“In a novel, we must get to know some things in Act I before we can move on in the story. Then the problem is presented, and the Lead spends the greater part of the book wrestling with the problem (Act II). But the book has to end sometime, with the problem solved (Act III).” (James Scott Bell, Write Great Fiction – Plot & Structure)
The Still Room: A Compressed Arc of Contradiction
Writing Practice Development Techniques Illustrated:
Establishing Stakes Through Character Introduction – A strong Act I reveals the protagonist’s inner contradiction and what emotionally drives or obstructs them. Driving Conflict with Character Agency – In Act II, the protagonist confronts a meaningful external problem they must respond to with specific, character-revealing action. Designing Change Through Resolution – Act III closes with a shift in the protagonist’s internal state, earned through resistance and response to tension.
500-Word Writing Prompt:
Write a compressed, character-driven story in three acts under the title “The Still Room.” Keep the story to 500 words. Set the entire story in a single unchanged location—an old pantry, a waiting room, a stairwell, a parked car, or any place where people usually pause rather than act.
In Act I (no more than 150 words), introduce your protagonist through a quiet contradiction—something they believe about themselves that their behavior undercuts. In Act II (250 words), an external problem must force the protagonist into action that both reflects and challenges that contradiction. The problem must escalate—emotionally or practically—inside the same room. In Act III (100 words), resolve the tension not through solution but through subtle transformation. Show us what has changed, not what has been fixed.
Avoid exposition. Prioritize sensory detail, subtext-rich dialogue, and action-based emotional shifts.
Evaluation Criteria for Success:
– The protagonist’s internal contradiction is immediately clear through action or behavior
– The external conflict intensifies the emotional tension without relying on high-stakes drama
– The single setting interacts with the character’s internal state—trapping, mirroring, or contrasting it
– The ending shows the protagonist changed in a visible, specific way, even if their problem persists
– The writing compresses time and emotional movement without sacrificing clarity or depth
Strong vs. Weak Response Examples:
Strong: A high school teacher sits outside the principal’s office rehearsing an apology for yelling at a student. As other teachers pass by, she downplays the incident—until a parent walks in and thanks her for standing up for their child. When called in, she enters without the apology in hand.
Weak: A man in a hotel lobby thinks vaguely about his regrets. The story lacks clear contradiction, external pressure, or action. The room is inert, and so is he.
Follow-up Questions for Workshopping/Revision:
– What belief or self-image does the protagonist begin with, and how is it tested?
– What does the room do to the character’s decisions or emotions?
– Could the emotional turn in Act III be shown with a single gesture, line, or change in voice?
– Is the compression working, or is the story relying on abstraction or exposition to cover too much?
– How would the piece shift if one beat of dialogue or sensory detail were replaced?
Recommended Reading:
“The Cousins” by Charles Baxter (from Gryphon: New and Selected Stories)
This story compresses decades of familial tension into a series of charged, intimate scenes. Baxter captures the contradiction at the heart of the narrator—his discomfort with privilege, his envy, his loyalty—and shows a character who doesn’t “solve” anything but leaves changed. The setting becomes emotionally loaded, and the final gestures are understated but resonant.
Leave a comment