July 8, 2025 • 29 mins
Are your readers bored? Disappointed? Confused? Here's what that tells you about your story's middle.
You’re stuck in the messy middle. Languishing in the doldrums of your story. The inciting incident is long past, the climax is so far ahead you can’t see it over the horizon, and you’re drifting, lost at sea.
What is actually supposed to happen here?
Where did your plot momentum go?
Why do your pages feel full of stuff, and yet nothing ever happens?
The answers to all those questions lie in your progressive complications. Specifically, something’s going wrong in your progressive complications.
In this episode, I’m digging even deeper into the progressive complications.
I’m sharing the seven most common traps I see, the impact they have on your story and your readers, and of course, how to fix them so you can make your story unputdownable from beginning to end.
You’ll learn:
- How to diagnose the problem in your story’s middle based on how your reader feels
- How to spot “fluff” that isn’t moving your story forward
- How coincidences work in stories—and what happens when they don’t work
- What happens when a story has no progressive complications at all
- And more!
And don’t miss the free cheat sheet that goes with this episode! Print it and keep it handy as you’re editing.
Here’s the thing: the middle of a story isn’t an inscrutable secret. This episode is your guide to spot the most common traps and free your story from them.
Links mentioned in the episode:
- Get the Progressive Complication Revision Cheat Sheet: alicesudlow.com/88
- Work with me: alicesudlow.com/contact
- Ep. 87: Make Sense of Your Messy Middle With the Most Underrated Story Element
Rate, Review, & Follow on Apple Podcasts
"I love Alice and Your Next Draft." If that sounds like you, please consider rating and reviewing my show! This helps me support more writers through the mess—and joy—of the editing process. Click here, scroll to the bottom, tap the stars to rate, and select “Write a Review.” Then be sure to let me know what you loved most about the episode!
Loving the show? Show your support with a monthly contribution »
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
So you are stuck in the messymiddle, languishing in the
(00:04):
doldrums of your story.
The inciting incident is longpast, the climax is so far
ahead, you can't see it over thehorizon, and you're drifting
lost at sea.
What is actually supposed tohappen here?
Where did your plot momentum go?
Why do your pages feel full ofstuff and yet nothing happens?
(00:27):
How did the story that inspiredyou so much at the start lose
its way and become boring?
How do you make this longstretch of middle matter?
Here's the thing.
The middle of a story isn't aninscrutable secret.
Great middles are made of aseries of progressive
complications that compel yourprotagonist and your reader to
(00:49):
keep going to the climax, whichmeans that if your messy middle
just refuses to come together.
It's likely because you'vefallen into some common
progressive complication traps,the things that don't work to
keep protagonists moving andreaders reading.
In this episode, I'm sharing theseven most common traps.
(01:09):
I see the impacts they have onyour story and your readers, and
of course, how to fix them soyou can make your story
unputdownable from beginning toend.
Let's spring you from the traps,shall we?
(02:09):
Welcome to your next draft.
In the last episode, I sharedthe way I define the progressive
complications, where in thestory the progressive
complications appear, and whatI'm watching for as an editor
when I evaluate progressivecomplications, and today I'm
covering seven common traps thatwriters often fall into when
(02:30):
they're writing theirprogressive complications.
The messy middle of your novel.
If you haven't yet listened tothe previous episode, I
recommend you check it out.
It's called Make Sense of YourMessy Middle, with the most
underrated Story Element, andthe link is in the show notes.
And I've also put together afree cheat sheet with all the
progressive complicationinsights from both episodes.
(02:53):
You can print it out and keep itat hand, easy to reference as
you edit.
Go to alice sudler.com/eighteight.
Enter your email there and I'llsend it straight to you.
Now we've got a lot to cover, soI'm going to get right to it.
First, let's quickly recap theeight qualities that I'm looking
for in progressivecomplications.
(03:14):
The progressive complicationsone.
Escalate.
Two are positive or negative,never neutral.
Three can be active orrevelatory.
Four can be causal orcoincidental, but tread
carefully with coincidences andwe will explore that more in a
moment.
(03:35):
Five, they come from outside theprotagonist or they are the
result of a choice.
The protagonist makes six.
Stories typically include one tothree progressive complications
on the scene level and on theglobal level.
Every scene is a progressivecomplication.
Seven.
On the scene level, theprogressive complications
(03:56):
reinforce the beginning value,and on the global level, they
move the story along thespectrum of the value.
And eight, the progressivecomplications are aligned with
the stories genre.
Now you can absolutely use thoseeight qualities as a sort of
checklist to evaluate yourprogressive complications, but
(04:18):
there are a few common trapsthat I often see in manuscripts.
Think of them as the symptomsthat are present when some of
those eight qualities arebroken.
I'm going to walk you throughseven traps you can watch for
the impact they have on thereader and the missing quality
that will solve them, Here's thefirst one.
the progressive complicationsare neutral.
(04:39):
Neutral.
Progressive complications arethings that happen in the story
that don't escalate the conflictin a positive or negative way.
They don't move the protagonistcloser to or further from their
goal.
They're not actually progressivecomplications at all.
They're just stuff that happens.
Fluff, story filler, the busywork of story events.
(05:02):
If you cut them out of the storyentirely, nothing would change.
I have seen manuscripts filledwith so much stuff, thousands of
words, even tens of thousands ofwords where nothing actually
happened.
This slows the story down forthe reader.
It leaks tension from the storybecause of the lack of conflict.
(05:23):
As far as the reader can tell,nothing seems to matter.
It's all irrelevant information,and that is boring.
Remember, in story, nothing isneutral.
Figure out why the neutral thingmatters to the story or cut it
Now for the second trap, theprogressive complications repeat
(05:44):
the same conflict rather thanescalating the conflict.
This is a very common trap inthe first episode on progressive
complications.
I used an example seen from theTV show younger.
Liza and Kelsey are outcelebrating Kelsey's new client.
Kelsey charges Liza, ourprotagonist, with the
responsibility of keeping Kelseyfrom getting wasted and sloppy,
(06:08):
which would set her up forfailure when she meets with the
clients in the morning.
Let's zoom in on the early partof the scene.
First, Kelsey agrees to stopshrinking.
Then Kelsey's boyfriend arrivesand they take a round of shots.
Then Kelsey's boyfriend orderssix more rounds of shots.
each of those six rounds ofshots is the same progressive
(06:28):
complication over and over andover.
Individually, they don't addanything new or raise the
stakes.
They simply repeat the samechallenge again and again.
Kelsey's boyfriend orderingshots, Liza saying No, and
Kelsey drinking the shots.
Anyway, watch the scene andyou'll see that all six rounds
(06:49):
are smushed into one montage.
For about 30 seconds, we watchKelsey and her boyfriend
throwing back an absurd numberof shots.
I don't even know how many,honestly, because it all becomes
sort of a blur.
And that's because theshowrunners made the wise
decision to collapse those manyrounds of shots into one single
progressive complication.
The sheer volume of alcohol thatKelsey drinks as Liza is unable
(07:13):
to stop her.
Where writers go wrong is whenthey mistake each round of shots
as a fresh progressivecomplication.
After all, each time Kelsey'sboyfriend orders another round.
Liza objects and her objectionsare overruled.
And every shot is making Kelseymore drunk and more difficult to
manage.
So it's escalating the scene,right?
(07:35):
Technically yes, but onlyincrementally.
And without presenting any freshchallenges to Liza.
If you repeat progressivecomplications like this without
actually escalating the storyfor the reader, this will slow
the story down.
It feels irritatinglyrepetitive, and it bores us.
It's much more interesting tocompress all the shots into a
(07:56):
montage And move us forward toKelsey throwing a rock through a
window, which is a progressivecomplication that happens later
in the scene.
Another version of this trap isa long series of progressive
complications that are allactive or all revelatory.
The protagonist learnsgroundbreaking information and
then they learn moregroundbreaking information, and
(08:17):
then they learn yet moregroundbreaking information.
This too, can feel repetitive.
Slow your story down and boreyour reader.
Now, the third trap, theprogressive complications.
Don't reinforce the startingvalue, but pull us off course to
focus on different values Thislooks a little bit different on
(08:39):
the scene level versus theglobal story, so let's break
them both down.
In the global story, this lookslike throwing a dead body into
an enemies to lover's romance,assuming that it's just a
romance and not also a mafiastory, or it might be more
subtle than that, it might shiftthe focus to a different
character relationship thatdoesn't impact the romance or to
(09:00):
a different problem.
That's not the goal of theprotagonist is chasing.
It might feel like opening up anew plot thread for just a scene
or two and then never resolvingit or using it to impact the
main story.
I watched a performance storythis weekend where everything
was really, really good.
Loved the whole thing, but therewere just a handful of scenes
where I felt really bored.
(09:20):
And when I sat back to thinkabout those after I finished the
movie, I realized that all ofthose scenes were about a
romance subplot that had noimpact whatsoever on the journey
of the protagonist towards hisgoal, and honestly, I think the
story would've been better if wejust cut the girlfriend
entirely.
Usually this kind of diversionof focus from the core conflict
(09:41):
of the story to other sorts ofvalues, other kinds of events
occurs because the writer isn'tclear on their character's
distinct internal arc.
Because of that, the writer addsin a variety of complications
that.
Could matter or they could be adistraction from the main plot.
And because the writer isn'tclear on how and why they matter
(10:02):
to the character's internal arc,those events feel oddly
disconnected or off topic.
Now that's it on the globallevel.
Now let's look at the scenelevel.
On the scene level, this lookslike things happening, maybe
even interesting things thataren't related to the
protagonist skull within thescene, it's any details that
aren't relevant to the conflictand the value shift of the
(10:24):
scene.
Here's the thing about readers.
They're smart and they trustthat you, the writer, will tell
them only the things that matterand all of the things that
matter.
Therefore, if you've putsomething on the page, your
readers will assume that itmatters until proven otherwise,
when this kind of scattershotcollection of progressive
(10:46):
complications happens.
When your progressivecomplications emphasize a
variety of values.
It splinters the reader's focus.
Now you're telling them to lookin a lot of different
directions, not just at onesingle thing, because they're
looking in a lot of differentdirections.
They won't get to experience onestreamlined build of emotion and
(11:06):
meaning over the course of thescene or the story, and that
pulls the power from theemotional punch.
At the end of the story, thereaders will feel it, but with
just a fraction of the impactthat it could have.
Now, it's also possible thatyou'll confuse your readers
because you're sending theirattention in several directions.
But honestly, it'll take a whileto confuse your readers because
(11:29):
they're smart.
They will track with you lookingfor all the connections and
meaning in every scattershotdetail that you share.
And when they get to the end,they'll notice which threads
haven't paid off, and they'll bedisappointed.
Me with this performance story,with this romance subplot that
ended up not mattering.
editor's note.
I realized I'm not actuallyhating on this movie.
(11:51):
I think it's a really goodmovie.
So it's worth mentioning thetitle so you can see what my
reference is.
The movie is Grand Torino andthe performance story is a guy
who wants to be a race cardriver, learning to drive race
cars through a video game, andthen trying to actually become a
race car driver and prove thathe can do it.
The performance plot isexcellent, And there's a little
(12:13):
Roman subplot that I don't thinkadded anything to the movie.
The movie itself is very goodand worth watching, and I think
an interesting study in what itlooks like when your progressive
complications are not relevantto the plot of your story.
Remember, the whole job of yourprogressive complications is to
emphasize the value on the scenelevel, to reinforce the starting
(12:34):
value and on the global level tomove the story through the
spectrum of values.
So in your revision, watchreally carefully to see whether
you're emphasizing what you wantthe reader to focus on, or
whether you're splintering thereader's attention and sending
them off course.
So that's that trap.
Now, the next three traps areall about coincidences and the
(12:58):
cause and effect trajectory ofyour story.
I promised you we dig into itand here we go.
Here's trap number four.
The progressive complicationsare too coincidental.
Now, I rarely see this trap onthe scene level, but it does
happen, especially on the globallevel.
(13:18):
This occurs in two ways.
One, that there are severalcoincidences happening very
close together.
Remember that progressivecomplications can be causal or
coincidental, but too manycoincidences will break the
reader's suspension of disbeliefas well as break down the
goal-driven cause and effecttrajectory of the story.
(13:39):
The other trap here isn't thefrequency of coincidences, but
the believability of them.
Even one coincidence that's tooconvenient will threaten the
suspension of disbelief.
What does too convenient mean?
It can mean a couple of things.
It might be a series of positivecoincidences where the
protagonist gets what they wantand we start to feel that the
(14:01):
story is going too easily forthem.
Or it might be just one eventwhere the reader can tell that
you, the author, really neededsomething to happen in a
particular way you neededcharacter A to be at location B.
So conveniently, there they are,you needed to reveal a
particular piece of information,and so character c blurts it out
(14:23):
for no reason, just when theprotagonist needs to hear it.
So that's what I mean by tooconvenient, too many positive
coincidences in a row, makinglife too easy for the
protagonist or storydevelopments that feel
contrived, where you'reinadvertently telegraphing to
the reader that the reasonsomething happened is just
because you, the writer, reallyneeded it to.
(14:46):
All of these varieties ofcoincidence will erode the
reader's suspension ofdisbelief.
The story will no longer feelgrounded in reality, but
fantastical and unrealistic.
not in a cool fantasy worldbuilding way, but in a, this
story lost me kind of way.
In addition, the two convenientcoincidences will also make the
(15:07):
reader feel as though they cansee behind the curtain the cogs
and gears the author is using toconstruct the story.
It will no longer feel likestory magic, but like the reader
knows the magician's secrets andcan spot their work behind the
scenes.
Now, don't let this turn youaway from coincidental
progressive complicationsaltogether.
(15:28):
Consider that in pride andPrejudice.
Mr.
Bingley's decision to rinseNetherfield is entirely a
coincidence.
So too is Wickham just happeningto be among the malicious,
stationed nearby.
And when Elizabeth goes to visitKimberly, it's a coincidence
that Mr.
Darcy happens to return that dayand see her.
Coincidences happen in life andin story, and they do
(15:49):
effectively move the storyforward.
Just keep an eye out that youdon't have so many coincidences
that you threaten the reader'ssuspension of disbelief.
And if you ever have the gutfeeling that you're manipulating
a story event for yourconvenience, because you just
need something to happen.
Check yourself and look for away to move the chess pieces of
(16:10):
your story with reasonablecausality.
If you feel like something iscontrived, the reader will feel
it too.
So that was trap number four.
Here's trap number five.
Still on the theme of thecoincidences.
The majority of the progressivecomplications are not caused by
the protagonist actions, and sothe protagonist lacks agency.
(16:34):
Again, this one is rare on thescene level, but it is a common
trap on the global level.
It occurs when the progressivecomplications are not caused by
the actions the protagonisttakes.
Remember the protagonist choicesand actions are not themselves
progressive complications, butthe results of those choices and
(16:55):
actions can be progressivecomplications.
when the protagonist takesaction.
We assume that the consequencesof that action will be the next
progressive complication.
The next thing that theprotagonist has to deal with.
The trap here is when theiractions don't impact the next
progressive complication.
Instead, the next progressivecomplication comes out of the
(17:17):
blue, unrelated to the choicesthe protagonist has made.
In all of these instances, theprotagonist loses agency.
We're not watching a strongprotagonist make choices that
have an impact on their life andthe world around them, and then
navigate the consequences.
We're not following theprotagonist as they drive the
(17:37):
plot.
Instead, we're watching aprotagonist get blown about the
story on the winds of chance orsomeone else's decision making.
All of this risks the readerbecoming disappointed by the
story, disliking theprotagonist, and getting bored.
We like to see characters takebold and interesting action and
(17:57):
then navigate the consequences.
We find it annoying,frustrating, disappointing or
boring when we watch characterswithout agency fall into and out
of circumstances outside theircontrol.
So watch for how yourprotagonist's actions cause the
next progressive complicationsand make sure that their choices
(18:18):
are driving the story.
Now, chapter number six, there'slittle or no causality
connecting progressivecomplications.
And so the story feels episodicAgain, this is a trap I rarely
see on the scene level inscenes, I find that writers are
typically pretty consistentabout creating strong chains of
(18:40):
cause and effect.
It is less common that we losethat chain of causality on the
scene level, but this is a trapon the global level.
In this trap, writers turnprogressive complications into
self-contained stories of theirown.
When this happens, eachprogressive complication feels
like a big event that'sdisconnected from the larger
(19:01):
goal and conclusively resolvedwithin a few scenes.
The impact on the reader is anepisodic feel rather than one
cohesive, singular story.
It reads like a series of shortstories without a clear and
meaningful build towards anoverarching plot.
and there are types ofstorytelling where an episodic
structure is desirable.
(19:23):
Episodes of television areliterally episodic.
The Mandalorian is one show thatstands out for me as being
particularly, so each episodefeels to me like one small
story.
They do build to a cohesive,overarching whole.
But every episode is kind oflike a little short story within
it.
It's a delightful viewingexperience.
(19:44):
Another type of storytellingthat lends itself to an episodic
structure is tabletoprole-playing games.
when you're playing an RPG, eachsection of storytelling has to
fit within one gaming session.
So just a few hours together,and there can be one-off
encounters that are fun to play,but have limited plot
significance.
I've worked on some novels thathave been translated from RPG
(20:05):
campaigns, And those storiestend to need some refining to
turn the episodic feel into onecohesive momentum driven story.
Then there are novels like Anneof Green Gables that truly are
designed to be somewhatepisodic.
Anne of Green Gables reads as aseries of vignettes rather than
one singular build of plot.
(20:25):
The trick there though is thatAnne of Green Gables is a
primarily internal story ratherthan an external one.
It's not a high stakes actionplot.
It's a slow, gentle, long-termstory of character
transformation where theinternal genre takes the lead.
Those stories can be veryrewarding to read, but because
(20:46):
the story arc is so internal andthey're light on external action
and plot, they are morechallenging to write, and that
episodic vignette approach doesnot work very well for highly
external novels like the actiongenre.
So default to creating clear,strong driving cause and effect
connections between yourprogressive complications on
(21:07):
both the scene and the globalstory level.
Unless you have a really goodreason to break that.
And even then, if you go thevignette route, I, I'd say
you'll still need stronginternal causality, even if the
external events are only looselyconnected.
So those are the main traps thatstories fall into when they lean
(21:27):
harder on coincidence thancausality and lose their cause
and effect trajectory.
The final trap is not aboutcoincidences, but something even
simpler.
Here it is.
There are no.
Progressive complications.
All the challenges ofcoincidence and causality are
(21:48):
almost always global issues.
Usually on the scene level, wecan pretty clearly see how one
story beat causes the next one.
By contrast, this trap anabsence of progressive
complications.
This is almost always a sceneissue.
I have never yet encountered awriter who had no progressive
complications in their globalstory, but I have encountered
(22:11):
scenes with no progressivecomplications.
This means that the scene movesstraight from the inciting
incidents to the turning pointwith no progressive
complications in between.
Or the first major thing thathappens in the scene feels like
both the inciting incident andthe turning point It probably
comes about one third of the waythrough the scene.
(22:33):
So there are several pages ofgeneral scene setting before it
happens.
And once it happens, it feelslike the action has just kicked
off.
The character's goal has justbeen incited, and in the same
moment, the character is rushedstraight into their crisis and
climax.
The several pages of scenesetting before the inciting
incident aren't inherently aproblem.
(22:55):
Sometimes the scene needs thattime and space to really
establish the before value,before the inciting incidents
disrupt things.
But when you combine that longeropening with a lack of
progressive complications andone single event that's playing
the role of both incitingincidents and turning points.
(23:15):
It means that the scenestructure, pacing, and purpose
are wonky From the reader'sperspective, the scene still
moves the story forward, butthere's potential left
unrealized punches that itpulled emotional impact that it
could have had but missed.
So.
Space things out.
Figure out what the scene isreally about and what the
(23:39):
inciting incidents and turningpoint are, and then look for at
least one progressivecomplication that can escalate
the conflict in between them.
and there you have it.
The seven most commonprogressive complication traps
that I see here they are again,one.
The progressive complicationsare neutral.
(24:00):
This slows the story down.
Leaks tension because of thelack of conflict and bores the
reader because they feel likethey're wading through
irrelevant information.
Two, the progressivecomplications repeat the same
conflict rather than escalatingthe conflict.
This slows the story down.
Feels irritatingly, repetitive,and bores the reader.
(24:22):
Three, the progressivecomplications.
Don't reinforce the startingvalue, but pull us off course to
focus on different values.
This splinters the reader'sfocus pulls power from the
emotional punch of the endingand risks confusing or
disappointing readers when theynoticed that details were
included, that didn't matter, orplot threads were opened without
(24:45):
payoff four.
If the progressive complicationsare too coincidental, this is
usually a global story levelissue and it erodes the reader's
suspension of disbelief.
In addition, if the coincidencesfeel contrived, the reader will
feel like they're seeing thestory machinery at work rather
(25:05):
than getting lost in the magic.
Five.
The majority of the progressivecomplications are not caused by
the protagonist's actions, andso the protagonist lacks agency.
This is usually a global storylevel issue, and it disappoints
the reader, makes them dislikethe protagonist and bores them.
(25:27):
Six.
There's little or no causality,connecting progressive
complications, and so the storyfeels episodic.
This is a global story levelissue, And it makes the reader
feel like they're reading aseries of short stories,
watching a season of TV show orfollowing an RPG campaign rather
than experiencing the cohesive,overarching plot of a novel.
(25:51):
And seven, there are noprogressive complications.
This is a scene level issue, andwhile the scene may move the
story forward, it leavespotential impact and meaning
unrealized.
So now that you know whatprogressive complications are,
what they're doing in your storyand what traps to avoid, what do
(26:11):
you do next?
Well, first off, do not try tohold all of this in your head as
you write a first draft.
My goodness.
It is way too much for that.
These are editing tools,revision principles, not writing
rules.
I cannot say that emphaticallyenough.
This is for editing, not forwriting.
(26:34):
When you're writing a firstdraft, set all of this aside and
let yourself sink into your owncreative flow.
If you try to reverse engineer astory by building progressive
complications, according to thislist of traps, you will make
yourself miserable.
You're going to be filled withall of the things that you
should not do, and you won't beable to imagine what the
(26:56):
possibilities are for yourstory.
But when you've got somethingwritten and you're ready to put
all these revision tools towork, here's where to start.
Pick a scene, any scene fromyour manuscript.
Look at what happens between theinciting incidents and the
turning point.
Can you find one, two?
(27:16):
Three progressive complications.
Do they escalate?
Do they push the protagonistcloser to or farther from their
goal?
Do they reinforce the startingvalue of the scene and does the
scene move the story along theglobal value spectrum?
And just as important, do theyavoid the traps?
(27:36):
If the answer is yes, amazing,your progressive complications
are doing their job well.
If you spot gaps where yourscene doesn't check all the
boxes, great.
Now you know what to revise for.
And if all of this feelsoverwhelmingly technical, like
the calculus of storytelling, Iget it.
That's why I'm here.
I.
This is my jam.
(27:58):
Truly.
I gathered all my thoughts onprogressive complications for
weeks before I wrote thisepisode.
I went over the script severaltimes after it was written, and
every single time I thought of anew trap to include or a new
layer of nuance to add, I had myeditor friend, Kim Kessler peer
review all this for me, andbased on her feedback, I
probably added another 10minutes of episode, and that was
(28:20):
fun for me.
I love this kind of analysisbecause I am an editor.
It is my job to know all of thisand to run all this analysis in
my head so that you can stay inyour creative flow.
You can dip your toe into thisanalysis as much as you like,
Then nope.
Write out and outsource it to meat any time if you'd like, help
(28:41):
seeing what's working, what'smissing, and how to revise your
scenes and stories so that everymoment builds towards something
powerful.
I would love to work with you.
Go to alice sudler.com/contactand fill out the form there to
tell me about your story andI'll be in touch.
And don't forget, you can grab afree progressive complication
cheat sheet to print out andreference anytime you're
(29:02):
editing.
Go to alice sudler.com/ 88 andenter your email address in the
form on that page, and I'll sendit right to you.
All right, this was theprogressive complication part of
our series.
Up next, we've got the TurningPoint, crisis Climax and
Resolution, so there's much moreto come.
Until next time, happy editing.
So you are stuck in the messymiddle, languishing in the
(00:04):
doldrums of your story.
The inciting incident is longpast, the climax is so far
ahead, you can't see it over thehorizon, and you're drifting
lost at sea.
What is actually supposed tohappen here?
Where did your plot momentum go?
Why do your pages feel full ofstuff and yet nothing happens?
(00:27):
How did the story that inspiredyou so much at the start lose
its way and become boring?
How do you make this longstretch of middle matter?
Here's the thing.
The middle of a story isn't aninscrutable secret.
Great middles are made of aseries of progressive
complications that compel yourprotagonist and your reader to
(00:49):
keep going to the climax, whichmeans that if your messy middle
just refuses to come together.
It's likely because you'vefallen into some common
progressive complication traps,the things that don't work to
keep protagonists moving andreaders reading.
In this episode, I'm sharing theseven most common traps.
(01:09):
I see the impacts they have onyour story and your readers, and
of course, how to fix them soyou can make your story
unputdownable from beginning toend.
Let's spring you from the traps,shall we?
(02:09):
Welcome to your next draft.
In the last episode, I sharedthe way I define the progressive
complications, where in thestory the progressive
complications appear, and whatI'm watching for as an editor
when I evaluate progressivecomplications, and today I'm
covering seven common traps thatwriters often fall into when
(02:30):
they're writing theirprogressive complications.
The messy middle of your novel.
If you haven't yet listened tothe previous episode, I
recommend you check it out.
It's called Make Sense of YourMessy Middle, with the most
underrated Story Element, andthe link is in the show notes.
And I've also put together afree cheat sheet with all the
progressive complicationinsights from both episodes.
(02:53):
You can print it out and keep itat hand, easy to reference as
you edit.
Go to alice sudler.com/eighteight.
Enter your email there and I'llsend it straight to you.
Now we've got a lot to cover, soI'm going to get right to it.
First, let's quickly recap theeight qualities that I'm looking
for in progressivecomplications.
(03:14):
The progressive complicationsone.
Escalate.
Two are positive or negative,never neutral.
Three can be active orrevelatory.
Four can be causal orcoincidental, but tread
carefully with coincidences andwe will explore that more in a
moment.
(03:35):
Five, they come from outside theprotagonist or they are the
result of a choice.
The protagonist makes six.
Stories typically include one tothree progressive complications
on the scene level and on theglobal level.
Every scene is a progressivecomplication.
Seven.
On the scene level, theprogressive complications
(03:56):
reinforce the beginning value,and on the global level, they
move the story along thespectrum of the value.
And eight, the progressivecomplications are aligned with
the stories genre.
Now you can absolutely use thoseeight qualities as a sort of
checklist to evaluate yourprogressive complications, but
(04:18):
there are a few common trapsthat I often see in manuscripts.
Think of them as the symptomsthat are present when some of
those eight qualities arebroken.
I'm going to walk you throughseven traps you can watch for
the impact they have on thereader and the missing quality
that will solve them, Here's thefirst one.
the progressive complicationsare neutral.
(04:39):
Neutral.
Progressive complications arethings that happen in the story
that don't escalate the conflictin a positive or negative way.
They don't move the protagonistcloser to or further from their
goal.
They're not actually progressivecomplications at all.
They're just stuff that happens.
Fluff, story filler, the busywork of story events.
(05:02):
If you cut them out of the storyentirely, nothing would change.
I have seen manuscripts filledwith so much stuff, thousands of
words, even tens of thousands ofwords where nothing actually
happened.
This slows the story down forthe reader.
It leaks tension from the storybecause of the lack of conflict.
(05:23):
As far as the reader can tell,nothing seems to matter.
It's all irrelevant information,and that is boring.
Remember, in story, nothing isneutral.
Figure out why the neutral thingmatters to the story or cut it
Now for the second trap, theprogressive complications repeat
(05:44):
the same conflict rather thanescalating the conflict.
This is a very common trap inthe first episode on progressive
complications.
I used an example seen from theTV show younger.
Liza and Kelsey are outcelebrating Kelsey's new client.
Kelsey charges Liza, ourprotagonist, with the
responsibility of keeping Kelseyfrom getting wasted and sloppy,
(06:08):
which would set her up forfailure when she meets with the
clients in the morning.
Let's zoom in on the early partof the scene.
First, Kelsey agrees to stopshrinking.
Then Kelsey's boyfriend arrivesand they take a round of shots.
Then Kelsey's boyfriend orderssix more rounds of shots.
each of those six rounds ofshots is the same progressive
(06:28):
complication over and over andover.
Individually, they don't addanything new or raise the
stakes.
They simply repeat the samechallenge again and again.
Kelsey's boyfriend orderingshots, Liza saying No, and
Kelsey drinking the shots.
Anyway, watch the scene andyou'll see that all six rounds
(06:49):
are smushed into one montage.
For about 30 seconds, we watchKelsey and her boyfriend
throwing back an absurd numberof shots.
I don't even know how many,honestly, because it all becomes
sort of a blur.
And that's because theshowrunners made the wise
decision to collapse those manyrounds of shots into one single
progressive complication.
The sheer volume of alcohol thatKelsey drinks as Liza is unable
(07:13):
to stop her.
Where writers go wrong is whenthey mistake each round of shots
as a fresh progressivecomplication.
After all, each time Kelsey'sboyfriend orders another round.
Liza objects and her objectionsare overruled.
And every shot is making Kelseymore drunk and more difficult to
manage.
So it's escalating the scene,right?
(07:35):
Technically yes, but onlyincrementally.
And without presenting any freshchallenges to Liza.
If you repeat progressivecomplications like this without
actually escalating the storyfor the reader, this will slow
the story down.
It feels irritatinglyrepetitive, and it bores us.
It's much more interesting tocompress all the shots into a
(07:56):
montage And move us forward toKelsey throwing a rock through a
window, which is a progressivecomplication that happens later
in the scene.
Another version of this trap isa long series of progressive
complications that are allactive or all revelatory.
The protagonist learnsgroundbreaking information and
then they learn moregroundbreaking information, and
(08:17):
then they learn yet moregroundbreaking information.
This too, can feel repetitive.
Slow your story down and boreyour reader.
Now, the third trap, theprogressive complications.
Don't reinforce the startingvalue, but pull us off course to
focus on different values Thislooks a little bit different on
(08:39):
the scene level versus theglobal story, so let's break
them both down.
In the global story, this lookslike throwing a dead body into
an enemies to lover's romance,assuming that it's just a
romance and not also a mafiastory, or it might be more
subtle than that, it might shiftthe focus to a different
character relationship thatdoesn't impact the romance or to
(09:00):
a different problem.
That's not the goal of theprotagonist is chasing.
It might feel like opening up anew plot thread for just a scene
or two and then never resolvingit or using it to impact the
main story.
I watched a performance storythis weekend where everything
was really, really good.
Loved the whole thing, but therewere just a handful of scenes
where I felt really bored.
(09:20):
And when I sat back to thinkabout those after I finished the
movie, I realized that all ofthose scenes were about a
romance subplot that had noimpact whatsoever on the journey
of the protagonist towards hisgoal, and honestly, I think the
story would've been better if wejust cut the girlfriend
entirely.
Usually this kind of diversionof focus from the core conflict
(09:41):
of the story to other sorts ofvalues, other kinds of events
occurs because the writer isn'tclear on their character's
distinct internal arc.
Because of that, the writer addsin a variety of complications
that.
Could matter or they could be adistraction from the main plot.
And because the writer isn'tclear on how and why they matter
(10:02):
to the character's internal arc,those events feel oddly
disconnected or off topic.
Now that's it on the globallevel.
Now let's look at the scenelevel.
On the scene level, this lookslike things happening, maybe
even interesting things thataren't related to the
protagonist skull within thescene, it's any details that
aren't relevant to the conflictand the value shift of the
(10:24):
scene.
Here's the thing about readers.
They're smart and they trustthat you, the writer, will tell
them only the things that matterand all of the things that
matter.
Therefore, if you've putsomething on the page, your
readers will assume that itmatters until proven otherwise,
when this kind of scattershotcollection of progressive
(10:46):
complications happens.
When your progressivecomplications emphasize a
variety of values.
It splinters the reader's focus.
Now you're telling them to lookin a lot of different
directions, not just at onesingle thing, because they're
looking in a lot of differentdirections.
They won't get to experience onestreamlined build of emotion and
(11:06):
meaning over the course of thescene or the story, and that
pulls the power from theemotional punch.
At the end of the story, thereaders will feel it, but with
just a fraction of the impactthat it could have.
Now, it's also possible thatyou'll confuse your readers
because you're sending theirattention in several directions.
But honestly, it'll take a whileto confuse your readers because
(11:29):
they're smart.
They will track with you lookingfor all the connections and
meaning in every scattershotdetail that you share.
And when they get to the end,they'll notice which threads
haven't paid off, and they'll bedisappointed.
Me with this performance story,with this romance subplot that
ended up not mattering.
editor's note.
I realized I'm not actuallyhating on this movie.
(11:51):
I think it's a really goodmovie.
So it's worth mentioning thetitle so you can see what my
reference is.
The movie is Grand Torino andthe performance story is a guy
who wants to be a race cardriver, learning to drive race
cars through a video game, andthen trying to actually become a
race car driver and prove thathe can do it.
The performance plot isexcellent, And there's a little
(12:13):
Roman subplot that I don't thinkadded anything to the movie.
The movie itself is very goodand worth watching, and I think
an interesting study in what itlooks like when your progressive
complications are not relevantto the plot of your story.
Remember, the whole job of yourprogressive complications is to
emphasize the value on the scenelevel, to reinforce the starting
(12:34):
value and on the global level tomove the story through the
spectrum of values.
So in your revision, watchreally carefully to see whether
you're emphasizing what you wantthe reader to focus on, or
whether you're splintering thereader's attention and sending
them off course.
So that's that trap.
Now, the next three traps areall about coincidences and the
(12:58):
cause and effect trajectory ofyour story.
I promised you we dig into itand here we go.
Here's trap number four.
The progressive complicationsare too coincidental.
Now, I rarely see this trap onthe scene level, but it does
happen, especially on the globallevel.
(13:18):
This occurs in two ways.
One, that there are severalcoincidences happening very
close together.
Remember that progressivecomplications can be causal or
coincidental, but too manycoincidences will break the
reader's suspension of disbeliefas well as break down the
goal-driven cause and effecttrajectory of the story.
(13:39):
The other trap here isn't thefrequency of coincidences, but
the believability of them.
Even one coincidence that's tooconvenient will threaten the
suspension of disbelief.
What does too convenient mean?
It can mean a couple of things.
It might be a series of positivecoincidences where the
protagonist gets what they wantand we start to feel that the
(14:01):
story is going too easily forthem.
Or it might be just one eventwhere the reader can tell that
you, the author, really neededsomething to happen in a
particular way you neededcharacter A to be at location B.
So conveniently, there they are,you needed to reveal a
particular piece of information,and so character c blurts it out
(14:23):
for no reason, just when theprotagonist needs to hear it.
So that's what I mean by tooconvenient, too many positive
coincidences in a row, makinglife too easy for the
protagonist or storydevelopments that feel
contrived, where you'reinadvertently telegraphing to
the reader that the reasonsomething happened is just
because you, the writer, reallyneeded it to.
(14:46):
All of these varieties ofcoincidence will erode the
reader's suspension ofdisbelief.
The story will no longer feelgrounded in reality, but
fantastical and unrealistic.
not in a cool fantasy worldbuilding way, but in a, this
story lost me kind of way.
In addition, the two convenientcoincidences will also make the
(15:07):
reader feel as though they cansee behind the curtain the cogs
and gears the author is using toconstruct the story.
It will no longer feel likestory magic, but like the reader
knows the magician's secrets andcan spot their work behind the
scenes.
Now, don't let this turn youaway from coincidental
progressive complicationsaltogether.
(15:28):
Consider that in pride andPrejudice.
Mr.
Bingley's decision to rinseNetherfield is entirely a
coincidence.
So too is Wickham just happeningto be among the malicious,
stationed nearby.
And when Elizabeth goes to visitKimberly, it's a coincidence
that Mr.
Darcy happens to return that dayand see her.
Coincidences happen in life andin story, and they do
(15:49):
effectively move the storyforward.
Just keep an eye out that youdon't have so many coincidences
that you threaten the reader'ssuspension of disbelief.
And if you ever have the gutfeeling that you're manipulating
a story event for yourconvenience, because you just
need something to happen.
Check yourself and look for away to move the chess pieces of
(16:10):
your story with reasonablecausality.
If you feel like something iscontrived, the reader will feel
it too.
So that was trap number four.
Here's trap number five.
Still on the theme of thecoincidences.
The majority of the progressivecomplications are not caused by
the protagonist actions, and sothe protagonist lacks agency.
(16:34):
Again, this one is rare on thescene level, but it is a common
trap on the global level.
It occurs when the progressivecomplications are not caused by
the actions the protagonisttakes.
Remember the protagonist choicesand actions are not themselves
progressive complications, butthe results of those choices and
(16:55):
actions can be progressivecomplications.
when the protagonist takesaction.
We assume that the consequencesof that action will be the next
progressive complication.
The next thing that theprotagonist has to deal with.
The trap here is when theiractions don't impact the next
progressive complication.
Instead, the next progressivecomplication comes out of the
(17:17):
blue, unrelated to the choicesthe protagonist has made.
In all of these instances, theprotagonist loses agency.
We're not watching a strongprotagonist make choices that
have an impact on their life andthe world around them, and then
navigate the consequences.
We're not following theprotagonist as they drive the
(17:37):
plot.
Instead, we're watching aprotagonist get blown about the
story on the winds of chance orsomeone else's decision making.
All of this risks the readerbecoming disappointed by the
story, disliking theprotagonist, and getting bored.
We like to see characters takebold and interesting action and
(17:57):
then navigate the consequences.
We find it annoying,frustrating, disappointing or
boring when we watch characterswithout agency fall into and out
of circumstances outside theircontrol.
So watch for how yourprotagonist's actions cause the
next progressive complicationsand make sure that their choices
(18:18):
are driving the story.
Now, chapter number six, there'slittle or no causality
connecting progressivecomplications.
And so the story feels episodicAgain, this is a trap I rarely
see on the scene level inscenes, I find that writers are
typically pretty consistentabout creating strong chains of
(18:40):
cause and effect.
It is less common that we losethat chain of causality on the
scene level, but this is a trapon the global level.
In this trap, writers turnprogressive complications into
self-contained stories of theirown.
When this happens, eachprogressive complication feels
like a big event that'sdisconnected from the larger
(19:01):
goal and conclusively resolvedwithin a few scenes.
The impact on the reader is anepisodic feel rather than one
cohesive, singular story.
It reads like a series of shortstories without a clear and
meaningful build towards anoverarching plot.
and there are types ofstorytelling where an episodic
structure is desirable.
(19:23):
Episodes of television areliterally episodic.
The Mandalorian is one show thatstands out for me as being
particularly, so each episodefeels to me like one small
story.
They do build to a cohesive,overarching whole.
But every episode is kind oflike a little short story within
it.
It's a delightful viewingexperience.
(19:44):
Another type of storytellingthat lends itself to an episodic
structure is tabletoprole-playing games.
when you're playing an RPG, eachsection of storytelling has to
fit within one gaming session.
So just a few hours together,and there can be one-off
encounters that are fun to play,but have limited plot
significance.
I've worked on some novels thathave been translated from RPG
(20:05):
campaigns, And those storiestend to need some refining to
turn the episodic feel into onecohesive momentum driven story.
Then there are novels like Anneof Green Gables that truly are
designed to be somewhatepisodic.
Anne of Green Gables reads as aseries of vignettes rather than
one singular build of plot.
(20:25):
The trick there though is thatAnne of Green Gables is a
primarily internal story ratherthan an external one.
It's not a high stakes actionplot.
It's a slow, gentle, long-termstory of character
transformation where theinternal genre takes the lead.
Those stories can be veryrewarding to read, but because
(20:46):
the story arc is so internal andthey're light on external action
and plot, they are morechallenging to write, and that
episodic vignette approach doesnot work very well for highly
external novels like the actiongenre.
So default to creating clear,strong driving cause and effect
connections between yourprogressive complications on
(21:07):
both the scene and the globalstory level.
Unless you have a really goodreason to break that.
And even then, if you go thevignette route, I, I'd say
you'll still need stronginternal causality, even if the
external events are only looselyconnected.
So those are the main traps thatstories fall into when they lean
(21:27):
harder on coincidence thancausality and lose their cause
and effect trajectory.
The final trap is not aboutcoincidences, but something even
simpler.
Here it is.
There are no.
Progressive complications.
All the challenges ofcoincidence and causality are
(21:48):
almost always global issues.
Usually on the scene level, wecan pretty clearly see how one
story beat causes the next one.
By contrast, this trap anabsence of progressive
complications.
This is almost always a sceneissue.
I have never yet encountered awriter who had no progressive
complications in their globalstory, but I have encountered
(22:11):
scenes with no progressivecomplications.
This means that the scene movesstraight from the inciting
incidents to the turning pointwith no progressive
complications in between.
Or the first major thing thathappens in the scene feels like
both the inciting incident andthe turning point It probably
comes about one third of the waythrough the scene.
(22:33):
So there are several pages ofgeneral scene setting before it
happens.
And once it happens, it feelslike the action has just kicked
off.
The character's goal has justbeen incited, and in the same
moment, the character is rushedstraight into their crisis and
climax.
The several pages of scenesetting before the inciting
incident aren't inherently aproblem.
(22:55):
Sometimes the scene needs thattime and space to really
establish the before value,before the inciting incidents
disrupt things.
But when you combine that longeropening with a lack of
progressive complications andone single event that's playing
the role of both incitingincidents and turning points.
(23:15):
It means that the scenestructure, pacing, and purpose
are wonky From the reader'sperspective, the scene still
moves the story forward, butthere's potential left
unrealized punches that itpulled emotional impact that it
could have had but missed.
So.
Space things out.
Figure out what the scene isreally about and what the
(23:39):
inciting incidents and turningpoint are, and then look for at
least one progressivecomplication that can escalate
the conflict in between them.
and there you have it.
The seven most commonprogressive complication traps
that I see here they are again,one.
The progressive complicationsare neutral.
(24:00):
This slows the story down.
Leaks tension because of thelack of conflict and bores the
reader because they feel likethey're wading through
irrelevant information.
Two, the progressivecomplications repeat the same
conflict rather than escalatingthe conflict.
This slows the story down.
Feels irritatingly, repetitive,and bores the reader.
(24:22):
Three, the progressivecomplications.
Don't reinforce the startingvalue, but pull us off course to
focus on different values.
This splinters the reader'sfocus pulls power from the
emotional punch of the endingand risks confusing or
disappointing readers when theynoticed that details were
included, that didn't matter, orplot threads were opened without
(24:45):
payoff four.
If the progressive complicationsare too coincidental, this is
usually a global story levelissue and it erodes the reader's
suspension of disbelief.
In addition, if the coincidencesfeel contrived, the reader will
feel like they're seeing thestory machinery at work rather
(25:05):
than getting lost in the magic.
Five.
The majority of the progressivecomplications are not caused by
the protagonist's actions, andso the protagonist lacks agency.
This is usually a global storylevel issue, and it disappoints
the reader, makes them dislikethe protagonist and bores them.
(25:27):
Six.
There's little or no causality,connecting progressive
complications, and so the storyfeels episodic.
This is a global story levelissue, And it makes the reader
feel like they're reading aseries of short stories,
watching a season of TV show orfollowing an RPG campaign rather
than experiencing the cohesive,overarching plot of a novel.
(25:51):
And seven, there are noprogressive complications.
This is a scene level issue, andwhile the scene may move the
story forward, it leavespotential impact and meaning
unrealized.
So now that you know whatprogressive complications are,
what they're doing in your storyand what traps to avoid, what do
(26:11):
you do next?
Well, first off, do not try tohold all of this in your head as
you write a first draft.
My goodness.
It is way too much for that.
These are editing tools,revision principles, not writing
rules.
I cannot say that emphaticallyenough.
This is for editing, not forwriting.
(26:34):
When you're writing a firstdraft, set all of this aside and
let yourself sink into your owncreative flow.
If you try to reverse engineer astory by building progressive
complications, according to thislist of traps, you will make
yourself miserable.
You're going to be filled withall of the things that you
should not do, and you won't beable to imagine what the
(26:56):
possibilities are for yourstory.
But when you've got somethingwritten and you're ready to put
all these revision tools towork, here's where to start.
Pick a scene, any scene fromyour manuscript.
Look at what happens between theinciting incidents and the
turning point.
Can you find one, two?
(27:16):
Three progressive complications.
Do they escalate?
Do they push the protagonistcloser to or farther from their
goal?
Do they reinforce the startingvalue of the scene and does the
scene move the story along theglobal value spectrum?
And just as important, do theyavoid the traps?
(27:36):
If the answer is yes, amazing,your progressive complications
are doing their job well.
If you spot gaps where yourscene doesn't check all the
boxes, great.
Now you know what to revise for.
And if all of this feelsoverwhelmingly technical, like
the calculus of storytelling, Iget it.
That's why I'm here.
I.
This is my jam.
(27:58):
Truly.
I gathered all my thoughts onprogressive complications for
weeks before I wrote thisepisode.
I went over the script severaltimes after it was written, and
every single time I thought of anew trap to include or a new
layer of nuance to add, I had myeditor friend, Kim Kessler peer
review all this for me, andbased on her feedback, I
probably added another 10minutes of episode, and that was
(28:20):
fun for me.
I love this kind of analysisbecause I am an editor.
It is my job to know all of thisand to run all this analysis in
my head so that you can stay inyour creative flow.
You can dip your toe into thisanalysis as much as you like,
Then nope.
Write out and outsource it to meat any time if you'd like, help
(28:41):
seeing what's working, what'smissing, and how to revise your
scenes and stories so that everymoment builds towards something
powerful.
I would love to work with you.
Go to alice sudler.com/contactand fill out the form there to
tell me about your story andI'll be in touch.
And don't forget, you can grab afree progressive complication
cheat sheet to print out andreference anytime you're
(29:02):
editing.
Go to alice sudler.com/ 88 andenter your email address in the
form on that page, and I'll sendit right to you.
All right, this was theprogressive complication part of
our series.
Up next, we've got the TurningPoint, crisis Climax and
Resolution, so there's much moreto come.
Until next time, happy editing.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
New Heights with Jason & Travis Kelce
Football’s funniest family duo — Jason Kelce of the Philadelphia Eagles and Travis Kelce of the Kansas City Chiefs — team up to provide next-level access to life in the league as it unfolds. The two brothers and Super Bowl champions drop weekly insights about the weekly slate of games and share their INSIDE perspectives on trending NFL news and sports headlines. They also endlessly rag on each other as brothers do, chat the latest in pop culture and welcome some very popular and well-known friends to chat with them. Check out new episodes every Wednesday. Follow New Heights on the Wondery App, YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. You can listen to new episodes early and ad-free, and get exclusive content on Wondery+. Join Wondery+ in the Wondery App, Apple Podcasts or Spotify. And join our new membership for a unique fan experience by going to the New Heights YouTube channel now!