What it Means to Raise the Stakes
No matter the genre, a book can be unputdownable. Some people might think a book that is hard to put down can only be a thriller. While thrillers are typically top of the game when it comes to high stakes, they’re not the only ones who do. They can’t be the only books that have stakes.
In every book, in every genre, the stakes are the why behind the story. Sure, you may have high, medium, to low stakes (the fate of the world, changing of livelihood and relationships, and no change to livelihood and relationships respectively), but those stakes still exist.
Keep reading; I’m going to define stakes a little more, and talk about why they’re so important to your story (even if they’re low).
Let’s get into it.
What are Stakes?
You’re going to be seeing the word “stakes” so much in this post, you’re going to start wondering if that’s really how it’s spelled. (I’m already there.) But let’s get to the easiest definition: what’s on the line.
We’ve got the fate of Middle-earth at stake in The Lord of the Rings (high stakes), the fate of Ebeneezer Scrooge’s soul and his personal relationships in A Christmas Carol (medium stakes), and finding suitable husbands for Lizzie Bennet and her sisters in Pride and Prejudice (low stakes).
Now, don’t confuse stakes for plot. Remember I said earlier stakes is the “why.” The plot is the sequence of events; the stakes are the why we care.
Why Are Stakes Important?
If we didn’t have stakes in books, we wouldn’t have urgency; we wouldn’t have tension. The readers wouldn’t understand what is actually at risk. If Middle-earth wasn’t at stake, who cares if Frodo didn’t make it to Mount Doom, or struggled so hard? If Ebeneezer wasn’t at risk of a miserable, lonely death and the suffering of Tiny Tim (and his family), who cares if he doesn’t change? If being a stuck in a crap marriage or being a spinster wasn’t a risk, who cares if Liz snarked at Darcy?
Stakes make us care about the protagonist’s journey. Have you ever yelled at a protagonist to just listen to what the other character is saying, or fight harder, or whatever? That’s because you care; you understand the stakes and how they define the outcome.
Without stakes, your story’s conflict has no legs.
Internal vs. External Stakes
There’s always, always, always an internal and external component. What are the physical components of failure versus the emotional or psychological consequence?
Let’s take a look at The Hunger Games. Katniss must survive a brutal death match. If she fails, she’ll be killed (physical). Her internal struggle is about retaining her humanity in this inhumane world. She has to kill to survive while still keeping her soul. She is at risk of losing her compassion, her sense of self—basically all the things that make her human. If she won the Games by compromising her morals, she would fail internally.
How those two work together creates a richer narrative. Katniss’ decision to fool not only the Capitol with the berries, but also Peeta—her ally—did compromise her morals; which she has to deal with throughout the rest of the series.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
Mistakes happen and that’s okay. It’s about learning from those mistakes! When I work with baby authors (which we all were at one point), I notice they tend to focus more on the plot. When they do that, they forget the why, which means no stakes. If the characters fail, it doesn’t matter. Typically, their plot then reads like their characters are going through the motions.
Or if there are some stakes, the stakes are vague. Vague stakes mean the readers don’t understand what’s on the line.
Remember, there’s nothing wrong with low stakes, but if the consequences of the failure aren’t significant enough to justify the story; you’ll have to rethink things. Think about what Lord of the Rings would have been like if the only consequence of Frodo not taking the Ring to Mount Doom would be Rosie not marrying Sam.
