Story Analysis Diagnostic

Purpose

Systematically evaluate completed short stories or novel chapters to identify strengths, weaknesses, and improvement opportunities. Use after drafting to assess whether the piece achieves its narrative goals.

Quick Reference

Short Story Analysis

SA1: Narrative Foundation

Evaluate:

• Single clear premise or conflict driving the story
• Scope appropriate for length
• Premise integrated with plot and character
• Clear implications that matter to the story

Questions:

1. Can you state the core conflict in one sentence?
2. Is the scope right for the word count?
3. Does the premise connect to character stakes?
4. Are the implications explored within the story?

SA2: Character Construction

Evaluate:

• One or two main characters with clear stakes
• Efficient characterization through actions/choices
• Character arcs intersecting with premise
• Limited but purposeful supporting cast
• Distinct voice and perspective

Questions:

1. Who is the story about and what do they want?
2. Is character revealed through action, not description?
3. Does the character change in response to events?
4. Does every character serve a purpose?

Red Flags:

• Character described but never demonstrated
• Supporting characters who don’t affect anything
• Stakes unclear or abstract

SA3: Story Environment

Evaluate:

• Details woven into action, not exposition
• Each element serves multiple purposes (setting/plot/theme)
• Clear rules and limitations
• Environment revealed through character interaction
• Effective atmosphere and tone

Questions:

1. Is worldbuilding shown through action or told in blocks?
2. Does each setting detail do double duty?
3. Are the story’s rules clear and consistent?
4. Does the environment affect character choices?

Red Flags:

• Info-dump paragraphs
• Details that never matter again
• Setting that doesn’t influence events

SA4: The Shattering Moment

Definition: The pivotal point that transforms everything—a moment that cannot be undone.

Must function through one approach:

• Personal revelation that transforms understanding
• External event that forces change
• Relationship transformation that shifts dynamics
• Internal realization that cannot be undone
• Cultural/social collision that demands response

For Science Fiction:

• Technology IS the shattering moment
• Technology ENABLES the shattering moment
• Technology PREVENTS recovery
• Shattering moment CHANGES relationship with technology

Questions:

1. Is there a clear turning point?
2. Is it connected to the core conflict?
3. Does it change the character irreversibly?
4. Does everything after feel different?

SA5: Scene Structure

Evaluate:

• Scenes maximize both character and premise
• Strategic balance of scene and summary
• Opening hook establishes character, situation, conflict
• Focused conflict from the core premise
• Resolution addresses conflict while suggesting broader implications

Questions:

1. Does every scene advance character AND plot?
2. Is the opening hook doing its job?
3. Is the conflict focused or diffuse?
4. Does the resolution satisfy while resonating beyond?

SA6: Technical Execution

Economy of Detail:

• Every element serves multiple purposes
• No extraneous background or world info
• Exposition integrated into action
• Clear connection between details and story purpose

Point of View:

• Consistent and purposeful POV choice
• Viewpoint optimal for revealing character and premise
• Minimal POV shifts
• Clear character perspective on events
• Effective narrative distance

Language and Voice:

• Consistent tone throughout
• Purposeful dialogue
• Effective subtext
• Style serves story purpose
• Distinct narrative voice

SA7: Emotional Architecture

Tension Management:

• Clear emotional throughline
• Strategic building and release
• Effective pacing of reveals
• Balance of explicit and implicit

Reader Engagement:

• Clear emotional stakes
• Strategic use of empathy
• Meaningful emotional payoff
• Effective use of subtext

Questions:

1. Is there a clear emotional journey?
2. Does tension build appropriately?
3. Is the emotional payoff earned?
4. What remains unspoken but felt?

SA8: Thematic Resolution

Evaluate:

• Character arc completion
• Premise implications addressed
• Immediate conflict resolved
• Larger questions remain thought-provoking

Questions:

1. Is the character arc complete?
2. Are the premise implications explored?
3. Is the immediate conflict resolved?
4. Does the story linger in the mind?

Novel Chapter Analysis

CA1: Position in Narrative Arc

Evaluate:

• Chapter’s specific role in overall structure
• Contribution to plot progression
• Advancement of character development arcs
• Thematic development within larger work

Questions:

1. What is this chapter’s job in the novel?
2. What plot progress happens here?
3. What character progress happens here?
4. How does it develop the theme?

CA2: Narrative Momentum

Evaluate:

• Opening hook’s connection to previous chapter
• Tension management across chapter breaks
• Balance of resolution and open questions
• Strength of chapter ending propulsion
• Questions answered vs. questions raised

Questions:

1. Does the opening connect to what came before?
2. Does the ending make readers want to continue?
3. What questions does this chapter answer?
4. What new questions does it raise?

Red Flags:

• Chapter ends at natural stopping point (too easy to put down)
• Opening ignores previous chapter’s energy
• All questions answered, no forward pull

CA3: Plot Threading

Evaluate:

• Ongoing plot threads advanced
• New plot threads introduced
• Plot elements resolved
• Setup for future chapters
• Connection to primary and secondary arcs

Track:

CA4: Character Continuity

Evaluate:

• Progress on character arcs from previous chapters
• New character aspects revealed
• Relationship evolution
• Setup for future development
• Consistency with established traits

Questions:

1. How has this character changed since chapter 1?
2. What new facets are revealed here?
3. How do relationships shift?
4. Is the character consistent with who they’ve been?

CA5: POV and Voice

Evaluate:

• Consistency with established POV patterns
• Effective transitions between viewpoints (if multiple)
• Depth of penetration into character perspective
• Balance of internal and external narrative
• Voice and tone alignment with overall narrative

CA6: Information Flow

Evaluate:

• Balance of new and established information
• Strategic revelation of background elements
• Management of reader vs. character knowledge
• Setup of future revelations
• Integration of necessary exposition

CA7: Pacing Elements

Evaluate:

• Chapter’s pace relative to surrounding chapters
• Internal pacing structure
• Tension development and release
• Scene length and rhythm
• Strategic use of time

CA8: Connection Tracking

Previous Chapter:

• Immediate continuity elements
• Tension carryover
• Question resolution
• Thread advancement

Next Chapter:

• Setup elements planted
• Tension building toward
• Questions raised
• Threads advanced

Broader Novel:

• Major arc advancement
• Theme development
• Character arc progression
• World development contribution

Evaluation Checklists

Short Story Checklist

• Single clear premise/conflict
• Appropriate scope for length
• Characters with clear stakes
• Characterization through action
• Environment serves multiple purposes
• Clear shattering moment
• Every scene advances character AND plot
• Consistent POV
• Emotional arc present
• Resolution satisfies while resonating

Chapter Checklist

• Clear role in overall novel
• Opening connects to previous chapter
• Ending creates forward pull
• Plot threads advanced
• Character development progresses
• Consistent with established elements
• Sets up future developments
• Appropriate pacing for position in novel

Anti-Patterns

1. The Checklist Tyranny

Pattern: Treating all checklist items as equally important. Flagging every missed item as a problem requiring fix. Why it fails: Not all issues matter equally. A missing shattering moment is critical; a slight POV wobble might be stylistic choice. Checklists identify possibilities, not mandates. Fix: Prioritize by impact. Ask “Does this actually hurt the story?” before recommending changes. Some rules can be broken effectively.

2. The Genre Blindness

Pattern: Applying one genre’s standards to all stories. Evaluating literary fiction by thriller pacing standards, or action stories by literary depth requirements. Why it fails: Genres have different contracts with readers. What’s a flaw in one genre is a feature in another. Fix: Identify genre expectations first. Evaluate against what the story is trying to be, not a universal standard.

3. The Nitpick Cascade

Pattern: Focusing on micro-issues while missing macro problems. Catching comma splices while the story has no conflict. Why it fails: Sentence-level perfection can’t save structural failure. Fixing small things first is procrastination from hard work. Fix: Diagnose at structure level first. Only move to prose-level analysis after structure is sound.

4. The Comparison Trap

Pattern: Evaluating against published bestsellers or classics. “This isn’t as good as [famous work].” Why it fails: Drafts aren’t finished works. Different stories serve different purposes. Unfair comparison discourages rather than guides. Fix: Evaluate against the story’s own goals. What is this trying to do? Does it succeed at that?

5. The Fix-Everything Dump

Pattern: Delivering a comprehensive list of all issues without prioritization or encouragement. Why it fails: Overwhelming. Writers shut down when facing 50 problems. No sense of what matters most. Fix: Identify 3-5 highest-impact issues. Note what’s working. Create actionable, prioritized guidance.

Integration Points

Inbound:

• From drafting: After completing draft
• From revision: As part of revision process

Outbound:

• To revision: For identified issues
• To scene-sequencing: For pacing problems
• To dialogue: For conversation issues
• To character-arc: For character problems

Complementary:

• flash-fiction: For stories under 1500 words
• prose-style: For sentence-level issues
• story-sense: For diagnosing what’s wrong