Getting Closer

Who dunnit

We were left in the last post with Frank being killed, but we weren't sure why or how, and how did Jake get involved?  I was standing outside, not even thinking about it, when it came to me.  Frank was having it out with Nancy, and they got into a struggle.  A ten-year-old Jake found the, and tried to separate them.  In the struggle, Frank was stabbed.  Nancy let Jake think it was him, but also makes him believe she will take the blame for it.


What this solves

Jake isn't really a killer, but thinks he killed his father.  The discovery that it was really Nancy releases him from this block.  Everybody else thinks it was Nancy, only Jake thinks he knows it was him, a secret he tells nobody but which shapes his personality for years to come.


So have we sorted everything?

Some things, but not others. Let's have a look at the chronology:

• Twenty years ago, Friedrich Recker is rescued from the sea and brought to Glasgow
• As he gains strength, he gains popularity and influence
• Frank Fraser and his wife Peggy fall under his influence
• Recker embarks on a reign of terror in the community
• Nancy has an affair with Recker and falls pregnant
• She kills Frank in a struggle and let's Jake think it was him
• VAGUE - Her irrational behaviour gets her locked in a shed and set alight
• She survives in secret and goes into hiding
• VAGUE - someone traps Recker in the church

The first thing off the bat is that I cannot call him Frank Fraser.  This is the name of a notorious real-life London criminal, and is so instantly recognisable that it would be a distraction to keep calling him that.  So let's call him Billy, which would explain why his first son is called William.

We seem to be left with two vague items on the list - what Nancy did that made some in the community lock her up.  Why someone then set fire to the shed.  And then the whole mechanism for how Recker as Fiend gets trapped and locked in the church.


What Nancy Did

Well we know she actually killed Frank, I mean Billy! but is that enough?  I don't think so.  To lock her up, I think people would have had to fear her doing something terrible, and although I hinted that perhaps she threatened the children, I cannot see any logical way to get this into the story, unless I introduce a narrative of growing resentment against them.  Remember she is alive but hasn't been in touch for years.

I think what is much more likely is that William aged thirteen does it.  He is in grief about his father, and they haven't told him who did it, just that they are in the shed.  He doesn't know.  William has never told anyone he was the one who set the fire, and has had to live with the fact for years.  It explains why he is always on the search for excitement, he hates thinking and introspection.

The twist in this is that after William dies, Nancy is the one who tells Jake about it.  It also explains why she has not tried to contact the boys again, she is bitter that her son tried to kill her, and she had a new baby.


How did Fiend get in the church?

This is the major puzzle, and perhaps has something to say about the modern story.  It had to be someone close to him, and that person could only be Nancy.   But she was hiding.   And why would she do it anyway?  Because she was trying to protect him?  From who?

I think he was planning to leave.  The pitchforks were out in the community, and he was about to do a runner.  She wanted to come with him, but he was going to go without her.  So she trapped him.  And she kept feeding him over the years.


So how did she do it?

As we hinted at before, Fiend needs something to be healthy.  This stems from the original idea of him being a vampire, and it was blood which roused him from his catatonic state, and the lack of blood which kept him in it.  But now he's not a vampire, we need something else.  I don't like the idea of something chemical, what about light itself?  He needs sunlight to survive!

So she drugged him, got him to the church, locked him in, and when he awoke, he was weak with the lack of light.  And he stayed weak. And she kept him barely alive by bringing him food and water.  It was only when he was broken out of the church and exposed to the light again that he started to recover/


That's it

I think we've almost got the entire back story.  We'll go over it in the next post, to make sure we have everything covered.

The Nub of the Issue

Things are moving fast

I am already exhilarated and scared by the pace of this new method, but let's take a moment to pause and make sure we've assimilated all the new material into the existing story framework.  Then we can see any new hooks and work on them.


A recap of where we are in the 20-years-ago chronology

• Twenty years ago, Friedrich Recker is rescued from the sea and brought to Glasgow
• As he gains strength, he gains popularity and influence
• Frank Fraser and his wife Peggy fall under his influence
• Recker embarks on a reign of terror in the community
• Nancy has an affair with Recker and falls pregnant
• VAGUE - she does something to warrant community retribution and dies
• VAGUE - Frank gets killed somehow
• VAGUE - a ten year old Jake attacks someone and kills them
• VAGUE - someone traps Recker in the church

And the rest is history.  This seems like a good inroad into the mystery, but we still have a lot of unknowns to work through.

I've just had a thought

What if Nancy didn't die?  What if it is believed she died, but she went into hiding and has been the one feeding Fiend all these years?  What happened to the child?  Remember this is Jake's half-sibling, sired by the Fiend himself.  What kind of person would that be?  Could it be one of the characters we've already met?  This would be a nineteen year old, remember.

I'm very tempted to make the child either Katie or Elaine.  If we make it Katie, then both Jake and William have been in relationships with their half-sister. If we make it Elaine, then only Jake has been, and it might explain why they don't get on.  Is this too weird a revelation?  Would a very-much-alive Nancy have allowed the Fraser boys to have had a relationship with their half-sister?

I'm torn.  I had it in my mind that Jake and Katie end up together, but obviously the revelation of their blood ties puts an end to that.  If we imagine that Katie is Jake's ex, then at age nineteen, this seems a lot of history to squeeze into such young person.  If I make it Elaine, then it justifies the fact that they are drifting apart, on some subconscious level they know it's wrong,  and it lends a justifying moral overtone to him leaving her and going towards Katie.

But, I want the daughter of Fiend to be an important part of the story.  Until now, Elaine has been more of an annoyance factor, the naysayer who nags and drags Jake down.  There is no way the daughter of Fiend can be such an insect to be swatted off.

So do we abandon the idea, or do we make Elaine have more of an impact and character in the story?

Imagine: Jake finds out his mother is alive.  He finds out Elaine is her daughter.  He finds out she betrayed his father and was still bringing food to Fiend in captivity.  Imagine it. Imagine this not coming out until after William has been killed.  Wow.

These are too good to waste.  I have to go with it, no matter how difficult it will be rewriting Elaine's character.

The impact of that tremor

So what impact does this have on the story?  Well, luckily, not much in the medium term.  Having Nancy still around both explains a few things and introduces a complexity in the final third of the story that we didn't have before.  Someone was feeding Fiend during the twenty years of captivity, and now we know who.

Elaine now has to get some attention.  She's immediately a lot younger than I originally thought, and quite a bit younger than Jake.  Obviously her mother gave her up, because she knows nothing about her or who her father is.  She spent a lot of her childhood in children's homes.  This has made her self-reliant and a little bit tough, and she seems older than her years (explaining the age gap somewhat). She has inherited her father's meddlesome nature, and in the last third of the story she finds out who he is.

Jake is with her because she fights his battles for him.  He is unable to stick up for himself, so she does it for him, in a sisterly way - little knowing that she actually is his half-sister.  I think we need to introduce the idea that she and Jake are almost celibate, something he complains about to Katie, but which Elaine seems perfectly happy with.  On a deep level, they don't feel attracted to one another sexually, and this is borne out in the course of the story,

Back to where we were

So all of this is interesting, but the impact of it lies mostly in the modern day story, and whilst vital in the grand scheme, we can come back to that later.  So Nancy doesn't actually die in the community retribution - I'm almost completely convinced they locked her in somewhere and set fire to it - the image popped up at once and hasn't gone away.  Obviously she did survive, but she went into hiding and everybody thinks she's dead.

So what was it she did that people thought they must kill her in this way?  Well, it's clear she is really under Fiend's spell, completely entranced.  Did he ask her to murder her two sons, and it was found out?  Was she prevented from doing it, and then tried again, causing the community to think there was nothing else for it for to end her?

This is interesting.  She wanted to please Fiend, and was willing to kill her own family to do it.  She still has a flame for him, and carries it through 20 years of exile and hiding. And then when Fiend finally escapes?  He flicks her off like an insect.

So where does Frank fit in?

So while this was all going on, what was Frank doing?  A bit like the Jake story, Frank went along with Fiend at first, getting caught up in the excitement.  But at some point, he stopped, probably when he realised Nancy was slipping away from him.  So I think turning away from Fiend was what precipitated his death.  Did Jake kill him?

I have the same problem with Jake killing his father that I had before.  What reason would provoke a ten-year-old to violently kill his father, even if he was physically capable of doing it?  Frank seems more like a victim here than a perpetrator, he's lost his wife to the Fiend, and he's now the target of his evil glare by going against him.  What wold make him be attacked by his young son?  Nothing I can see.

Are we any further forward?

It seems every question we answer, we come up with another one.  But progress is beig made, so let's keep going.

The Deadly Deed

We made a start

Last time I actually had to create some new plot material.  This was because when I bounced the story theme up into the higher threads, I hadn't written enough backstory to satisfy this.  So we looked at the hooks I had left in the sketch plot and started to fill them out a bit.  We came up with the idea that Fiend was an immortal being, trapped in a church previously, starved of a vital nutrient and thus weak and unable to escape.


Hook 2: Who did Jake kill, and why?

Man, this is getting to the nub of the problem, and quickly.  To answer this probably answers all the other hooks put together, because Jake's problem is going to be ultimately wrapped up in the entire mystery.  He doesn't know it yet, but he killed for a reason, and that reason is tied up with Fiend.

He's 29 now, and if we put the original entrapment of Fiend nineteen years in the past, that makes him a 10-year-old when he does the killing.  Who does he kill?  There are a few possibilities, and I'll list them here as a sort of brainstorming fart:

1. Jake is the one who poisoned Fiend, and accidentally poisoned someone else and killed them
2. Jake killed the person who poisoned Fiend for some unknown reason
3. Jake killed one or both of his parents
4. Jake killed a member of Fiend's gang during the previous reign
5. Jake poisoned Fiend and believes he killed him
6. Jake did not kill anyone, it is a false memory
7. Jake killed the person who killed his parents

I think I can rule out the poisoning ones, because Jake has a memory of a violent outburst, this is why he controls his temper now.  A poisoning is not really violent.  But does it have to be a poisoning?  all we need is for Fiend to have been incapacitated.  Could it be that Jake attacked Fiend and thinks he killed him, while someone else removed the body?

It sounds good, and I love the idea that Jake has been labouring under a misapprehension for all these years - it would help the redemption thread - except I think I have to rule it out because I suspect Jake would recognise him.  10 years old enough to remember what Fiend looked like, also the older people would remember Fiend.  I don't think Jake can have had such intimate contact with Fiend before, I know people block traumatic things out, but that's too much to believe.

That leaves Jake killing someone other than Fiend. The devilish part of me would love him to have killed his own parents, but as a reader I don't think he could come back from that.   There is scope for him thinking he caused their deaths, but I think the most emotional one is that he killed the person who murdered his parents.  This immediately engages sympathy with him.  It can be revealed that this person was involved with Fiend, so that in his mind Fiend becomes responsible for his parent's death.


The Answer to Hook 2?

Who did Jake kill, and why?
Jake killed the person who murdered his parents.  We have yet to establish the exact events and methods, but it was violent, and scarred Jake for life.

Not bad.  Unfortunately as it answers one question, it raises another, who killed his parents and why?  Luckily this was already Hook 3.


Hook 3: What happened to his parents?

Well, they got killed.  But by whom and why?  I think I need to go back and nail this backstory, because the holes are starting to show.  So what facts do we know about the backstory?

1. Fiend was out and about, having been rescued off the coast of north Germany and brought over in a ship.

2. Jake's parents were killed by someone connected with Fiend.

3. Jake killed someone, probably the person who killed his parents.

4. Fiend was trapped in the church by someone now gone or dead.

5. Some wrong was done by the community which they are now ashamed of.

6. Those who do remember, have a reason not to tell Jake.

I like the look of number 5 the best to start off with, because it's away from the main characters and I can get creative without harming what I've already created.  Something shameful was done by the community, they thought they were doing it for good reason at the time, but the cost of it has led to an ongoing shame and inhibition.  What could it be?

Well, it was caused by Fiend, either directly or indirectly, that's for sure.  Like with the modern story, Fiend is charismatic and good at making the weaker-minded fall under his spell.  Could it be that an ally of Fiend's was subjected to some sort of community punishment, one that was shameful and cruel?

This would be a good time-parallel, because of the way William dies in the modern story.  Being close to Fiend gets you killed, not by Fiend, but by others.  So we need a someone from the past to have fallen under his spell.


Who was close, and how did they die?

I think there is an unexplored area here, and that is a female love interest for Fiend.  Someone was in love with Fiend and was having his baby.  The community killed her.  I think it's obvious this was Jake's mother.  And this begs the idea it was Jake's father who killed her.  But whoa there....

...Let's not immediately jump with the obvious.  Since we're going to be discussing them, I think we need to give his parents names.  His father was Francis, or Frank to everybody else.  His mother was Nancy.  Since they already had a 10 year old and a 13 year old, they had to have been in their early thirties, let's make Frank 31 when he died and Nancy 30.

So, at some point in the backstory, Nancy fell for Fiend and had an affair with him.  Until this time, Frank has also been in his thrall but this event turned him against Fiend (and Nancy).  This is a nice parallel with the way Fiend divides Jake and William in the modern day story.  I like it.


But did Frank go on to kill Nancy?

I think not.  Apart from being too obvious, and I hate obvious, remember that Nancy dies at the hands of a community punishment.  Obviously the wrong of a young mother having an affair is bad, but not bad enough to warrant a cruel retribution by the community.  Also, this means that the person Jake killed is more likely to have been the person who killed his father Frank, since his mother was killed by an ensemble of ordinary people.

So what did Nancy do, how did she die, and who killed Frank, and why did Jake kill him?


Multiplying Questions

Well, we're getting somewhere, but every question I answer seems to generate a dozen more.  I need to end this post somewhere, and this seems as good a place as any.

You can see that bouncing the theme upwards has caused more creativity than any number of Dramatica grids.