Everyone loves a plot twist, right?

https://media0.giphy.com/media/PsBRTPKG71YVq/giphy.gif?cid=19f5b51a5d4589e04a3955416bbe4919&rid=giphy.gif

          Well, apparently not, if the ending of Game of Thrones is any indication. With each episode of the final season, fans of the show became more and more irritated by the apparent lack of internal consistency or care for the story elements by the showrunners. To viewers, the writers had sacrificed everything people adored about the show so they could shock the audience. But is a shock ending really the same as a plot twist?

          Technically, yes. Wikipedia defines a plot twist as "a literary technique that introduces a radical change in the direction or expected outcome of the  in a work of fiction. It may change the audience's perception of the preceding events, or introduce a new conflict that places it in a different context." By this definition, anything that shifts the course of the story or changes a viewer's understanding of it counts as a plot twist, including shock endings. In discussions, however, distinctions are made between the literary techniques. While plot twists reframe the previous events of a story or change the course of the plot or characters, shock endings usually involve an element thrown in--or the true meaning of an element explained--practically at the end of the story to surprise the audience.

https://media1.giphy.com/media/3ohhwlPs99FLPfwfcc/giphy.gif?cid=19f5b51a5d4589e04a3955416bbe4919&rid=giphy.gif

          There are good and bad examples to both techniques. Here, I will outline the types of plot twists and what separates a good and memorable plot twist or ending from a bad one. I'll also discuss how to know whether the one you're implementing into your story works with your narrative or not.

          Plot twists and shock endings are usually sorted into seven categories: Anagnoris (discovery), Flashback, Unreliable Narrator, Peripeteia (reversal of fortune), Deus Ex Machina, Red Herring, and the False Protagonist. Some of these are less twisty than others, but all shift the direction of the plot or characters.

[Also, note, I chose not to include non-linear narrative and reverse chronology because a, they're hardly ever used (Wikipedia can hardly come up with examples for them), b, they're especially not prevalent in fantasy, and c, they're fairly similar to each other. Anyway, back to the article.]

          Anagnoris--the protagonist's sudden recognition of their own or another character's true identity or nature. This was used to great success in The Sixth Sense and Fight Club. J. K. Rowling used this type of plot twist regularly in her Harry Potter series. It can be found in pretty much every mystery novel. Cassandra Clare also utilized it twice (with the same character) in The Mortal Instruments. Basically, if you read a story with a surprise character reveal, it falls into this category. Anagnoris only works when the reveal has been either set up beforehand or does not conflict with what has been set up beforehand. Crimes of Grindelwald was heavily criticized for the strange character reveals. Very few of its "clever twists" were properly foreshadowed. Those that were alluded to earlier in the film were not thoroughly set up in the film or the one preceding it. It was truly tragic that the film went the direction it did, because up until watching it I considered J. K. Rowling the queen of Anagnoris. Severus Snape is a pretty good example of how to execute a character reveal, although Sirius Black and Mad Eye Moody were also fantastic. The reason these moments worked was because you can look back and have everything make sense. Readers aren't confused by the reveal, as they were by several character turns/reveals in Crimes of Grindelwald. If you pay attention, Sirius Black is actually mentioned in the very first chapter of the series so his existence does not come completely out of nowhere. Now, spoilers for the third and fourth books, in book three, we are given quite a few hints that Sirius isn't actually the bad guy. He tries to stab something (or someone) in Ron's bed instead of Harry. Once we know he's the black dog, we realize he chose not to kill Harry on Privet Drive. There are also several clues pointing towards the real culprit. Goblet of Fire meticulously shows readers all the hints, yet provides enough explanation to them that readers don't find them suspicious. Upon rereading, though, they notice every clue. Spoilers over. That is what makes a good character reveal. It has to be alluded to (albeit subtly) and it cannot conflict with anything we know about the characters. This is also why Prince Hans from Frozen was so heavily disliked. There was nothing implying he was anything but a good hearted prince. Even his smile after meeting Ana wasn't sinister--bad plot twist.

          Flashback--a sudden, vivid reversion to a past event, surprises the reader with previously unknown information that solves a mystery, places a character in a different light, or reveals the reason for a previously inexplicable action. Not many books utilize this type of twist do to the difficulty working it into the medium. However, it is quite prevalent in movies and TV shows. While Wikipedia cites Alfred Hitchcock's Marnie as an example, I think Once Upon A Time much better illustrates it. Once Upon A Time features flashbacks in every episode. These moments from the characters' pasts provide insight into their motivations for that episode, provide information necessary to the plot, or foreshadow a future event. Flashbacks are most effective when they provide backstory that the audience is interested in knowing. Otherwise, the use of flashbacks seem rather self-indulgent on the writer's part. That's also why prologues are commonly criticized; like Flashbacks, they have been known to focus on future events that the writer finds impressive or intriguing, but the reader has no interest in seeing. Keep Flashbacks to moments that are essential for the narrative, either by providing necessary character development or by furthering/explaining the plot.

         Unreliable Narrator--twists the ending by revealing, almost always at the end of the narrative, that the narrator has manipulated or fabricated the preceding story, thus forcing the reader to question their prior assumptions about the text.The most notable examples of this type are The Usual Suspects (movie) and Gone Girl (novel). In fact, readers can pretty much thank Gone Girl for the recent spike in popularity of this type of twist. The biggest problem when using the Unreliable Narrator is in making sure the readers aren't completely convinced what they're reading/watching is the truth. A common complaint I've seen from stories using this technique is that it comes out of nowhere. This comes back to the shock ending point I was trying to make earlier. Authors, especially after Gillian Flynn's success, wanted to replicate that success with their own unreliable narrator thriller. Unfortunately for them and their readers, they did not lay the groundwork earlier in the story. With Unreliable Narrators, readers need to doubt. You can't give them no reason to doubt or mistrust the narrators only to pull the rug out from under them with a surprise reveal right at the end. There needs to be clues, and, upon reread, your readers should be able to recognize all the signs that told them what they were seeing wasn't completely accurate.

         Peripeteia--a sudden reversal of the protagonist's fortune, whether for good or ill, that emerges naturally from the character's circumstances. Unlike the  deus ex machina device, peripeteia must be logical within the frame of the story. A famous example of this would be Cinderella, in which, at the end of the fairytale, she goes from servant to princess. Victorian literature liked to utilize this in the form of the long lost will. Of course, these reversals can be for the worst. A Series of Unfortunate Events is, essentially, a series of peripeteia. Over the years, writers have stopped using perpeteia for a good ending. It almost always now introduces something terrible to the protagonists. I think the reason for that is because of a major problem with this technique; while this type of twist might make sense in fitting with the plot, it may come across as a Deus Ex Machina if there is no proper set up. A Cinderella Story uses the "long lost will" to solve the ending, however, the will was mentioned earlier in the movie and characters commented on how unfair/odd it was that Sam's father wouldn't leave her everything. Therefore, it does not come across as contrived that her father's will, stating Sam as his heir, should be found. Without proper hints that the twist, good or bad, is possible or might happen, it will appear to audiences as contrived or merely thrown in at the end.

          Deus Ex Machina--a Latin term meaning "god from the machine." It refers to an unexpected, artificial or improbable character, device or event introduced suddenly in a work of fiction to resolve a situation or untangle a plot. Deus Ex Machina is more a shock ending than a plot twist, seeing as it occurs at the end and is usually not set up earlier in the narrative. Scores of movies, tv shows, and books employ this technique to the point that it is often considered to be a trope in its own right. I think most people are familiar with this particular technique: in the climax some greater force (usually unknown to the protagnoists) comes into play and solves the problem for them. This greater force could be the arriving allied army who the heroes had given up waiting for or the more egregious "discovery of a new/stronger power". It is essentially any relatively new element arriving to save the day. For example, if Mary Sue and her allies are at the cusp of defeat only for her to discover energy powers that were never mentioned or available to use prior to this incident, that is a deus ex machina. However, if Mary Sue has been trying to unlock this power the entire book/movie or her mentor has told her that she has greater power that she needs to learn how to use, it is less likely to be considered a Deus Ex Machina. That is why the ending of Legend of Korra season two, in which Korra turns into a giant blue version of herself that can teleport and shoot energy beams, is considered an example of this technique but not Aang merging with the Ocean spirit in The Last Airbender. Avatar: The Last Airbender has previously shown that spirits can influence our world. The entire preceding episode involved him trying to get help from spirits. He even mentioned (albeit jokingly) the possibility of such an attack. Korra, on the other hand, gave no indications this type of power was possible. The fact that it was never used again illustrates that this ability was thrown in as a one-time saving grace.

     Most literary and film critics say that Deus Ex Machina is bad and should be avoided like the plague. I, on the other hand, think that it can be utilized without coming across as contrived. Once again, I believe proper set up and/or foreshadowing is key to ensuring your ending seems genuine and earned.

          Red Herring--a false clue intended to lead investigators toward an incorrect solution. Like with Deus Ex Machina, most people of aware of this type. It's extremely common in mysteries, but it's also prevalent in--surprisingly--super hero media. How many times have the heroes raced to foil the villain's plan only to realize that plan was meant to distract them from the villain's real plot? The ending of Game of Thrones' eighth season failed for a variety of reasons, the most significant of which was the decision by writers/show runners to throw away many significant character arcs for the sake of subverting audience expectations. Season Eight tried to utilize red herrings, such as leading viewers to believe Jon Snow would kill the Night King only to have (omitted for spoilers) do it instead. Needless to say, their execution was lackluster and only succeeded at infuriating fans. I think The Dark Knight is a great example of a good execution of red herrings. The Joker himself is sort of a red herring for Harvey Dent, and it really works because the climax with Dent is actually set up earlier in the film. Those who know that he will become Two Face probably saw the ending coming, but for those who didn't, it was a nice twist.

          False Protagonist--a character presented at the start of the story as the main character, but then disposed of, usually killing them. The False Protagonist is incredibly common in thrillers, where the first chapter is often told from the perspective of a character who dies at the end of said chapter. One of my favorite series, Women of the Otherworld, did this in almost every novel. It provides a shock ending to the chapter and gets readers intrigued about the mystery. Psycho's Marian Crane is also a great example. Honestly, this one doesn't have many pro's or cons to it. The only time I've found where people have complained about this plot twist is in, yet again, Game of Thrones season eight. Now, spoilers, but the season ends with Daenerys Targaryen becoming a mad queen who burns literally thousands to death for reasons that aren't really explained at all. In the books, this ending is foreshadowed pretty heavily from the beginning. However, the show whitewashed many of her darker moments only to confuse viewers by carrying out what most believe to be G. R. R. Martin's intended ending. Like most plot twists, if they come out of nowhere, your audience will get upset. The result might shock them, but it will also turn them against you.

So, you probably noticed a theme throughout this article. Set up is key to ensuring your plot twists feel authentic. Shock endings usually lack foreshadowing, which is a major reason why they are so often the subject of criticism.

Thank you to those who made it to the end of this bloated article. Hopefully I made at least some sense. Even more so, I hope that this was helpful to anyone who is writing their own plot twist or shock ending.

From a non-Wattpad user: When should you keep adverbs in your story?

Great question! Simply by asking, you show you already know that the "rules" of writing, such as NO ADVERBS, can only go so far before they become merely advice.

Ultimately, it depends on your writing style. If you aim for the modern method of minimalist, streamlined prose, your best bet is to kill most of the adverbs, leaving only those that are absolutely essential. You can even consider cutting down on adverbs in dialogue, but not at the expense of authenticity. The fact is that most people use an arsenal of basic adverbs in their day-to-day speech.

If you're writing in a more classically influenced vein, you are probably using more complex sentences and variegated structure to achieve a lyrical effect. Under these circumstances, an adverb is not quite so taboo. All the same, you don't want them littering your pages; and keep them simple and non-attention-grabbing. Their job is to facilitate the meaning, not steal the show. Watch your adverbs; if one isn't necessary, chop it. If you read a section and the "lys" jump out at you, find a way to reword.

Deep POV, where your character's thoughts directly influence the narration, is another place where you can drop a few adverbs, much like in dialogue. As always, take care and reread. If you start noticing the adverbs... it's too much.

However, if your writing has a humorous, individualistic voice, you can get away with adverbs of a more showy kind, as long as they don't clutter your flow. The funnier your voice, the more quirky the adverbs you can implement and no-one will ever care.

In summary: Evaluate. Think about what comprises your personal writing style and whether deletion of the adverb in question would improve or degrade the quality of your story and your voice. In many cases, it's the best decision to eliminate. In a few, it will be best to keep. You decide.

As always, if you've got a tough writer question that's been bothering you, drop it here! We love to hear your struggles and help out as best we can!

Of Spinning Gold and Song by wisteriaflower

Candlemaiden: The Stranger Shore by StormlitFain

The Midnight Storm by Dante_Greywolf

Crown Games by stormstars-

Warped Souls by no_kidding

Do your characters talk to you?

Writers of urban fantasy?

What are your favorite tropes? Least favorite?

Would your main character play with Legos?

What kind of mood does your fantasy world have? Is it a quirky place where people wave to unicorns on their commute? Is it dark and grave, or sweet and fairytale-like? Or is it just plain creepy?