From runester@ix.netcom.com Tue, 05 Sep 1995 06:23:25 GMT
From: runester@ix.netcom.com ("Astro Mutt")
Newsgroups: alt.sex.stories.d
Subject: Readers Request: Pointers on better writing
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 1995 06:23:25 GMT
I enjoy reading the stories posted on A.S.S. But have found that some common errors detract from the desired impact by causing readers like me to focus more on the problem then on the story. I hope to help improve the quality of stories posted, not as an expert writer but as an experienced reader. This article is not meant to offend anyone, just offer some common sense pointers that could help some very promising authors.
The thing I have no intention of commenting on is subject matter; I enjoy reading many different types of stories. Besides, it wouldn't be called Alt.Sex.Stories if the stories didn't contain graphic sexual content. The pointers here are only about style and technique.
I would also like to invite any interested parties to suggest changes and additions to this document. Complaining is not enough, suggesting a solution makes you part of the answer not just the problem. That also applies to this 'Readers Request.' Since I am not an expert in either the English language nor writing technique (just a good-hearted Samaritan trying to help) I'm sure there are some flaws within this document. Don't just point them out, suggest a correction. Making this a cooperative effort could be very rewarding.
My writing history (if anyone cares) is divided between amateur works of fiction and professionally writing things like ad copy and technical specs. I like writing the interesting stuff, but get paid for all the boring stuff!
Contents:The vast majority of writing errors fall within four main categories. Each category is really a level of abstraction ranging from the way you spell the words to how you introduce your characters. The higher the level of abstraction, the more the problem is prone to interpretation. What one person sees as a clumsy description may be seen by someone else as indicative of the mind set of the portrayed character. Instead of focusing on whether something is problematic or purposeful, I'll just point out some areas that authors should consider and then they can decide for themselves.
To keep my examples from pointing at a particular author(s) I will use
an imaginary story best summed up as: Foo meets Bar
This is the least-abstract, hardest to argue about, and easiest to fix problem area. Some misspelling on the Net is expected, not many people have a spell checker in their news reader or Emailer, but those are not really the tools most appropriate for authoring works that range in the hundreds to thousands of written lines. The advantage of writing a story with some word processor that offers spell checking (at least) and possibly grammar checking can not be over-stated. Besides, every word processor I've seen has a 'save as ASCII' option that is perfect for uploadable stories.
Now, let's look at an example of how much difference there can be when spelling and grammar are overlooked.
<<Foo, holdin Bar's rite paw, gently reachs around to teh back of her blose adn pops open the first button. >>
Well, the thought is okay but the spelling stinks! Let's try again.
<<Foo, holding Bar's right paw, gently reaches around to the back of her blouse and pops open the first button. >>
Please notice that the content and meaning did not change, it just becomes easier to read. In fact, many of the pointers in this document should be transparent -- what is supposed to be noticed is your superb writing, not the details of technique!
What I mean by structure is the way sentences and paragraphs (of correctly spelled words!) are organized within a document. It is standard English to make each sentence contain a whole thought, and each paragraph to contain a set of topically-related sentences. Some exceptions may be dialog (for effect) and possibly stream-of-consciousness type writing. Still, these exceptions are usually clearly set off from the main body of writing by quotes and/or hanging indents. The majority of the story should probably use standard English writing conventions. This includes placing dialog in separate paragraphs.
Another wrong way to do it:
<<Bar, quivering with anticipation, looks into Foo's eyes and whispers, "Take me you fuzzy stud, you. Make my stuffing leak out!" To which Foo replied, "You're the warmest, cuddliest, teddy bear I've ever brought back to my pad." "Oh, you say the nicest things.">>
How about this way:
<<Bar, quivering with anticipation, looks into Foo's eyes and whispers, "Take me, you fuzzy stud, you. Make my stuffing leak out!"
Foo replies, "You're the warmest, cuddliest, teddy bear I've ever brought back to my pad."
"Oh, you say the nicest things.">>
It is always easier to follow the conversation and thoughts it expresses if it follows the correct format.
This is my personal pet peeve. Without ranting or raving it should be pointed out that many readers use the story to build pictures in their minds as the scenes unfold. What happens when the picture is abruptly changed by an inconsistent statement? The picture is shattered. I usually end up going back and rereading the paragraph to see if I missed something, then just chalk it up as another case of poor proofreading. Not only inner inconsistency but inconsistency with the reality being used. For example, using cars in a story placed in the old west, or referring to sidearms of the future as 'six-shooters.' Technically anything can be done in a work of fiction, no need to nail it to reality. But, there is the inner reality that needs to be consistent for the reader to willingly suspend their disbelief. Authors are allowed to make up any set of rules and story conditions they want, but readers will always know when authors break their own rules.
Let me show you an example of inconsistent imagery.
<<Foo and Bar, stepping out of the car, stand together and glance around the lightly wooded park to see if anyone is in visible distance. After deciding it is safe, Foo spreads a blanket on the ground while Bar begins unpacking their picnic basket. Before Bar can finish, Foo pulls her close and kisses the nape of her furry neck. She shudders and leans back on the car seat, drawing Foo on top of him.>>
So, which is male and which female, Foo or Bar? Are they in or out of the car? The first sentence states that they both step out of the car and stand together. The last sentence implies that they are in the car again. From the previous paragraphs and the beginning of the last sentence, Foo is male and Bar female. But, the last phrase, "drawing Foo on top of him," suggests that Bar is male.
The gender confusion is probably just a typo, 'him' for 'her.' The other error is something else entirely. Perhaps the author revised the work and wanted a steamy backseat scene, and added it in without noticing the first sentence in the paragraph. The problem is, the image the author has is consistent within their own mind, but poorly communicated. It really is important to get your point across, and correctly describe the scene you picture in your head. Thinking it is not enough! You need to, as a good author, get your reader to think it also.
Though this area irritates me the most, it is hard to point out logic errors to amateur authors when big name writers of novels and screenplays make some of the most absurd errors imaginable in this area. There is a new mega budget movie that came out this summer dealing with lots of water. I'm sure you know the one (I won't name any names). It amazed me that $175M couldn't buy a good screenwriter or perhaps a technical expert. I was wowed by scenes of urine filtration and electrolysis, after it had been carefully explained that fresh water was hyper rare. Hmmmm, unlimited supply of salt water and sunshine and even though they could filter urine and use generators to split water into gas no one could come up with a way to distill drinkable water? And that was only one of the odd inconsistencies (cloth balloons holding hydrogen, deep sea diving with a plastic diving bell and no bends on resurfacing) that made me sign that movie off as poorly written.
Almost every book on writing technique I have ever read (yes, that would be several) suggests putting your work away for a few days then rereading it with a fresher perspective and an eye for errors and inconsistencies.
It should also be pointed out that these errors are not going to be caught by a spell checker or grammar checker or even something like Grammatik 5 (which checks for almost everything!) The only way to catch these errors is to have a person proofread your work, even if you have to do it yourself. Trust me, it is worth it.
This is the most abstract problem area, and therefore most prone to debate. I call it MacroStyle because it is not any of the other areas listed and seems to be much more abstract then the rest. [Besides, I couldn't think of a better name.] What I am referring to is the way the story and characters within the story progress over several paragraphs, perhaps even the whole length of the work. When characters and situations are described, they are expected to stay consistent or change with adequate cause over some space. Sudden changes or inconsistent character behaviors, with no accompanying explanation, are disturbing to the reader. Surprise endings are one thing, but (for example) having a sweet loving character flash into sudden rage and then back with no further explanation or comment is poor technique.
It has been said that short stories are like line drawings, every part is there to add to the whole and no unnecessary strokes are present. Likewise, every part, scene, character and action in a story should add something meaningful to the whole. Changing character qualities is a very important part of writing, but if the change happens in an inconsistent way or with no subsequently logical cause, the story will ring false. Ringing false is that odd sense that the author rushed through or forgot something, instead of the sense of immersion in an intriguing tale.
Sex stories fall into this category when characters that were very reserved suddenly become kink monsters, or when passionate characters act cold and reserved. The tricky part of this discussion is that these behaviors MAY be consistent with some stories. What makes it an error is when it seems out of place and adds nothing to the story line. If it adds some element consistent with the way the story has or will progress then it is wholly necessary, otherwise it is an error.
The best way to detect something at the MacroStyle level is to read it and let other people read it. Find out if there is a portion of the story that seems rushed or inconsistent with the way the rest is written and presented. In the end, only the author can decide if more work is necessary or if that portion is a deliberate attempt to create an 'effect.'
Though no one would suggest that works of fiction posted free by amateurs (and some pro's too!) should meet the same requirements that professionally published works should, but it certainly is possible! The goal of this document is to point out some simple ways to improve what I really feel is an important part of literature. The stories posted to USENET News are not screened by editors or watered down by moralists but can really represent raw creativity and talent when well written. Perhaps hundreds of thousands of people read the stories in A.S.S, more then the distribution of many magazines and journals - especially considering the content! Where else can stories of frank sexuality in almost any imaginable form be readily available for no special cost (other then Internet access fees) and with the possibility of discussing the story with fellow readers and author's alike?
On one hand, I would like to see the end to all efforts to censor the Internet. On the other hand I would really like to see deliberate attempts to improve the quality and quantity of what is presented. I am not the only person with these goals, many others discuss stories and offer excellently written reviews with the hopes of improving and supporting their favorite news groups. I just want to join those ranks and do what I can.
EMail me at: runester@sojourn.com
or runester@ix.netcom.com
And be sure to check out my home page:
http://www.sojourn.com/~runester/web/index.htm
Regards;
Runester