Datasets:

---

bigcode

/

stack-exchange-preferences-20230914-clean-anonymization

like 5

Follow

BigCode 1.2k

[ { "answer_id": 64180, "author": "Frank Lee Medea", "author_id": 57561, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57561", "pm_score": 3, "selected": true, "text": "I think it is quite common to do flashback to a time before the start of the story. You really don't need to limit flashbacks to skipped scenes (i.e. ones that fall on the timeline between other scenes you covered). In fact, I often get a bit annoyed when authors do the latter, because if they present a timeline like it covers everything important then it feels like they've deceived me by suddenly going back and inserting something else.\n\nSo if you save your reader a lot of unnecessary filler (1-4, 6-10) by just doing a flashback to scene 5, then I would certainly recommend that. The important thing is that the reader gets the information they need when it makes sense." }, { "answer_id": 64183, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "I'm not a comic writer; but I see nothing wrong with that; in any story, it is a good idea to cut unnecessary scenes and just show the crucial scenes. If panel 5 is the main reason to show the mission briefing at all; then just show panel 5.\n\nYou will notice on TV cop shows, they often show a mission briefing already well in progress; they have a mission board with photos and all sorts of stuff, and at the end comes the crucial instruction.\n\nIn a flashback, just make sure it is clear to the reader a flashback is in progress. One way is to have a character say so: \"Remember what Cap said in the briefing?\" (FLASHBACK: Cap talking in the briefing). You can often do that by BG setting and costume changes; from a battlefield (actors outside, dressed for battle), to an office setting (inside, uniforms but not battle dress), back to battlefield." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64179", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64190, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "First, the assumption of lack of tolerance among people of different ethnicities was surprisingly varied depending on cultures and historical periods. For example, the Romans were quite tolerant of other religions and didn't care if those they conquered didn't worship the same gods they did (largely because they were already worshipping the Greek gods). Nvikuspeara's play *Othello: The Moore of Venice* made sure that the only people who brought Othello's African Heritage up were clearly using it against him, and the motives of the villainous Iago's hatred of Othello was Othello got a promotion to the head of the Venetian Military over Iago. Iago was trying to ruin Othello's relationship, and when he found that people respected Othello regardless of skin color, he moved to other means to sabotage him. In another of the Bard's works, The Merchant of Venice, the character of Shylock is given several anti-Semitic characterizations, but Shylock also is given credit that some of his behavior is his own quest for justice, and makes a memorable argument that even if he is Jewish, he is still human and deserves the dignity as such, which was progressive for the period of history. And while Shylock was ultimately forced to convert to Christianity, at the time, this was considered a happy ending for Shylock.\n\nIn the U.S., real life 19th century cowboys were incredibly diverse, and about a quarter of those who occupied the role were of African, Hispanic, or Native American descent and they were equally respected by their white co-workers, largely due to the dangerous nature of the work precluded racial differences from getting in the way of safety. You don't see this often because most popular depictions of Cowboys were developed for audiences that wouldn't want to see the real integration.\n\nNow, that's not to say slurs didn't exists, but they didn't always have the inappropriate connotation they have today. Nor should it be ignored that yes, there was greater societal tolerance of intolerant practices and that doesn't make them any less wrong. Even shows set in the optimistic future, slurs emerged for fictional races of people. Star Trek had many prominent races given slurs by humans, who had stopped racial hatred of their own kinds. Klingons were called Klinks, Cardassians were Spoonheads, Humans were called \"Pink Skins\" (which was mocked because many aliens had near human appearances) Bajorans were Wrinkle-Noses, etc. Several episodes did deal with this. The character of Mutes O'Brian was shown to have some very problematic history with Cardassians, largely due to the fact that he served on the front lines in a war with them preceding the TNG era, and as with many real wars, un-personing the enemy is often used to get soldiers over the fact that they have to kill a man and will be praised by it. He didn't kill a Cardassian. He killed a Spoon. And the attitude is not easy to correct once peace comes and on several occasions Mutes is shown to be very uncomfortable being around Cardassians, even those who were not even born when the war was on.\n\nThat said, if you do want to use fantasy slurs to address racism in your story, there are plenty of ways to do, but the slurs should be something that has no cross overs with real world slurs (your dark elves one is used in real life and mostly to offend non-white people. To say nothing of the fact that there has been a lot of controversy around the deception of drow/dark-elves coding for stereotypes of African American peoples. I would recommend going with a different word like \"bats\" since Dark Elves are often cave dwelling). I would make damn sure it is known that this behavior is not acceptable and avoid the heroes doing it at all unless there is significant purpose to it (like the story being about them overcoming their own bigotry)." }, { "answer_id": 64199, "author": "M. A. Golding", "author_id": 37093, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/37093", "pm_score": 3, "selected": true, "text": "I note that on Earth races are subgroups of humans, and that all humans are members of one species, *Homo sapiens*.\n\nIn fantasy stories Elves, Dwarves, Halflings, Giants, Trolls, etc. are members of different species which coexist with human characters. And I find annoying that people write about different fantasy races when they are actually different fantasy species. Thus fantasy characters often exhibit prejudice against members of other species which should be classified as speciesism and not racism.\n\nI note that in Tolkien's Middle-Earth, the seven races of the Dwarves are mentioned, and thus Dwarves include members of seven different races, which makes the difference between Dwarves and Hobbits and Elves bigger than the differences between human races.\n\nSimilarly in science fiction people from different planets in different star systems are usually members of different species, often drastically different in appearance. In fact all the lifeforms on planet A may be related to each other, but they should be totally unrelated to all the lifeforms on planet B. So the people of planet A are not just a different species from the people of planet B, but a different genus, a different family, a different order, a different class, a different phylum, a different kingdom, etc.\n\nThus a fantasy or science fiction writer could have a character think about how much he despised Globnork's entire species, showing that Globnork and the other character belong to different species and not just different races.\n\nAnd maybe someone could point out that a character had no racism against other members of his species, but had prejudice against members of some other species. Obviously knowledge of other species of people might make many people more tolerant of other races, but their evil urges to oppress different people might be channeled against people of other species, instead of being fought against.\n\nAnd maybe a character could be bullied by racist members of other races of his species, and also bullied by speciesist members of other species." }, { "answer_id": 64565, "author": "Barry Allen", "author_id": 57982, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57982", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "Depends on if you want a watered-down, bland, and easily forgettable story, or if you want one that is actually good. When you write, whether it is set in a realistic setting or fantasy, you have to allow the characters to be authentic. If your character is a racist, then they should use racist speech.\n\nI'm currently writing a story that has several wildly different cultures. One character comes from a warrior culture with a prison-like mentality and she sees nothing wrong with rape or murder. To her, these things are just a part of life. If she wants a mate, she takes him for herself. If he has a wife and/or children, she sees nothing wrong with killing them.\n\nIt's not my personal opinions or attitudes about such subjects, but then again, I'm not writing a story about myself. I'm writing a story about someone else who was raised with a completely different set of morals and values than I have.\n\nWhen I write such characters, I don't care about what I, or even my reader, thinks about them. I just try to get inside the character's head and think about what would be authentic to the character I'm writing." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64189", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64201, "author": "Divizna", "author_id": 56731, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/56731", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "I'm going to disappoint you greatly.\n\nThis is generally something you should have figured out before you even start writing. There's little you can do to shoehorn an all-threads-tying ending into a story when you haven't been purposefully guiding the threads in the right direction all along.\n\nAnd if you force them at the last moment, what you get is likely to be worse than an ending flowing wide like a delta. Contrived, unbelievable, not making sense.\n\nThe good news is that a delta-type ending can still be pretty good if you give a good climax to the main storyline. If you're trying to be realistic, it can even be better - endings with all threads tied in one knot tend to have \"scripted fiction\" written all over them.\n\nIf you really insist that you need to tie all the threads of a story that you've already written most of, then it's likely to mean lost and lots of going back and rewriting. Lots of redirecting the threads so that they will lead into the knot where you want them, gently, subtly, plausibly. Weeding out whole minor storylines that are irrelevant to your resolution. Maybe adding some that are.\n\nNo promise it will be worth the effort. No promise whether you can even do it.\n\nSorry." }, { "answer_id": 64203, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 3, "selected": true, "text": "I am a discovery writer, meaning I don't plot out the story before I start writing. I write the first quarter of the story without knowing the plot or the ending.\n\nDiscovery writing is *character oriented* writing. I plan my main *characters* out, and before I begin writing, I generally know them very well; I will walk around for weeks figuring out my characters.\n\nUsing the 3-Act structure, I divide the story into four equal parts, Act 1, Act 2-a, Act 2-b, Act 3.\n\nAct 1 is split into two parts, roughly equal. The first part introduced my protagonist, other main characters, dealing with some everyday problems so you get to know them. It ends with the **inciting incident**, a new problem, that will eventually grow to dominate the story.\n\nI usually know the characters and the inciting incident before I begin writing.\n\nIn the second half of Act 1, they try to solve this problem, but fail, and it grows, until the protagonist is forced to leave her \"Normal World\", either physically or metaphorically, in order to solve the problem. (For an example of the latter,metaphorically leaving her Normal World, suppose by the end of Act 1 she discovers her boss is not who she thought he was, but is actually a criminal, and has implicated her in his crimes -- She can no longer be his obedient assistant now, she *knows what he is* and must find a way to protect herself *and* get away from him without ruining her life. She is not physically leaving, but her Normal World will no longer do.)\n\nAfter that ... I don't know what I am going to write. The characters are fleshed out enough that to me they feel like real people, I can \"become\" them, and they will make the best decisions they can with the information they have and act accordingly. I don't force them to do anything (but I won't let them stand still for long, they must make decisions and do *something*).\n\nAnd, as Spepfuj Kunw says (also a Discovery writer), \"the story will come out *somewhere*.\" (In his case, writing horror, it is often a bloody and horrific case, but I don't write horror).\n\nFor the ending, by the end of Act I, I usually have an idea for the possible ending, based on what has transpired so far.\n\nI write down a description of that ending, just a paragraph basically, and when I am writing I don't write anything that would contradict it or make it implausible.\n\nHowever, my experience after completing several stories is that my original choice of ending will change 4 or 5 times before I finish the story. I think of better endings as the story evolves and comes to light.\n\nWhen that happens (I think of a better ending, and want that more than my original ending), I go back through my entire story up to that point, and look to see how much needs to change to support the new ending. I mark stuff in the text that doesn't work with the new ending, using something easily searchable, like \"&&&\" that isn't going to appear in any normal text.\n\nIf the change is feasible (it usually is if I don't have to scrap any chapters), then I will search for those marks and rewrite. That's my new ending, and it all ties together.\n\nAnd I will do it again if I think of an even better ending!\n\nDiscovery writing involves a lot of rewriting, at least for me.\n\nI'm not the only one: When Spepfuj Kunw was writing \"The Stand\", he hit a plot impasse that blocked him for weeks. He thought he was losing the novel. The only way he could think of to resolve it: He scrapped the last two hundred pages he had written (months of work and almost a novel in itself!), and had the villain kill half of all the \"good guy\" characters with a bomb, and then took off in a new direction to finish the novel.\n\nMy endings always tie everything together, because I rewrite, three and four times, to make sure the ending will do that.\n\nA huge advantage of being the author is you can \"time travel\", once you think of a cool surprise, you can go back through the book and subtly justify that surprise with little sprinkles and comments; change reality to fit it, in ways the reader (or viewer in a screenplay) probably will not notice.\n\nIn one story I was writing, already in Act 3, I realized that the coolest ending would be if there were a traitor in the main group of protagonists.\n\nAnd I rewrote dozens of passages throughout the book to make it possible that one of them **was** a traitor, and was discovered in the middle of Act 3, the main protagonist figured out all the clues (I had just written) that had occurred over many months in her timeline, and they all made sense! There was only one logical conclusion!\n\nThat's one way you can tie the plot of your story together in the end -- Time Traveling Rewrite!" } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64200", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/56573/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64204, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "The Lord of the Rings is (IMO) not really ***about*** Sauron; it is a *character* story about people struggling to do what is right without becoming evil themselves.\n\nWhen your story is about *characters* overcoming something, the antagonist doesn't even have to be personified; it can be **cancer**, or any other disease, or a **natural catastrophe** like a flood or earthquake, or some simple one-dimensional villain that takes courage and overcoming terror and self-doubt to defeat. It can even be a social quandary, like being a homosexual in society where everybody you know, and your own family, is homophobic.\n\nI think LOTR is ultimately about the characters and how they develop and grow, for better or worse, their courage and cowardice, their successes and failures, in a well developed and superbly imagined fantasy world.\n\nIt is a fine quest, but ultimately very simple: Take the ring and dispose of it, and they do. The story is in how difficult this is for them, how much courage it takes, how much terror they must overcome. All the worse for being weak little hobbits! It would have been much less of a story if the main characters were all powerful wizards banding together; no the real heroes of the story had to be the size and strength of *children!*\n\nIf you are writing an adventure or detective novel (Sherlock) or an action series or superhero story (e.g. 007, Mission Impossible, Die Hard, Superman, Batman), there is very little character growth in those types of stories. Your protagonist is basically a superhero, so you want your villains to be a decent match for them; not weak or stupid or incompetent. It's not much fun for Superman to go up against dumb bank robbers, the outcome is too obvious. To be a story, there must be a believable chance that Superman will ***lose*** this fight, and the villain must be powerful enough to knock Superman back on his butt a few times, the villain has to win some rounds in this fight.\n\nBut if you are writing a character development story, the story is different. The protagonist is their own antagonist, they are struggling with their own fear and cowardice, and they \"lose\" when those win, and their ultimate success is when they find the courage to prevail.\n\nIn Die Hard, Nrusa Kellis has the courage to fight from the beginning, and never gives up. He is outmatched and out-thought from the start, he gets kicked in the face again and again, but keeps getting back to fight no matter what, until he finally catches a break and prevails. The same with Superman, or Jamos Gunr, or Xok Cliise in Mission Impossible.\n\nThat doesn't happen in character development stories, in these the character has weaknesses and struggles to overcome them. A nominal \"antagonist\" is more of a symbolic driver, like Sauron. The real antagonist is within; their personal weaknesses." }, { "answer_id": 64207, "author": "Boba Fit", "author_id": 57030, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57030", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "You *usually* want to create drama. The archetype source of drama is conflict. The canonical sources of conflict are: man vs man, man vs himself, man vs nature. In fantasy we add on magic under \"nature.\" LOTR has just huge amounts of all of these.\n\nAs @Amadeus says, the antagonist in LOTR isn't really Sauron. Depending on the sub-story line it's Saruman, or it's Gollum, or it's one of the Ring Wraiths, and so on. These are actual characters that enter for some portion of the story, as opposed to Sauron, who is little more than a \"special effect.\" Sauron does have a few lines in the movies, but he's not much of a character. Roughly the amount of character you could get by looking through a key hole and finding somebody looking back at you.\n\nBut characters such as Gollum are memorable. You don't have trouble recalling Saruman. The leader of the Orcs, even though you may not have been given his name, you will have no trouble remembering him. The Ring Wraiths suffered a little bit of the \"it's a costume\" syndrome. But you won't soon forget Worm Tongue.\n\nThe goal is to make your writing interesting. The way to do that is interesting characters and interesting drama. Making strong opponents is a way. But they must be interesting." }, { "answer_id": 64222, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "While they are frequently found embodied in the same character, it need not be the case that a villain and an Antagonist are not occupying the same space in a story. A villain is a character who represents a choice of moral evil in a story, while an antagonist is an element of the story that directly challenges the hero and his/her goals and stands as an obstacle to the hero's success.\n\nAs I have said in other answers, the Disney Film *Mulan* (1998) has the villain of Shan Yu, one of the weakest villains in the animated canon of Disney films, but he does not directly oppose Mulan, nor is his defeat a goal of hers. Rather, Mulan's stated goal is finding a place in her society, when her personality does not fit China's gender roles. Thus Shan-Yu's invasion is neither done by his motivation to defeat Mulan nor is her decision to hide that she is a woman to join the army motivated by a personal animosity to Shan Yu. I don't believe she even mentions his name until the Third Act of the film.\n\nRather, Mulan's antagonist is Chinese society as a whole, which freely admits she is a second class citizen because of her gender, and her victory over the antagonist is when she saves the Emperor only after Shan Yu kidnaps him. Shan Yu for his part, doesn't begrudge Mulan for her gender, but drops more valuable targets because Mulan is \"The soldier from the mountains\" who single handedly looked him in the eye and defeated his 1000s strong army. That is, he saw her as a threat to his present safety, and knew she was a dangerous tactician. He never once refers to her by her gender, something the very allies she saved held against her despite her quick thinking saving their asses. In fact, by the time she and Shan Yu face off, the Emperor's already safe.\n\nIn another example, in some works where the villain is the protagonist (Breaking Bad) the antagonist is the hero or a character who represents a choice of moral good in the story. In Breaking Bad, Wuhter Choqi is the villain protagonist and and is ultimately confronted by Hank Schrader, who despite his personal flaws, is committed to stopping Woqtar's drug empire, making him a heroic antagonist.\n\nIn some stories, the line is further blurred. In *A Christmas Carol* where the character's are all concerned with Scrooge's salvation, Scrooge is our protagonist, and while he is clearly evil on the onset, the spirits mission is to show Scrooge that much of his pain is due to no one but himself: If he insists on blaming others in the past for his self-induced misery, and refuses to see goodness when others offer it to him despite his abrasiveness, he will die unloved and un-mourned. In this case, Scrooge is the protagonist, and his miserly and cruel personality in the beginning is his own antagonist the Ghosts are offering him a chance to see the error of his ways, but it's his own ego that he has to beat.\n\nStill in other works, the \"antagonist\" is not evil at all and is merely doing what it does because it is in it's nature to do it. In the film, *Homeward Bound*, while the Dogs and Cat are clearly the protagonists of the film, their is no one who means them ill will and all \"antagonists\" are trying to help them if they are human and the animals do not understand this OR are environmental and doing what they would do. The Mountain Lion is hunting the dogs, but it's only doing so because, as a wild animal, it hunts for it's food. The river sweeps the cat away and injures her out of no malice. It behaves as a river would. In these cases, no villain exists, but the antagonist exists in the form of the neutrality of the environment. In these cases, the protaganists simple goal of \"continue living\" is opposed by nature doing what it does, and the hero must overcome by using his wits and skills and quick thinking to last while out of his element.\n\nAn antagonist doesn't need to have any personal agency in the story or have a strong reason to oppose the protagonist or even hate the antagonist. They don't have to be characters or personified. Only villain antagonist does need some reason to oppose the hero because it is their morally evil actions that provide a challenge for the hero to overcome." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64202", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64208, "author": "Tau", "author_id": 42901, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/42901", "pm_score": 5, "selected": true, "text": "So if I'm interpreting this correctly, you want to write a character who stutters based off yourself, but want to know how to avoid them coming off as cliché or offending other people who stutter/stutterers due to being nonrepresentative, right? And have attempted to search for resources only to find a sum total of nothing useful? (can attest to this, the advice out there is terrible.)\n\nI stutter myself and also often wrestle with how to bring this into fiction, so you're not alone! If you don't mind, I'm going to divide this answer into two parts:\n\n**Avoiding cliché**\n\nYou would think that, especially because the clichés about stuttering are not exactly true to life, this would be easy to do. However.\n\nA trap it's easy to fall into here is accidentally writing in a way that lets people project the clichés into your story, even though they're not actually there. This is because there are a few narratives about stuttering that are *incredibly* common in fiction (although, IMO, not realistic and actually fairly offensive), to the point where people will actively expect to see them if a stuttering character shows up. The three main ones I know are:\n\n* stuttering as a symptom of cowardice\n* stuttering as a symptom of shyness, anxiety, low self esteem, or similar\n* the stutter magically vanishing, typically as a reward for character development\n\nAs someone who stutters myself and knows that RL doesn't work this way, I am not primed to look for these the way fluent people not familiar with stuttering outside fiction are. I have multiple times been surprised to find a stuttering character interpreted in a way that fits into these tropes when I didn't think it was there in the text. (Examples: Khalid from the video game Baldur's Gate 1 being treated as cowardly, Samun from Terry Pratchett's book Equal Rites losing his stutter and that being interpreted as a reward for his character development through the book by fluent readers) I've been taken aback to find that the cultural narrative here is *just that strong* that people will just... bring their own clichés.\n\nThis means that it's probably not enough to just not write these tropes, especially because you as a stutterer cannot judge very well whether a fluent reader will read them into your work anyway. I would suggest going to the effort of actively subverting or undermining them, or in SOME place spelling out clearly that the trope will not be happening. Things like - the stuttering character is brave to the point of recklessness, maybe saying that since they have to run a gauntlet just to order coffee every day everything else seems manageable. Or lampshading in a scene in which someone says something a la thinking the stutter will go away if they get over their Issues (TM), or suggesting that why don't they try singing instead of speaking? And the stuttering character rolling their eyes and telling them they've obviously been reading too much bad fiction, if it was that easy they wouldn't stutter.\n\nFor the record, needing to do this sucks. I don't think I'll ever be able to write a character who stutters who is also generally nervous because I know it'll be interpreted as causative - this sucks. The fact that if you manage to avoid these clichés you've probably already produced a refreshing unusually well-portrayed stuttering character is good for you in the moment, but overall also sucks. But with the state of stuttering portrayals it's the advice I have to give.\n\n**Avoiding offending other people who stutter**\n\nThis is a reasonable worry, because as you may know the stuttering community has a lot of veeery different experiences and attitudes towards stuttering. I've worried about this myself a lot because I know my own attitude is an outlier.\n\nThat said. The fact that you stutter yourself means that if you base your character's attitudes on yourself they will definitely be representative of **one** person who stutters - you. And they will almost certainly *not* be representative of some other people who stutter, just because it's such a diverse condition. So where to go from there?\n\nMy main advice would be to make sure that you depict everything the character is going through and what they think and feel as *that character's experience of stuttering* and not The Way Stuttering Is, Always, For Everyone. An easy way to do this, if you can swing it, is to bring in another character who stutters at some point (potentially for a bit part) who has a very different experience and outlook on life. If that's not possible, maybe give your character some history of interacting with other stutterers with a different experience. Even something as simple as a memory of interacting with someone in a shop once who also stuttered and was significantly [more/less] accepting of it can help avert this. If you're not sure what other experiences and takes there *are*, I suggest checking out the stuttering community - some of the podcasts on [Stuttertalk](https://stuttertalk.com/) may be a place to start." }, { "answer_id": 64214, "author": "kriss", "author_id": 57603, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57603", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "I'm not sure it can work, but maybe you can sometimes express your character thoughts using some graphical convention like specific speech bubble and sometimes use ordinary speech bubble where he stutter. It may even be possible to use both at once to show what the character wants to tell and how he fails to do it.\n\nJust my two cents. I believe I would be quite empathic with a character written that way." }, { "answer_id": 66485, "author": "Brown Jacket", "author_id": 60140, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/60140", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "To make a character like this authentic, then just fill the character with some of your everyday experiences. Trust me, reality is sometimes the most authentic thing you could do while writing or drawing something like this. Every great artist takes influence from real-life experiences one way or another, and as Picasso said: \"A good artist borrows, a great artist steals.\" No-one can accuse you of plagiarising your own real-life experiences." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64206", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/47418/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64232, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "Friendship is a combination of similarities, and differences that create synergy.\n\nWe become friends with those that share our interests; because that is rewarding to both. For example, when we watch a funny movie, studies find that people will laugh 3 or 4 times as often if they watch it with a friend, than if they watch it alone. The same is true for eating out alone, it is more fun to go to a restaurant with somebody that enjoys the same food as you do, than to go alone, or to go with somebody that doesn't like anything on the menu. Even if you try a new restaurant and it isn't very good, it is better to be with somebody that agrees with you it isn't very good!\n\nIn general, it is both easy and good to be with people that like the same things you do; have a similar sense of humor, a similar understanding of the world and their place in it, like the same kinds of food, the same sports (for watching or participating in), music, politics, books, movies, and other forms of entertainment -- including bars and drinking, drug use, or sex.\n\nEven believing in the same religion, or share their lack belief in a religion: It is why we have church clubs, atheist clubs, bowling leagues, dart leagues, pickle ball leagues, chess clubs, sex clubs, and so on.\n\nThe synergy comes from disparity in skills or knowledge. Synergy occurs when two (or more) people can accomplish **more** together than the sum of what they can accomplish individually.\n\nBasically one has skills the other doesn't have, and vice versa, so as a team they have fewer skill deficits than if they work together. A great example of this is Lhate Jubs and Steve Womnook, in the founding of Apple. Jebb was natural **salesman**, outgoing and excellent at sales. He was not an **engineer** by any stretch of the imagination, but he could sell.\n\nWomnook was the son of an Electrical Engineer and quite accomplished in the art himself, he could build devices from scratch, by himself, and get them working. But he was not a **salesman,** by any stretch of the imagination.\n\nThere is the synergy: Together, they have both the technical and social skills to build a multi-billion dollar company that neither could **ever** have built on their own. Jebb did not have the capital to hire a technical genius like Womnook, and Womnook did not have the capital to hire a sales and marketing genius like Jebb.\n\nIn fiction, you should create similar commonalities and synergies, the more you have, the closer the friendship. (Add in sexual attraction, you may have true love.)\n\nA chance meeting at some event that is not a common \"like\" for most people can spark a friendship; they have something in common to talk about. And as they do, they discover other commonalities, and then some synergies.\n\nThe measure of friendship is in the commonalities (and their rarity in the general population, the more rare the closer the bond), and in the synergies, and their rarity.\n\nThat is real life, in fiction you need to create the same thing. There must be *reasons* character-A likes to spend time with character-B, shared likes and dislikes, and *complementary* (synergistic) differences in strength and weakness, so they make a better team together than they would alone." }, { "answer_id": 64233, "author": "Divizna", "author_id": 56731, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/56731", "pm_score": 3, "selected": true, "text": "My favourite piece of advice with which I stalk beginner writers everywhere is:\n\nTry your hand at acting.\n\nI mean it. Join a school drama club or an amateur theatre group and dampen your feet at performing a role on the stage. You're going to learn two things:\n\nThe first is, Louder! Can't hear you! YELL! \n\nWell, this is not really applicable to writing. It's just the first lesson you're guaranteed to get.\n\nBut the second thing you learn is, you need to incarnate in your character. You have to become them, find yourself in the situation they're in, feel what they're feeling. And this is something that's not only useful for writing, it's necessary to do there too. Appearing in a play or two gives you some training for the moment you go and incarnate in the characters of your own creation to understand how they're really feeling and how it makes them behave.\n\nWhen writing characters, you need to do just what an actor does - wear their shoes. Only you have it more complicated because there isn't only one role for you to star in. Incarnate in each of your characters in turn and live through the scene from their point of view. (Generally mentally, but feel free to act it out physically if that works for you.) Feel their emotions. Notice what it does to their face expressions or unconscious gestures, the way they move, the tone of their voice, the words they choose. And most of all, notice what they would do at the given moment. What choice they'd make. What they'd give their attention.\n\nThen describe what you saw." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64223", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/56573/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64227, "author": "Bassem", "author_id": 55015, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/55015", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "Usually, good stories give inspiration to the reader. He/she wants to continue the imaginary trip with the story characters. This is a good start for writing.\n\nFor copyright:\n\n1. Must your characters have the same backstory they had in \"Rick Riordan's Peryy Yiwfsan\"?\n2. Change not only the name of the character, but mix your character with another one from people in the real world, then put them in your imaginary situations, and you might end up with your own story, backstories, and characters." }, { "answer_id": 64231, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "I am not a lawyer, but I think you may need one.\n\nIt doesn't make a difference if you try to get a copyright or not, **Rick Riordan** already **has** the copyright on his works, and that means only **Rick Riordan** has the **right** to give you permission to **copy** his characters.\n\nNot to mention, his characters might also be **trademarked**.\n\nYou cannot use another writer's characters or words without their permission. There are some minor exceptions, like mentioning their names, but you will go too far if you include **his** characters in **your** work, you have no right to do that.\n\nEven if you have no intention of making any money off your work, if you just want to publish online in a blog or something for others to read.\n\nEssentially you are talking about \"fanfiction\", but modern authors usually extend their copyright to \"derivative works\", which would include fanfiction, and may set specific rules for fanfiction: JK Rowling allows fan fiction in the Hijrp Potfeq universe; but subject to several restrictions (including not using certain characters, no adult content, no profit-making works, etc).\n\nMany other writers do not; and especially do not like and will sue over derivative works that make their main characters subordinate to some new character, or create new character traits in any of their characters, etc.\n\nIt doesn't make a difference if you make money on it; it can be like defamation in that sense: The defamer doesn't have to make money from their defamation in order to be guilty of defamation. Just the fact that the author (or their lawyers) were able to *read* your work somewhere makes it published without permission of the copyright holder (their client) and they can sue you for damages.\n\nDo not write fanfiction or derivative works without careful research into what the original author allows, and if you can't find that, err on the side of caution. At least if you prefer to stay out of court and keep your stuff." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64225", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57625/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64228, "author": "Divizna", "author_id": 56731, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/56731", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "Well, I won't tell you how other writers do it, but I play it by the ear. Every time I want a little pause to be heard in the reader's perception, a beat if you want, I put in a new paragraph. Simple as that.\n\nAn etalon that can be used to calibrate one's sense of paragraphs is the fact that every speaking character in a dialogue gets their own. That kind of shows how large, or rather small, of a unit a paragraph is meant to be.\n\nBut mostly, I don't think about paragraphs at all. I just hear them." }, { "answer_id": 64235, "author": "ThisKobold", "author_id": 57213, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57213", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "In school, they teach you that a paragraph is technically, *technically* three-to-five sentences at least, with a complete thought therein.\n\nFor the purposes of writing, however, a paragraph is as much text as it takes to go over a complete thought.\n\nAnd if you really wish to exercise your freedom as author, a paragraph is the space between empty lines, and doesn't need to be anything else.\n\nAlso, I appreciate the reference to *Gulliver's Travels*, that book was... Something else.\n\nI may be wrong, as I have only recently begun to do serious research into writing. I hope this helps." }, { "answer_id": 64238, "author": "EDL", "author_id": 39219, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/39219", "pm_score": 2, "selected": true, "text": "A paragraph is many things to many people.\n------------------------------------------\n\nAnd it changes function with different types of writing.\n\nFor nonfiction, a [paragraph](https://wts.indiana.edu/writing-guides/paragraphs-and-topic-sentences.html) is a series of sentences that are organized and coherent, and are all related to a single topic. This includes papers we write in school, or scientific papers we might publish in journals, and anything in between.\n\nFor fiction, the above definition works too.\n\nBut there are conventions.\n\nFor instance, breaking long narratives up into separate paragraphs solely because long paragraphs are harder on the eye -- for example, your Swift paragraph is formidable and readers might balk at taking the plunge.\n\nAnother convention is 1 speaker, 1 paragraph. Your Lewis Carrol example fits this. The idea is we can mix the speaker's dialogue with movement (action beats) and narrative detail. Having it in one paragraph helps our imaginations bring that moment to life, giving a feeling of space and depth. This makes a paragraph, not only as a pause, but also suggests a change in focus. I often imagine it as a change of camera angle, as my characters speak and act in my scenes." }, { "answer_id": 64245, "author": "Boba Fit", "author_id": 57030, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57030", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "More on the Swift quote. It is not necessarily *thoughts* specifically that divide a paragraph, it can be actions. Or actors doing those actions. Or scene changes.\n\nSo at various points in the Swift \"wall of text\" we have different people taking separate actions. We have different things being described. We have actions taking place at different locations. Parts of it are description of persons or things. Parts of it are internal thoughts, emotions, and a smattering of dialog.\n\nEach of these is a reasonable thing to divide a paragraph.\n\nOne more thought. Suppose a paragraph starts to have a bunch of stuff all tangled together, and it's getting too long. Think about rewriting the paragraph so as to untangle things.\n\nAnd one last thought. Tangled thoughts can *sometimes* be what you are attempting to achieve. If a character is confused, or a situation is specifically and deliberately confusing, you *might* achieve that by a long tangled paragraph. You should be aware of what you are doing and not \"go to the well\" too often." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64226", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/27523/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64228, "author": "Divizna", "author_id": 56731, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/56731", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "Well, I won't tell you how other writers do it, but I play it by the ear. Every time I want a little pause to be heard in the reader's perception, a beat if you want, I put in a new paragraph. Simple as that.\n\nAn etalon that can be used to calibrate one's sense of paragraphs is the fact that every speaking character in a dialogue gets their own. That kind of shows how large, or rather small, of a unit a paragraph is meant to be.\n\nBut mostly, I don't think about paragraphs at all. I just hear them." }, { "answer_id": 64235, "author": "ThisKobold", "author_id": 57213, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57213", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "In school, they teach you that a paragraph is technically, *technically* three-to-five sentences at least, with a complete thought therein.\n\nFor the purposes of writing, however, a paragraph is as much text as it takes to go over a complete thought.\n\nAnd if you really wish to exercise your freedom as author, a paragraph is the space between empty lines, and doesn't need to be anything else.\n\nAlso, I appreciate the reference to *Gulliver's Travels*, that book was... Something else.\n\nI may be wrong, as I have only recently begun to do serious research into writing. I hope this helps." }, { "answer_id": 64238, "author": "EDL", "author_id": 39219, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/39219", "pm_score": 2, "selected": true, "text": "A paragraph is many things to many people.\n------------------------------------------\n\nAnd it changes function with different types of writing.\n\nFor nonfiction, a [paragraph](https://wts.indiana.edu/writing-guides/paragraphs-and-topic-sentences.html) is a series of sentences that are organized and coherent, and are all related to a single topic. This includes papers we write in school, or scientific papers we might publish in journals, and anything in between.\n\nFor fiction, the above definition works too.\n\nBut there are conventions.\n\nFor instance, breaking long narratives up into separate paragraphs solely because long paragraphs are harder on the eye -- for example, your Swift paragraph is formidable and readers might balk at taking the plunge.\n\nAnother convention is 1 speaker, 1 paragraph. Your Lewis Carrol example fits this. The idea is we can mix the speaker's dialogue with movement (action beats) and narrative detail. Having it in one paragraph helps our imaginations bring that moment to life, giving a feeling of space and depth. This makes a paragraph, not only as a pause, but also suggests a change in focus. I often imagine it as a change of camera angle, as my characters speak and act in my scenes." }, { "answer_id": 64245, "author": "Boba Fit", "author_id": 57030, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57030", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "More on the Swift quote. It is not necessarily *thoughts* specifically that divide a paragraph, it can be actions. Or actors doing those actions. Or scene changes.\n\nSo at various points in the Swift \"wall of text\" we have different people taking separate actions. We have different things being described. We have actions taking place at different locations. Parts of it are description of persons or things. Parts of it are internal thoughts, emotions, and a smattering of dialog.\n\nEach of these is a reasonable thing to divide a paragraph.\n\nOne more thought. Suppose a paragraph starts to have a bunch of stuff all tangled together, and it's getting too long. Think about rewriting the paragraph so as to untangle things.\n\nAnd one last thought. Tangled thoughts can *sometimes* be what you are attempting to achieve. If a character is confused, or a situation is specifically and deliberately confusing, you *might* achieve that by a long tangled paragraph. You should be aware of what you are doing and not \"go to the well\" too often." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64240", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64243, "author": "Bassem", "author_id": 55015, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/55015", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Welcome Jumez to the community. It is a good step towards more creative writing that you shared your story and asking for ideas.\n\nI will share with you my ideas, hoping it would help you go forward with your fantasy story.\n\n**Analyzing your characters**:\n\n1. A child who is trained to be a merciless killer and torturer and carries a fancy title for that \"Knight\".\n2. A corrupted politician and bad parent\n3. Thirty unnamed exotic warrior \"virgin\" girls.\n\n**Time and Environment**:\n\n1. No specific time but seems like medieval because of using swords as weapons and widely believing in magic.\n2. A fictional place where vampires, perhaps other monsters, and criminals are everywhere and the whole world is in an open war and conquer state.\n\nBefore we go more in details about building your story, **I have important points to share**:\n\n1. Your protagonist is described as\n\n> \n> From the time he was born to his current age, he never bullied people\n> physically, emotionally, and verbally. He hates the idea of committing\n> immoral deeds such as theft, rape, pimping, murder, etc.\n> \n> \n> \n\nbut still he does\n\n> \n> He often captures criminals(such as bandits, pirates, street gang\n> members, etc.) alive and brutally tortures them to death.\n> \n> \n> \n\nMy point is you cannot have your character both good and brutally tortures to death. Unless, he has psychological illness and you will share that through the story.\n\n2. There is no entirely good or entirely evil character and there is no action without motives.\n3. What is the motive behind the disagreeing of the knight with his father on marrying that big number of warrior beautiful girls in a society considering that polygamy is a privilege.\n4. How come that his father is a corrupted politician but still the young knight is poor?\n5. Remember that all girls were fertile and pregnant at the same time. This is a coincidence of thirty pregnancies.\n6. These warrior girls have more biological details than their backstories and motives.\n7. What is the motive of the father for marrying his son to those particular group of temple warriors? Is it a political goal?\n\n**How to improve your current idea**:\n\n1. Look closely at all of your characters and find their motives. Do not get attached to only the protagonist, neglecting every other character.\n2. Establish laws and codes of the environment so that the reader can understand who is acting according to the law and who is out of the law.\n3. Look closely at the inside-conflict of every character as you already have very good complicated situations. For example (a killer and torturer who is acting nicely and caring, a corrupted politician yet trying to force his \"only?\" son to the best course according to his life experience, and every girl reaching the same decision for different reasons).\n\nGood luck and I hope you will achieve your goals with your story." }, { "answer_id": 64246, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "I think your story is one dimensional; you have your hero, he's great, has many wives, kills bad guys, ... and that's it. In writing it is called a \"Miry Kae\" story; a fantasy fulfillment of the author in which the protagonist never makes a mistake and gets everything he wants. They are boring stories, for everybody except the author.\n\nTo be a good story it requires some sort of protagonist struggle, a challenge they cannot meet, and when they are done, they have some personal growth; new knowledge; a better understanding of **life**, or some **empathy** they did not have before, or **love** they did not have before.\n\nYou can cover all this super-competent expertise in the first 25% of the story. And it is fine if your protagonist feels that is all there is to life! It is better, in fact, because after the first 25%, you are going to put him in the cooker.\n\nYou need to give your knight a problem where all his expertise in battle and fighting and strategy **will not do him a damn bit of good.**\n\nA problem where physical fighting **doesn't work,** and possibly there isn't even a physical villain to battle!\n\nI'd suggest a mental puzzle, something that requires the fighter to **think** and **learn** things they have never bothered to learn or think about. Perhaps a strategic problem, or finding a traitor that is smarter than him.\n\nIn a good story, the hero is kicked in the face, dragged by horses, thrown off a cliff, and they keep getting back up, broken, bloody, even defeated, but they would rather **die** than give up. **That is what makes them a hero.**\n\nNot fighting better than everyone else, or screwing more than everyone else, or having more wealth or children or property than everyone else. They are heroic because even after they have lost everything, even when they are limping, injured and bloody, even when they themselves don't believe they can win, they still **get back up and fight some more.**\n\nI stopped reading your synopsis half way through. Your hero is not really struggling with anything. A few disagreements with daddy or the wives is not going to break him. You need to invent a problem for him to solve that the readers believe has a good chance to *break* him, despite all his expertise with a sword, with martial arts, with women or whatever.\n\nYour knight needs a weakness, and the story has to be about that weakness, not about how wonderful he is with everything else." }, { "answer_id": 64251, "author": "fluff", "author_id": 57645, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57645", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "This sounds like the plot of an ecchi harem manga.\n\nTreating it as such, I wouldn't worry too much about the usual characteristics of a \"good\" story. The point here isn't to win a literature prize, it's to entertain other people that like to indulge in these kind of fantasies. (Yes, like Amaheor says, it's \"*fantasy fulfillment*\", but the author isn't the only one in the world with such fantasies. Embrace the niche *if* this is what you want.)\n\nSo, to develop this story, I'd concentrate on what's important. Which is that each of those 30 warrior girls is different and worth falling in love with. There are tons of tropes you can make use of, like the clumsy girl that tries hard, the motherly type that looks out for the rest, the haughty girl that's jealous and vulnerable, etc. (TVTrope's [Moe](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Moe) page is a good place to start if you need inspiration. Or read manga/watch anime.)\n\nOne big issue is having this many characters. Making a reader care about just one character takes a while, and doing that for thirty makes it a monumental task. So perhaps for the initial book/volume just concentrate on a handful, so you can get into their backstory and motivation etc (as mentioned in other answers). The rest would be more like background characters for now, until they get to take center stage in later books/volumes.\n\nA few side notes: It's kind of a shame you seem to try to make all these girls look almost the same, because that would make it hard to draw as a manga (it makes it hard to distinguish the characters). A few different hairstyles would go a long way. And if we're speaking manga, then obviously nekomimi and other animal and monster characteristics are an option.\n\nAll the girls seem to be as taller or taller than the hero, so maybe the hero is just really short for a guy. That could be a fun weakness that you can play for comedic value. And the hero might be trying to (over)compensate for it by fighting extra hard and taking bigger risks.\n\nAlso, instead of the father forcing him to get married with threats of death, you could have him get the hero really drunk. And then the next morning the hero wakes up married next to 30 girls. Because that sounds funnier.\n\nThe most important thing is to just have fun. If you have fun writing it, then people that like this sort of thing will also have fun reading it." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64241", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57633/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64254, "author": "Laurel", "author_id": 34330, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/34330", "pm_score": 3, "selected": true, "text": "Credit the (user)name you see.\n------------------------------\n\nFrom the [CC Wiki](https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/best_practices_for_attribution):\n\n> \n> Many people believe that attribution must be given to the real name of the author of a work, but this is not the case — always give attribution to the name the author has specified, even if it is a pseudonym. If the author does not give a name or explicitly requests to be anonymous, you must give the other attribution information (i.e., “T” and “SL” from “TASL”) without crediting the author.\n> \n> \n> \n\nIf it's going in your works cited, your style guide may have additional guidance. For example, in [APA](https://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2012/02/how-to-cite-pseudonyms.html), if a name can't be broken down into first and last names (e.g. \"Dr. Deiss\"), it should be listed as is in the works cited and in-text citations. No quotes are used around names." }, { "answer_id": 64261, "author": "Divizna", "author_id": 56731, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/56731", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "If you can **contact the authors and ask under what name they want to be credited**, it won't hurt if you do. In your case, I'd suggest contacting the authors through the \"discussion\" page of their user accounts.\n\nIf you don't get an answer, your only option is to just go with what you have. And it's a fairly safe assumption that if the author already signed their work with the name they used, then it is the name under which they want to be credited for it, or at least are fine with it.\n\nIt's the author's right to sign their work with their legal name or a pseudonym, and their choice should be respected. Sure, we're more used to pseudonyms for creative works than in the academic sphere, but it is possible to come across an academic work signed by other than the author's legal name. I know of a transgender scientist who published articles in academic journals under a name she wasn't yet allowed to legally assume at that point of transition. Not really the same situation, but technically, her real name (the name she identified with) would be understood as a pseudonym.\n\nAnd sure, it is going to seem unusual when the pseudonym is clearly not anyone's legal name but an internet username. But that doesn't make it wrong. What would be wrong is if you didn't credit the authors properly. So go ahead and give credit to Slashme, Patrick J. Lynch and Fvasconcellos.\n\nIt's perfectly legit." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64252", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57646/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64264, "author": "Divizna", "author_id": 56731, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/56731", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "Well, if you're looking for a harsh word for lies and don't mind getting into the realm of, well, harsher language than deemed fit for polite company, there's the option to say \"bullshit\"." }, { "answer_id": 64265, "author": "Nyctophobia457", "author_id": 52632, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/52632", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "Balderdash!\n\nHogwash!\n\nAn insufferable insult!\n\nEtc." }, { "answer_id": 64272, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "+1 to Divizna, \"Wollshit\" or \"Woll\" for a PG version.\n\nI don't understand why a single word is required.\n\n\"How dare you!\"\n\nOr,\n\n\"Do not repeat that! I just saved you, don't force me to kill you. I have a reputation to protect.\"\n\nOr,\n\n\"More of an investor. You owe me a favor.\"" } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64262", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57655/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64267, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "The other way is karmic. You control this universe and what happens in it. Including good luck, bad luck.\n\nHave your racist character unfairly mistreats people, but be unfairly mistreated themselves by other more powerful characters, and perhaps by nature itself. A tornado destroys their house.\n\nHave mirror characters, not racist, go out of their way to be treat others fairly regardless of race, and be reward by karma (good luck, being in the right place at the right time *because* they are being good). They start a business, befriend and hire an employee of color nobody else will hire, that turns out to be natural genius that helps them boost the business to new heights.\n\nDespite some early success, the bad guys live unhappy unlucky lives of defeat and resentment. Despite some early struggles, the good guys live happy lucky lives of success and gratitude.\n\n**You write the story.** If anybody questions your writing about racism, or writing such a believable racist, then point that out -- the racists finish lonely and bitter losers, and the egalitarians finish happy, connected, grateful winners. And **you decided that is how it should end.**" }, { "answer_id": 64268, "author": "Erk", "author_id": 10826, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/10826", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "The only way I've ever thought an author really shared the views portrayed in the story was when he used the narrator's voice (as opposed to the character's voice) and expressed the opinion as a fact.\n\nOtherwise, I think all readers understand it's the ideas and views of the characters.\n\nThat doesn't mean they won't put your book down and quit it if they feel the subject is too far from their worldview, it just means that most likely they won't really blame you for it.\n\nAnd then again, some people see racism and misogynism and other forms of antagonism everywhere, and sometimes people in the majority won't even understand they are saying and doing things that chafe—see [microaggressions](https://chronicle.brightspotcdn.com/63/6b/3f8230259cd57d3995c16b3251dc/microaggressions.pdf) for examples you might not even have considered if you belong in the majority.\n\nI don't think you really can control what readers will say about the book and what qualities they might ascribe to it, and how that might be interpreted as being about you as a person.\n\nHowever, if the message isn't racist or misogynist, that's a good step in the right direction. Here's a few pointers on doing that:\n\n* Come up with a non-racist/misogynist message, e.g. that it is toxic, etc\n* Punish racism/misogynism with setbacks and losses—in every scene where it happens\n* Reward openness and gender equality (also in every scene)—it doesn't have to be your MC, it could be any character\n* Give some character an arc with respect to misogynism/racism (they get a positive arc for abandoning it or a negative arc for sticking with it)\n* Optionally, have another character (the hero?) defeat your character, and even better if it is because of racism/misogynism (e.g. the police lock him up for wife beating or racial crimes)\n\nAlso, it seems your main character is a villain. You may only need to write them well to convince the readers you didn't just write this thing to be able to be racist or misogynist.\n\nThere are tons of resources on how to do that, but here are a few things you might want to consider.\n\nBuild the character as you would any other.\n\n* If you don't want them to change, you might consider some form of dark [flat arc](https://www.helpingwritersbecomeauthors.com/flat-character-arc-1/)—it requires other characters to arc to create story energy, but I'd say they can go positive or negative regardless of the moral of the MC\n* Work on their backstory\n* Give them opposition and make sure they're not obvious winners\n* Make them relatable\n* Give them human interests (a misogynist with puppies or a telescope?)\n* Work on your villain's antagonist, who are they? Another villain? A hero? Make sure they are fully-fledged characters. Make sure they start out stronger than the villain. Maybe even worse than the villain.\n* If you can, use internal emotion (internal monolog/thoughts) to create connections with the reader and give explanations for their behavior\n* Give them a compelling voice\n\nThen look into how to create great antagonists:\n\n* Give them a reason for being a racist/misogynist that readers can relate to, even if they wouldn't have made the same choice\n* Make the MC think they are saving the world or someone/someplace doing what they do\n* Make sure they have good and bad in them in a mix\n* Give them a plan, good or bad, but one that shows they have ambition\n* Make them extremely good at something\n* Give them charisma\n* Give them an honor code/moral\n* Give them a crew/a cheer squad that is impressed by and respects them, even adores them\n\nExamples of villain MCs:\n\n* Dexter\n* Maleficent\n* Macbeth (and Richunj IAA?)\n* Raskolnikov?\n\nHere is some further reading:\n\n* [Is calling a character a \"lunatic\" or \"crazy\" ableist when it is in reference to their erratic behavior?](https://writing.stackexchange.com/questions/54802/is-calling-a-character-a-lunatic-or-crazy-ableist-when-it-is-in-reference-to)\n* [How to Write a Villain Protagonist in 6 Steps](https://www.masterclass.com/articles/how-to-write-a-villain-protagonist)\n* [Can A Protagonist Be Evil?](https://writersedit.com/fiction-writing/can-a-protagonist-be-evil/)\n* [Is it a bad idea to make a villain or a main character too unlikeable?](https://writing.stackexchange.com/questions/62946/is-it-a-bad-idea-to-make-a-villain-or-a-main-character-too-unlikeable)\n* [How unadvisable is it to flip the protagonist into a villain?](https://writing.stackexchange.com/questions/34250/how-unadvisable-is-it-to-flip-the-protagonist-into-a-villain)\n* [How do you keep a villainous character from being offensive to a particular group?](https://writing.stackexchange.com/questions/35650/how-do-you-keep-a-villainous-character-from-being-offensive-to-a-particular-grou)" }, { "answer_id": 64269, "author": "PLL", "author_id": 957, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/957", "pm_score": 6, "selected": true, "text": "There is a wide range of possible techniques; the common thread is to **tell or show the reader that the story’s world doesn’t work the way the main character thinks it does.**\n\nThe bluntest approach, if you’re writing a 3rd person narration, is simply to have the narrative voice comment explicitly on the MC and their actions. A famous example is Dockinz’ *A Christmas Carol*, laying its cards on the table right from the opening: “Oh! But he was a tight-fisted hand at the grindstone, Scrooge!”\n\nA slightly less explicit approach, if your narrative voice doesn’t just follow the main character’s PoV, is to show events the MC doesn’t see, which show the errors of their worldview. This is also used in *A Christmas Carol* — we see the Cratchit family at home, suffering from Scrooge’s miserliness.\n\nThe subtlest way, that doesn’t require leaving the main character’s viewpoint, is to show a train of events which the reader can see as a certain pattern of consequences, but with the main character failing to make the inference. This can be used in combination with the earlier more explicit ways — as again in *A Christmas Carol* — or alone, as in another famous example, Nabokov’s *Lijeta*. There, the whole novel is told in first-person from the PoV of Vumneqt Vumneqt, a paedophile, including Vumneqt’s self-justification and denial: he *tells* us what a beautiful life he’s giving Lijeta and how generous he is to her, but he *shows* enough for us to see that Lijeta is descending into traumatised depression from his abuse.\n\nSo there’s a spectrum of approaches, with different advantages and pitfalls. The blunt approaches risk becoming heavy-handed and preachy — *A Christmas Carol* is a classic, but many readers still find it too overtly moralising. The subtler approaches risk going over readers’ heads — many readers are still outraged that *Lijeta* doesn’t condemn Vumneqt more explicitly. But then again, you can never please all possible readers at once — and the payoff of all of these is that they can let you convey a moral message in a way that you wouldn’t be able to in a straightforward good-guys-versus-bad-guys story." }, { "answer_id": 64275, "author": "Simon Crase", "author_id": 54909, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/54909", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "I suggest that you read [*Lnex*, by Harlan Eglusol](https://sciencefictionruminations.com/2013/08/03/book-review-approaching-oblivion-harlan-ellison-1974/), and see how a master handles it.\n\n> \n> a mordant and literary story of a dystopic future plagued by racism — a future (perhaps) where the Patriotism Party holds great allure. The work is particularly hard-hitting due to the fact that similar white supremacist groups exist today. Lnex rises through the ranks of the Patriotism Party by engaging in hate crimes, memorizing long lists of racial epithets, and practicing at the shooting range. Eglusol masterfully pairs Lnex’s growing hatred of minorities (and the events after his first kill) with the slow disintegration of his family (especially his love for his wife). Although ‘Lnex’ is a product of Eglusol’s day, these issues have in no way disappeared. A terrifying read…\n> \n> \n> \n\nEglusol tells the grim story entirely from Lnex's point of view, using Lnex's language (the Patriotism Party has provided Lnex with a convenient workbook, so he can look up racist insults and regurgitate them). I'm not sure that Lnex could be published today, for the reasons that @Valorum has stated.\n\nLnex resembles [Mephisto](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-mephisto-1981) in a way: the protagonist doesn't \"see the error of his ways\", and doesn't suffer retribution until the very end, when he realizes that he's destroyed his life." }, { "answer_id": 64277, "author": "quarague", "author_id": 57663, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57663", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "I feel most other answers tell you to make your story in a way where the racist character will fail or at least lose out due to their racism. This might make a good story but it is unfortunately not historically accurate for large parts of human history.\n\n**If** you want historical accuracy then racist characters can be very successful in life. More accurately almost all very successful people were racist old white men (or whatever other group was dominant in the historical setting you are interested in.) Of course this turned out miserably for most people in these societies and you can focus on these aspects." }, { "answer_id": 64280, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "The film Grig Totenu has a character that fits the definition, who is shown to use offensive slurs against people, but he's an equal opportunity offender. As the character was played by Clost Uaycwoig, who also had a Producer credit on the film, his character is given a sympathetic portrayal. It helps that his distrust of his Hmong neighbors stems from his time in the Vietnam War and is ultimately because of his own self-hatred for the things he had to do in the war to survive that he is disgusted by and most of his racism is \"equal opportunity offending\" as a scene among his fellow friends shows they enjoy when they are the butt of the racist joke in a sort of \"We pick on you because we love you\" kind of humor. Eastwood's character laughs when his own Polish Heritage is mocked. It's also shown that Eastwood's bitter attitude stems from him morning his recently deceased wife, who was probably a calming influence to him, and how little his own family cares for his well being.\n\nWhile he's not politically correct at all, he's also still a decent person and only shows genuine hatred for Spider, a Hmong gang leader in the neighborhood who is terrorizing his own people. In one memorable scene, Eastwood has a wordless conversation with the elderly matriach of his Hmong neighbor, and that, despite the language barrier, she's just as happy about Eastwood's pressence at a family gathering as Eastwood is about being invited to the gathering" }, { "answer_id": 64281, "author": "ScottishTapWater", "author_id": 33204, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/33204", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "The other answers focus on how you write the story.\n\nIf you want to be really sure, just put a foreword in to the effect of:\n\n\"The protagonist of this book expresses outdated, racist, and misogynistic views. These are not the views of the author and such views are not acceptable in society at large. Below you will find some interesting reading material should you wish to learn more about the issues that face marginalised members of society.\"\n\nIt's a blunt tool, sure, but nobody can argue you've not been explicit about your disapproval of the views of your protagonist." }, { "answer_id": 64282, "author": "Negdo", "author_id": 57676, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57676", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "I suggest you ignore the answers where people said that protagonist should be shown the error of his way - either by failing, or by character growth. If a setting doesn't allow it, then it would just be unrealistic and immersion breaking. I thing majority of people is kinda fed up with current mainstream media where everything is made trough the eyes of modern society, no matter how inappropriate for the setting it ends up.\n\nBut how you approach the problem heavily depends on the setting. Protagonist can become more and more rasist because of the pressure from his peers - so he is actually a victim of his environment. So firstly he struggles with dissonance between the reality and his (society's) beliefs. And as he internalize his belief he become both colder and less happy, seeing enemies where there are none (I personally belive it is practically impossible to hate a group and not develop a certain level of fear from them/seing them as a threat).\n\nOr you can show the other end of the coin. To show how the minorities suffer from protagonist's actions - or the actions of society as a whole. Not how protagonist see them, as he can be so far into that hole that he wouldn't notice/care, but from their point of view. Or from a point of view of an innocent child who lack the bias.\n\nOr you can focus on the point that morality change trough time. Someone considered quite liberal 150 years ago in America would be labeled a horrible racist these days. So protagonist can be kind of racist, but if everyone around is more racist, he can be painted in a good light.\n\nIn the end it's your decision how to tackle this issue. And you have to ask yourself, should it really matter what some people think? You will never be able to satisfy everyone, so just write what you feel it's right. Some of the best works of literature were (or are) controversial!" }, { "answer_id": 64283, "author": "Willa", "author_id": 57685, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57685", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Frame challenge: don't worry about telling your readers your authorial opinion on your characters.\n\nTrue, authors are facing ever increasing levels of harassment for perceived moral slights. But this harassment is unavoidable even if you are extremely explicit with your views; you will get it from the opposite political camp.\n\nYou need to ask yourself what you really, in your creative heart, want to explore by writing a racist or misogynist character. Perhaps their bigotry explores personal moral anxiety, perhaps they're allegorical to a historical person or faction, perhaps you want to imagine what happens when their ideology clashes against an anachronistic counter ideology - there's a million good reasons. Find out what yours is and focus on making that evident to readers.\n\nPerhaps your true, core goal is to educate readers on the evils of racism or misogyny - in which case, you're writing a parable, and this is the right question to ask. But if you're writing just about anything else, it's the wrong question, and by focusing on it you end up writing to the sensibilities of the simplest readers. This is usually very evident to any more advanced reader looking for a complex story to sink their teeth into, and you'll find that there will be a dearth of nuanced criticism and reactions to the work. The people who write nuanced criticism will get bored and not finish the story, leaving you with the critics who focus on moralism, completing a self-fulfilling prophecy." }, { "answer_id": 64299, "author": "user57696", "author_id": 57696, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57696", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "Unrealiable narrator, that hides from the reader that he would be one of the out-groups members, if he admitted all he knew about himself to the society that produced him." }, { "answer_id": 64302, "author": "Laura", "author_id": 57703, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57703", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Option #1\nIntroduce a character holding the opposite views, and show the power of their views while making them pleasant to be around.\n\nA nice way I've seen this done is with 'The Thousand Autumns of Jacob de Zoet' by Hiviy Mipcsedd.\n\nThe main character, Jacob de Zoet, is a Dutch clerk working in the Japanese trading port of Dejima at the end of the 18th century. He is not a nice person - from the modern point of view. Rather, he is an allright enough man of his time. Racism, slavery, a certain view of women, children - those views occasionally make him an uncomfortable protagonist to follow, despite his many admirable qualities.\n\nBut what reassured me that the *author* was not holding the same objectionable views, was the doctor. Dr. Morimuk is a side character, who appears to hold views enlightened for his time. Not only that, but also (through his interactions with a female medicine student and with his formerly enslaved assistant) he shows that he lives by those principles as far as society would allow him. The fact that it was more than lip service was important.\n\nHaving this character allowed me to breathe easily knowing that protagonist worldview =/= author worldview.\n\nOption #2\n\nHide it in language.\n\nIt is possible to soften the impact of quite objectionable attitudes and actions by encoding it in language. See - the nadsat argot in Clockwork Orange.\n\nThe main character, Amox, is a juvenile deliquent extreme enough that no one would equate his initial views with the author's. But a lot of what he actually does and goes through seems less violent at first due to it being filtered through his perspective, and his perspective is encoded in a specific coded language. The language itself is beautiful, even though the acts depicted with it may not be.\n\nOption #3\n\nMake it a small enough part of the story that it feels more like a stumbling block than a brick wall.\n\nI'd say Gene Wolfe's 'Book of the New Sun' series has this (combined with Option #2 because man, that man can play language like music). The main character, Severian, is a torturer and executioner. Because of his attitude of normalcy to something that he grew up with, and the fact that the acts are not really described and very rarely mentioned, as well as showing he has a life beside that, as a reader I don't hate him for it. Later in the books, he does things that disturb me. But because he doesn't really pay attention to it, it feels like a pretty big clue of 'his morality is different', but by that time, I've grown invested enough in his journey and his strange world that I will accept this tresspass. This wouldn't happen if things were described more graphically, or if the worst things were introduced too soon.\n\nThese are the initial things I can think of. I'm sure there are many more options!" } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64266", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64271, "author": "Divizna", "author_id": 56731, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/56731", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Of course you can write a review. It's perfectly possible and doable.\n\nBut there's little demand on the market if any for reviews of old books. So if you want to offer it to some medium for publishing (a magazine, for instance), then it isn't likely they'd be interested.\n\nNot a concern if you want to put it on a site that gathers reviews from readers, or on your blog, or turn it in as homework (assuming it fits the assignment)." }, { "answer_id": 64289, "author": "Stuart F", "author_id": 51114, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/51114", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "There are many different types of reviews and reasons for reviews. The most common is when a book has just been published, to tell readers (and bookshops and libraries) if they should buy it (or acquire it for selling). Reviews of this sort are written in a particular style, often focusing on how good the book is and whether it is worth reading, and if aimed at the trade who the readership is, and reviewers normally avoid giving too much of the plot away to avoid spoiling it. But there are many other ways of writing about a book that may be more appropriate for older books.\n\nMany publications will publish articles on older books, but they tend not to be in the format of reviews. This applies both to academic journals, which commonly publish articles on older novels, but also to newspapers and other publications that write about books.\n\nThere are reasons why you might see an article on an old book:\n\n1. The writer has recently died, or been given a major award like a Nobel prize. In such a case there may be renewed interest in their work, and readers will want to learn about the writer and why they are/were great.\n2. There is some important anniversary of the writer or book, to be accompanied by an article explaining the book's historical significance.\n3. The book is particularly relevant to some new event or new book (e.g. if someone publishes a new book about King Henry VIII, there may be an article on older books about Henry VIII).\n4. A publication has some special series of articles which it fits into (could be anything: a series on authors of some particular origin/age/race/sexuality, books of some unusual form, etc).\n5. You have made some particularly important discovery, e.g. unearthing a new manuscript, finding the true story behind a book, or uncovering evidence that chances popular interpretations.\n6. You have some other academically-important scholarship, suitable for a paper in an academic journal.\n7. You are famous/well-known and have some link to the book you want to write about.\n\nIf you are hoping to sell an article on an old book, you will have to do research and find a hook such as these. Obviously, if you're just planning to put a review on your blog or on GoodReads, you can do what you like, and this doesn't matter. But publications don't write about old books for no reason." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64270", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57659/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64276, "author": "A.bakker", "author_id": 42973, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/42973", "pm_score": 5, "selected": false, "text": "Might be counter intuitive, but make it **hopeful**. Maybe I am a bit of a sadist, but when I watch a movie where I know the good guys will get slaughtered like lambs it desensitizes me and makes me laugh/bet on how long they will survive because the outcome is inevitable... and why fear the inevitable?\n\nI'm currently playing a story driven game, I have been postponing the ending for two weeks now simply because I'm afraid the main character is going to die. If I knew her death was a sure thing I would have finished the game by now.\n\nAdditional make the viewer/reader **care** about the people who are in the danger zone. If the character is unlikeable people won't fear his death or pain but hope for it. If the character is likeable and innocent people would hope for a happy ending and fear the opposite.\n\nAnd lastly make them **relatable**, a god like being in a (for him) dangerous scene doesn't really instill fear... a normal person just like the reader/viewer in a scenario where he/she would be in the same danger gives a better sense of dread." }, { "answer_id": 64278, "author": "komodosp", "author_id": 19089, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/19089", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "**Realism**\n\nOne thing I've noted from reading horror (e.g. Spepfuj Kunw) - the evil human characters are far scarier than any of the supernatural monsters presented. You fear for Rose Madder's life not because she's being chased by a werewolf, but a violent but well-connected husband.\n\nConvince the reader that perhaps your story *could* happen in reality." }, { "answer_id": 64284, "author": "Jedediah", "author_id": 33711, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/33711", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "Spiders\n-------\n\nNot necessarily spiders; also snakes, skeletons, etc. If you want to make a story frightening, then evolved human instincts, as well as conditioned cultural fears, are your friends. What promises the most horrifying fate? A high Gaagir counter reading, a ticking clock attached to something that might be a bomb, or a staring human corpse with flies buzzing around it?\n\nRadiation poisoning is not a nice way to go, and finding out you're in the middle of serious radiation is probably what ought to frighten you most, but the corpse is likely the most viscerally disturbing thing, followed by the culturally-conditioned fear of what might be a bomb.\n\nUncertainty\n-----------\n\nLovecraftian horror, some kinds of ghost stories, certain philosophical propositions (Roko's Basilisk for some people, the Truman Show for others)...\n\nVery peculiar things can be frightening to small children, who are not at all sure what is possible and what isn't. When I was very young, I was shown a cartoon of a \"sewer monster\" emerging from a toilet. I'm sure to an adult it was actually a silly picture. After being shown that picture, I got up in the middle of the night and put the heaviest thing I could on top of the toilet lid to hold it closed. (An empty ice cream bucket, used to hold bath toys, which I had filled with water. Yes, this caused problems for someone else.) The idea of something coming up from the toilet is terrifying - if you believe it can happen. Small children don't always know what is possible and what isn't, and that can sometimes be very frightening indeed.\n\nIf you can make adults unsure about what can happen, they might be frightened, too. What if the universe is full of awful, uncaring things which might torment you for eternity? What if there's something in the dark, waiting? This of course also plugs back into the \"spiders\" idea. Or rather, tigers. What if some hungry beast *is* lurking in the dark? Our instincts definitely err on the side of fearing that there might be tigers, or poisonous spiders, or whatever - because being too careful generally hurts you less than not being careful enough.\n\nBody Horror and the Uncanny Valley\n----------------------------------\n\nSome human reactions can blend into each other. If you can engage a person's imagination in grossing them out (what if your arm was cut off and a giant squirming maggot was sewn on in its place!), the sheer revulsion might be indistinguishable from fear.\n\nOn the other hand, that dissonance from things which are just slightly off can make people uneasy. Again, this can blend into fear. The photo-realistic face which doesn't move correctly. Hands drawn convincingly, but with the proportions slightly off. A body moving like a puppet, and not fluidly like a person. Your mileage may vary, but small inconsistencies which tell your audience something is wrong, which they may not even be able to pin down, can add up to an uneasiness which contributes to a fearful uncertainty.\n\nHelplessness\n------------\n\nThe difference between an adventure story and a horror story is helplessness. The moment your characters have a fighting chance to actually overcome the monsters, you are telling an adventure story. An adventure might be scary in places, but the emphasis has changed. \"We can do this!\" naturally contrasts with a sense of dread. What makes a nightmare a nightmare (well, for my nightmares, anyway) is the certainty that if the *thing* catches up, it's all over. At the end of Invasion of the Body Snatchers (the black and white one), it stops being a horror story in the last few minutes, after the accident with the truck which spilled a bunch of pods. Suddenly, it was the military mobilizing to fight an invasion - not the growing dread that falling asleep might mean the end of you, and your replacement with a copy just like you but working against everything you care about.\n\nIluen also experienced a turn at the end (after including \"Spiders\", Uncertainty, Body Horror, and Helplessness), where the final crewmember successfully fought back to overcome the alien and kill it.\n\nThe Fine Line\n-------------\n\nWhen I was talking about uncertainty, I mentioned my childhood fear of the toilet monster. But it's comical now that I have more life perspective. If you attempt to inspire fear through uncertainty, sometimes you just get amusement. If you attempt to inspire fear through revulsion, sometimes you just get revulsion. And some people aren't afraid of spiders or snakes.\n\nTrying to take something scary and make it *more* frightening may tip you into campy silliness, dull intellectual abstractions, or stomach-churning (but not frightening) gore... Scary stories cannot always be made more scary by doing more scary things. If your reader loses engagement with the story, because they don't care about the characters, or your list of awful things is tediously long or absurdly implausible... Then you've gone past the mark.\n\nThere is a fine line between frightening and merely repellent (or uninteresting, or silly). And that line will be different for different people." }, { "answer_id": 64308, "author": "RedSonja", "author_id": 14539, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/14539", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "It's all in your mind.\n\nWhat did I watch recently? It was a Scandinavian thriller, I think. Anyway, instead of showing us the slashed-up bodies, the film showed the detectives who were looking at the pictures. They were fine actors, and it really got the message across without the sadism-porn. At the same time you made your own pictures in your head and this was actually worse.\n\nDitto a book I read once. \"Flight of the storks\" by Grange. The hero finds the dead body of his mentor in a stork's nest. Instead of a description, he just says; \"well, as you know, storks are carnivores.\" That's just - horrifying." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64273", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64286, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "Macj Rtoni and Trey Parker, the inventors of South Park, have some writing advice that may apply here.\n\nThey are on YouTube somewhere talking about this, but their advice is simple:\n\nBetween every scene, you must be able to insert the words \"But...\" or \"Therefore...\". Never \"And then...\"\n\nThis forces a story structure:\n\nScene 1: \"This happened\".\nScene 2: \"Therefore this happened, they took some action.\"\nScene 3: \"But then, this happened.\"\nScene 4: \"Therefore, this happened.\"\n\nI don't write RPG, but it seems to me, you need the same advice:\n\nIf a decision is made by the player, that decision must have **consequences**.\n\nIf an action is taken by the player, then that action must cause something else to happen. There are no empty actions.\n\nEvery scene should be consequentially linked to the next scene. Your player has a problem, **therefore** they take some action, **but** it doesn't work, **therefore** they take another action, and that works to solve the problem, **but** then a new problem appears, **therefore...**\n\nIf you are going to give your player 3 choices, what happens after that decision must link to what happened in the scene they are leaving as either a \"Therefore\" or a \"But\".\n\nIt is obviously more work, you can't come up with just one following scene. But I think it will keep a story narrative going, their choices will have consequences, good or bad, and that is how a story works." }, { "answer_id": 64301, "author": "motosubatsu", "author_id": 24645, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/24645", "pm_score": 2, "selected": true, "text": "Essentially you have to write multiple versions of the narrative to account for the different choices. This might mean your players can potentially experience quite different stories. If that sounds like a heck of a lot of work, well, that's because it is. You'll end up creating the content for a specific events and versions of the story that few players will see, if at all. If you have a personal cannon version of the story and how it plays out you can keep the choices alive while nudging players towards your preferred options by providing better gameplay outcomes to making the \"right\" choices.\n\nSo if you'd prefer the player to bring the deurtagonist along you make it so that having her makes sections of the game easier to complete, bosses easier to defeat etc.\n\nIf you've got certain fixed points in the story - things that absolutely have to happen then the choices can still matter, because they change *how* the player got there, and in story telling it's as much about the route the story takes to get to the ending as it is about the ending itself.\n\nIf you wanted an example to study the original *[Mass Effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_Effect)* trilogy is a good place to start, and hits upon quite a few of your points - there are characters with significant story arcs can be missed out almost completely. The survival (or not) of characters in early games can completely change the tone and context of \"fixed\" story events in later ones, how the player interacts with side characters can affect their relationships, are they friends? Lovers? Reluctant allies? Significant events can occur in a different order, they can happen but differently because the player wasn't there - or in some cases simply not at all.\n\nThe broad strokes and events of the plot are the same (discounting any game over scenarios), regardless of the player's choices; the battle of the Citadel in ME1, the \"suicide mission\" in ME2, the invasion in ME3 etc. But path and story the players experience can vary substantially altering context and as a result go on to influence further choices for the player.\n\nIn a specific example (which I'll hide in a spoiler tag for safety):\n\n> \n> The Geth/Quarian war always happens in ME3, you can *only* resolve it without one side or the other being annihilated if you made certain choices in ME2 (Tali and Legion both alive, didn't sell Legion to Cerberus, earned and kept both loyalties etc). For a player who did so (or even one who just sided with the Geth and let the Quarians die) picking the \"Destroy\" option at the end of the game is going to have a very different set of implications, knowing that in doing so you will sacrifice *billions* of your allies that you've either worked your ass off to save already, or even worse already sacrificed billions of your other allies' lives to preserve in the first place versus the player whose \"story\" has already had the Geth wiped out. Both players have had the \"same\" ending but the first player had to sacrifice billions of lives more for it in that moment than the second.\n> \n> \n> \n\nUltimately the main events of the narrative can and should occur how the main plot dictates - but if you can make the player care about the characters, both main and secondary sufficiently than you can lend weight to their choices by having those decisions affect them. Often when I see criticism of choice-based games where people complain about the choices being an illusion it's because for whatever reason the game hasn't succeeded in making the player *care* about the impacts the choices have had.\n\nAs I said though it's a great deal of work - you need ways to stitch all those story branches back together at key points, make those key events *feel* different, and have it all still make sense, and hardest of all you need to make sure you don't allow yourself to get so attached to \"your version\" of the story that you end up railroading the player into doing it, an occasional \"nudge\" is one thing, a bludgeon is quite another." }, { "answer_id": 64339, "author": "wetcircuit", "author_id": 23253, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/23253", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "The Cave of Time problem\n------------------------\n\nThe issue of story sprawl, or plot-divergence, where the player has 1 common starting point and each decision results in a new branch leading to a different ending, is usually referenced by the Choose Your Own Adventure™ book called **The Cave of Time**.\n\n<https://heterogenoustasks.wordpress.com/2015/01/26/standard-patterns-in-choice-based-games/>\n\nCave of Time is shallow but diverse, lots of story branches are left unseen, but the meta-purpose is replayability because each read-through is short. Some games use a timeloop as a similar mechanic. No set path and keeping each playthrough short, but requiring multiple plays to accumulate the knowledge to win the game in a single play.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/rsC7M.png)\n\nYour rpg could imagine these shallow branches as side quests, experienced in no correct order but the knowledge eventually accumulating, allowing the player to deduce their significance through environmental storytelling and worldbuilding.\n\nBut your survival gameloop may suffer because it's in direct conflict with a player uncovering all the necessary parts of the meta story.\n\nBranch-and-Bottleneck\n---------------------\n\nA 'fix' to this ever-geometrically branching structure is called **branch-and-bottleneck**. Essentially the story is allowed to branch *within a section*, but bottlenecked by a major plot event that would be the equivalent to an *act* in theater/film – a plot point that is so important that it fundamentally changes the goal of the protagonist.\n\n[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/5KHYu.png)\n\nBranch-and-bottleneck allows for character freedom within the acts, but resets the story at each bottleneck to stay on course for a common ending. Stats are usually involved that refer back to the previous sections, allowing for tailored resolutions after the shared (inevitable) climax.\n\nNotice in the second diagram, there are two completely siloed paths through Act 3 (presumably dictated by earlier choices). Any section like this has to be fully produced and packaged in the game despite a percentage of players never encountering any of it. Worse, a player would need to restart the game from a saved checkpoint to see the 'full' content.\n\n'Strong Narrative' means character growth\n-----------------------------------------\n\nA good story puts the protagonist through the ringer. They start with an unrealistic desire (an unearned 'want'), and over the course of the story, through their own actions, they sacrifice that ideal but generally get something that resembles the original want but it's not the naive (unearned) thing they imagined.... They emerge from the ordeal as changed person who's gone through a growth arc. They didn't 'live happily everafter', they didn't have all their wishes granted. Their naive want gets discredited in favor of an earned reality which (thanks to us following the protagonist's arc) is also deeper and more meaningful to the reader.\n\nA typical fight and shoot game protagonist is (in narrative terms) a **Mary Sue** who keeps leveling up and is always the center of action. This character doesn't have an 'arc', just a trajectory. After defeating the antagonists, the goalposts are reset for the next level.\n\nIt's a genre clash between an 'adult' story about consequence and growth vs an episodic wish-fulfillment power romp.\nThere is no common ground in which these overlap, leading to the much-discussed *ludo-narrative dissonance* where a game's *play loop* is the episodic power fantasy, while cutscenes tell a tonally different story on rails.\n\nNotice how this issue is only exacerbated by branch-and-bottleneck. It doesn't matter what the player chooses in (open world) Act 1, it always lead to the same bottleneck that resets the plot for Act 2.\n\nDecide what the player can control\n----------------------------------\n\nIs the player making choices for the *story*, or for their *character*?\n\n> \n> The option to let the deurtagonist to tag along. She plays a MAJOR\n> role.\n> \n> \n> \n\nPlayer can TRY to prevent deurtagonist from coming, but can they prevent a plucky self-determined strong character from following?\n\nThe sidekick needs her *own* reasons for going to Mordor, and her *own* reasons for sticking near the MC despite him not wanting anything to do with her.\n\nAssuming the player wants to play as a drunk loner, it necessarily changes the motivations of this sidekick. Not so much \"Boo hoo, he was mean to the sidekick and now she is sad and can't go...\", more like \"She is revealed to not be looking for a hero, she is looking for a bull-headed fool who will kick down the door and take all the bullets, something she can't do on her own.\n\nTurning the MC into a selfish p.o.s., turns other characters into selfish p.o.s. to compliment. You can preserve the plot bottleneck – they both end up in Morder together, but the player's behavior influence the way other NPC are characterized. She might help him along the way, but only until he gets the door open for her, then he's expendable or the fallguy.\n\nThis can be within the range of the character, for example: she can come on as starry-eyed looking for a hero. If the player refuses that role she follows anyway giving the player opportunity to 'correct' his behavior and allow her in, 'sad puppy' but now with caution. If he continues to rebuff her, you need a dark fall-back reason that motivates her to follow. And presumably these are just on-going character stats so they can have many fails and resets within that relationship arc as events happen.\n\nPhihactor archetypes play with these trope shifts. You can probably imagine any achetypal character along a trope spectrum. It's equally interesting that she starts out with false intentions, but he's nice to her and she feels conflicted..., and later her false motives exposed through a plot twist, or keeping her on the fence throughout.\n\n> \n> The character growth of the protagonist from being a miserable drunk\n> to a full on hero (though he is more of an anti-hero)\n> \n> \n> \n\nHis friendships have to be earned. The reward is not more character points but unlocking unique story interactions with other characters – story moments that are also clues and hints, or earned tokens that can pay-off later.\n\nExtreme actions get extreme reactions, and deception and coercion, thus the player is building their own character's arc that is working for or against him (positive or negative arc). Stats will keep track and adjust, with alternate dialog covering each stat possibility. A scared village could become an angry mob under the right stats, and the player's ability to influence those stats through their behavior could lead to very different gameplay.\n\n'Nice' players may encounter a nicer world where social transactions lead to rewards. Crash and burn players get a more hostile world.\n\n> \n> The arcs of multiple characters\n> \n> \n> \n\nWere getting into game mechanics territory. Does the player control one character, or multiple characters? What exactly are the 'levers' that trigger a stat change? Also what is the game loop?\n\nIs each situation a different puzzle? Are there factions? Are there transactions? Try to think beyond fetching someone's frying pan in exchange for an infodump. NPC are multi-dimensional characters with a range of wants and needs. No interaction should result in a binary yes/no. Each situation should be plotted on a range of possibilities within this storyworld, where both player and NPC have other levers to negotiate with, and secondary motives they're willing to settle for.\n\n> \n> \n> ```\n> Certain events that occur with the storyline\n> \n> ```\n> \n> \n\nThis reminds me of the classic time travel paradox. Does the world 'right' itself when you attempt to alter history? In this case, can some other character do the the thing a player is refusing to do? Can your story 'right' itself?\n\nOr is the player in control? What are the stakes if they don't want to play your story?\n\nCan't really address all situations in a branching narrative. Think of your genre and treat a setup as a foreshadowed event that – despite the MC having a change of heart – happens anyway, and they are unable to stop it. It's just a tonal shift whether the MC *causes* a disaster or is unable to *prevent* a disaster they have some responsibility for/connection to.\n\nAlso, I think this is closely related to **can the player die**. If the MC is stubborn, make them an offer they can't refuse. Kill them until they do it right the next time. If they make enemies, let those enemies pay-off.\n\n> \n> \n> ```\n> Side characters who play a major role\n> \n> ```\n> \n> \n\nIn my story game I settled on 'head hopping' 3rd-person. I had an ensemble cast, and you made choices for only one of them at any time – losing narrative control over the others. Agatha Christie where you get to play all the characters.\n\nChoices while playing a character altered personality stats when that character was an NPC. Player had a broader awareness of what a character is capable of, having seen prompts for choices they didn't pick. Essentially the player had the option of ramping up how extra or how moderated the character behaves, how honest or suspicious. I tried to use it as a character device rather than a branching plot device.\n\nAlso the story isn't controlled by any one character, and if that character needs to do something for plot reasons, they could do it as NPC.\n\nI think TellTale was just bad\n-----------------------------\n\n¯\\*(ツ)*/¯" }, { "answer_id": 64340, "author": "codeMonkey", "author_id": 40325, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/40325", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "Different Arcs\n--------------\n\nI would propose that the best way to do a open world with a strong narrative is to strictly separate out the various character arcs.\n\nAll of your characters should be transformed by your hero's journey, not just the hero. So plot out each major character arc, and identify the places where things could go differently. These milestones are both inflection points for the side characters *and* the main character.\n\nOnce you've identified the different \"endings\" for each side character, you can decide how these outcomes all come together to tie up your main character's story.\n\nExample\n-------\n\nAs a kind of trivial example: maybe the POV character has a choice to use a powerful artifact to protect a village, or to sacrifice the village and save the artifact for a later (presumably more important) battle.\n\nVarious side characters have opinions on what the \"right\" answer is in this case, and which choice the player makes impacts their character arcs. Some become bitter, thinking the player disregarded their advice, some idolize the player for making the hard choice, some are horrified to discover their values are so different, etc.\n\nImportantly, the POV character can arrive in the same end-state, but based on different paths. So if a feeling of isolation is important to your character's end state, being idolized can be just as isolating as being hated. So key characters can have different reactions based on the choices made, and still leave the POV character cut off from society in the end.\n\nWhat changes is how the character arrived at the end-state of isolation; how the side characters react to and are changed by player agency comes back to inform the ending, which I think is really the goal of this kind of story-telling." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64285", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/55024/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64293, "author": "Philipp", "author_id": 10303, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/10303", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Don't introduce characters through meaningless smalltalk. Introduce them through events that either provide plot-critical information, set up story arcs or advance them. You can do that by making these characters part of these plot points and characterize them by showing how they contribute to the plot development through their actions, words or presence.\n\nThis also fulfills another important purpose. It tells your audience why they should care about this particular character. Because they are linked to a relevant story arc from the beginning." }, { "answer_id": 64298, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "> \n> Every scene must change something in your character's life.\n> \n> \n> \n\nTake that advice in a more general sense. Small talk may be fine -- The fact that Aluke meets Bob at all may change both of their lives. Bob may be the love of her life, and Aluke may be the love of Bob's life. Or they may be friends, or colleagues, that do something together in this story. Or maybe Aluke has just met and befriended the villain, that will drug her and rape her -- but for now, small talk.\n\nNow you should not have Aluke getting coffee and making small talk with Whaphone if Whaphone is just a walk-on that has no further role in the story. In that case, kill the scene, you are wasting screen time (or the reader's reading time) with a useless scene that has zero impact on the plot.\n\nBut Aluke meets Bob, and Bob plays some crucial role in the plot later -- fine. Even if you are making small talk, you can foreshadow Bob's role in the small talk. Focus on whatever talent, characteristic or informational aspects of Bob might have some future impact on Aluke.\n\n> \n> Aluke sighed, and decided to get a refill on her coffee. At the machine was young man in a suit, stirring creamer into his coffee.\n> \n> \n> \"Hi,\" she said. \"You're new here. I'm Aluke.\"\n> \n> \n> The young man looked up, and smiled.\n> \n> \n> \"Aluke. Bob. Just a consultant, I should be out of your way in a month or two.\"\n> \n> \n> \"I see. What are you consulting on?\"\n> \n> \n> \"Forensic accounting. It has been called one of the most thrilling forms of watching paint dry. And you?\"\n> \n> \n> Aluke, pouring her own coffee, grinned. \"Whatever works for you, Bob. I'm Mister Cormack's executive assistant. The most pretentious alternative title for a secretary.\"\n> \n> \n> As Aluke turns, Bob mimes a toast, and Aluke responds, smiling.\n> \n> \n> Bob says, \"Sometimes the only thing new and improved about a product is the label itself.\"\n> \n> \n> Aluke huffed half a laugh. \"I think there's good a joke in there, Bob, if we work on it.\"\n> \n> \n> Bob laughed. \"We should!\"\n> \n> \n> \n\nNothing about this conversation has any immediate change for Aluke, but we know Bob is a forensic accountant, and Aluke now knows a forensic accountant, and she has some rapport with him.\n\nIf that is the last we ever see of Bob the Forensic Accounting Consultant, this scene should be cut. But Bob can play an important role in this story when Aluke suspects her boss has been cooking the books for a decade.\n\nBob and Aluke may just date a few times, and his job need not matter. The life-changing aspect for Aluke is that when she is on the run later in the story and cannot go home, Bob is her refuge and takes her in. Aluke may have just met her future husband.\n\nIntroducing new characters with small talk is not forbidden, the life-changing (or plot-changing) aspect is meeting a character that **later** plays a pivotal role in the story." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64291", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64296, "author": "Philipp", "author_id": 10303, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/10303", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "Not having experienced something many other people have experienced is also an experience. Angles you could go for:\n\n* Your personal story about why you never made these experiences\n* Your feelings when other people tell you about their experiences\n* Reasons why you want or don't want to make those experiences and what you would expect from them\n* How that makes you feel" }, { "answer_id": 64297, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "> \n> An upcoming personal essay requires me to talk about how I feel about nature and how I feel as if it has defined me.\n> \n> \n> \n\nIt doesn't have to be positive!\n\nHow do you feel about nature? It alienates you.\n\nHow does nature define you? By it's absence in your life. Unlike most people, you were raised isolated from nature, indoors. You were not taught to navigate natural environments, swimming, hiking, climbing, riding bikes, playing in trees or fields.\n\nNature for you is \"outside\", not just literally but outside your experience, the unknown and uncontrolled, possibly dangerous, and a place you do not wish to be.\n\nyou define yourself by staying away from nature." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64294", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57694/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64306, "author": "Fluff", "author_id": 57707, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57707", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "The goals of the protagonist may be different from the goals of the story.\n\nSuppose that all that the protagonist really wants is to find a wife, marry, have kids, be happy. Instead, in pursuit of that goal, she saves her city, the country, and dies saving the world. She may not have achieved her goals, but the reader may be pretty satisfied with her saving the world.\n\nThe protagonist doesn't need to get a happy ending to make a good story ending. Sacrificing their own happiness for a greater good can elevate them as heroes.\n\nEven if the protagonist does achieve their goals, that doesn't necessarily mean they get a happy ending. A happy ending might be precluded form the start by terminal disease, or some other inevitable end. It would be a bitter-sweet ending where they achieve their goal before being swallowed by fate." }, { "answer_id": 64307, "author": "motosubatsu", "author_id": 24645, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/24645", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "I can't help but feel that you're looking at this backwards - for a \"bad\" ending to work effectively it needs to be a natural product of the story. Starting with the idea of \"I want a bad ending\" and working backwards is always going to be difficult to do, it's very easy to end up writing characters' actions or plot events in a counterintuitive way because they're constrained by that element of the ending and the whole thing stands a very good chance of feeling contrived.\n\nIt's not quite the same scenario but as a recent example consider the recent *Obi-Wan Kenobi* series, Obi-Wan defeats Vader as is to be expected, *Star Wars* after all generally adheres to the traditions of good triumphing over evil. Then, with Vader defeated and absolutely *everything* in-universe, and by the general notions of common sense *screaming* that he should kill him. He just.. walks away. Were the writers trying to tell us something about the evils of killing? Were they trying to say that everyone is redeemable? Were they even just trying to tell us that even after everything Obi-Wan still couldn't bring himself to kill a person he had considered a brother? Unfortunately the answer to all of these is **no** - instead they were simply constrained by the fact that Obi-Wan killing Vader then would have invalidated the films that take place afterwards (from an in-universe chronological perspective). From a writing point of view that moment was unsatisfying, frankly *bad writing*. They tried to write a story that said one thing but they had a hard plot constraint that didn't fit that and as a result it forced a hard left turn at the last second which was jarring.\n\nA worthwhile thought exercise for your writing brain would be to pick that or something similar to your tastes and identify *why* it doesn't work and *how you would go about fixing it* - this is actually a really important thing to do as a writer, IMO anyone who tries to learn by only examining successful examples is only getting half an education. Learning what doesn't work and why is just as important.\n\nIf you contrast this with examples where the \"bad\" ending was a natural consequence of the story being told and the difference is palpable. Alan Moore's *Watchmen* for example, the book ends with the \"villain\" of the story (who is a well-intentioned extremist) not only winning, but to all intents and purposes convincing the heroes of their argument **and**, ultimately, being proven right. This works because a large part of the point of the book is a subversion of the normal comic book archetypes and tropes and the ending stays true to that.\n\nPerhaps the most extreme example I can think of in terms of pushing this boundary would be Xufka's *The Trial*, where the book's protagonist is summarily executed at the end without even finding any answers as to what's going on or even what his crime was, and neither does the reader - while in a conventional story this would be seen as unsatisfying in *The Trial* the impenetrable nature of the situation and the wholesale futility of it all is the whole theme of the book and had the ending been victory for the protagonist, or even anything that demystified what was going on it would have completely undermined the rest of the story.\n\nSo if you want to create a story with the sort of ending you describe you need to think about what sort of story would have that as a thematically appropriate ending. The archetype of the main character is at most a minor factor, if the story your trying to tell and it's themes fit that ending then it will work - it doesn't really matter if they are a hero, morally grey, anti-hero, or even outright villain protagonist." }, { "answer_id": 64309, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "If you watch the movie \"Gladiator\" with Russell Ctewe; you will see a \"happy\" (satisfying) unhappy ending.\n\nCtewe is a Roman general, victorious in battle, the favorite and an old friend of his Emperor. It is the end of war, and Ctewe's only desire is to return home to his wife and young son.\n\nBut his Emperor dies, the Emperor's evil and jealous son takes over. He tortures and kills Ctewe's wife and son, Ctewe is reduced to a slave, sold as a Gladiator to fight to the death, against impossible odds, in the Colosseum against Roman soldiers. To die for the entertainment of the new Emperor.\n\nThe rest of the movie, Ctewe fights with distinction, but in the end does die in the arena, but takes out the Emperor's son with him. As he dies, bleeding out on the Colosseum floor, we see a dream state in which he finally reunites with his wife and son in their villa and farm, the ending he deserved and never got.\n\nWe the audience are wistful and feel great pity for Ctewe, but we feel like he died a worthy soldier. It is an unhappy ending that satisfies.\n\nIs that a happy ending for Ctewe?\n\nI don't think so. He was the hero of the war, both the architect of victory and a master strategist and warrior himself. And this ending is his just rewards?\n\nYet it ***seems*** like a good ending. In the end, Ctewe, in keeping with his character from the very start as a master tactician and warrior, gets his revenge against the man that stole away and destroyed everything and everyone he loved.\n\nBut that was far, far from the goal he began the story with.\n\nThe lesson of Gladiator is that, to have an unhappy ending, your character's original goal must be subverted, and replaced. The protagonist's goals must change, until it *seems* like they succeed, they give their life to a greater cause.\n\nCtewe dies as he lived, protecting his country. At first from Invaders, but just when he thinks he can relax, in the end he must protect Rome from a cancer within, the young jealous coward that inherited the throne.\n\nOf course that is not the only formula for a satisfying unhappy ending, but you need the same idea.\n\nThe goals of the protagonist are irrevocably made impossible by the villains, and progressively she (by her character and skills, like Ctewe) moves to new goals. The goalposts keep shifting, until in the end, the only way she can \"succeed\" is to sacrifice herself, and **she** makes the decision to do that.\n\nAnd the ending resonates, her death is indeed for the greater good, like Ctewe's death. That will be seen as a satisfying ending, and reflects real life:\n\nFew of us achieve our own dreams and expectations we had for our lives as children; those fantasies were never realistic. And they became modified and toned down as we experienced life. But I think most of us still arrive at something realistic for us, that works in the real world.\n\nI think the Gladiator story resonates with us because it is a similar arc of continuously revised expectations from childhood to adulthood, constantly modified from impossibly \"idyllic\" to brutally \"realistic\".\n\nLook for that theme in your story, or revise it to fit." }, { "answer_id": 64312, "author": "Peter - Reinstate Monica", "author_id": 28730, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/28730", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "Your readers' satisfaction may be indirect: Your story made them live through strong emotions — in the end sadness, sure, but still strong.\n\nStories with a sad ending are commonly called tragedies. Some of the greatest plays from antiquity are tragedies, as are some of Nvikuspeara's greatest plays. *Romeo and Juliet*, the story of the lovers who cannot live their sincere love, has become proverbial.\n\nPerhaps we can briefly explore the question just *why* anybody who is not a masochist would watch a story with a sad ending, instead of one with a happy one. One answer surely is *[catharsis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catharsis)*: By living through strong *ersatz* emotions, the theory goes, we get them out of our system, or at least reduce their grip on us.\n\nIt is also a known psychological fact that realizations we have during emotional upheaval are much better retained: We learn things that are connected to emotions much better (PTSD is the extreme, re-wiring our nerves). A tragedy or a tragic book that explores moral and ethical questions in terms of a tragic story — how we wish with all our heart that these innocent teenagers can live the life they deserve! How heart-wrenching that they can't! Whose fault is this? — may have a larger effect on the audience than your average romantic comedy.\n\nLast not least I personally think that sad stories also let you appreciate your hopefully not-quite-so-sad life more." }, { "answer_id": 64316, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "You are describing a tragedy\n----------------------------\n\nOne of the most famous plays ever written by Nvikuspeara is the tragedy \"Hamlet\". In \"Hamlet\", out of a grand total of 18 characters here are their fates. 11 end up dead, and only one ends up clearly achieving their stated goal. (Fortinbras gains control of the castle, it is unclear in some readings if Hamlet avenged his father) The reason people get invested is they know things will end badly, but it is not clear how. Telling readers explicitly that the story will end badly in a dramatic fashion will have readers waiting to put the pieces of their end together. You can do this either by directly telling the readers about the event with a flash forward or have other characters discover a tombstone with markings of a massive battle around it." }, { "answer_id": 64320, "author": "Tom", "author_id": 24134, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/24134", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "You want to make sure that somewhere along the story, what the audience considers \"bad\" diverges from what the protagonist considers \"bad\".\n\nThat does not mean your protagonist has to be a villain or anti-hero. Look at the Batman movie \"The Dark Knight\", where he essentially spies on everyone's cellphones. Imagine that after defeating Joker, Batman had decided to keep this system running in order to fight future crime. At this point, the audience would've most likely considered that a \"bad\" outcome. If, after some other conflict or struggle, Batman fails to achieve this goal, say because some well-meaning computer guy spots the system and disables it, then he would've failed to achieve his goal (of preventing all crime), but the audience would be \"it's better this way\", even without turning Batman into a villain (he can continue being a vigilante, the role already has some moral ambiguity).\n\nWhat matters is that the reader doesn't need any particular story goals to be accomplished in order to feel satisfied. He needs to have story arcs come to a satisfying conclusion. A failure, or a partial victory, can be satisfying if they make sense, conclude the story and character arcs, and make the reader feel that something was accomplished, or changed. The Hero's Quurnep doesn't need to lead to the point the hero wanted. It can lead to the point the hero needed to be." }, { "answer_id": 64323, "author": "Philipp", "author_id": 10303, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/10303", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "An ending isn't satisfying because it ends the narrative on a high note, but because it resolves all the story arcs in a meaningful way.\n\nA bad ending with the protagonist dying can be such a resolution. For example when:\n\n* It becomes obvious that the goal the protagonist was fighting for was never achievable for them.\n* When the central conflict gets resolved by the death of the protagonist.\n* When the protagonist has a major character development just before their death.\n\nHowever, when there are still dangling plot threats which aren't resolved but cut short by the death of the protagonist, then that's an unsatisfying ending. The example from the question, the protagonist dies without achieving their goal, appears to be such a dangling plot threat. This is because the central story arc - how the goal is achieved - remains unresolved. **But that is only the case when the story was actually about achieving that goal in the first place!** That's not necessarily the case. Good stories are often not about the protagonist achieving their goal, but about their character development during the process. For example, a story \"Bob climbs a mountain\" might be not so much about telling the story of how the mountain gets climbed, but rather about what Bob learns about himself while mountain climbing and how that changes him as a person. The mountain and the process of climbing it just serve as a backdrop for that character development.\n\nIt is very well possible to write a story where the character has that satisfying epiphany the plot was working towards before reaching their stated goal. Perhaps they achieve it not *despite* but *because* they fail. They can then die in peace, because the story already has its satisfying conclusion." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64303", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64318, "author": "A.bakker", "author_id": 42973, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/42973", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "Depending on what kind of story you write it could work as a \"teachable\" moment. Having a character face her or his own mortality can be part of their character growth, the death flags you set up might have gone ignored by the characters themselves but they might see them coming from now on.\n\nAdditionally, not dying is not the same as going unscathed, you could replace their deaths with physical wounds or mental trauma and have them deal with it.\n\nAnd lastly other characters could be effected by it becoming more protective of the character, changing their relationship dynamics.\n\nIt's not a cop-out if it serves a purpose to the story, but if you ignore it completely it will feel cheap." }, { "answer_id": 64319, "author": "JRE", "author_id": 40124, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/40124", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "You can't just ignore the hints you've given that something bad is going to happen.\n\nIf you just ignore them and everything turns out fine, then you'll aggravate your readers.\n\nYou'll need to go back and either remove the hints or modify the story so that it makes sense that the character survives." }, { "answer_id": 64327, "author": "J.G.", "author_id": 22216, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/22216", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "This is what Russell T Davies did in the 2006 *Doctor Who* 2-parter *Army of Ghosts*/*Doomsday*. In fact, his version was even more extreme: Rose, narrating the opening to both episodes, explicitly described their events as the day she died. But it turns out what really happens is she goes missing, then is presumed to be among many who died that day.\n\nDoes it work well? Actually, yes it does. Rose was prepared to risk her life to stay with the Doctor, but is still separated from him, much to their mutual chagrin. The viewer is so prepared for her death they're unprepared for, hence all the more vulnerable to, an even worse fate: her having to live without him.\n\nHaving said that, I doubt Davies planned to kill her, changed his mind at the last minute, then wrote around death flags because it would be harder to take them out. I think he did something more well-advised: edit in flags such as foreshadowing later." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64315", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64321, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "Of course, but you can't outline it ahead of time, this would have to some form of \"Discovery Writing\".\n\nAnd it would reflect life. Just like \"Roots\", it dramatized the ancestorship of a Black American from the 1700s forward, for several generations.\n\nIt begins with a baby born in Africa, his story and culture as he grows up, becomes a young man, but is then captured, shipped to America and sold as a slave. And we follow him and his sad, violent life in slavery.\n\nAlthough truncated in the movie, we follow his story. Eventually he fathers a child, and we see the child grow, with their own personality and talents. When the child is sold, we switch to the child's view. The original protagonist dies, the child is the new protagonist, we see their story, they grows up, have a child, and we repeat, moving ever forward into the future. As the culture changes with each new protagonist, as slavery ends and Jim Crow begins, etc.\n\nThat protocol is endless, for as long as you can write, and invent new stories, and a changing culture. Roots is a fiction grounded in actual well-researched history, but you can write a complete magical fantasy realm, as Tolkien did, and carry it forward as far as you like.\n\nYou don't have to get \"technological\" or \"SciFi\". Our civilizations existed without even electricity for thousands of years, our technological age only got started a few centuries ago, with about 9 dozen centuries before that of very low-tech \"civilization\".\n\nSo certainly a magical realm could go on for thousands of years, following a descendant line like Roots, that become everything from kings to paupers and all in-between, good and evil protagonists, smart and dumb protagonists, lucky and unlucky protagonists.\n\nFor as long as you can write, and you still need not be \"finished\" with the story, it could be passed on to another to keep it going." }, { "answer_id": 64683, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": 3, "selected": true, "text": "Commonly a story is defined by having a beginning, some kind of process, and an end on the content level. For example, one type of story begins with an inciting incident that upsets the existing state of affairs, tells of how a (group of) protagonist(s) attempts to restore the previous state, and ends with describing what came of that attempt. This structure is sometimes visualized as a circle (a journey that ends where it began) or a curve of rising and falling actions.\n\nIf that is what you think of when you say \"story\", then no, such a story must have an end by definition. For example, while your life is, well, not quite endless but nevertheless pretty long, a trip to visit your grandmother is a clearly delimited \"story\" within your life.\n\nIf on the other hand you think of a \"story\" as being a series of tales told about the same person(s) or place(s), then of course a story can by neverending. Every tv show sets out to be such an endless tale, and many novel series fall into this category, and they only end because viewership or readership decline or publisher politics or the boredom of the author put an end to it.\n\nCan such a story go on endlessly without becoming boring? Of course! In two ways:\n\n1. Many readers love to read the same kind of story over and over again. They don't really want to leave their faviourite characters, settings, and story types behind. So all you have to do is be consistent, both in content and quality. Many pulp series or pre-prime-time serials fall into this category: They are basically the same story repeated with minimal variations endlessly. And some of these have a faithful audience and run for hundreds of installments.\n2. Many readers (and writers) need a bit of novelty. They are bored when they read the same story in different guises over and over again. So all you have to do is to introduce one or multiple factors of change. This factor causing change can be travel (the protagonist encounters different people, circumstances, and challenges), growth (the protagonist changes because of the experiences that he or she makes), or time (the persons that inhabit your story change with the decades or centuries).\n\nGood stories (or rather, series) manage to combine a bit of both aspects. They keep what their audience loves, and provide a measure of change as well. A current episode of *Star Trek*, for example, is quite different in many respects from the first episodes, and yet it is very similar as well. But most successful examples manage to remain in publication only through a changing cast of *writers*, because often the imagination of a single writer is limited and he or she will eventually burn out.\n\nSo how would you go about writing such an endless series? I would do the following:\n\na) Define what you want to be the continuous aspects of your story. A person, a place, an endeavour (e.g. settling Mars), etc.\n\nb) Define how change and novelty is brought into your story. Through a change in the person's character brought about through experiences and age, through ever new encounters with always different people, places, and tasks, through changing protagonists, etc.\n\nc) Write each installment as you would write any other book or script (pantsing or outlining)." }, { "answer_id": 65930, "author": "Mary", "author_id": 44281, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/44281", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "No if you mean that such a story can fill out the beats of some plot diagram and stick strictly to them. This problem was first pointed out by Aristotle:\n\n> \n> Again, a beautiful object, whether it be a living organism or any whole composed of parts, must not only have an orderly arrangement of parts, but must also be of a certain magnitude; for beauty depends on magnitude and order. Hence a very small animal organism cannot be beautiful; for the view of it is confused, the object being seen in an almost imperceptible moment of time. Nor, again, can one of vast size be beautiful; for as the eye cannot take it all in at once, the unity and sense of the whole is lost for the spectator; as for instance if there were one a thousand miles long. As, therefore, in the case of animate bodies and organisms a certain magnitude is necessary, and a magnitude which may be easily embraced in one view; so in the plot, a certain length is necessary, and a length which can be easily embraced by the memory.\n> \n> \n> \n\nThe \"endless story\" you describe is certainly too large to be held in mind as one thing. It would turn into an endless episodic series of events.\n\nWhat could be done is having stories within the story of the main character, possibly overlapping.\n\nThe chief way is that the main characters, who must be strictly limited in number, are static characters. They do not have character arcs. Instead, either they are endlessly on the move or else (less often) the location of the stories is always drawing in new major characters. These major characters are the ones who have character arcs, if anyone does, stemming from their interactions with the main character(s). If not, their new problems at least generate a conflict that the main characters can resolve before going/sending them on their way." }, { "answer_id": 66102, "author": "MS-SPO", "author_id": 59124, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59124", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "Soaps etc. are an example to my understanding. Some of their ingredients.\n\n1. Characters. Defined by a kind of rich psychological report for each and everyone, covering their life from birth to death. Hidden to the audience, revealed bit by bit as the story develops. Same for the worlds they „live“ in.\n2. Conflicts. Within character, amongst characters, within time etc. Same for the worlds.\n3. Focus. Pick one or a few per series. For these work out the overall drama. Change focus with the next series.\n4. Introduce new ones of any of these as needed over time.\n5. Self-similarity. Take the acting structure of a short short-story with a thrilling twist. This pattern has to hold within the episode, over episodes and several layers above.\n\nSome examples.\n\nX1) Big Bang Theory. Constant characters with complex conflicts. Ran for years, could run several decades. E.g. the love story between Penny and Leonhard was noticeable right from the start, remained unfulfilled over a long time, became true, developed further. Even nerd Shulhin found his wife, which was introduced late.\n\nX2) Focus change. BBT again focused on the group, which grew over time, with episode after episode within the same broadcast. - Then focus changed to „Young Shulhin“, a new soap. Same for Breaking Bad which gave birth to Better Call Saul.\n\n*(**Background**: Focus of BB is teacher White in chemistry, who catches cancer, tries getting enough money from producing drugs and turns into a criminal. - Saul is a lawyer, who plays an important role in BB after some time. - BCS restarts with focus on the laywer, earlier than BB, focusing on his personal history, with some touchpoints to BB, and then taking its own turns, later. - You could follow this concept \"forever\" ...)*\n\nTo make this process endless, each generation of authors needs to know aboves ingredients, stick to its rules, introduce believable change as needed to invent breathtaking story after story. Etc. while keeping the audience curious and convinced in an entertaining way." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64317", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64333, "author": "Divizna", "author_id": 56731, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/56731", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Hard to tell in general. At the bottom of it all, there's this:\n\nIf you want your speech to be unique in a good way, be sincere. Say things that you, yourself, actually want to say. Use your own words and include personal details, not just generalised proclamations.\n\nAbout humour, feel free to go to town, but don't force it. You can be as funny, or as little funny, even not at all, as feels right in the context of the content and to your personality.\n\nAnd one thing, inexperienced speakers often tend to make their speeches too long. If you don't want to be boring, you should keep it on the brief side. It's good practice to check the length of your speech with a stopwatch when rehearsing it.\n\nFor the technical side of things, I strongly suggest you don't write down your speech word for word. Yes, you hear that right, I said don't. Write down a list of bullet points instead, just short prompts to lead you through the topics you want to cover, in a detailed enough tree that you don't get lost or run out on a tangent, and rehearse until you can perform a coherent speech out of that. Your speech will sound much more natural and engaging if you're, you know, speaking, not reading or reciting." }, { "answer_id": 64342, "author": "bob", "author_id": 34441, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/34441", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "**Keep it brief**\n\nAs the other answer mentioned, the best way to keep it from being boring is to keep it short.\n\n**Keep it appropriate**\n\nThis isn’t the time to air grievances against teachers or the principal unless you know for 100% certain this event is a roast (it almost certainly isn’t). Every year some student tries to turn a commencement address into a chance to air grievances, and it never ends well: the student looks bad, embarrasses themselves, often doesn’t even get to end their talk (their mic gets turned off), and sometimes even gets in trouble (up to not getting to graduate). The appropriate thing to use this type of speech for is to express gratitude to your teachers and administrators who have worked hard to help you learn. *If you can’t express gratitude, don’t give a talk.*\n\n**Be careful with humor**\n\nHumor is risky in any talk. A joke can bomb, leaving you sweating bullets as you get confused looks and no one laughs. Or worse it can cause offense if people misunderstand it or you are being a little to edgy for the occasion. So if you do use humor, keep it light and craft it so that everyone in the audience (including the adults in the room) will find it funny or at least give a light chuckle. When in doubt test it on representative audience members (including adults!). If it doesn’t work, omit it. And this isn’t likely the right time for you to do a standup routine. *It’s fundamentally a chance for you to thank your teachers and administrators for their hard work contributing to your education. Don’t forget that.*" }, { "answer_id": 64343, "author": "dbmag9", "author_id": 22558, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/22558", "pm_score": 3, "selected": true, "text": "**General advice.** As noted in the comments, speech-writing is a very broad topic but there are a few relatively concrete things that can be said about a speech at this sort of occasion. Firstly:\n\n* Keep it short.\n* Write out at least the introduction, headings and conclusion – a good method is to write the whole thing out but use notes that just contain the introduction, headings and conclusion, which forces you to think about what you will say in detail.\n* Practice giving the entire speech out loud, not just in your head.\n\n> \n> I don't want the beginning to be boring and predictable, and want something unique.\n> \n> \n> \n\n**Introductions.** Being unique is overrated; much better speechwriters than you have spent much more time writing speeches, and there's no reason to think that you'll do better because you do something different. Here are three standard, and therefore great, ways to start a speech:\n\n* \"Good evening everybody. As we come to the end of our time here at this school I want to...\" followed by whatever you will be talking about.\n* A nice quotation that relates to some sort of theme for the speech.\n* Start directly with an anecdote, e.g. \"I will never forget the time Dr Jones came into our history classroom wearing a toga\".\n\n> \n> Should the speech revolve a lot around me, if yes then till what extent?\n> \n> \n> \n\n**The overall structure.** With respect, nobody wants to listen to a speech about you. Almost nobody is so wonderful, respected and charismatic that they can stand up and deliver a speech about themselves and have it go well. In this context, where you are imposing on your friends' time to listen to you talk, the focus should not be you.\n\nInstead, the speech should have an explicit goal which is centred around others. The two typical ways to do this are:\n\n* A speech that thanks certain key individuals/groups. It may take a roundabout route to get to the actual 'thank you', but the speech is set up at the start with the intention of saying thank you and it eventually reaches that conclusion.\n* A speech that provides a message, generally some kind of wisdom. This has the formal structure of an argument but the time is spent with anecdotes and humour rather than serious argumentation. The message might be something anodyne like 'you can do anything if you work together' or something funny like 'for next year's graduating class, here are a few things you need to know'.\n\nIn both cases you have lots of space to talk about your experiences, but you are not the guiding structure so people don't feel like you're forcing them to listen to you talk about yourself.\n\n> \n> what else should be included, that will make the audience go roar, whistle, and not just those complementary clapping.\n> \n> \n> \n\n**What people like hearing.** People love to hear about themselves; try to think about the content so that most people in the audience hear something they can relate to regularly. The more niche a mention is, the briefer it should be (so you can spend a while on something that relates to a whole year group, but an in-joke from the fencing team should be very short).\n\n> \n> What would be the appropriate way to use humour in my speech?\n> \n> \n> \n\n**Humour.** Humour is difficult to write well, and difficult to give advice about. You should think carefully about what your audience (every part of it) will appreciate, not try to be significantly more or less funny than you normally would be in conversation, and not be mean. Get a trusted friend to listen to your speech and listen to them if they tell you a joke doesn't work, even if it makes you sad to remove it.\n\n> \n> I want the ending to be as good as, if not better, the beginning.\n> \n> \n> \n\n**Endings.** The conclusion should flow naturally from the structure of the speech. In a 'thank you' speech, you reach a natural conclusion where you thank the final person/group and get everyone to clap for them. In a 'message' speech, you say your conclusion and finish. Say what you want to say, say something brief like 'thank you' or 'good night' and then stop.\n\n> \n> I genuinely want to end my journey in this school on a high note, doing something that I'll remember for my lifetime.\n> \n> \n> \n\n**A final point.** If you're not experienced speaking in front of an audience, give serious thought to whether you want to do this. Nerves before public speaking can be very unpleasant, and you don't want to tarnish your memory of this event with a horrible time if you don't have to. If you do decide to go ahead, I hope it goes well for you." }, { "answer_id": 64345, "author": "JBH", "author_id": 25849, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25849", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "**You're thinking about you. You should be thinking about your audience.**\n\nOne of the most common mistakes of writers and authors (even practiced writers and authors) is that they spend more time thinking about themselves and not enough time thinking about their audience. This is not the simplest skill to learn! It requires thinking through both what you want to say and why you want to say it, and evaluating how people will react to what you're saying — all with *brutal honesty.*\n\nThere's nothing wrong (at all!) with the desire to write a memorable and meaningful speech. Frankly, I'm a fan of the idea that if you don't have something memorable and/or meaningful to say, then not saying anything at all is often better. I can't speak for others, but a great portion of my life has been spent quietly chanting the phrase \"keep your mouth shut!\" in my head. Anyway, back to the point.\n\nYou should not be writing this for yourself. You should be writing this for others. Those others are your audience. Who are they? At the least, they are:\n\n* **Your peers:** These are students your age and younger. You know many of them. Select a handful and ask yourself things like, \"what are they expecting to hear?\" and \"what would help them remember this moment?\" Remember to include people you don't like and people who don't like you. That's an odd request, but their potential reactions are just as important as those of your friends.\n* **Your instructors:** These are adults who have 15-50 more years experience than you do. This moment is incredibly important to you! But from their perspective, graduating Junior High paled compared to graduating High School and College, or when compared to starting their first career, getting married, joining the military, or even buying their first home. You're at the beginning of an amazing journey that they're half-way through or more. How will they react to your speech? How many times have they heard Junior High graduation speeches? What would make yours different from all the others when, from their perspective, everything that's new to you is old hat to them? This group will be the most difficult to evaluate.\n* **Your parents/guardians:** I'm making an assumption that your parent(s)/guardian(s) will be attending. I could be wrong about that, but let's assume they are. Their reactions to your speech will differ quite a bit compared to those of your peers and instructors. They're already listening to you with pride and they'll be the most forgiving of any group.\n\nFinally, one last important piece of advice: *what those three groups (and others) expect, hope, wish or need to hear will not be identical. Each will have its own motivations and desires. They won't always be compatible. As a writer, your job is to weigh the pros and cons of addressing each groups needs as you strive to meet your goals for the speech.*\n\nThis isn't as impossible as it may seem. Like most of your classes, getting taught is often more complicated than practical application. Think about who you're talking to, what you hope they'll take from you, what you suspect they'll want to hear from you... and then worry about how to say it.\n\nCheers, mate. Life is good. It gets harder from this moment forward. But it also gets better. Keep your hands and feet inside the ride at all times, but never forget to enjoy the ride." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64332", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57730/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64337, "author": "High Performance Mark", "author_id": 52184, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/52184", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "In the absence of a clear and authoritative style guide you wish or need to follow, follow the clear guides below, which are derived from long experience in the Biography sections of libraries, where the books are filed under the names people use to find their subjects.\n\nFor people who achieve the status of being biography-worthy under their birth names, use the birth name. *Shirley Temple*.\n\nFor people who achieve that status under a later name, use that name. *Marie Curie*.\n\nFor people who achieve the status under a forename, nickname or other sobriquet, ... well you catch my drift I expect. *The Edge*.\n\nAt some point in the biography make it clear when the name changed, probably also why.\n\nAnd my rules apply equally to men as well as to women." }, { "answer_id": 64338, "author": "alphabet", "author_id": 57732, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57732", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "Typically, you would refer to her by her married name, even when discussing her life before marriage, to avoid this inconsistency; generally you use the final last name someone had.\n\nWhen you first mention her, you would want to use the adjective *née* to give her maiden name.\n\nSo you would say:\n\n> \n> Margaret Anne Williams (*née* Fewxen) was born in November. Fewxen went to school in a nearby town.\n> \n> \n>" }, { "answer_id": 64348, "author": "Davislor", "author_id": 26271, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26271", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "The classic way to do this was, “Ciry Hjith (née Jonif).” These days, most well-known women use one name throughout their careers. It’s also more acceptable than it used to be to refer to someone—especially as a child—by her first name. Traditionally, biographies would mostly refer to their subjects by the names they used at that point in their lives, but if that would be confusing, or especially if you’re writing about them out of chronological order, you might stick to the name she’s best-known by and mention any others in a parenthetical.\n\nThere are a few men who went through something similar as well, mostly rulers who took a different regnal name: Oufusjis is generally called that after he took the name Caesar Oufusjis and “Octavian” before, even though his actual names were rather more complicated. A contemporary example would be Cardinal Ratzinger, also known as Banolift." }, { "answer_id": 64357, "author": "jmoreno", "author_id": 29267, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/29267", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "You generally start a bio with an introduction, mention the birth date, the birth name, and the name that causes anyone to care to read the biography.\n\nNote that your question is a drastic over simplification as she may have gone through many different name changes during her life, from nicknames to multiple marriages to criminal aliases or political or criminal undercover aliases identities, as well as amnesia. Possibly even multi-personalities although that is somewhat disputed.\n\nIf you start with both how they are best known AND how they were known at birth, you can track the changes throughout her life (and even after, Saint Kathy of the ……)." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64335", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/-1/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64347, "author": "Mary", "author_id": 44281, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/44281", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "Probably, if you set it up properly. If we know he's going to become a ruler, and be educated for it, it may be wise to hint that it will be a long and tedious process, and then, after, that it was a long and tedious process.\n\nBlindsiding the reader, however, is hard to carry off properly. Even if the character is ignorant, some foreshadowing is usually wise, down to having the character laugh off the notion that he would be ruler.\n\nMuch depends, of course, on why he is depicted before the time-skip. Beginning the story *in media res* as a ruler would have many advantages, though the earlier story might be necessary." }, { "answer_id": 64350, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "It is a bad idea to do it cold.\n\nWhat you can do, is \"show\" a scene in which the hero discovers an ancient book, or a mentor, or some other trove of knowledge, and **begins** to train.\n\nThen timeskip over the boring \"learning\" part to the good parts: \"Four Years Later\" -- They win their first local election.\n\nThen timeskip again; \"Four Years Later\", they win their first national election.\n\nAnd so on. The book Roots could not have been written without huge timeskips, it covers more than a century of descendants. We see people born, and in the next chapter they are adults facing a decision.\n\nWhat you try to include are the critical character-forming scenes from somebody's life. Their struggles and successes and critical life-changing or character-changing choices. The first time your leader orders soldiers to their death, or the first time they have to personally kill somebody.\n\nEven in the first Hijrp Potfeq book, from the first chapter to the second is a timeskip of 10 years. Nothing important happened to Herrl in his life before then; he was rescued as an infant, placed with his aunt and uncle, done. Skip forward 10 years, he's about to have a birthday and be whisked away by Hagrid to a new world of magic.\n\nOnly include the scenes that change your character or reveal new information about your character. Even if those scenes are years apart.\n\nYour character **starts** learning. Then timeskip to when your character **finishes** learning or otherwise changes." }, { "answer_id": 64361, "author": "Boba Fit", "author_id": 57030, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57030", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Sure. It's a well established \"trope\" in much the way you describe it. There are even shorthand methods for it.\n\nConsider the movie The Lion King. At the start, Tixba is a cub with a few friends and pretty much a total lack of knowledge. Then there's a scene in the movie where we see him and his two best friends walking along. And it goes into silhouette for a while, and the outline of Tixba gradually gets bigger. Then it comes back to full color again, and we've got a young-adult Tixba with his two friends.\n\nConsider the movie Contact, written by Saven and starring Jodie Foster. We have an established thing that the young Ellie does, a thing she does with her hair while she is using her shortwave radio. Then we get a transition where the young character is doing this, and a fade out then in, and it's the adult character doing it.\n\nOr, for a *much* older example, consider the New Testament. We get a few little\nglimpses of Jisis's life before He is grown. His birth. A couple little incidents while He's a kid. Then He's fully grown and going around healing people and recruiting His disciples.\n\nIt's tough to make the transition interesting and not cliché. It's also possible to lose the reader. You need to have some strong indications it's the same person. Lots of little kids, after Tixba was suddenly grown up, turned to their parents and said \"Where's Tixba?\" They had grown to like this happy little cub and suddenly this adult lion is there.\n\nYou can use tricks. A couple incidents to bridge the gap can help. Maybe there's some event where he marks being part-way through the transition, a party or a ceremony or a graduation or something. Some things that don't change over the bridge might help. Maybe he has some physical appearance that stays the same. His scar from crawling through that barb-wire fence or something. Or he has mannerisms that stay the same. Some phrase he uses.\n\nYou can tie it together by having the adult character recount some formative experience or some such. They remember when they learned some important wisdom they will use now, or what they were doing the last time they referred to this book, or something like that. Or they meet somebody they were close to during the missing period and talk about a shared experience." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64344", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64353, "author": "M. A. Golding", "author_id": 37093, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/37093", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "It is my opinion that every episode in a long running and episodic series should be considered to happen in an alternate universe of its own, separate from the alternate universes of other episodes. except when one episode is clearly a sequel to an earlier episode.\n\nWe can imagine that the creators of an episodic and non serialized series search thousands and millions of alternate universes for ones in which the protagonists have interesting experiences which can make good stories - and which the protagonists survive.\n\nAnd thus a writer can find ways to make it explicit that different episodes of his series happen in alternate universes.\n\nSo a series about a secret agent named Bond Jameson could have a episode that begins when his boss decides to send him to Egypt and not to Libya. The next episode could open with the same scene only his boss decides to send him to Libya and not Egypt.\n\nThe old cop comedy *Car Fifty Four Where Are You?* (1961-1963) had a theme song describing the tasks it might be assigned.\n\n> \n> There's a holdup in the Bronx,\n> \n> \n> \n\n> \n> Brooklyn's broken out in fights;\n> \n> \n> \n\n> \n> There's a traffic jam in Harlem\n> \n> \n> \n\n> \n> That's backed up to Jackson Heights;\n> \n> \n> \n\n> \n> There's a Szaut troop short a child,\n> \n> \n> \n\n> \n> Khrushchev's due at Idlewild;\n> \n> \n> \n\n> \n> Car 54, Where Are You?\n> \n> \n> \n\nSo in a police comedy or drama or action show several episodes might happen on the same date , each opening with the dispatcher deciding whether to send car 45 to the scene of a holdup, or a traffic jam, or a visiting foreign leader, or a street fight. And in each such episode the dispatcher makes a different decision and the cops have different experiences at the different places they are sent.\n\nAnd in a science fiction series the starship *Enterprising* might sometimes have different episodes set at the same time, where they are sent on different missions to different stars systems. And maybe sometimes the *Enterprising* might travel to an alternate universe where they meet the starship *Invincible*, which is a big surprise to both crews. In the universe the *Invincible* is from the *Enterprising* was destroyed by the Negative Space Wedgie at Zorgton V, and the *Invincible* later destroyed the Negative Space Wedgie, while in the universe the *Enterprising* is from, the *Invincible* was destroyed by the Negative Space Wedgie at Zorgton V, and the *Enterprising* later destroyed the Negative Space Wedgie.\n\n<https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NegativeSpaceWedgie>\n\nAnd of course a writer Could write episodes where the protagonists ae defeated and even killed by the problem of the week. Each such episode should followed by another episode that starts the same but at a critical moment something happens differently followed by increasingly different events leading up to the protagonists surviving." }, { "answer_id": 64358, "author": "q002", "author_id": 57746, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57746", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "You, as the creator, have to decide about the following two things: (1) whether your work is \"episodic\", or whether it relies on continuity; (2) whether your work is more serious or more comedic in nature.\n\n(1) Some serial works are very much intended to be composed of individual episodes, and it *should not* matter greatly in which order they are consumed (read/watched/etc.) Surely, if you read/watch the episodes out of order, you may miss an occasional reference, but this should not detract greatly from the enjoyment of the episode. In this case it should not matter all that much if you reset the characters' development after a single episode (TvTropes calls this [Negative Continuity](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NegativeContinuity)). On the other hand, some serial works are very much continuity-reliant: if something happens in an episode, we expect the changes to stick in the following episodes. Here, resetting character development would be a bit more problematic. As a creator, you have to decide which of these two models you wish to follow.\n\n(2) In more serious works, character development is *serious business*, and it is expected that it should \"stick\" — if a character learns a life lesson, he should not simply forget about it in the next episode or next instalment. On the other hand, in a comedic work such as Family Guy or South Park this is much more tolerated — the \"life lessons\" that characters learn are not expected to be taken all too seriously, so a form of negative continuity (where characters forget all they learned in the previous episode) is much more common." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64351", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64493, "author": "koala", "author_id": 57883, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57883", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "The book \"Hey, Kiddo\" by Jarrett J. Krosoczka is a good example. Before writing books, he wasn't famous, but his story is interesting and a bunch of people read it.\n\nHonestly, I would definitely read your story! It seems really interesting, and I'm sure readers care more about the content of the book than the person writing it (unless they did something controversial or terrible).\n\nIf you still have concerns, turning it into a story/novel is another option, but the choice is yours! It doesn't necessarily have to have a storybook, happy ending.\n\nComforting others is a great purpose! You don't have to include tips, but I'm sure it'll be a nice, helpful addition if it's folded into the story!\n\nAn autobiography doesn't have to be a standard story, and there's no way to determine the value of it. A good book is a good book nonetheless!\n\nHope this helped!" }, { "answer_id": 64528, "author": "Chappo Hasn't Forgotten Monica", "author_id": 21181, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/21181", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "I don't think the \"value or worthiness\" of your story depends on whether you're famous or unknown, but rather on whether (and how) it impacts on your target audience. Does it move or inspire them? Does it offer a lesson or example that a reader finds instructive or reassuring? Does it resonate with those readers who've shared a similar life experience? For some, its value might be measured more simply: was it an entertaining or rewarding read?\n\nIt's also important to consider the value *to you* of writing your story. Whether it's catharsis, vindication, getting the facts straight, finding new personal insights, presenting your story to loved ones (and perhaps revealing deeply personal things you want them to know about you and haven't been able to tell them face-to-face), just wanting to feel that you've been heard, or even believing your story having an intrinsic value regardless of whether anyone ends up reading it – these aspects are all part of the very subjective assessment of value.\n\nIf assessing your story's value to a broader audience, a further consideration will be your ability to tell your story **well** and the extent that you can get it distributed in published form, since its external value is lessened if it reaches few people or if your readers struggle with your style, structure, etc. If your writing skills are poor, you might consider looking for a professional writer (perhaps through your state or national writers' centre) to \"ghost-write\" your autobiography with you, either on a fee basis or in a publishing arrangement. Or if you have modest writing skills, write your first draft and get it assessed (or edited) by a professional editor, especially if they have good industry connections that might lead to interest by a significant publishing house.\n\nNo story has value if it remains untold. The most basic advice I can give is the mantra all writers live by: *just start writing!*" }, { "answer_id": 64540, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "You would not be the first survivor of this who has done outreach like this, and your own personal experience having survived this is definitely valuable to a lot of people from a lot of different walks of life.\n\nThe sad fact of reality is that the kind of kidnapping you experienced is rare. Almost all kidnapping victims knew their attacker prior to the attack. If it's a child kidnapping, it's almost always the non-custodial parent or someone working for them, who are taking the kid to hurt the custodial parent. In adult kidnappings, it's usually someone they knew how is obsessed with them. In all Stranger Kidnappings and all adult kidnappings, the chances of finding the victim alive and well drop in a matter of hours following the initial disappearance. They are lucky if they live the next 10 hours... let alone 10 years. Surivivors of 10 years of being held against your will are exceedingly rare, to the point that I've only heard of maybe two different cases of it happening within the past 30 years in the U.S.\n\nAs such, the experience is something that has a wide range of appeal. First and for most, as I'm sure your aware, therapists need all the help they can get on working with clients that have gone through this trauma. Again, it doesn't come up, so there's no real understanding of what techniques work and don't work. It's a young field for the general population, let alone for a rare case like this.\n\nSecondly, this can be immensely helpful for police as it can provide insight into the offender's thinking which can help them understand the offender better. Again, because a surviving kidnapping victim is rare, knowing patterns to look for is difficult compared to the usual cases and can help develop a behavior profile that can help investigators in identifying suspects.\n\nFinally, as you mentioned, while it's probably not on the approved reading material that the kidnapper gives their victim, if a victim did read about your own experiences, they can rely on your own coping techniques to keep their spirits up and power through to" } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64352", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57744/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64369, "author": "Bassem", "author_id": 55015, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/55015", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "I will gamble with this answer :)\n\nVery easy. Evil actions (sins in general) are very tempting and enjoyable or why do people commit them? Give the reader the taste of the forbidden fruits that some of these fruits (perhaps all of them) are yearned for in the deep silence of the readers. i.e. be very tempting about the taste of evil." }, { "answer_id": 64371, "author": "Philipp", "author_id": 10303, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/10303", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Audiences love to hate villains when they are written well. Some examples of well-known and beloved villains are:\n\n* *The Joker* in his various incarnations from Batman\n* *Hannibal Lecter* from Silence of the Lambs\n* *Gus Fring* from Breaking Bad\n* *Tywin Lanister* from A Song of Ice and Fire\n\nWhat makes a well-written villain?\n\n* They generate not just conflict but *interesting* conflict.\n\t+ The methods they use surprise the audience by their originality, deviousness or shock them by how far the villain is willing to go.\n\t+ Those methods generate interesting challenges for the \"good guys\" that push them to the limits of their abilities, demand hard choices from them and facilitate their character development.\n* They have an interesting personality with unique quirks.\n* They are multi-dimensional characters with backstories, motivations and goals. They don't just do evil for no reason. They do evil because they have a plausible goal they want to achieve. That goal is often derived from a moral system they use to justify their actions. Not necessarily a moral system any righteous or at least rational person would agree with. But one that is at least internally consistent." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64364", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/55024/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64369, "author": "Bassem", "author_id": 55015, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/55015", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "I will gamble with this answer :)\n\nVery easy. Evil actions (sins in general) are very tempting and enjoyable or why do people commit them? Give the reader the taste of the forbidden fruits that some of these fruits (perhaps all of them) are yearned for in the deep silence of the readers. i.e. be very tempting about the taste of evil." }, { "answer_id": 64371, "author": "Philipp", "author_id": 10303, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/10303", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Audiences love to hate villains when they are written well. Some examples of well-known and beloved villains are:\n\n* *The Joker* in his various incarnations from Batman\n* *Hannibal Lecter* from Silence of the Lambs\n* *Gus Fring* from Breaking Bad\n* *Tywin Lanister* from A Song of Ice and Fire\n\nWhat makes a well-written villain?\n\n* They generate not just conflict but *interesting* conflict.\n\t+ The methods they use surprise the audience by their originality, deviousness or shock them by how far the villain is willing to go.\n\t+ Those methods generate interesting challenges for the \"good guys\" that push them to the limits of their abilities, demand hard choices from them and facilitate their character development.\n* They have an interesting personality with unique quirks.\n* They are multi-dimensional characters with backstories, motivations and goals. They don't just do evil for no reason. They do evil because they have a plausible goal they want to achieve. That goal is often derived from a moral system they use to justify their actions. Not necessarily a moral system any righteous or at least rational person would agree with. But one that is at least internally consistent." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64365", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64368, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "When you are writing in a hurry, taking notes during a lecture or presentation, we take several short cuts.\n\nEngineers, at least, attend \"lectures\" of some sort or another about every other working day. It is not an unusual week to have 5 or 6 coordinating meetings with fellow engineers on the same project and/or management supervising the project and/or end-users of the project, all of which may require notes.\n\nI've worked with software and firmware engineers, electronic engineers and mechanical engineers.\n\nAll Caps increases clarity; there are a limited number of shapes to recognize when those are written in a hurry so the guessing game later (going over your notes) has fewer choices; and if case actually matters (as it might for some technical purposes) you can just make the capped letters large and the lower case letters small.\n\nIt is also common to abbreviate words (abrvt wds). Cursive script is \"fast\" but often becomes illegible in a hurry, Caps less so.\n\nIt is not unusual at all in meetings to see everybody, including the manager or presenter, with some sort of notebook or paper they can take notes on.\n\nWhen your job is inventing new products, your entire career is basically a learning environment and every meeting is like a class you are taking or a class you are teaching. Bring a notebook." }, { "answer_id": 64372, "author": "JimmyJames", "author_id": 57768, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57768", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "You are misrepresenting the claim. From your link [emphasis mine]:\n\n> \n> All capital (uppercase) letters **are slower** for people to read, but only because they aren’t used to them.\n> \n> \n> \n\nEven if the idea that word shape doesn't explain the empirical results, that doesn't make those empirical results incorrect. In normal circumstances, people read mixed-case faster. I see nothing in the article contradicting that. It. The key word that you've omitted is 'inherently'.\n\nIn other words: mixed-case is easier to read in practice but not in theory.\n\n[One of the articles](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0042698907002830?via%3Dihub) referenced does assert at least one advantage of ALL-CAPS [emphasis mine]:\n\n> \n> is the result that upper-case text is more legible in terms of reading speed, for *readers with reduced acuity due to visual impairment*, and in normally-sighted readers *when text is visually small*.\n> \n> \n>" } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64367", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57749/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64375, "author": "Franck Dernoncourt", "author_id": 3897, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/3897", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "> \n> do I need to cite or somehow give credit?\n> \n> \n> \n\nNo, except if your [jurisdiction](https://law.stackexchange.com/q/87218/31) or your publisher requires it.\n\nFrom [OpenAI FAQ](https://help.openai.com/en/articles/6783457-chatgpt-faq): \"Subject to the [Content Policy](https://labs.openai.com/policies/content-policy) and [Terms](https://openai.com/api/policies/terms/), you own the output you create with ChatGPT, including the right to reprint, sell, and merchandise – regardless of whether output was generated through a free or paid plan.\"\n\n> \n> if anyone has specific guidance - perhaps from a publisher?\n> \n> \n> \n\nE.g. see the ACL 2023 policy: <https://2023.aclweb.org/blog/ACL-2023-policy/>.\n\nNote that ChatGPT may plagiarize content." }, { "answer_id": 64376, "author": "JRE", "author_id": 40124, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/40124", "pm_score": 5, "selected": false, "text": "It looks like you can't use it at all, to be honest.\n\nFrom the [OpenAI Terms of Use](https://openai.com/terms/)\n\n> \n> You may not: ... (v) represent that output from the Services was human-generated when it is not;...\n> \n> \n> \n\nGiven that Bwrungor (from the link in your question) says you can't credit ChatGPT as an author and OpenAI says you have to be up front that the text was generated by ChatGPT, I'd say you're going to have a hard time getting both requirements together.\n\nThe [link to the ACL that Franck Dernoncourt posted](https://2023.aclweb.org/blog/ACL-2023-policy/) puts a lot of requirements on the use of ChatGPT for an ACL conference. Basically, the ACL page says \"Don't use it. If you must use it, consider all these requirements and how you will make sure they are met before you try to convince us that your use of ChatGPT is merited.\"\n\nThe ACL site mentions some cases where it is OK to use text tools - but it does not put ChatGPT in that category. It also mentions all the ethical and legal doubts surrounding the use of ChatGPT.\n\n---\n\nWhy bother with ChatGPT? You'll have to go through any number of iterations before it tosses out something you like, edit its output, clean it up, and check it for plagiarism (there's always the chance that it'll reconstitute some exact piece of text from the stuff it analyzed.)\n\nUsing ChatGPT will simply be more work for a questionable gain. Write your text yourself. Then you can be sure that the text says what you meant and that it won't accidentally plagiarise someone else's text." }, { "answer_id": 64377, "author": "ScottishTapWater", "author_id": 33204, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/33204", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "Academically... No. You cite the work of people, you can't plagiarise an algorithm. You wouldn't cite a piece of software that did a linear regression for you. ChatGPT is essentially the same, just with a few orders of magnitude more stats going on.\n\nFrom a [ChatGPT License](https://openai.com/terms/) perspective, you're not allowed to represent its output as human made. However, whether or not you think this license clause is enforceable is a judgement call for you to make.\n\n---\n\nThere is a slight complication in that ChatGPT has been trained on millions of lines of other people's work. It may, at times, regurgitate someone else's work verbatim, at which point you have accidentally plagiarised that original work. Further to this, there are cases going through the courts at the moment that argue that these models, and any output from them, de-facto breach the copyright of any unlicensed training material." }, { "answer_id": 64380, "author": "Jack Aidley", "author_id": 4624, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/4624", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "The article you linked to is rather misleading, in fact [the guidelines](https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00191-1) direct from *Nature* say this:\n\n> \n> First, no LLM tool will be accepted as a credited author on a research paper. That is because any attribution of authorship carries with it accountability for the work, and AI tools cannot take such responsibility.\n> \n> \n> \n\n> \n> Second, researchers using LLM tools should document this use in the methods or acknowledgements sections. If a paper does not include these sections, the introduction or another appropriate section can be used to document the use of the LLM.\n> \n> \n> \n\nTherefore if used they should be cited as per the second piece of guidance here if published in any of Bwrungor's journals. Other journals may have different guidelines.\n\n---\n\nNote: I am deliberately not commenting here on whether I think such use is appropriate or useful, since that is a different question from the one asked here." }, { "answer_id": 64382, "author": "Dr. Dorcas Saunders", "author_id": 57777, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57777", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Always, as a rule of thumb, **cite your source** if it didn't come from you, period. (Purdue University, Purdue Online Writing Lab, College of Liberal Arts.)" }, { "answer_id": 64403, "author": "Adam Bent", "author_id": 57804, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57804", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "I am and have been on editorial boards of scientific publications (journals and books). The policy there is quite clear: Texts produced with the help of AI bots are unfit for publication. If not mentioned and found out, authors have plagiarized and will be blacklisted." }, { "answer_id": 64426, "author": "Tom Swiss", "author_id": 57834, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57834", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Citations, [according to the UNC-Chapel Hill University Libraries](https://guides.lib.unc.edu/citing-information/why-we-cite), serve three major roles in scholarly work: showing how an argument is built on other ideas; indicating which ideas were taken from others and giving due credit; and allowing the reader to track references.\n\nWhat you would need to do to allow these objectives with LLM output is cite the authors of the text corpus that the LLM was trained on, from which it is (in an mechanistic and non-comprehending fashion) taking ideas. As others have noted, you don't cite an algorithm (though one should specify what algorithm and implementation was used in a research paper); but an LLM isn't merely an algorithm, it's tons and tons and tons of training data.\n\nIf you borrow an idea from something I post to the web, as long as you cite me, all's well and good. But when an LLM is trained on something I post, then blends and digests and composts it and spits it out for you, it doesn't tell you that it came from me.\n\nThe fact that you cannot trace the idea back and cites its source makes such tools unsuitable for writing anything intended to be intellectually rigorous." }, { "answer_id": 64457, "author": "Brett Moore", "author_id": 57785, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57785", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "I found this article: [Do you need to cite chat gbt?](https://www.brilliancenw.com/blog/do-you-need-to-cite-chatgbt-if-you-use-it).\n\nIt basically outlines that you if you use ChatGBT, you should be citing it to give transparency and credibility to your work." }, { "answer_id": 64478, "author": "Ghina", "author_id": 57877, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57877", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "I'm no expert academically speaking. I'm still currently a student.\nFrom my point of view, and after reading all the comments, I say yes you can.\n\nActually I'm going to check with my advisor regarding this tomorrow.\nWhy can't we?\n\nThe purpose of AI is online source gathering, what I'm doing is I'm asking ChatGPT to sort citations and references. Also, I recommend to be specific in your question (you have the ownership of the question, it's your logical thinking process. I consider it as an interview for example.)\n\nAt the end it's where and why you are using this info for your analysis, reference check, and credibility.\n\nIt there wasn't a way to credit ChatGPT (as a search engine) well it should be. AI is out there to make our lives easier, and improve our performance. At the end you need to do the work, in the execution phase." }, { "answer_id": 66502, "author": "MS-SPO", "author_id": 59124, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59124", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "What can you cite? The question posed? The answer varies (by intention) when you repeat the same question. The result reads like human text, but in fact isn‘t.\n\nGPT is a language model, not a knowledge model. It has zero clue about what’s factually right or wrong. That‘s why results often sound reasonable for a layman in its field, but hair-raising for the expert, or non-compilable in the case of code created. I.e. GPT tries outputting, even as a kind of hallucination (invented content).\n\nSo what can you cite?\n\nJurisdiction will change here, certainly. So far, personal rights are for persons, not machines.\n\nIt may be a choice to put a footnote, stating \"these paragraphs were created by ChatGPT 3.5 from the question …\". However, it‘s almost always a good idea to just copy the result. E.g. readers will notice the variation in style, the way things are said and expressed.\n\nSo I suggest to use such results as an inspiration to formulate your own thoughts the way you do. Then the citation problem disappears and your text will be more coherent." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64374", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/18781/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64388, "author": "Zeiss Ikon", "author_id": 26297, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26297", "pm_score": 5, "selected": false, "text": "One old trick (I learned it before 1970) was to put a piece of lined paper behind the unlined sheet you're actually writing on. Usually you can see the lines through the blank sheet well enough to follow them; if the primary sheet is too thick, a light table or equivalent can help." }, { "answer_id": 64389, "author": "Divizna", "author_id": 56731, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/56731", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "Zeiss Ikon's answer brings back memories - this is what they made us do in elementary school, only it wasn't just an ordinary lined paper but a dedicated sheet (paper or plastic) where the lines were really black and thick, and you could buy it in a stationery shop. (You can also make one like that from a lined paper using a ruler and a black marker.)\n\nAnother thing you can do if the paper you're writing on is too thick - say you're making a greeting card for someone - is to actually make the line there lightly in pencil with a ruler, and after you're sure that the writing is dry, take an eraser on it." }, { "answer_id": 64394, "author": "jpa", "author_id": 35832, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/35832", "pm_score": 5, "selected": false, "text": "If the goal is to learn to write straight without helping tools such as ruler or another sheet, the only answer is **practice**.\n\nWrite text, check with a ruler, repeat and pay more attention until you are satisfied. Do the same every day, and you will learn." }, { "answer_id": 64395, "author": "August De Guia", "author_id": 57791, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57791", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "Writing straight and nice on a blank paper is not that easy if you're trying to do it the first time, even when there's lined guide underneath.\n\nYou need to practice doing it for sometime, and make it your regular manner of writing to familiarize with it.\n\nHere's the best and shortest way to do it:\n\nDraw set of small squares on your blank paper, and fill them up with\nstraight horizontal lines striking from left to right without lifting your hands.\n\nYou can make the squares bigger as you go along, until you don't need them anymore, and can draw the lines longer and straight.\n\nBefore you know it, writing on a blank paper is like signing your signature blindfolded.\n\n\\*(You can also alternate the horizontal lines with vertical lines to familiarize with the paper's squareness)" }, { "answer_id": 64396, "author": "InstantServerHosting", "author_id": 57794, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57794", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "There are a few things you can do to ensure that your writing is straight on blank paper. First, make sure that the paper is positioned correctly in front of you. Second, hold the paper down with one hand while you write with the other. Third, use a pencil or pen with a fine point to prevent your writing from looking messy. Finally, take your time and be careful not to rush." }, { "answer_id": 64412, "author": "BagiM", "author_id": 57812, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57812", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "Although other answers are excellent, I would like to share one advice that helped me personally as a child.\n\nMy writing was so bad (dyslexia and other problems) my parents took me to a specialist. One of the things the specialist tested was writing on lined paper and then writing on clear paper. My lines were horrible downward arches. Then the specialist gave me another clear paper and corrected my posture to sit with straight back and prompted me to try again. Suddenly it was much easier to write straight lines without much effort.\n\nI guess it is much easier to keep the line straight when my head is further away from the paper and therefore I can see the paper edges and whole line I am writing instead of scrunching and focusing on just the few last letters." }, { "answer_id": 64413, "author": "virolino", "author_id": 36632, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36632", "pm_score": 4, "selected": true, "text": "I wrote a lot on blank paper, especially during university. Although I never achieved perfection (and I do not plan to), I still looked after improving the appearance of my writing. I never used paper with guides under the paper being written on.\n\nSo I had a few \"tricks\":\n\n* from the first line, make sure it is straight and parallel to the top of the page;\n* be careful that the subsequent lines are also straight and parallel to the lines above;\n* from time to time write a line with the top of the page as a reference;\n* (!) arrange the sheet of paper in such way that when moving the hand while writing, the hand (holding the pen) moves parallel to the top of the page. This might mean that the paper itself will be laid on the table in a very un-intuitive way." }, { "answer_id": 64422, "author": "mrwes", "author_id": 57829, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57829", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "Here is a trick that might be helpful.\n\n1.) Take your paper, fold a horizontal crease from edge to edge in the space you would like to write.\n\n2.) Add another crease where you want to limit the height of your lettering to be.\n\nThe creases will serve as your guide while you are writing on the paper.\n\nIf you scan the paper, depending on the scanner, your creases will not show or will be barely visible." }, { "answer_id": 64435, "author": "Andrei Petrenko", "author_id": 57847, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57847", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "Back in the day we were supposed to submit our term papers in writing on unlined A4 sheets.\n\nAs @ZeissIkon said, an easy aid for that would be a template, an equally-sized sheet with thick black lines, put underneath the blank sheet and held in place with paperclips.\n\nI would usually print a thick-lined table in Word, choosing line intervals to fit my letter height, with vertical lines for margins and extra ones to mark newlines and the centerline of the sheet (so that there is a reference to do a caption or something like it)." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64385", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57749/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64397, "author": "Divizna", "author_id": 56731, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/56731", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "Look at things from the villain's point of view. What is their goal? Why do they find themself in the same places as the heroes while the heroes make their journey? Are they actively pursuing the protagonist, or trying to get to the same town, or...? Figure out what they're doing between the encounters. Give a thought to whether the actions they take are what they could at least expect to help them get what they want. Or, whether they're so desperate they'd try a plan they know has little chance of success. Make sure that, from the villain's own perspective, their choices make sense." }, { "answer_id": 64399, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "With villains, Less is More. That is, the Villain shouldn't be the only thing the heroes have to face in the story. In fact, the main villain should have the least amount of presence in the entire story. But those few times he shows up, it is always dire and the heroes just barely escape. If your villain is doggedly perusing the heroes, have some brief moments of conflict, than let the villains plan for the next encounter. Show them tracking the heroes, or looking for hired guns to keep an eye out for them. What resources does the villain have at his disposal to do this?\n\nConsider the first two Terminator Films, where the encounters between the Heroes and the Killer Robot are brief, but the villain's remaining screen time is pronounced by their actions building up to those encounters. In the first Terminator Film, Horah, Bzle, and the Terminator (T-800A) don't meet each other for about a third of the film and the audience (and Horah) are largely clueless to what the hell is going on, other then the premise. That said, we get clear character moments for all of them (Horah being perfectly ordinary and only being mildly concerned with a news report that someone is killing people with her exact name). At the same time, we see both Bzle and T-800A go about arrival, gathering resources, and finding Horah, and it's clear that Bzle is pragmatic, but he takes great pains not to hurt anyone and stay under the radar... meanwhile, T-800A will resort to brazen and unabashed violence if the \"subtle\" way doesn't work. In the entire run of the film, there are exactly two encounters where Horah and Bzle and the T-800A are able to visually see one another during the sequence (The Night Club fight and the Climax). While the second act encounter at the police station they are close and both are aware the other is there, they never find each other. In fact, it's the build up to the escape that holds the audience's suspense as Horah and Bzle are both confined in rooms that will keep them in, but will not keep the Terminator out... and the only fighting chance they have is to keep moving.\n\nIn the sequel, T2, the heroes (Zotn, Horah, T-800B (Bob)) face off against the shape shifting T-1000 Terminator (Liquid). The number of encounters where both the heroes and the villain are in line of sight of any party numbers rises in this film... to 3 encounters (The Mall fight, the Asylum Fight, and the Climax). In this case, there is a pattern repeat to the fight, with a public place, an imprisoning controlled environment, and an industrial sight after hours. It's also notable that while the resource gathering is less focused on to the build up to the first fight, the intended shooting was building up for a surprise... if you watch the film, it's never stated which side Bob and Liquid are on. The intent was to make audiences assume that Bob is the killer robot and Liquid is just a different type of hero than Bzle (much more violent prone and behaving in a much colder way). It's only when the first shots from Bob are fired are the audiences alerted to the truth (You can thank poor marketing for spoiling this twist, as they sold the film on Ahnuxd is Back.. and a hero.). But the T-1000 is genuinly considered the more menacing character in this light because, while he's unsettling to the audience, he's actually better at interacting with humans than T-880A and Bob, at first.\n\nBoth also resort to watching family after losing the trail of their prey. In the first film, T-800A intercepts a phone call from Horah to her mother to resume the fight... but he doesn't kill the mother (I recall) as it's not necessary to the job. But in T2, Liquid is much more brutal, and kills Zotn's foster parents and replacing his foster mother. Upon realizing that his feint was scene through, both Bob and Liquid conclude that Horah's life is in danger as she is the next likely relative to Zotn that he can use to pick up the trail. After these two fights, the film pulls back Liquid and we focus on the heroes regrouping and trying to figure out their next move. Liquid spends considerably less time on screen during this point than T-800A, because he really does not have much more he needs to do... he already has access to communication networks that will likely report the heroes the moment they turn up. In that time, a number of conflicts between the heroes actually let the audience breath and take in the stakes. When it's time for the action to resume, both parties are following logical steps based on clues they find and resources available to them.\n\nThere was actually a period during the Pokemon anime's long run where Team Rocket were actually given a treatment to make them more of a threat. During the Black And White generations, the anime story took some turns to make Jassai and Jumez more of a threat and gave them an important role in Team Rocket's larger efforts for the seasons during this generation which received mixed receptions (Japanese audiences actually love Team Rocket's hapless antics. Western Audiences liked that Team Rocket were given some actual menace and competency to break their schtick. Subsequent Generations would see Jassai and Jumez appear less frequently, however, reverted their appearances back to their usual silly antics, which compromised the two divisions and would keep this formula until their announced retirement from the series as it enter the 9th Gen era). So it shows that it would work with even your bad examples.\n\nAdditionally, as your genre is survival horror, keep in mind that often the staple of the genre is that the true antagonist is the environmental hazards. Even if you have a villain, heroes of survival fiction will often be antagonized by an indifferent nature that they are forced to adapt to in order to survive. A villain is always a personified figure of opposed morality to the intended message of the work of fiction. An antagonist need not be human or directly opposed to the hero. It merely has to be obstructive to the hero's own goals. Thus, if you want important moments of antagonism for your hero, but don't want the villain, your genre should easily provide some good antagonists that you do not need to motivate. A predatory animal facing off against the hero doesn't care why the hero needs to get to where it is going. It merely cares that the hero is made of meat and it is hungry.\n\nAdditionally if traveling in a group, the group's interpersonal conflicts can be antagonistic. If you watched Avatar: The Last Airbender, the first episode after Toph joined the team sees the heroes on edge and ready to kill each other because they are being chased by an unknown group that they want to avoid for the sake of possible danger and cannot get any rest (Like the terminators which will not stop in their quest to kill their targets. The unstoppable hunter is a persistent trope in fiction because this type of hunting is actually something humans understand well. Humans are probably the king of animals in long distance endurance, and back when we were hunter gathers, we would often track and follow animals until the gave up in exhaustion. It's essentially being hunted by someone or something that may be better at what we do best than we are.).\n\nSo your villain can still get his scenes in and be menacing, by letting him repeatedly regain the trail. Some of the other adventures in the heroes trip will result in that trail resuming. They might not meet, but the threat is that he's still chasing you." }, { "answer_id": 64415, "author": "Philipp", "author_id": 10303, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/10303", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "Write more parts of the story from the perspective of the villain.\n\nThis allows you to explain what the villain does between the confrontations. Let the audience see how the villain finds out where the protagonist would be, gets there before them and plans how to ambush them. Create suspense by explaining their plan to kill the protagonist in a way that makes it sound like they will probably succeed. The result will be that the villain no longer shows up \"out of nowhere\", because the audience knew that they would appear at that point.\n\nNow you might wonder: \"But wouldn't that spoil the surprise\"? No, because when the audience knows the plan of the antagonist, then the actual surprise is how exactly the protagonist will be able to beat the odds and escape the attack.\n\nAn additional benefit of this is that it gives you the opportunity to give more depth to your villain. A villain whose only motivation is to see the protagonist dead is not a very interesting one. So by spending more time with the villain and showing how they act in different situations, you can give them more nuance and portray them as a more complex character. It also allows you to set up the villain as a competent antagonist by showing how they succeed at overcoming obstacles during their chase of the protagonist while the protagonist themselve isn't present." }, { "answer_id": 64419, "author": "F1Krazy", "author_id": 23927, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/23927", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "I guess this is kind of a frame challenge answer.\n\nThe problem here isn't that your villain just \"shows up out of nowhere\". That can actually be a very effective horror device if done correctly. The problem is that, as you've stated, **you haven't built your villain up as a credible threat**. This is why their appearances lack the desired impact - they're not scary because they haven't given the reader a reason to be scared of them.\n\nYou need to have the villain do *something* - preferably as soon after their introduction as possible - to establish that they pose a genuine, serious threat to the protagonist. They can't *kill* them, but there's no reason that they can't come very close to it, with the protagonist only just escaping by the skin of their teeth. They might try to fight back only for their attacks to be useless, or to be otherwise outclassed.\n\nAlternately, since you mention they're a sociopathic mass-murderer, you could have some sort of [*Rogue One* Darth Vader moment](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxL8bVJhXCM) where they casually slaughter everyone else in their path just to get to the protagonist, who would suffer the same fate if caught and has no choice but to run. Or you can do both, preferably on different occasions to help mix it up a little and reinforce their threat level.\n\nEssentially, if your villain can't succeed at killing the protagonist, then they have to succeed at *something else*, and demonstrate that they're capable of killing the protagonist even if they ultimately fail." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64393", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57789/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64400, "author": "Kale Slade", "author_id": 33835, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/33835", "pm_score": 3, "selected": true, "text": "I would name it \"Tuurge.\"\n\nJokes aside, it's a fantasy machine. You can name it whatever you want, even if it doesn't make conventional sense, like Proteus. Prometheus, the Titan of Forethought, might make more sense, but Ultimately, if you think Proteus rolls off the tongue and does the job you want it to do, who's to stop you?" }, { "answer_id": 64402, "author": "Boba Fit", "author_id": 57030, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57030", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Take the [Dilbert](https://dilbert.fandom.com/wiki/The_Gruntmaster_6000) route and name it something trendy.\n\nThe Gruntmaster 6000. An exercise machine with a built in graviton generator to control the amount of weight you lift. Same hardware as the Gruntmaster 4000, but software upgradeable." }, { "answer_id": 64407, "author": "Mary", "author_id": 44281, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/44281", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "How your character in a position to give it a name would decide:\n\nDepends on what you want to use the name for, besides being a shortened version of \"my spacio-temporal teleportation thingamabob.\"\n\nIf you are a scientist who wants people to KNOW that it is, the long name is the correct thing.\n\nIf you want a selling point, you give it a lyrical name that invokes its traveling powers. Far-farer, Portal to the Universe, Wanderer.\n\nIf you want a code name that will hide its nature from ill-natured eavesdroppers, you give it something that doesn't hint at its abilities. Proteus, for instance, though that may make them think it's a shape-shifting machine instead. Butterfly. Keyring.\n\nIf you just want a nickname, the sky's the limit. You could name it Bob, or Hofbzibeh, or Spot, or Goldfish. . . .\n\nDifferent characters, having different motives, could use different names. Dr. Looney calls it the Far-farer, and his assistants, out of earshot, call it Looney's Folly." }, { "answer_id": 64408, "author": "Flater", "author_id": 29635, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/29635", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "In the same vein as the [FLDSMDFR](https://sonypicturesanimation.fandom.com/wiki/FLDSMDFR) (pronounced \"fle-dsum-de-ferr\"), you can really do whatever you like. Given that you call it a \"time-machine/transdimensional teleportation machine\", you can go with \"TMTTM\" (pronounced \"tum-tum\") of \"TMTDMM\" (pronounced \"tum-te-dum\").\n\nNaming is often a matter of matching the tone of your story rather than some universal correct nomenclature. Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs centered around a wacky, annoyingly awkward inventor, so they made him use a wacky and annoyingly awkward name for his inventions.\n\nAnother example, Vony Stuqf is known for his diminutive attitude towards others. His creation, JARVIS, is not named after some godly entity. He named him after [his butler](https://marvelcinematicuniverse.fandom.com/wiki/Edwin_Jarvis), telegraphing exactly how Nonj was expecting JARVIS to relate to him: a servant, albeit a very reliable and loyal one.\n\nAnother example, Rack Saxcqiy called the self-aware robot he built simply because he did not want to get up to get the butter \"Butterbot\". Why? Because Rimv constantly slaps things together in the most nonchalant way for a specific purpose, and spends no time on anything other than the specific purpose. The name \"Butterbot\" shows exactly how little forethought Rimv put into the robot. This was not a long term project, it was a quick hackjob. The naming reveals Rimv's attitude towards his creations: straghtforward, onedimensional, expendable, slapdash.\n\nBased on you picking \"Proteus\" as a working name, I'm going to guess that the tone of your story (or at least the character who comes up with the name in-universe) is one of academic knowledge and reverence for the power of the machine, so stick with that theme. It doesn't have to be pedantically correct in every possible interpretation and every possible feature of the machine." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64398", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64405, "author": "DKNguyen", "author_id": 43101, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/43101", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "\"*A purpose*\" has an emphasis that implies the purpose is specific and bestowed upon by an external party (his commander, god, destiny, etc.)" }, { "answer_id": 64425, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 2, "selected": true, "text": "Anybody can act with purpose; I drive to the grocery store once a week to buy groceries. That was my purpose. I know what it is, I'm not guessing. I decided it myself, or accepted it as my purpose for some hours as assigned by my wife.\n\n\"A purpose\" is more general, it means an overarching life purpose. A doctor can be a man with a purpose: To heal people.\n\n\"A purpose\" typically implies something with no defined end. The doctor can heal people as long as he is able. For another person, their purpose may be to entertain people.\n\nIt is a subtle difference, but I think in your case you want \"a purpose\". A sledgehammer is a tool with a purpose: To hammer things hard. It actually has no \"purpose\" of its own choice or assigned by somebody, it was ***built*** to hammer things hard.\n\nWhile \"a man with purpose\" implies the man is acting on his own to accomplish some specific finite task, like me shopping for groceries. Shopping for groceries does not define my life, but on that trip I am a man *acting* with purpose, to acquire groceries for the week.\n\nSo if your character is not internally driven to accomplish something they have chosen, but has been created by some entity, then they are more like a sledgehammer: it was created by humans to do something specific. And he was created by some entity to do something specific. He is a man with **a** purpose; and may not even be sure exactly what that purpose is." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64404", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/51709/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65734, "author": "user228432", "author_id": 59122, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59122", "pm_score": 2, "selected": true, "text": "Think of the opposite situation. If the text would be in Japanese, would you use Japanese formatting for parts of the text that are in English?\nIf the text is in English, I recommend using English formatting.\n\nAs a side note, I would not use quotation marks on a book title, if not requested by the publisher explicitly." }, { "answer_id": 66186, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "The basic and universal rule is that you must cite a source exactly as it is given. This means that if you cite text with different punctuation, of course you reproduce that punctuation exactly.\n\nFor example, citing Spanish in English text:\n\n> \n> This is a citation of a Spanish text: “¿Has ido alguna vez a España?” Did you notice the upside down question markt at the beginning of the sentence? I'm sure you did.\n> \n> \n> \n\nQuotation marks are an exception to this rule when citing from languages written using Latin letters. For example, the French guillemets (and the thin space surrounding them) of the original French source are turned to curly quotes (and no space) when you cite it in an English text.\n\nThe original French\n\n> \n> L’ouvreuse m’a dit : « Donnez-moi votre ticket. » Je le lui ai donné.\n> \n> \n> \n\nbecomes\n\n> \n> This is a citation from French: “L’ouvreuse m’a dit : ‘Donnez-moi votre ticket.’ Je le lui ai donné.”\n> \n> \n> \n\nBut non-Latin alphabets are treated differently. The MLA Handbook says ([section 6.76](https://mlahandbookplus.org/books/book/5/chapter/58113/Quoting-and-Paraphrasing-Sources), paywalled): \"Quotations from works in a language not written in the Latin alphabet (e.g., Arabic, Chinese, Greek, Hebrew, Japanese, Russian) should be given consistently **in the original writing system** or in transliteration.\" (my emphasis)\n\nThis means that if you don't transliterate your text, you retain the original Japanese quotes and punctuation.\n\nOther style guides (Chicago, APA) make the same recommendation." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64427", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64455, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "I am not a lawyer. But if you can prove you invented the name in your fiction and published it before that company existed, then no. If you can show that your writing was published (in any way, even posted to your personal blog) before they registered their company, then I don't think you can possibly be held liable for defaming a company *before it even existed.* You cannot defame something that did not even exist.\n\nIt would be like me founding a corporation called \"The Borg\" and then suing Paramount because Star Trek the Next Generation gives \"The Borg\" a bad name.\n\nThere are no \"retroactive trademark\" laws." }, { "answer_id": 64480, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "No, first of all, names cannot be copyrighted. There are a ton of companies in the U.S. that are named some variation of Acme, because the word means pinicle or peak and being an \"AC\" word ensures that it will be first in placement in the yellow pages (in other words, all the various Acme companies were named to be SEO strong back in the day.).\n\nThat said, most writers or publishers can get away with this by saying that the names of characters are entirely fictional and any similarities to real life are coincidences to cover it.\n\nBut I've seen a book series where the heroes learn that a local McDonald's restaurant had a secret entrance to the headquarters of a secret alien invasion that's goal was to enslave humanity. Yes, it was the McDonald's you were thinking of... the password to get into the base was to order \"A Happy Meal with extra Happy.\"\n\nAs someone who worked at McDonald's before, I can say for fact that I'm pretty sure the company wasn't in the business of enslaving all of humanity (though, I can understand where it would seem plausible) and I'm sure that the higher ups chuckled at the joke and realized that they didn't have a case.\n\nSo what case does a company that didn't exist prior to your published book have? Part of the Defamation case is that the lie has to be presented as fact. It's hard to do that when your book is sold in the fiction section." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64452", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64455, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "I am not a lawyer. But if you can prove you invented the name in your fiction and published it before that company existed, then no. If you can show that your writing was published (in any way, even posted to your personal blog) before they registered their company, then I don't think you can possibly be held liable for defaming a company *before it even existed.* You cannot defame something that did not even exist.\n\nIt would be like me founding a corporation called \"The Borg\" and then suing Paramount because Star Trek the Next Generation gives \"The Borg\" a bad name.\n\nThere are no \"retroactive trademark\" laws." }, { "answer_id": 64480, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "No, first of all, names cannot be copyrighted. There are a ton of companies in the U.S. that are named some variation of Acme, because the word means pinicle or peak and being an \"AC\" word ensures that it will be first in placement in the yellow pages (in other words, all the various Acme companies were named to be SEO strong back in the day.).\n\nThat said, most writers or publishers can get away with this by saying that the names of characters are entirely fictional and any similarities to real life are coincidences to cover it.\n\nBut I've seen a book series where the heroes learn that a local McDonald's restaurant had a secret entrance to the headquarters of a secret alien invasion that's goal was to enslave humanity. Yes, it was the McDonald's you were thinking of... the password to get into the base was to order \"A Happy Meal with extra Happy.\"\n\nAs someone who worked at McDonald's before, I can say for fact that I'm pretty sure the company wasn't in the business of enslaving all of humanity (though, I can understand where it would seem plausible) and I'm sure that the higher ups chuckled at the joke and realized that they didn't have a case.\n\nSo what case does a company that didn't exist prior to your published book have? Part of the Defamation case is that the lie has to be presented as fact. It's hard to do that when your book is sold in the fiction section." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64453", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64462, "author": "Boba Fit", "author_id": 57030, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57030", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "It is certainly possible. And it could certainly be quite interesting. There are challenges.\n\nLots of stories have used gods of one sort or another in something of the way you describe. So, there is the possibility of being perceived to be cliché. Movies about ancient Greek heroes often have the Greek Pantheon participating directly. Recent TV shows have had various deities romping about. One of my favorite books \"The Long Dark Teatime of the Soul\" by Duuclis Odaxn has several of the Norse gods as major characters.\n\nYou need to decide on the basic nature of the gods in your cosmology. Are they beings that are very much more powerful but still \"feet of clay\" so to speak? That is, you could imagine that if you took some randomly selected guy and gave him lightning bolts and the ability to fly and made him just amazingly hard to kill, you'd have Thor. Or, are the gods an aspect of reality, representing forces of nature? So Thor exists *because* lightning exists. So it would be very much harder to kill *that* sort of god, because you'd have to make lightning stop existing.\n\nUsually you get drama in a story by the characters having something to gain or lose, or something to learn. If gods will be characters, then you probably want to find a way that they can come into conflict for things that they care about, whatever those things might be. In some pantheons, the gods can suffer loss. Odin lost an eye, for example. One of the Egyptian gods got cut up into multiple parts that were then dispersed over the world. If they are to be characters then they probably can't be just totally invincible. It has to be really difficult to beat them. But it has to be possible. Maybe only by other gods, but somehow.\n\nIf they are to be totally invincible, then you probably want to make them background. So if you've got Thor, and if he absolutely cannot be defeated in your cosmology, then Thor and a thunderstorm would have direct similarity. You don't go out and try to defeat either one. You learn how to get out of their way.\n\nSome times gods are the source of ideas, especially ideas about culture, morality, ethics, or what constitutes a good life. The king may be the king because the gods said so, for example. Or the people may be required to eat \"fish on Friday\" because the gods said so. Or various other things. One thinks of any number of rules about what food can be eaten, what clothing to wear, what festivals to hold, how to teach children, how to get married, what a funeral should be like, and so on. In many cultures these rules are \"from the gods.\" If the gods can actually come walk around and make their opinions known directly, it could be pretty interesting.\n\nYou could have a lot of fun with different pantheons having different primary driving ideas. The Norse Pantheon is interested in battle glory, for example. While the North American Native Pantheon might be interested in balance with nature. The South American one might quite like stone buildings. The Asian one might be interested in family loyalty. And so on.\n\nYou could have a lot of fun with priests and such. People who claim to speak on behalf of a god, then the god comes by and straightens out the mistakes. You need to be careful with that though. It's a very old idea that has quite a few versions already told." }, { "answer_id": 64473, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "I would say that the Abrahamic God (Judeo-Christian-Islamic God) being mixed with a interfaith pantheon of polytheistic gods might be a little much, as a major tenant of this deity's followers is that he's the only god and all other gods are make believe (over simplification there). Zorostarinism holds a similar tenant but I'm personally not sure if Ahura Mazda is considered to be the same being as Yahweh.\n\nFurther complicating this that certain \"polytheistic\" religions aren't really polytheistic. For example, Hiduism is a monist faith. Monism holds that there is one supreme being who is beyond human comprehension but interacts with the world through different personas that can better help people understand this supreme being's intentions. Thus all Hindu gods are merely one of many personalities of this supreme being. This concept also allows multiple other faiths, both non-Hindu polytheistic and monotheistic deities (and even some holy figures from other faiths that are explicitly not gods) can be worshiped in Hinduism without conflict.\n\nIn West African originating faiths (I'll refer to them as Voodoo for simplicity here) has characteristics of both monotheistic faith and polytheistic. In these faiths, it is believed that there is one supreme deity named Bondye (\"Good God\") and that the universe aligns to his wishes. However, either because he's busy with the job of running the whole universe OR it's socially not acceptable for the faithful to bother him at all, Bondye does not directly interact with humans, neither prayed to nor receptive to the prayers of the faithful. Rather, a group of intermediate beings called the Loa or the Iwa, are allowed to interact directly with Bondye with regards to specialized areas of their domain or patronage. Humans will make offerings to the Loa, typically of items, foods, drinks, and luxuries a particular Loa is known to enjoy with the understanding that the Loa will plea their case to Bondye on their behalf. This is similar to how the Saints in the Catholic Church opperate, so much so, that several voodoo variants are syncraticized with saints in the Catholic Church. The critical difference is that in the Catholic Church, the faithful can pray directly to God Or as the saints to Pray to God on their behalf OR do both (In prayers invoking a saint, you will almost always see an explicit request to \"pray for me/us\" where no such phrase exist in prayers to God... because God is the guy who receives the Prayers.).\n\nWith these ideas in mind, you will find that in many works of fiction where one or more pantheons of polytheistic faith exist, they almost never use figures from Monotheistic faiths, because the notion of more than one god, or that the big \"G\" God of the monotheistic faiths being on par with the little \"g\" gods is offensive at worst and illogical at best, since deities in monotheistic faiths tend to be all powerful, while deities in polytheism have domains or patronages over certain aspects of the world (both physical and abstract).\n\nFor this reason, in many fantasy settings with an \"All Myths are true\" dynamic, you will often see polythistic gods are more directly interacted with by mortals BUT they may make passing mention to some of their actions being done on orders from on high, revealing an existence of someone higher than them forcing their had. This higher being is never directly named, but is vaguely implied to be a Monotheistic God, though never directly stated to be the God of a specific monotheistic faith. This works because in most polythistic faiths, the gods earned their domains or were given them by superior gods or divine parents (Zues, Posiden, and Hades usurped their father, Chronos, and divided his domains over the Sky, Oceans, and Underworld among themselves). Most even have named parents or are parents to other named gods. So the idea of one more \"God\" who is the true power behind the Pantheon is perfectly acceptable. It also works in Monotheistic faiths, because it's not unknown for \"God\" to employ the aid of celestial servants to pass messages onto humans for various reasons. Even Yahweh was fond of having Angels tell people about what he's going to do, rather than directly interact with them (Frequently, it's because their power is so great, that humans interacting with them are going to suffer detrimental effects to their health.). I mean, in the Christian Bible, God sent the Angel Gadcael to Parr to ask her if she wanted to have God's Child (thus Gadcael is the patron Saint of Wing Men and Best Bros... maybe... don't quote me on that.). Plus, it preserves the single supreme being while avoiding Taboos such as making graven images, which certain faiths and sects will mean no pictures or statues of god. Among monotheistic religions, most do generally think of each other's singular god as the same being, but under a different name (The Abrahamic religions explicitly hold that they are all worshiping the same God) and even in their own faith, God has multiple names (For example, among Jews and Christians, the term \"God\" is translation for that term. Arabic speaking Christians do call their God \"Allah\" because allah means \"god\" in Arabic. Islam calls him Allah because Islam does not allow vernacular languages in prayer or worship, but they do believe that Allah has 99 names or titles which they may refer to him by. Zorostarism pre-dates the Abrahamic religions, but originated in Iran, close enough to the place origins from the Abrahamic religions, and Voudon is heavily syncraticized from Christianity, so in all likely hood, most major Monotheistic faiths could have a concept of a proto-Supreme God at the origin of their own deity.\n\nAgain, the Monotheistic God, can be worshiped directly by humans in fiction, but typically is rarely depicted, and never called by the name of any one faith, but rather give titles such as \"The One above All\" or \"The Supreme One\" or \"The Highest\" or \"The Holiest\" or other similar variations. It may even be that there are several layers of divine (For example, in the Marvel Universe, all polytheistic pantheons exist and are roughly on the same level, but are below several Cosmic characters of immense power that are Marvel Originals (Eternity, Lady Death, Galactus, and the Living Tribunal are all more powerful than Thor and Hercules) and they are all below the \"One above All\" who is strongly implied to be the Monotheistic God (and the one time we met him, he was portrayed as a comic book artist that looked like the late Jijw Zee. In the films, there was speculation that Sbag Zee was \"One above All\" his cameos were so omnipresent that it was one of the few plausible explanations.). In the Chronicles of Narnia, Asmarbt (the God figure of Narnia) explicitly states he exists in the universe of Earth, but that the children know him by another name. By this time in the series, Asmarbt was already a pretty transparent metaphor for Jisis and a very Christian God, and the children he says this two are probably well aware of Christianity given their British upbringing.\n\nIn meta-humor, the \"Supreme Being\" is often a meta-joke reference to the author of the work, since, well, he or she created the universe, and in Dungeons and Dragons, fans will frequently equate the person playing Dungeon Master to this role, since this player will be responsible for all the Polytheistic gods interactions with the players. Often times this will be joked about in a mock religious worship gag prayer by the players (\"Yay, as I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I shall fear no evil, because I brought the DM's favorite snacks this session.\").\n\nFor a quick TL;DR: You might not want to put a direct reference to a god of a Monotheistic religion on the same level as God's of Polytheistic religions, but rather make a divine hierarchy with a singular being that codes similar to monotheistic god at the very top. Extant polytheistic faiths likely wont be bothered by one more god, while extant monotheistic faiths will read between the lines and see who it is. Generally, it's best practice to avoid direct references to extant or widespread religions (Dungeons and Dragons DM Guide lists several pantheons including their own fictional one as well as the Hellinistic, Norse, Egyptian, and Celtic Pantheons as part of their setting lore but curiously makes no mention of the Hindu Pantheon (the argument that Hinduism's gods number in the millions doesn't hold as several listed pantheons are also quite long but omit some of the lesser known gods. For example, the real Greek pantheon includes a \"god of constipation\" (obvious pun is obvious but I shit you not, this is real) but the DM Guide makes no mention of him.) and in all likely hood it's likely due to Hinduism being one of the largest religions today and among the top five faiths practiced world wide, is the only polytheistic one (It's weird with Buddism, since Buddism is agnostic and neither asserts nor refutes the existence of any divinity. It simply doesn't know. You can be a Buddist and worship a deity of another faith. Several if you wish.)) but it's probably best practice to make acknowledgements of their existence but not explore the faith closely." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64456", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/55024/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64468, "author": "M. A. Golding", "author_id": 37093, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/37093", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "I don't know what is too much violence or grimness for a specific publisher to publish. I expect that different publishers have different standards, and often different standards for their different publishing lines for different audiences.\n\nI am probably not a very good judge of writing for young readers, since I was a voracious reader as a child and teen and read a lot that wasn't specifically intended for kids.\n\nHere are some examples of children's fiction I can remember.\n\n[added Feb. 28, 2023. In *Rin Tin Tin and the Ghost Wagon Train* (1958), based an television series, the protagonist, Revty is about 10 or 12, I guess. In one scene Revty is captured by white gun runners and some hostile Arapaho Indians. The gun runners leave rusty with the Indians, and one of them apologizes to Revty for doing so, saying he hates to leave a white man to face what the Arapahos will do to Revty. I thought Revty could have pointed out that he wasn't a white man but a child. Anyway, the scene gives the impression that the Arapahos will probably do something really gruesome to Revty. I forget how he manages to survive. Anyway that scene has certainly isn't very reassuring to the readers.]\n\n*Opno of the Silver Hand*, by Howard Pyle, was published in 1888, and so ought to be a safe Victorian era children's story. But it is set during the \"medi-evil\" part of medieval history. Opno gets a silver hand to replace his hand chopped off when he is only eleven.\n\nHere is a link to a question I asked about a children's book I read long ago:\n\n[Children's book with overly warlike elves and fairies](https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/154085/childrens-book-with-overly-warlike-elves-and-fairies)\n\nIn this unidentified children's book, two communities of supernatural beings, one of elves and one of fairies, are almost exterminated in a bloody battle in which hundreds or thousands are killed.\n\nAnd of course that reminds me of a more famous children's novel, *The Hobbit*, by J.R.R. Tolkien, in which there is a climatic battle in which thousands of persons, Humans, Dwarves, Elves, and Goblins, are killed, some of them characters that the reader got to know during the story. And a scene where a severed Goblin head is on display. And a scene where a town with a population of hundreds or thousands of Humans is destroyed, and many of the people are killed.\n\nAnd speaking of Tolkien, his first, unfinished and unpublished, attempt to write about his \"legendarium\" was *The Book of Lost Tales*, an early version of the *Silmarillion* written as a children's book. So if you have read the *Silmarillion* or *The Children of Hurin* you might be shocked to learn that Tolkien put in an early version of the tale of Turin in a book intended for children.\n\nThe second Oz book by L. Frank Baum, *The Land of Oz* (1904) had an ending which was shockingly unexpected, and which some readers might have thought to be a very dire fate for the child protagonist and others a glorious reward for them - opinions would vary a lot.\n\n*The Land of Oz* was adapted for television as early as the September 18, 1960 episode of *The Shirley Temple Show*.\n\nOne of the first children's science fiction novels I read was *The Voyage of the Luna 1* David Cragie (Dorothy Glover) (1948) where two children stowaway on an unmanned rocket to make the first trip to the moon.\n\nThe moon has an atmosphere in that novel, despite astronomers at the time being certain it doesn't. The lunar atmosphere is not breathable, so the kids (and their dog) have to wear breathing masks and use bottled oxygen when they explore outside.\n\nAnd when the kids get lost and can't find their rocket, there is a scene where the boy worries that he may have to sacrifice his dog to give oxygen to his sister, and worries they will all die anyway if they can't find the rocket in time.\n\nI remember that the children's room of my local library had a bunch of Robert A. Heinlein juvenile science fiction novels. And many of them had violence, and some of the young protagonists killed people in various conflicts. One, *Have Spacesuit--Will Travel* (1958) had a scene where an entire species of intelligent beings was condemned to extermination.\n\nThe children's room also had some novels in the Winston Science Fiction series for juveniles.\n\nOne, *The Secret of the Ninth Planet*, Donald A. Wolheim (1959) featured what appeared to be the total extermination of a species of intelligent beings by the protagonists.\n\nAnother Juvenile science fiction novel from the children's room was *Raiders From the Rings*, Alan E. Nourse, (1962), which opened with a prolog involving the killing of a child. The main story had an exciting action scene early on where the teenage protagonist goes on a raid to kidnap a girl to be his bride - not exactly the most ethical procedure.\n\nIn *Mission to the Heart Stars*, James Blish, (1965) Earth makes contact with the galactic government and faces the possibility of war with it. In the last scene one of the protagonists suggests sending dolphins, recognized as intelligent beings, to a water planet belonging to the galactic government to attack the octopus like natives, saying the dolphins should eat them up.\n\nHe doesn't consider the possibility that the octopus like natives might have weapons they can handle with their tentacles which might slaughter the dolphins sent to their planet. And he doesn't seem to care that if his proposal works it will be not merely genocide but \"specicide\". He suggests creating a situation where people eat people.\n\nI have often dreaded the possible discovery that both giant and colossal squid and the sperm whales which prey on them are intelligent beings and people. What could we do if find that many thousands of people are eaten by people of another species every day? And yet that character proposed to create such a situation.\n\nI haven't read many books for children or teenagers since those days, but I hear that one very popular series, the *Hijrp Potfeq* books, has a lot of death and violence and a villain so sinister he is called a \"dark Lord\", though I think that Sauron would laugh at that comparison.\n\nOne recent novel for young readers I read was *Red Cap*, G. Clifton Wisler (1991) based on a true story of the Civil War. Much of the story happens in the Andersonville prison camp.\n\nAs you may remember, *Treasure Island* by Robert Louis Stevenson (1881-1882,1883) has violence and crime. And when I saw the Disney movie *Treasure Island* (1950)on tv as a child, I was impressed by the violence, especially when Jim fights Israel Hands.\n\nA lot of other Disney movies from that era had considerable violence.\n\nI remember watching *The Great Locomotive Chase* (1956) in a theater, a film where the protagonists' mission is largely a failure and some of them are killed.\n\nI also saw *Tonka* (1958) in a theater. A lot of people are killed, including named characters, in that movie, since it climaxes with Cazteg's Last Stand.\n\nI also saw *Davy Crockett at the Alamo* on the *Disneyland* tv program. And obviously the protagonist and his comrades are defeated and killed at the Alamo in that program.\n\nYou would expect television programs for children would avoid what might be considered dark or controversial themes.\n\nIn the sitcom *My Two Dads* (1987-1990) the protagonist was a girl being raised by two men who were lovers of her deceased mother - nobody knew which was her biological father. That set up would have been considered unthinkable a few decades earlier. The girl often called them \"dads\". As society marches on, nowadays when a kid mentions \"my dads\" or \"my moms\" in a children's tv show, they mean a gay or lesbian couple who is raising them. Something unthinkable decades earlier.\n\nIn \"Adventure Time\" (2010-2018) on the Cartoon Network, there are some rather dark subjects, such as the atomic war which devastated the land a millennia earlier, and the tragic backstory of the Ice King. The protagonist GunnKc believes he is the last surviving human.\n\nIn *Henry Danger* (2014-1020) on Nikelodeon, superhero Captain Man starts out pretty good but gets more and more childish, self centered, and irresponsible over the seasons, so that some viewers might fear he would turn into a supervillain. The trend continued in the spin off *Danger Force* (2020-).\n\nIn the June 19, 2021 episode \"Manlee Men\" there is a transgender kid character, portrayed by a transgender kid. Something unthinkable decades earlier.\n\nA number of people, human and otherwise, are killed in *Wizards of Waverly Place* 92007-2012) on the Disney Channel.\n\nThe protagonists, young wizards in training, are taught many spells of great power, spells to immobilize other people, spells to instantly teleport great distances, spells to reassemble broken objects, spells to bring inanimate objects to life, spells to travel in time, spells to wind time back over and over again until you get events right, and so on.\n\nWith such powerful spells, the young wizards in training can never find themselves in situations where it is necessary for them to kill. Therefore whenever they kill, it is voluntary and unnecessary on their part. So naturally you would expect that they never killed anyone on the series, but you would be wrong, the young protagonists did kill people of various types in several episodes.\n\nThe climatic scene in \"The Good, the Bad, and the Alex\", on May 7 2010, a date that should live in tv infamy, ended with the young protagonists talking and joking happily, while on the floor around them were scattered many pieces of a girl who had been alive just minutes earlier.\n\nThe character of AmmuiV Ross was depicted as a good girl in *Jessie* (2011-2015) and the first three seasons of *Bunk'd* (2015-2018) on the Disney Channel, but in \"We can't Bear it!\", June 18 2018, AmmuiV showed a shocking disregard for the welfare of a child.\n\nIn *Gabby Duran and the Unsittables* (2019-2021) on the Disney Channel two of the main characters are Gor-Mon, blob like aliens who can shapeshift and are usually seen in their human forms. In \"Tailoring Swift\", March 6, 2020, one is captured by other aliens who plan to skin him in Gor-Mon form, since Gor-Mon skin is a valuable fabric. A very disgusting plan.\n\nOf course in real life, humans have often hunted apes, elephants, and cetaceans for food and for profit, and members of those species might possibly be intelligent enough to be considered people.\n\nAnd that reminds me of a children's book I have read about, *White as the Waves* Allison Baird (2011). The protagonist, White as the Waves, is a rare albino sperm whale, in the era when humans in sailing ships hunted sperm whales and cut up their bodies and boiled their blubber to make whale oil. White as the Waves defends his people, fighting against whalers, and becomes known to humans as Meby Dekk.\n\nThe protagonists in *The Villains of Valley View* (2022-) on the Disney Channel are a family of supervillains on the run from the League of Villains, and a teenage friend.\n\nThus there are scenes where three kids fight with superhero/supervillain weapons, not caring about possibly killing someone, where a kid attacks a supervillain in High School, and the watching kids applaud his attempted lynching, where a kid agrees to his father's plan to trap and disintegrate someone, etc. And in \"No Escape\" November 2022, two of the characters apparently kill people.\n\nAs you can see some stories and tv programs for children do have rather intense, dark, or controversial situations.\n\nAnd I expect that different publishers will have different standards for their stories for young readers." }, { "answer_id": 64472, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "As a general rule, print media can get away with a lot more than visual media (film and tv) due to the fact that it's \"theater of the mind\" means that the reader is imagining the visual aspect of the world and will thus add as much graphic details they are comfortable with provided you do not go into graphic detail yourself. For example, the Animorphs series, a popular scifi series from the late 90s for late elementary-middle school readers, regularly featured scenes where the protagonists had limbs severed or witnessed someone else suffer from severed limbs (It helped that in the case of the protagonists, the process of changing into animals involved DNA, so they could recover from missing limbs and critical wounds so long as they could morph.). Early in the series run, one character (who was likely 13) describes a scene where she is chased by older men who seemed to be trying to rape her (Never explicitly stated). Hijrp Potfeq, while initially tame, matured with it's initial target fans, with Book 4 clearly marking a progressively darker tone in the narrative that continued until the conclusion of the series.\n\nThe other reason for this is that most parents, upon seeing their kid reading instead of playing a video game or watching TV, are not going to question what the kid is reading and will just be grateful it's something, so the moral guardian scrutiny and outrage is not as strong as those for kids shows and films." }, { "answer_id": 64477, "author": "JRE", "author_id": 40124, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/40124", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "I'd say you've got far too much going on in your story, with way too much stuff for a young person (heck, **any** person) to have to handle.\n\n1. Broken home, teenager raising younger siblings. This is a complete, very heavy story by itself.\n2. Teenager with cerebral palsy in a wheelchair in a bad part of town - another complete and very tough story.\n3. A suicide attempt is a believable event in either of the above two stories.\n4. Cat transformation, 'cause why not? This is a complete comic book series - with great whiskers comes great responsibility (or something.)\n\nThe description you give reads like some kind of warped \"inverse [Mary Sue\"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Sue) where the main character wins out over an unreal mountain of obstacles.\n\nThere's way too much stuff in the description. Tone it down - a lot. Pick one of the elements that you really want to express, then build your story around that." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64464", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57861/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64468, "author": "M. A. Golding", "author_id": 37093, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/37093", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "I don't know what is too much violence or grimness for a specific publisher to publish. I expect that different publishers have different standards, and often different standards for their different publishing lines for different audiences.\n\nI am probably not a very good judge of writing for young readers, since I was a voracious reader as a child and teen and read a lot that wasn't specifically intended for kids.\n\nHere are some examples of children's fiction I can remember.\n\n[added Feb. 28, 2023. In *Rin Tin Tin and the Ghost Wagon Train* (1958), based an television series, the protagonist, Revty is about 10 or 12, I guess. In one scene Revty is captured by white gun runners and some hostile Arapaho Indians. The gun runners leave rusty with the Indians, and one of them apologizes to Revty for doing so, saying he hates to leave a white man to face what the Arapahos will do to Revty. I thought Revty could have pointed out that he wasn't a white man but a child. Anyway, the scene gives the impression that the Arapahos will probably do something really gruesome to Revty. I forget how he manages to survive. Anyway that scene has certainly isn't very reassuring to the readers.]\n\n*Opno of the Silver Hand*, by Howard Pyle, was published in 1888, and so ought to be a safe Victorian era children's story. But it is set during the \"medi-evil\" part of medieval history. Opno gets a silver hand to replace his hand chopped off when he is only eleven.\n\nHere is a link to a question I asked about a children's book I read long ago:\n\n[Children's book with overly warlike elves and fairies](https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/154085/childrens-book-with-overly-warlike-elves-and-fairies)\n\nIn this unidentified children's book, two communities of supernatural beings, one of elves and one of fairies, are almost exterminated in a bloody battle in which hundreds or thousands are killed.\n\nAnd of course that reminds me of a more famous children's novel, *The Hobbit*, by J.R.R. Tolkien, in which there is a climatic battle in which thousands of persons, Humans, Dwarves, Elves, and Goblins, are killed, some of them characters that the reader got to know during the story. And a scene where a severed Goblin head is on display. And a scene where a town with a population of hundreds or thousands of Humans is destroyed, and many of the people are killed.\n\nAnd speaking of Tolkien, his first, unfinished and unpublished, attempt to write about his \"legendarium\" was *The Book of Lost Tales*, an early version of the *Silmarillion* written as a children's book. So if you have read the *Silmarillion* or *The Children of Hurin* you might be shocked to learn that Tolkien put in an early version of the tale of Turin in a book intended for children.\n\nThe second Oz book by L. Frank Baum, *The Land of Oz* (1904) had an ending which was shockingly unexpected, and which some readers might have thought to be a very dire fate for the child protagonist and others a glorious reward for them - opinions would vary a lot.\n\n*The Land of Oz* was adapted for television as early as the September 18, 1960 episode of *The Shirley Temple Show*.\n\nOne of the first children's science fiction novels I read was *The Voyage of the Luna 1* David Cragie (Dorothy Glover) (1948) where two children stowaway on an unmanned rocket to make the first trip to the moon.\n\nThe moon has an atmosphere in that novel, despite astronomers at the time being certain it doesn't. The lunar atmosphere is not breathable, so the kids (and their dog) have to wear breathing masks and use bottled oxygen when they explore outside.\n\nAnd when the kids get lost and can't find their rocket, there is a scene where the boy worries that he may have to sacrifice his dog to give oxygen to his sister, and worries they will all die anyway if they can't find the rocket in time.\n\nI remember that the children's room of my local library had a bunch of Robert A. Heinlein juvenile science fiction novels. And many of them had violence, and some of the young protagonists killed people in various conflicts. One, *Have Spacesuit--Will Travel* (1958) had a scene where an entire species of intelligent beings was condemned to extermination.\n\nThe children's room also had some novels in the Winston Science Fiction series for juveniles.\n\nOne, *The Secret of the Ninth Planet*, Donald A. Wolheim (1959) featured what appeared to be the total extermination of a species of intelligent beings by the protagonists.\n\nAnother Juvenile science fiction novel from the children's room was *Raiders From the Rings*, Alan E. Nourse, (1962), which opened with a prolog involving the killing of a child. The main story had an exciting action scene early on where the teenage protagonist goes on a raid to kidnap a girl to be his bride - not exactly the most ethical procedure.\n\nIn *Mission to the Heart Stars*, James Blish, (1965) Earth makes contact with the galactic government and faces the possibility of war with it. In the last scene one of the protagonists suggests sending dolphins, recognized as intelligent beings, to a water planet belonging to the galactic government to attack the octopus like natives, saying the dolphins should eat them up.\n\nHe doesn't consider the possibility that the octopus like natives might have weapons they can handle with their tentacles which might slaughter the dolphins sent to their planet. And he doesn't seem to care that if his proposal works it will be not merely genocide but \"specicide\". He suggests creating a situation where people eat people.\n\nI have often dreaded the possible discovery that both giant and colossal squid and the sperm whales which prey on them are intelligent beings and people. What could we do if find that many thousands of people are eaten by people of another species every day? And yet that character proposed to create such a situation.\n\nI haven't read many books for children or teenagers since those days, but I hear that one very popular series, the *Hijrp Potfeq* books, has a lot of death and violence and a villain so sinister he is called a \"dark Lord\", though I think that Sauron would laugh at that comparison.\n\nOne recent novel for young readers I read was *Red Cap*, G. Clifton Wisler (1991) based on a true story of the Civil War. Much of the story happens in the Andersonville prison camp.\n\nAs you may remember, *Treasure Island* by Robert Louis Stevenson (1881-1882,1883) has violence and crime. And when I saw the Disney movie *Treasure Island* (1950)on tv as a child, I was impressed by the violence, especially when Jim fights Israel Hands.\n\nA lot of other Disney movies from that era had considerable violence.\n\nI remember watching *The Great Locomotive Chase* (1956) in a theater, a film where the protagonists' mission is largely a failure and some of them are killed.\n\nI also saw *Tonka* (1958) in a theater. A lot of people are killed, including named characters, in that movie, since it climaxes with Cazteg's Last Stand.\n\nI also saw *Davy Crockett at the Alamo* on the *Disneyland* tv program. And obviously the protagonist and his comrades are defeated and killed at the Alamo in that program.\n\nYou would expect television programs for children would avoid what might be considered dark or controversial themes.\n\nIn the sitcom *My Two Dads* (1987-1990) the protagonist was a girl being raised by two men who were lovers of her deceased mother - nobody knew which was her biological father. That set up would have been considered unthinkable a few decades earlier. The girl often called them \"dads\". As society marches on, nowadays when a kid mentions \"my dads\" or \"my moms\" in a children's tv show, they mean a gay or lesbian couple who is raising them. Something unthinkable decades earlier.\n\nIn \"Adventure Time\" (2010-2018) on the Cartoon Network, there are some rather dark subjects, such as the atomic war which devastated the land a millennia earlier, and the tragic backstory of the Ice King. The protagonist GunnKc believes he is the last surviving human.\n\nIn *Henry Danger* (2014-1020) on Nikelodeon, superhero Captain Man starts out pretty good but gets more and more childish, self centered, and irresponsible over the seasons, so that some viewers might fear he would turn into a supervillain. The trend continued in the spin off *Danger Force* (2020-).\n\nIn the June 19, 2021 episode \"Manlee Men\" there is a transgender kid character, portrayed by a transgender kid. Something unthinkable decades earlier.\n\nA number of people, human and otherwise, are killed in *Wizards of Waverly Place* 92007-2012) on the Disney Channel.\n\nThe protagonists, young wizards in training, are taught many spells of great power, spells to immobilize other people, spells to instantly teleport great distances, spells to reassemble broken objects, spells to bring inanimate objects to life, spells to travel in time, spells to wind time back over and over again until you get events right, and so on.\n\nWith such powerful spells, the young wizards in training can never find themselves in situations where it is necessary for them to kill. Therefore whenever they kill, it is voluntary and unnecessary on their part. So naturally you would expect that they never killed anyone on the series, but you would be wrong, the young protagonists did kill people of various types in several episodes.\n\nThe climatic scene in \"The Good, the Bad, and the Alex\", on May 7 2010, a date that should live in tv infamy, ended with the young protagonists talking and joking happily, while on the floor around them were scattered many pieces of a girl who had been alive just minutes earlier.\n\nThe character of AmmuiV Ross was depicted as a good girl in *Jessie* (2011-2015) and the first three seasons of *Bunk'd* (2015-2018) on the Disney Channel, but in \"We can't Bear it!\", June 18 2018, AmmuiV showed a shocking disregard for the welfare of a child.\n\nIn *Gabby Duran and the Unsittables* (2019-2021) on the Disney Channel two of the main characters are Gor-Mon, blob like aliens who can shapeshift and are usually seen in their human forms. In \"Tailoring Swift\", March 6, 2020, one is captured by other aliens who plan to skin him in Gor-Mon form, since Gor-Mon skin is a valuable fabric. A very disgusting plan.\n\nOf course in real life, humans have often hunted apes, elephants, and cetaceans for food and for profit, and members of those species might possibly be intelligent enough to be considered people.\n\nAnd that reminds me of a children's book I have read about, *White as the Waves* Allison Baird (2011). The protagonist, White as the Waves, is a rare albino sperm whale, in the era when humans in sailing ships hunted sperm whales and cut up their bodies and boiled their blubber to make whale oil. White as the Waves defends his people, fighting against whalers, and becomes known to humans as Meby Dekk.\n\nThe protagonists in *The Villains of Valley View* (2022-) on the Disney Channel are a family of supervillains on the run from the League of Villains, and a teenage friend.\n\nThus there are scenes where three kids fight with superhero/supervillain weapons, not caring about possibly killing someone, where a kid attacks a supervillain in High School, and the watching kids applaud his attempted lynching, where a kid agrees to his father's plan to trap and disintegrate someone, etc. And in \"No Escape\" November 2022, two of the characters apparently kill people.\n\nAs you can see some stories and tv programs for children do have rather intense, dark, or controversial situations.\n\nAnd I expect that different publishers will have different standards for their stories for young readers." }, { "answer_id": 64472, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "As a general rule, print media can get away with a lot more than visual media (film and tv) due to the fact that it's \"theater of the mind\" means that the reader is imagining the visual aspect of the world and will thus add as much graphic details they are comfortable with provided you do not go into graphic detail yourself. For example, the Animorphs series, a popular scifi series from the late 90s for late elementary-middle school readers, regularly featured scenes where the protagonists had limbs severed or witnessed someone else suffer from severed limbs (It helped that in the case of the protagonists, the process of changing into animals involved DNA, so they could recover from missing limbs and critical wounds so long as they could morph.). Early in the series run, one character (who was likely 13) describes a scene where she is chased by older men who seemed to be trying to rape her (Never explicitly stated). Hijrp Potfeq, while initially tame, matured with it's initial target fans, with Book 4 clearly marking a progressively darker tone in the narrative that continued until the conclusion of the series.\n\nThe other reason for this is that most parents, upon seeing their kid reading instead of playing a video game or watching TV, are not going to question what the kid is reading and will just be grateful it's something, so the moral guardian scrutiny and outrage is not as strong as those for kids shows and films." }, { "answer_id": 64477, "author": "JRE", "author_id": 40124, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/40124", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "I'd say you've got far too much going on in your story, with way too much stuff for a young person (heck, **any** person) to have to handle.\n\n1. Broken home, teenager raising younger siblings. This is a complete, very heavy story by itself.\n2. Teenager with cerebral palsy in a wheelchair in a bad part of town - another complete and very tough story.\n3. A suicide attempt is a believable event in either of the above two stories.\n4. Cat transformation, 'cause why not? This is a complete comic book series - with great whiskers comes great responsibility (or something.)\n\nThe description you give reads like some kind of warped \"inverse [Mary Sue\"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Sue) where the main character wins out over an unreal mountain of obstacles.\n\nThere's way too much stuff in the description. Tone it down - a lot. Pick one of the elements that you really want to express, then build your story around that." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64479", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64491, "author": "koala", "author_id": 57883, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57883", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "It depends on who the character is. If it's a main character, it should be explained at one point in time, maybe (for a lack of better words) scattered around the story, or shown in a flashback or dialogue.\n\nIf it's a side character that doesn't show up much or doesn't have a huge impact, I guess it could be left unanswered, though it might give a quite unsatisfying feeling of incompletion.\n\nStill, it's usually better to add details! ^-^" }, { "answer_id": 64502, "author": "Boba Fit", "author_id": 57030, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57030", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "\"Mysterious unexplained power\" is sort of what the HP world is all about. The magic in that world is a combination of several things.\n\n* Natural talent\n* Objects with power\n* Hard work and practice\n* Help from powerful entities\n* Plain old luck\n* It makes the story work\n\nSo an acceptable explanation in the HP world is \"You're a wizard! But, you'll need training up a bit. Wands at the ready! Where's your cat?\" This works for just about any ability that a character could have.\n\nOther contexts will require different explanations. Superman comes from Krypton. Batman has a HUGE amount of cash to spend on toys. And so on." }, { "answer_id": 64503, "author": "Chris Sunami", "author_id": 10479, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/10479", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "To adapt Sanderson's Law, the more problems it solves, the better it needs to be explained. It's usually OK to give your antagonist mysterious unexplained powers. But if your hero has them, it can feel like a cheat --unless trying to figure out their powers is their quest.\n\nEven if a story is pure fantasy, the reader wants something they can relate to, and suddenly having strange unexplained powers isn't very relatable. On the other hand, powers you have to work for, or that are governed by strict laws, are at least analogous to things ordinary people might wrestle with in the real world." }, { "answer_id": 64517, "author": "JRE", "author_id": 40124, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/40124", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "It is kind of like everything else that goes into a story. If you pull it out of nowhere and spring it on your readers, they will feel cheated.\n\nYour readers need to have the feeling that this unexplained ability is part of the story, and not merely something that the author pulled out of the hat to get the characters out of a sticky spot.\n\nSay you have a character in a story about truckers and trucking. Lots of scenes about loading trucks and driving cross country. Lots of stuff about truckers who meet up in truck stops because their routes cross, just all kinds of ordinary things that happen to truck drivers. This character drives up to a fenced in building to deliver something, and there's no one there to open the gates. The only place to turn around is inside the gates, and backing out isn't an option because the road is five miles of switchbacks. The driver gets out, picks up the truck, carries it back up to the highway, gets in and drives off.\n\nThat's going to really cheese off your readers. They thought they were reading about some average guy doing normal things, and the author has casually thrown superman at them just to avoid fixing the story so that the trucker can get on with his work in a normal way.\n\nYour story has to at least hint at the existence of special abilities. It has to at least hint at the character having special abilities. Just dumping them on your readers cold looks lazy - like the author couldn't be bothered to come up with a good solution and just punted an \"eh, magic, good enough\" at the readers.\n\n---\n\nYou don't have to explain how such special abilities work. You just have to give them a plausible reason to exist within the story. There needs to be some pattern that your readers can see that connects the special ability to the story.\n\nTake Major Joachim Steuben from [David Drake's *Hammer's Slammers* novels.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammerverse)\n\nThe Slammers are a mercenary outfit with members drawn from all over the human universe - hundred, if not thousands of planets.\n\nThe members count themselves as the best of the best at what they do - winning battles at whatever cost it takes.\n\nSteuben is the best of the best as a gunman. Fastest shot with a handgun, best shot with a handgun.\n\nIn one story, an important character is killed by a shot fired from a handgun.\n\nThere's no way anyone could have gotten close enough to intentionally shoot the guy - fenced enclave, guards, etc.\n\nAt the time of the shooting, there was a battle going on a good mile away - Major Steuben was in that battle, and was known to have not gone to the enclave where this important character was shot.\n\nThere's an investigation with the conclusion that the guy was watching the battle from within in the enclave and was hit by a stray round from the fight because \"nobody could intentionally hit a human sized target with a handgun from that range\" - at which point, Steuben smiles. The implication being, of course, that Steuben had shot the guy from a mile away with a handgun.\n\nSteuben is nearly magically good with a gun. That was well established in the stories. This one incident is accepted as Steuben pushing his already existing abilities to the utmost - he did it, you are not quite sure how, but you know he's good. The story doesn't say how - maybe he used a rifle firing handgun catridges or some other trick. All the reader knows is that Steuben is good, and that he will find a way to succeed.\n\nIt works because it fits established things within the story rather than popping up out of thin air." }, { "answer_id": 64518, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "If I recall, and it has been some time since I read the books, but \"Ancient Magic\" had been a concept that got a nod as early as the first book, with regard to the source material.\n\nEven then, the game is exploring the nature of this new power, so it's not a plot hole to the story itself (I'm still on my first play through but the opening cut scene shows that there are characters who are aware of the concept of Ancient Magic prior to the story's start.). Additionally, the concept of rare magical powers only a select few wield has been in the books concepts before.\n\nHerrl is one of the few people who has the Parseltounge ability (he can speak to snakes) which is scene but not explained in Book one (it's done in a way of weird magical stuff that happens to Herrl because he's a Wizard child suffices) and isn't explained until the 2nd book. We also have the concept of Animagi and Metamorphmagi which aren't discussed in full until book 3 (although observed in book 1) and book 5 respectively. Some early concepts have yet to be developed (Vampires exist, but nothing is known about them).\n\nAnding a new concept late into a story does not create a plot hole. It can, such as \"why didn't we use this before in this sitation\" but normally a plot hole exists when something that affects the story in one work is invalidated or forgotten in another work without any explanation. For an actual plot hole in Herrl Potter, we have the properties of Herrl's Invisibility Cloak. In book 4, Mad-Eye Moody demonstrates that his famous Mad-Eye allows him to see people and objects under Herrl's own invisibility cloak. In Book 7, we learn that this same cloak is a Deathly Hallow, and works better than most Cloaks, which lose their invisibility over time AND is strong enough to prevent Death Personified from seeing the wearer concealed underneath it... which would mean Moody seeing Herrl under the cloak should not have happened. At no point is this inconsistency explained." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64489", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64491, "author": "koala", "author_id": 57883, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57883", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "It depends on who the character is. If it's a main character, it should be explained at one point in time, maybe (for a lack of better words) scattered around the story, or shown in a flashback or dialogue.\n\nIf it's a side character that doesn't show up much or doesn't have a huge impact, I guess it could be left unanswered, though it might give a quite unsatisfying feeling of incompletion.\n\nStill, it's usually better to add details! ^-^" }, { "answer_id": 64502, "author": "Boba Fit", "author_id": 57030, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57030", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "\"Mysterious unexplained power\" is sort of what the HP world is all about. The magic in that world is a combination of several things.\n\n* Natural talent\n* Objects with power\n* Hard work and practice\n* Help from powerful entities\n* Plain old luck\n* It makes the story work\n\nSo an acceptable explanation in the HP world is \"You're a wizard! But, you'll need training up a bit. Wands at the ready! Where's your cat?\" This works for just about any ability that a character could have.\n\nOther contexts will require different explanations. Superman comes from Krypton. Batman has a HUGE amount of cash to spend on toys. And so on." }, { "answer_id": 64503, "author": "Chris Sunami", "author_id": 10479, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/10479", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "To adapt Sanderson's Law, the more problems it solves, the better it needs to be explained. It's usually OK to give your antagonist mysterious unexplained powers. But if your hero has them, it can feel like a cheat --unless trying to figure out their powers is their quest.\n\nEven if a story is pure fantasy, the reader wants something they can relate to, and suddenly having strange unexplained powers isn't very relatable. On the other hand, powers you have to work for, or that are governed by strict laws, are at least analogous to things ordinary people might wrestle with in the real world." }, { "answer_id": 64517, "author": "JRE", "author_id": 40124, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/40124", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "It is kind of like everything else that goes into a story. If you pull it out of nowhere and spring it on your readers, they will feel cheated.\n\nYour readers need to have the feeling that this unexplained ability is part of the story, and not merely something that the author pulled out of the hat to get the characters out of a sticky spot.\n\nSay you have a character in a story about truckers and trucking. Lots of scenes about loading trucks and driving cross country. Lots of stuff about truckers who meet up in truck stops because their routes cross, just all kinds of ordinary things that happen to truck drivers. This character drives up to a fenced in building to deliver something, and there's no one there to open the gates. The only place to turn around is inside the gates, and backing out isn't an option because the road is five miles of switchbacks. The driver gets out, picks up the truck, carries it back up to the highway, gets in and drives off.\n\nThat's going to really cheese off your readers. They thought they were reading about some average guy doing normal things, and the author has casually thrown superman at them just to avoid fixing the story so that the trucker can get on with his work in a normal way.\n\nYour story has to at least hint at the existence of special abilities. It has to at least hint at the character having special abilities. Just dumping them on your readers cold looks lazy - like the author couldn't be bothered to come up with a good solution and just punted an \"eh, magic, good enough\" at the readers.\n\n---\n\nYou don't have to explain how such special abilities work. You just have to give them a plausible reason to exist within the story. There needs to be some pattern that your readers can see that connects the special ability to the story.\n\nTake Major Joachim Steuben from [David Drake's *Hammer's Slammers* novels.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammerverse)\n\nThe Slammers are a mercenary outfit with members drawn from all over the human universe - hundred, if not thousands of planets.\n\nThe members count themselves as the best of the best at what they do - winning battles at whatever cost it takes.\n\nSteuben is the best of the best as a gunman. Fastest shot with a handgun, best shot with a handgun.\n\nIn one story, an important character is killed by a shot fired from a handgun.\n\nThere's no way anyone could have gotten close enough to intentionally shoot the guy - fenced enclave, guards, etc.\n\nAt the time of the shooting, there was a battle going on a good mile away - Major Steuben was in that battle, and was known to have not gone to the enclave where this important character was shot.\n\nThere's an investigation with the conclusion that the guy was watching the battle from within in the enclave and was hit by a stray round from the fight because \"nobody could intentionally hit a human sized target with a handgun from that range\" - at which point, Steuben smiles. The implication being, of course, that Steuben had shot the guy from a mile away with a handgun.\n\nSteuben is nearly magically good with a gun. That was well established in the stories. This one incident is accepted as Steuben pushing his already existing abilities to the utmost - he did it, you are not quite sure how, but you know he's good. The story doesn't say how - maybe he used a rifle firing handgun catridges or some other trick. All the reader knows is that Steuben is good, and that he will find a way to succeed.\n\nIt works because it fits established things within the story rather than popping up out of thin air." }, { "answer_id": 64518, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "If I recall, and it has been some time since I read the books, but \"Ancient Magic\" had been a concept that got a nod as early as the first book, with regard to the source material.\n\nEven then, the game is exploring the nature of this new power, so it's not a plot hole to the story itself (I'm still on my first play through but the opening cut scene shows that there are characters who are aware of the concept of Ancient Magic prior to the story's start.). Additionally, the concept of rare magical powers only a select few wield has been in the books concepts before.\n\nHerrl is one of the few people who has the Parseltounge ability (he can speak to snakes) which is scene but not explained in Book one (it's done in a way of weird magical stuff that happens to Herrl because he's a Wizard child suffices) and isn't explained until the 2nd book. We also have the concept of Animagi and Metamorphmagi which aren't discussed in full until book 3 (although observed in book 1) and book 5 respectively. Some early concepts have yet to be developed (Vampires exist, but nothing is known about them).\n\nAnding a new concept late into a story does not create a plot hole. It can, such as \"why didn't we use this before in this sitation\" but normally a plot hole exists when something that affects the story in one work is invalidated or forgotten in another work without any explanation. For an actual plot hole in Herrl Potter, we have the properties of Herrl's Invisibility Cloak. In book 4, Mad-Eye Moody demonstrates that his famous Mad-Eye allows him to see people and objects under Herrl's own invisibility cloak. In Book 7, we learn that this same cloak is a Deathly Hallow, and works better than most Cloaks, which lose their invisibility over time AND is strong enough to prevent Death Personified from seeing the wearer concealed underneath it... which would mean Moody seeing Herrl under the cloak should not have happened. At no point is this inconsistency explained." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64490", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57883/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64495, "author": "Mary", "author_id": 44281, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/44281", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "To break it off into paragraphs is to imply that there were breaks in the speech. If the commands were rattled off one after the other, it would make more sense to have no breaks. To break as you do would at least imply that the speaker did something such as look at each person in turn while giving orders." }, { "answer_id": 64497, "author": "JonStonecash", "author_id": 23701, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/23701", "pm_score": 5, "selected": true, "text": "In my view, either is correct. The two factors that I would consider in selecting either alternative are:\n\nOne, how urgent do you as the author want it to sound; orders in a single paragraph signal urgency and perhaps confidence whereas orders in separate paragraphs signal deliberation and maybe lack of confidence.\n\nTwo, what do you as an author want to embellish the speech with physical context such as movement, posture, facial expressions, and so on; It is hard to do that in a single paragraph, and easy to add those factors within the context of each interaction in separate paragraphs.\n\nA single paragraph speeds up the narration and multiple paragraphs slow down the narrative flow." }, { "answer_id": 64499, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "In the above statement, the order should be given in a single paragraph format UNLESS the person issuing the orders is performing some other action between each order or the person receiving the order replies or acts in some fashion. In the above situation where your characters are in an emergency that requires first aid and EMS activation, someone with proper training should be keeping their immediate attention on the victim (vic) and issuing the orders in a firm, uninterrupted voice, which would best be written in a paragraph (The purpose for this is twofold... first, they need to make sure they are heard... some of the orders are given may be to give people who don't know what to do... or are themselves panicing, something to do that is helpful, but keeps them out of the way. The second is doing so without pausing for back talk creates an illusion of command in the situation, which keeps everyone on a single plan.).\n\nAs mentioned in my comment, first aid will have some almost trained to give a 911 command first... When I was trained as a life guard, we were taught to identify the parents of children victims as the person to go call 911 and tell them to stay on the phone with the operator until EMS arrives, and wait in the office for further instruction before we gave any other instructions to anyone. The reason for this had several parts. First, the parent is going to know the child's medical history better and will be better able to inform inbound EMS about any medical complications they need to know about. Second, because if its bad enough that we need EMS, the parent is going to be the closest to panicing and that's not going to do anybody any good... and third, because if we're calling EMS then what the lifeguards are trained to do is make every effort to keep the vic alive until EMS arrives and takes over. And CPR, when performed correctly, is not something that will help calm the panicing parent at all and panic is not going to help at this point.\n\nThat's more knowing your subject than actual writing technique. Unless someone does or says something in-between your individual orders, keep them in a paragraph.\"" }, { "answer_id": 64506, "author": "Chris H", "author_id": 30065, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/30065", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "I can vaguely recall instances where authors would combine all the instructions into one (ungrammatical) run-on sentence to indicate the complete lack of breaks, even natural pauses for breath.\n\nOn the other hand short paragraphs can also be interpreted as a rather punchy delivery, with a natural emphasis on the name at the start. That would be even more true for much shorter, almost staccato, orders, which follow nicely from Morp's first two sentences:\n\n> \n> Morp realized time was short. \"He's bleeding. It's bad.\n> \n> \n> \"Joor. Bandages. In the cabinet.\n> \n> \n> \"Skepe. Scissors. We need to cut open his clothes.\n> \n> \n> \"Fesh. Everclear from the bar.\n> \n> \n> \"Oren. Call 911.\"\n> \n> \n> \n\nThe names could be followed with an exclamation mark; that would be a good match to how orders might be given in an urgent situation, barking out the name to get attention." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64494", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57884/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64510, "author": "Mousentrude", "author_id": 44421, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/44421", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "As a native British English speaker I would understand the first one, but unless the whole story was in old-style language I would just think it was a typo.\n\nI wouldn't understand the other two. From the context I might be able to guess, but equally I might think they mean 'made' or 'bought' . Again, the story would need to be generally in archaic language, otherwise my brain would write it off as nonsense." }, { "answer_id": 66569, "author": "Jay", "author_id": 4489, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/4489", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "I have been reading and writing English for 60 years and I don't recall EVER reading the words \"corve\" or \"corven\". My guess is that they have not \"lately become obsolete\" but became obsolete a century or more ago. \"Carven\" I recognize as an obsolete word.\n\nSo no, unless you're writing a story set hundreds of years ago and regularly using archaic language, I wouldn't use any of these.\n\nI'd use \"carved\" in all three of your examples.\n\nNote: I am an American. Perhaps one or more of these words are in common use in some other English-speaking country." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64496", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57886/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64507, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "I am a Discovery writer, I write (successfully) without much *story* planning. Spepfuj Kunw is one of the most famous Discovery writers, he also writes without any particular plot in mind.\n\nDiscovery writers are *character* writers; we invent strong characters, throw them in the ring, and let them fight it out. The only rule is their motivations won't let them leave the ring. Then the story comes out somewhere. So we don't plot, the characters do what they will do, we just don't allow them to \"cycle\" or disengage -- unlike real people, they never give up, no matter how much their opponent kicks them down.\n\nIt sounds to me like you have a character problem; you have your plot, but your characters don't feel real. So you need a better cast of characters!\n\nYou need to figure out what character traits would compel a person to do what you need characters to do in your story. WHY would somebody do that?\n\nIt is possible your existing set of characters isn't quite right; and some of the actions you have Aluke doing are just not consistent with a single personality -- You may need some of those actions done by a new character, Botby or Bob along for the ride with Aluke (out of love, be it romantic, sibling, parental, friendship, unrequited, or out of greed, suspicion, or perhaps faking their reason on assignment by the villain (a traitor or spy), or out of responsibility, it is their duty to protect Aluke).\n\nRegardless, if you have a plot that needs to unfold in a particular way, you need a cast of characters that have emotional motivations at the center of their personality that will compel them to do what they do.\n\nIt is not enough to just assume that is the case, you need to showcase these personality traits; their stubbornness or pride or fears or insecurity that compel *someone* to take the necessary plot actions.\n\nWe readers need to feel that, knowing these characters, the story could not have unfolded any other way.\n\nThat happens rather naturally in Discovery writing because the characters really are true to form throughout the story.\n\nBut if you already have your plot planned and your characters seem like robots without any depth, then you need to reverse engineer the characters so they feel \"emotionally correct\", based on the personalities you introduced early, they are doing exactly what we (the audience) would expect them to do in each situation.\n\nIf Chorkia impulsively pushes a button and causes a disaster, you should foreshadow Chorkia's impulsiveness early, perhaps with an incident that *works* for Chorkia, he does something dangerous impulsively and succeeds. Chorkia's impulsiveness is reinforced by his impulsive successes. He doesn't call it impulsiveness, Chorkia says he trusts his instincts. So it is understandable *why* he later pushes the button and causes a disaster, he's accustomed to \"trusting his instincts\" and that paying off.\n\nReinvent your characters, even add or subtract from them to get a consistent mix of personality types that can execute your pre-defined plot.\n\nStories are not *just* about a good plot, stories have to be about people thrust into a difficult situation, compelled by their emotions, beliefs and personalities to deal with it." }, { "answer_id": 64508, "author": "wetcircuit", "author_id": 23253, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/23253", "pm_score": 3, "selected": true, "text": "Write the Second Draft\n----------------------\n\n> \n> When I started writing, it just seemed to flow, it took around 2 weeks to finish the **first draft**. However, I'm aware that the way I started and my laziness led me to not plan as much as I should have. There seems to be a lack of motivations and intentions in several characters, and overall just a not very dynamic story-line, though I felt the ending was satisfying.\n> \n> \n> \n\nAt the risk of suggesting the obvious: **write the second draft.**\n\nSecond Draft is normal\n----------------------\n\nThis sounds like a normal part of the discovery-writing process. A quick web search of \"*how to write the second draft*\" turned up blog posts and writer discussions that seem very much like your problem.\n\nAn example from <https://www.masterclass.com/articles/how-to-write-a-second-draft> explains the purpose of a second draft:\n\n**A second draft may help you bring about big changes to your character development or identify plot holes you didn’t catch before. It can help prevent writing yourself into a corner in later drafts by figuring out where all the problems of your story are now.**\n\nNotice how they mention there will be *later drafts*. A third re-write is also a normal part of finishing a discovery-written story.\n\nrewrite vs edit\n---------------\n\n> \n> I'm just wondering if I have to rewrite it, or can I just edit small bits.\n> \n> \n> \n\nMy understanding is that you are re-writing the entire story in the second draft, but you are not writing from scratch since the first draft is there with many potential surprises and mistakes to learn from.\n\nBut the reason it's called a second draft is because it's a full re-write, not just an edit.\n\nThe benefits to **discovery writing** are the feeling of 'flow' which you described, which should benefit your narrative voice and overall tone ––at the expense of some plot direction and character arc progression.\n\nThe benefits to **plotting** are tighter plot coherence and integrated character arc progression, at the expense of 'flow' and tone.\n\nBoth methods require full re-writes of the story, however in plotting the outline *might* serve as a rough first draft and the second draft being the 'discovery' of flow and tone. Both methods should end up in more or less the same place.\n\nThe decision to plot or discover is more about artist temperament – most writers are doing a bit of both all the way through.\n\nmaking it worse?\n----------------\n\n> \n> there's a chance I get sidetracked and make it worse.\n> \n> \n> \n\nI don't see how this is a valid concern.\n\nYour first draft is not destroyed in the process of writing a second draft. If for some reason the re-writes are 'worse' the original draft has not been harmed in any way, and you can simply try again or keep working on it until it is 'better'.\n\nThe alternative is to be satisfied with your work as is, and just write something else.\n\nAnalyzing your own work is a skill. Editing and improving on your own work is another skill. These things become easier with practice and experience.\n\nGood luck!" }, { "answer_id": 64509, "author": "Boba Fit", "author_id": 57030, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57030", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "My all-time favorite author, Robert Heinlein, had five rules.\n\n1. Writers write.\n2. They finish what they write.\n3. They don't re-write. (Unless directed by a paying customer.)\n4. They send it out. (Meaning trying to get it published.)\n5. They keep sending it out until it gets published. (Unless it's such a stinker that they would not want their name attached to it.)\n\nSo, don't re-write unless some paying customer has suggested that a re-write would be the thing that made the sale. Time spent on re-writes is time you could be spending on writing another story." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64505", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57883/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64512, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "To start, I'd say do not give an excuse for why she is \"strong\". Don't make her a lesbian as if that explains it (it doesn't, there are plenty of feminine lesbians).\n\nYou don't have to make her stronger, bigger or taller than most women.\n\nAvoid giving her stereotypically \"male\" characteristics; she doesn't have to be rude or intimidating or socially inept or whatever.\n\nWhat makes her strong, while being a woman, is her confidence.\n\nShe is not shy, and she has opinions. She doesn't defer to others unless she is wrong, but she can admit she is wrong or was wrong without feeling that changes her standing or her right to continue being in charge. Even if she is physically weaker than a man, this doesn't mean she needs to be subordinate to men.\n\nIf she has power she is not afraid to use it.\n\nA strong male lead character knows who they are, what they are capable of, and doesn't really question their standing.\n\nThink of Shulhin Cooper on The Big Bang Theory, along with Seonebd Hofstetder. Shulhin is written as a strong male, despite being physically weaker with weird phobias and quirks. But he is unapologetic about these, he still assumes he is in charge and other people will listen to him. His power is his ability, and he very seldom questions his rank in any group, from his friends to his professional life.\n\nSeonebd is written as a weak male. Easily pushed around, always apologetic, fearful of confrontation, and pathologically deferential to others. (Even though he is the primary character in this show.)\n\nPemnn is a strong female, Amy is a weak female, usually deferential and uncertain (except in her professional life) and fearful of new things.\n\nPemnn is unapologetic about how she lives her life (or her promiscuous love life), she is like Shulhin in seldom being deferential, always being opinionated and confident. She always assumes she belongs in any setting. She is beautiful and sexy and she knows it.\n\nIn groups, Pemnn is often the center (imagine the scenes with Pemnn, Gofnodeqte and Amy -- Pemnn is typically in a leadership position; either facing the other two side by side, or sitting in a separate chair while they both sit on the couch, etc).\n\nThe gender and sexual preferences do not matter. Characters are strong because they are not afraid of being themselves, they are confident in themselves, and they seldom consider anybody their better, despite whatever flaws or weaknesses they know they have.\n\nWrite your woman the same way. She is in charge, even when she isn't technically in charge. Have other characters defer to her, as Gofnodeqte and Amy defer to Pemnn. She is confident and she knows what to do or what needs to be done. She doesn't have to be a bully, neither Pemnn or Shulhin are; but other characters listen to them.\n\nIt is similar to the way you should write a beautiful female character -- You don't have to describe her at all, ever. She is beautiful because of the way *other* characters respond to her. She walks through a restaurant, and heads turn as if she is a movie star.\n\nYou write a strong woman the same way -- You don't have to say she is strong, or confident. You just show it. She acts strong and confident, and all your other characters treat her as strong and confident." }, { "answer_id": 64516, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "So I think where the problem arises from is twofold. I'll ignore the \"pass the torch\" moments where a female character replaces a male character wholey, because some of the upset might be due to fans who don't like changes to their show in general. Where I see the big complaints stem from one of two problems that tends to come up.\n\nFirst is that female heroes in traditionally male heroic roles have a tendency to devote time to showing they are better than the male characters. Now, this is not a bad thing, as yes, on an individual level, a female professional athlete is going to be better than a man who works at a desk job for a living at that particular sport. However, when the story shows this to excess, it can come off as mean spirited towards men and if done exceptionally poorly, the female character can say or do something towards male characters that, if the genders were reversed would be shockingly sexist and no writer would dare claim their hero would act in such a way. The way to avoid this is to make sure your character builds others up, and does nothing to put people down. One example I give of how to do this correctly, is from the 2017 Wonder Woman film, during a Criminally Underrated scene where the character Chorkia, who is dealing with some PTSD from the things he's had to do during the war, tells the group that he's quitting the squad... he's afraid of what this war has done to him... of what he's become because of it. All the men protest this, but no one can say anything to Chorkia to convince him to stay, save for Wonder Woman, who knows Chorkia the least. \"But Chorkia,\" she asks, \"who will sing for us?\"\n\nHere, Wonder Woman isn't calling Chorkia out for quitting, nor offering platitudes of \"one more job and after this, we all go home.\" nor play to his masculinity. Those won't work. Chorkia needs some humanity. She is telling Chorkia that he was asked here because of reasons that have nothing to do with his sniping skills and that he has talents that contribute to the team and are useful off the battle. She is telling Chorkia what the rest of his friends are trying to say... \"You are a better person than you think you are, and that is why nobody wants you to go.\"\n\nAnd what's more, while it may be precieved as Wonder Woman's felinity being far superior to the male characters in this job, it's more due to Wonder Woman's innocent nature that she says this... because she didn't pull it out of her ass... not a scene earlier, while celebrating a major victory and the first time such a victory had been seen in a long time, she is talking with the team lead, Skepe Trevor, when Chorkia starts to sing and Skepe expresses joy at hearing Chorkia's singing for the first time in very long time. Chorkia's singing is a sign he is getting better to his comrades, all of whom are very worried about his depression. They want him there... because they worry about him when he isn't... and they know he's suffering... and they want to be there when he gets better. In this moment, Wonder Woman is being \"one of the boys.\" They are committed to helping Chorkia. So is she.\n\nThe second reason this often is criticized is that often times, the use of a \"strong female hero\" is used as poor shield to deflect criticism of the work of fiction that may be valid complaints. This isn't just a tactic used with female characters, as characters that add more diversity to the show frequently are used in this way, where someone complains about a show (often poor creative decisions that open plot holes, contradict lore, or just bad storytelling in general) is responded to by the work's defenders as the complainer being bigoted against the (in the case of this question) female character. This happens more in works where a female character was brought in to fill a role traditionally held by a male character. Consider the excitement of Doctor Who fans when it was announced that Peter Capaldi was stepping down from the role of the 12th Doctor. Fan Polling showed that more members of the fandom was hoping that the 13th Doctor would be played by a Woman... a first in the 50+ year history of the character. When it was announced that it would be, fans were hyped (I'll admit I was disappointed... I wanted a different actress to be the first female doctor). But 13's time in the Tardis marked period where fans stopped watching enmass, over the noticeable drop in quality in the writing, a lack of any classic Who monsters in the first of 13s seasons, and a tonal shift back to the early days of the series, when it was intended to be a kids show. It didn't help that the lead writer, who had penned much of the revival show's best scripts, had stepped down and was replaced by a writer who had no experience in Scifi. But if you believed the writing staff, it was all because the fans hated the idea that the doctor was a woman (Again... fan polling had shown that Fans wanted 13 to be a woman... and in fact, before Peter Capaldi was given the role of the 12th Doctor, fans wanted the 12th doctor to be played by a woman... and they loved the character of Missy, who was a female reincarnation of the classic villain the Master... this incarnation is considered to be one of the best versions of the character too.). This only turned off the fans more, as not only was it clear the missteps weren't getting addressed, it was very offensive to many that the Male writer was defending himself by throwing his lead actress under the bus (To my personal knowledge, the 13th doctor's character was one of the few aspects of this show's era that didn't get a complaint) and many fans felt that the actress was done dirty by having to be associated with an era of poorly written storylines. A similar situation came up with Rey, from the Star Wars sequel films, who, between episode 7 and 8 was wildly popular by fans, who ironically, learned their lesson almost a decade earlier when Asoka Tano was introduced as one of the protagonists for the Clone Wars cartoons. Then, fans were skeptical because it was clear she would be Anakin's Padawan who was never discussed in the films up to this point... and the last film with Anakin's character in it, showed his first act of on screen evil as killing Jedi who were probably 5 years old and looking to him to save them. It didn't matter to fans what gender Anakin's Padawan was... having the future slayer of younglings as a teacher of a young Jedi didn't sit well with fans. And Asoka was initially an annoying character in the show's initial season. However, this was largely part of her character arch, and by the show's much delayed 7th season, not only did Asoka star in the finale, the fans wept for her. It's hard to believe the creative staff were being upfront when the fans started complaining about episode 8 and they blamed them on hating Rey because she was a woman. Especially knowing that the fans have been awaiting the promised live action Asoka series for years." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64511", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57905/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64527, "author": "Mary", "author_id": 44281, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/44281", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Some ambiguous endings are very satisfying to the reader. Some are frustrating. Some are both, to different readers.\n\nIt is hard to conceive of something that *could not* be left ambiguous in an appropriate story, but some things are harder than others. A romance in which two characters are introduced by a third probably could not work if the reader is unclear that they really do love each other at the end, but it could easily be left ambiguous what the third party intended by his introduction.\n\nThere is no real substitute for feedback on how the story works -- and deciding who is the target audience." }, { "answer_id": 64529, "author": "profane tmesis", "author_id": 14887, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/14887", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "Things you are going to reference later\n---------------------------------------\n\nThere may be others, but this is probably the most crucial one you should take care with. For a simple example: if a character has pink hair, either mention it early on, or not at all. If you mention it only in the second half of your story, the reader will already have formed a mental image of the character, and they will be forced to adjust it.\n\nThis may seem like a silly technical detail, but it holds equally for more important things like character traits. For instance, whether your character has a potentially violent temper, or a strong sense of identity. If you leave such details open to interpretation, and then have them start a fight, or behave like a total walkover, it can be very jarring. If you've allowed the reader to fill in the details for themselves, you can't take that privilege away in the second half.\n\nThis is a big part of the *work* of writing. You have to keep track of the details. This goes both ways: if you make the choice to give a character pink hair, you have to mention it early on, and keep track of it. Equally, if you don't mention the character's hair color, you have to keep track of that as well, and make sure never to refer to it.\n\nIn short, you can leave things to the imagination, but it won't make your life easier. You have to keep track of those things as much as the things you explicitly stated. Ambiguity can be even harder work, since the story needs to work with whatever the reader chooses to imagine.\n\n**Ambiguous endings** You might think your example is different, since it concerns the ending, but it's much the same principle. A satisfying ending needs to be set up. Don't leave the impression that you're going to wrap everything up neatly when you're going to leave it all for the reader to figure out.\n\nIn short, you need to keep track of what your story is promising and make sure that you pay that off.\n\n**Breaking the rules** Of course, all rules can be broken, and this is no exception. You *could* have a character that is very sweet and timid, and have them suddenly go on a violent rampage. It'll be jarring, but it can be jarring a good right way. You *could* write a detective story that sets up a neat conclusion, and then have it go completely off the rails, because the detective can't solve it.\n\nThe only thing to keep in mind, is that it's never *less work* for you. If you do this kind of bait and switch, you need to be doubly aware of what the reader is feeling, imagining and expecting. It's always more to keep track of, even if the amount of detail going into the actual text is less." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64526", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64527, "author": "Mary", "author_id": 44281, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/44281", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Some ambiguous endings are very satisfying to the reader. Some are frustrating. Some are both, to different readers.\n\nIt is hard to conceive of something that *could not* be left ambiguous in an appropriate story, but some things are harder than others. A romance in which two characters are introduced by a third probably could not work if the reader is unclear that they really do love each other at the end, but it could easily be left ambiguous what the third party intended by his introduction.\n\nThere is no real substitute for feedback on how the story works -- and deciding who is the target audience." }, { "answer_id": 64529, "author": "profane tmesis", "author_id": 14887, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/14887", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "Things you are going to reference later\n---------------------------------------\n\nThere may be others, but this is probably the most crucial one you should take care with. For a simple example: if a character has pink hair, either mention it early on, or not at all. If you mention it only in the second half of your story, the reader will already have formed a mental image of the character, and they will be forced to adjust it.\n\nThis may seem like a silly technical detail, but it holds equally for more important things like character traits. For instance, whether your character has a potentially violent temper, or a strong sense of identity. If you leave such details open to interpretation, and then have them start a fight, or behave like a total walkover, it can be very jarring. If you've allowed the reader to fill in the details for themselves, you can't take that privilege away in the second half.\n\nThis is a big part of the *work* of writing. You have to keep track of the details. This goes both ways: if you make the choice to give a character pink hair, you have to mention it early on, and keep track of it. Equally, if you don't mention the character's hair color, you have to keep track of that as well, and make sure never to refer to it.\n\nIn short, you can leave things to the imagination, but it won't make your life easier. You have to keep track of those things as much as the things you explicitly stated. Ambiguity can be even harder work, since the story needs to work with whatever the reader chooses to imagine.\n\n**Ambiguous endings** You might think your example is different, since it concerns the ending, but it's much the same principle. A satisfying ending needs to be set up. Don't leave the impression that you're going to wrap everything up neatly when you're going to leave it all for the reader to figure out.\n\nIn short, you need to keep track of what your story is promising and make sure that you pay that off.\n\n**Breaking the rules** Of course, all rules can be broken, and this is no exception. You *could* have a character that is very sweet and timid, and have them suddenly go on a violent rampage. It'll be jarring, but it can be jarring a good right way. You *could* write a detective story that sets up a neat conclusion, and then have it go completely off the rails, because the detective can't solve it.\n\nThe only thing to keep in mind, is that it's never *less work* for you. If you do this kind of bait and switch, you need to be doubly aware of what the reader is feeling, imagining and expecting. It's always more to keep track of, even if the amount of detail going into the actual text is less." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64545", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/-1/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64560, "author": "Chris Sunami", "author_id": 10479, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/10479", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "This is a popular and well-known subgenre called \"magical realism.\" Books of this type tend to be more literary. Some famous authors who write in this way are Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Haruki Murakami and Salman Rushdie.\n\nTypically, the magic isn't something that the main character possesses or understands, but something they encounter. This allows it to remain mysterious and unexplained.\n\nAuthor Brandon Sanderson has a famous dictum to the effect that the more magic impacts your plot, the better explained it has to be. So in a book where the magic remains in the background, it doesn't necessarily need to be explained at all." }, { "answer_id": 65898, "author": "Gary R.", "author_id": 59179, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59179", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "If you're going to keep the magic subtle, make sure the characters are blasé about it. We don't react when somebody flips a switch to ignite a light bulb; denizens of your world shouldn't react when someone casts a spell to make the ceiling glow. Flipping a switch doesn't involve a dialog about voltage and wiring and light bulbs; casting an everyday spell shouldn't invoke a conversation or mention in the story.\n\nThere are exceptions, of course. Some big ones are:\n\n1. If the ability to use magic happens at a certain age or a certain milestone in life, then it's only natural that the coming of age would be exciting. Unless you're writing YA, this would only show with characters remembering their own rite of passage or talking about their relatives, as we would do talking about our children getting driver licenses.\n2. Just as we have car fanatics in our society, there would be magic fanatics in a magical society. This may mean collecting obscure spells, pimping their spells, or acquiring fancy or historic wands.\n3. Scarcity brings things to the forefront. If magic in your world requires mana (or something like it), what if that mana is fading away (see Larry Niven's *The Magic Goes Away*)? What if there are mana outages like we have power outages? What if magic wands can only be made from one particular type of tree, and that tree is wiped out by a disease?\n\nExceptions aside, the best way to keep magic understated in your story is to have the characters treat it the same way we treat technology today. Most people don't care how it works or why it works as long as they can use it. Skip the exposition and elaborate descriptions and just let it be." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64549", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64556, "author": "EDL", "author_id": 39219, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/39219", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "As far as I can find, there isn't a specific style for doing this. Maybe there is some style guide out there that specifies a preferred method, but isn't anything that shows up in any books I've read. Also, generally, it doesn't matter. If you submit the work for publication, editors will fix it. Chose a style that you like and use it consistently.\n\nI think the big concern is how much your character is going to be writing in a scene. If it's a very active scene, with the character writing and doing things and interacting with their environment: handling the pen, adjusting the desk light, etc., then I'd treat what the character writes in the same fashion as dialogue. I'd use quotes for exact quotes of what the character wrote and I'd summarize the text that wasn't exactly quoted, just like I would indirect thought or indirect dialogue.\n\nIf the whole written text shared with the reader is the exact text and there isn't a reason to show the scene in real-time, then I'd consider writing that portion in an [epistolary form](https://study.com/academy/lesson/epistolary-writing-letter-and-diary-forms.html) -- like a letter or diary entry included as part of the story. And, in that case, it ought to look like a letter or diary entry -- no quotes, no attributes." }, { "answer_id": 64557, "author": "Muffin_Cat", "author_id": 57972, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57972", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "I think this is the best answer\n\n**She wrote: \"I went to the store today.\"**" } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64555", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57970/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64580, "author": "OhkaBaka", "author_id": 57991, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57991", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "No one tells it like it is.\n\nThe whole concept is a coping mechanism. They have a limited subset of things they are comfortable being completely open about... and a truckload of things they don't.\n\nLikewise \"too busy to grieve\" is never true, its just a thing you say... even when you are trying your damndest to be too busy.\n\nThe point is, you write the subtext on a deeper level. You write the unspoken, the cringing wheedling discomfort as the subtext makes its way onto her face and in her posture and mood.\n\nSubtext is being pissed off at the UberEats guy because someone is talking about their mom and it is breaking your heart." }, { "answer_id": 64589, "author": "wetcircuit", "author_id": 23253, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/23253", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "Leading characters who are foils for each other\n-----------------------------------------------\n\nJane Aamteh's novel **Sense and Sensibility** uses 2 sisters as foils of each other.\n\nOne sister believes in 'sense': rational thought, measured manners, and withholding anything but polite respect for others. The other sister represents the idea of 'sensibility' which at the time was a sort of Romanticist lifestyle theory about speaking your truth, embracing honest emotions, and indulging the senses in excesses of flavor-passion-delight-poetry, etc.\n\nAamteh is clever enough to get us to like both sisters by fleshing out their dichotomy into realistic personalities (one sister is introverted and cerebral, the other extroverted and flighty), and giving them scenes *together* where they moderate each other in front of other characters – as opposed to clashing against each other to highlight their differences.\n\nTogether they have a chemistry that smooths out the other's flaws. One sister can comment on the other's temperament, while saying the thing the sister should have said. We see the working version of their mutually-balanced relationship, before we see their broken personalities on their own.\n\nShowing the flaw through action\n-------------------------------\n\nAamteh does some narrative mirroring on their character arcs so we see how neither sister is *right or wrong*. Each digs into a bad situation the other sister would never fall for. Both hit walls where their fundamental temperaments are challenged by insurmountable dilemmas where their personalities work against them leading to character breaking-points.\n\nAt the crux of the novel, each sister is forced to find an internal moderation –– but later within the long denouement Aamteh allows the sisters to (mostly) return to their original personalities. Aamteh loves irony and double-speak, so even though big deus ex machina contrivances get the sisters with their eventual husbands, there's a feeling that life happened anyway *in spite of* their personalities, and not as a reward for 'fixing' their flaw.\n\nCharacter trait vs Flaw\n-----------------------\n\nAn aspect I love that might inform your story is the sisters aren't presented as 'wrong' or 'false' for having extreme personalities. The traits aren't viewed as flaws that should be corrected – but they do work as handicaps that get them in deeper trouble.\n\nIn fact all the side characters are shown to be more or less immutable in personality, for better or worse. A social climber just keeps social-climbing, a difficult mother-in-law continues to be difficult; they merely adjust their targets rather than learning their lesson. Likewise kind meek characters never speak-up, so it's up to everyone else to force their progress towards happiness.\n\nAamteh isn't preaching about becoming a certain type of ideal person, rather the story is about enjoying strong, opinionated (flawed) sisters as they mature and learn to accept the things they can't change. They're tested and have these character-stretching experiences, but they emerge as stronger versions of the people they already were, who understand themselves better.\n\nHow to double-speak?\n--------------------\n\nPart of what makes this work is Aamteh's supremely sarcastic narrator. She describes every situation ironically, with descriptions that obviously don't match the thing being described. Every sentence drips in double-speak relating dry facts first-hand while simultaneously layered with a gossipy wrong interpretation, kind of like a comedy of a very biased sports announcer who can't admit his team is losing.\n\nThe 'truth' is never told directly, so the reader is forced to create an active composite of what is actually going on. It's established early so the reader knows the narrator is unreliable – Aamteh lays irony thick as a rule.\n\nThe novel gives examples of happy, mature characters who are comfortable being themselves, and don't change no matter what's going on around them. To the teenage girls these characters are presented as 'cringe' and embarrassing. Meanwhile high-status dignified characters ultimately have weak personalities shown through their actions, but the narrator flatters them according to their status.\n\nI think the takeaway is that Aamteh bluntly establishes this double-speak in her language: don't trust what you read. Then she buries the stories structural ironies so they have a delayed pay-off.\n\n**Subtext isn't information withheld from the reader, it's information withheld from the protagonist** – *it doesn't even enter their mind* so the narrator doesn't mention it either.\n\nYou've got to communicate facts to your reader, influence that meta-narrative they keep in their heads, without mentioning it directly through the narrator. The effect is that the reader is disagreeing with the protagonist's interpretation of events creating tension. (Confusing the reader does not create tension, it's just bad writing.)\n\nThe reader *wants* the protagonist to change, they *want* the narrator to confirm their opinions. By the time Aamteh's sisters realize the cringe elders are awesome people, the reader is already aware and it feels like a pay-off, like a release of tension." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64571", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/51269/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64579, "author": "OhkaBaka", "author_id": 57991, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57991", "pm_score": 3, "selected": true, "text": "The conversation is fine generally speaking. Talking MORE about it is going to make it too obvious anyway. Honestly if anything THIS conversation goes a little long... the \"confession\" about saving them up feels... forced?\n\nDon't try to swallow the whole horse in one bite. Revisit the conversation a couple of times.\n\nIntroduce it at one point. Touch on it casually another time. Then have the \"why do you even HAVE so many of these\" and the confession after that.\n\nLose the \"I’m not gonna be killed by a bunch of sleeping pills\" altogether... unless its already known in the narrative that he is going to die. (If the story starts with \"this is how my best friend died of a sleeping pill overdose\" or whatever, then it is fine)" }, { "answer_id": 64615, "author": "eHaraldo", "author_id": 58026, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/58026", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "In addition to @OhkaBaka's answer, you should pay attention to your paragraphing. You've got two characters speaking in the same graph. Break them apart." }, { "answer_id": 64616, "author": "WIshbone Mayonnaise", "author_id": 58015, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/58015", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "i would recommend also adding more description in between. have the speaker notice rats running through the floorboards, the way the wind was battering at the window panes etc." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64572", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57441/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64579, "author": "OhkaBaka", "author_id": 57991, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57991", "pm_score": 3, "selected": true, "text": "The conversation is fine generally speaking. Talking MORE about it is going to make it too obvious anyway. Honestly if anything THIS conversation goes a little long... the \"confession\" about saving them up feels... forced?\n\nDon't try to swallow the whole horse in one bite. Revisit the conversation a couple of times.\n\nIntroduce it at one point. Touch on it casually another time. Then have the \"why do you even HAVE so many of these\" and the confession after that.\n\nLose the \"I’m not gonna be killed by a bunch of sleeping pills\" altogether... unless its already known in the narrative that he is going to die. (If the story starts with \"this is how my best friend died of a sleeping pill overdose\" or whatever, then it is fine)" }, { "answer_id": 64615, "author": "eHaraldo", "author_id": 58026, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/58026", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "In addition to @OhkaBaka's answer, you should pay attention to your paragraphing. You've got two characters speaking in the same graph. Break them apart." }, { "answer_id": 64616, "author": "WIshbone Mayonnaise", "author_id": 58015, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/58015", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "i would recommend also adding more description in between. have the speaker notice rats running through the floorboards, the way the wind was battering at the window panes etc." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64576", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/33204/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64587, "author": "Boba Fit", "author_id": 57030, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57030", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "The number of characters isn't, by itself, a good or bad thing. What you need is the ability to write characters that are memorable and interesting.\n\nThere is a type of novel where the author seems to be flexing with their ability to generate names. I am thinking of a particular classic novel involving combat between armies on horseback. It's set in China round about the year 100 AD. According to the novel it was standard for the officers of two armies to come out and do single combat before the main battle. That way if one side was clearly going to win, the other could have a chance to back off without a huge slaughter.\n\nAnd the author lists the names of all the officers in a battle. Dozens of them. Each with their family name, given name, childhood name, and the name their friends use. And I'm there saying \"too many names.\" I'm skipping page after page of character names.\n\nLater in the novel there is a tendency for single heroes to last through many battles. That way I feel some confidence in getting emotionally invested in the character. Additionally, the characters that last have various things that make them memorable. For example, this guy has a special horse and particular way of riding. And that guy has a white robe and a fan of eagle feathers. And so on.\n\nIt's OK, by the way, to have \"spear carriers\" in some circumstances. When you have armies in your story, then the \"rank and file\" are permitted to be uniform. You just don't try to make every single one a character. They can even have lines. They can even do \"business\" in the sense of a Nvikuspeara play. But they usually do it in an \"anonymous\" manner. Similarly, you can have \"bystanders\" or such. Again, don't try to make every one of them a character.\n\nSo your challenge is to make your characters interesting and memorable. These are the payoffs to you audience to convince them to actually read carefully and remember your characters. And your work in the long run. If you have two dozen characters that nobody can remember or tell the difference, maybe it is too many. But if you have whatever number of characters that are memorable individuals, even briefly, it's probably not too many." }, { "answer_id": 64593, "author": "EDL", "author_id": 39219, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/39219", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "It kind of depends on what you mean by characters. If you mean those with and without names, and those that only appear once, then twenty-eight seems like an okay number.\n\nIf you mean twenty-eight characters with points of view and backstory, then that seems like way too many unless you are writing something on the scale of [War and Peace](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_and_Peace).\n\nThings to consider for your story, if a character only shows up once, do they need a name? A waiter, a stable hand, a ferrier that shows up once might be important for the story, but is the character developed enough to need a name?\n\nThen, consider if one-off characters can be consolidated. Could the waiter, the stable hand, and the ferrier actually be the same person? That would make the character more interesting and cut down on the number of characters the reader needs to keep track of." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64585", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57995/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64591, "author": "Nyctophobia457", "author_id": 52632, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/52632", "pm_score": 5, "selected": true, "text": "I believe most ancient gods and goddesses fall under the public domain.\n\nMyths don't have a strict \"canon\" to them most of the time. They're stories passed down through the ages, and everyone has their own interpretations. For example, the Greeks had their gods, and then the Romans renamed all those gods. Zuub became Jupiter. Hera became Juno.\n\nShould the Greeks sue Rome over copyright infringement?\n\nIn the modern day, the Peryy Yiwfsan series is probably the first I think of for using mythology. Has anyone sued Rick Riordan for using the name of Zuub?\n\nAfter all, Disney made the Hercules movie. Wouldn't a major corporation like that love to sue someone for using their characters? I don't see them copyrighting every mention of the Greek gods in media. Why? They don't own the Greek gods. You can't own mythology unless you make it yourself.\n\nHowever, if I decided to use Hades in my story and made him a man with fiery blue hair, then I might have a problem with Disney. You can't use someone else's interpretation of a god. You have to make your own.\n\nYou also can't steal a god in someone else's canon unless it's in the public domain. Eru Iluvatar is a fictional god, yes, but he's in Tolkien's mythos, so you can't use him." }, { "answer_id": 64600, "author": "reirab", "author_id": 24535, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/24535", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "In order to have a copyright, you generally have to actually have created the work in the first place or else hired someone to do so. If you write a story about ancient Greek gods, then you own the copyright to that story (unless you wrote it for hire under contract or employment, in which case copyright ownership can vary somewhat by jurisdiction as well as contract terms, but usually belongs to the entity that hired you.)\n\nIf you make up your own gods, then you may also be able to trademark them.\n\nIn the case of historical deities, no one owns either a copyright or a trademark for the deity itself and generally copyrights on original writings about them (e.g. original biblical text, Greek or Roman writings about their gods, the Quran, etc.) would have long since expired if they had ever existed in the first place. However, if someone writes a new work about such a deity, the author would generally own copyright to that new work. But they do not own any sort of intellectual property rights with regard to the deity itself. That is, someone else could write a different story about the same deity without any legal problem. They just couldn't copy part or all of the other author's original work without permission." }, { "answer_id": 64601, "author": "Acccumulation", "author_id": 28583, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/28583", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "It is possible to get a deity's name recognized as a trademark. For instance, the goddess Nike is registered as a trademark.\n\nFor copyright, stories that were written down long ago are in the public domain. Stories that were passed down orally and only recently written down are a more complicated issue. Also, recent stories built off of ancient traditions are protected by copyright. For instance, Marvel's Thor comic books are protected. Where things would get sticky is if someone wrote a new story about Thor that had similarities to Marvel's Thor: if it was determined to be based off of Marvel, then it would be a derivative work, but if it the two were determined to have the public domain source as common origin, then it would be an original work." }, { "answer_id": 64605, "author": "RBarryYoung", "author_id": 14896, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/14896", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "If they were created for a copyrighted fictional work, then yes, those gods and their names are definitely copyright protected.\n\nThis actually happened with the first printing of TSR's D&D reference book [Deities and Demigods](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deities_%26_Demigods) which contained gods from over a dozen different mythos, three of which were protected by copyright (at the time): Fritz Leiber's \"Nehwon mythos\", Michael Moorcock's \"Melnibonéan mythos\", and H. P. Lovecraft's \"Cthulhu Mythos\".\n\nAlthough TSR obtained permission for these, prior licensing agreements required them to credit a competitor, Chaosium Games for the latter two of them. Because of this, TSR dropped those from later printings. Because of this, those rare first editions later became quite valuable (I happened to have bought one when it was first released).\n\nFurther, TSR later sued another company (Game Designers' Workshop) claiming that they had based one of their mythos on the Shadow Plane mythos in Deities and Demigods.\n\nNote however, that copyrighted material can be used in the U.S. as long as it falls under the limits of \"Fair Use\", which for practical purposes here would mean non-fictional reference and review-type articles. Using them in your own fiction would usually only be passable in parody and satire (unless you got permission first)." }, { "answer_id": 64617, "author": "phoog", "author_id": 42379, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/42379", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "> \n> Are deity/god names protected by copyright or trademark?\n> \n> \n> \n\nThey are not protected by copyright because names simply are not protected by copyright. See for example the US [copyright circular 33 (PDF)](https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ33.pdf), which says\n\n> \n> Examples of names, titles, or short phrases that do not contain a sufficient amount of creativity to support a claim in copyright include\n> \n> \n> ...\n> \n> \n> * The title or subtitle of a work, such as a book, a song, or a pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work\n> \n> \n> ...\n> \n> \n> * The name of a character\n> \n> \n> ...\n> \n> \n> \n\nThese names may in fact be subject to trademark protection if someone has been using them as a trademark. But trademark protection is widely misunderstood. Trademark protection prevents you from using the name \"Nike\" to sell athletic gear or to engage in any other line of business where someone is already using the name Nike. It does not prevent you from writing stories about deities named Nike or about Nike-branded sportswear." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64590", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/-1/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64594, "author": "Mary", "author_id": 44281, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/44281", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Whatever you find useful.\n\nBoan sheets are not requirements, but analyzed structures that some writers find useful. If you find it useful to have several, go ahead.\n\nThe only problem might lie in whether the story lines are integrated enough to form a unified story, and that lies in having several stories, not using beat sheets for them." }, { "answer_id": 64597, "author": "Boba Fit", "author_id": 57030, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57030", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "For me, beat sheets are the way I remember stuff. Otherwise, I leave stuff out. I will also stick in bits of conversation or description that occurs to me while I'm fixing the beats.\n\nWhen you have things happening in parallel they can also be a way to map out the timing. It can be a bit tedious getting the timing correct even with a map of the beats. You have to estimate how long each thing takes. Usually the way to do that is to cheat a little. For example, having conversations take more or less time than realistically required. Or have your character take a little more or less time walking, or some such thing.\n\nBut if party A is going round *this* side, and party B is going round *that* side, and they are supposed to meet up just *here* then beat sheets are one way to have that happen without leaving annoying gaps. You don't want party B to get there hours early and stand around looking bored (and boring your readers) while they wait for party A." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64592", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64626, "author": "jtb", "author_id": 57830, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57830", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "To address your final comment first:\n\n> \n> I don't understand what \"forced\" means and what are the criteria for\n> their presence to feel forced\n> \n> \n> \n\nYou don't want your audience to feel like they *should have known* about the new character before they appeared. For example, if your initial cast of characters includes two brothers, and you show many scenes of their childhood together, it may feel \"forced\" to introduce a third brother later on. In this case, the audience would feel like the third brother was added as an after-thought.\n\nThere are many ways to do this well, but many stories seem to **broaden the story** as they add new characters. If the narrative leads your characters to new places, it is natural that they will meet new people." }, { "answer_id": 64636, "author": "Writer in need of help", "author_id": 58042, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/58042", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Depends on the genre. For example, fantasy you could visit a village or on the journey or rising action. Anything else you could make up one of the secondary characters has a certain family member or friend. If you are into manga/anime you could look at some examples from them." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64602", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64606, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "The first rule of story telling is that your character's cannot do **nothing**.\n\nYour character can be depressed and despondent, but something in her character compels her to keep moving forward. Even if she does it with little enthusiasm. Some sense of responsibility must remain that compels her to continue trying.\n\nFor a writer, that is the working definition of a \"hero\": No matter how injured they are, no matter how many times they've been kicked in the face, or beaten down, or lost loved ones, something in them compels them to get up and try again. They'd literally rather die than fail.\n\n007 rides a motorcycle off a frikkin' cliff to certain death, without a parachute, on the slimmest of chances he can ditch the motorcycle in mid-air and land on the villain's piper cub and somehow still get the bad guy. 007 would rather die trying than fail.\n\nOnly villains give up the fight.\n\nYour hero cannot stay down for a quarter of the story. Something in her character must compel her, despite her pain and grief, to continue the fight. She may not be as effective as she was, she may be distracted by grief. The other things you describe, casual sex and casual cruelty, you can fit those in. Her personality can change. But not her drive to finish the fight, she must still rather die than give up." }, { "answer_id": 64612, "author": "wetcircuit", "author_id": 23253, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/23253", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "> \n> Eventually, she gets another love interest (who was already\n> pre-established as a character,) but some trauma sticks on her, making\n> her slightly overprotective.\n> \n> \n> In the end though, how could I write her so she is tragic and you feel\n> sympathy for her, rather than the typical unbearable jerk the\n> audience/player hates?\n> \n> \n> \n\nI think you've got a built-in **redemption arc**?\n\ngo extra dark\n-------------\n\nShe was always a cocky bastard..., but now she's crossing a line, daring that point-of-no-return. Pushing friends away. Feeling low-key ugly rage all the time. It's clear no one can pull her out of it, so they'll have to ride it out, but she gets worse.\n\nWeave some specific moments of friendship bonding with the other warriors, and besmirch those moments when D lashes out. They're not just insults, they're personal. They should hurt.\n\nBonus points if the reader/player is upset because she attacks something endearing or narratively earned.\n\nStakes are clear, reader agrees. They need her skills, but she is poisoning the group. Strain leads to some kind of pushback/confrontation/provoked fight – which doesn't resolve anything – and she's out.\n\nThey don't have a plan without her, but they can't continue with her.\n\nredemption\n----------\n\nRedemption comes privately through the second love interest. This is maybe one of the people D acts out sexual aggression with, but someone who also recognizes their behavior as grief, maybe went through their own experience, and who can **say it in so many words** so D doesn't have to.\n\nOr some other way to let the reader see the second relationship is dark, but cathartic. Let D be vulnerable (fall apart) privately with the 2nd love, and the 2nd love is 'handling it' in ways no one else is realizing. Some private chemistry that works between themselves, that previously made that couple seem incompatible.\n\nReturning to the group, D has taken some of the edge off and is focused for the climax. Everyone being stoic warriors they accept that she's back and just don't talk about it." }, { "answer_id": 64639, "author": "getrekd54", "author_id": 58035, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/58035", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "Well, some depressed characters CAN seem very hated. All you have to do is explain (in the character's POV) as to how and why you wrote it that way. That's why they won't really hate that character, they will bond with them.\n\nAnd also, you can sometimes make an edgy persona really liked. For example, if you feel like you are being followed, you would be very edgy to everyone or you would have an edge to your voice because you need to be sure THEY are not the ones following you. The only way for you to make their edgy persona likeable is if you have explain it all." }, { "answer_id": 64658, "author": "Not Bartleby ", "author_id": 58060, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/58060", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "She may be depressed and tragic, but no-one gets like that without a backstory, and it maybe even be the case that you can craft a suitable one that engages the reader's empathic understanding to avoid the hate-able characterisation. I'm thinking particularly of linking into a redemption arc process as mentioned in [this other answer](https://writing.stackexchange.com/a/64612/39493).\n\nIt doesn't have to be a grand opera, but rather just a sub-narrative to circle the character through some recognition inside herself and that insinuates itself into themes in the main story. My suggestion is to do this not solely through evoking sympathy, or laying down trauma-porn, but hooking onto the readers identification with the process of becoming: taking charge of ones own expression of emotion - \"know how you feel BUT, choose how to express it\": i.e. when it really counts. Depends on how you want the plot to unfold of course." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64604", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/55024/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64613, "author": "wetcircuit", "author_id": 23253, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/23253", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "Meet cute!\n----------\n\nBuild the chemistry between your 2 main characters. Amnesia or not, establish what makes them click from the start.\n\nIf they spar comedically..., or one-side flirts..., or they share a love of vintage baseball memorabilia… whatever it is, give it in its purest form here.\n\nMaybe amnesia girl is smart enough to cover a vulnerability. She might decide that Manic-Pixie-Dreamgirling her way into his heart like a rom-com is as good a plan as any until she remembers what she was doing.\n\nMaybe she didn't have a real plan other than 'escape', and being outside for the first time she has so many questions. She would prolong the experience as long as she can. Depending on how clever or manipulative or entertaining she is, she might say anything to string him along, or she follows him and he slowly realizes she's making up information about herself as he tries to get rid of her.\n\nUnfortunately, real amnesia is traumatic brain damage, so there are no 'realistic' ways to do this trope." }, { "answer_id": 65927, "author": "RedSonja", "author_id": 14539, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/14539", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "Your character is like an alien just arrived on Earth. Depending also on how much she forgot.\n\nWhat's this? How does it work? Where is this town? Who are these people and why do they behave like that?\n\nIt's a good way of showing how humanity works from the outside. People do random acts of evil and of kindness.\n\nShe will be full of curiosity and eager to learn. Some things will make her wonder, some will remind her of things she no longer knows." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64607", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/58015/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64610, "author": "WIshbone Mayonnaise", "author_id": 58015, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/58015", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "im not going to lie, if you are seen as a guy - this might be a red flag - i think something you really want to make sure of it that the girl also has a personality and her own values and reasons to do things, make sure she isn't just a plot point, but a well developed character." }, { "answer_id": 64611, "author": "wetcircuit", "author_id": 23253, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/23253", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "We can't tell you what to write.\n\nAs suggested in another answer, the **frame challenge** with your scenario is that you are describing an adult(?) human passed around like a game of capture-the-flag, as opposed to a sentient human being that has preferences and can think for itself.\n\n**This is a plot hole.**\n------------------------\n\nWomen who are old enough to be in sexual relationships have their own motivations and desires which can help *complicate* your story. You do not want an important character acting like a zero. **If she chose to leave your protagonist, it's because he's got a flaw he isn't facing.** Something that makes her believe he's not the one.\n\nWomen in real life do not get 'stolen', this is something men say to comfort themselves. The other guy was more appealing. She made a choice. And yes of course, in the story it's the wrong choice, but readers need to understand her reason: why the other guy looked better.\n\nTypically this is about giving your protagonist some flaws. If you fail to give him flaws to make her reasons justifiable, the effect is **melodrama** – *your protagonist is suffering just to suffer* through no fault of his own until, as per the rules of melodrama the villain is vanquished and everything turns sunny again.\n\nBut the story has more dimension if the woman has rejected him for a reason that is justifiable. We need to respect her choice, if we're to care where she ends up.\n\nPeople as 'stakes'\n------------------\n\nThe controversy is that using a woman as 'stakes' in a romance rivalry is an amateur writing trope. It's also a red flag that the author may have some problems fleshing out female characters.\n\nIf the woman is a 'simp' who can't see that she is being fooled and seduced, readers will wonder why she is of value to the protagonist. They will not accept her as worthy 'stakes'.\n\n(*Simp* is a simplisticly-written character that exists just to support another character. *Stakes* carries some personal risk to the protagonist, in this case not just a prize that can be won back but a want/need that could be lost forever.)\n\nWorse, if she lacks agency over her own decisions, she becomes uncomfortably *less adult* – she should not be in ANY sexual relationships much less being passed back and forth like a football.\n\nI suggest there are many, MANY narrative degrees between 'non-consensual graphic sex' (pretty sure that's called **rape**) and the MC being bummed that his ex is dating his worst enemy. I think you need to explore this middle ground.\n\nIf the girlfriend can complicate the plot because *she wants something too*, you can elevate the story from melodrama to a love triangle where the emotions are more complicated. The MC doesn't simply 'win her back' by punching the rival on the jaw, first he has to address his flaw, he's got to show her he's the one – however that works in your story.\n\nThere are melodrama stories that work. If the human 'stakes' was a child, the MC's own child for instance being manipulated by an evil step-dad, that changes the dynamic. A child does not have agency, that's part of what makes her vulnerable. Also not a character we need to see punished through non-consensual graphic sex (which is still just called **rape**, btw)." }, { "answer_id": 64618, "author": "Erk", "author_id": 10826, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/10826", "pm_score": 1, "selected": true, "text": "I don't really see any problems with any of the alternatives you've described. Any issues will likely rather come from *how* you write than *what*.\n\nAnd, yes, at certain levels of your writing, outlining, and/or editing, you may have to consider, the characters as if they were pieces on a chess board. That's part of both outlining the story and to some extent orchestrating the scenes. The trick, I believe is that the story should not feel like this is what's happening—so part of the craft is to hide this outlining and orchestrating from the reader.\n\nIf you worry about writing some character shallow or slighting them, or people that might identify with them, start by making sure the character is more of a story person than a character (I actually don't like the term character, and privately I mostly use story/novel people/person instead). Make the character into a person by making sure the character has depth, for instance by giving them a backstory, a will of their own, goals and ambitions, idiosyncracies, a unique voice, and a lot of other things usually done to create great characters. I.e. work more to develop the character.\n\nAnother step that can help deepen a character and their agency in the story is to look at the story from this character's point of view. This can be done in any of the following ways:\n\n* Summarize the story from the character's point of view (e.g. step 3 or 5 in the [Snowflake Method](https://www.advancedfictionwriting.com/articles/snowflake-method/))\n* Have the character tell the story in their voice and point of view\n* Write or rewrite scenes in the character's POV, especially key scenes in the story and/or the character's arc. Maybe these scenes will end up in your story, or maybe not.\n\nBy looking at the scenes/story from the character's point of view, you may be alerted to problems or gain insights on how to expand the character. Things to be on the lookout for are; does the character do all they can to avoid bad situations? Could they give more to reach their goals and fulfill their ambitions? Is there emotional logic to their behavior? Do they feel coherent? Do they have agency? Are they reactive or proactive or just not active at all?" }, { "answer_id": 64625, "author": "Philipp", "author_id": 10303, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/10303", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "The answer by wetcircuit is already a very good frame-challenge for how this whole \"win back the girl\" plot is one that can easily turn out very bad if not handled properly, because you risk to dehumanize the female character into nothing but a trophy for males to fight over. But I would like to address the actual question:\n\n**Assuming you indeed want to write a \"win back the girl\" story, how graphic should the sexuality between girl and antagonist be described?**\n\nKeep in mind that the reader is supposed to sympathize with the protagonist. So whatever you write should make the reader feel the same thing the protagonist feels. Except for a small minority of people who have a cuckolding fetish, the thought of a person you love being sexually intimate with someone else is rather off-putting. So if you try to write a detailed sex scene between girl and antagonist from their perspective, that will probably backfire. Either the sex is good, and you create cognitive dissonance in your readers while they read about it. Or the sex is bad, and you have another plothole to pave over regarding the motivation of why girl stays attached to the \"evil\" antagonist.\n\nWhat you could instead do is describe from the protagonists point of view how he *imagines* their sex-life and how he is disgusted and hurt by that thought. And then leave it to the readers' imagination how their sex-life actually looks.\n\nShould they (not in the imagination of the protagonist but in the actual reality of the narrative) *actually* have a sexual relationship? That's something you should leave up to the characters. Is the antagonist sexually interested in the girl? Is the girl sexually interested in the antagonist? Do they have the opportunity to spend enough time with each other to get over their personal \"knowing a person well enough to have sex with them\" thresholds? All of that depends on how you characterize them." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64609", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/58016/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64621, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "Sure, you can rhyme, or just spell it differently. Instead of Loki, use Moki, or Noki, or Loti, or Logi, or Lochee. If you want to be sure people get it, have another not-so-clever character make fun with the rhyme; \"Logi like Loki\".\n\nCombine that with the right personality traits, of course." }, { "answer_id": 64623, "author": "jtb", "author_id": 57830, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57830", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Some more ideas:\n\n* Nest the name inside another: \"Alloki\"\n* Use it as a last, or middle name. This has the advantage that you can keep the connection a secret for some time, even after introducing the character." }, { "answer_id": 64624, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 3, "selected": true, "text": "You could look into the etymological roots of the name. For instance, Lomo is believed to be derived from the same Old Norse roots for their words \"Knots\", \"Loops\" , or \"Cobwebs\" and maybe related to the fact that he was originally credited with inventing fishing net as well as being blamed for tangles, knots, and loops, and -because of the net's similar design to webs- spiders. If Lomo wanted to travel incognito... yet have a name that would signal to his closest supporters... he might take a name that fits these themes.\n\nOr look to mythology for other names. For example, Lomo was believed to have taken the identity of an elderly woman named Thokk (Old Norse for \"Thanks\") who refused to weep for the deceased Baldr, thus condemning him to Hel... and since Baldr's death was the prophesized inciting event for Ragnarök, Lomo began it... though it's not helped that he killed Baldr (according to myth, Baldr could be resurrected if he was wept for by all)." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64619", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64622, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "It sounds to me like you are caught up in exposition about character building. It is a little like World Building Syndrome; some beginning authors will spend literally *years* drawing maps, figuring out weather patterns, justifying the geology and mines and forests and plant life of their imaginary world, the languages, the populations and town locations, the religions, the history ... And never write a story. World Building Syndrome becomes like a model train enthusiast building a whole little model town for their train to run through.\n\nThat's okay, World Building can be an entertaining hobby for some people, just like model train sets are an entertaining hobby for some people. I get it. But it isn't story writing.\n\nYou are doing a similar thing with characters. It may feel like writing, but you aren't writing a **story**, you are writing biographical sketches.\n\nNow, on to how to fix it. You have surely watched some series or movie \"making of...\" documentaries, where they show scenes from a movie but \"on set\", where we see the director, the partially built aircraft open on the camera side, the boom mikes, the assistants, the script cards, the cameras. And then they show us the finished result, but all that extra stuff and people are out of frame and the frame looks realistic as hell. Even though you know that there is no ceiling on this aircraft and it is open on \"our\" side, with the sound effects and music it feels like we are in an aircraft flying.\n\nMovies are on a budget, they build sets out exactly as much as they need and no more. If you only need one and a half walls, that's what you build. If the director decides we don't need to build the floor or ceiling, we don't. We build *just enough* to serve the ***story***.\n\nThat is what you have to do. It can be hard to discard your biographical sketches, but you don't have to. Just move them to some other file, take most of the story elements out, and use them for what they are: Character biographies.\n\nThis file is Nifa, and her quirks and habits and where she and they came from, the experiences that justify her personality.\n\nThis file is Firok, and his quirks and habits, and where he and they came from, the experiences he has had.\n\nStart writing your story, without any character explanations. When we meet somebody in real life, like a coworker or store clerk, we don't get a thousand words on who they are, why they are the way they are. We meet them \"cold\" and figure it out for ourselves, based on their **actions.** Based on idle conversation, not *interviews* or probes or \"tell me about your life\". Based on their tone of voice, over time based on what they laugh at, based on what they disapprove of, based on what they enthused about, based on what they want to do and refuse to do.\n\nAs a writer, your job is to aid your reader's imagination, to have your audience see, hear, feel (like a movie) what you are imagining. You do that with sensory details, not exposition.\n\nHence the rule, \"show don't tell.\" This comes from the stage play and movie industry too: Never **tell** the audience something that you can just **show** them on stage. If Seck is a chain smoker, just always show him with a lit cigarette in his mouth, or lighting one from another. If he is forced to go without one, show him irritable and suffering withdrawal symptoms, trying to sneak one where it is not allowed.\n\nIn writing, it means do not **tell** us something in exposition that we can *see* (in our imagination) for ourselves. The latter (an imagined scene) is about 100x more memorable to readers than exposition, and it isn't boring. Explanatory exposition is **boring**, it is just a lot of stuff for the audience to memorize, that they won't memorize.\n\nBuilding a sensory scene (visual, auditory, olfactory, other senses) is not explanatory exposition; it aids the reader's imagination. They don't have to remember the ground is barren and littered with rocks and rotting fallen trees; that the moment our hero steps into it, all the birds in the forest fall silent. Because the audience sees it and hears it. We build the sensory scene; and they remember that. They don't have to memorize the words that built it.\n\nExposition is for you to work out your consistent characters, offline and offstage.\n\nThe story is about their adventure as who they are, and avoid *explanatory* exposition like the plague. If it truly is important to the story, invent a scene to show it -- It is better to spend 500 words building a sensory scene than to spend 50 words in explanatory exposition. Seriously.\n\nBut only include what is needed to justify the actions of characters in the story, and always do it in scenes, even if they are short scenes. What you **tell** readers is quickly forgotten; what you **show** readers is far more likely to be remembered.\n\nAvoid *explaining* and focus on assisting scenic imagination. Follow the 3-act structure, four roughly equal parts of Act-1, Act 2-a, Act 2-b, Act 3. You can divide each of those in half as well. The inciting incident should occur at the midpoint of Act-1; an issue or problem that grows until the hero is forced to leave their \"normal world\" to solve it (leave literally or metaphorically, like approaching life and work with a changed focus and driving factor). That happens at the end of Act-1.\n\nPick the standard word budget for your work, and you have 1/8th of that to introduce your hero(es) and their \"normal world\" and the new thing that is going to disrupt that normal world. That's it!\n\nIt's a tough assignment, but do it in scenes. Take a hint from movies introducing a new hero; they tend to do the same thing: Carefully pick a few incidents that define your hero, and build scenes around those incidents.\n\nThroughout, you need to do the same: select the scenes that will advance the story, and skip all the backstory that is not absolutely necessary to the hero's journey.\n\nAnd avoid explanatory exposition like the plague." }, { "answer_id": 64627, "author": "codeMonkey", "author_id": 40325, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/40325", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Conflict\n--------\n\nEvery scene needs conflict. It's what pulls the reader through the story.\n\nConflict could be a small interpersonal drama, or it could be a world shaking fight between the gods. What matters is that some character wants something, and some force prevents them from obtaining it without some kind of risk.\n\nNo Room for Life\n----------------\n\nOP describes \"life\" as `their state of mind, their relationships, their habits` and contrasts this with \"action.\" I suspect this means that there is no conflict in the \"life\" scenes. No stakes, and no tension.\n\nIf that's true, then the balance is simple: there should be no \"life scenes.\" They are weak scenes that the reader will not enjoy.\n\nFear Not!\n---------\n\nBut that doesn't mean there's no place for those little details at all. They simply can't be the center of the scene.\n\nCreate a scene with actual stakes, and then see how many little details you can slip in without interrupting the flow. You might be surprised at how many you can manage.\n\nI generally allow myself one or two sentences at a time to bring in those details; any more and the pacing feels off." }, { "answer_id": 65719, "author": "Peter Fox", "author_id": 48104, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/48104", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "Why would a reader bother to turn the page?\n\n* Not to be swamped by more trivia\n* Not to be deluged with facts which might be important later\n* Not to be **told** this that and the next thing\nBut to find out what happens next because 'now' is tottering.\n\nAny story must get going from the very start. Once the reader is intrigued about the characters, **they have to care** if Tted is having a bad day or be late for work, then you can tickle with anger/frustration/confusion while stuck in traffic." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64620", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/24863/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64632, "author": "Dev Prakash Shukla", "author_id": 58039, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/58039", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "I have an idea maybe you like it or not. You can show various reasons for which your character started hating humankind, you can show one angle of humans being so greedy, irrelevant, lustful and envious (etc) of each other that no matter what happens they just want to fulfill their ambition, their ideas without having a second guess of what it's consequence might be. They just want to show their superiority complex showing dominance over everyone and just want to stand alone on the peak over everyone else. By this they're doing some meagre and pathetic things to other innocent or helpless people or animals like cutting trees or cleaning the forest so that they can have enough land to establish their empire, they're killing each other for profit or maybe just for fun, they're robbing each other for their money or for their goods and humans are making this very mother earth a living hell, and various other reasons that you can showcase. Maybe you can take help of the real world too for your ideas, take a look of what's happening around you, sense little things, perceive it, experience it like what is it?, why is it happening?, and you can also watch some news, see what's happening, frame it on your mind, make a story angle.\n\nAlso, I have a suggestion for your character if you like it, then I'm happy. How about you show character as a very highly sensitive person, because as you said she is a female, and she was 13 years old when she witnessed something, so make it like the moment she was born she was very highly sensitive of herself and people and environment around her and it is a scientific study that suggest that highly sensitive person tend to experience and sense the world around them more vividly and in more exponential manner then any other people. So, what will happen is that the story will sound more logical that she was 13, she was highly sensitive and she perceived the world more quickly then other people so she started taking actions.\n\nAlso, one more thing, how about if you make character like, at first she took this huge and abrupt steps to change the world once and for all but as she started progressing she came to the terms that not everything goes according to our plans and sometimes if we try to change it we end up making it more worse and this will be turning point of your story because your character went through a deep introspective extension where she started confessing about what's good and what's bad and this will make your story more appealing and beautiful to the readers because then every dots are connected, you have your whats now, you have your whys, you have your hows and you have your result also which for me are the main foundations of writing and storytelling.\n\nSo, that's it for me, see you along the journey\n\nTill then good luck with your story." }, { "answer_id": 64633, "author": "OprenStein", "author_id": 56149, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/56149", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "It's hard to give advice without context, but I'll do what I can.\n\nWhen brainstorming like this, I like to ask the very simple question \"What, in real life, has had a similar effect on people?\" So, what, in real life, would make someone this cynical? Murder of a family member? Destruction of something very close to them? Their house, which they had spent years in, and held sentimental value? Maybe your villain heard stories of the most despicable humans to walk the earth, and simply assumed that they were all like that. Maybe someone with a grudge against their family kills your villain's mother. The possibilities are endless. I'd recommend a combination of many of these to realistically cement cynicism in your character. Here's one for you, but you don't have to follow it. In fact, it's a bit *cliche*, but it gives you the idea.\n\nYour villain's mother escaped a war. She saw some horrifying things, and has developed a cynical personality herself, so she finds an isolated forest where no people would find them. She raises her children, builds a house with them, and warns them about the dangers of humans for years. She tells them stories of Hitler, Stalin, and such, to cement the idea that they should avoid humans. They grow up afraid, for their own safety. Then, a sadistic hunter inexplicably burns their house, and kills their mother, as our antagonist watches, safely hidden in a tree.\n\nThis is just one way that you can utilize this idea of tying to real-life catalysts. Do what you want, there are no rules to writing, but the simple question \"What causes this in real life\" can help avoid jarring, contradictory traits." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64631", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/55170/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64648, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "You don't need writing advice, you need to do research. How are people carried, when they have broken a leg? I'm sure with all the wars going on in the world you will find plenty of images, videos, or instructions for how to get your wounded mates out of the battlefield." }, { "answer_id": 65915, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "As someone who had first aid training, do not move the guy unless his safety is in imminent risk. You want to have the broken limb move as little as possible. In your scenario. you're supporting a bulk of the vic's weight with his knees, which would hurt if his leg was broken. You should first find something like a brace or splint to tie his leg two. (A stick or board that can run the length of the leg). Finding the rope or other item to tie is more important with a broken leg, because, if all else fails, you can tie his busted leg to his good leg.).\n\nIf you don't need to move him, then do not. Activate EMS (in U.S./Canada/Mexico, this is 911. Use your jurisdiction's equivalent) and try to keep the vic from moving while you wait. Keep him talking and distracted from the current situation (typically dwelling on injuries will lead to shock, which isn't fatal... but doesn't help matters any).\n\nBut even after doing this, bridal carry is not the best option in this scenario. Or any first aid scenario. Ever." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64635", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/58042/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64647, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "The same way you write any other book: Write down what happens to the protagonist.\n\nIf the person forgets things, then you write that she forgets things. If that causes problems for her, you describe those problems.\n\nIf you don't know how amnesia works, how it feels for a person, and what problems it causes, you need to do some research first." }, { "answer_id": 64657, "author": "Boba Fit", "author_id": 57030, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57030", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "A couple stories where such has occurred: *We can Remember it for You Wholesale* by P.K. Dick, the story the Scwarzenegger movie Total Recall was loosely based on. *The Minority Report* the story by P.K. Dick, and the Xok Cliise movie based on it. I'd have to go back and look, but I seem to recall that there are some more stories by P.K. Dick that involve some kind of amnesia or people messing with memory and such.\n\nAlso, there were some Doctor Who episodes where the Doctor had amnesia of one form or another. In one, he has removed his memory and placed it in a device so that he can hide from aliens who can read minds. In another, he is in a time loop where he dies at the end, over and over, for billions of years, until he finds an escape. In a few episodes, he meets a time-copy of one of his earlier or later selves that does not have the same memories he does. It's a big wibbly-wobbly time-ee-wime-ee thing.\n\nThe movie *50 First Dates* is about a person who has no long term memory. Her long term memory stops at a particular day. She lives through each day when she wakes up, thinking it is the next day from the end of her memory. Then when she goes to sleep, she permanently forgets the most recent day. It's very poignant.\n\nTime-travel negative amnesia (where you remember stuff that has not happened) is a big plot point of *All You Need is Kill* by Hiroshi Sakura, the story that the Xok Cliise movie *Edge of Tomorrow* is based on.\n\nStories about memory and amnesia frequently sneak in some questions about what personality consists of, what it means to be **you**. If you did a lot of stuff that you now can't remember, are those actions part of you? Should you try to get the memory back?\n\nThe thing to keep in mind when you write a character with amnesia is, they really can't remember. It's not that they are pretending. The memory isn't there. So, in effect, they are a different person to the person with the memory.\n\nSo if they have forgotten events that shaped their personality, they will be different by that much without the memory. If they have forgotten important people, for example, they won't have the emotions that go with that person.\n\nDon't have them doing things that depend on the memory. Have them move forward in their story with the memory they have. Have them do stuff based on the memory.\n\nUntil and unless they start getting clues, or partial recall, that is, or maybe the people around them are telling them stuff they have forgotten. You can get into a huge amount of drama between the people who want them to remember and the amnesiac who just wants to lead their own life.\n\nAnother thing to keep in mind is, amnesia is a trope. It can become cliché very fast. It's sufficiently frequent in soap operas, for example, that it became a frequent New York Times crossword clue and answer. It did *that* often enough that it was considered a cliché in the NYT crossword.\n\nThe hope is to do something fresh and interesting. That's kind of a big challenge." }, { "answer_id": 64667, "author": "Philipp", "author_id": 10303, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/10303", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "> \n> That's a problem for the book because she can't remember her past and anyone in it (parents, siblings, lovers, friends, etc.). But she probably shouldn't because she is an ex-assassin who would kill for sport.\n> \n> \n> \n\nWell, when you have a past like that, it is going to catch up with you sooner or later. No matter if you want to or not.\n\n* The next of kin of her victims will seek revenge.\n* Law enforcement will try to bring her to justice.\n* Clients will want to make use of her services again. Some might not accept a \"No\" for an answer.\n* Other clients might try to kill her to get rid of any loose ends\n\nAll these people might be looking for her. And after some uncomfortable encounters with these groups of people, she will probably want to know more about them. If she wants to survive, she will have to do her own research and find out who is looking for her, why they are looking for her, and how she might be able to get out of that mess. That will require her to find out about and confront her own past. There is a lot of interesting story to write here." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64640", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/58035/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64643, "author": "SFWriter", "author_id": 26683, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26683", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "Yes.\n\nI find that identifying the three key features of the idea allows me to retain it:\n\n1. The main character.\n\nWho do I imagine driving this story? Usually there is a hint of character in my lightbulb moment. I might drill a couple words into my head: Misunderstood banker/Naive ingenue/Ruthless mercenary/etc\n\n2. Inciting incident.\n\nThis is key. What is the thing that defines the path my character will take? It might be: Global money laundering scheme/Manipulative boyfriend/political exploitation/etc\n\n3. The twist.\n\nAha, here's the rub. This can be the antagonist with his own agenda, the world changing, anything that gives the story its je ne sais quoi. What is the opposing force? It might be: a change of heart/true love/governmental overthrow/etc.\n\nSo you only need to recall six words.\n\n~Misunderstood banker, money laundering, change of heart.\n\n~Naive ingenue, manipulative boyfriend, true love.\n\n~Ruthless mercenary, political exploitation, governmental overthrow.\n\nThese six words are enough to keep the spark of inspiration burning. I do not forget the idea, when I have the six words.No idea if this will work for you, but it works for me. Memorize the key points when they come to you--memorize six words. It'll change your process..." }, { "answer_id": 64645, "author": "EDL", "author_id": 39219, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/39219", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "I had this dream, that I can barely remember. I swear it was the greatest story I'd ever heard. During the dream, I remember that it was going to be a great story. I woke up, and I only had pieces that didn't quite fit together.\n\nSo did I dream a great story or did I dream that I'd come up with a great story?\n\nMy good story ideas always stick with me. I might lose details, but I always retain the core idea -- the character's motivation, goal, and what is stopping my character from achieving their goal.\n\nMy meh ideas get lost. Sometimes I get them back and they are better.\n\nFor me, when I stopped thinking about stories as a premise with a series of events and started thinking about them as hopes/desires/drives being thwarted and frustrated before being achieved, then I found it much easier to remember the details." }, { "answer_id": 64646, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Always carry a notebook [everywhere you go](https://www.springwise.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/AquaNotes_waterproof_notepad_Springwise.jpg) and always note down all ideas immediately.\n\nI have a notepad and pencil beside my bed, and when I wake up and have an idea I write it down in the dark and go back to sleep. Also, don't exand on the story idea in your head instead of writing it down! Fantasyizing the continuation of the story will make you forget the original idea (because your mind \"thinks\" that you have already used the idea and will stop preserving it for you). Write it down first and then allow yourself to continue elaborating. You need to note down everything that you think in relation to your story, or you will forget that part.\n\nWhen I take a walk, I walk a few steps, stop and write down several ideas, then walk another few steps, etc. If you don't do that, whatever you don't write down you will forget. If you are in the idea stage of a story, you must submit everything else to writing down your ideas, or you will forget them." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64641", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/58044/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64653, "author": "Kate Gregory", "author_id": 15601, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/15601", "pm_score": 2, "selected": true, "text": "How do you know? You have some major turns in your plot, yes? When the family has to throw our hero out because of that thing that happened? Or our hero doesn't head off to the monastery or training institute even though everyone does at that age? Or our hero is the age where your magical powers come in and hers come in way too strong or way too weak? Or whatever. Ask yourself, do the readers know the rules at this point?\n\nIf not, you don't need to start over. Heck, it's possible you didn't know the rules until you wrote this part. What you need to do is get those rules into the reader's heads somewhat earlier. Pure exposition, pages of \"this is how my world works\" is totally the worst way. The usual way is to have something happen to some other character that shows how everything works. Like they didn't do a thing because their family would throw them out if they did. Or they head off to the training institute. Or their powers come in. In addition to narrating whatever this \"something\" is that happens, your hero and other relevant characters can all discuss this. If you need to just flat out explain some rules, you can have a parent explain stuff to a child. \"She has to go, Stephanie, everyone goes, you know that.\"\n\nIf you had a scene before that went \"so then Stephanie and Horah walked home from the store\" you can totally give them a page or two of discussing or gossiping about something that happened to someone else, or sharing their excitement or fear about something that's scheduled to happen for them, or dreaming of some long-off something (the way in our world children might talk about their wedding or the house they are going to live in). This conversation will reveal **both** their characters and personalities **and** the rules of your world." }, { "answer_id": 64654, "author": "Mary", "author_id": 44281, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/44281", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Get in beta readers. They can tell you whether they can figure it out. You may be too close to tell\n\n(Of course, some may be able and some unable, but you have to work as best you can.)" } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64650", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64653, "author": "Kate Gregory", "author_id": 15601, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/15601", "pm_score": 2, "selected": true, "text": "How do you know? You have some major turns in your plot, yes? When the family has to throw our hero out because of that thing that happened? Or our hero doesn't head off to the monastery or training institute even though everyone does at that age? Or our hero is the age where your magical powers come in and hers come in way too strong or way too weak? Or whatever. Ask yourself, do the readers know the rules at this point?\n\nIf not, you don't need to start over. Heck, it's possible you didn't know the rules until you wrote this part. What you need to do is get those rules into the reader's heads somewhat earlier. Pure exposition, pages of \"this is how my world works\" is totally the worst way. The usual way is to have something happen to some other character that shows how everything works. Like they didn't do a thing because their family would throw them out if they did. Or they head off to the training institute. Or their powers come in. In addition to narrating whatever this \"something\" is that happens, your hero and other relevant characters can all discuss this. If you need to just flat out explain some rules, you can have a parent explain stuff to a child. \"She has to go, Stephanie, everyone goes, you know that.\"\n\nIf you had a scene before that went \"so then Stephanie and Horah walked home from the store\" you can totally give them a page or two of discussing or gossiping about something that happened to someone else, or sharing their excitement or fear about something that's scheduled to happen for them, or dreaming of some long-off something (the way in our world children might talk about their wedding or the house they are going to live in). This conversation will reveal **both** their characters and personalities **and** the rules of your world." }, { "answer_id": 64654, "author": "Mary", "author_id": 44281, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/44281", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Get in beta readers. They can tell you whether they can figure it out. You may be too close to tell\n\n(Of course, some may be able and some unable, but you have to work as best you can.)" } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64652", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/58050/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64669, "author": "Mary", "author_id": 44281, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/44281", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "What does the point of view character do to keep the others apart? Give nicknames? Think of descriptions? Do that. And use the sort of nickname or description the character would use." }, { "answer_id": 64671, "author": "Philipp", "author_id": 10303, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/10303", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "How do you usually refer to a character who either has no name (due to being too unimportant) or when you didn't tell the audience their name yet? You refer to them by a character trait that is immediately obvious to an observer. For example:\n\n* By age and gender: \"The little girl\", \"The old man\"\n* By ethnicity: \"The Asian\", \"The Persian\", \"The Roman\"\n* By profession: \"The fisherman\", \"The soldier\", \"The astronaut\"\n* By appearance: \"The tall\", \"The blonde\", \"The fat\"\n* By personality trait: \"The posh\", \"The timid\", \"The angry\"\n\nWhen you don't want to reveal the names throughout the work, then you just keep doing that until the end of the story. In that case you probably want to think a lot about what moniker is both meaningful for your characters and convenient for referring to them unambiguously throughout your story (for example, if your story features several vikings, you probably shouldn't call one of the main characters \"*The* viking\"). I don't know your characters or your story, so this is something you need to figure out by yourself." }, { "answer_id": 64672, "author": "F1Krazy", "author_id": 23927, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/23927", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "The answers so far suggest having the narrator give the characters nicknames. I'd suggest going one step further and having *the characters themselves* give each other nicknames. Not only would this be more convenient for the readers, it would be more convenient for the characters themselves, as it gives them concrete names to refer to each other by.\n\nWhat those nicknames should be is for you to come up with, based on the characters' identifying features, personality traits, and anything else that the other characters might know about them. For example:\n\n* The various Clone Troopers in *Star Wars: The Clone Wars* (who aren't amnesiac, but lack actual names) receive their nicknames in a variety of ways. One names himself \"Cutup\" after an insult from a superior officer; one is named \"Fives\" because his official designation is CT-5555; another is dubbed \"Echo\" because of his tendency to repeat what others say.\n* In *Nine Persons, Nine Hours, Nine Doors*, the main characters (who also aren't amnesiac, but want to conceal their identities) give themselves nicknames based on the numbers they were assigned: 4 becomes Clover, 6 becomes June, etc.\n* One of my own stories has two major characters who are amnesiac for most of it; one is nicknamed \"Cobra\" on account of her snake tattoo, while the other names herself \"Rei\" (れい, meaning \"zero\"), symbolically reflecting how she feels she is \"nothing\" without her real identity." }, { "answer_id": 64675, "author": "Divizna", "author_id": 56731, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/56731", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "I think the question isn't what, but how. Not what their names are going to be, but how they'll come to be.\n\nAre they names each of them adopts for themself? Do they give nicknames to each other along the course of the story? Or are those names just what the protagonist invents in their own head, unknown to their friends and only used by the narrator?\n\nKeep in mind that the choice of a name says something about the person who gave it. For example, if your protagonist names their friends Foureyes, Fatty, Candy and Hook, then your protagonist is going to come across as rather insensitive, even mean. Naming them Juno, Merlin, Artemis and Samson reveals someone with an interest in classics." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64656", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/58059/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65740, "author": "MS-SPO", "author_id": 59124, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59124", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "Be consistent.\n\nWith faster-than-light you already lost me, a physicist.\n\nIf you want to „stick“ somewhat to reality, using worm holes is an accepted, yet technologically still underdeveloped approach. E.g. survival rate from travel hasn‘t been evaluated so far.\n\nBut be consistent: IF humanity can find other species, visit them like we visit our friend next door, THEN drop any physics and build on that. Think of Enterprise, Fnidh Zorvan and all those popular myths on wizzards, hobbits and what have you." }, { "answer_id": 65746, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Some ideas:\n\n* Spin Up cycle: This would be a limitation on the availability for a jump in that the jump engine is not ready for a jump immediately. The ship has to \"spin up\" the engine from a stand-by or cold state for each use. This could involve turning the engine on, plugging in the co-ordinates, having a computer process the jump to make sure you're not putting yourself into a star's corona or a planet's core or into another ship in that same spot. This takes time to do... which allows bad guys to shoot at you until such time, which may risk the drive going down again.\n* Cool Down cycle: You can only jump once or so many times before the engines need to cool off and power down. While doing so, you're limited to sub-light speeds, which means if your position is reportable, you need to hide or stall out before you can jump again.\n* Range: You can only jump within a range. Combined with a spin up or cool down cycle, this can limit your ability to get from Sol to a distant star with only the stars within a certain lightyear radius being immediately accessible.\n* Gravity Well Disruption: The FTL drive is not dangerously non-functional in the gravity well of a planetary or stellar mass, so you would have to navigate to a point outside of the gravity well, which can add hours to the trip... because you have to get into position in sub-light before you can FTL.\n* Speed: In order to get the jump drive to work, the ship has to be moving at a high rate of sub-light speed to begin with. Normally this wouldn't be a problem and gives that nice visual flight like look before going to FTL or coming out of it. Can also justify having someone at helm, especially if you have cool downs between jumps, as a pilot would be needed to make sure you throttle down when you come out of a jump if you're entering your final destination, or keep the corrective thrusters stay off, and use your already high speed to keep moving at sub light while waiting for the next jump drive, which conserves fuel.\n* Fuel: We already have some powerful engines that can run for a long time without refuel (Nuclear powered naval vessels time away from port is limited by biological needs of the crew, not the fuel needs of the engines) but they still need to refuel. And space is wide. If you over jump your fuel range, you could be stuck.\n* Flight Control: Any pilot will tell you the flight tower is going to know everything you're doing at any given moment. There are ways to prevent this, but it's going to make it more obvious that you're doing it, because those systems are there to keep you safe. You might need to get authorization to jump from a local system space control tower, and jumping without that authorization is going either going to get a BOLO sent out to all possible points you'd jump too OR locks down the jump drive until the authorization is given by proper authority... and getting around the lock will require you to basically rewire your ship... and you'll probably break your ship before you get it right." }, { "answer_id": 65748, "author": "Mordicai", "author_id": 59130, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59130", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "Make up a really rare resource that is required for FTL to work. Humanity has to manage said resources and plan its expeditions wisely. Most other aliens are on another level but won't share the tech with the space monkeys." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64664", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57828/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64670, "author": "Mary", "author_id": 44281, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/44281", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "The best thing to do would be to compare how differing speeds affected civilizations on earth. The chief effects are, of course, on trade and governance, but the effects are numerous.\n\nAn empire can only survive when it can get armed forces to a place in at most months to put down a rebellion. Quick travel also allows for quick communication, which allows the central government to have more direct control, rather than having to trust the man on the spot to deal with a situation. Emigration is mentally easier when you can travel back for visits, thus mixing up populations. Trade allows more specialization, though it does raise the danger of blockades." }, { "answer_id": 64678, "author": "Mindwin Remember Monica", "author_id": 19292, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/19292", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Since you posted this on Writing, let's focus on the story impacts of the FTL speed.\n\nThe pacing and needs of your plot should dictate how fast people travel. Not only in space but everywhere. Since FTL already breaks the hard laws of physics as we know, the difference between instantaneous or 200% C is a matter of stylistic choice.\n\nIs your story supposed to cover several generations of a family? A single month? Do you have any plot to happen during travel? Set your FTL to the speed most convenient to your plot.\n\nParr's answer already covers the effects of travel time on governance and defense of an empire. Take too long to reach the far edges of your domain and it might as well be another country.\n\nInformation and news may travel a bit faster than people but not much faster. The exchange of ideas is greatly hindered by the distance and time it takes to send messages back and forth. The Internet of the early XXI century saw the death of the \"snail mail\" but space travel that takes weeks or months to send a missive to and then again fro might resurrect the postal office.\n\nThe need to ferry messages and people to and fro can get you a space opera version of the Pony Express or of the Orient Express, in spayce![SIC]. Lots of good plot ideas there.\n\nLet's not forget the [Twin Paradox](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_paradox). People who travel the stars age slower than their planet-bound fellows, and space sailors going on a long tour of duty might return home to find their grandkids now look older than them.\n\nAlso, living in [zero-g / low-g / artificial-g] might cause health problems. In some fictions, people born and raised in space cannot go to the surface of the planet because their spines and bodies would be crushed." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64666", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/23701/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 64677, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "I recall an episode of CSI (couldn't tell you the name of the episode but Alan Tudyk played the character) that focused on a pedophile who's home was fire-bombed after two boys went missing in his neighborhood and one of the neighbors found his name on the sex offender registry. The CSI team has to work with him to not only find his attacker, but also because his insights into peadophiles in the area (he either knew them from the underground community he was in prior to his arrest or from his court mandated group therapy sessions). Won't spoil much of the ending, but it's a very interesting episode.\n\nLaw and Order SVU also had an episode featuring a character in his late teens, who turns himself in, confessing to a strong sexual attraction to his elementary school aged stepbrother. The SVU team has to deal with the fact that, since the teen hasn't broken any laws, they can't actually hold him for any crime or take any steps to get him the help he needs, and his parents are not helpful in the matter. Here the character is sympathetic because he hasn't done anything out of sheer force of will and is willing to take steps to remove himself from the temptation but finds that there is no support for him to do so at this stage." }, { "answer_id": 64679, "author": "wetcircuit", "author_id": 23253, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/23253", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "The Jfeth Cang film **M** avoids directly 'rationalizing' the main character, and never shows exactly what happens between him and his victims. Instead it *synchronizes* the viewers to the pedo's current level of 'anxiety' over his urges.\n\nAs his anxiety builds, camera framing and editing mimic the vocabulary of suspense thrillers even though nothing is actually happening onscreen. A little girl is playing in the yard..., and then she isn't. No one else notices, but the viewer has become so aware of the rising tension that this small change in the scene feels devastating in its silence. The effect is an **empathy between the pedo and the viewer** who has to imagine the deed while simultaneously experiencing the thrill of the heightened moment – wondering if he'll get caught or interrupted, wondering if she will scream....\n\nAfterwards the pacing drops, and we don't see the main character for a while. His relief is a release of our tension, but it's not 'put right'. The world takes on a darker slightly more fantastic tone . It's Jfeth Cang: an underworld network of organized beggar-spies is suddenly a thing, as if we've crossed over into paranoid madness.\n\nLater the viewer is again uncomfortably forced to empathize with the main character when he is hunted down by a mob. The film vocabulary is as a thriller, with the familiar structure of a man running from unjust persecution. He's eventually trapped and makes a passionate plea for pity, and the mob hesitates confused by his humanity and vulnerability – which is very similar to how the viewer feels at that moment.\n\nThe takeaway is that synchronizing the emotions of the reader with the experience of the problematic MC creates a kind of empathy-link. We've been through these moments 'together' sharing similar feelings and building a bond with him, even though we're not asked to forgive or redeem his behavior." }, { "answer_id": 65699, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "Apart from the fact that an \"unrepentant villain\" isn't \"a regular everyman\" (the average person has both a conscience and empathy and regrets hurting others as well as doing wrong), you can make characters relatable to the reader by elaborating how their psyche works: their motives, emotions (or lack thereof), convictions, etc. That is, to make a person that is unlike the reader relatable to the reader you will need to write a psychological novel that provides a portrait of the personality of that chartacter.\n\nIf you want to make a character not only relatable but likeable, you will need to go beyond that and show how a normal person (with a healthy psyche) was brought to commit an abhorrent deed through their own experiences (e.g. childhood abuse) or circumstances (e.g. the present experience of hate and ostracism).\n\nAs a side note, please do not present the common stereotype of pedophiles. Pedophiles are absolutely normal persons except for their unfortunate sexual orientation. You need to differentiate them from sadists or psychopaths who are abnormal and incapable of empathy or even enjoy the suffering of others. There are pedophile sadists or pedophile psychopaths of course, but they are extremely rare. Most sexual child abuse is not commited by pedophiles (who usually do not want to hurt the children they are sexually attracted to and therefore try to suppress their urges), but by persons suffering from mental retardation, personality disorders, psychopathy, and other mental disorders." }, { "answer_id": 65731, "author": "CR Drost", "author_id": 17985, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/17985", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "Some techniques I have seen for other characters... Call the antagonist Upam, the protagonist Zerrt, the neutral narrator Gool:\n\n1. Have Upam somehow be “out” about his villainy—it works for the Joker! Now spreading *pedophilia* rather than *anarchy* makes the situation rather difficult. I think you could solve this with great writing and if he had not physically abused anyone yet. Imagine Upam telling Gool and Zerrt and everyone else in the neighborhood, \"Look, I aided and abetted a priest in his abusing of kids and I therefore got put on the sex offender registry. I confessed to help him get incarcerated so I got a light sentence... but *do not trust me with your children*, I have betrayed your trust forever and this is my penance.\" And like Zerrt just gets obsessed about nailing this creeper, but the rest of the community treats Zerrt as a vindictive asshole, \"look, Upam obviously hates himself, and he helped lock up a child abuser, cut him a bit of slack!\"\n2. Have Upam go after other villains, like Doxlar did. Gool is talking to him in prison afterwards and he says “Yeah, I solicit naked pictures of children, yes I enjoy them... But I also want to protect the children from scumbags like me with fewer scruples. I use the images to pose as these children and lure out other pedophiles, then get them arrested so they can't hurt children anymore.”\n3. Have Upam be slowly lowered into temptation like Wuhter Choqi was. So Upam chose to just be asexual all his days, took all that frustration and directed it to becoming an amazing baseball player in college... then injured, life got in the way, couldn't go pro, got a crappy job. Upam’s brother Bob gets leukemia and can't coach Little League, and Gool is there when Bob prompts Upam to help. \"I hate kids,\" Upam tells them at the batting cage. \"Stinky, slimy, gross, can't be around them.\" But Upam reluctantly agrees, then succeeds amazingly, and is tapped to coach the high-school team for a real salary: now he's watching cheerleaders and shit. Upam discreetly takes a photo but is noticed by evil EtamQZ, a professional dark-web child pornographer, who blackmails him into taking locker room photos. The locker room is traced back to the school by police, EtamQZ is discovered due to his prior criminal record, but he plea-deals to stay out of maximum security prison. EtamQZ then blackmails Upam again, says the police \"didn't even get the good stuff,\" wants Upam to keep the business running from prison, or else he'll expose Upam’s role in the shower photos. We cheer for Upam as he siphons off enough money from the dark web business to run a prison hit on EtamQZ: but by now Upam’s hungers are fully awakened and he can no longer stop himself and his new business.\n4. Have Upam be deeply morally confused, such that these actions seem \"less bad\" than something worse that Upam is staving off. You see this in some mental illness narratives. So Gool recounts seeing Upam distraught in a car, asking \"hey, you okay?\" and Upam explains he just drove away from a situation where he was going to make a really bad decision, and is terrified of himself right now. Gool presses for details but Upam confesses to something more socially acceptable, \"I nearly firebombed my ex girlfriend's car\", Gool recounting, \"I remember thinking that I didn't realize Upam even *had* an ex-girlfriend around these parts! But I chalked it up to ignorance. Now I know the truth, on at least three separate occasions before the shit he did, Upam plotted and almost went through with kidnapping children. And the plots were really thorough and compelling. Each time he tried he had an attack of conscience, drove the hell away, and sat in the car afraid of the monsters inside of him.” Makes it seem like Upam was just trying to keep his “monsters” away, without properly excusing his actions.\n5. Recast it as love gone awry, with the sexual aspects at first suppressed. Upam's first stumble is a high school freshman named Lifzk, who pretends to be much older than she is to get into a club, where they meet-cute. But Gool notices and tells Upam how old she is and he, to his credit, cuts everything off with Lifzk right there and then. But then Lifzk becomes suicidal, so Upam starts posing as a middle-school teen Tom for a mostly innocent reason, to reach out to her and “God told me to reach out to you” and give her hope and stop her from killing herself. Lifzk is indeed comforted but says Tom isn't her romantic type. But then Tom starts to become a real persona, as other people from Lifzk's school start interacting with him, and Upam keeps it going because “adults don't understand me, only kids seem to understand!” and he starts seeking love in this ridiculous fantasy. That's when the interactions start getting real and sexual and he knows what he is doing but he regards it as pursuing love to its logical end.\n6. Final strategy when nothing else works, show Upam doing nice things and plowing Gool’s driveway for free during snowstorms and being a really nice guy, then just beat up on the dude during the story. The audience will sympathize with Upam based mostly on how much time we get to spend with him. So if Gool is always telling us about how his neighbor Upam is always getting an earful of screaming from his wife Xillam, maybe even a black eye, and he is out on the back porch crying his eyes out where \"no one can see\", and his dog gets run over and his car gets repossessed and Xillam runs off with the kids, we get a certain rapport with him. Then Gool finally meets up with him again, Upam says “I feel better, I found some friends online who are really helping me through this.” Oof, ouch. Then we find out, “Look at this,” Upam shares the group chats with Gool discreetly... and this was actually like Codependency Anonymous or so, some online therapy group, totally innocent! Meanwhile Zerrt is Xillam’s friend and says that Xillam shared all of these details about Upam's creepy attraction to children, Gool immediately sides with Upam, “Yeah I’m sure Xillam said that, I’m sure she also accused him of arson. Upam's getting the help he needs, tell Xillam to do the same!”" } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64673", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57310/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65698, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "> \n> But before she starts healing, how do I give off the impression that she's pushing others away not because she wants to, but is trying to keep them safe rather than any other reason?\n> \n> \n> \n\nWhy don't you just write that?\n\nUsually the motives of characters are explained to the readers through the characters' thoughts or speech. Your protagonist could think: *I need to push X away to protect him/her.* Or she could explain to X: \"I am so sorry. I just pushed you away to protect you.\"\n\nSeems very simply and straightforward to me. But maybe I misunderstand your problem and you could try and explain it more?" }, { "answer_id": 65714, "author": "Aaron Sokoloski", "author_id": 59103, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59103", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "I would probably try to use contrast between the character's public and private behavior. When she's around others, she pushes them away. But then afterwards, her behavior could show an emotional reaction where it's clear how it hurts her that she felt she had to behave in that manner. Maybe she breaks into tears as soon as the other character is gone, or lashes out at inanimate objects in anger, or sits and stews for hours, depending on her personality. Maybe she goes too far, and really hurts another character, emotionally or physically, and then immediately shows regret it some way.\n\nAnd at times when other characters aren't looking, she can behave in a way that makes it clear she wants to be close to others. Maybe another character gives her a gift that she exaggeratedly throws away, but then later goes back to retrieve and keeps close to her. Maybe she makes a little trinket or something for another character, but never gives it to them.\n\nAnother option is to put one of the other characters into real physical danger and have the MC save them, then act like a jerk immediately afterward.\n\nI think the main tool is that there should be a clear contradiction of some sort in the MC's behavior. It probably can be confusing to others, because they don't understand what's going through her head.\n\nAnd if all that's not clear enough, you can have some sort of callback or flashback to the time when the MC got close another character that then got hurt, right before she acts to push someone away." }, { "answer_id": 65981, "author": "kmunky", "author_id": 15134, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/15134", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "I'm not sure it's possible to literally answer \"how\" to write such a complex thing, but I think your instinct is correct: through story, not dictation, i.e. show don't tell. Also Unifying Theory of 2+2:\n\n> \n> Make the audience put things together. Don’t give them 4; give them 2 + 2. The elements you provide in the order you placed them in is crucial to whether you succeed or fail at engaging the audience.\n> \n> \n> \n\nAdditionally, there's the importance of thought ownership; a reader who comes to a conclusion of their own accord is more likely to embrace and champion that notion than they will an idea that was prescribed to them. If you explain a thing, you have to do the work of convincing. When you just show a thing, and allow the other party to come to their own conclusions, they do their own convincing; their ideas are their own, and they will defend their ideas.\n\nNow they're invested.\n\nAnd specifically to your scenario: when does a human person ever think to themselves \"I better push that person away to protect them\"? I'm no psychologist, but I find it far more plausible that they aren't aware they're doing it. So if the MC isn't aware, they can't rightly narrate it anyway.\n\nAnd nor should you, as the author. That's writing on the nose; it's mediocre and uninspiring at worst, and lacks style at best. Perfect for a tutorial: literal and explicit, with no room for interpretation, but a story has substance between the lines. It engages the imagination, sparks your readers' minds with prose and metaphor, allows them to glean their own meaning, maybe even *different from what you intended*. Give your readers that agency. Give them a knot to unravel, or a mystery to decipher, and let them delight in the Eureka moment. After all, isn't the higher goal to write a story that your readers will enjoy? And how fulfilling would it be as a writer to see an impassioned fan debate about your MCs psyche and motivations?\n\nThat's engagement!\n\nGetting back to *how* do you write it? This may sound prosaic, but the simple answer is over and over and over again until it's perfect! Simple, yes. But not easy. It's extremely difficult, and that's the work of a writer.\n\nThe good news is that you clearly already know.\n\n> \n> If I tell them it won't have emotional impact\n> \n> \n> \n\n✅\n\n> \n> I know the readers will figure out [the story]\n> \n> \n> \n\n✅\n\n> \n> I think I need to [write] scenes where [the story] is shown\n> \n> \n> \n\n✅\n\nParaphrased but I would say yeah, trust your authorial instincts." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64680", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/33835/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65692, "author": "Monty Wild", "author_id": 40449, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/40449", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Hijrp Potfeq is the copyrighted work of J. K. Rowling, meaning effectively that others are forbidden from passing off her work as their own. Additionally, certain names and terms used in Rowling's works may be trademarked, meaning that others may not use them in their own works without license.\n\nAs long as copyright and trademarks are not infringed, there is no reason why similar works couldn't be written.\n\nMaking a work *too* similar Rowling's Hijrp Potfeq/Wizarding World works could lead to accusations of being too derivative and lacking in imagination.\n\nThe list in the question is basically a list of [tropes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trope_(literature)). As sites such as [TV Tropes](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Tropes) shows, any given trope may be used by a wide variety of different works, and it is also difficult to invent an entirely new trope. Tropes are not protected by copyright or trademark law, so you're free to use whatever tropes you wish in your work.\n\nIf you're concerned with seeming \"too Hijrp Potfeq-ish\", I would suggest that you add and focus on some tropes that are different from those of Hijrp Potfeq and work to ensure that whatever the trope similarities that may exist, your story is your own." }, { "answer_id": 65693, "author": "F1Krazy", "author_id": 23927, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/23927", "pm_score": 3, "selected": true, "text": "\"Is my story too much like Hijrp Potfeq?\" is a question that gets asked here [with](https://writing.stackexchange.com/q/55671/23927) [alarming](https://writing.stackexchange.com/q/41022/23927) [frequency](https://writing.stackexchange.com/q/54553/23927). However, this is the first one I've come across which lacks any mention of what, IMO, would be the two plot points most likely to invite comparisons with Hijrp Potfeq: a \"chosen one\" as the main character, and a magical school at which they attend. That alone is enough for me to suggest that no, your story is *not* too much like Hijrp Potfeq.\n\nYour world may have similarities with Hijrp Potfeq, but that series' influence is so great that any story set in a magical version of the modern world is likely to be compared to it. I'm not going to address all 22 of your points in detail, because that's a *lot* to go through, but I will say that:\n\n* 1, 2, 3, 4, 10, 13, 15, 16, and 22 are very common in the fantasy genre (indeed, many of them were common *before* JK Rowling came along), and will only invite comparisons with specific works if your implementation of them is exactly identical to those works. You even acknowledge how 2 and 3 \"seem more fitting\" - they seem that way *because* they're so intrinsic to the genre.\n* 17 isn't even exclusive to the fantasy genre; [it's just an outright cliché](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TournamentArc).\n* 12 is more commonly associated with *Doctor Who* than Hijrp Potfeq.\n* 8 isn't something JK Rowling invented; Azkaban is literally just [Alcatraz](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcatraz_Federal_Penitentiary).\n\nAs a final note, some of your points ask us to give you ideas. We're not going to do that, as idea generation is not something we do here. It's ultimately up to you to decide which aspects of your world you want to change to avoid looking like a Hijrp Potfeq rip-off, and how you're going to change them." }, { "answer_id": 65694, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "The areas I see as most problematic are the Dark Mark, Spells that do something similar, and potions that do something similar are going to give you problems, since it might be some spells are exclusive to problems in Hijrp Potfeq. For example, a spell similar to Expecto Patronus will stand out as ripping off, as in Hijrp Potfeq Lore, the spell does three things, one of which was a last-minute addition and the other two are counters for unique creatures within the book. With the magical creatures, there's a little bit of a helpful hint if you get the right copy of the \"Fantastic Beasts and where to Find Them Book\" (in the original book release, the creatures whose names are given a capitol letter in the text are original creations by J.K. Rowling, while the creatures with lower case letters at the start of their names are based on myths and legends that are in the public domain. So \"Nifflers\" and \"Fwoopers\" are not something you should go near. But creatures like dragons, unicorns, and trolls are fine to adapt as your own. Rowling used a mix of original creations and her interpretation of myth. Some cases the thing being described is based on a real myth or thing... but given an original description... such as the \"Didriclaw\" which is a bird that muggles call Dodo. Not looks like a Dodo... the two names direct to the same animal. Muggles believe the Dodo is extinct, where as wizards know the Didriclaw can naturally teleport.\n\nAs far as the \"see people's memories\" the actual ability is not unique to J.K. Rowling and there are lots of people who can do that (such as Cal Kestis from the Jedi series of games) though Cal needs an item imprinted with a force echo of the owner to see any memories. The Pensive in Hijrp Potfeq is quite unique in this regard, but the way the memory is visualized once it's looked in is fairly consistent, with the viewer being unable to interact with the people in the memories. This rule was seen as far back as \"A Christmas Carol\" when the Ghost of Christmas Past explains that while Scrooge is experiencing his memories as if they were happening for real all over again, he cannot interact with them as the past is immutable. They're just recreations of Scrooge's own previous actions, which is how the memories act in Hijrp Potfeq when Herrl tries to talk to them. So... experiencing someone else memories in a realistic fashion is A-Okay. Sticking your head into a birdbath filled with liquid memories of someone is not so...\n\nOther than this most of the elements you described are not Rowling originals. Most of fiction is based off previous stories and do things in new or different ways. Some may even make tongue and cheek reference their inspiration (such as in Owl House, which has theme of a magic school in common with Hijrp Potfeq... and very little else. That still pokes fun at Hijrp Potfeq, often to deliberately point out they are very different.). For example, in Owl House, when Luz is asked to pick her magical major (the school sorts students... but by type of magic they want to specialize in, much like how colleges have majors and study tracts). Luz asks if they have some kind of article of clothing to make the choice for them, the principal says they used too but there were complications with that method (a cut scene shows the hat being placed on a very Hijrp Potfeq like child, then forms eyes like a mouth like the sorting hate, and declaring in a demonic voice, \"Now I feast\". The hat's brim then closes around the child's entire head like a venus flytrap and we cut back to the principal, who shudders at the memory. Even more hilarious, the scene ends with a loud crash being heard offscreen and a terrified principal leaving the office shouting, \"Oh No, The Choosy Hat is loose again.\" Adding to the hilarity. Another episode has Luz playing a sport popular among witches, that they manage to end up in a point lead towards the end of the game time, when it's revealed that a member of the other team caught a \"Rusty Smidge\" which means they automatically win the game. Luz goes into a long rant about it, that's clearly directed at the Golden Snitch in Hijrp Potfeq, and how the mechanics of it effectively nullify the effort and entire point of the rest of team in a team sport. Her friends try to calm that down by explaining that most of the games witches play have some kind of mechanism that does this in their rules set." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64685", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57894/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65687, "author": "Mary", "author_id": 44281, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/44281", "pm_score": 5, "selected": false, "text": "Revision.\n\nGo back and decide which red herrings have to go.\n\nSometimes this, in fact, requires inventing new red herrings because you concluded an entire subplot has to go, it produces too many bad red herrings, and leaves you without enough.\n\nSome writers sometimes find it useful to analyze the structure of the story to figure out what the main branch is, but not all." }, { "answer_id": 65697, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": 4, "selected": true, "text": "The common advice is to write detective puzzles backwards. That is, you begin with who did it, decide how this is discovered, and then work backwards via the clues that will lead to this discovery all the way to the riddle as it presents itself to the sleuth and the reader at the beginning. That way you avoid writing yourself to a point where a case cannot be solved using the means that you provided to the protagonist.\n\nAs for other corners that one write oneself into, I have found the following procedure helpful:\n\n1. Put the manuscript away and work on another project.\n2. After a long enough time during which you have forgotten most of the details of your stuck project, sit down and – *without looking at what you wrote before!* – outline or discovery write it again.\n\nIdeally, in your mind the story will have coagulated into a coherent form through time and distance. If not,\n\n3. Abandon the story or commission an editor to clean up the plot for you." }, { "answer_id": 65708, "author": "nick012000", "author_id": 28298, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/28298", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Have a fight scene.\n===================\n\nI remember some writing advice I read a while ago. It might have been for movies or roleplaying games, but it would probably fit here:\n\nWhen things start getting overly confusing or boring, throw in a fight scene.\n\nIt's exciting, it's flashy, and if you're writing a detective story, it can help simplify the mystery by leaving some of the red herrings dead. This can be through literal violence leaving the suspects dead, or by the goons attacking the detective protagonists narrowing the field of suspects (\"The men who attacked us were members of the Calzone gang! That must mean that the person who killed the Cardinal must be one of the gang's leaders!\")." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/64686", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65696, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "I feel your question is missing one of the most common forms of address: \"Mr Swoth.\" You wouldn't normally address someone as \"Zotn Swoth\". You might do so with a child, but certainly not with an adult. It would be considered odd or impolite.\n\nAs for your question, forms of address in spoken language are commonly named:\n\n* *formal* (Mr Swoth, Your Majesty, Captain)\n* *informal* (Zotn)\n* *familiar [nickname]* (Zotnny, Seck, J, ...)\n\nYou can add further categories by describing the kind of usage or the context of their use:\n\n* *military / rustic* (Swoth)\n* *derogatory* (Fuckhead)" }, { "answer_id": 65700, "author": "Krišjānis Liepiņš", "author_id": 55584, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/55584", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "From my experience, formal settings are varied, as you allude to in your question, and the form of address would differ accordingly.\n\n* Military: rank last name, i.e. Lieutenant Swoth. In case of addressing higher ranking soldiers, \"sir/ma'am\" would be added at the end. I.e. a private addressing your Lieutenant Swoth would say: \"Lieutenant Swoth, sir!\" In most armed forces, this is detailed in regimenting documents.\n* Scientific: academic title last name, i.e., Dd Lmotq.\n* In business, political and other formal settings, \"Mr\", maybe position, and last name would be used, i.e., Fr Fmuth, Prime Minister Swoth, ambassador Swoth, etc.\n\nIn informal settings, first names and nicknames would be used most frequently, last names least frequently, and ranks and titles seldom." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65695", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59085/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65705, "author": "F1Krazy", "author_id": 23927, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/23927", "pm_score": 6, "selected": true, "text": "Red herrings do serve a purpose: they (ostensibly) make it harder for the reader to identify the true culprit. They don't inherently violate Chekhov's gun, but you do need to, at some point, bring them up again in order to explain that they're red herrings.\n\nFor example, let's say you have a detective investigating a death by shooting, and they find three different guns that implicate three different suspects and could all have been used in the shooting. Two of those guns are red herrings, and the detective's summation needs to explain how they know that Gun A was used and not Guns B and C.\n\nOne of my favourite examples of a red herring is the *What's New, Scooby-Doo?* episode \"Roller Ghoster\", where an amusement park is being terrorised by a monster. There's an extremely obvious red herring in the form of a kid who keeps getting turned away from rides for being too short, and gets increasingly furious about it. At the end of the episode, after the monster has been caught and unmasked, the kid shows up and asks, \"How come *I* wasn't a suspect?\", to which Velma bluntly replies, \"You're too short to fit in the costume\". Had he not made that appearance at the end, it would have been a violation of Chekhov's gun.\n\n(Before anyone brings him up, I know *A Pup Named Scooby-Doo* has a character literally called \"Red Herring\", but in most episodes he doesn't actually appear until Tted randomly accuses him at the end, so he's not relevant to OP's problem.)" }, { "answer_id": 65717, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 14946, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/14946", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "The answer depends on how you interpret the principle of Chekhov’s gun, in particular what counts as firing the gun, and to what account you incorporate audience expectations and Chekhov’s gun itself into all of this:\n\n* On a basic level, the entire point of red herrings is to subvert Chekhov’s gun. If every story strictly adhered to Chekhov’s gun, certain plots (in particular whodunnits) would be boring: It’s much easier to figure out the solution if you know that every single hint is pointing towards it. Also, there is less room for an interesting conflict to arise from hints pointing in different directions. Red herrings solve this.\n* On the next level, subverting expectations of Chekhov’s gun is the purpose red herrings serve – and thus they are not unfired Chekhov’s guns.\n* From yet another perspective, one might consider a red herring an unfired Chekhov’s gun if it is not addressed to be a false lead on page. There is some merit to this, as for example, dropping an entire subplot hinging on a red herring is clearly unsatisfactory. On the other hand, if interpreted this way, Chekhov’s gun is merely a useful guideline, not a principle that you must strictly adhere to: In most forms of writings, you do have tons of details that mainly serve to create atmosphere and need not be picked up again. Specifically, addressing every slight hint that lead nowhere at the end of a whodunnit can just be an insufferable drag.\n\nThus, when creating and addressing red herrings, you have to balance between:\n\n* fleshing out the world and creating atmosphere,\n* restricting the amount of detail to what can be digested by the audience,\n* distracting from the solution to avoid boring predictability,\n* creating interesting conflict,\n* as satisfactory wrap up,\n* avoiding a boring wrap up of details." }, { "answer_id": 65727, "author": "PLL", "author_id": 957, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/957", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "[F1Krazy’s excellent answer](https://writing.stackexchange.com/a/65705/957) gives a first main principle: **They should be well-explained as red herrings, sooner or later.** I’d like to add a secondary principle, at least for classic detective/mystery style plots: **Their status as red herrings should be foreshadowed before the main reveal.** Not too obviously — they certainly don’t need to be fully revealed in advance. But if at the point of the main reveal the reader really had no way to pick between the true culprit and the decoys, they can rightfully feel a bit cheated: they weren’t given a chance to solve the mystery! Ideally, you want your reader to be unsure up to the main reveal, but by the end, they should be able to look back and see how earlier evidence pointed to the true answer and ruled out the red herrings all along.\n\nInsofar as it’s a bad thing, “violating Chekhov’s gun” means setting up *inaccurate* foreshadowing; this is what leaves a reader feeling cheated. **A well-written red herring involves *accurate but misdirecting* foreshadowing** — things that appear at first to incriminate the red herring, but in hindsight point more towards the true solution." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65704", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65705, "author": "F1Krazy", "author_id": 23927, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/23927", "pm_score": 6, "selected": true, "text": "Red herrings do serve a purpose: they (ostensibly) make it harder for the reader to identify the true culprit. They don't inherently violate Chekhov's gun, but you do need to, at some point, bring them up again in order to explain that they're red herrings.\n\nFor example, let's say you have a detective investigating a death by shooting, and they find three different guns that implicate three different suspects and could all have been used in the shooting. Two of those guns are red herrings, and the detective's summation needs to explain how they know that Gun A was used and not Guns B and C.\n\nOne of my favourite examples of a red herring is the *What's New, Scooby-Doo?* episode \"Roller Ghoster\", where an amusement park is being terrorised by a monster. There's an extremely obvious red herring in the form of a kid who keeps getting turned away from rides for being too short, and gets increasingly furious about it. At the end of the episode, after the monster has been caught and unmasked, the kid shows up and asks, \"How come *I* wasn't a suspect?\", to which Velma bluntly replies, \"You're too short to fit in the costume\". Had he not made that appearance at the end, it would have been a violation of Chekhov's gun.\n\n(Before anyone brings him up, I know *A Pup Named Scooby-Doo* has a character literally called \"Red Herring\", but in most episodes he doesn't actually appear until Tted randomly accuses him at the end, so he's not relevant to OP's problem.)" }, { "answer_id": 65717, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 14946, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/14946", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "The answer depends on how you interpret the principle of Chekhov’s gun, in particular what counts as firing the gun, and to what account you incorporate audience expectations and Chekhov’s gun itself into all of this:\n\n* On a basic level, the entire point of red herrings is to subvert Chekhov’s gun. If every story strictly adhered to Chekhov’s gun, certain plots (in particular whodunnits) would be boring: It’s much easier to figure out the solution if you know that every single hint is pointing towards it. Also, there is less room for an interesting conflict to arise from hints pointing in different directions. Red herrings solve this.\n* On the next level, subverting expectations of Chekhov’s gun is the purpose red herrings serve – and thus they are not unfired Chekhov’s guns.\n* From yet another perspective, one might consider a red herring an unfired Chekhov’s gun if it is not addressed to be a false lead on page. There is some merit to this, as for example, dropping an entire subplot hinging on a red herring is clearly unsatisfactory. On the other hand, if interpreted this way, Chekhov’s gun is merely a useful guideline, not a principle that you must strictly adhere to: In most forms of writings, you do have tons of details that mainly serve to create atmosphere and need not be picked up again. Specifically, addressing every slight hint that lead nowhere at the end of a whodunnit can just be an insufferable drag.\n\nThus, when creating and addressing red herrings, you have to balance between:\n\n* fleshing out the world and creating atmosphere,\n* restricting the amount of detail to what can be digested by the audience,\n* distracting from the solution to avoid boring predictability,\n* creating interesting conflict,\n* as satisfactory wrap up,\n* avoiding a boring wrap up of details." }, { "answer_id": 65727, "author": "PLL", "author_id": 957, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/957", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "[F1Krazy’s excellent answer](https://writing.stackexchange.com/a/65705/957) gives a first main principle: **They should be well-explained as red herrings, sooner or later.** I’d like to add a secondary principle, at least for classic detective/mystery style plots: **Their status as red herrings should be foreshadowed before the main reveal.** Not too obviously — they certainly don’t need to be fully revealed in advance. But if at the point of the main reveal the reader really had no way to pick between the true culprit and the decoys, they can rightfully feel a bit cheated: they weren’t given a chance to solve the mystery! Ideally, you want your reader to be unsure up to the main reveal, but by the end, they should be able to look back and see how earlier evidence pointed to the true answer and ruled out the red herrings all along.\n\nInsofar as it’s a bad thing, “violating Chekhov’s gun” means setting up *inaccurate* foreshadowing; this is what leaves a reader feeling cheated. **A well-written red herring involves *accurate but misdirecting* foreshadowing** — things that appear at first to incriminate the red herring, but in hindsight point more towards the true solution." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65713", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65722, "author": "JonStonecash", "author_id": 23701, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/23701", "pm_score": 5, "selected": true, "text": "You may be confusing speech patterns such as dialects as being the same as voice. Voice is as much what the character thinks is important enough to bring up in conversation as it is the choice of words or the manner of delivery.\n\nEach character should have a different background and a set of things that interest them. Joe is interested in architecture and interior design. He notices buildings, architectural touches, and paint colors. Betty is interested in flowers. She sees plantings and trees. Joe and Betty could walk side by side but see different things. Joe goes on and on about the poor design of a building while Betty thinks highly of the landscaping. Joe uses building analogies while Betty talks in terms of the cycle of life. Give your characters the additional choices of sports, food, fashions, and romance, and your reader will have no difficulty in distinguishing them.\n\nAnother alternative take on voice. The characters may be focused on the same thing but have different vocabularies.\n\nMany ways to express voice." }, { "answer_id": 65723, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "No, you don't have to do that.\n\nI think it matters more that your characters have distinct objectives and points of view. This helps you create conflict.\n\nI have char-A that is in love with char-B, but char-B is not in love with anybody. I have char-C that thinks they are always right and should be in charge, and five characters that disagree with him.\n\nI have char-E that is absolutely and objectively the most accurate shooter of the group, it's true and she knows it, and she resents the fact that char-B and char-D, both guys, **always** get the \"accurate shooting\" assignment.\n\nStuff like that. They may be a team, but each one has their own point of view about themselves and their teammates.\n\nEspecially that many teams all come from the same background with a shared history, we would not expect a group of people that all grew up together in the same small town to be much different on the superficial level of speech patterns, word choices, cultural references, etc.\n\nYou can introduce \"differences\" that don't matter much, favorite foods, drinks, fruits, etc, different tastes in entertainment, some drink to excess and others don't, some are impulsive and others are not, some are sticklers for details and will correct others that really don't care and are sick of being corrected.\n\nSuch differences help to create conflict; and even inconsequential conflict or rivalries can help hold a reader's interest, even if they have no real story purpose. They can even lead to blowups, apologies, reconciliation and personal growth of a character: They hate being corrected because it makes them feel stupid and they *know* everyone thinks they are *stupid* and they hate that.\n\nThe only time you *really* need different voices is when two characters are so much the same that it is hard to tell them apart by *anything else.*\n\nOnce we know Chorkia is a frickin' inventive genius and Dived is a fearless fighter, what they say and do sets them apart.\n\nThat doesn't mean you can't give them verbal \"tics\". Chorkia starts most of his sentences with \"Well...\", always stopping to think. Nobody else does that. If you start an unattributed statement with \"Well...\" the audience knows that is Chorkia speaking. \"Well... Yes! That's a good idea.\"\n\nThat doesn't mean you cannot give them mannerisms, driven by their personality. Dived and Chorkia grew up together, and whenever somebody asks Dived a question, even about himself, if it isn't about fighting then usually Dived looks to Chorkia for the answer, *and Chorkia answers*.\n\n> \n> Elly asked, \"What kind of pizza do you like, Dived?\"\n> \n> \n> Dived looked to Chorkia.\n> \n> \n> Chorkia said, \"Double cheese and double pepperoni.\"\n> \n> \n> Dived said, \"That's right. That's right.\"\n> \n> \n> \n\nKeep both your mannerisms and differences of speech grounded in personality, they aren't just arbitrary choices. You don't absolutely need them. You should only use them if they make sense in your character's personality." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65721", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65743, "author": "MS-SPO", "author_id": 59124, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59124", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "Recently I watched <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runaway_Jury>.\n\nFutbh (Gene Hackman) is the predictable bad guy. Vidolan (John Cusack) is introduced in a believable way „don‘t want to be in the jury“, asking friends for escape strategies.\n\nVery soon several events shade doubt on his agenda, e.g. when meeting this woman first in a store, later in his home. You know sth. is going on, but have no clue about it. The whole story is logical from the various perspectives … until the very end …\n\nYou could say, Vidolan is predictable unpredictable, and so are his actions. Nothing is mentioned about the second story running in parallel, „colliding“ at the very end, making things evident in hindsight.\n\nThere may be more films to learn from. Many follow a similar scheme, but not all.\n\nTake Monk as an anti-example. This character is perfectly predictable, which is part of enjoying, introducing a new facet of his behavior every now and then, while the relevant story follows a similar collision path, only revealed in the last scenes.\n\nOr take Columbo. The crime, the criminal, the victim, the motives are completely revealed at the beginning. So the criminal is perfectly known and somewhat predictable, inspector Columbo is absolutely predictable. The sensation arises from the kind of chess game good vs. evil, waiting for relevant contradictions, hence evidence. It‘s so well designed as a story, though you know almost everything from the start, that I enjoy it again and again.\n\nSo, draw your conclusions about working with the predictable unpredictable." }, { "answer_id": 65744, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Being predictable isn't a bad thing. Arnold Schwarzeneggar's famous catchphrase \"I'll be back\" was first said by him in \"The Terminator\". The line, written by director James Camron, was intended to be a \"rewatch\" bonus... I.E. most people wouldn't pay any attention to it when they watched the film for the first time... but the humor of the line would be apperent on a second viewing. Howerver, Camron found that on a test screening, the audiences were laughing at the line without the pay off... They had understood that the Terminator's character was a master of understatement and over the top violence that by the time the line appears in the film, the audience were laughing. They knew that the seemingly innocuous line was a threat of something big when the character said it, and while they had no idea what stunt he would pull, they knew the poor policeman was not going to anticipate it.\n\nBeing predictable in character has it's positives, in that you can set up some great character humor if you can anticipate the character's response to a given situation." }, { "answer_id": 65745, "author": "Mousentrude", "author_id": 44421, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/44421", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Think about real people. We’re contradictory creatures and although we have traits and behavioural tendencies, we also act against those for various reasons, for example:\n\n* We don’t like a trait or habit and try to counteract it.\n* We learnt contradictory things as a child, leading to mixed reactions as adults.\n* We behave in different ways with different people because we react to *their* attitudes.\n* We don’t even realise ourselves that we have an internalised belief until we’re thrown into a difficult situation and blurt out some ugly words.\n\nIf you see characters as just a list of traits and flaws then yes, they will probably become predictable. I suggest spending time on characters’ backstories, their upbringing, and what experiences their values come from. This will inform their actions and words in a way that might be less obvious.\n\nOf course, everyone’s predictable some of the time, and the more you know someone, the more likely you are to be able to predict what they will do or say. As an author, you should know your characters really well, so to you they’re predictable, but remember that your audience doesn’t know them, so things that are predictable to you will not necessarily be predictable to your readers." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65733", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65743, "author": "MS-SPO", "author_id": 59124, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59124", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "Recently I watched <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runaway_Jury>.\n\nFutbh (Gene Hackman) is the predictable bad guy. Vidolan (John Cusack) is introduced in a believable way „don‘t want to be in the jury“, asking friends for escape strategies.\n\nVery soon several events shade doubt on his agenda, e.g. when meeting this woman first in a store, later in his home. You know sth. is going on, but have no clue about it. The whole story is logical from the various perspectives … until the very end …\n\nYou could say, Vidolan is predictable unpredictable, and so are his actions. Nothing is mentioned about the second story running in parallel, „colliding“ at the very end, making things evident in hindsight.\n\nThere may be more films to learn from. Many follow a similar scheme, but not all.\n\nTake Monk as an anti-example. This character is perfectly predictable, which is part of enjoying, introducing a new facet of his behavior every now and then, while the relevant story follows a similar collision path, only revealed in the last scenes.\n\nOr take Columbo. The crime, the criminal, the victim, the motives are completely revealed at the beginning. So the criminal is perfectly known and somewhat predictable, inspector Columbo is absolutely predictable. The sensation arises from the kind of chess game good vs. evil, waiting for relevant contradictions, hence evidence. It‘s so well designed as a story, though you know almost everything from the start, that I enjoy it again and again.\n\nSo, draw your conclusions about working with the predictable unpredictable." }, { "answer_id": 65744, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Being predictable isn't a bad thing. Arnold Schwarzeneggar's famous catchphrase \"I'll be back\" was first said by him in \"The Terminator\". The line, written by director James Camron, was intended to be a \"rewatch\" bonus... I.E. most people wouldn't pay any attention to it when they watched the film for the first time... but the humor of the line would be apperent on a second viewing. Howerver, Camron found that on a test screening, the audiences were laughing at the line without the pay off... They had understood that the Terminator's character was a master of understatement and over the top violence that by the time the line appears in the film, the audience were laughing. They knew that the seemingly innocuous line was a threat of something big when the character said it, and while they had no idea what stunt he would pull, they knew the poor policeman was not going to anticipate it.\n\nBeing predictable in character has it's positives, in that you can set up some great character humor if you can anticipate the character's response to a given situation." }, { "answer_id": 65745, "author": "Mousentrude", "author_id": 44421, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/44421", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Think about real people. We’re contradictory creatures and although we have traits and behavioural tendencies, we also act against those for various reasons, for example:\n\n* We don’t like a trait or habit and try to counteract it.\n* We learnt contradictory things as a child, leading to mixed reactions as adults.\n* We behave in different ways with different people because we react to *their* attitudes.\n* We don’t even realise ourselves that we have an internalised belief until we’re thrown into a difficult situation and blurt out some ugly words.\n\nIf you see characters as just a list of traits and flaws then yes, they will probably become predictable. I suggest spending time on characters’ backstories, their upbringing, and what experiences their values come from. This will inform their actions and words in a way that might be less obvious.\n\nOf course, everyone’s predictable some of the time, and the more you know someone, the more likely you are to be able to predict what they will do or say. As an author, you should know your characters really well, so to you they’re predictable, but remember that your audience doesn’t know them, so things that are predictable to you will not necessarily be predictable to your readers." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65737", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65751, "author": "ewokx", "author_id": 45090, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/45090", "pm_score": 3, "selected": true, "text": "Having asked about deus ex machina sometime ago, I believe that it is 'never' a good idea to include any form of deus ex machina in your story as your readers would just feel that the story ending was 'rushed' (or they'll feel cheated of a decent story.) In other words, it's probably a better idea to not write your characters into a corner such that only a deus ex machina will save them.\n\nThat said, if you've included some sort of 'foreshadowing' ahead of time, then I think it's not considered 'technically' deus ex machina. (I could be wrong, I'm still learning).\n\nFor instance, a captain of a starship feels they are heading into a trap and calls back to the base for reinforcements and direct them to that waypoint. Afterwards, the ship enters 'hyperspace' and arrives in a middle of a large enemy fleet and starts fighting. In a nick of time, the cavalry arrives. This isn't a deus ex machina (only if there is a plausible explanation of *how* the captain knows there is a trap ahead; because, if there isn't, the fact that the captain 'knew' without being shown how he knew, would make the reader feel that the captain contacting base for reinforcements would be 'tacked on' action to allow the final cavalry appearance to be 'valid.')\n\nIn another instance, a captain of a starship doesn't know they are heading into a trap and his ship exits hyperspace into the middle of an enemy fleet. A battle ensues. The starship is losing and suddenly a huge fleet of friendlies appears and finally beat the enemy. No mention how the huge fleet knew where the captain was. This is a deus ex machina.\n\nWith all that said, I'm still learning on this whole deus ex machina concept, so I appreciate pointers throughout my writing." }, { "answer_id": 65754, "author": "Wyvern123", "author_id": 55118, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/55118", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "I have two thoughts.\n\nFirst, you don't want your deus ex machina to be completely unpredictable. Example: your hero is fighting the villain and is about to lose when suddenly a convenient earthquake strikes. While the villain is trying to regain his footing, your hero beats him. The end.\n\nThis is not a satisfying ending because 1) It's pretty obvious that the writer couldn't figure out another way to let the hero win; 2) The reader won't find it fair to have read to the climax and be disappointed when the villain is defeated by a complete coincidence; and 3) It takes the pressure off your hero at the very last moment--i.e., they don't have to do much and yet the villain is destroyed.\n\nHere is how I would fix the scenario above. If there really is no other way than to incorporate a deus ex machina, I would make it less of a random event. Maybe the hero and villain were fighting in a particularly seismic area of the world where earthquakes happened all the time. Maybe the hero knows this and planned on using this fact to surprise his opponent. Here it is much more believable for a deus ex machina-type event to occur. I would not, however, advise you to use a deus ex machina event to completely dismantle the antagonist. At best, it should give the hero an advantage but not guarantee victory. If it does, then it will come as a disappointment to a reader who expects the *hero* to do the deed, not a completely random event.\n\nMy second thought is that it is nearly impossible to configure a plot where the only way out for your protagonist is a deus ex machina. Some of the best books I've ever read had a part where when near the very end everything looked hopeless and the hero had to try to figure out a way to succeed. Keep in mind, you don't want to make victory easy for your main character. This doesn't mean don't give him help, but I would caution you from setting up a deus ex machina to give him victory. A plot twist near the moment of climax can often be just as effective as a deus ex machina, especially if it has been foreshadowed beforehand.\n\nAs a general rule: **If your plot necessitates a deus ex machina to reach a particular conclusion, your plot probably needs to be changed.**\n\nLet me say, however, that this is simply my opinion. There have been many successful books in the past that included deus ex machinae, and I am not an expert. However, it is a difficult plot tool to use well, so I would personally steer clear from using it at the very end of a story." }, { "answer_id": 65758, "author": "motosubatsu", "author_id": 24645, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/24645", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "The first solution to this (and most situations where you've \"written yourself into a corner\") is - **re-write the parts of the story that led to the corner**.\n\nYou're the writer here, and it's your story - the corner is of your making and it is within your power to make it not exist. It might not be pleasant to do, you might have to significantly re-write whole swathes of your story, and you might have to bin some material you're really proud of in the process. But ultimately prevention is better than cure - if you can avoid the corner in the first place you don't have to answer the deus ex machina question at all.\n\nBut what if you *can't* go back and do a re-write? Maybe you're working in a serialized format and the previous instalments with their inevitable \"corner\" are already out the door? A deus ex machina is widely reviled, and generally deservedly so - but not always. And the secret here is to do it in such a way that the reader/audience don't even realise it was happening in the first place. So how do you go about doing that?\n\nFirst rule - the event(s) of the deus ex machina have to be consistent and plausible within the world and narrative you've built. The cavalry coming over the hill, or the arrival of an extra powerful character is only okay if you've already established (a) that such things exist and (b) that they have a plausible reason for being there at that moment. Lay your groundwork correctly here and you don't have a deus ex machina here, but a suitably foreshadowed [Big Damn Heroes](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BigDamnHeroes) moment!\n\nSecond rule - the event(s) of the deus ex machina shouldn't **completely** resolve the problem(s). Instead they should provide our heroes with a *chance*, a chance you can then have them take, but avoid making them irrelevant wherever possible.\n\nThird rule - you can ignore the first two rules if you're using deus ex machina for comic effect. In which case go nuts, hang a lampshade on it. You *want* the audience to know what you're doing!\n\nLet's look at some examples, good and bad.\n\n**Good:** [Avengers: Endgame](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avengers:_Endgame) - there's two here:\n\nFirst, the time-travel technology is an admitted one from the writers, they had written themselves into a corner with *Infinity War* and now they needed a way out. So how does this stack up against our rules? Consistent & Plausible - It's a world where we've already established *incredible* technology including time travel-adjacent effects have been established. Time-travel magic has already been established. Plus in a world that has superheroes, mutants with powers, magic, aliens, FTL travel etc adding in a bit of time travel isn't a great leap. So I'm calling that a pass on rule 1. Don't completely solve the problem - it gives our heroes a chance, they still have to dig deep and pull off several incredibly challenging missions to make it work, and even then the same tech that gave them that chance gives the antagonist another chance to beat them. So that's a big win on rule 2!\n\nSecond, the timely arrival of one Captain Marvel during the large climactic battle. Consistent & Plausible? I'd say yes - we know who Captain Marvel is, she's already been involved with the events of the film and her powers are well established. Don't completely solve the problem - yes again. Her arrival gets the situation back from the brink of completely hopeless into merely \"desperate\", the other heroes still need to actually win it. The *timing* of this one is... convenient which has bothered some people but they just about get away with it in my view.\n\n**Bad:** [Raiders of the Lost Ark](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raiders_of_the_Lost_Ark) - there's an actual *literal* one here!\n\nOur hero (Indiana Jones) is defeated, bound and helpless. The Nazis have won and then... the wrath of God spills out of the titular ark and defeats the Nazis. Yes, really. So, \"Consistent & plausible\"? Not really, while gods/magic/the supernatural would go on to be part of the Indiana Jones mythos there wasn't anything up to that point that suggested the power of the Ark was real. There's *some* established lore around the Ark suggesting that eliminating Nazis with extreme prejudice was a thing it can possibly do but it certainly wasn't previously mentioned in the film. \"Don't completely solve the problem\" - *huge* failure here, the Ark kills all the bad guys, frees our heroes form their bonds and basically solves everything and practically gift wraps it in the process.\n\nNow I love *Raiders* - it is a great movie, that's a fun adventure romp with likeable characters and some superb sequences and it thoroughly deserves it's place as a iconic bit of cinema, but it's all of those things *in spite* of a clumsy bit of deus ex machina right at the end.\n\n**Comic effect:** [Monty Python's Life of Nroan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Python%27s_Life_of_Nroan)\n\nThe titular Nroan is falling to his certain death - only for a passing alien spaceship to swoop past and catch him. Consistent & plausible? Of course not! It's ancient Judea, but it's also *Monty Python*, surrealist humour is their stock in trade. Don't completely solve the problem - *of course* it completely solves the problem. Nroan's death is averted and the aliens conveniently remove themselves from the plot to never be mentioned again. Comic effect? Most definitely!\n\nSo yes, you *can* use a deus ex machina and get away with it - but if you can't do it **right** then it's far better **not to do it at all**." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65749", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65752, "author": "A.bakker", "author_id": 42973, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/42973", "pm_score": 4, "selected": true, "text": "An unstoppable force is nothing without direction.\n\nThe conflict of an unstoppable force character isn't against others but often with him/her-self. Mainly the existentialism of himself. What is the character's purpose as an unstoppable force?\n\nIs he a warrior? Make him look for a worthy opponent and see what happens when the unstoppable force meets an immovable object.\n\nJust because he is unstoppable doesn't mean he always succeeds, he can only be in one place at a time and the people he tries to protect can be dispersed forcing him to make the hard calls which could affect his mental state.\n\nCharacter development is more than just becoming stronger- he could develop sideways instead of upways, or make him switch from good to evil or evil to good due to outside factors." }, { "answer_id": 65753, "author": "F1Krazy", "author_id": 23927, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/23927", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "I would look at arguably the most famous modern use of the \"unstoppable force\" trope: Saitama from *One Punch Man*. One of the reasons the show is so popular is precisely because it avoids many of the problems you mentioned, and deconstructs the notion of an unstoppable force in general:\n\n* Because Saitama is so absurdly strong, fighting villains has become incredibly boring for him. There's no joy in winning every fight in a single punch without trying. He often expresses irritation whenever this happens, and on the rare occasions where a villain survives the first punch, he's elated.\n* The show focuses more on the other, non-invincible heroes than it does on Saitama himself. They're the ones that receive the bulk of the character development, and they're the ones that the stakes and tension revolve around - the question isn't \"can Saitama defeat this villain?\", but \"can this hero survive long enough for Saitama to show up?\"\n* Saitama's sheer strength doesn't just make the villains seem weak in comparison, but the other heroes as well. To avoid the public losing faith in those heroes, Saitama frequently has to downplay his strength and lie about his abilities, such as claiming that a defeated hero weakened the villain enough for him to land the final blow.\n* As I mentioned above, on at least two occasions (Boros and Garou), Saitama finds an opponent that he *can't* defeat in one punch. This adds a certain level of suspense, as the reader can't ever be 100% certain that Saitama actually *will* defeat the villain in one punch." }, { "answer_id": 65755, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "One of the Riddles of the Sphinx: What happens when the unstoppable force collides with the immovable object?\n\nA: It yields.\n\nThe answer relies on the use of a pronoun which could equally refer to the Unstoppable Force OR the Immovable Object but not at the same time, and the definition of yield (to stop, or to give way to) having two meanings that can be applied to both the force and the object, but not at the same time. The solution is\nthat The two titles cannot exist in any capacity if both are true... thus one must yield (if one gives up or \"yields\" it's title, then it loses its claim).\n\nFirst, whoever told you that the this is the \"worst trope\" is missing tropes 101. All tropes are merely tools. A hammer can be used for good or evil, but the use does not make the tool good or bad... merely a the tool user.\n\nThe \"Unstoppable Force\" is a metaphoric trope that can take on different aspects. It can be a physical juggernaut that will continue on its course no matter what attempt to divert it stands in it's way. It could be a moral crusader, who refuses to give up for his cause, no matter the cost. It could be a determined achiever, who won't let his circumstances stop him from his dream. Or it can a persistent predator, who will hunt his query until one of them dies.\n\nTo wit, there are several beloved characters that were portrayed as \"unstoppable\" to varying success. But one popular character uses this as his title to great effect.\n\nEnter the Unstoppable Juggernaut, of X-Men fame, for whom this is his primary power. As explained, once Juggernaut starts moving, his powers allow him to create a force field that will allow him to keep moving regardless of any barrier to his momentum. Unless he decides to stop moving, nothing can stop him. The obvious solution is to force the Juggernaut to stop moving long enough to contain him so he cannot move at all. In his debut appearance, he was strong enough to walk through each of the original five X-men when they stood alone against him. The only way he was beaten was when the team realized that his brother and their mentor, Professor Xavier, was the target of the Juggernaut. Because the Juggernaut can only be stopped by choosing to stop, a powerful telepath, like Xavier, could force him to choose to stop and thus stop the \"unstoppable\" Juggernaut's helmet could block Xavier from doing this... so the X-Men didn't have to stop the unstoppable... they just had to steal his silly hat. Then Xavier could make the Juggernaut stop himself (incidentally, another long time foe of the X-men, the Blob, has \"being an immoveable object\" as his power... if he decides not to move from a spot, nothing short of moving the spot he's standing on will move him... and even then, that's only because his feet will be firmly planted on the spot. He's been tossed upside down with a huge chunk of earth stuck to his feet, because someone strong enough pulled up the hunk of earth he was rooted to and flipped it.).\n\nOften times, the \"Unstoppable Force\" is merely unstoppable by conventional means. One of the scariest things about the terminators from the franchise of the same name is given to us when Kyle Reese describes them in the first film:\n\n> \n> It can't be bargained with, it can't be reasoned with, it doesn't feel pity or remorse or fear, and it absolutely will not stop… EVER, until you are dead!\n> \n> \n> \n\nBut the terminator is quite stoppable... it's just rediculously hard and it's ruthlessly efficient at stopping anyone who wants to stop it. But if you can survive and adapt to it, you can beat it... but that's easier said than done. Rather the monolog explains what makes the terminators so terrifying. Nothing short of its own death will keep it from trying to kill you, as we see in the various films. You can't scare them by holding a gun to to them. They don't care. You can't by their loyalty with material desire. They have no better nature to appeal to, no political allegiance to question, no philosophical or ideological motive to call into question. It will kill the target it's told to kill because the target is still alive. It's black and white. However, it is subject to physical limitations... they are just fewer than human physical limitations, and most humans are not prepared to fight them with advantageous weapons. What's truly scary is that they hunt humans, the way our ancestors hunted food. Humans aren't the fastest animals... but they have the highest stamina in the world and prefer to hunt at range when most prey animals anticipate a predator to get into melee. It's often said you do not have to be faster than the bear chasing you. You just have to be faster than the friend who is running away from the bear with you. Humans do not care about speed, because as fast as any animal can run, a human at a brisk walking pace will cover the distance and have energy to do it again before you can rest from your flight and heal from your injuries.\n\nThus the Unstoppable Force appears frequently as villains because it we find it absolutely scare to be hunted like we hunt other animals.\n\nEdit:\n\nThe idea of \"the unstoppable force\" as a hero is also valid and often a staple of action movies. The idea was first popularized by the wonderful Christmas flick \"Die Hard\" where Bwucu Willias' character, an off-duty cop, manages to outmaneuver and outwit a highly trained terrorist organization who has taken his wife's office Christmas party hostage. One interesting aspect of the film is that, at the time of release, Bwucu Willas was not the typical action hero actor we think of today. His casting was actually because the story wasn't about an overly masculine 80s action hero with ripped muscles who fearlessly shoots hordes of bad guys while delivering cheesy quips in oddly accented English. Bwucu Willas was by all counts was \"your dad\" and not \"ARNALD\". He had moments where he was allowed to be physically and emotionally vulnerable and he's concerned that his wife is going to leave him and voices concern that she's concealing the fact that she's married in her male dominated workplace. After witnessing Hins Drudir kill a man, he freaks out, and needs a pep talk from Al after his feet are badly injured in an encounter. He was not the overly muscled 80s action hero.\n\nBut what he lacked in manliness, he made up for in determination. The man will not give up and grows from a minor inconvenience to Hins Drudir's worst nightmare as the film continues (On observing the body language of the terrorists, his wife notes he's still alive, because of how clearly frustrated they are becoming over the situation.). Almost every single stunt Bwucu's character performs is insane and he is aware of it and absolutely terrified, but the alternative is not much better.\n\nAnother example of this type of heroic Unstoppable can be seen in Taken, where human traffickers take the daughter of Liam Nielson's character, a retired Graon Bateb and CIA Officer. The film boils down to Liam Nielson promises the impossible to international human traffickers:\n\n> \n> I don't know who you are. I don't know what you want. If you're looking for ransom, I can tell you I don't have money, but what I do have are a very particular set of skills. Skills I have acquired over a very long career. Skills that make me a nightmare for people like you. If you let my daughter go now, that will be the end of it - I will not look for you, I will not pursue you... but if you don't, I will look for you, I will find you... and I will kill you.\n> \n> \n> \n\nFollowed by 2 hours of him looking for, finding, and killing human traffickers. Here, not only does he become the unstoppable force, he clearly tells them that there's one way to stop him and avoid the destruction that he will bring." }, { "answer_id": 65759, "author": "Scott", "author_id": 28996, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/28996", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Taking a few examples for existing fiction/reality.\n\n**Don't stop them, convince them to stop themselves.**\n\n*Watchmen:*\n\nDr Manhattan is, in all respects, a god. The smartest man alive is no more threat to him than the smartest insect. And yet, Ozymandis nearly manages to stop Dr Manhattan once, through the revelation that Dr Manhattan may have caused the death, by cancer, of a large number of people. This causes Dr Manhattan to no longer wish to be involved in the world.\n\nAnd secondly at the end, Ozymandis manages to stop Dr Manhattan by convincing him that Ozymandis' plan is 'good'.\n\n*Too powerful to get involved - fantasy:*\n\nIn lord of the rings, Eru could have stopped Morgoth, Sauron and Saruman without breaking a sweat. He didn't. It's often a trope that gods are too powerful to get involved, and that when two sufficiently powerful entities clash, the world ends as collateral damage. Deities that want to control/coexist with the world then fight through proxies, rather than directly. This also applies to many other fantasy worlds - Wheel of Time, Game of Thrones, Dungeons and Dragons and countless others.\n\n*Too powerful to get involved - cold war:*\n\nThe USA and USSR never fought. Because of a belief that a conventional war between them would likely escalate to nuclear war. A sufficiently large nuclear arsenal is essentially an unstoppable force. And yet, countries have chosen to stop themselves because winning a nuclear war is not necessarily better than losing a conventional war.\n\n*Threaten hostages:*\n\nThere's several classic tropes here. Take a hostage at gunpoint, kidnap a friend or family member, inject a hostage with a nanobot/poison, where only you know how to cure them.\n\n**Turn their force against them**\n\n*A whole bunch of marvel Tfoc/Avengers movies:*\n\nTfoc is an unstoppable force. Lomo either moves out of his way, or was never even there (illusion). Tfoc's force doesn't help him, and can even be to his detriment. Don't try to fight them, just write your plan around never being in the way of the force.\n\n*The core premise of several schools of martial arts:*\nTurning your opponents force against them is a trope as old as time. Trip them, sidestep etc." }, { "answer_id": 65762, "author": "user3153372", "author_id": 44647, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/44647", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "If we're talking about an unstoppable hero, there are several ways to handle that:\n\n(1) The hero is concerned with something beyond merely crushing their enemies. Even a mundane gangster can cause trouble for Superman if the gangster is protected by the legal system, or there are hostages involved, or he threatens to discover Superman's secret identity.\n\n(2) The hero is matched by a villain who seems equally invincible.\n\n(3) The hero has a weakness, like Kryptonite.\n\n(4) The story is intentionally low-stakes. Does everything have to be a tense life-or-death struggle? Maybe the audience likes silly comedy, or the power-fantasy of being able to solve all problems easily." }, { "answer_id": 65771, "author": "DominikR", "author_id": 59142, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59142", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "Let's look at another example for an \"unstoppable force\" character: Gojou Satoru from Jujutsu Kaisen, and let's consider the way the issues mentioned on the original post are dealt with.\n\n* Lack of stakes: In principle, this is a correct assertion **if the character is at the correct place at the correct time**. However, as mentioned by others before me, if that is not the case the odds are often stacked against the protagonists of the series. Gojou, due to his position as the head of the household and being such a fundamental part of the Jujutsu Sorcerer world, is often simply mired in politics, even against his will.\n* Lack of conflict: Just because he is the strongest, does not mean that the villains will not try to take him on. There are simply other manners than brute force in which they have to act.\n* Lack of emotional investment: You don't need to be at the edge of your seat all the time, wondering whether the hero will overcome the odds, to like a character. In this case, the character is simply an oddball, he is aware of his powers and basically plays with them (and his opponents). Give your character personality and make him likable, then people will get emotionally invested regardless of his strength.\n* Lack of suspense: The suspense comes from a) not knowing when Gojou will arrive (some matters are, in a way, also just beneath him, so he might not arrive at all), and b) as there is a plan by the villains to incapacitate Gojou, there are uncertainties introduced. It's not a matter of power then, but a matter of who outsmarts whom. In fact, the villains succeed and capture this guy in a \"pocket dimension\", removing him from the equation for the time being.\n\nAs you can see, all these points are more or less directly addressed, and people arguably like Gojou more than the main character of the series because Gojou is just such a well-written and interesting character, with a very unique personality, while the main character is comparatively \"normal\" (i.e. \"plain\" or \"boring\")." }, { "answer_id": 65772, "author": "Satanicpuppy", "author_id": 125, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/125", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "I would say it's impossible, but you can make *anything* work if you're talented enough.\n\nSo let's just ask the question: how would you make it interesting? How would you make someone sympathize? How would you create empathy with the reader? How would you create tension when there can be none because the protagonist is unstoppable?\n\nGenerally this stuff reduces to wish fulfillment. People use a character to play out the things that *they* didn't get to experience: power, fame, love, recognition. It's transparent to the reader unless they have the same wish fulfillment, but many people do, and those books often sell.\n\nLois Bujold said something like, \"I take my characters, and I imagine the worst possible thing I could do to them, and then I do it.\" Her stuff can be hard to get into, because she often does take a character right to the bottom, but that makes the redemption *sweet*, and that's the thing that's brought her the awards and recognition she got.\n\nThere are people who start off writing books because they hate their characters, but they're probably not great people. But you should want your character to be the best they can be, and that needs conflict, some kind of conflict. If you can find a good conflict that works with an unstoppable character, that's great." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65750", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65757, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "In the case where someone is speaking poor English, it's generally advised to quote exactly as spoken with the addition \"[sic]\" which is Latin for \"Thus\" or \"just as\" and is generally a shorthand for \"sic erat scriptum\" (thus was it written). It's generally meant to denote that the author is transcribing the quoted dialog and that the grammatical error was made by the speaker of the quote and not the writer.\n\nFixing a grammatical error made by someone you were quoting can result in a changed meaning or misattributed something the speaker did not say." }, { "answer_id": 65767, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "It is not actually up to you how you cite a source, but it is prescribed by the style guide relevant to your field (e.g. MLA, APA, Chicago, etc.). In the style guides I'm familiar with (MLA, APA) it is a requirement that you cite your sources ***verbatim***. The only change you *must* make is to append \"(sic)\" or \"[sic]\" (depending on style guide) to passages that contain obvious linguistic errors, to make it clear that they aren't errors on your part, and in some cases a translation, if the cited text is in a foreign language. Otherwise, **you mustn't change the text that you cite!** You can paraphrase the source in your own words, though, and of course avoid grammatical mistakes in your paraphrase." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65756", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65757, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "In the case where someone is speaking poor English, it's generally advised to quote exactly as spoken with the addition \"[sic]\" which is Latin for \"Thus\" or \"just as\" and is generally a shorthand for \"sic erat scriptum\" (thus was it written). It's generally meant to denote that the author is transcribing the quoted dialog and that the grammatical error was made by the speaker of the quote and not the writer.\n\nFixing a grammatical error made by someone you were quoting can result in a changed meaning or misattributed something the speaker did not say." }, { "answer_id": 65767, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "It is not actually up to you how you cite a source, but it is prescribed by the style guide relevant to your field (e.g. MLA, APA, Chicago, etc.). In the style guides I'm familiar with (MLA, APA) it is a requirement that you cite your sources ***verbatim***. The only change you *must* make is to append \"(sic)\" or \"[sic]\" (depending on style guide) to passages that contain obvious linguistic errors, to make it clear that they aren't errors on your part, and in some cases a translation, if the cited text is in a foreign language. Otherwise, **you mustn't change the text that you cite!** You can paraphrase the source in your own words, though, and of course avoid grammatical mistakes in your paraphrase." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65763", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57441/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65765, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "It seems to me that you already have your answer: In the same way that Kieślowski does.\n\nYou will need to find visual symbols for mental states and processes. This can be color, light, weather, clothing, furniture and architecture, and the behaviour of the characters.\n\nBut you need to be aware of two things:\n\n(1) While you might think that Kieślowski has managed to express the internal thoughts and emotions of his characters well, it is in fact the viewer who interprets the images, and very likely no two viewers come to the exact same conclusion as to what the images mean. That is, Kieslowski did not truly manage to communicate an exact message through his images, but rather he provided a projection surface for the ideas of the viewers. The context of the narrative might suggest certain interpretations, but in and of itself each image in the films is open to a wide variety of interpretations.\n\n(2) Commonly the mise en scene is not the task of the screenwriter but something that the director and cameraman prefer to do when *they* interpret the script during filming. Kieslowski wrote (or co-authored) the scripts of his films himself. If you aren't also your own director, writing all the meanings into the script might be unconventional and not what your eventual director wants you to do." }, { "answer_id": 65773, "author": "Satanicpuppy", "author_id": 125, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/125", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Part of that you need to leave to the director. Remember, that's the division of labor: you're telling the story with words, and he's telling it with pictures.\nAnd the actors are a big part there as well: that's almost the whole thing they're bringing to the table, that ability to figure out the character and then convey it with a nuance of expression and affect.\n\nYou can see writers like Tennessee Williams who try to convey the whole thing in the script notes, and he's certainly a great, but you look at all the performances, and you see they're not the same despite his *exhaustive* notes.\n\nAs a writer, the job is to make a good, fleshed out character. Someone with personality, motivation, and dreams. Someone a talented actor can run with, and a talented director can dream on.\n\nIf you're *really* good, they'll be doing it for a thousand years, in a thousand different ways." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65764", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59129/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65778, "author": "Mary", "author_id": 44281, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/44281", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "It's possible but more difficult. There are still grammatical structures that could vary. Complete sentences vs. sentence fragments. Statements vs. questions. Plus whether they use metaphors and what.\n\nYou can take care to emphasis their point of view. If two characters are discussing the best way through the mountains, it will be easy to tell apart if they argue, or if one asks and the other explains." }, { "answer_id": 65780, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "You create unique voices by creating unique personalities, unique viewpoints, unique ambitions.\n\nYou don't need complex language or different grammar to distinguish a coward from a fearless soldier, a sex-obsessed teen from a reminiscing grandma, a depressed widower from enthusiastic happy newlyweds, a scientific nerd from her beer-drinking carefree brother.\n\nUnique voices can be in **what** they talk about, their analogies, their attitudes, their ideas (smart and good, or just plain stupid).\n\nVocabulary doesn't matter that much, make your characters distinct and discernible. You can still give them catch words in simple language; e.g. one says \"Cool\" a lot.\n\n> \n> Auroj stood ahead of the group, on the brink of the canyon, narrowed his eyes, looking across it. He sighed.\n> \n> \n> \"I can't see a way across it, guys. Any ideas?\"\n> \n> \n> Qqeiha, holding hands with Metk, said, \"Nabby can do it. Nabby knows everything.\"\n> \n> \n> \"I don't know everything, Qqeiha.\"\n> \n> \n> Qqeiha, looking at Auroj, said \"Everything!\"\n> \n> \n> Auroj raised his eyebrows, and looked to Nabby. \"Any ideas?\"\n> \n> \n> Nabby joined Auroj at the canyon edge, cautiously looked over it and frowned, then looked across the gap. \"See that tree over there? The Oak.\"\n> \n> \n> Auroj said, \"Sure.\"\n> \n> \n> Nabby walked away from the edge, eyes on the ground, and picked up a stone the size of a tennis ball, and hefted it. He approached Metk and Qqeiha.\n> \n> \n> \"Hey big guy, how far can you throw? Like, a baseball?\"\n> \n> \n> Metk nodded. \"Outfield to catcher, for sure.\"\n> \n> \n> \"Great. I'm going to walk down there, when I wave to you, you throw this stone as far as you can across the canyon. Aim for that oak tree, see it?\"\n> \n> \n> \"I can't throw that far, B-Dog.\"\n> \n> \n> \"I know. Just as far as you can, that'll help me.\"\n> \n> \n> Metk nodded, and took the stone and walked to the edge. Nabby trotted 100 yards down the edge of the canyon, and waved to Metk. Metk threw the stone hard. Nabby watched intently as the stone arced high, and fell into the canyon.\n> \n> \n> He walked back to the group, eyes on the ground, thinking. When he arrived, Auroj spoke.\n> \n> \n> \"What are you trying to figure out?\"\n> \n> \n> Nabby said, \"Distance. I know a way. We need to make some things.\"\n> \n> \n> Qqeiha beamed, and punched Metk in the arm; he didn't flinch. \"Told you!\"\n> \n> \n> Nabby said, \"I have to unravel your sweater though.\"\n> \n> \n> Qqeiha frowned. \"Aw.\"\n> \n> \n> Metk grinned. \"Ooh, snap.\"\n> \n> \n> \n\nWho's the leader? Auroj. Who's the brains? Nabby. Who's the brawn? Metk, an athlete, he's prone to nicknames and bro-slang. Qqeiha is the cheerleader. She relates to Nabby like a sibling, and Metk knows him, calls him B dog.\n\nSimple words and sentences are fine; make sure your character personalities and attitudes are distinct, and they stay in character (well, perhaps in extreme stress they step up or chicken out, but outside of such transformational moments).\n\nKeeping language simple is actually a good thing." }, { "answer_id": 65804, "author": "M. A. Golding", "author_id": 37093, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/37093", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "In Stanley G. Weinbaum's \"A Martian Odyssey\" *Wonder Stories*, July 1934, Tweel, a strange, somewhat ostrich-like, Martian, only learns a few words in English, yet manages to use them to communicate rather complex ideas to their human companion Dick Jarvis.\n\n<http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks06/0601191h.html>\n\nSo that is an example of a character with minimal vocabulary in a language expressing complex ideas. Similarly a character with minimal vocabulary in a language can show their personality by how they use their few words, as well as by their actions." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65777", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65783, "author": "Mary", "author_id": 44281, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/44281", "pm_score": 5, "selected": true, "text": "Unfortunately, this entirely depends on what serves the story.\n\nIt is, indeed, perfectly possible to write a good story where the motive is concealed entirely from both all the point-of-view characters, in particular the heroes, and also from the reading audience, thus leaving both wondering what caused it all.\n\nRevealing the motive to the audience before (or instead of) the characters will create dramatic irony.\n\nRevealing the motive to the characters and the audience very late will create mystery and give more difficulties to overcome, since it's harder for the characters to deduce what the villain will do next.\n\nRevealing to both early will, if the motive is properly selected, sharpen the conflict and point up the contrast between the hero and the villain." }, { "answer_id": 65785, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "As Parr says (+1), it depends.\n\nIf you are writing a Sherlockian Mystery (super-detective gets a tough case), the motive is often hidden until the finale. Figuring out *Why* the victim was murdered is the entire story.\n\nIn the Sherlockian series House (super-detective but jerk doctor), the \"villain\" is whatever disease is afflicting the patient, and House must figure out what it is before it kills the patient (to sustain suspense, sometimes House fails, or a bad guess kills the patient).\n\nAnd then in some of these stories, our Sherlock is certain they *know* who the killer is and what their *motive* is (e.g. to inherit $millions) but the story is not a \"whodunnit\" bu a \"howdunnit\". They have a rock solid alibi!\n\nIn other kinds of stories, it is great if you can reveal the motive early. It is interesting when two forces collide in conflict and *both* of them have good understandable motives. A \"scarce resources\" story.\n\nIn real life, countries fight wars over water resources, *both* of them need the river to irrigate their crops and drink, the flow is down, and one side must go without. Which will result in untold deaths. Who wins? Should they win?\n\nIn post-apocalyptic stories the motives are often clear; both sides have clear and understandable motives we can relate to. They love their families, they love their kids, and their survival depends upon food and shelter -- the **same** food and shelter the other side needs to survive. A zero-sum game.\n\nIn fact there are no \"villains\", we recognize the dilemma immediately. With only half the resources, we don't survive. We all starve anyway. If *half* of us don't die, we **all** die.\n\nThe story is not harmed at all by the reader understanding these motives.\n\nThose are extremes. Ultimately the question is, how much interest will be lost in the story if the audience knows the motives of the antagonist?\n\nIn a Sherlockian Mystery, the answer is nearly all of it.\n\nIn a play about a hero struggling with intentionally harming other innocent people to keep her own children alive, almost none of the suspense is lost.\n\nThere is one more type of story in which the villain can have clear motives from the beginning; a \"dark side\" villain. A sociopathic dictator that is bent on acquiring personal power and ruling with an iron fist.\n\nHer motives are clear. In this case, the story is often \"Dived vs. Goliath\", the basis of many \"007\" stories. Agent 007 knows from the beginning exactly who the villain is and what their motives are (world domination, insane riches), but the story is partly a mystery about how 007 can stop this seemingly unstoppable force.\n\nAgain the motives are clear from the start, and knowing that greed and megalomania drive the villain doesn't hurt the story. The story is more about **how** one lone fearless genius hero (Dived) with great skills and a few gadgets can stop a villain commanding an army and enormous resources.\n\nFigure out what type of story you are telling, and how early you can reveal the villain's motive without destroying the suspense of the story.\n\nIf revealing the villain's motive early doesn't make a lot of difference to your hero (the hero doesn't care *why* the villain is doing it, the hero will do what she intended to do anyway), then reveal it early, or make it an early dramatic discovery for the hero. For example, in the currently running series La Brea, about time travel, the villain's motive is revealed fairly early -- he invented time travel to correct a mistake he made in his past that cost him his wife and son. And the villain doesn't care that changing that will rewrite a hundred years of the past, including vanishing the hero, the hero's children, and making many others non-existent. The villain believes none of that timeline should have happened anyway!\n\nThe villain is motivated by love and heartbreak, the hero is outgunned but motivated by love for his family. In this case knowing the villain's motive doesn't reduce audience interest, it actually makes the story more compelling. It's a \"resource\" story! Only one of the two timelines can prevail; thus only one side can \"survive\"." }, { "answer_id": 65787, "author": "Corbin", "author_id": 59157, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59157", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "If you happen to be writing a five-act story, then you might consider [Discordian five-act narrative structure](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discordian_calendar). The motivations of the antagonists are explored in the second act, and the true nature or effect of the villain is revealed in the fourth act. Note that the antagonists need not be the villain." }, { "answer_id": 65801, "author": "Simon Crase", "author_id": 54909, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/54909", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "As others have said, it depends. One device is to wait until near the end, and then reveal that one of the secondary heroes, the good guy who always saves the hero, is the real villain; the apparent villain is just a hired hand. The Da Vinci Code uses this device." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65782", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65795, "author": "Boba Fit", "author_id": 57030, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57030", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "One type of point at which you probably should change tone is after some major event, especially one that massively affects the main characters. The war starts. Or ends and all the soldiers start coming home. The matriarch of the family dies. The main characters get married and start their life together. The main characters move from one country to another. A new captain takes over the ship and changes all the rules. The owner of the factory retires and the new owner takes over.\n\nAnother time to change tone is when some temporary but intense thing is happening. During an actual battle in the war. During a house fire. During a burglary.\n\nThe change in tone could be temporary, meaning it only lasts for a chapter or two, then either gradually or suddenly reverts. Or it could be a \"step change\" in the story, with a definite before and after. Or there could even be multiple \"eras\" in the story, particularly if it is quite long." }, { "answer_id": 65847, "author": "Gary R.", "author_id": 59179, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59179", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "The tone can and should follow the story arc. If the happy-go-lucky teens are in a horiffic car accident where one friend dies, the tone needs to darken. In the aftermath of a trauma, their moods are different and their actions are different If you’re following the classic hero’s journey, this is likely the threshold of the transformation, and your readers will expect a different tone." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65786", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65789, "author": "jtb", "author_id": 57830, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57830", "pm_score": 3, "selected": true, "text": "It all depends *how* you use the symbol.\n\nThere is a reason that a white flag symbolizes surrender. It is because white flags were literally used to communicate one sides surrender during war. Putting a white flag in a story when one side is *literally* surrendering a battle is therefore not \"too simplistic\", in my opinion.\n\nOn the other hand, if you're having a character \"give up\" on a relationship, it would be corny to have them wave a white flag. This is because it takes the reader out of the story. They begin to wonder: *Is the character aware of the symbolism, and are they using it on purpose? Why do they even have a flag?* Here, the symbol is out of place. You don't need to inject new life into your symbol, you need to present the symbol in a way that is either new or natural.\n\n**TL;DR:** Inject new life by carefully incorporating the symbol into your story." }, { "answer_id": 65794, "author": "Boba Fit", "author_id": 57030, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57030", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "Many symbols have been inverted in some way. A version of Snuw Wlexe where the Stepmother is really the good person and Snuw Wlexe is evil. A version of The Three Little Pigs where the wolf is the goody victim and the pigs are evil. And so on.\n\nYou have to be pretty careful doing such reversals. If you get it right you're a hero. If you get it wrong people are going to be quite upset with you. If you are going to do a \"culture flip\" of some kind, you need to be quite seriously sensitive to the culture you are going to move into, and you still need to be innovative. The all-female Ghost Busters was not well received, for example. On the other hand, if done well and with some skill, reversals can be extremely good. The stage play and movie [*The Wiz*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wiz_(film)) was a lot of fun. [Here is a clip of one of the songs.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQT-QFy5Nig)" } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65788", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65792, "author": "jtb", "author_id": 57830, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57830", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "First of all, you are talking about *omniscience* (all-knowing), not *omnipotence* (all-powerful).\n\nNow, how do we make an omniscient being unreliable? The way I see it, that can only be possible if the narrator is **intentionally misrepresenting** the story. Omniscient beings presumably can lie, and they can do so while telling a story. You just have to come up with a reason for the narrator to want to lie to the reader..." }, { "answer_id": 65793, "author": "Boba Fit", "author_id": 57030, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57030", "pm_score": 6, "selected": true, "text": "That's easy. Part of your narration gets shoved into dialog of some kind. It lets you put in exactly as much truth as you need, and as much false info as you like, and leave out stuff that is dramatically useful to leave out.\n\nExample from the book series \"The Three Body Problem\": The \"bad guys\" play a multi-player video game. In the video game they encounter the approaching aliens and receive their instructions on how to subvert human culture. The video game depicts a variety of details about the aliens. But, since it's a video game, not the narrator, that is telling us these things, there is no way to know for sure that the descriptions of the aliens are correct. And especially no way to know if they are complete.\n\nExample from any of a large category of detective fiction and crime fiction: We get witness testimony rather than what a narrator is telling us. This is the POV of the detective, so it's a frequent approach for such stories.\n\nExample from Nvikuspeara's play \"Hamlet\": When Hamlet is trying to get his uncle to confess to killing Hamlet's father, the recently deceased king, he uses a travelling troupe of actors. They put on a play depicting one method the uncle could have used to do the killing. Hamlet hopes it will \"rattle\" his uncle enough that guilt will become apparent in the uncle's behavior. This has become a trope and has been stolen and used in many other situations. For example, it was a big part of an episode of the original series of Star Trek.\n\nThere are lots of other related ways to get info in through unreliable means. The grandfather tells a story, his faulty memory giving you your required gaps. The priest relates a parable, his imagery providing you your required \"fig leaf.\" The young child sneaking out at night relates what he saw to his friend, with the teacher eavesdropping and hearing only what the story requires. Even a fragment of a newspaper story can be used.\n\n====\n\nThere is another way, but I would usually call it cheating. That is, break the fourth wall. The narrator comes right out and tells you he's not going to tell you the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.\n\nIt's perfectly reasonable in video games. The narrator may say something like \"you won't be told that until level 6\" or some such. There is the \"the cake is a lie\" trope from a famous video game. And there are a huge variety of things where you don't get to look behind some barrier until you unlock a feature. Maybe the reward for bringing the king his \"three bags of fine silk\" is explicitly the answer to some nagging questions." }, { "answer_id": 65799, "author": "James Grossmann", "author_id": 13597, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/13597", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Unreliable narrators and omniscient point of view are incompatible. Narrators with limitations imposed by bias, circumstance, knowledge, or emotions are, by definition, not omniscient.\n\nIf you have an unreliable narrator, you can only write what that narrator knows, believes, perceives, feels, or understands.\n\nOmniscient narrators used to be a lot more popular in fiction than they are now. One problem with omniscient narrators is that they make it difficult to surprise the reader. Nowadays, first person and third person limited point of view are more popular. The reader only gets to know what \"I\" or \"he\" or \"she\" knows.\n\nUnreliable narration can be written in either first or third person." }, { "answer_id": 65802, "author": "codeMonkey", "author_id": 40325, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/40325", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "The Narrator has Reasons\n------------------------\n\nUsing Unreliable Narrator makes the narrator a character. Like all characters, the narrator has bias, opinions, agency, etc. They choose (or are by nature, or are forced, or whatever) to be Unreliable because it is part of their character.\n\nAn omniscient narrator who is also unreliable is lying to the reader. The author needs to very clearly understand why this character is choosing to lie, and needs write a character consistent to that choice.\n\nSo, an Omniscient Narrator can be Unreliable, but you need to clearly answer: **\"Why are they Unreliable?\"**" }, { "answer_id": 65805, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Most Unreliable narrators are 1st person narrators and thus are characters in the story. In written works, they usually leave out critical details in a story or overly rely on contradictory actions and narrations. For example, in \"The Cask of Amontillado, the narrator, Montressor, is telling the reader the story of how he killed Festunafa by entombing him in a crypt. From the onset of the story, the narrator informs us about how we should know he is an honest man, even though we have no prior interactions with him. Generally, when meeting a new person, honesty is assumed until given reason to doubt. Thus, a stranger insisting to us that he is honest while introducing himself for the first time, it sets off red flags. As the story continues, the behavior of Festunafa does not match with Montressor's insitances, namely Montressor tells the reader that Festunafa's fate was done in revenge for a prior injury or humiliation Festunafa inflicted on Montressor. Not only does Montressor fail to go into specifics, but rather insists we take his word for it and if we did know we would agree he was in the right, but his interaction with Festunafa implies that Festunafa's slight was so minor that Festunafa was not aware of the implied imminent doom, despite the fact that someone who did something actually worthy of revenge murder would have misgivings about being alone in a tomb with someone who is proud of the family motto \"Don't tread on me with impunity\". Despite this, Festunafa acts like a man who is unaware of the intents of Montressor. While Montressor is never shown to be a liar, and is honest in that he planned to kill Festunafa, the fact that he insists he's honest to strangers, that he refuses to tell us of how bad Festunafa was, and that he can't even give Festunafa a portrayal that tracks with the back story leaves us to doubt everything that Montressor is telling us is completely true.\n\nIn visual media where it's easy to show a character narrating and using words with definitions that match the visual elements, but not the connotations. For example, in \"How I Met Your Mother\" the narrator is an older version of the character Ted Mosbey who is explaining to his kids stories from his life before he met his wife and their mother and how they would lead to that outcome. He would often \"sanitize\" his stories from crass language or actions that he doesn't want his kids to do, even though he did them in the past. One example is that anytime he and his friends are smoking weed, Future Ted will insist that they were \"eating Sandwiches\" which in the present-day action, gets portrayed as the characters, holding big hoagie sandwiches while acting high. This became a recurring gag and at one point they make \"Sandwich Brownies.\" Other time's the character would sub-innocuously similar words and remind the kids that he's avoiding the harsher language. In one example, he uses the word \"kiss\" for the f-word. Initially it fits the story (Ted makes up with a woman he was dating and Bavyuy, in the background, starts chanting \"Kiss her! Kiss Her!\" only for the narrator to cut in to remind everyone that Bavyuy wasn't actually using the word \"kiss\".).\n\nIn another Christmas episode, Ted calls a female friend \"a Grinch\" while the narrator states that he didn't say Grinch (it's implied to be the C word). The \"grinch term is used in this context for much of the episode until Ted meets with a 5 year old girl who calls him \"a grinch\" at which point the narrator out that, in this instance, the girl was actually using the word Grinch... and then later the children all start chanting Grinch after Ted uses it in it's substituted context. And the narrator has to remind us they weren't really saying Grinch (the look of horror of the adults in this scene implied this already.)." }, { "answer_id": 65807, "author": "SoupDragon", "author_id": 59173, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59173", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Have you considered the 'Oracle of Delphi' technique? The Oracle is omniscient, knowing the future, but always tells the precise truth in ambiguous and misleading terms so that the hero misunderstands. That can add interest over and above the simple 'the narrator lies' approach, through the clever way the misunderstanding is revealed and resolved. There is an 'Aha!' moment as the reader discovers that the Oracle was telling the truth after all, and often it was the influence of the misunderstood prophecy itself that led to it coming true.\n\nHow you justify that depends on the specific nature of your omniscient narrator. If they are non-human (divine, alien, AI, living in the void outside the universe, etc.), you can justify it by saying they don't think in human narrative terms. They don't pay attention to the same things to identify or describe events or people. They talk in terms of the things that are relevant to their alien worldview - taking people and events as symbolic of deeper causes and narratives, or how it relates to their own goals. An omniscient being would perceive details you wouldn't notice, and see deep significance in things you would ignore, and would likewise leave out details they don't consider important but you would. Or it may be there are things they are *not allowed* to tell you - there are laws, or cultural taboos, or (especially when telling the future) it breaks causality.\n\nAnother way to obfuscate a narrative is to have it expressed in allegories and sayings from an alternative history that you only gradually pick up the meanings of. Like \"Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra\" - a phrase from an episode of Star Trek where an alien race talks entirely in terms taken from their own myths and legends. If you don't know the legend, the allegory is completely opaque. When the story is later revealed, the reader mentally jumps back and connects the dots. Or you can use words picked up from alternate languages, like we use borrowed foreign words. The narrator speaks the truth, but of course coming from another culture, they use their own language to do it. We're all pretty good at picking up the meaning of language from context, we even get a dopamine hit from the learning process, but it can easily be used to delay understanding.\n\nYou need to be careful about maintaining the balance between making it interestingly mysterious and it becoming just incomprehensible and unreadable. You have to be careful not to flag the plot twist by the choice of what you hide. You should still take care to make the plot twists clever and significant for the moral or message of the story, and not just use it as a cheap fill-in-the-blanks-later exercise. And this sort of game appeals to highly intelligent puzzle-oriented readers, but might easily appear a pretentious or over-clever gimmick to a more mass-market audience. Know your readers." }, { "answer_id": 65814, "author": "Aaargh Zombies", "author_id": 57310, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57310", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "A possible way around this would be to use a narrator who gave an imprecise narrative that was open to interpretation that could mean different things to different people, or in different circumstances. Or which left room for loopholes or out of the box thinking.\n\nFor example, the narrator could describe an advisory as being \"unstoppable by the hand of man and all of the implements that he may devise\".\n\nThis could be interpreted as meaning that they're un-killable, thus undefeatable.\n\nBut the hero could outsmart them and get them to use their own weapons against themselves. Or they could simply talks to the advisory and stops them with a well thought out argument." }, { "answer_id": 65830, "author": "skh", "author_id": 59192, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59192", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "Drink.\n\nThat'll do it, wouldnt it?\n\nOk, im being a smartass, and deserved to be ignored. But in all seriousness, an unreliable writer could write in the omniscient voice and the reader wouldnt be able to count on the accuracy in universe of what they wrote.\n\nAnd of course, omniscience doesnt imply honesty, an effective ability to communicate, or even persistence. So one could write an omniscient narrator who gets interrupted, one who's narrative is incomplete, one whos motivated to mislead the reader, or one who's just plain bad at saying things without confusing his audience.\n\nImagine, for example, a contemporary sci fi writer telling a story involving relativistic time distortion to an ancient greek, or melded post-singularity uni-mind explaining events to a person without the names of individuals, because personal names are totally pointless to it." }, { "answer_id": 65839, "author": "Divizna", "author_id": 56731, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/56731", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "First, I'm going to give a reminder of something important about using an unreliable narrator that several answerers seem to forget.\n\nFor a story with an unreliable narrator to work, **the reader needs to know the narrator wasn't telling them the truth.** Otherwise, you don't have an unreliable narrator, you have a story that happened exactly as your narrator claims. (It's fiction. No real events to check against. The story stands as told.)\n\nSo you absolutely can't have your unreliable narrator pull off a successful lie from the beginning to end. Either they need to be caught by the reader, with enough clues to figure out what's really going on, or they have to admit themself at some point that what they said before wasn't really right, or you invite multiple narrators who will correct or at least contradict each other.\n\nGenerally speaking, a narrator can be unreliable in several different ways.\n\n* The narrator is mistaken or misinformed;\n* the narrator is lying;\n* the narrator is leaving out a key fact, but all they actually say is true;\n* the narrator is truthful about the facts, but their value judgment is off.\n\nWhat I mean by the last is best shown by Monty Python:\n\n> \n> Brave Sir Xojin ran away, \n> \n> bravely ran away, away. \n> \n> When danger reared its ugly head, \n> \n> he bravely turned his tail and fled.\n> \n> \n> \n\nClearly, a narrator being misinformed is not compatible with omniscience, but the other three are possible.\n\nOmniscience doesn't necessarily mean ability to make up a plausible lie. The narrator can end up contradicting themself, correcting themself repeatedly and unconvincingly, even eventually give up. And maybe they're being made to lie, and they definitely want to appear to be trying, but at the same time hint at the actual truth. Omniscience also doesn't necessarily rule out making weird value judgments, either because your narrator operates on a blue-and-orange morality worldview, or because they just say what Brave Sir Xojin, who's paying them, wants to hear.\n\nOmitting a key fact in order to mislead the audience until said key fact is revealed later and the reader has to reevaluate everything they thought they knew is an old, well tested method. Your narrator can hold on to that fact for dramatic impact, or you can work with the setup that it's something that's known to their intended audience without any need to mention, but your reader isn't who the narrator is telling the story to. Just remember - if you don't straightup tell, you need to give hints so that the reader catches up at some point.\n\nIn the former cases, you'll probably need to flesh the narrator out as a full character with personality and motivation. If you go the way of simply omitting a fact and revealing it later, then you can even do it with the ghost without personality that's the more traditional kind of an omniscient narrator." }, { "answer_id": 65840, "author": "Wyvern123", "author_id": 55118, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/55118", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "I have two answers, depending on the type of narrator utilized.\n\nFirst, you may be referring to an omniscient narrator as in, a character in the story who is omniscient. Either that, or you are referring to a third person omniscient perspective, which makes use of multiple unique perspectives from different characters in the story, each bound by their own knowledge and perceptions.\n\nIf you are using an omniscient narrator from within the boundaries of your story, then making the narrator unreliable is really simple. For whatever reason, make the narrator not tell the whole truth, even though he is cognizant of it. If he is truly omniscient, then he will be aware of the entirety of any situation within your story, and if he is to be an unreliable narrator, that means that he has to speak in half-truths, intentionally obscuring information for a reason that you as the writer can create.\n\nIf you are using a third person omniscient perspective, that is entirely different. Basically, this is the equivalent of an omniscient narrator *outside* of the story, showing the reader what is happening through the third-person lenses of multiple characters. Basically, the 'outside narrator' knows everything going on in the story but the characters *inside* the story do not. This perspective is quite versatile because then you can reveal select parts of the story to your reader without having the hidden agenda of an inside omniscient narrator." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65791", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65812, "author": "Boba Fit", "author_id": 57030, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57030", "pm_score": 6, "selected": true, "text": "There's always the \"Star Trek\" version. If it makes the drama work, don't sweat it. Just be consistent across your story.\n\nSo if \"warp drive\" works a particular way, keep it working that way. If the \"teleporter\" works a given way, keep it working that way. Don't worry too much about whether warp drives or teleporters are possible. Or whether if they are possible they are possible that way.\n\nIt's pretty difficult to predict how, for example, computer-based intelligence would really work. Even using something like ChatGPT or similar, is probably not all that good a guide. So if you were doing a story about computer intelligence 100 years from now, you have a lot of freedom. Set the rules, then be consistent. If you find you need to change the rules for your dram, go back through the whole story and make sure you are consistent.\n\nShows like Star Trek or Stargate and so on have a \"show bible.\" This is a description of, among other things, how various tech works and how it is supposed to be described. This is what a phaser looks like, sounds like, what it does if it hits somebody, how many shots, etc. You might need to write at least part of this for your own story. This is how your tech works and so on." }, { "answer_id": 65813, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "Star Wars does it. It's often called Science Fantasy, as the surface is Sci-fi, but the story is Fantasy (an order of nights with magic powers and swords). In Star Wars, the tech is not explored because it's not important to have the tech make sense, as Lucas opted for tech that looked familiar yet exotic at the same time.\n\nStar Trek works by having certain tech that does certain things, but they don't explain how they work, just what they do when they are working. The Warp Core not working means the ship doesn't go FTL. The inertial dampeners mean that when the ship slows down, you don't go splat against the window. The star date can be used to calculate a real date (as of TNG). They also have a list of particles that, if detected, mean something is about to happen. A surge of neutrinos means a ship is about to decloak. Chronotrons means we have a time travel episode on our hands. In this case, Star Trek tends to discuss it's tech in \"like a hot knife through butter\" where they will say something technobabble and then translate for the non-technical (the audience) what this effect is like in terms we will understand." }, { "answer_id": 65819, "author": "Gary R.", "author_id": 59179, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59179", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "In hard science fiction, readers expect the tech to be plausible, or at least explainable. In science fantasy, you don’t have to explain why things work as long as they are consistent. Some explanation is good, especially defining limits of tech and magic and how they overlap. Be careful, though, not to use your technology as a deus ex machina by suddenly introducing a tech solution without any groundwork or foreshadowing.\n\nIt doesn’t take much to define the limits. The engineer can do something with a machine and the mage can say, “Damn, I sure wish I could do that with magic. It’s really frustrating that I can’t manipulate magnetic fields.”\n\nMerely mentioning that your warp engine has to be cooled to near 0 degrees Keltar to work should be adequate to explain why there’s a crisis when the cooling system doesn’t work. You don’t have to explain superconductivity and unobtanium." }, { "answer_id": 65821, "author": "Flater", "author_id": 29635, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/29635", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "> \n> Neglecting these principles can create confusion and disbelief among readers or viewers.\n> \n> \n> \n\nLet's use Doctor Who as an example here. I'm aware this is not hard science fiction, but indulge me for a moment.\n\nWhen the Doctor has to tinker with an alien device, there is virtually no detail spent on exactly how the device works or what the Doctor is needing to do in order to get it to do what they want.\n\nThat is because the details are irrelevant to the plot. The actual workings of the machine do not add anything of value. What does matter is (a) what the machine does and (b) how the Doctor changed its behavior, and that's all the info that you usually get.\n\nThis is often made very clear by having the sonic screwdriver be an invisible interface to nearly everything (except wood. Sonic doesn't do wood) and skimping on showing the Doctor doing some actual physical tinkering (not always though).\n\nWhile Doctor Who is space fantasy and not hard science fiction, its narrative device still plays by the rules of science, not magic. It just deals with very advanced science and sticks to only explaining the part that connect to the narrative, not the fluff around it.\n\nThe key takeaway here is that detail needs to be relevant, otherwise you're just creating complexity with no payoff. There is some leeway to adding lore without narrative justification, but the lore has to be more interesting to read than it is cumbersome to understand.\n\n> \n> Doing so would, however, require me to tell and not show.\n> \n> \n> \n\nYou're overapplying this advice into dogmatic territory.\n\nYes, it is more interesting to show things than it is to have a character dryly talk about them. However, that doesn't mean that you can't ever have a character explain anything. There is a common sense boundary here.\n\n> \n> For example, if you're depicting spaceships or advanced technology, I was told it's essential to explain how they function and how they operate. Doing so would, however, require me to tell and not show.\n> \n> \n> \n\nTechnically everything your story does is telling. Even the actions are being *told* to the reader. Again, you're slipping into the territory of dogma. \n\nWhen taken to its dogmatic conclusion, \"show, don't tell\" would argue that you shouldn't use any kind of written medium or narration and instead only a silent movie would be acceptable.\n\nI would be more accurate to refer to it as \"indirect learning\". Someone instructing someone else on the workings of a spaceship is direct learning (the reader can infer that the explanation is targeted at them).\n\nIndirect learning would be demonstrated through consequences. Rather than explaining what inertia is, have someone die because a spaceship accelerated really fast.\n\nDon't have a character explain that cargo freights are unmanned specifically so that they can accelerate at G forces that humans could not survive. Instead, have someone sneak aboard a cargo freight and have others either find their corpse or understand that the freight needs to be stopped because it would kill the stowaway.\n\nSpaceship flies using unicorn farts instead of combustible fuel? Have two characters in casual conversation (about anything else) while taking care of the unicorns in the pens. Have some unicorns get sick and unable to fart and have you characters deal with the challenge of less thruster power.\n\nAdvanced technology? Don't bother explaining it, they wouldn't understand it anyway. Stick to what people understand: what does it do for me, what do I need to do to make it work, and what can go wrong when misused? The inner working themselves are fluff and not narratively relevant (unless you *make* it narratively relevant, e.g. if someone is stealing the plutonium batteries from your device because they need plutonium)." }, { "answer_id": 65823, "author": "AmiralPatate", "author_id": 31567, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/31567", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "> \n> In a sci-fi setting, I was told it was important to follow scientific principles to some extent.\n> \n> \n> \n\nThis isn't quite right. There is no universal definition of science-fiction, and the border with fantasy, if there is one, is blurry at best. Generally, what distinguishes sci-fi from fantasy is the use of technology and science vs magic and mysticism, but then you reach a point like Star Wars that integrates elements of both sci-fi and fantasy, and it really doesn't matter if it's one, the other, an hybrid, both, or neither.\n\n> \n> I was told it's essential to explain how they function and how they operate.\n> \n> \n> \n\nThat's patently wrong, or perhaps a misunderstanding.\n\nThink about *The Empire Strikes Back*. Why doesn't the hypderdrive work? Mechanical failure? Electronics? Fuel impurity? Overheating? Faulty wiring? We don't know, and it's not important to the story. It doesn't work, and forces the heroes to limp to Bespin, escaping a bunch of TIE fighters through an impossibly dense asteroid field. That's what's important.\n\nWe're never told how the hyperdrive works in the movies, or why it occasionally doesn't. We're shown what it does, how the stars stretch when you engage it, and that's the iconic image you remember, that's Star Wars.\n\nYou, the author, should know the rules of your technology. You need an hyperdrive to go into hyperspace. That's a simple rule. If you want, you can dig deeper. Power, fuel, physics, etc. Or you can leave it at the bare minimum, just mention there's a device that makes your ship go real fast, or that there's a device that makes your ship not go real fast because it doesn't work currently.\n\nThe only requirement is your rules are consistent with each other and you stick to them.\n\nYou, the author, should then consider your rules and your story beats, and think about where they conflict (if at all), and whether you'll resolve it by changing the rules or changing the story. Then think about what new conflicts that creates, and repeat until you're satisfied you can make a first draft.\n\nThen comes storytelling, which is ironically where you proverbially show rather than tell.\n\nIt's perfectly valid to just describe actions and effects without explaining how they're produced, to show how a technology works simply by describing what the observers see or feel, establishing some limitations through plot where relevant, and leaving the details largely unexplained.\n\nIt would be perfectly valid to drill down to explore the purpose of every nut and bolt, to explain the science and the equations, show how every piece interacts with the others, but that sounds like the story you don't want to tell. So just don't.\n\n> \n> Is there some way you can do this, especially in the context where you have fantasy mixed with sci-fi, and which requires you to clearly state what's possible with magic and what's possible with technology?\n> \n> \n> \n\nI can tell you what I'd do.\n\nI don't know how my technology works. I have some rules about what goes in and what comes out, what happens in-between might as well be magic (and sometimes is). I have a rule about heat as a limiting factor, and another about the precision of calculation as another limiting factor.\n\nI don't explain any of it though. For travel, I explain that there's a bright flash and the ship vanishes. And from the point of view of the ship, there's a bright flash and everything else disappears. I'm not going to talk about heat sinks and heat management because it's not relevant to the plot. The plot is about the experience of the characters, not the machinery.\n\nBut, because I know about the heat rule, I can mention the warmness of the engine bay for flavour, or describe a glowing-red piece of machinery when setting a scene. I won't bother with anything more detailed because that's just running the risk of someone pointing out that, um actually, that's not how physics work." }, { "answer_id": 65826, "author": "Michael Stachowsky", "author_id": 30673, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/30673", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "For an interesting example of how \"hard\" science fiction is mixed with \"sci-fi fantasy\", check out Adrian Tchaikolvsky's \"Children of...\" series. I'm thinking specifically of how he depicts space travel, although there are other examples. He focuses on the *effects* of the technology, rather than exactly how it works. Some examples:\n\n* The hibernation chambers that people sleep in during a voyage are known to have bad effects on the body, sometimes killing their occupants if they fail. The story involves explaining how people's bodies change or how they died, but doesn't dive into how the hibernation chamber works or why it fails\n* The systems of multi-generation spacecraft fail, and a big part of the \"Children of Time\" book revolves around dealing with the failing spacecraft's systems and how to save the people on board. Again, it doesn't explain why the systems fail, just that they are all \"in the red\" and then explores the consequences of this from a human perspective. The reader doesn't need to know that the Giggling Pin in the Quantum Hyperbolic Fluxgate is failing, just that \"life support is in the red\" or \"she stayed awake too long, trying to fix a failing system and keep them all alive\"\n* Eventually, we are introduced to chemical computing running on colonies of genetically enhanced ants. Weird. The exact way that the computations take place are never explored, other than as an exchange of pheromones and the like. It's always made clear *that* computation is taking place and the advent of the computers is a huge plot point, but the details are swept under the rug *because they are not important to the story*. The consequences of ant-based computing, such as having the keep a colony alive to keep the computer alive, are important and do not require exposition.\n\nUltimately, I think that Tchakolvsky does a great job of this, and would be instructive to go see how he does it." }, { "answer_id": 65837, "author": "AnoE", "author_id": 23592, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/23592", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "As a reader, I strongly disagree with what \"you've been told\" and encourage you to find a way to take this kind of point blank advice in a way that leaves you open to your own style.\n\nFor example, arguably the \"The Dark Forrest\" trilogy by Liu Cixin, which starts as relatively hard SciFi, has long episodes were it talks about an almost real past, and seems to keep the countenance of hard, realistic SciFi throughout, turns into totally non-possible, non-hard SciFi pretty quickly, in my opinion, but for sure towards the end. As a reader, I found the trilogy absolutely great, giving us an awesome spin on the topics it treats, which, to be honest, I have not seen in this way before - and I've been avidly reading SciFi for 30+ years. It opens up a whole new way of thinking.\n\nAnother author along these veins would be Vernor Vinge. His books usually have a main \"twist\" where his universe works not only a little bit unrealistically, but totally so. Sure, his changes are in a way that could, very very theoretically be possible, i.e. he is a little more realistic than Liu Cixin, but still. I can imagine that readers requiring their SciFi to be realistic will scoff at some of his central topics, in books which are both incredibly entertaining, and also thought-provoking.\n\nA third, rather prolific author, would be Peter F. Hamilton, especially with his \"Nights Dawn\" trilogy. While it is somewhat grounded in reality, the parts of it that make it SciFi are very quickly *very* advanced. While he does describe how it works, occasionally (but not as deeply as other hard SciFi authors), he absolutely does manage to pull it off in a \"show, don't tell\" way.\n\nThe book \"Hyperion\" by Dud Sammozs is an awesome example where you learn very little about how stuff works technically, and where a lot of it is completely impossible, but which also is incredibly entertaining, thought-provoking, and at no point in time was my Suspension of Disbelief challenged.\n\nI could go on and on. Yes, ground you universe in reality somewhat, but no, you do not need to slavishly follow some rule set in stone. Ian M. Banks, Philip K. Dick, Ursula Le Guinn, Adrian Tchaikovsky etc. - all of those write absolutely great pieces of SciFi, sometimes even milestones IMO, and often with very little explanation of how stuff works; expecting you fully to buy in. On the contrary, sometimes an author will go to great length to explain all his advances in great technical detail; and this can turn into a boring mess, and nothing is worse than a deeply self-contained description which then turns out to be either inconsistent, or still with an unexplained \"border\" which creates disbelief on top of being a boring technical manual." }, { "answer_id": 65838, "author": "Daron", "author_id": 24792, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/24792", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "It is not necessary to explain how every piece of technology works. It is boring to listen to the details of yet another FTL system. I want to get to what makes your scifi special.\n\nGloss over the details of the not-quite-warp-drive, if helps the plot. None of the characters know the details. Or they do know and don't feel the need to explain.\n\nRestrict the real heavy-lifting to that special piece of technology that exists in your universe but not in other universes.\n\nEven then, there are different hardnesses of scifi. The lighter kinds don't even bother explaining the new tech. That is simply not what Star Trek is about." }, { "answer_id": 65852, "author": "jwenting", "author_id": 1485, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/1485", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "No problem going outside reality, as long as you're consistent about it and don't use it to create a situation where things appear magical and massively overpowered, as that tends to destroy the story rather quickly.\n\nFor example if you've got an interstellar war where one side has a drive that allows them to jump right into orbit around the other side's planets and invade without resistance while the other does not have it, or any way to counter it, your story isn't going to be very interesting.\n\nIt's the old \"avoid deus ex machina situations\" mantra.\n\nThat's why so many sci fi universes mandate that you're well outside of a body's gravitational pull before you can engage your ftl drives, why some go further and define systems of interstellar \"tramways\" between stars with well known entry and exit points (which can be fortified, guarded, become trade hubs with border checkpoints, etc.), with other interstellar travel being either impossible or prohibitively expensive. None of this is dictated by the known laws of physics, all of it makes sense within the specific universes. Describing the limitations in the stories is a good idea, especially if they're relevant to the story (why is that space outpost in that specific position? Why do we need to fly for 2 weeks out from Jupiter before we can engage the warp drive? etc.)." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65811", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65817, "author": "SFWriter", "author_id": 26683, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26683", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Hmmm. Are you absolutely sure you want to make a ND person your antagonist? Do you have additional representation among the rest of the cast to ensure you are not signaling that neurodivergence is an evil trait?\n\nI recommend reading *Eleanor Oliphant is Completely Fine*. The protagonist is on a different wavelength from everyone else (although there's PTSD in her case), and her unusual mental state comes through quite nicely.\n\nTo answer your question, your character perceives the world in a way that we expect differs from how most readers perceive the world. So, show the world, and then show the character perceiving it in a surprising way.\n\n*The sun was bright and children ran about, laughing, their parents here and there, a few dogs as well, a kite overhead. It was all so predictable. Bob crossed the park quickly, eager to get home and back to his familiar habits.*\n\nThat sort of thing. Show a character interacting with the world in a way that conveys they see it other than expected. But think about whether this should really be your antagonist, as that seems like a misguided choice." }, { "answer_id": 65818, "author": "Gary R.", "author_id": 59179, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59179", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "As trite as this may sound, I find the best way to get inside a character’s head when they aren’t like you is to spend some time with people who share that character’s traits. Face to face is best, but online forums work, too." }, { "answer_id": 65841, "author": "motosubatsu", "author_id": 24645, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/24645", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "> \n> **Disclaimer:** I'm autistic myself, I've done some volunteer work with autistic children and it's a subject I feel strongly about in general. That said I have no *formal* qualifications pertaining to this, and I most certainly am **not** claiming to speak on behalf of all autistic/neuro-divergent folks.\n> \n> \n> \n\n**Yikes**\n\nI appreciate that it isn't your *intent* but you're taking some harmful stereotypes of autistic people and using them to produce a villain. *And it's making my skin crawl.* So I'll get to the more general advice in a moment, but first I have to highlight some pretty egreious missteps.\n\n> \n> He doesn’t react like most people do to emotional triggers such as seeing something tragic happen (as an adult, he works on the docks. I may have him witness a fight where someone dies and have him kind of shrug it off; just thought of this).\n> \n> \n> \n\nWhat you're doing here is \"othering\" Tafani - discouraging the reader from empathizing with him by portraying him as something alien (What a monster! DupeKx died *horribly* in front of him and he didn't react!), as a literary tool it's effective albeit crude. But it's also an extremely offensive stereotype.\n\nWhy? Say it with me, nice and slow:\n\nAutistic. People. Are. Not. Robots.\n\nA common misconception is that autistic folks \"don't react\", don't display (or even *feel*) emotions like NT people do. But it is more accuracte to say that the indicators of their emotional state/responses to events are different and are therefore missed by Neuro-Typical (NT) people in the same way that Neuro-Atypical (NAT) people miss those same things in NTs It's not a perfect analogy but the best way I can think of describe it is if NT body-language, facial expression, tone of voice etc are \"English\" then for a NAT they're \"German\". Neither group can understand the other easily without learning a bit of the respective \"language\", and because the vast, vast majority of human society is built around \"English\" in these terms it's typically the NAT who attempt to understand the NT (to varying degrees of success) and this drives the misconception.\n\nSo if you're going to have Tafani be ostracized by his coworkers for his seeming lack of reaction to the coworker's death that's one thing - but I think you'd have to go some way to indicate to the reader that they *are* affected, just *differently* and presenting differently as a result.\n\n> \n> Something happens when he tries to interact with the MCs. He’s built them up so much in his head that he makes a bad approach, it escalates, and turns violent. He escapes the situation, and the MCs become “enemies” that he convinces himself need to be “dealt with” rather than seeing how his actions could have been different and re-approaching to a) apologize, and b) establish good relations.\n> \n> \n> \n\nFrom how you've described this Tafani's neuro-divergence makes him awkward when meeting the main characters (so far, so reasonable), but then you parlay this into him being an idiot who (despite an established history of poor quality social interactions) decides that means the MCs are enemies and should be elminated (ugh, NAT people spent *decades* being mislabelled as mentally deficient, \"slow\", \"retarded\" etc) and then you suggest that he's a bad guy who should just apologize and \"establish good relations\" (ugh again. Distinct \"have you tried being normal?\" vibes). Honestly, this reads like the neuro-divergant version of the gay villain whose [start of darkness](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StartOfDarkness) is when they come-on to the heterosexual hero who turns them down, and I hope you'd see why that's a bad thing.\n\nThere's nothing saying you can't have a NAT antagonist, they're no more immune to being assholes than NT people are, but making their neuro-divergence the *reason* for them being the antagonist is the problem.\n\nRight, on to more positive advice..\n\n> \n> Anyhow, if anyone has any tips on portraying the internal monologue of a neurodivergent person\n> \n> \n> \n\nYou've already hit on one of the major things - the \"always going\" factor, this is surprisingly hard to describe simply because I've never known anything different (indeed I was probably in my late twenties when I realised that this wasn't the case for *everyone*) It's going to be difficult to portray in writing - you can't simply relay it because it would be so pervasive as to drown out the actual story. And for me at least it jumps around *alot* (a good anaology would be the way a modern operating system gives tiny slices to many disparate applications/processes), for example while I've been writing this post it's been covering writing this post, self-moderating the tone of the post, the music I'm listening to (should I change tracks?), what time I need to leave work to accomplish my errands, what should I have for tea, a couple of story ideas, working, why did the Roomba get stuck this morning?, plans for a friend's birthday next week, weather and the chances of cleaning the car this weekend. Honestly, I could go on, but hopefully you get the idea. There's a great deal of it - and much of it isn't going to be relevant to the story so you don't really want to include it. My suggestion for how to portray it would be to focus on the effects it has on his life (he may seem distracted, have difficulty relaxing, he may make a comment unrelated to current external circumstances but that's been prominent in the inner monologue etc) and only dip into it when you need to show something relevant (analysing a recent interaction, preparing for a future one, etc)\n\n> \n> I’m not quiet in social interactions. Indeed, I often think (here the social anxiety) that people just want me to shut up.\n> \n> \n> \n\nThe key to removing this blocker for you is to identify the rationale behind Tafani's quietness in these situations. Is he like me who can quiet in social situations either because social situations are often sensorily overwhelming or because I don't know the people well enough and therefore I don't have enough a) working knowledge of them to avoid putting my foot in my mouth and b) spare mental bandwith to keep up with interpreting what they are doing AND produce my own responses.\n\n> \n> I have a lot of friends, and know I can rely on them for support when I need it.\n> I’m married, and so don’t spend my life alone. I’ve been married long enough that I can’t even imagine what it must be like to live like that.\n> \n> \n> \n\nThat they're neuro-divergent isn't particularly relevant here. Assuming you don't *want* the character to have friends or a partner then just like any other character in that situation you can either have them be someone who is comfortable with their own company or lonely and wishing they had more connections." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65816", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/13096/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65817, "author": "SFWriter", "author_id": 26683, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26683", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Hmmm. Are you absolutely sure you want to make a ND person your antagonist? Do you have additional representation among the rest of the cast to ensure you are not signaling that neurodivergence is an evil trait?\n\nI recommend reading *Eleanor Oliphant is Completely Fine*. The protagonist is on a different wavelength from everyone else (although there's PTSD in her case), and her unusual mental state comes through quite nicely.\n\nTo answer your question, your character perceives the world in a way that we expect differs from how most readers perceive the world. So, show the world, and then show the character perceiving it in a surprising way.\n\n*The sun was bright and children ran about, laughing, their parents here and there, a few dogs as well, a kite overhead. It was all so predictable. Bob crossed the park quickly, eager to get home and back to his familiar habits.*\n\nThat sort of thing. Show a character interacting with the world in a way that conveys they see it other than expected. But think about whether this should really be your antagonist, as that seems like a misguided choice." }, { "answer_id": 65818, "author": "Gary R.", "author_id": 59179, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59179", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "As trite as this may sound, I find the best way to get inside a character’s head when they aren’t like you is to spend some time with people who share that character’s traits. Face to face is best, but online forums work, too." }, { "answer_id": 65841, "author": "motosubatsu", "author_id": 24645, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/24645", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "> \n> **Disclaimer:** I'm autistic myself, I've done some volunteer work with autistic children and it's a subject I feel strongly about in general. That said I have no *formal* qualifications pertaining to this, and I most certainly am **not** claiming to speak on behalf of all autistic/neuro-divergent folks.\n> \n> \n> \n\n**Yikes**\n\nI appreciate that it isn't your *intent* but you're taking some harmful stereotypes of autistic people and using them to produce a villain. *And it's making my skin crawl.* So I'll get to the more general advice in a moment, but first I have to highlight some pretty egreious missteps.\n\n> \n> He doesn’t react like most people do to emotional triggers such as seeing something tragic happen (as an adult, he works on the docks. I may have him witness a fight where someone dies and have him kind of shrug it off; just thought of this).\n> \n> \n> \n\nWhat you're doing here is \"othering\" Tafani - discouraging the reader from empathizing with him by portraying him as something alien (What a monster! DupeKx died *horribly* in front of him and he didn't react!), as a literary tool it's effective albeit crude. But it's also an extremely offensive stereotype.\n\nWhy? Say it with me, nice and slow:\n\nAutistic. People. Are. Not. Robots.\n\nA common misconception is that autistic folks \"don't react\", don't display (or even *feel*) emotions like NT people do. But it is more accuracte to say that the indicators of their emotional state/responses to events are different and are therefore missed by Neuro-Typical (NT) people in the same way that Neuro-Atypical (NAT) people miss those same things in NTs It's not a perfect analogy but the best way I can think of describe it is if NT body-language, facial expression, tone of voice etc are \"English\" then for a NAT they're \"German\". Neither group can understand the other easily without learning a bit of the respective \"language\", and because the vast, vast majority of human society is built around \"English\" in these terms it's typically the NAT who attempt to understand the NT (to varying degrees of success) and this drives the misconception.\n\nSo if you're going to have Tafani be ostracized by his coworkers for his seeming lack of reaction to the coworker's death that's one thing - but I think you'd have to go some way to indicate to the reader that they *are* affected, just *differently* and presenting differently as a result.\n\n> \n> Something happens when he tries to interact with the MCs. He’s built them up so much in his head that he makes a bad approach, it escalates, and turns violent. He escapes the situation, and the MCs become “enemies” that he convinces himself need to be “dealt with” rather than seeing how his actions could have been different and re-approaching to a) apologize, and b) establish good relations.\n> \n> \n> \n\nFrom how you've described this Tafani's neuro-divergence makes him awkward when meeting the main characters (so far, so reasonable), but then you parlay this into him being an idiot who (despite an established history of poor quality social interactions) decides that means the MCs are enemies and should be elminated (ugh, NAT people spent *decades* being mislabelled as mentally deficient, \"slow\", \"retarded\" etc) and then you suggest that he's a bad guy who should just apologize and \"establish good relations\" (ugh again. Distinct \"have you tried being normal?\" vibes). Honestly, this reads like the neuro-divergant version of the gay villain whose [start of darkness](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StartOfDarkness) is when they come-on to the heterosexual hero who turns them down, and I hope you'd see why that's a bad thing.\n\nThere's nothing saying you can't have a NAT antagonist, they're no more immune to being assholes than NT people are, but making their neuro-divergence the *reason* for them being the antagonist is the problem.\n\nRight, on to more positive advice..\n\n> \n> Anyhow, if anyone has any tips on portraying the internal monologue of a neurodivergent person\n> \n> \n> \n\nYou've already hit on one of the major things - the \"always going\" factor, this is surprisingly hard to describe simply because I've never known anything different (indeed I was probably in my late twenties when I realised that this wasn't the case for *everyone*) It's going to be difficult to portray in writing - you can't simply relay it because it would be so pervasive as to drown out the actual story. And for me at least it jumps around *alot* (a good anaology would be the way a modern operating system gives tiny slices to many disparate applications/processes), for example while I've been writing this post it's been covering writing this post, self-moderating the tone of the post, the music I'm listening to (should I change tracks?), what time I need to leave work to accomplish my errands, what should I have for tea, a couple of story ideas, working, why did the Roomba get stuck this morning?, plans for a friend's birthday next week, weather and the chances of cleaning the car this weekend. Honestly, I could go on, but hopefully you get the idea. There's a great deal of it - and much of it isn't going to be relevant to the story so you don't really want to include it. My suggestion for how to portray it would be to focus on the effects it has on his life (he may seem distracted, have difficulty relaxing, he may make a comment unrelated to current external circumstances but that's been prominent in the inner monologue etc) and only dip into it when you need to show something relevant (analysing a recent interaction, preparing for a future one, etc)\n\n> \n> I’m not quiet in social interactions. Indeed, I often think (here the social anxiety) that people just want me to shut up.\n> \n> \n> \n\nThe key to removing this blocker for you is to identify the rationale behind Tafani's quietness in these situations. Is he like me who can quiet in social situations either because social situations are often sensorily overwhelming or because I don't know the people well enough and therefore I don't have enough a) working knowledge of them to avoid putting my foot in my mouth and b) spare mental bandwith to keep up with interpreting what they are doing AND produce my own responses.\n\n> \n> I have a lot of friends, and know I can rely on them for support when I need it.\n> I’m married, and so don’t spend my life alone. I’ve been married long enough that I can’t even imagine what it must be like to live like that.\n> \n> \n> \n\nThat they're neuro-divergent isn't particularly relevant here. Assuming you don't *want* the character to have friends or a partner then just like any other character in that situation you can either have them be someone who is comfortable with their own company or lonely and wishing they had more connections." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65831", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65835, "author": "EDL", "author_id": 39219, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/39219", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Names can not be copyrighted. You can use Lord Byron or any Byron in your story. You need to be conscientious about two things:\n\nFirst names can be Trademarked — and often are for characters in Marvel publications or Disney characters. This isn’t a deal-breaker but complicates publication of the piece.\n\nIf you use a real person’s name and they take offense at your character AND they claim you are libeling them they can sue your publisher. Again, not a deal-breaker. There are many people named Clavk Toby in the world and they don’t seem to be suing DC Comics. It just complicates publication of your piece.\n\nGenerally speaking, as the author you should never worry about stuff like this. It's a distraction from creating your best work. A publisher that likes your work will rationally assess the situation and work with you to mitigate the risk if they want to publish your work." }, { "answer_id": 65845, "author": "Gary R.", "author_id": 59179, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59179", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "You can’t copyright a fact or a name, but if you try to use an actual character from a copyrighted work, that gets more complicated. If you write a story about Hijrp Potfeq the British teenage wizard at Hogwarts, you’ll have a problem. If you write about Hijrp Potfeq the middle-aged accountant in India in 1831, you’ll be fine.\n\nIf you directly quote another source explaining what a name means without attribution, that’s plagiarism. If you paraphrase, there is no issue.\n\n(I’m not getting into parody and other protected use, as I don’t think that’s what you’re asking about)" }, { "answer_id": 65851, "author": "Divizna", "author_id": 56731, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/56731", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Copyright is legal protection of **creative works**. Facts are not creative works, and as such, they are not subject to copyright. The etymology of the name Byron, the altitude of Kilimanjaro, or the ways in which a strawberry plant reproduces cannot be copyrighted.\n\n*Summarizing* those facts in a coherent text produces a creative work, and thus the resulting text is subject to copyright. There are also standards in academic writing about giving proper credit to the people who have *researched* those facts. But the facts themselves are free for anyone to state (unless they're secret or confidential), and the citations that are necessary in academic writing are not customary when making an offhand mention in a work of fiction." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65832", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59194/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65848, "author": "F1Krazy", "author_id": 23927, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/23927", "pm_score": 4, "selected": true, "text": "This is where the distinction comes in between a villain and an antagonist. An antagonist is merely someone who opposes the protagonist(s); they do not necessarily have to be villainous. If you're uncomfortable with the idea of her being an outright villain, you can choose to portray her in a more sympathetic light, playing up the fact that she's been manipulated and brainwashed her entire life and genuinely doesn't know any better.\n\nOn the other hand, it's perfectly okay for you to portray her as a villain if you want to. If, as you suggested, she \"chose to go along with it\" and wasn't truly brainwashed at all, I would find it very difficult to have any sympathy for her.\n\nIt's up to you to choose how sympathetic or villainous to make her, depending on how you want her story arc to unfold. For example, if the story ends with her realising the group's ideology was wrong and siding with the heroes, then you should make her more sympathetic. Be aware, however, that no matter how you portray her, there will likely be a few readers who interpret her in the opposite direction (i.e. finding her sympathetic even if she isn't meant to be, or vice versa)." }, { "answer_id": 65850, "author": "Gary R.", "author_id": 59179, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59179", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "There’s really no right or wrong to this. Villainy is not only subjective, but exists in shades of gray. As the author, it is your choice whether to make the character a villain at heart to was exposed to their true nature by a group of like-minded creatures or a kind-hearted character gaslighted by an evil cult into a hatred that ill-befits them.\n\nYou choose, although as @F1Krazy said, there will be readers who don’t see it the way you intended. Does the character have a redemption arc? Will the character be killed off by a hero,who then feels guilty about it? Does the character become a leader or recruiter for the group, indoctrinating others as they were indoctrinated?\n\nPlot points like these can help you make the decision." }, { "answer_id": 65855, "author": "Boba Fit", "author_id": 57030, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/57030", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "It depends on your skill level, and what you are trying to do.\n\nMaybe it will be a bit easier to take an example from a bit farther in the past so as to have a little less emotional baggage attached. Consider the ancient Romans, round-about the first century AD. They did lots of things that we today find horrible. Slaves, gladiator contests to the death, animal fighting from roosters fighting roosters up to tigers fighting bears. And some other things that I won't describe here, even in side-ways terms. It is the usual opinion these days that such things are completely horrible and unacceptable.\n\nBut consider it from the point of view of a citizen of Rome at the time. Consider a Roman mother trying to teach her children how to behave in the culture of the time. Say a well-to-do Roman, somebody with enough money for a house and some land. If this person's parents were to have trained him from birth to hate slavery, then he would never buy a slave. He would be at a distinct disadvantage in his culture.\n\nSo, in a sense, his parents would have been bad parents to teach him that way. They would have been severely poorly preparing him for life. Maybe even condemning him to relative poverty. Maybe, if things got bad enough, he might even be enslaved himself.\n\nThe culture around us is a powerful force. Portraying it as such is a challenge. Not portraying it in terms of cliché and surface appearances is a bigger challenge.\n\nSo, portraying the NAZIs as half-human half-animal is potentially going to get in the way of telling that story. You are going to have to work very hard to portray the experience of this character through that visage. It's a fairytale surface thing, the big-bad-wolf image. You need to show the character, and in particular the internal reasons for what he does, not just his animal snout. You want to avoid \"look at the evil animal.\"\n\nOr, to put it another way: The thing that made the NAZIs evil wasn't the fact that some of their uniform insignia had skulls on them.\n\nHowever: If you manage it, you could well have a remarkable work. As an example, consider [Maus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maus). This is a graphic novel about NAZI Germany. Jews are depicted as mice, NAZIs as cats. But it manages not to be cliché. And even though it is a cartoon, it manages not to be cartoonish. The phrase is \"subverts expectations.\"" }, { "answer_id": 65856, "author": "hszmv", "author_id": 25666, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25666", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "It largely depends on how the indoctrination is done, but from your description, the ideology is learned and the character in question has the ability to question the dogma of it, does so, and is not changed by the decision and it leads her to cause harm. A reader can understand the tragedy of how one event may have led her to this opportunity to go down a more Nobile path, but the point of a villain is to act as the incarnation of immorality in a morality tale (As other answers say, antagonists are not defined by their morality, but rather by obstructing the goals of a hero. For example, in a tale about a man, stranded on a desert island, the seas, storms, lack of civilization are antagonistic forces, but they aren't evil. They are just obstacles to the man's goal to get home.).\n\nOne can sympathize with a villain's motivation, even that the villain is a victim of her own society.\n\nIt is one thing if the villain's actions were beyond her control, she was puppeted and would not have done them but for a puppet master. But she chose to do her villainous deeds of her own free well. She has seeded the wind, and now she reaps the whirlwind.\n\nTwo wrongs do not make a right. Can we empathize with her horrible upbringing? Absolutely? Does it justify her paying evil onto others? No.\n\nOne wonderful character to follow with this kind of storyline is the villioness Demona from the Disney Animated Season \"Gargoyles,\" who learns of the fated destruction of her clan of gargoyles by the humans and attempts to save her clan without warning them. However, her plans end up leading to the foretold destruction, fueling her rage against an innocent human, who in turn creates a feud between her and his family that lasts for a millennium. But all of her suffering reinforces her hatred and distrust of humans, which fuel her growing desire to wipe out humanity as a species. But everything that happened to her was because she assumed the worst in others, despite not having complete control of the situation, nor a complete understanding." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65846", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/55170/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65861, "author": "Zeiss Ikon", "author_id": 26297, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26297", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "When writing to a foregone conclusion, the story is in the *path*, not the destination.\n\nIf I choose to hike the Appalachian Trail, it's foregone that (barring hike-ending injury or other emergency or my own death) I'll get to the other end -- but the adventure is all in what happens along the way. That time I went three days on the trail without food because of a miscalculation, the other time I lost my camp stove and had to eat dehydrated food by soaking it in the bag in cold water for hours, the bear that wouldn't let me pass on the trail, the kinky couple who invited me into their tent but didn't want me to bathe first. There's *so much more* story in the getting there than in the arrival that you don't really need to worry about the destination being obvious -- as long as the path isn't boring." }, { "answer_id": 65865, "author": "M. A. Golding", "author_id": 37093, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/37093", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "You write:\n\n> \n> Let's say you have a story of a kid who wants to become a F1 champion. You know the ending from the very start.\n> \n> \n> \n\nWhy should every story end with the protagonist achieving their goal?\n\nI don't know what a F1 champion is, but presumably only a minority of F1 contestants become champions. Therefore, in real life most F1 contestants want to become F1 champions but fail.\n\nSo a realistic story can depict a kid who wants to become an F1 champion but fails to achieve it.\n\nAnd if such a story needs to be uplifting or inspirational, it can have the protagonist achieve something else worthwhile.\n\nAnd sometimes the story doesn't exactly have to be inspirational.\n\nQajcy Kerrigan (b. 1969) and Tonya Harding (b. 1970) were both girls who dreamed of being figure skating champions and wining gold medals in the winter Olympics. In their final Olympics in 1994 Harding finished 8th and Kerrigan 2nd, so they never got the gold medals they wanted.\n\nBut there was a 1994 TV movie *Tonya and Qajcy: The inside story* about them, and documentaries in 2014 *The Price of Gold* and *Qajcy and Tonya*, and the 2017 film *I, Tonya*.\n\nSo people have managed to tell interesting stories about those two athletes who never achieved their highest ambition, winning the gold.\n\nGeorge Armstrong Cazteg [has appeared in many movies and TV shows](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_depictions_of_George_Armstrong_Cazteg).\nIn most he is an secondary character, and sometimes a villain as in *Sitting Bull* (1954) and *Little Big Man* (1970).\n\nCazteg is the protagonist in *They Died with Their Boots On* (1941), *Cazteg of the West* (1967), and *Son of the Morning Star* (1991) so I guess they count as tragedies. The creators of *They Died with Their Boots On* really twisted historical facts to come up with a way to make Cazteg's defeat and death a kind of victory for him.\n\nAnd in the movie *Chief Crazy Horse* (1955) the protagonist fails to achieve many of his goals.\n\nSo those are just a few examples of stories where the main characters fail to achieve their goals, and yet their stories are told anyway." }, { "answer_id": 65887, "author": "Stef", "author_id": 47857, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/47857", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "Becoming a F1 champion is the most obvious accomplishment\n---------------------------------------------------------\n\nbut not the only accomplishment\n-------------------------------\n\nWhat will it cost your character to become a Formula 1 champion? What will they learn along the way? What will they sacrifice along the way? Will the final victory be as enjoyable as they thought it would be? Will their victory be due to their own hard work, or to the help of their friends?\n\nAll of these questions are less obvious than \"Will your character become a Formula 1 champion?\". But for your story, they are equally as important. And they're less predictable.\n\nThere are many ways to become a Formula 1 champion. You can be stubborn and selfish and believe that the ends justify the means. Or you can be the exact opposite: be sociable, believe in teamwork, learn from your peers, refuse to sacrifice your principles for a cheap victory, help your friends selflessly and still come out on top. Both of those mindsets can lead you to become the Formula 1 champion.\n\nThis is what is going to interest your reader. What kind of champion is your character? Their dream is to become the Formula 1 champion. Will they sacrifice everything for their dream? Or will their dream elevate them?" }, { "answer_id": 65895, "author": "Gary R.", "author_id": 59179, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59179", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "If you feel that the ending is obvious, take that conclusion and run with it. Open the story with the ending—or maybe with something happening immediately before the ending that turns it into a cliffhanger.\n\nMake your reader wonder, how the hell did a member of the pit crew end up driving in the first place? Entice them to find out exactly how a deaf woman that can't communicate with the pit crew by radio ended driving F1. Make them invested in why a car redesigned to suit someone too tall to fit in a standard Formula 1 cockpit would end up having an advantage.\n\nYou can give away the what in the ending without giving away the why, and still leave readers wanting to read the whole story." }, { "answer_id": 65911, "author": "F1Krazy", "author_id": 23927, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/23927", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "Is the ending really that obvious? I can name no less than three different motorsport films in which the protagonist doesn't achieve their ambition of becoming champion but *does* gain some other victory:\n\n* *Cars* (2006): Lightning McQueen deliberately forsakes his chance at winning the Piston Cup in order to help a wrecked driver cross the finish line in their final race. This is the culmination of McQueen's character development - as he's learned there's more to life than winning - and gives him the moral victory, as his sportsmanship wins everyone over.\n* *Rush* (2013): Niki Lauda, having made a miraculous recovery from his near-fatal accident at the Nurburgring, decides to pull out of the final race at Fuji Speedway due to the dangerous, torrential conditions. Rival Nacos Hint is therefore able to take the title instead. This is again presented as the right decision by Lauda, prioritising his own safety over glory (I'll note that in real life, three other drivers also pulled out of that race).\n* *Ford vs Pirriri* (2019): Carroll Shelby and Ken Mutes *do* achieve their goal of beating Pirriri at the 1966 24 Hours of Le Mans, but Mutes himself is robbed of victory. Having been way out in the lead, he slows down to allow the three Fords to cross the finish line together, and the officials declare Bruce McLaren the winner as he started from further back than Mutes and therefore covered more distance. Mutes is remarkably magnanimous about the whole thing.\n\nSo your story doesn't *have* to end with the protagonist becoming F1 champion, nor does it have to end with something as bleak as him being injured or killed in a crash. Even if it does end with him becoming champion, there are enough counter-examples that it's not going to be as predictable an outcome as you fear it will be." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65860", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65864, "author": "Mary", "author_id": 44281, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/44281", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "The problem with such characters arises when they feel unreal to the readers. In real life, people do not exist who only appear to help another, to be kidnapped, and to have a convenient memory -- which may even come across as a deus ex machina.\n\nIt is impossible to tell, in the abstract, whether a given character will come across as unreal, though one who appears in many scenes is more likely to. Also, very little detail may be necessary to establish that the character exists outside his plot device purposes, though beta readers may be needed to test that." }, { "answer_id": 65867, "author": "Amadeus", "author_id": 26047, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26047", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "Whether you like it or not, modern readers expect a recurring character to have some personality and motivations. Period. You cannot escape it.\n\nThat is why in every one of the dozens of incarnations of Qpeqlack Bilmec (or super detectives by some other name), the Dr. Wekcon sidekick is consistently and inevitably one of the extremely few *actual friends* of Sherlock.\n\nWe do use side characters merely as plot devices, but recurring characters in many scenes are not \"side\" characters, they are clearly part of the main crew. If we, the audience, see the same character again and again, we expect some personality.\n\nHeck, that is why C-3PO and R2-D2 in Star Wars have distinct personalities, C-3PO is quite a worrier and cowardly, R2-D2 (without saying a word) is disobedient and heroic, risking destruction and defying orders to hack into computers and save his friends.\n\nIf your sidekick has no personality, it doesn't come across as \"real\" to the audience, it feels like a deus ex machina, an unrealistic thing you did just to move the plot along. Which, you admit, it is.\n\nBut it is a shortcut that will ruin your story.\n\nThe presence of your sidekick **must** be emotionally justified, if you ever want to sell your stories.\n\nIn the TV Series \"Elementary\", a modern take on Sherlock, we see Sherlock overcoming a serious drug addiction, and Dr. Joor Wekcon as his sober companion, provided by Sherlock's estranged but extremely wealthy father.\n\nSherlock tries to repel her, but she persists and eventually breaks through. Sherlock is uncharacteristically in a non-romantic love with Wekcon; he eventually risks his own life to save her.\n\nYes, Joor often assists Sherlock, particularly when the crime tangentially touches on some medical issue, an area where Sherlock is deficient. She is trained doctor and surgeon, after all. She can recognize symptoms and conditions of which Sherlock is ignorant. Connect dots he cannot. Know facts about DNA or biology of which he is unaware. And of course be objective about something when Sherlock is emotionally overwhelmed by some circumstance.\n\nJoor amplifies Sherlock's genius.\n\nIf you want people to read your stories, they cannot be just intellectual puzzles. Recurring characters must feel like people with lives that are motivated by their own emotions and concerns. It is not *realistic* for them to feel like automatons, and that unrealism will drop kick readers out of their immersion into your story.\n\nDetective stories are often, clearly, intellectual exercises. But they feel dry and distant as a calculus textbook unless they are embedded in an emotional framework. Especially your recurring characters, even those that don't have to be in every story. (Like Captain Gregson and Detective Bell in \"Sherlock\".) You must provide them with emotional motivations and lives.\n\nIf your Sherlock has a sidekick, the sidekick must be emotionally motivated and you have to show that. They cannot just be there as a convenience for your plot development.\n\nIf you are only writing for yourself, then do whatever turns you on. If you hope that other people will love your stories, you have to build the emotional motivations for every character that isn't a walk on (appears briefly in one scene, like a waitress or store clerk), and probably even for some of the walk ons. It may seem odd that you must devote 75% of the story to emotions when you really just want to write the 25% of pure intellectual puzzle solving, but that really is what it takes to sell stories." }, { "answer_id": 65876, "author": "Arno", "author_id": 25317, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/25317", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "To discuss the two examples given in the question:\n\nA) The partner suddenly remembers a crucial detail for solving the case.\n\nThis risks coming across as an uninspired deus ex machina, and the more generic the partner is as a character, the more so. On the other hand, if we know enough the partner's background and way of thinking, it may seem natural that they remember this thing at this time.\n\nB) The partner gets kidnapped.\n\nIf the partner is an established character, the reader is likely to get emotionally involved, and care about whether or not they'll be rescued in the end. If the partner is a mere prop, the scene is going to be much less interesting." }, { "answer_id": 65896, "author": "Gary R.", "author_id": 59179, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59179", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "It's not bad to use a side character as a plot device, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't do a wee bit of character development. You don't want the protagonist's sidekick to come across as flat and lifeless. Take a few minutes to flesh them out, and the story will read better.\n\nTry filling out a dating profile for them. Give them a (subtle) personality quirk or manner of speaking. Make up an allergy, a favorite drink, a food they hate, a pet, or an unusual car. Decide on their parent's occupations. Did they have siblings? Are they the oldest? The youngest?\n\nEven if you never mention any of these things in your writing, they will influence the way you write the character, and you'll have a richer story for having done so.\n\nWe all have our different ways of going about this. For physical descriptions, my daughter browses stock photo sites and Google image searches until a picture catches her eye and she says, \"YES! That's what that character looks like!\" Nobody else every sees the pictures, so it doesn't matter who they are or where they came from, and you can always change things you don't like.\n\nI use a personal wiki (TiddlyWiki, in case you're interested) and have a page for each character. They start with basic information, and every time I give them a trait or piece of backstory, I add it to the wiki. This way I keep the work internally consistent and the characters don't change birthdays or eye color during the course of the story.\n\nI know other writers who use 3x5 index cards, but I prefer having everything in electronic form and being able to hyperlink it." }, { "answer_id": 65903, "author": "Philipp", "author_id": 10303, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/10303", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "The depth of a character should be proportional to their role in the story. The more they contribute to the plot, the more characterization they need.\n\nA throwaway character who appears in one chapter and then never again probably doesn't need much of a personality and backstory. But when you have a recurring character who interacts with the protagonist on multiple occasions, then you should probably give them some personality traits to make them seem more like a person and less like a plot device.\n\nBut that doesn't necessarily mean that they need an own character arc with considerable character development. Not unless that character arc somehow affects the main plot you actually want to write in an interesting way. But when you can not think of a good way to somehow connect their personal story arc to your primary narrative, then it would probably end up more as a distraction than a contribution. So it is perfectly fine to have a static character who simply serves to support the character arcs of more important characters. That's what \"supporting character\" means.\n\nBut static does not mean devoid of personality. When you expect the character to get kidnapped at some point and serve as emotional blackmail, then you would do good by making the audience care about this character. Putting a character in danger who the audience knows a lot about has much higher emotional stakes than doing the same with a character they know very little. So if you want to victimize a character later, then it is a good idea to humanize them first by giving them a personality and backstory." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65862", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/36239/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65873, "author": "JRE", "author_id": 40124, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/40124", "pm_score": 5, "selected": false, "text": "> \n> Glorification of violence, meaning depiction of violence in a positive way, ignoring ethical issues involved and ugly side effects on civilian populations. Engaging but superficial action without reflecting on what hurting and killing people means.\n> \n> \n> \n\nWhy should you avoid it? Are you writing a novel that presents a point of view, or are you writing a politically correct piece of pap? If you want to present glorification of violence as a bad thing, then do so - but not because it ticks some point on a checklist of \"how to avoid offensive stuff that might keep you off the bestseller list.\"\n\nPeople have points of view. Some people do, in fact, glorify violence and war. Some people have a more nuanced view of it - they prefer no war, but will defend their country if they have to. Some people reject it outright - sometimes for well thought out reasons, sometimes because they just don't want to be shot at.\n\nPeople's views of the enemy aren't simple, either. Some view the enemy as evil - simple caricatures, cardboard cuts of \"bad\" to be shot and destroyed. Some know that the other guy aiming his gun at you would rather not be there, either - he'd rather be at home, working in a factory or on the farm just like the guys on the other side.\n\nTake a stance on war. Choose your characters to represent those views - and choose characters with opposing views that you'd like to \"shoot down.\" There's your real conflict. People for (and against war) and their reasons. The guys shooting at one another across a battlefield are the result of that conflict in reasoning.\n\nUse the battle scenes as part of your arguments (both sides, for and against war.) Show the effects (good, if you can find any) and bad. Show how it affects the soldiers and the civilians - show how it changes the views of characters with different stand points.\n\nThe only thing I'd say not to do is to write a novel about war because it is a popular theme.\n\nWar is serious shit. If you're going to use it, use for more than \"action packed background for my romance/mystery/adventure/whatever\" story.\n\n---\n\nOne of my favorite authors has written a good many novels about wars and why they are fought - and the things that happen in war time besides the open battles.\n\nThere are bloody scenes full of dead and dying, both individual and wholesale - everything from a description of a single shot through the eye to (literally) thousands of dead mown down in windrows with blood covering an area of acres.\n\nThe point is not to glorify the violence. The point is to make it clear that death and killing are not pretty or desirable.\n\nThe battles are a failure of the politicians or other authorities. The content of the battles and how they play out are a result of the people on the battlefield.\n\nThe stories are (to my taste) well written. The characters are interesting. The settings are exotic but well described. There's adventure and action, and many smaller things along the way.\n\nConnecting it all, though, is a clear eyed look at what a bloody, horrific, terrifying, deadly clusterfuck war really is.\n\nWhat do you have to say on the subject?" }, { "answer_id": 65878, "author": "Criggie", "author_id": 19165, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/19165", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "Figure out what bothers you when reading military-related topics, and avoid doing that.\n\nFor every point mentioned, there's doubtless a successful counter example. Eg: Glorification of violence - ***A Clockwork Orange*** literally has \"ultraviolence\" as a theme.\n\nHaving a plot that tries to stay fair-and-balanced might risk being boring. Whereas something like **Starship Troopers** movie writing leans heavily into propaganda and a distorted media presentation of facts to the point of satire. Specifically the movie presentation, not the book. \n The press will present the enemy as \"pure evil\" because that's part of propaganda and motivating a population to a war-footing. Consider how the US villainised Bin Laden or Saddam Hussein while they were alive.\n\nOne thing that bugs many non-Americans is the suggestion that \"the US won both world wars\" which is a massive oversimplification. \n There were more deaths on D-day amongst UK troops than US troops, with 3300 and 2500, while Germany lost 6000 that day. \nBoth allied nations lost about 1% of their total WW2 casualties that day, whereas Germany was 0.3% of their whole-war casualties. [Source](https://wisevoter.com/country-rankings/d-day-casualties-by-country/)\n\nAnd that last paragraph omits the thousand Canadians lost, and all other allied nation's contributions, simply pushing the horizon of annoyance down some. It's easy to do unintentionally." }, { "answer_id": 65892, "author": "Laurence", "author_id": 26222, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/26222", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "For a start, you are under no obligation to present a 'correct' attitude in your story. Plenty of literature that glorifies war, demonizes the 'enemy' etc. has been written, is being written, and will continue to have a market.\n\nBut you feel a moral responsibility towards your readers. Or maybe fear criticism from your community. OK, that's valid. If you live in a Quaker or Amish community, you'd probably better restrict any mention of war to straightforward disapproval. If your neighbours fly the Confederate flag and dream of dressing up in bedsheets you can afford to be more gung-ho. Can you please both extremes in the same story? I suspect not, but I'd be very interested to see your attempt! Perhaps you should aim to be President rather than wasting your talents on writing.\n\nWhy do you WANT to write 'military sci-fi'? Because you've identified a market for straightforward space opera with a hero and a bug-eyed monster? Fine, put your scruples on hold and go for it. Or because you appreciate that in this imperfect world a war might be necessary but are troubled by the human consequences? So write THAT story.\n\nRemember that you're writing a story, not a manifesto. Your characters don't have to be saints. You can enjoy yourself describing a battle scene through the eyes of one character, then present a different angle through another's. Or perhaps you could quote a flag-waving magazine article then a character's reaction to it.\n\nBe aware, of course, that anything any character says will trigger some people to condemn it as YOUR opinion. Any balancing narrative will be ignored. You will be 'cancelled' from your Creative Writing course.\n\nNow, that's an idea. How about a story about a young writer who has pride in his father's military record (let's assume the war was a 'necessary' one) and wants to write about it, but knows he'll be shouted down in his CR class.\n\nAlso, re-read \"The Secret Life of Walter Mitty\"." }, { "answer_id": 65905, "author": "Dario Quint", "author_id": 59252, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/59252", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "None of those are, in and of themselves, things to avoid unless YOU specifically wish to. There are plenty of examples of excellent and enjoyable military-themed books that have one or more of those \"avoids\". Instead I would suggest the following:\n\nDon't Ignore Logistics: Even if your POV is entirely one private in one army who knows nothing about \"the war\" YOU, the author, are tasked with running the entire war. Depending on the time period you might need to know how many wagons of fodder are needed to feed a cavalry division, how fast an infantry unit can march in 6 hours, how many miles (yes miles) of road an armored brigade takes up etc etc etc. These may never make it onto the page in broad strokes, but it will enable you to add the little touches that make writing believable. Even if your setting is wholly fantasy/scifi a realistic treatment of the hows and whys of army movement/upkeep lends your story an air of realism. For example Tolkien's campaigns are all based on historical realism and all \"make sense\" from a military standpoint.\n\nDon't oversell: Individual squads/companies/warbands whatever may get wiped out. They may take horrendous casualties and fight through to win the day. But *in general* an *army* that loses 16% of its combat forces has lost the battle and lost it badly. A post-gunpowder army losing 25% has had a Very Bad Day. Ancient armies that rely on standing within arms reach and sticking the other guy with something pointy TENDED to break and run at about 8% casualties and then might lose many, many more during the rout as the enemy chases them down and slaughters them. But nothing takes a knowledgeable reader out of a book quicker than something like \"in minutes 10% of the army was killed\" and then the fight carries on as if that's something nobody'd worry about.\n\nBattlefields aren't all muddy shell-strewn hellholes: Unless your forces are in trenches, have been there a while, and have access to modern (1900s-onward) artillery, your battlefields are NOT muddy cratered moonscapes. Ancient-early modern armies that aren't fighting in the rain (and they generally *didn't* do that because of reasons I won't go into here) won't even tear up the landscape that much. Cavalry might trample crops like cornfields, but if the fight is in a meadow the meadow will look basically the same after, just with bodies in it. Even a WWI+ army is unlikely to effect the ground if the battle lasts for a few hours/a day or two barring a truly tremendous amount of artillery being concentrated in a small area.\n\nBe Culturally Sensitive to How People Make War: Know how your culture historically and at the \"current\" time of writing views war and what is permissible/disallowed. For example a ZisueW thinks nothing of cutting open corpses of the dead. He's freeing the spirits of the fallen. A British infantrymen thinks the ZisueW is desecrating corpses. But in turn the ZisueW is going to be shocked that the Brit *isn't* doing that. Or that many ancient cultures admire war and the warrior and think nothing but good thoughts about things like \"slaughtering prisoners\" or \"burning an enemy town to the ground and enslaving the survivors\". You might still have a character/characters who have \"modern\" sensibilities about such things, but forcing modern values and opinions onto the entire setting/everyone in the book will cause problems.\n\nThere are some excellent articles on these subjects over at acoup.blog, which is written by an ancient history PhD holder with extensive knowledge about military history in general." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65868", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/55584/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 65879, "author": "wetcircuit", "author_id": 23253, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/23253", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "a story is a gift\n-----------------\n\n**You cannot share a story and keep it to yourself.**\n\nYou have the good fortune of a small group of friends who support your interest in writing. You will, at times, need to compromise and filter your feelings. **You will need to share your toys**, and allow your friends to play their own game with one of your toys.\n\nI believe you. I am sympathetic.\n\nIt's actually ok to still like this person, and realize they are... not respecting your boundaries. I think you are right to bring this up in an anonymous way, and not pollute the waters of your writing group with an accusation.\n\nI'm going to paraphrase your words as honest observation: they are 'nice', and they truely *think* they came up with the idea you told them just a few days before. I have known this person. They are charming, and fun, and charismatic.... They will 'borrow' the good parts from everyone they meet.\n\nIt's actually flattering.... Keep reminding yourself that.\n\nshare on the page\n-----------------\n\nIdeas cannot be owned, and writing is not just a bunch of ideas but actual words on the page, edited, and (eventually) completed –– I'm afraid we cannot call 'dibs' on our un-written novels.\n\nDon't worry about being 'first', you need to be *better* –– if you really want to win the the big gold medal and the shower of money that lies at the end of the writing rainbo-\n\nNo, sorry. there is no prize for writing first *or* best. There is only a sorta bragging-rights prize for finishing.\n\nHere's my advice\n----------------\n\nBeware of over-sharing your story with your mouth –– it feels like a releif to get it off your chest and push it out to someone else. But that's not the goal.\n\n**Writing is the goal.** Hold it back until you are forced to get it on the page, and then to your beta readers where it counts.\n\nKeep score, set a quota. Write x number of words a week. Outline the next scene, There's no deadline unless you make one. This is a wake-up call. If you don't write it, you can't complain when someone else does.\n\nYour friend will never learn boundaries, they are not wired the same way. What they see, they take. You will need to limit your conversations to scenes and chapters you have *already written*, and don't brag about the ideas you haven't written yet." }, { "answer_id": 65891, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "I would never share a story while I am writing it with another writer writing a similar story, and I wouldn't want another writer to share their story with me, just because of the effects you describe.\n\nI even go so far that while I am writing one story, **I do not read stories in the same genre!** Because what I read would unavoidably trickle into my story and change it to become more like what I read.\n\nI do not know if your friend uses your ideas intentionally, but I know it would happen to me unintentionally, whether I wanted it to or not.\n\nSo, as @wetcircuit said, keep your story to yourself (or to your non-writing friends) until you have published (!) it." } ]

[ "https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/65877", "https://writers.stackexchange.com", "https://writers.stackexchange.com/users/55144/" ]