How to use deus ex machina safely?What methods does Rowling use to establish Dumbledore as being wise and trustworthy?How do you force a turning point in a narrative that is supposed to be precisely about the lack of such devices?Do You Use A Specific Set Of Questions For Developing Your CharacterHow to use sociological and/or psychological studies in character building?How do I plot the defeat of an all-knowing, god-like antagonist?How to use pun in this storyHow often can I use time lapses?Is it a deus ex machina if the alternative is illogical?Intentionally writing a Deus Ex Machina?How best to avoid the appearance of Deus Ex Machina with established character?

Gantt Chart like rectangles with log scale

Min function accepting varying number of arguments in C++17

How big is a MODIS 250m pixel in reality?

How to terminate ping <dest> &

Co-worker team leader wants to inject his friend's awful software into our development. What should I say to our common boss?

How to use deus ex machina safely?

Why doesn't the EU now just force the UK to choose between referendum and no-deal?

How difficult is it to simply disable/disengage the MCAS on Boeing 737 Max 8 & 9 Aircraft?

Are all passive ability checks floors for active ability checks?

Have researchers managed to "reverse time"? If so, what does that mean for physics?

Why do Australian milk farmers need to protest supermarkets' milk price?

Should we release the security issues we found in our product as CVE or we can just update those on weekly release notes?

(Calculus) Derivative Thinking Question

how to draw discrete time diagram in tikz

Time travel from stationary position?

A Cautionary Suggestion

How can you use ICE tables to solve multiple coupled equilibria?

Can a druid choose the size of its wild shape beast?

Professor being mistaken for a grad student

Sailing the cryptic seas

How do I hide Chekhov's Gun?

What exactly is this small puffer fish doing and how did it manage to accomplish such a feat?

Are there other languages, besides English, where the indefinite (or definite) article varies based on sound?

What is the significance behind "40 days" that often appears in the Bible?



How to use deus ex machina safely?


What methods does Rowling use to establish Dumbledore as being wise and trustworthy?How do you force a turning point in a narrative that is supposed to be precisely about the lack of such devices?Do You Use A Specific Set Of Questions For Developing Your CharacterHow to use sociological and/or psychological studies in character building?How do I plot the defeat of an all-knowing, god-like antagonist?How to use pun in this storyHow often can I use time lapses?Is it a deus ex machina if the alternative is illogical?Intentionally writing a Deus Ex Machina?How best to avoid the appearance of Deus Ex Machina with established character?













10















One of my main character's traits is that she has some superstitious beliefs. That trait is not essential to the MC, but everyone in the era of my story is. I'm contemplating a plot point near the end that the reader might perceive as deus ex machina, but the plot point isn't the actual climax, it's a faux climax.



To bring the idea home, my MC is one who believes good people are afflicted with calamities, only to be corrected and restored by a superpower without much effort on one's behalf. Then an event happens (like some relative wins the lottery and promises to help) that the MC thinks is the solution to all problems, only to discover this solution is not happening, or it made things even worse.



If the reader knows that the MC is superstitious would that be enough foreshadowing for the faux climax I'm considering? Or, would they think its a cheap shot on my part? I'm thinking of this because it could be the last lesson my MC needs to finish her arch.










share|improve this question







New contributor




imatowrite is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • So you have a faux "deus ex machina" which does not lead to any resolution?

    – Alexander
    7 hours ago











  • Only temporarily, But still I fear it would have the same effect on the reader. Because it would definitely tie some loose ends, but not the main conflict. In other words: even a miracle is not enough to solve your problems, oh you Main Character!

    – imatowrite
    7 hours ago
















10















One of my main character's traits is that she has some superstitious beliefs. That trait is not essential to the MC, but everyone in the era of my story is. I'm contemplating a plot point near the end that the reader might perceive as deus ex machina, but the plot point isn't the actual climax, it's a faux climax.



To bring the idea home, my MC is one who believes good people are afflicted with calamities, only to be corrected and restored by a superpower without much effort on one's behalf. Then an event happens (like some relative wins the lottery and promises to help) that the MC thinks is the solution to all problems, only to discover this solution is not happening, or it made things even worse.



If the reader knows that the MC is superstitious would that be enough foreshadowing for the faux climax I'm considering? Or, would they think its a cheap shot on my part? I'm thinking of this because it could be the last lesson my MC needs to finish her arch.










share|improve this question







New contributor




imatowrite is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • So you have a faux "deus ex machina" which does not lead to any resolution?

    – Alexander
    7 hours ago











  • Only temporarily, But still I fear it would have the same effect on the reader. Because it would definitely tie some loose ends, but not the main conflict. In other words: even a miracle is not enough to solve your problems, oh you Main Character!

    – imatowrite
    7 hours ago














10












10








10








One of my main character's traits is that she has some superstitious beliefs. That trait is not essential to the MC, but everyone in the era of my story is. I'm contemplating a plot point near the end that the reader might perceive as deus ex machina, but the plot point isn't the actual climax, it's a faux climax.



To bring the idea home, my MC is one who believes good people are afflicted with calamities, only to be corrected and restored by a superpower without much effort on one's behalf. Then an event happens (like some relative wins the lottery and promises to help) that the MC thinks is the solution to all problems, only to discover this solution is not happening, or it made things even worse.



If the reader knows that the MC is superstitious would that be enough foreshadowing for the faux climax I'm considering? Or, would they think its a cheap shot on my part? I'm thinking of this because it could be the last lesson my MC needs to finish her arch.










share|improve this question







New contributor




imatowrite is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












One of my main character's traits is that she has some superstitious beliefs. That trait is not essential to the MC, but everyone in the era of my story is. I'm contemplating a plot point near the end that the reader might perceive as deus ex machina, but the plot point isn't the actual climax, it's a faux climax.



To bring the idea home, my MC is one who believes good people are afflicted with calamities, only to be corrected and restored by a superpower without much effort on one's behalf. Then an event happens (like some relative wins the lottery and promises to help) that the MC thinks is the solution to all problems, only to discover this solution is not happening, or it made things even worse.



If the reader knows that the MC is superstitious would that be enough foreshadowing for the faux climax I'm considering? Or, would they think its a cheap shot on my part? I'm thinking of this because it could be the last lesson my MC needs to finish her arch.







technique character-development plot






share|improve this question







New contributor




imatowrite is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question







New contributor




imatowrite is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question






New contributor




imatowrite is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 8 hours ago









imatowriteimatowrite

49416




49416




New contributor




imatowrite is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





imatowrite is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






imatowrite is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












  • So you have a faux "deus ex machina" which does not lead to any resolution?

    – Alexander
    7 hours ago











  • Only temporarily, But still I fear it would have the same effect on the reader. Because it would definitely tie some loose ends, but not the main conflict. In other words: even a miracle is not enough to solve your problems, oh you Main Character!

    – imatowrite
    7 hours ago


















  • So you have a faux "deus ex machina" which does not lead to any resolution?

    – Alexander
    7 hours ago











  • Only temporarily, But still I fear it would have the same effect on the reader. Because it would definitely tie some loose ends, but not the main conflict. In other words: even a miracle is not enough to solve your problems, oh you Main Character!

    – imatowrite
    7 hours ago

















So you have a faux "deus ex machina" which does not lead to any resolution?

– Alexander
7 hours ago





So you have a faux "deus ex machina" which does not lead to any resolution?

– Alexander
7 hours ago













Only temporarily, But still I fear it would have the same effect on the reader. Because it would definitely tie some loose ends, but not the main conflict. In other words: even a miracle is not enough to solve your problems, oh you Main Character!

– imatowrite
7 hours ago






Only temporarily, But still I fear it would have the same effect on the reader. Because it would definitely tie some loose ends, but not the main conflict. In other words: even a miracle is not enough to solve your problems, oh you Main Character!

– imatowrite
7 hours ago











3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















12














Actually, the faux deus ex sounds pretty good.



That makes it all about the characters perception of the events. Just be sure that you have enough clues leading up to the event that after the reader finds out that it is not real, the readers can say, "of course, I should have seen that."






share|improve this answer








New contributor




ShadoCat is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.



























    4














    A deus ex machina actually does solve the problem.



    I can't tell, from what you have written in your question, if winning the lottery eventually does solve all her problems. If it does not immediately but does eventually there is no escaping that fact that you used a deus ex machina, and this is not a good story. Her problems were not solved by her own efforts, or her own sacrifice, or her own imaginative solution, so she doesn't deserve the solution. No matter what "character growth" you have given her.



    If the lottery win is not real, but the idea of it spurs her to solve her problems, then that is okay. If the lottery win is real but the only way to solve her problems is to donate all the money to charity or use it all to help somebody else, that is probably okay too. The miracle of the lottery win cannot solve her problem in any way.



    But once it is "undone" (she will not benefit personally from any of the money), it can be used for her to learn a lesson, change her life goals, or accept a situation and then this personal change in her may provide the solution to her problem.



    Like Dorothy in the Wizard of Oz, the way home was always with her, she was wearing the ruby slippers the whole time. But the WoZ is a kid-to-adult story; so Dorothy had to become a hero first, and save her friends, and be betrayed by the Wizard (he left without her) before she got her heart's desire.



    You can't use a true deus ex machina "safely", you cannot solve the character's problem with any kind of million-to-one payoff. A satisfying ending must be a result of character, of bravery, of sacrifice, of risk-taking, of resolve, of selflessness, of one or more of the aspects of personality we find admirable, perhaps enough to bring us to tears.



    Being lucky isn't one of those. In fact being lucky is one of the things many of us can resent! We use dismissive terms for it, like being born on third base, or being born with a silver spoon in her mouth, or being a trust-fund baby. It doesn't inspire admiration or sympathy; it generally inspires jealousy and resentment.






    share|improve this answer























    • Guessing you're not a George R.R. Martin fan...

      – barbecue
      4 hours ago











    • @barbecue Do you have something specific in mind?

      – Amadeus
      3 hours ago











    • "there is no escaping that fact that you used a deus ex machina, and this is not a good story" This is too prescriptive. It can be a good story.

      – David Siegel
      32 mins ago












    • @DavidSiegel Said slightly in humor (and agreeing with you), but Chapter 48 of Richard Adams' excellent book Watership Down serves as a rather good example of this.

      – dgnuff
      4 mins ago


















    2














    It seems to me that the sort of faux deus ex machina described in the question is perfectly acceptable. As to whether it works for readers, or is sufficiently foreshadowed, that requires reading the whole work, and is a question for the author's beta readers.



    But then, I don't agree that a true deus ex machina is always bad for the story; it often is. But it can be part of a good story. An essential part, indeed.



    For example, consider The African Queen by C. S. Forrester. (The book, not the movie based on it.) In this book, the central problem, to which the two MCs are dedicated for most of the narrative, is the destruction of the German gunboat Louisa, which gives the German forces total control of the river and lake. Their plan for this destruction fails totally, and the Germans are about to hang Charlie as a spy when Rose is rescued. Unwilling to hang a European woman, the German Captain of the Louisa sets them both on shore at a British outpost on the lake. From this same outpost, a few days later, an armed British speedboat sets forth after the Louisa. Having longer ranged guns, and twice the speed of the Louisa, it easily sinks her.



    Neither the characters nor the reader had any idea that the British speedboat existed until after Charlie and Rose were set down at the British outpost. It is a pure deus ex machina. It solves the story problem with no effort by the MCs and would have done so in exactly the same way had they both fallen dead on page 10 of the book. Their efforts are totally irrelevant to the outcome.



    The real story problem, unknown to the characters, is their character development, and the real climax is the scene in the gorge, where Charlie, at the insistence of Rose that they do not simply give up, repairs the damaged propeller, a task had considered far beyond his powers, and the two become lovers. Rose has learned to be less puritanical and convention-bound. Charlie has learned a sense of self-discipline and confidence. The remainder of the book develops these qualities further and displays them in action. The point is the value of the human spirit and the best efforts in the face of adversity, even if no result is achieved or no one ever knows of the efforts, much the same point as is made in the author's Brown on Resolution



    In the movie version, the swamped African Queen destroys the Louisa using the improvised torpedoes that Charlie created at Rose's insistence, thus making their efforts successful, albeit only through an enormous stroke of luck. This removes the deus ex machina but reduces the emphasis on the character development, thus in my view weakening the story, not strengthening it.



    Thus I say that in a rare case, a true deus ex machina can actually strengthen a story, by revealing that the apparent story problem wasn't the true issue at all.






    share|improve this answer
























      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function()
      var channelOptions =
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "166"
      ;
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
      createEditor();
      );

      else
      createEditor();

      );

      function createEditor()
      StackExchange.prepareEditor(
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader:
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      ,
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      );



      );






      imatowrite is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function ()
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fwriting.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f43585%2fhow-to-use-deus-ex-machina-safely%23new-answer', 'question_page');

      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes








      3 Answers
      3






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      12














      Actually, the faux deus ex sounds pretty good.



      That makes it all about the characters perception of the events. Just be sure that you have enough clues leading up to the event that after the reader finds out that it is not real, the readers can say, "of course, I should have seen that."






      share|improve this answer








      New contributor




      ShadoCat is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.
























        12














        Actually, the faux deus ex sounds pretty good.



        That makes it all about the characters perception of the events. Just be sure that you have enough clues leading up to the event that after the reader finds out that it is not real, the readers can say, "of course, I should have seen that."






        share|improve this answer








        New contributor




        ShadoCat is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.






















          12












          12








          12







          Actually, the faux deus ex sounds pretty good.



          That makes it all about the characters perception of the events. Just be sure that you have enough clues leading up to the event that after the reader finds out that it is not real, the readers can say, "of course, I should have seen that."






          share|improve this answer








          New contributor




          ShadoCat is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.










          Actually, the faux deus ex sounds pretty good.



          That makes it all about the characters perception of the events. Just be sure that you have enough clues leading up to the event that after the reader finds out that it is not real, the readers can say, "of course, I should have seen that."







          share|improve this answer








          New contributor




          ShadoCat is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.









          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer






          New contributor




          ShadoCat is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.









          answered 7 hours ago









          ShadoCatShadoCat

          3014




          3014




          New contributor




          ShadoCat is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.





          New contributor





          ShadoCat is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.






          ShadoCat is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.





















              4














              A deus ex machina actually does solve the problem.



              I can't tell, from what you have written in your question, if winning the lottery eventually does solve all her problems. If it does not immediately but does eventually there is no escaping that fact that you used a deus ex machina, and this is not a good story. Her problems were not solved by her own efforts, or her own sacrifice, or her own imaginative solution, so she doesn't deserve the solution. No matter what "character growth" you have given her.



              If the lottery win is not real, but the idea of it spurs her to solve her problems, then that is okay. If the lottery win is real but the only way to solve her problems is to donate all the money to charity or use it all to help somebody else, that is probably okay too. The miracle of the lottery win cannot solve her problem in any way.



              But once it is "undone" (she will not benefit personally from any of the money), it can be used for her to learn a lesson, change her life goals, or accept a situation and then this personal change in her may provide the solution to her problem.



              Like Dorothy in the Wizard of Oz, the way home was always with her, she was wearing the ruby slippers the whole time. But the WoZ is a kid-to-adult story; so Dorothy had to become a hero first, and save her friends, and be betrayed by the Wizard (he left without her) before she got her heart's desire.



              You can't use a true deus ex machina "safely", you cannot solve the character's problem with any kind of million-to-one payoff. A satisfying ending must be a result of character, of bravery, of sacrifice, of risk-taking, of resolve, of selflessness, of one or more of the aspects of personality we find admirable, perhaps enough to bring us to tears.



              Being lucky isn't one of those. In fact being lucky is one of the things many of us can resent! We use dismissive terms for it, like being born on third base, or being born with a silver spoon in her mouth, or being a trust-fund baby. It doesn't inspire admiration or sympathy; it generally inspires jealousy and resentment.






              share|improve this answer























              • Guessing you're not a George R.R. Martin fan...

                – barbecue
                4 hours ago











              • @barbecue Do you have something specific in mind?

                – Amadeus
                3 hours ago











              • "there is no escaping that fact that you used a deus ex machina, and this is not a good story" This is too prescriptive. It can be a good story.

                – David Siegel
                32 mins ago












              • @DavidSiegel Said slightly in humor (and agreeing with you), but Chapter 48 of Richard Adams' excellent book Watership Down serves as a rather good example of this.

                – dgnuff
                4 mins ago















              4














              A deus ex machina actually does solve the problem.



              I can't tell, from what you have written in your question, if winning the lottery eventually does solve all her problems. If it does not immediately but does eventually there is no escaping that fact that you used a deus ex machina, and this is not a good story. Her problems were not solved by her own efforts, or her own sacrifice, or her own imaginative solution, so she doesn't deserve the solution. No matter what "character growth" you have given her.



              If the lottery win is not real, but the idea of it spurs her to solve her problems, then that is okay. If the lottery win is real but the only way to solve her problems is to donate all the money to charity or use it all to help somebody else, that is probably okay too. The miracle of the lottery win cannot solve her problem in any way.



              But once it is "undone" (she will not benefit personally from any of the money), it can be used for her to learn a lesson, change her life goals, or accept a situation and then this personal change in her may provide the solution to her problem.



              Like Dorothy in the Wizard of Oz, the way home was always with her, she was wearing the ruby slippers the whole time. But the WoZ is a kid-to-adult story; so Dorothy had to become a hero first, and save her friends, and be betrayed by the Wizard (he left without her) before she got her heart's desire.



              You can't use a true deus ex machina "safely", you cannot solve the character's problem with any kind of million-to-one payoff. A satisfying ending must be a result of character, of bravery, of sacrifice, of risk-taking, of resolve, of selflessness, of one or more of the aspects of personality we find admirable, perhaps enough to bring us to tears.



              Being lucky isn't one of those. In fact being lucky is one of the things many of us can resent! We use dismissive terms for it, like being born on third base, or being born with a silver spoon in her mouth, or being a trust-fund baby. It doesn't inspire admiration or sympathy; it generally inspires jealousy and resentment.






              share|improve this answer























              • Guessing you're not a George R.R. Martin fan...

                – barbecue
                4 hours ago











              • @barbecue Do you have something specific in mind?

                – Amadeus
                3 hours ago











              • "there is no escaping that fact that you used a deus ex machina, and this is not a good story" This is too prescriptive. It can be a good story.

                – David Siegel
                32 mins ago












              • @DavidSiegel Said slightly in humor (and agreeing with you), but Chapter 48 of Richard Adams' excellent book Watership Down serves as a rather good example of this.

                – dgnuff
                4 mins ago













              4












              4








              4







              A deus ex machina actually does solve the problem.



              I can't tell, from what you have written in your question, if winning the lottery eventually does solve all her problems. If it does not immediately but does eventually there is no escaping that fact that you used a deus ex machina, and this is not a good story. Her problems were not solved by her own efforts, or her own sacrifice, or her own imaginative solution, so she doesn't deserve the solution. No matter what "character growth" you have given her.



              If the lottery win is not real, but the idea of it spurs her to solve her problems, then that is okay. If the lottery win is real but the only way to solve her problems is to donate all the money to charity or use it all to help somebody else, that is probably okay too. The miracle of the lottery win cannot solve her problem in any way.



              But once it is "undone" (she will not benefit personally from any of the money), it can be used for her to learn a lesson, change her life goals, or accept a situation and then this personal change in her may provide the solution to her problem.



              Like Dorothy in the Wizard of Oz, the way home was always with her, she was wearing the ruby slippers the whole time. But the WoZ is a kid-to-adult story; so Dorothy had to become a hero first, and save her friends, and be betrayed by the Wizard (he left without her) before she got her heart's desire.



              You can't use a true deus ex machina "safely", you cannot solve the character's problem with any kind of million-to-one payoff. A satisfying ending must be a result of character, of bravery, of sacrifice, of risk-taking, of resolve, of selflessness, of one or more of the aspects of personality we find admirable, perhaps enough to bring us to tears.



              Being lucky isn't one of those. In fact being lucky is one of the things many of us can resent! We use dismissive terms for it, like being born on third base, or being born with a silver spoon in her mouth, or being a trust-fund baby. It doesn't inspire admiration or sympathy; it generally inspires jealousy and resentment.






              share|improve this answer













              A deus ex machina actually does solve the problem.



              I can't tell, from what you have written in your question, if winning the lottery eventually does solve all her problems. If it does not immediately but does eventually there is no escaping that fact that you used a deus ex machina, and this is not a good story. Her problems were not solved by her own efforts, or her own sacrifice, or her own imaginative solution, so she doesn't deserve the solution. No matter what "character growth" you have given her.



              If the lottery win is not real, but the idea of it spurs her to solve her problems, then that is okay. If the lottery win is real but the only way to solve her problems is to donate all the money to charity or use it all to help somebody else, that is probably okay too. The miracle of the lottery win cannot solve her problem in any way.



              But once it is "undone" (she will not benefit personally from any of the money), it can be used for her to learn a lesson, change her life goals, or accept a situation and then this personal change in her may provide the solution to her problem.



              Like Dorothy in the Wizard of Oz, the way home was always with her, she was wearing the ruby slippers the whole time. But the WoZ is a kid-to-adult story; so Dorothy had to become a hero first, and save her friends, and be betrayed by the Wizard (he left without her) before she got her heart's desire.



              You can't use a true deus ex machina "safely", you cannot solve the character's problem with any kind of million-to-one payoff. A satisfying ending must be a result of character, of bravery, of sacrifice, of risk-taking, of resolve, of selflessness, of one or more of the aspects of personality we find admirable, perhaps enough to bring us to tears.



              Being lucky isn't one of those. In fact being lucky is one of the things many of us can resent! We use dismissive terms for it, like being born on third base, or being born with a silver spoon in her mouth, or being a trust-fund baby. It doesn't inspire admiration or sympathy; it generally inspires jealousy and resentment.







              share|improve this answer












              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer










              answered 6 hours ago









              AmadeusAmadeus

              54.8k470179




              54.8k470179












              • Guessing you're not a George R.R. Martin fan...

                – barbecue
                4 hours ago











              • @barbecue Do you have something specific in mind?

                – Amadeus
                3 hours ago











              • "there is no escaping that fact that you used a deus ex machina, and this is not a good story" This is too prescriptive. It can be a good story.

                – David Siegel
                32 mins ago












              • @DavidSiegel Said slightly in humor (and agreeing with you), but Chapter 48 of Richard Adams' excellent book Watership Down serves as a rather good example of this.

                – dgnuff
                4 mins ago

















              • Guessing you're not a George R.R. Martin fan...

                – barbecue
                4 hours ago











              • @barbecue Do you have something specific in mind?

                – Amadeus
                3 hours ago











              • "there is no escaping that fact that you used a deus ex machina, and this is not a good story" This is too prescriptive. It can be a good story.

                – David Siegel
                32 mins ago












              • @DavidSiegel Said slightly in humor (and agreeing with you), but Chapter 48 of Richard Adams' excellent book Watership Down serves as a rather good example of this.

                – dgnuff
                4 mins ago
















              Guessing you're not a George R.R. Martin fan...

              – barbecue
              4 hours ago





              Guessing you're not a George R.R. Martin fan...

              – barbecue
              4 hours ago













              @barbecue Do you have something specific in mind?

              – Amadeus
              3 hours ago





              @barbecue Do you have something specific in mind?

              – Amadeus
              3 hours ago













              "there is no escaping that fact that you used a deus ex machina, and this is not a good story" This is too prescriptive. It can be a good story.

              – David Siegel
              32 mins ago






              "there is no escaping that fact that you used a deus ex machina, and this is not a good story" This is too prescriptive. It can be a good story.

              – David Siegel
              32 mins ago














              @DavidSiegel Said slightly in humor (and agreeing with you), but Chapter 48 of Richard Adams' excellent book Watership Down serves as a rather good example of this.

              – dgnuff
              4 mins ago





              @DavidSiegel Said slightly in humor (and agreeing with you), but Chapter 48 of Richard Adams' excellent book Watership Down serves as a rather good example of this.

              – dgnuff
              4 mins ago











              2














              It seems to me that the sort of faux deus ex machina described in the question is perfectly acceptable. As to whether it works for readers, or is sufficiently foreshadowed, that requires reading the whole work, and is a question for the author's beta readers.



              But then, I don't agree that a true deus ex machina is always bad for the story; it often is. But it can be part of a good story. An essential part, indeed.



              For example, consider The African Queen by C. S. Forrester. (The book, not the movie based on it.) In this book, the central problem, to which the two MCs are dedicated for most of the narrative, is the destruction of the German gunboat Louisa, which gives the German forces total control of the river and lake. Their plan for this destruction fails totally, and the Germans are about to hang Charlie as a spy when Rose is rescued. Unwilling to hang a European woman, the German Captain of the Louisa sets them both on shore at a British outpost on the lake. From this same outpost, a few days later, an armed British speedboat sets forth after the Louisa. Having longer ranged guns, and twice the speed of the Louisa, it easily sinks her.



              Neither the characters nor the reader had any idea that the British speedboat existed until after Charlie and Rose were set down at the British outpost. It is a pure deus ex machina. It solves the story problem with no effort by the MCs and would have done so in exactly the same way had they both fallen dead on page 10 of the book. Their efforts are totally irrelevant to the outcome.



              The real story problem, unknown to the characters, is their character development, and the real climax is the scene in the gorge, where Charlie, at the insistence of Rose that they do not simply give up, repairs the damaged propeller, a task had considered far beyond his powers, and the two become lovers. Rose has learned to be less puritanical and convention-bound. Charlie has learned a sense of self-discipline and confidence. The remainder of the book develops these qualities further and displays them in action. The point is the value of the human spirit and the best efforts in the face of adversity, even if no result is achieved or no one ever knows of the efforts, much the same point as is made in the author's Brown on Resolution



              In the movie version, the swamped African Queen destroys the Louisa using the improvised torpedoes that Charlie created at Rose's insistence, thus making their efforts successful, albeit only through an enormous stroke of luck. This removes the deus ex machina but reduces the emphasis on the character development, thus in my view weakening the story, not strengthening it.



              Thus I say that in a rare case, a true deus ex machina can actually strengthen a story, by revealing that the apparent story problem wasn't the true issue at all.






              share|improve this answer





























                2














                It seems to me that the sort of faux deus ex machina described in the question is perfectly acceptable. As to whether it works for readers, or is sufficiently foreshadowed, that requires reading the whole work, and is a question for the author's beta readers.



                But then, I don't agree that a true deus ex machina is always bad for the story; it often is. But it can be part of a good story. An essential part, indeed.



                For example, consider The African Queen by C. S. Forrester. (The book, not the movie based on it.) In this book, the central problem, to which the two MCs are dedicated for most of the narrative, is the destruction of the German gunboat Louisa, which gives the German forces total control of the river and lake. Their plan for this destruction fails totally, and the Germans are about to hang Charlie as a spy when Rose is rescued. Unwilling to hang a European woman, the German Captain of the Louisa sets them both on shore at a British outpost on the lake. From this same outpost, a few days later, an armed British speedboat sets forth after the Louisa. Having longer ranged guns, and twice the speed of the Louisa, it easily sinks her.



                Neither the characters nor the reader had any idea that the British speedboat existed until after Charlie and Rose were set down at the British outpost. It is a pure deus ex machina. It solves the story problem with no effort by the MCs and would have done so in exactly the same way had they both fallen dead on page 10 of the book. Their efforts are totally irrelevant to the outcome.



                The real story problem, unknown to the characters, is their character development, and the real climax is the scene in the gorge, where Charlie, at the insistence of Rose that they do not simply give up, repairs the damaged propeller, a task had considered far beyond his powers, and the two become lovers. Rose has learned to be less puritanical and convention-bound. Charlie has learned a sense of self-discipline and confidence. The remainder of the book develops these qualities further and displays them in action. The point is the value of the human spirit and the best efforts in the face of adversity, even if no result is achieved or no one ever knows of the efforts, much the same point as is made in the author's Brown on Resolution



                In the movie version, the swamped African Queen destroys the Louisa using the improvised torpedoes that Charlie created at Rose's insistence, thus making their efforts successful, albeit only through an enormous stroke of luck. This removes the deus ex machina but reduces the emphasis on the character development, thus in my view weakening the story, not strengthening it.



                Thus I say that in a rare case, a true deus ex machina can actually strengthen a story, by revealing that the apparent story problem wasn't the true issue at all.






                share|improve this answer



























                  2












                  2








                  2







                  It seems to me that the sort of faux deus ex machina described in the question is perfectly acceptable. As to whether it works for readers, or is sufficiently foreshadowed, that requires reading the whole work, and is a question for the author's beta readers.



                  But then, I don't agree that a true deus ex machina is always bad for the story; it often is. But it can be part of a good story. An essential part, indeed.



                  For example, consider The African Queen by C. S. Forrester. (The book, not the movie based on it.) In this book, the central problem, to which the two MCs are dedicated for most of the narrative, is the destruction of the German gunboat Louisa, which gives the German forces total control of the river and lake. Their plan for this destruction fails totally, and the Germans are about to hang Charlie as a spy when Rose is rescued. Unwilling to hang a European woman, the German Captain of the Louisa sets them both on shore at a British outpost on the lake. From this same outpost, a few days later, an armed British speedboat sets forth after the Louisa. Having longer ranged guns, and twice the speed of the Louisa, it easily sinks her.



                  Neither the characters nor the reader had any idea that the British speedboat existed until after Charlie and Rose were set down at the British outpost. It is a pure deus ex machina. It solves the story problem with no effort by the MCs and would have done so in exactly the same way had they both fallen dead on page 10 of the book. Their efforts are totally irrelevant to the outcome.



                  The real story problem, unknown to the characters, is their character development, and the real climax is the scene in the gorge, where Charlie, at the insistence of Rose that they do not simply give up, repairs the damaged propeller, a task had considered far beyond his powers, and the two become lovers. Rose has learned to be less puritanical and convention-bound. Charlie has learned a sense of self-discipline and confidence. The remainder of the book develops these qualities further and displays them in action. The point is the value of the human spirit and the best efforts in the face of adversity, even if no result is achieved or no one ever knows of the efforts, much the same point as is made in the author's Brown on Resolution



                  In the movie version, the swamped African Queen destroys the Louisa using the improvised torpedoes that Charlie created at Rose's insistence, thus making their efforts successful, albeit only through an enormous stroke of luck. This removes the deus ex machina but reduces the emphasis on the character development, thus in my view weakening the story, not strengthening it.



                  Thus I say that in a rare case, a true deus ex machina can actually strengthen a story, by revealing that the apparent story problem wasn't the true issue at all.






                  share|improve this answer















                  It seems to me that the sort of faux deus ex machina described in the question is perfectly acceptable. As to whether it works for readers, or is sufficiently foreshadowed, that requires reading the whole work, and is a question for the author's beta readers.



                  But then, I don't agree that a true deus ex machina is always bad for the story; it often is. But it can be part of a good story. An essential part, indeed.



                  For example, consider The African Queen by C. S. Forrester. (The book, not the movie based on it.) In this book, the central problem, to which the two MCs are dedicated for most of the narrative, is the destruction of the German gunboat Louisa, which gives the German forces total control of the river and lake. Their plan for this destruction fails totally, and the Germans are about to hang Charlie as a spy when Rose is rescued. Unwilling to hang a European woman, the German Captain of the Louisa sets them both on shore at a British outpost on the lake. From this same outpost, a few days later, an armed British speedboat sets forth after the Louisa. Having longer ranged guns, and twice the speed of the Louisa, it easily sinks her.



                  Neither the characters nor the reader had any idea that the British speedboat existed until after Charlie and Rose were set down at the British outpost. It is a pure deus ex machina. It solves the story problem with no effort by the MCs and would have done so in exactly the same way had they both fallen dead on page 10 of the book. Their efforts are totally irrelevant to the outcome.



                  The real story problem, unknown to the characters, is their character development, and the real climax is the scene in the gorge, where Charlie, at the insistence of Rose that they do not simply give up, repairs the damaged propeller, a task had considered far beyond his powers, and the two become lovers. Rose has learned to be less puritanical and convention-bound. Charlie has learned a sense of self-discipline and confidence. The remainder of the book develops these qualities further and displays them in action. The point is the value of the human spirit and the best efforts in the face of adversity, even if no result is achieved or no one ever knows of the efforts, much the same point as is made in the author's Brown on Resolution



                  In the movie version, the swamped African Queen destroys the Louisa using the improvised torpedoes that Charlie created at Rose's insistence, thus making their efforts successful, albeit only through an enormous stroke of luck. This removes the deus ex machina but reduces the emphasis on the character development, thus in my view weakening the story, not strengthening it.



                  Thus I say that in a rare case, a true deus ex machina can actually strengthen a story, by revealing that the apparent story problem wasn't the true issue at all.







                  share|improve this answer














                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer








                  edited 2 hours ago

























                  answered 2 hours ago









                  David SiegelDavid Siegel

                  1,308118




                  1,308118




















                      imatowrite is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









                      draft saved

                      draft discarded


















                      imatowrite is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                      imatowrite is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











                      imatowrite is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Writing Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid


                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function ()
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fwriting.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f43585%2fhow-to-use-deus-ex-machina-safely%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      名間水力發電廠 目录 沿革 設施 鄰近設施 註釋 外部連結 导航菜单23°50′10″N 120°42′41″E / 23.83611°N 120.71139°E / 23.83611; 120.7113923°50′10″N 120°42′41″E / 23.83611°N 120.71139°E / 23.83611; 120.71139計畫概要原始内容臺灣第一座BOT 模式開發的水力發電廠-名間水力電廠名間水力發電廠 水利署首件BOT案原始内容《小檔案》名間電廠 首座BOT水力發電廠原始内容名間電廠BOT - 經濟部水利署中區水資源局

                      Prove that NP is closed under karp reduction?Space(n) not closed under Karp reductions - what about NTime(n)?Class P is closed under rotation?Prove or disprove that $NL$ is closed under polynomial many-one reductions$mathbfNC_2$ is closed under log-space reductionOn Karp reductionwhen can I know if a class (complexity) is closed under reduction (cook/karp)Check if class $PSPACE$ is closed under polyonomially space reductionIs NPSPACE also closed under polynomial-time reduction and under log-space reduction?Prove PSPACE is closed under complement?Prove PSPACE is closed under union?

                      Is my guitar’s action too high? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)Strings too stiff on a recently purchased acoustic guitar | Cort AD880CEIs the action of my guitar really high?Μy little finger is too weak to play guitarWith guitar, how long should I give my fingers to strengthen / callous?When playing a fret the guitar sounds mutedPlaying (Barre) chords up the guitar neckI think my guitar strings are wound too tight and I can't play barre chordsF barre chord on an SG guitarHow to find to the right strings of a barre chord by feel?High action on higher fret on my steel acoustic guitar