The Rule of six

The rule of six

I first heard about the rule of six from the fabulous writer and teacher John Claude Bemis. It thought it was a great way to help me along with very many of the issues in my writing. Since then, I’ve found out that it is based on a Native American practice for expanding possible theories or solutions to problems we face. So, for example, rather than answering a question with one answer, it challenges you to come up with six possible answers or six different explanations or possible stories that could answer the question. This reduces the risk of jumping to conclusions and broadens the scope of understanding.

This rule can be applied to all areas of life but is particularly useful for creative endeavours. For example, when developing characters, one can explore different backstories and motivations that could explain the character’s behaviour. It can lead to more complex and relatable characters as it takes into account different aspects and influences from the character’s backstory.

Let’s assume your main character is an investigative journalist who is pursuing a lead on disappearances in a small country town. Why is this particular lead compelling for your character. If you apply the rule of six, you will not stop after the first explanation:

1.      Personal trauma: her younger sister disappeared under similar circumstances.

That is a good start, but let’s challenge yourself, come up with five more explanations:

2.      Professional ambition: there is a new chief editor at the newspaper, and she is really keen to prove herself.

3.      External pressure: another journalist from a different newspaper is hot on her heels pursuing the same story. Time is of utmost importance.

4.      Sense of right and wrong: her strong moral values compel her to act and see justice done.

5.      Curiosity: she has always been a curious person who loves solving puzzles and has therefore chosen investigative journalism.

6.      Personal connection: she went to school with one of the mother’s of one victim.

This approach allows for a rich and multi-dimensional character portrayal.

 

But this is not its only application. Equally, you can use it to generate ideas, brainstorm different scenarios, openings and conclusions. I have found it particularly useful when I look at a sentence or paragraph, and I just know it’s not right. This rule allows me to write a few really bad sentences, without the pressure of ‘getting it right.’ Usually, I am out of ideas by sentence three or four. Then, the real thinking starts. Now that I have used up all my bad ideas, I can move on to more outlandish concepts and ideas. Sometimes, if I think I am still mining the depts of weird or I feel I am not quite there, but it feels like the right ideas at the tip of my pen, I keep going. I do another round of six sentences/paragraphs.

Even if you are not convinced (to be honest, I wasn’t at first, either, but John Claude is quite persistent), give it a try! I am positive, you will hate the idea by number three or four but will come around by five or six.

 

It challenges you to get out of your comfort zone or the single-rail track you’ve been stuck in. And isn’t that the problem most of the time?