taints the human experience



But Golem ate raw fish... I'm just sayin'...


----------



## Dictarium

Terry D said:


> But Golem ate raw fish... I'm just sayin'...


Ssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhh


----------



## EmmaSohan

To me, it borders on ridiculous that I can decide the theme of the Great Gatsby is anti-stalking.

And yet, I found that freeing. For the first time, I did not dislike that book.


----------



## Jeko

> To me, it borders on ridiculous that I can decide the theme of the Great Gatsby is anti-stalking.
> 
> And yet, I found that freeing. For the first time, I did not dislike that book.



I think the theme of 'chasing after love' (or something synonymous) is one of the strongest in the novel. Another great theme, far more in the background, that I encountered was sexual orientation. Did you think Nick was gay? The debate on the issue still rages on, and questioning why that debate rages on is fuel for, IMO, an even more interesting discussion - why does the reader have to know? Then there's the whole case for purposeful ambiguity, which overlaps with theme (ambiguity of theme can feel like the aforementioned 'evasion of theme' that I don't think many writers do). The scope for thought, from a single interpretation of theme, is endless.

Your comment is strong evidence towards why having an open mind about theme can improve your reception of a text. Sure, you'll be open to more bad ideas, but you'll be open to more good ones too.


----------



## Newman

EmmaSohan said:


> To me, it borders on ridiculous that I can decide the theme of the Great Gatsby is anti-stalking.



Exactly. It IS ridiculous.



Terry D said:


> It's also unproductive to try and make the point that 'great' stories are all built around theme. I could name a dozen stories I consider 'great'



Just reverse engineer the top fifty movies or something. You'll see what I mean.



Cadence said:


> I think the theme of 'chasing after love' (or something synonymous) is one of the strongest in the novel. Another great theme, far more in the background, that I encountered was sexual orientation. Did you think Nick was gay? The debate on the issue still rages on, and questioning why that debate rages on is fuel for, IMO, an even more interesting discussion - why does the reader have to know? Then there's the whole case for purposeful ambiguity, which overlaps with theme (ambiguity of theme can feel like the aforementioned 'evasion of theme' that I don't think many writers do). The scope for thought, from a single interpretation of theme, is endless.
> 
> Your comment is strong evidence towards why having an open mind about theme can improve your reception of a text. Sure, you'll be open to more bad ideas, but you'll be open to more good ones too.



That might be good for literature class. 

But the theme is the exact central idea the story is built around. And that certainly has one.


----------



## Terry D

Newman said:


> Just reverse engineer the top fifty movies or something. You'll see what I mean.



The top 50 anything is uselessly subjective, and books are different from screenplays. Some commonality, yes, but, as I've said before, whatever theme is present in a movie has as much to do with the director, and design staff as it does with the writer. But, let's talk about how fundamental theme is between books and movies. The classic movie Dr. Strangelove: or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love The Bomb, actually started out as a novel, Red Alert. It's original adaptation for the screen was as a cold-war thriller, but the director, Stanley Kubric, decided early on to take the film down the path of satire. So, the original concept, and its original execution as a screenplay, had completely different themes than did the finished product after the director got his hands on it. He obviously saw a far different theme than either writer intended. And the execution of that theme was done on-the-fly.


----------



## Dictarium

It is _not_ ridiculous. Themes do not need to be explicit and when they're implicit they do not need to be obvious or overt. You CAN find themes not at all related to the surface narrative and not at all intended by the author and make perfectly valid arguments therefor. It's not even terribly difficult. Your insistence otherwise is frankly backwards and outdated by quite some ways.


----------



## EmmaSohan

Cadence said:


> I think the theme of 'chasing after love' (or something synonymous) is one of the strongest in the novel....



I think the idea is that the theme isn't in the novel, it's in the reader.

I am not a fan of this idea, but if people will let me make up whatever themes I like.... one of the themes of _The Great Gatsby_ is that if you are the kind of creep that can leave a woman behind and still be sending her letters two months later signed with love even though you don't care about her, then your best friends will be amoral jerks who you don't even like.

I'm starting to like that book.


----------



## Newman

Dictarium said:


> It is _not_ ridiculous. Themes do not need to be explicit and when they're implicit they do not need to be obvious or overt. You CAN find themes not at all related to the surface narrative and not at all intended by the author and make perfectly valid arguments therefor. It's not even terribly difficult. Your insistence otherwise is frankly backwards and outdated by quite some ways.



You can see kaleidoscopic colored kangaroos and 500ft dinosaurs if you like. That doesn't mean any of it's valid.

But by saying that theme is "whatever the reader wants it to be" you're telling people that they don't have to think about it or figure out how it works.

That's bad advice and misleading.


----------



## Terry D

EmmaSohan said:


> I think the idea is that the theme isn't in the novel, it's in the reader.
> 
> I am not a fan of this idea, but if people will let me make up whatever themes I like.... one of the themes of _The Great Gatsby_ is that if you are the kind of creep that can leave a woman behind and still be sending her letters two months later signed with love even though you don't care about her, then your best friends will be amoral jerks who you don't even like.
> 
> I'm starting to like that book.



Yes. You are free to be as wrong as you want. If that's what you see in it, then it is a valid viewpoint _for you_.


----------



## Jeko

> I think the idea is that the theme isn't in the novel, it's in the reader.



I like to think that when a novel is read, the story goes inside the reader; so yes, I'd say the themes they draw from it are as much a part of them and their individual experience.

As Terry D said, you perspective of a text can be as wrong or right in another reader's eyes as you like, as long as it's _your _perspective. Not the writer's. Not Newman's. Not mine. Yours. 



> But by saying that theme is "whatever the reader wants it to be" you're telling people that they don't have to think about it or figure out how it works.



It's the exact opposite. By saying theme is always decided beforehand and that stories are always built around it, there is no point whatsoever thinking about theme while you read because it's already explicit; you might as well be thinking about the colour of your underwear.

The idea, if you've missed it over the last 8 or so pages, is to encourage certain themes through what you write, sometimes to the point that they are almost impossible not to find. Write a theme of sexual corruption into your story well and your readers will pick up on it; but they may also pick up on a theme of sin and redemption that you don't intend. You never thought about the interplay between the two themes and the components that create them - it came naturally, one theme perhaps the product of the other. But because of that, your success rises beyond what you thought the story could be capable of. Later, feminist critics identify your narrative as heroically utilising a theme of sexual repression to champion the powerless women of so-and-so and your novel is heralded as the next blah-blah-blah, and they therefore see a moral in the story that is way more relevant than the one you had thought of, and you didn't think any of it would happen.

Call them wrong if you want to; maybe their interpretations will lead to your story's downfall instead. But that's how literature works. That's how storytelling works. Readers come to their own conclusions, and a skilful writer manipulates the way they read to further the story's success. That's how it's done. That's what the 'great' writers do; they understand their readers. You don't.


----------



## InstituteMan

EmmaSohan said:


> I think the idea is that the theme isn't in the novel, it's in the reader.
> 
> I am not a fan of this idea, but if people will let me make up whatever themes I like.... one of the themes of _The Great Gatsby_ is that if you are the kind of creep that can leave a woman behind and still be sending her letters two months later signed with love even though you don't care about her, then your best friends will be amoral jerks who you don't even like.
> 
> I'm starting to like that book.



My biggest problem with _Gatsby_ is Fitzgerald overdoing the theme, at least as I perceived it. Pick any page out of that novel; I guarantee you the prose will be exquisite. Select any character, and you will find a depiction with depth and interest. The entire book is just soooooo preachy, though. 

As I took it (and without getting into the college essay mindset), the theme of the book is that the rich elites of America had eschewed the fundamental virtues of the American midwest, and we all should aspire to the simpler virtues of a simpler time (in my mind imagined by Fitzgerald) rather than material and financial advancement. Now, I am all for calling out the vanities of the wealthy, and I am by choice a midwesterner myself, but Fitzgerald applied that theme with abundant skill and no subtlety or wisdom. His nostalgia for a simpler time of midwestern values always struck me as the naiveté of someone who had never experienced true poverty. Yes, there are rich who deserve to be lampooned, but I can only fault Gatsby for thinking he would be accepted by the old money elite, not for wanting what and who he did.

_Gatsby_, in my mind, is an example of what happens when an author leans too heavily on theme and too little on empathy. Of course, Fitzgerald is remembered as a great of the Lost Generation, and I am a schlub posting on the Internet, so take my thoughts with a grain of salt.


----------



## Bishop

Cadence said:


> ...you might as well be thinking about the colour of your underwear.



Sometimes, when I'm reading, I start thinking about the color of my wife's underwear.

Then I have to go back and read that whole page again, of course.


----------



## Blade

InstituteMan said:


> _Gatsby_, in my mind, is an example of what happens when an author leans too heavily on theme and too little on empathy. Of course, Fitzgerald is remembered as a great of the Lost Generation, and I am a schlub posting on the Internet, so take my thoughts with a grain of salt.



I think you are right on that one. No one likes to be preached to and if the work is weighted too far in that direction it undermines both the credibility of the author as well as the interest of the reader. This all went down before I was even born and if it turned out to be 'lost generation' all for the better as far as I can see.:eagerness:


----------



## Deleted member 56686

InstituteMan said:


> My biggest problem with _Gatsby_ is Fitzgerald overdoing the theme, at least as I perceived it. Pick any page out of that novel; I guarantee you the prose will be exquisite. Select any character, and you will find a depiction with depth and interest. The entire book is just soooooo preachy, though.
> 
> As I took it (and without getting into the college essay mindset), the theme of the book is that the rich elites of America had eschewed the fundamental virtues of the American midwest, and we all should aspire to the simpler virtues of a simpler time (in my mind imagined by Fitzgerald) rather than material and financial advancement. Now, I am all for calling out the vanities of the wealthy, and I am by choice a midwesterner myself, but Fitzgerald applied that theme with abundant skill and no subtlety or wisdom. His nostalgia for a simpler time of midwestern values always struck me as the naiveté of someone who had never experienced true poverty. Yes, there are rich who deserve to be lampooned, but I can only fault Gatsby for thinking he would be accepted by the old money elite, not for wanting what and who he did.
> 
> _Gatsby_, in my mind, is an example of what happens when an author leans too heavily on theme and too little on empathy. Of course, Fitzgerald is remembered as a great of the Lost Generation, and I am a schlub posting on the Internet, so take my thoughts with a grain of salt.
> 
> All t



Actually in some circles Fitzgerald is considered one of the most overrated authors. I've read Gatsby, it was okay, but I've read better. As for the lost generation  there is one that I like a lot and it isn't Fitzgerald (or Hemingway for that matter). Still have to read Gertrude Stein for a true opinion on the lost generation in general. As for themes I don't think them so much as a reader. I'm just trying to appreciate the book.


----------



## Kyle R

Cadence said:
			
		

> Later, feminist critics ... see a moral in the story that is way more relevant than the one you had thought of, and you didn't think any of it would happen.


I think what Newman is trying to say is that, if you want to learn how to _consciously apply_ theme to your story (an approach which many professional writers use today), it helps to learn how to identify the correct theme that the writer applied. 

This way, you can see how the writer used that theme to craft their story.

Finding whatever theme you want, while perfectly okay as a reader, won't help you learn how to apply theme consciously the way the writer did (if you're aiming to write stories in that way, that is). 

For example, if we take a look at James Cameron's _Avatar_, we can find a lot of themes in it. Viewers can come away with many different messages from it. 

But there was a very specific thematic message Mr. Cameron had in mind, and he _consciously applied_ it in very specific places. The theme is stated on very specific page numbers, even. 

This was not an accident, but an intentional application. He said to himself while writing the screenplay, "I want to state the theme _here_, on _this_ page, for _this_ reason..."

Being able to recognize and identify those moments can help you learn how to apply theme consciously to your stories as well.

We can point out the exact moments where the Wachowski brothers consciously applied theme to scenes in _The Matrix_. These would not be guesses or estimations on my part, but actual spots where the writers deliberately placed the theme for specific reasons.

Being able to identify those places can help one see how one can consciously apply theme to a story to enrich it.

In Act 1, Neo, on a ledge, running from Agent Smith, complains, "Why me? I can't do this. I'm nobody." *Neo doesn't believe in himself.*

Fast forward to Act 3, and Neo, on a subway platform, instead of running from Agent Smith, turns and stands to fight.

Trinity asks, "What is he doing?"

Morpheus replies, "*He's beginning to believe*."

These are not accidental moments that just sprang up from the plot on their own. These were scenes where the theme was _intentionally applied _by the writers.

Learning to recognize those moments (the thematic moments that the writer(s) intended) can help one learn how to consciously apply theme to your own stories.

*If you want to, that is. *It's totally okay not to use theme if it's not something you want to concern yourself with. I think we've established that thoroughly in this thread.

But hopefully, my explanation has clarified why Newman is so adamant on stating that theme (in _this specific approach to writing_) cannot be considered whatever the reader wants it to be.

Yes, the reader can find whatever themes they want. That's true. And we should totally encourage readers to explore and find whatever themes they want! 

But, if you want to learn how theme can be _consciously applied_ to a story, then it helps to find the _exact_​ theme that the writer intended. That's what Newman has been trying to say. :encouragement:


----------



## Terry D

Kyle R said:


> I think what Newman is trying to say is that, if you want to learn how to _consciously apply_ theme to your story (an approach which many professional writers use today), it helps to learn how to identify the correct theme that the writer applied.
> 
> This way, you can see how the writer used that theme to craft their story.
> 
> Finding whatever theme you want, while perfectly okay as a reader, won't help you learn how to apply theme consciously the way the writer did (if you're aiming to write stories in that way, that is).
> 
> For example, if we take a look at James Cameron's _Avatar_, we can find a lot of themes in it. Viewers can come away with many different messages from it.
> 
> But there was a very specific thematic message Mr. Cameron had in mind, and he _consciously applied_ it in very specific places. The theme is stated on very specific page numbers, even.
> 
> This was not an accident, but an intentional application. He said to himself while writing the screenplay, "I want to state the theme _here_, on _this_ page, for _this_ reason..."
> 
> Being able to recognize and identify those moments can help you learn how to apply theme consciously to your stories as well.
> 
> We can point out the exact moments where the Wachowski brothers consciously applied theme to scenes in _The Matrix_. These would not be guesses or estimations on my part, but actual spots where the writers deliberately placed the theme for specific reasons.
> 
> Being able to identify those places can help one see how one can consciously apply theme to a story to enrich it.
> 
> In Act 1, Neo, on a ledge, running from Agent Smith, complains, "Why me? I can't do this. I'm nobody." *Neo doesn't believe in himself.*
> 
> Fast forward to Act 3, and Neo, on a subway platform, instead of running from Agent Smith, turns and stands to fight.
> 
> Trinity asks, "What is he doing?"
> 
> Morpheus replies, "*He's beginning to believe*."
> 
> These are not accidental moments that just sprang up from the plot on their own. These were scenes where the theme was _intentionally applied _by the writers.
> 
> Learning to recognize those moments (the thematic moments that the writer(s) intended) can help one learn how to consciously apply theme to your own stories.
> 
> *If you want to, that is. *It's totally okay not to use theme if it's not something you want to concern yourself with. I think we've established that thoroughly in this thread.
> 
> But hopefully, my explanation has clarified why Newman is so adamant on stating that theme (in _this specific approach to writing_) cannot be considered whatever the reader wants it to be.
> 
> Yes, the reader can find whatever themes they want. That's true. And we should totally encourage readers to explore and find whatever themes they want!
> 
> But, if you want to learn how theme can be _consciously applied_ to a story, then it helps to find the _exact_​ theme that the writer intended. That's what Newman has been trying to say. :encouragement:



Funny, but you are extracting a theme from his posts which he has not explicitly stated (what's been said is, all good books are constructed around theme, and the reader's opinion is irrelevant). The above is your interpretation. Valid. Perhaps even correct, but not what the writing actually stated.


----------



## Newman

EmmaSohan said:


> To me, it borders on ridiculous that I can decide the theme of the Great Gatsby is anti-stalking.





Terry D said:


> If that's what you see in it, then it is a valid viewpoint for you.



Terry D,
It's ludicrous to suggest that it's OK for anyone to think that the theme for _The Great Gatsby_ is anti-stalking.

You're giving awful, awful, awful advice.


----------



## Terry D

Newman said:


> Terry D,
> It's ludicrous to suggest that it's OK for anyone to think that the theme for _The Great Gatsby_ is anti-stalking.



That's your opinion. And you are welcome to it.



> You're giving awful, awful, awful advice.



I'm not giving advice. I'm not telling anyone what they should do, or how they should write, or how they should think about what they read. I'm saying no writer has the ultimate control of what the reader perceives. S/he can do the best writing they are able to, but that final evaluation of the theme is going to happen in the reader's mind. What the reader takes away is up to them. We've already established that John Green had a theme he wanted to pursue in _The Fault in Our Stars_, he's stated it clearly, but there is at least one of us who denies that theme. I don't have the hubris to try and tell anyone what they should get out of a piece of writing. As an author I may want them to come away with one thing, but if they get something else that works for them, that's not under my control.


----------



## InstituteMan

Newman said:


> Terry D,
> It's ludicrous to suggest that it's OK for anyone to think that the theme for _The Great Gatsby_ is anti-stalking.
> 
> You're giving awful, awful, awful advice.



Awful advice is when your doctor tells you to apply a cow dung poultice to your infected cut. Finding a theme different from what an author intended doesn't seem that bad in the scheme of things. Writing a story that inspires people to find more than you intended seems okay, too.


----------



## Mutimir

mrmustard615 said:


> Actually in some circles Fitzgerald is considered one of the most overrated authors. I've read Gatsby, it was okay, but I've read better. As for the lost generation  there is one that I like a lot and it isn't Fitzgerald (or Hemingway for that matter). Still have to read Gertrude Stein for a true opinion on the lost generation in general. As for themes I don't think them so much as a reader. I'm just trying to appreciate the book.



I wish I could see what those circles consider better so I could get a good laugh.


----------



## bazz cargo

Must...Not...Give...Up...The....Will....To...Live...

After analysing the situation I have come to the conclusion that this thread is so attractive because the word Theme breaks down as The Me. A writer's ego is never satiated. 


Don't some of you have a book to write?


----------



## Terry D

bazz cargo said:


> Don't some of you have a book to write?



Working on it even as we speak (almost).


----------



## EmmaSohan

I don't want to discourage someone from posting more in this discussion if they have something new to say, but this might be a good place to thank everyone who contributed to this discussion. I liked thinking and learning about themes and the different ways people use them, and it helped me.

It was very useful (but discouraging, I admit) to learn all the different ways people define themes. Some people think a theme is a message; some people think it is a topic. Some people think a message/topic becomes a theme when the book is structured around it; some believe it merely takes repetition; and I am guessing some people think a message can be a theme even if isn't repeated. Some people believe we can look at a book and argue about the theme; some believe theme is in the perception of the reader.


----------



## helium

Themes are BS. Just make some good writing and the money will flow into your wallet.


----------



## Jeko

> Themes are BS.



I like the theme of BS. It's what I hear when I listen to most political speeches.


----------



## Bishop

helium said:


> Just make some good writing and the money will flow into your wallet.



Not everyone's writing for that reason, though. Many writers really do want to have a message/theme in their work, and therefore, to them, themes are not BS.


----------

