Are Stakes Necessary?

[ThisAdamGuy]

There is no such thing as a story without conflict, and you can't have conflict without something being at stake. Even if the only thing at stake is not overcoming the conflict, that's still a stake.

 

[RepresentingCaution]

Even a relaxing bedtime story should have stakes and conflict of some sort. My kid wanted a bedtime story, so I told him a story about how he worked hard to get something he wanted. The stakes were the the thing he wanted. I told him about how he studied and practiced and rested when he got tired and got up the next day and tried again and practiced more and finally learned the skill he wanted to learn in the end. Being tired was the conflict. Man vs. self or man vs. nature, depending on how you look at it.

 

[Anonjohn20]

Are Stakes Necessary?​

Of course they are! How else will we defend ourselves from vampires trying to turn us into food?

 

[Deleted member 84247]

Of course they are! How else will we defend ourselves from vampires trying to turn us into food?

Man, being a vampire here is already a high-stakes story.

 

[bulmabriefs144]

I like the last option, Stakes and conflicts are different because not all stories have stakes but the mass majority have conflicts. In Hemingway's Old Man and The Sea (super spectacular book but almost nothing happens) there's almost zero stakes BUT there is a very clear conflict with the old man and a small child who doesnt understand his chill, do-nothing attitude towards life.

Stakes are for certain stories/genres, conflict will emerge naturally is nearly any story.

I think it's the reverse.

You could have a story where nothing really opposes the character (no conflict), but there are clear goals of a character and things they stand to lose (stakes). They succeed or fail on their own merits, not because of a third party.

Old Man and the Sea has both conflict and stakes.
Stakes: He's a struggling fisherman hoping for that one big catch that will change everything.
Conflict: The sea tries to take his catch away from him. It kinda succeeds, with the help of sharks.

Are you sure you read that book?

 

[Jocelyn_Uasal]

I think it's the reverse.

You could have a story where nothing really opposes the character (no conflict), but there are clear goals of a character and things they stand to lose (stakes). They succeed or fail on their own merits, not because of a third party.

Old Man and the Sea has both conflict and stakes.
Stakes: He's a struggling fisherman hoping for that one big catch that will change everything.
Conflict: The sea tries to take his catch away from him. It kinda succeeds, with the help of sharks.

Are you sure you read that book?

I have a tattoo of the boat on the front cover and the book bound in leather and gold, yes I've read the book.

The sea is fighting to take back the catch, true, but even when it succeeds and all he brings back is the carcass of a fish, the old man isn't all that worried. He doesn't really care, because the books about letting go and not letting the things that fight you, hurt you. Its about going with the flow, like an old man at sea.

The 'stakes' I guess would be if he brings the catch in, but that hardly matters at all. The most conflict arrises with the child in the book who hates the old mans lackadaisical attitude, even if they both care for each other very much.

With all this being said, it's totally understandable that we come to different conclusions when analyzing literature like this, but asking if I even read it was just rude.

 

[bulmabriefs144]

I honestly don't remember the kid. The impression I got was not that he was indifferent but more like he was totally defeated. Tbh, I stopped caring when he go to shore with mainly just the head of the fish. It just seemed like a terrible waste.

 

[Fox-Trot-9]

Stakes get me more invested into the story. Knowing the consequences makes things more compelling.