Chapter III: Plot Development

Simple Plots

To develop our germ-idea into a full-fledged plot or skeleton upon which to build our story, we must first analyze it carefully, use a little shrewd deduction, supply parts that are lacking, and then write the scattered parts into a lucid and logical whole. Patience, a careful survey of a story-idea’s many possibilities, and a methodical summing up of the conclusions drawn from our analysis will usually bring about the desired result.

If our mood is right and free rein is given to the imagination, it is seldom difficult to analyze a basic idea, provided it is striking or original enough to stir our sluggish minds to action; but it is sometimes hard to choose from the different fields into which our speculations are wont to lead us. The writer can only rely upon his best judgment in picking a way through the maze of possibilities that opens up before him and be guided by his own individual taste.

In explaining our manner of analytic procedure, we will confine ourselves at first to simple story-ideas, so the writer can get a firm grasp on the methods employed before he sets out to explore the labyrinths of the complicated plot. By simple story-ideas we mean embryo plots that follow the line of least resistance in unfolding. From these ideas are evolved the plots that form the basis of most short stories less than three thousand words in length. The simple plot is all that the name implies. It is usually direct in movement, and has no complications to harass the writer and distract the reader. Opening with either the inciting motive or the first incident of plot development, it marches forward over a straight road until it reaches its goal, the climax.

With a copy of the Chart for Plot Construction before us, let us now select a germ-plot and see exactly what we can do with it. We select the following typical plot-germ from one of our note books:

“Bride and groom leave home in dead of night, bride without wraps,
groom without hat or coat. They leave a red light burning at one of
the front windows. They never return.”

What does this suggest? When we glance at the Chart there instantly leaps into mind the following: Action--mystery; Setting--city; Atmosphere--gruesome; Mood--hate. We already have our principal characters--at least, enough for the present. A title also suggests itself: “The Red Flame.”

We now wish to analyze this idea, and, reading it over again, we find that these questions stare out at us:

1. Why did the bride and groom leave home in the dead of night
without their wraps?

2. Why did they never return?

3. Why did they leave a RED light burning at one of the front windows?

4. Where did they go?

5. (a) Who saw them leave? (b) Who first saw the red light? (c) Who
first entered the house? (d) Who did he or she find?

6. What would be a logical outcome of the affair?

After considering the matter carefully, we might reply:

1. Because they feared some person or some THING.

2. Same answer.

3. Probably as a signal.

4. To a foreign port, or to their death.

5. (a) Immaterial. (b) Same answer. (c) The man--or woman--for whom
the signal was intended. (d) Death.

6. The logical conclusion we draw from the foregoing is that when
the man--or woman--who entered the house did not reappear within a
reasonable length of time, the police batter down the door and find
the entrant lying on the floor dead.

This being the case, we naturally want to know:

1. Why was the man--if it was a man--killed? and

2. The manner in which he met his death.

Reading over the analysis again, we would say:

1. Because of the fear the bride and groom had for him, and as they
were absent,

2. They must have left some trap for him to walk into.

Now, before we can draw up a working plot based on this analysis, it will be necessary for us to select from the material offered the four pivots around which a plot revolves--the opening, the crisis, the crucial situation, and the climax. The inciting motive is found in the red light the bride and groom left burning at the window; the crisis would seem to be the appearance of the police on the field of action; the crucial situation when the man--or woman--enters the house; and the climax when the police batter down the door.

Having settled upon these important points, we find it an easy matter to fill in between them, and at once draw up a brief working plot, using the OUTLINE FOR PLOT DEVELOPMENT as our guide, as follows:

THE RED FLAME

(Inciting motive) A red light is seen burning in the window of a
house and causes some comment throughout the neighborhood. (Incident
of plot development) Man declares he saw the bride and groom who
had been occupying the house leave the night before without their
wraps, as if in great haste. (First moment of suspense) Stranger, who
had been hanging around the neighborhood for the past several days,
walks up to house, peers through the window, and walks rapidly away
again. (Cause of crisis) Police are notified. (Crisis) They cannot
enter the house as the doors and windows are locked and barred.
(Second moment of suspense) One policeman goes for an ax with which
to batter down the door, the other around to the back of the house.
(Crucial situation) Stranger returns, walks rapidly up to the house,
inserts key in lock, enters house, locks and bars door after him.
(Cause of climax) A pistol shot is heard in the house and the red
light goes out. (Climax) Police batter down the door. (Denouement and
conclusion) Find the man lying on the floor with a bullet wound in
the center of his forehead, and the following letter written in blood
grasped in his hand:

“We saw you pass the house this evening and know that you have
found us at last. You enter here thinking you will find the ?, but
instead you find--Death. For as you pick up this letter from the
table you will release a string connected to the trigger of the gun
pointed at your head, and as you die, The Red Flame dies with you.”

Seems simple enough, does it not? And it is simple, once we have a grasp on the methods to be employed. It is simply a matter of analysis and of elimination. Of course the writer has to draw freely upon his imagination, for it takes something more than determination to make a success at the writing game. It is the technicalities of invention, generally, that bother the literary aspirant.

Let us now build up another simple plot--simple, but one that seems at first glance a little more difficult than the one we have just constructed. Suppose we select as our central idea a newspaper heading: “Girl Stabs Self, in Wedding Gown.” This gives us a single crisp idea from which we are to build our plot.

Now, having let the idea percolate through our minds, we naturally want to know:

1. Where did the girl stab herself?

2. Why did she stab herself?

3. When did she stab herself?

4. What sort of weapon did she use?

Offhand we would say:

1. (a) A home, (b) in a cab, (c) or before the altar of a church
during the wedding ceremony.

2. Because she had just found out something in her intended husband’s
past life that promised to wreck her happiness, or (b) because she
feared he would find out something in HER past life which she wanted
to conceal, or (c) because she was temporarily insane.

3. On her wedding day.

4. (a) Stiletto, (b) hat pin or (c) some instrument she found in the
church.

Selecting the most dramatic situations from the foregoing, we find that the girl stabbed herself with a dagger before the altar because she feared the groom was about to discover some dark deed in her past life.

So far so good, but

1. What did she expect the groom to find out?

2. Why did she go as far as the church altar before carrying out her
terrible design?

Her motive must have been a great one; therefore we are led to believe that

1. Perhaps she was a Magdalene, or was already married, and

2. She feared that her husband (as the marriage-angle seems the safer
of the two possibilities) was about to reveal himself.

But, if this was the case,

1. Why, if she already had a husband, was she about to be married
again?

2. Why did she not tell the groom her secret instead of trying to
kill herself? and,

3. Why did she stab herself before the altar?

Doubtless because

1. She had believed her husband was dead; yet

2. Hearing that he was still living she had, while not believing the
rumor, prepared herself for emergencies.

3. Because she saw her husband in the congregation assembled for the
wedding.

What, then, would be a logical conclusion to such a situation? Well, as the plot is a little “heavy” and we want to wind it up with the happy ending, we would say that after the bride-elect stabs herself, the groom, who had seen a man in the congregation leap to his feet in an excited manner and rush from the church just before the bride-to-be plunged the stiletto into her breast, follows the man down the street, sees him killed by a street car or in some other plausible manner, and returns to the church to find his future wife still living.

So far everything is satisfactory. But how are we going to open our working plot? If we open with the inciting motive, it will be necessary for us to do considerable preliminary skirmishing before we can get into the action of the story we are planning to write. In this case, therefore, it would seem to be advisable to skip the inciting motive and open the plot with the first incident of plot development which, without a doubt, is found in bride-elect’s arrival at the church. This brings us to the crisis, which would seem to be when the girl pulls the dagger from the folds of her dress. The crucial situation is found in the act of attempted self-destruction; and the climax, of course, is when the girl’s lover sees the husband killed.

Based on these conclusions, we now draw up the following foundation for our story:

(Incident of plot development) Bride-elect enters church on her
father’s arm and walks towards the altar where the groom is waiting.
(First moment of suspense) Bride suddenly turns pale and reels back.
(Cause of crisis) A man in the congregation leaps to his feet and
cries out. (Crisis) Girl pulls stiletto from the bosom of her dress.
(Second moment of suspense) Man rushes from the church with the cry
“That woman is my wife!” (Crucial situation) Girl plunges dagger into
her breast and falls back into the groom’s arms. (Third moment of
suspense) Groom swears vengeance and places the girl in her father’s
arms. (Cause of climax) Benedict-to-be rushes from the church in
pursuit of husband. (Climax) Sees him run over by street car and
killed. (Denouement and conclusion) Returns to find future wife, who
is only slightly injured, reclining on a lounge, reading a telegram
from a detective agency: “Positive proof that your husband died in
South America two years ago.”

There we have the plot, and by adding the telegram (probably based on mistaken identity) we not only relieve the plot of some of its “heaviness” but wind it up with an unexpected twist that gives the reader much food for thought.

* * * * *

For our next analysis, we will select a newspaper heading offering us a broader field than the one we have just developed. The following, which seems to offer unusual possibilities, was actually clipped from a daily paper: “Convict Wins V. C.; Marries Red Cross Nurse.”

After a glance at our Chart, we would “place” this plot-germ as follows: Action--war; Time--during world war; Setting--this will depend upon developments; Characters--we will start off with the one man and the girl; Atmosphere--doubtful; Mood--love.

Now, first of all we want to know something about this convict with such an unique record. Therefore, our first task is to find out:

1. Who was he?

2. Was he a soldier?

3. If so, how could a convict enlist in the army?

4. How did he win the Victoria Cross?

It would seem very likely that

1. He was a notorious highwayman or cracksman.

2. Yes.

3. Under an assumed name.

4. Well, suppose we say he saved his regiment after it had been
trapped by the enemy.

Very well; but, if this man was a desperado, it naturally follows that he must possess all of a desperado’s unlovely characteristics. Therefore,

1. How could he change his personality to such an extent that he
could win the love of a refined girl?

2. Where did he meet this Red Cross nurse? and where did their
romance develop?

3. How did she learn of his past (for of course she must know his
true history)?

A rather dramatic situation occurs to us. We would say that

1. Because of a slight pressure on his brain, caused by an injury
received in action, his memory up to that instant is blotted out,
and because of this his whole personality has changed. (It is a fact
that this has actually happened many times.)

2. In the hospital where she nursed him through his illness.

3. Suppose we say he revealed his past to her while delirious,
following an operation to restore his memory by relieving the
pressure on his brain.

All right. Now we want to know:

1. Was the operation successful?

2. If so, what happens?

3. What would be a logical conclusion to the affair?

And in reply:

1. It would be easier for us to say “no,” but more interesting for us
to say “yes.” Therefore,

2. After the operation the man reveals his true character to the
girl whom he fails to recognize, and she, nearly beside herself with
grief, decides upon a daring course of action to save the man for
herself and FROM himself. When he goes to sleep she places her finger
over the spot on his head where the pressure has been relieved and
presses it gently (the surgeon having warned her not to let anything
touch this spot). And lo,

3. When he regains consciousness it is found that the operation has
been a failure, and the soldier is the same happy, cheerful, refined
lover the girl has learned to love.

This analysis is fairly broad, and as the material offered seems to call for a plot of a more leisurely type than the one we last evolved, it might be well for us to open our working plot with the inciting motive. This, it appears to us, is found in the surgeon’s decision to operate on the afflicted soldier. Very good. The crisis? The operation itself. The crucial situation? When the soldier regains consciousness in the character that was his before his mind became affected. The climax, of course, is when the girl renews the pressure of that part of the unfortunate man’s brain upon which the surgeon operated.

We now draw up a working plot:

(Inciting motive) Soldier is informed by his sweetheart-nurse that
he is to be operated on within the hour. (First incident of plot
development) They discuss the matter and its many possibilities.
(First moment of suspense) Surgeon says operation may fail. (Second
incident of plot development) Questions soldier, bringing to light
his unique record back to the time of his injury. (Cause of crisis)
He is wheeled to operating room. (Crisis) Operation, the nurse
assisting. (Second moment of suspense) He is brought back to his
room, still under the influence of ether. (Crucial situation) He
regains consciousness in his true character and, not knowing the
girl, upbraids her in harsh language, and tells her he is a famous
highwayman, of whom she has heard. (Cause of climax) The girl
decides there is but one thing for her to do: THE OPERATION MUST BE
A FAILURE. (Climax) Girl touches “danger” spot on sleeping soldier’s
head. (Denouement and conclusion) He regains consciousness and, the
operation failing because of the pressure the girl applied to his
head, proves to be the tender lover she has always known.

There are great possibilities to the above plot, especially if the writer is equipped to deal authoritatively with the dual-personality angle; but the author who knows little about the mechanism of the human mind, would do well to side-step the psychological lead and follow some other line of reasoning in working up the plot. He would find the experiment not only interesting but instructive, and if he has his proper share of creative ability, he should be able to work out a plot which, when compared with the one we have just unfolded, would show no signs of having sprung from the same basic idea.

PLOT DEVELOPMENT (CONCLUDED)

Complicated Plots

The complicated plot in its development calls for a fertile imagination and a natural aptitude for mental gymnastics. It usually proves to be the despair of the writer deficient in creative ability, and even the more imaginative author sometimes finds himself hopelessly entangled in its meshes. The simple plot, as we have shown, never swerves from a straight line; the complicated plot, on the other hand, may lead us off into divers by-paths, each ending in a cul-de-sac, from which the writer has to blaze a way back to the main idea. The difference between the two types of plots is traceable to the basic idea. Methods of development are the same in both cases. The thing the writer has most to fear in unfolding a complicated plot is the danger of becoming lost in one or more of the many side-issues that make this type of plot what it is, and until he becomes familiar with its intricacies, he should move slowly and never let the major idea remain long out of sight. Complicated plots form the basis of most mystery and adventure stories, and in fact, the majority of other stories of more than three thousand words in length.

For our first analysis, let us take the following sentence, or rather, part of a sentence, extracted from a recent book-length portrayal of life in the West Virginia mountains: “Melissa took the blood-oath ... and swore to shoot Blaze on sight.” A promising plot nucleus, because it is atmospheric.

We now glance at the Chart for Plot Construction and choose the most suitable field for the growth of this germ-plot, which is, we believe, as follows: Action--adventure; Time--present; Setting--mountains; Characters--uncertain; Atmosphere--doubtful; Mood--doubtful, but possibly hate or revenge.

As we want our characters to be original, we at once change the girl’s name to Dawn, and the man’s name to Jerry, and begin our probe by asking:

1. What is a blood-oath?

2. Who is Jerry?

3. Why should Dawn desire his death?

Having consulted one of our mountaineer friends in regard to the first question, we promptly reply:

1. A vendetta sworn by a feudist against another feudist of a hostile
clan.

2. Dawn’s lover.

3. He may have betrayed her trust, or perhaps, duelled with and
killed one of her kinsmen.

Excellent! It appears that our principal characters are feudists and are identified with different factions. As we like plenty of action in our plots, this sounds promising. But to proceed with our inquiry:

1. Did Jerry really kill Dawn’s kinsman (the duel appearing the most
promising of the two possibilities)?

2. If not, why has the finger of guilt been pointed at him?

After due reflection, we would say:

1. No. (The slain man is Dawn’s kinsman, let us say her cousin, and
if our story is to have the “happy ending,” it would never do for the
girl’s lover to be the murderer.)

2. Dawn’s cousin, whom we will call Boyd for the sake of convenience,
has been killed by some unknown person, and relatives have accused
Jerry, whom they bitterly hate because of his relations with their
kinswoman, of the murder.

All right. Now we want to know:

1. How and when did Dawn first hear the rumor that Jerry is guilty of
the crime?

2. How did it react on her?

In reply, let us say:

1. When the dying man is brought to her cabin in the mountains.

2. As it would on any normal girl. She believes her lover to be
innocent, and, having heard her kinsmen swear to avenge Boyd’s death,
leaps upon her horse to fly to Jerry to give him warning.

A brave and noble act, and quite in keeping with the character of the average mountain girl; but we must not forget her kinsmen who are of the same fibre that she is, and quite as determined to slay Jerry as she is to save him.

Therefore:

1. Is she pursued?

2. Does she reach Jerry in time?

3. Does he protest his innocence?

4. And, if the girl is followed by her kinsmen, does Jerry fight it
out with them or “take to the timbers”?

After weighing the possibilities of each question, we would say:

1. Yes.

2. Yes.

3. He does not have time to do so, and leaves the girl in doubt.

4. He escapes.

Very well. Now it is necessary for us to know:

1. What becomes of Jerry?

2. Is he pursued and captured?

3. What develops?

And in reply:

1. He goes into hiding in the mountains.

2. He is pursued by the feudists but eludes them.

3. Suppose we say he hid in the mountains until nightfall and then
went to the cabin of one of his kinsmen for food. He then learns, let
us say, that Dawn has become convinced that he killed Boyd, after
hearing two of her relatives falsely swear that they witnessed the
deed, and, regretting the part she played in his--Jerry’s--escape,
has taken the blood-oath and sworn to avenge her favorite cousin’s
death by shooting Jerry on sight. All of which, it should be said, is
very characteristic of the untamed mountain girl.

Here we have a pretty situation and one that requires delicate handling. But, before proceeding, we should ascertain:

1. What effect did this news have on Jerry?

2. What was the result of its reaction on him?

As Jerry is a mountaineer it is very likely that:

1. He took the news calmly, and,

2. Again sought refuge in the solitudes of the mountains until he
could decide upon his future course of action.

This, of course, makes it necessary for us to know:

1. What did Jerry decide to do? and,

2. What, in the meantime, has become of his pursuers?

Suppose we say:

1. Dawn finds her lover before he reaches any decision.

2. They have lost or abandoned Jerry’s trail.

Good. Dawn, bent upon avenging her cousin’s death, has now run Jerry to earth, and without a doubt is preparing to shoot him down. But she must never be allowed to kill the man she loves. This would be a tragedy that would ruin our chances of giving the plot a happy ending. But Dawn has shown herself to be the kind of girl no ordinary event could keep from her purpose. How, then, are we going to convince her of Jerry’s innocence before she has the chance to open up with her Winchester and make a sieve out of his body? It is not likely that she would believe anything he might say in his own defence. That is not a woman’s way. Therefore:

1. What circumstance or set of circumstances can we invent to gain
the unfortunate lover an hour’s respite?

2. In the circumstances we evolve, what action does the girl take?

3. What would be a logical conclusion to the unhappy situation?

Let us give our imaginations a chance, always keeping in mind the climax which we are now swiftly approaching. Suppose we say that:

1. Jerry’s father (dyed-in-the-wool feudist) has been thrown from his
horse and mortally injured and has asked to see Jerry before he dies.

2. Dawn (very much of a woman at heart) has promised the old feudist
that she will bring Jerry to tell him good-bye before he dies, if she
can find him.

3. The girl hears Jerry’s father, on his death-bed, confess to his
son to having killed Boyd in self-defence.

All of which is quite satisfactory. We have unearthed a ripping climax and are now ready to build our plot. We will therefore read over our analysis again and search out the inciting motive. This, without a doubt, is found in the murder of Boyd. We now look around for the crisis, and find two--the first being when Dawn flees into the night to warn Jerry of his danger, and the second, when Jerry is told that his sweetheart has sworn to kill him. The crucial situation, of course, is when Jerry and the girl stand face to face after she has tracked him down; and the climax, when Dawn overhears the death-bed confession of Jerry’s father.

We now have our bearings, and by drawing freely from the facts disclosed by our analysis, draw up, without much difficulty, the following working plot:

(Inciting motive) Wounded man is brought to Dawn’s cabin by kinsmen
who found him dying by the roadside. (First incident of plot
development) Boyd dies in spite of all efforts to save him. (First
moment of suspense) Dawn asks for information relative to the
shooting. (Second incident of plot development) Clansmen declare
Boyd was murdered by Jerry. (Cause of first crisis) Feudists make
preparation to hunt down Jerry. (First crisis) Dawn leaps upon
her horse and, pursued by her kinsmen, begins a mad race down the
mountain-side to warn her lover of his danger. (Second moment of
suspense) Finds him, warns him, and beseeches him to declare his
innocence before they separate. (Third incident of plot development)
Jerry, not having time to comply with her request because of the
approach of her kinsmen, hastily kisses her, and touches only the
high spots as he takes to the woods. (Cause of second crisis) Goes
to kinsman’s cabin. (Second crisis) He learns that Dawn has become
convinced of his guilt and has sworn to “shoot him on sight.” (Fourth
incident of plot development) Jerry again goes into hiding. (Crucial
situation) He is confronted by Dawn, who has tracked him to his
hiding-place. (Fifth incident of plot development) Dawn tells him his
father is dying, and that she is going to grant him--Jerry--an hour’s
respite so he can tell the old man farewell. (Cause of climax) At the
point of her rifle Dawn takes him over the mountain to his father’s
cabin. (Climax) The girl overhears the father on his death-bed
confess to the slaying of Boyd. (Denouement and conclusion) The
lovers again find happiness in each other’s arms.

There we have our plot, nor did we find the building of it very difficult. This plot, which could be written into a very exciting short story by a capable writer, is a good example of the moderate type of complicated plot.

We will now try something more complicated. The following is a condensed news item clipped from one of the daily papers:

“A man is found dead in a restaurant with a beer stein in his hand
and a scrap of paper lying by his body with the following words
scribbled on it: ‘Vile chi tradisce il segrets del confidente.’”

Instantly there flashes into our mind a corking title, “THE MUG OF DEATH.” With this as a “lead” we glance at our Chart and “place” our germ-plot as follows: Action--detective; Time--present; Setting--city; Characters--doubtful; Mood--revenge.

Now we plunge bravely into the maze of possibilities that opens up before us:

1. How was the man killed? (a) murdered? (b) suicide? (c) natural
death?

2. If he was murdered, how was it done?

3. Did his body show marks of violence?

4. Who was responsible for his death? (This, of course, depending on
whether or not he was murdered.)

5. Who was he?

6. What was in the stein?

7. What does “Vile chi tradisce il segrets del confidente” mean?

8. Who found the body and notified the police?

The following answers occur to us instantly:

1. He was murdered.

2. Poison.

3. No.

4. Unknown.

5. Not identified.

6. Nothing.

7. “He is a coward who betrays a confidential secret.”

8. The proprietor of the restaurant.

Before going further it might be wise to inquire:

1. What was the motive for the crime?

2. Whom do the police suspect?

And in reply:

1. The legend found by the dead man’s side suggests revenge.

2. A waiter in the restaurant, though they have no evidence upon
which to arrest him.

Now, no weapons were found near the dead man, nor are there any marks of violence on his body. We have suggested that he was poisoned, but the inside of the stein was dry and therefore could have held no liquid. Some deadly gas, then. But how could gas be confined in a beer stein? Easily, by fastening down the top with a thin rim of white wax, boring a small hole in the bottom of the stein, forcing in the gas and plugging up the hole again. When the top was opened (which could be easily accomplished by a slight pressure on the edge) the victim would get a good whiff of the gas and fall back dead, while the superfluous gas would escape and leave no trace of how the crime was committed.

This naturally leads us to the following questions:

1. What kind of gas was it?

2. Who was responsible for the diabolical plan?

Offhand we would say:

1. Carbon monoxide, which is one of the deadliest gases we have.

2. It must have been an “inside” job, and was doubtless “pulled off”
by a waiter or the proprietor of the restaurant, who was a member
of a Black Hand society. This last is suggested by the words on the
scrap of paper found by the dead man’s side, which are Italian.

Do the police solve this mystery? Suppose we say they do not, and that before they have completed their investigations a second man is found dead in the restaurant under exactly the same circumstances as the first victim. This gives us an opportunity to tie up the plot with a few more complications. Very well. Now, as the police have failed to get to the bottom of the affair, why not have a celebrated private detective undertake to solve the mystery? If this is done, we of course want to know:

1. Did he solve the crime?

2. If so, how?

In reply, we would say:

1. Of course. (Fictional detectives always do!)

2. Well, suppose we say he first found out HOW the men were
murdered, but fails to identify the murderer--although he suspects
the proprietor of the restaurant whom he believes to be a famous
criminal. Therefore, he plans out his course of action as follows:
He will tell the proprietor confidentially that he knows who the
murderer is, then order a stein of beer and see what will happen.
After making the necessary arrangements with the police, therefore,
he secures a duplicate of the steins used in the restaurant,
conceals it in his overcoat pocket, enters the restaurant, becomes
confidential with the waiter, and tells him in a voice loud enough
to be heard by the proprietor, whom he sees standing in the kitchen
door, that he is investigating the murders and that he has found out
who the murderer is; then he orders beer (feeling sure, of course,
that if the proprietor is the guilty man he will try to get rid of
him--the detective--at once).

Well, assuming that all of this took place:

1. What happens to the detective?

2. What happens in the restaurant after the attempted murder, if
there is one?

Suppose we say that:

1. The detective secures the stein which the PROPRIETOR (and not the
waiter) brings him, and replaces it with the one in his pocket; then
he falls over on the table as if dead or dying and is carried away in
an ambulance.

2. The WAITER is arrested by the police and charged with the crimes.

The following questions now occur to us:

1. How did the detective make sure of his man?

2. What is a logical conclusion?

And the following answers:

1. (a) He finds that the stein the proprietor brought him contains
carbon monoxide gas; (b) By comparing the proprietor’s finger-prints
(which he had secured by smearing transparent wax on a menu card)
with prints in the Police Department’s files and finding that he is a
famous criminal who is being sought by the police of a dozen cities.

2. The arrest of the man, who confesses, and the exoneration of the
waiter.

From this mass of material we now select the inciting motive, which is the discovery of the first of the two murdered men in the restaurant. A further search reveals two crises: the first, when the police declare the two dead men are evidently the victims of the same murderer or murderers, and the second, when the detective feigns death. The crucial situation is found in the arrest of the waiter, and the climax, in the arrest of the proprietor. Therefore, after carefully reviewing our analysis, we draw up a terse working plot, as follows:

THE MUG OF DEATH

(Inciting motive). Man is found dead at a table in a small Italian
wineshop. (First incident of plot development) Police declare man
has evidently been murdered. (Second incident of plot development)
Declare the “Vile chi tradisce il segrets del confidente” is the
motto of a Black Hand society. (First moment of suspense) Police
investigate but fail to find clue. (Cause of first crisis) Another
man is found dead in the restaurant. (First crisis) Police declare
that, because of the horrible expression on the man’s face,
they believe he died by the same hand and in the same manner as
the first victim. (Third incident of plot development) Private
detective undertakes to solve the mystery. (Fourth incident of plot
development) Discovers how the men were murdered. (Fifth incident of
plot development). Decides to trap the proprietor, whom he suspects,
by giving him sufficient cause to wish his--the detective’s--death,
and an opportunity to try to murder him. (Sixth incident of plot
development) Enters restaurant. (Cause of second crisis) Tells waiter
in a loud voice he knows who the murderer is, and orders beer, which
is brought him by the PROPRIETOR, who, after depositing the stein on
the table, quickly leaves. (Second crisis) Detective, after securing
the stein, falls over on the table as if dead. (Seventh incident
of plot development) Police arrive, declare the detective is dead,
and remove his body. (Crucial situation) WAITER is arrested by the
police, who still cling to their theory that he is the guilty man,
and charged with the crimes. (Cause of climax) Detective returns
to restaurant. (Climax) Denounces proprietor and arrests him for
the murders. (Denouement and conclusion) Proprietor, believing the
detective to be dead, in his fright breaks down, confesses that he
was commissioned by a Black Hand society to commit the murders, and
exonerates the waiter.

In this plot we have the complicated plot at its best--or worst, as the writer prefers, for even the most ambitious author would have a hard time making it more involved than it is. As an exposition of the technic of complicated plot building, therefore, the novice should find it worthy of study.

We have now covered the whole field of short-story plot development, and nothing remains but for the writer to experiment with plots of his own. Enthusiasm is the chief requisite in plot making, and method in analytic procedure the next. Once the author has a grasp on the methods employed in plot-construction, the development of germ-ideas into technically correct working plots will not be difficult.