Using Joseph Campbell's "monomyth" for writing stories at any scale

[bretbernhoft]

I've been outlining a cyberpunk story for the past month or so, and have used Joseph Campbell's monomyth to help me organize my thinking. I'm wondering what everyone else's opinion of The Hero's Journey is? Have you ever used it to organize a story?

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I think it's possible you might find that this does not work as well as you hope. Or if it does, then it almost certainly would have emerged all on its own without needing to "organize it."

Campbell's work can serve as an interesting guide for analyzing a story after it is written. It is by no means, and was never meant to be, a map for writing a story one is working on.

If the monomyth is in your blood, in your storytelling DNA, as it may well be (as it seems it speaks to you) it will emerge on its own inevitably and organically. To consciously use it as a guideline is more likely to produce something that looks mechanical and derivative.

I read all of Campbell's books as a young woman. I was quite taken with them. But over the years I have seen that he has far more to offer in the way of insight and inspiration than a blueprint for story writing.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I'm moving this to Writing Discussion where it is likely to get more responses and spark more discussion of the pros and cons.

 

[goldhawk]

The monomyth is great for writing action-adventures. George Lucas used it to write Star Wars and that certainly was a success. But you wouldn't use the monomyth for other types of stories. For examples, murder-mysteries or love stories have their own conventions that the monomyth does not fit well.

 

[M. Robert Gibson]

.You might be interested in reading 'The Writer's Journey' by Christopher Vogler, which is derived from Campbell's work

The Writer's Journey: Mythic Structure for Writers - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

A lot of films seem to use it as a blueprint, but that could just be me looking for the archetypes when I get bored with a film

 

[Wayne Mack]

I take note of the Hero's Journey, but I have read too many fantasy novels that seem to follow its arc for it to be interesting. The mentor dying becomes expected and loses its emotional impact. The protagonist wandering about collecting companions, weapons, and skills that will eventually be needed starts to become a slog deferring the true conflict. Do not simply fit a story into the Hero's Journey sequence. Explore your own pattern of story telling and give me, as a reader, some unique sequence of events to maintain my interest.

 

[Artoriarius]

A major problem with the Hero’s Journey* is that too many people take it as a set-in-stone blueprint for telling a good story, and try to force their story to fit its beats, even when it doesn’t fit. Let your story take its own path, and don’t worry too much whether it’s going down the path it’s supposed to go. If the story fits the Hero’s Journey, it’ll fit it regardless of whether you aim at it or not. If it doesn’t fit the Hero’s Journey, attempting to make it will only harm the story.

* Not the only problem by any means—I very much reject the idea of a “Monomyth” that’s applicable to all stories—but when it comes to writing a story, the important thing is the point above.

 

[msstice]

I've written (and published - under a different name) short stories. No novels published yet.

I am not using a template structure for my novel. I have a story (an outline) that I change often as I write more and more of the detailed story. I do pay attention to principles on the scale of a chapter.

My question to folks here is should I be paying more attention to fitting my story into template story arcs?

I personally like a good yarn, and I feel that each yarn is quite unique depending on the creativity of the writer. Movies are constrained by time and money to fit particular templates. That's their problem, I hope. I hope writing leaves more freedom.

But perhaps I don't understand publishing.

 

[HareBrain]

But perhaps I don't understand publishing.

I don't think publishing is there to be understood. It's there to be feared. And perhaps sacrificed to. (That's my approach -- not that it's yielded spectacular results yet. But if I keep sacrificing other authors, eventually the mathematics should work out.)

I agree with what you say, though. My own take is that template arcs can lead to a certain level of satisfaction, because you hit the beats, but the satisfaction risks being a bit superficial.

 

[Artoriarius]

The way I view a template story arc is that a template is like... like a wireframe model. It gives you the shape of the story, but it doesn’t give you anything else. And when you actually write the story, you may—or may not—find that there’s somewhere where you need to add something on, or take something away from the model. A good author will pay attention to these points, because they don’t expect a good story to fit a template perfectly (after all, there’s a reason why calling a story “formulaic” isn’t complimentary!). Basically, you can treat the template as a tool, and it can help you out a lot. Or you can do without one, and there’s nothing wrong with that—after all, the vast majority of stories ever written were written without a template at all. It is only when you attempt to force the story into a template that doesn’t quite fit it that the template becomes your enemy.

I can’t say definitively whether or not you should use one—you’re the only person who can really decide whether it’s a tool you can use. What I can suggest is that you try writing a few stories with templates, compare them to the stories you’ve written without, and decide which ones you like more.

 

[Topher]

Brandon Sanderson's lectures on YouTube have a good bit on this, where he encourages his students to be chefs rather than cooks. Cooks follow recipes; chefs understand why certain recipes work, what the different elements are doing, and so can use these elements (or alternatives) when they need them.

 

[Toby Frost]

Like Teresa above, I think it's a tool for critique, and not much use as a structure around which to write a story. I suppose it could be used in a variety of ways, but it always seems to me to be particularly geared for telling the story of a young person (man?) having his first adventure rather than, say, an ensemble story. That said, it seems to hit "beats" that audiences find pleasing.

 

[Toby Frost]

It just occurs to me that the OP mentions cyberpunk. To my mind, cyberpunk has a lot in common with noir crime or gangster stories, in terms of plotting. The monomyth sounds more to me like epic fantasy or a historical epic. Which isn't to say that it couldn't be used to plot a cyberpunk story, just that it might also be worth having a look at classic crime stories (Raymond Chandler, James M Cain and the early James Ellroy books, say) as well.

 

[Alan Aspie]

If you read about monomyth, it's better to read too much than too little.

Vogler, Snyder, Truby, Trotter, Block, Cron, Field, Hauge... and several others. They all talk about the same thing.

That thing is more a guideline of how we identify a story than a blueprint of writing one. And that's what you really need - your audience to identify your text as a story, whole story and nothing but a story.

 

[scarpelius]

@bretbernhoft Here is an example of a simple template for your story, taken from here:

The 12 Stages of The Hero's Journey

A popular form of structure derived from Joseph Campbell's Monomyth from his book The Hero With A Thousand Faces and adapted by Christopher Vogler is the Twelve Stage Hero's Journey. This is essentially a more detailed Character Arc for your story's hero which is overlayed onto the more traditional three-act structure that many successful Hollywood movies such as Star Wars and The Wizard of Oz when analyzed appear to follow.

 

[KGeo777]

I think the monomyth is a bad concept to have in mind in writing a story. It may be useful to be aware of so you can see what complexity is common place in a story--but I can't see it being useful for organic passionate storytelling.
I remember Syd Field books on story writing and he had an outline structure for plot points and character arcs but it just seems to me that a story does not fit an outline --it will flow out a certain way and be affected by influences or chance inspiration.

My main gripe is that EVERY story is a journey of some kind--and it is common sense that you will encounter obstacles and friends and adversaries in such a journey. What else are you going to encounter, wild broccoli?

And I can think of a few famous heroic characters where the monomyth does not fit: Sherlock Holmes, Conan, Solomon Kane, Tarzan, Flash Gordon....
Does Sherlock Holmes have to make atonement with his father?
Nope.
Conan has coming of age adventures but they are not usually life-changing or centered around a lesson to be learned.

I always think of the Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) because I do not recall him having an arc in there. He starts off as a nobleman and expert archer--he becomes an outlaw (never appears upset about it), he laments King Richard being off on foreign crusades when he should be at home dealing with King John but otherwise there is no conflict inside the character. He has a less hostile view of Normans by the end of it but it hardly registers since his personality doesn't change at all. Yet he is usually cited as a memorable dynamic heroic character. And he speaks treason fluently.
The appeal of that kind of character is the fact that he has it all "together" from the start--like Sherlock Holmes, he is a stalwart figure--an ideal--the one who stands up to adversity.
It is not necessary that there always be some personal conflict to resolve--especially if the external adversary is challenging.

Anyway that is what I think.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

My main gripe is that EVERY story is a journey of some kind--and it is common sense that you will encounter obstacles and friends and adversaries in such a journey. What else are you going to encounter, wild broccoli

That is a brilliant summation.

 

[Toby Frost]

I agree. One particular style of story is "An expert uses his expertise to overcome problems", which you see a lot in action and dectective stories. "Getting to the heart of the truth", which is slightly different, is used in a lot of spy and conspiracy plots. Both involve "finished" characters who, although they might end up more bitter and worn out (or dead), start out having learned their trade (or start and stop as ordinary people caught up in strange events). The Stepford Wives and The Wicker Man are about very different things, but the basic plot structure is the same.

 

[sknox]

If you use it and it works for you, then it's a good idea.
If you use it and it doesn't work for you, then it's a bad idea.
If you only talk about it, but don't write, then it's just an idea.

 

[Swank]

@bretbernhoft Here is an example of a simple template for your story, taken from here:

As long as you are using this in the most general sense, it can easily apply to most any story:

Mystery
Act I
Sherlock Holmes and Watson sit around shooting speedballs.
A visitor comes with an odd story.
Holmes refers them to Scotland yard.
Holmes has doubts and meets with Mycroft.
Holmes takes the case.
Act II
Someone takes a shot at Holmes.
Holmes goes undercover as a common dustman.
Holmes outs Moriarty, who dies in the fire.
Holmes gets paid and he and Watson enjoy Mrs. Hudson's continental cuisine.
Act III
Holmes looks longingly at his hypodermic.
Moriarty bursts in, guns ablazin'.
Holmes finds out something big about a wave of crime, just as he throws Moriarty in the Thames.

Harlequin Romance Novel
Act I
Bernice lives in the burbs in an okay house with a clogged sink.
A handsome plumber named Floyd flirts with Bernice, and hints of taking her away.
Bernice acts shocked, throws him out and calls for a much less attractive plumber.
Bernice talks to her mother, who points out that Bernice's husband is a "good-for-nothing".
Bernice goes to the bus station at the time when Floyd was set to leave.
Act II
Floyd is there, and they slip into the bus washroom where Bernice witnesses his toned abs and "plumbing certifications".
They arrive in Cincinnati, and Bernice agrees to shack up in the back office of Floyd's uncle's plumbing supply store.
After much romance and discussion resembling the plot of A Touch of Mink, Bernice closes the office blinds and loosens here girdle.
Bernice seizes Floyd's sword.
Act III
A month later in their new trailer home, Bernice has made a new life with the handsome Floyd.
One romantic evening, Bernice's husband bursts in, guns ablazin'.
Floyd hits Bernice's husband with a pipe wrench, then they dissolve his corpse in barrel of tree root remover.
Bernice embraces Floyd's pulsating manhood.