The Second Act Challenge

Writing the second act of a story is often the writer’s biggest challenge. It’s where the rubber hits the road in terms of plot development, character growth, and philosophical depth.

And it is, by far, the longest segment of the script.

On the other hand, it’s also the place where the subplots and subplot characters come out to play. Along with the challenge of substance and length comes immense creative freedom. A character can emerge from the shadows, ignite conflict, turn the world upside down, and vanish.

Or they can stick around and become a core part of your ongoing story.

But are subplots simply an expression of your wildest imagination, or do they have a functional purpose as well?

Yes.

Subplots have a crucial task

Well-constructed subplots leave the audience feeling that the story has explored all sides of an argument, not simply assumed that the audience will agree with the writer if they shout loudly enough.

They not only keep the story moving, but also enrich it.

Of course, many films are crusading films, setting out to prosecute a strong and definite statement. However, to give your story a strong and substantial second act, even these stories need open questions with multiple persuasive answers.

Here are a couple of approaches to giving your subplots focus and meaning. They are, in a sense, two sides of a coin.

They are Duelling Aphorisms and Double-sided Questions.

Both are ways of starting your story with a philosophical question, and then seeing where the question takes you.

Both require you, the writer, to be open to what the story throws up. Not simply making a pre-ordained statement.

The Double-Sided Question

Make sure that your philosophical question is open-ended, with at least 2 strong sides.

You can often express these as ‘Is it better to… or…?’, or ‘Should I… or …?’

In a version you may recognise, ‘Whether ‘tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take arms against a sea of troubles, and by opposing, end them?’

Some examples:

• Is it better to let yourself fall in love, or is the pain of rejection too much of a risk?

• Should you protect your children from every danger, or do they need to make their own mistakes to grow up?

• Is patriotism a noble virtue, or merely the last refuge of the scoundrel?

• Should you own knowledge, or is knowledge shared knowledge gained?

Then you make sure that each subplot makes the case for one side of the question, so you get depth and balance across all of them.

Duelling Aphorisms

Another way of getting to the same place is through oppositional aphorisms.

Many common aphorisms have an opposite, or even 2 or 3 opposites. These contradictory universal truths can be a powerful starting point for a story.

• ‘He who hesitates is lost’ vs ‘Look before you leap’

• ‘At all costs, be yourself’ vs ‘Adapt or Die’

The fact that contradictory aphorisms exist reflects a greater truth – sometimes in life it’s not so easy to know the best thing to do. And that’s perfect fodder for the philosophical question at the heart of your story. It captures a genuine universal dilemma.

Sometimes aphorisms that don’t seem oppositional in a general sense are oppositional in the right circumstances.

For example, ‘Honesty is the best policy’ doesn’t seem to be the opposite of ‘Blood is thicker than water’ – unless your story is about a family where a secret at the core of the family is eating away at trust.

If you can find a pair of duelling aphorisms that capture the philosophical question your story is asking, then you make sure that each of your subplots makes a different argument for one of these duelling aphorisms.

Can your core questions evolve?

Of course they can. Just as it’s better to discover your ending (and hence the meaning) rather than impose it, as your story develops you will naturally refine and refocus your questions.

Let them grow up, but don’t lose sight of them.

The skinny

• Can I articulate my core question as opposing aphorisms, or as a double-sided question?

• Is each subplot driven by one of the oppositional aphorisms, or one side of the question?

• Does each subplot show both the benefits and the costs of that position?

Going Deeper

If you want a deeper dive into how philosophical questions shape structure across the whole story, with examples — including crusading scripts — see Creating Meaning Through Subplots.