|
A couple of light-hearted comments on another thread suggested the following example:
A writer might decide to write a story with the theme "DRM is evil" (or the opposite, my point remains the same). There's lots of scope here to write a story that "proves" the theme, but where is the tension? Unless you challenge the characters (and, thereby, the readers) with the possibility that the theme is wrong, then the theme has offered much less than it could/should have. At most it will appeal to readers that have put has much thought into the theme as the writer. However, if the writer really explores the theme then the tension is inherent. Done properly, the characters (and readers) should be part-convinced that the theme will be proved wrong. To be really convincing, the writer must genuinely open themselves up to the possibility that their theme is wrong ... it may even be that the final climax will resolve itself in a way that surprises even the writer.
On a more serious note, I find that Richard North Patterson's books make very good examples of exploring a central theme. The stories dig out the various sides and aspects of his chosen theme in often surprising ways, and the more convinced you are that things will not turn out as you think they should the more the tension builds.
|