In Defense of Good Stories

“Prisoner of Azkaban is pointless. It didn’t advance the plot.”

The words stung, but I couldn’t quite say why. Of course, the obvious reason is that it is historically one of my favorites in the Harry Potter series, and I flinched at such a condemnation. I found myself taking the bait, arguing that it was important to the plot. It introduced key characters. It revealed crucial backstory. I will hereby present why my arguing in that situation was pointless and unnecessary.

I’ve seen this plot-advancement talk applied elsewhere. If you’re like me, you’ve sort of burned out on the Marvel Cinematic Universe by now. Every time I sneeze there’s a new show, or an obscure origin movie that just doesn’t bring the magic like Captain America or Black Panther did. But, for a glorious 11 years, it was a nonstop thrill ride of battles, character introductions, crossovers, and exhilarating build-up. From Iron Man in 2008 to Avengers: Endgame in 2019, Marvel released 22 movies, each providing a unique, interesting addition to the story. Well, here we meet the same criticism: I’ve heard it argued that most of the movies “didn’t matter,” because they didn’t significantly push the arc toward its ultimate resolution. But, what sort of logic is that? It was fun, bro. We’re not building a level 1 trauma hospital here. It’s okay to meander a little. This isn’t a sprint, nor is it a marathon. It’s a walk in the woods. No need to rush.

We seem to have mistaken plot for story. If the story is the forest, and the notable plot advancements are the trees, then we are very much missing the forest for the trees. I recently read Stephen King’s take on the matter. In his words, “Plot is, I think, the good writer’s last resort and the dullard’s first choice. The story which results from it is apt to feel artificial and labored.” From what I understand, his contention is that characters, situations, and themes drive a good story, and the rigidity of plot stifles it.

King is arguing against writing from a plot-first standpoint, and I am arguing against consuming from a plot-first standpoint. I think these go hand-in-hand. If we focus too much on the structure and advancement of a tale, we ignore the beauty of the characters, the motifs, and the imagery.

Why do we do this? Well, let’s look at our surroundings. If I want to know something, I can whip out my phone and find out within seconds. If I desire something, I can order it from Amazon and have it, sometimes before the sun even sets. If I watch a video on social media, I see and hear everything the creator intends for me to… in under 30 seconds. Quick solutions, instant gratification, and short-form video are winning right now. Our attention spans are losing. This seems to be the same reason college students are telling their professors they can’t finish a book.

So, when we’re given a story that takes place across seven big books, or 22 movies, we want that to be as short as it possibly needs to be. We could’ve watched 4,500 TikToks in the time it took to read this wretched epic of character-development. No room for frills like that.

We hustle and bustle enough in this life. Let’s not do the same with our beautiful stories. Going forward, when I hear these indictments, I won’t take the bait anymore. I won’t try to argue that they matter to the plot, because, while plot matters, it doesn’t matter as much as our short attention spans want it to. I don’t go to Six Flags to advance the plot of my life. I go because it’s fun. Apply a little bit of that logic to the stories you read. And yes, taken to the extreme, we’d get a 500-page Harry Potter book about his summer learning to garden with Aunt Petunia, or we might get a 2-hour movie about what Ant-Man did during COVID. So, as is often the case, there’s a balance to this. It just seems that our culture of impatience has pushed us too far out of that balance, and we’re missing the forest because of it.

Give yourself time to walk in the woods.

-John