WRITER'S CORNER

[Anonymous No.4460004]

Fellow writers,

This is a thread in which to share our difficulties, support each other, and provide valuable tips from our own experiences and theoretical learning.

Have a good time!

[Anonymous No.4460013]

I'd be interested in everyone's writing process. Here's how I usually do it:

- write down notes in my notebook with all the starting ideas I have for a story (short stories, I've never tackled a novel so far)

- work stuff out in my head until I have a good spine to write around

- write

I was never one to need too much planning, same for essays and other types of text.

[Anonymous No.4460017]

>show, don't tell

I've been reading some novels where there's quite a bit of "tell", rather than show, and it was just fine: basically big loads of information on the history of the fictional universe and such.

Would you agree that this furious need to show and not tell is potentially an attempt to read like a movie? When Hemingway did it, movies weren't very evolved, so it was definitely something new and interesting, but nowadays, telling is something only books can do, amd most contemporary authors have been told ad nauseum that to "tell" is bad writing. I'm not so sure anymore.

Naturally, the main points of this remain, but do we agree to say that certain sections are best told and not shown?

[Anonymous No.4460028]

I wrote a whole essay on the present tense in fiction.

I haven't posted it anywhere yet. The TL;DR goes like this: present tense is used for an effect which it doesn't really achieve since you build the events in your mind the exact same way regardless of what tense it is written in; using present tense only draws attention to the fact that you're trying to make things "more present", drawing attention to the illusion-making process rather than creating a convincing illusion.

In other words,

>He opened the door, took a hammer, and bashed John's skull in.

and

>He opens the door, takes a hammer, and bashes John's skull in.

both create the same scene in your head; the difference is that one of these is trying too hard and pretending that this shit is happening RIGHT NOW is counter-productive, because you know it's not. Instead of improving the illusion, it creates a second thing we have to overcome to get immersed.

[Anonymous No.4460030]

>>4460017
You can show without action or description, by character's thoughts.

[Anonymous No.4460031]

>>4460030

Character's thoughts isn't showing, because you can't see thoughts, you can only be told them.

[Anonymous No.4460035]

>>4460030

>doesn't understand what is meant by "show, don't tell"

>tell: "John thought it was very sad that his wife wanted to divorce him; he thought he was going to cry."

>show: "John sat by the window and looked into the distance. His eyes were more shiny than usual."

Guess which is better.

[Anonymous No.4460040]

>>4460035

Ahhhh, I get it now. Thanks!

[Anonymous No.4460044]

>>4460031
>>4460035
John wondered if that bitch would take the house.

That's showing, my friends.

[Anonymous No.4460048]

>>4460040

Welcome.

[Anonymous No.4460050]

>>4460044

It's not showing.

>wondered

How do you see someone wonder about this and guess, from seeing the character, that they're wondering about that?

"Show, don't tell," came about when narrators stayed outside character's minds, which means not having access to their thoughts, which is the exact opposite of what you're doing. You don't understand what we mean by show/tell.

[Anonymous No.4460054]

>>4460050
Its showing he's worried about a divorce rather than saying 'He worried about a divorce.'

You don't know what you're talking about.

[Anonymous No.4460075]

>>4460054

Everything is showing, then, or everything is telling. You clearly don't know what you're talking about or you're trolling.

For others, who may not know about this deal, though, this is the best summary of it:

>>4460035

Basically, one gets into the characters' mind and the other is like a camera, perceiving only what you'd perceive if you were there.

What we call "telling" is like the voice off in a movie, and everything else is the "showing".

Showing is showing through a scene, basically, while telling is just being told, straight from the narrator. Another example:

>Ella's hand trembled as she held her glass.

>Ella worried that the news might be bad.

One SHOWS because it SHOWS you what you'd see if you were there (camera mode), while the other does no such things, and just gets into Ella's head and tells you what's happening there. That's what we call "telling", as opposed to showing.

It's not very hard to grasp. If you persist in not understanding, I'll consider you a troll for the rest of the thread.

[Anonymous No.4460078]

>>4460030
>>4460044

Give us an example of telling, then.

>>4460054

Cancer.

[Anonymous No.4460087]

I always end up being self conscious about what I write. My paragraphs stay small and little because I usually worry about when would be a good idea to make a new one. Then I over analyze what I already wrote and go back and fix or change something.

[Anonymous No.4460095]

>>4460075

No. You're getting confused. Those are terrible examples.

Both Ella examples are showing, but the second one is poor. Telling is essentially just detached exposition.

>Ella's hand trembled as she held her glass.

That is showing. We SEE she is worried.

>Last week Ella had a breast scan, the results were due today.

This is telling. Exposition detached from character action or interaction, either introvert or extrovert.

An editor would never pick you up on internal reflections.

[Anonymous No.4460099]

>>4460087

Neil Gaiman said, “Perfection is like chasing the horizon. Keep moving.”

[Anonymous No.4460101]

>>4460078
>>4460075
You don't get it.

Telling: Harry was suicidal.

Showing: Harry wondered if he'd feel anything if he shot a bullet into his head.

Pretty simple

[Anonymous No.4460103]

>>4460095
That second quote is telling, but it's not telling the same thing as the first. So Ella had a breast scan, maybe she's not scared. Maybe she's in a novel by Palahinuk and has some sort of existential fearlessness going on, you don't know.

[Anonymous No.4460123]

I recently signed a two book deal with a large, reputable London based publishing house. I am currently writing the second of my two books. It's going well.

Here's my method, if it helps anyone else. I tend to write between 1k to 2k words in a day (sometimes more, but if it is, it's usually LOADS more, done about 8k in a day before – on a brilliant drug called modafinil). Then the next day, or writing session, I go over those words, tweak and edit, then continue onto my next batch.

I find going over yesterday's work is both essential and also acts as a great entry into the next bit of writing. It also becomes exponential and habit.

In terms of planning, I spend a huge amount of my time going over little plot points, or thinking about snippets of dialogue – doing other tasks such as work or exercise does help. Recently I’ve learned that writing is by far the best inspiration for writing. So if you’re stuck on one scene, don’t be scared to just skim over a bit to get to something you know needs to be written. However, this does leave you with bits that need to be bridged later, which can be a bit laborious. And often writing to a scene you’re excited about can be motivation in itself, so be wary of that.

Other tips include: don’t be attached, don’t be scared to let go. I’ve written, edited, tweaked and poured months into whole novels that will never see the light of day. And that’s fine. Nothing is wasted.

Writing novels also teaches you to think larger and fairly soon you don't quibble too much over the small stuff - the kind of hang ups that most short story writers, students and the average unpublished pleb (a lot of you) spend weeks over analysing. You do all that at a later date.

Success is about 75 perseverance and hard work and 25 talent and ability. Having more of the former can account for the latter, but rarely vice versa.

[Anonymous No.4460126]

>>4460103

Yeah, true, another reason why the first is better.

However, the first doesn't mean worry either, if you wanna be pedantic. Her hand could be shaking cos she's strumming herself off with the other, or she's on drugs, or there's a fucking earthquake.

[Anonymous No.4460130]

>>4460126
That's true, there would need to be more contextual clues around that quote to tell us why her arm is shaking. Or we could just be left to guess.

[Anonymous No.4460133]

>>4460123
Do you do a lot of research

Do you worry about being cliched

Do your characters speak brilliantly

[Anonymous No.4460142]

>>4460101
you're not showing anything in the second example. there's nothing to see in the harry wondering something. to show you need to describe action and charcters and settings, like youd see if you were there. internal stuff doesnt count. The best example of this is the "telling" part of the first person narrative of Lovecraft's "The Outsider" when he finally "shows" his viepoint character, you get a bit of a surprise.

[Anonymous No.4460148]

>>4460133

I do passive research. I don't sit and research a particular topic, but spend a lot of time reading stuff that might be of use. Reading ANY fiction could be considered research - it all helps.

It's different with the internet isn't it, if you get to something you don't know it takes literally one minute to find the answer.

I do worry about being cliched, yes. In fact, I fear some of what I write is very cliched, I just hope it's strong enough in other areas to be of interest - ie funny, insightful etc..

Mind you, I do have the odd idea that is quite original, so it's not my biggest worry.

My characters do speak brilliantly, yes. Dialogue is probably where I'm most confident. In fact, I started out (unsuccessfully) as a screenwriter. (Still an ambition of mine).

[Anonymous No.4460150]

>>4460142
Again, it shows Harry's suicidal rather than tells it.

BTW No book is 'telling' free. There will always be a sentence here and there that could be more imaginatively rendered.

[Anonymous No.4460155]

>>4460013
It's not exactly a novel, but for a video game script I'm writing, I started with a character idea and thought about who he would be and what his motivations would be, and the overarching plot came from that. The character is a sellsword with a severe neurological disorder which makes him highly sensitive to stress hormones to the extent that, during high-stress situations like combat, he becomes a highly effective fighter due to enhanced strength and such from the excessive adrenaline response. On the downside, it also triggers severe psychotic episodes which leave him unable to recognise and differentiate people during combat, so that he sometimes kills allies and non-combatants by mistake. Also, he doesn't want to kill people for money, but believes it's the only thing he can do. As a result, the plot revolves around his moral quandaries and trying to rationalise what he does, while searching for a cure or information about his condition. So now I'm going to write that, with some characters and side-quests and eight different endings depending on whether you decide to find and use the cure, whether you decide to retire from being a sellsword, and how many innocent people you kill.

[Anonymous No.4460160]

I remember reading that book OP.

It was all hilarious at first, but what struck me in retrospect was how the authors intentionally exaggerated the "mistakes" for comedic value in a way that often had absolutely nothing with the supposed error that had been committed

In other words, not that great

[Anonymous No.4460161]

>>4460148
The reason I ask is because I don't trust writers who can let it all come out quickly to be writing quality.

And there's areas you can't just look up online and find the answer straight away. Depends what your setting is, realism etc.

You sound like your on something good anyway, what's your genre, hard sci fi?

[Anonymous No.4460167]

>>4460155
Moral quandries in a video game? Wouldn't it be better if the consequences to killing civilians was police coming in or baddies, making the game harder. Then you'd know for sure if you shot a civilian or not.. Might make you less trigger happy and more of a survivalist game though.

[Anonymous No.4460168]

>>4460150
no, it's not "showing" anything. it's telling in different words: Having harry spin the cylinder in a revolver while looking at the picture of his dead wife and child and then at his unkempt face in the mirror would show us. Telling us harry wondered something could be showing if what he was wondering was oblique enough, but your example clearly isnt.

Tell: Bill worried a little about how hard it was for him to concentrate that morning. He seemed to just be leaning against the walls and thinking about nothing. His mind just kept going away. Then he would hear a sound and lurch into awareness and try to remember what he was thinking and it would flee from him like a half glimpsed face on a passing train. He had no idea what he wanted, why he was standing around all day instead of doing...something. It was like the parts of his mind wouldn't gel. Then the key kilciked in the door and he heard Doris's voice saying "Lunch time! Who's hungry?" all of a sudden Bill knew he was: and very hungry.

Show: The smell in the dark room hit Doris like a hammer. The rotting, sambling hulk that had once been Bill came out of the corner, moving fast: the drooping mouth and staring white eyes fixed on her as a mass of flies explodes from his body as he lunged. The black ottomon caught him at knee level and he sprawled, then began a lurching crawl across the living room. Instinct took over and she had the door shut behind her and was almost to the stairs before she thought again. Later, she would find her throat was sore. She would not rmemeber screaming.

[Anonymous No.4460173]

>>4460150
also, nobody thinks you need to "show" all the time. telling is fine, it's just that it takes a lot of arrows out of your quiver. and it makes your characters feel flat and puppetlike. if you must tell, tell in the first person: third person omniscient is boring and also puts awful limitations on the writer.

[Anonymous No.4460182]

>>4460168
You're going all semantical here. Your examples aren't clear. Who knows what you're trying to say.

Its really simple, friend. You can show a character's feelings without 'telling,' or describing what their body is doing.

[Anonymous No.4460185]

>>4460161

The books in question are actually middle grade children's books - fantasy/sci fi.

I know what you mean about research, but for fiction it's less important. It's art. You can just fucking make it up.

However, for other kinds of writing - which I also do for a living, research is essential.

[Anonymous No.4460188]

>>4460161

Plus, "research" is an ambiguous word. Living a highly enriched, varied life could be considered a form of research.

Doing stuff, as well as absorbing other art, certainly contributes.

[Anonymous No.4460191]

So how exactly should I make a research paper? My professors keep grading me as mediocre or whatever.

Common comment is that what I write lacks substance, and I should learn to write less but express more. I guess it has to do with writing a persuasive set of paragraphs to argue my point?

[Anonymous No.4460197]

>>4460167
>Moral quandries in a video game?
Yeah, I have this idea that, in a distance future, video games can have mature, thought-provoking stories as well as decent gameplay (unlike some recent story-based games which had neither). I don't think all, or even most, games should be like that, but I think that video games have an unparalleled potential for storytelling that mustn't be squandered, because no book can write itself as you read it. People have criticised video games for much the same reason as they criticise genre fiction: it's mindless escapism. An article I read about the game Dark Souls complained that, in its 100 hour play time, you could have read War and Peace and Anna Karenina and learned something greater than "kill the dogs first". To be honest, they're fair points. Video games are mostly mindless escapism, and you don't learn anything useful from them. But I think video games could achieve that with much better writing, and I hope that if I can become an excellent writer, I can help games attain that legitimacy as an artform and storytelling medium that critics say they lack.

>Wouldn't it be better if the consequences to killing civilians was police coming in or baddies, making the game harder
That could happen too, but I want the moral choice thing to be quite prominent.

>Then you'd know for sure if you shot a civilian or not
After combat, the psychosis ends and you'll be able to clearly see who's who. During combat I'll add clues, and intelligent players will be able to keep track of who's who, hopefully. I got the idea of making the player keep track from a theory that schizophrenia results in people whose "latent inhibition" (the ability of your brain to filter out information seen as unimportant, so that it doesn't have to process as much) is too low for their intelligence level; in other words, they aren't smart enough to process all the information their brain takes in from the environment, and confusion results to the point of psychosis. It's linked to the dopamine hypothesis because dopamine regulates latent inhibition and studies found psychotic people have high dopamine levels which makes them remember too much irrelevant information. Anyway, the idea is that the intelligence of the player determines the intelligence of the main character, because more intelligent players will be able to remember where the enemies are better. But there will be clues. Some of them obvious, like the characters running away or cowering.

[Anonymous No.4460198]

>>4460191
make sure you have a lot of distinct points, and don't harp on about one for very long at all. don't overwrite it either, your professor just wants a pleasant, comprehensible read. he doesn't need (and and in fact doesn't even want) to be wowed by writing. he just wants to be able to understand you, not cringe, and finish in a reasonable amount of time, basically.

[Anonymous No.4460202]

>>4460155

You sir, is this commissioned? If so can you explain your journey. I would very much like to write scripts for games.

[Anonymous No.4460204]

>>4460185
>I know what you mean about research, but for fiction it's less important. It's art. You can just fucking make it up.
That's generally looked down upon, though, as in the case of a certain author of a supposedly factually and historically accurate book about a conspiracy theory relating to the Holy Grail.

[Anonymous No.4460207]

>>4460198

Thanks anon. From what you've said, competency and the grasp of the basics is what is required and expected at the undergraduate level. I guess I was overthinking my papers and reaching beyond my grasp.

[Anonymous No.4460210]

>>4460202
No, it's just an idea I've been developing since yesterday. I don't even know if I'll make the game. I can program reasonably well but the game would be quite complex. If you want to know how to write a script for a game, these helped me:
* http://www.stormthecastle.com/video-game-design/write_a_video_game_script.htm
* http://www.stormthecastle.com/video-game-design/writing-a-video-game-script.htm
The script takes the form of a movie script, but more complex because you can't just describe the scene and the actors, you also have to describe what actions the player can take and what choices he can make.

[Anonymous No.4460212]

>>4460204

Yeah, supposedly factual? If you say it's based on fact, research.

Otherwise, fuck it. You ain't gonna deduct points from Jurassic Park cos dinosaur DNA wouldn't survive the pyritisation or amber or rock or whatever. And if you do, you're a cunt.

Crichton sticks a load of pseudo science in there, so the story works in the story's world. Whether it works in this one doesn't matter.

[Anonymous No.4460214]

>>4460197
>because no book can write itself as you read it

Videogames don't write themselves as you go. Even the videogames that are contingent upon the player's choices are still on par with Choose Your Adventure novels.

People need to get away from using videogames, mainly, as a storytelling medium. They're "potential" to tell stories is naught. Any means through which they tell stories is representing other media [text : literature :: cutscenes : film]. They do not tell stories in a new way; there is no need to even have them focus on storytelling. Mario has done fine without needing exposition and constant scenes of story-reminders. A simple plot and better gameplay is what's needed: not more stories.

[Anonymous No.4460220]

>>4460210

Do you know much about video games and their conception? How often does a script written by someone not in the industry lead to a production?

[Anonymous No.4460221]

>>4460197
Sounds a bit like the difference between Breaking Bad and crime shows / films where in the former the consequences of bad actions / murder are played out.

You could have him hallucinate government interference and make it more like you as the player think you're going mad.

Dead civilian bodies turn into a now dead loved one of his.

The intelligence thing - I don't know bro, who wants to think when they're playing a shooter game. Its always such a drag when a puzzle pops up somewhere..

[Anonymous No.4460229]

>>4460028
i agree. even when reading a book in past tense, you think of the events as they are happening while you read. since past tense is the norm, present just seems unnatural and unnecessary

[Anonymous No.4460234]

>>4460197
>An article I read about the game Dark Souls complained that, in its 100 hour play time, you could have read War and Peace and Anna Karenina and learned something greater than "kill the dogs first"


If ''kill the dogs first'' is all you can get out of DS, I really doubt you can get much more than 'don't jump under a train' from Tolstoy.

And I'm not saying this as a mad DS fanboy, the problem is the approach. You can approach books as mindless escapism as well and plow through them and forget about them the next week. It's not as easy to do as it is vidya, but it happens.

PS - your idea is fun, but it can fall apart if not done correctly. Make sure the development team doesn't waste it with poor execution, and that you actually work on moral choices as such, to be used as plot points.
Going nuts and killing civilians is not a conscious decisions. There's no morality involved in it. You have to add an element of choice to it somehow, otherwise 'moral choices' are false advertising.

[Anonymous No.4460236]

How do you guys come up with a plot? I don't want to do some boring romance or murder, but at the same time I dislike fantasy and sci-fi. Maybe a compromise like something magic realist or po-mo (thinking of the crying of lot 49)? I can write reasonably competently, I just end up rambling about single scenes but can never link it to an overarching story.

[Anonymous No.4460237]

>>4460182
how do you do this? "show a character's feelings or thoughts" without telling what they are, or describing actions? if you don't say "he thought" or "he wondered" or "he felt" or "he was afraid" or happy or startled or encouraged, basically if you don't tell us what he's thinking or feeling, then how do you show it without describing his actions, reactions or surroundings? Dialog?

[Anonymous No.4460247]

>>4460234
Additionally, you've mentioned that you want the character's intelligence to be proportionate with the player's intelligence. (let's assume that by intelligence you mean a good eye for detail, perceptiveness, awareness, logical thinking, good memory, and other traits that are useful when playing vidya)

I don't know how you can diss Dark Souls when it's actually one of the rarer 'cerebral' games, where you don't need reflexes, or in-game skills to beat it fast and easy. Apart from some parts people will call bullshit (which serve a different purpose), it's a game that directly rewards how well you pick up clues.

>>4460236
Non-fiction's always a good inspiration if you don't want other fiction to inspire you. Incredible things have happened, are happening, and will happen. Inspirational events are at your fingertips, just look for them spontaneously as you go through your day, or if that doesn't yield any results, look up anything from news articles to historical records.

>I don't want to do some boring romance or murder, but at the same time I dislike fantasy and sci-fi.

Those really aren't your only options. People write (well) about anything and everything.

[Anonymous No.4460254]

>>4460148
show us some dialog. if you can write good dialog you can get away with a lot of other stuff. In fact, Shakespeare told amazingly good stories with basically nothing but dialog. post a bit of it.

[Anonymous No.4460255]

>>4460214
>Videogames don't write themselves as you go
Well, first of all, that was hyperbole to point out how games can tailor the story to the player's choices much more than any book, CYOA or not, can. Second, that's entirely dependent on the linearity of the game. If I go load up Oblivion and kill a hundred NPCs, I'm effectively writing my own story within the game world. The game developers didn't write that and I didn't imagine it. It happened, on some level.

>A simple plot and better gameplay is what's needed: not more stories.
Maybe for the games you like, but I tend more towards story-heavy action RPGs like the Witcher games.

>>4460220
>Do you know much about video games and their conception?
I don't know much about the writing or design processes, if that's what you mean, but as a programmer I have at least a vague idea of the software development phase and I have some experience with game development.

>How often does a script written by someone not in the industry lead to a production?
Probably very rarely, but I'd be developing the game myself (if I develop it at all; for now I'm just conceptualising and story-building) as an indie developer.

>>4460221
>You could have him hallucinate government interference and make it more like you as the player think you're going mad.
Actually this started from a somewhat similar idea where you go around killing stuff and it turns out you were nuts the whole time and killed shitloads of innocent civilians while hallucinating that they were various monsters, but I couldn't think of any motivations for the protagonist other than "he hunts monsters" and that sounded too Witcheresque.

>Dead civilian bodies turn into a now dead loved one of his.
I was thinking that, as an extremely dangerous person to be around, he would only have one true friend, someone who he knows well enough that they'd be safe fighting alongside him and being near him during his psychotic episodes. But the player could choose to kill that friend, losing his humanity entirely in the process.

[Anonymous No.4460258]

>>4460236
Work out what the character wants. Put a lot of escalating- in -intensity obstacles in the way of his goal.

[Anonymous No.4460266]

>>4460247
I'm a big fan of games where the "shiow, don't tell" thing is used. I find that story distracts from gameplay and vice versa. I like the idea of a game where you're told nothing, and just wake up on a beach with no knowledge and have to go out and learn the world and the game on your own. it's the most immersive i find. also, in a story, i read a lot for prose style, narrative technique, dialogue and story. I don't need a lot of problem solving. I'd rather just observe and appreciate.

[Anonymous No.4460267]

1st person or 3rd person? what makes a 1st person narrator interesting and unique?

[Anonymous No.4460285]

>>4460267
a first person narrator immediately involves the reader in a single viewpoint and set of limitations. it makes a character identifiable: you're riding inside the narrator's head.
It forces some linearity on you sometimes, and you can be mislead by the narrators opinions and preconcepts.

The big problem with first person is it's easy to write your viewpoint character as a fatuous, self justifying, unlikebale oaf without realizing it, because of the author's tendency to self insert and the character's tendency to consciously or unconsciously self-justify. It's easy for a first person author to fall in love with his narrator, and give him perceptions, insights, abilities and traits that don't fit with his stated background. He can quickly become unbelievable and boring.
Third person is not immune to this, and it does tempt the author to cheat a bit by telling instead of showing and also by conceaing events form one character while telling the reader. this can create either suspense, when done right, or frustration when used as a tease. and really good writers have fallen prey to the sometimes subtle distinction. A beginning witer should probably write third, just for the practice in describing and expalining unobtrusively. it's the easiest way to hang characters and events on a plot outline too.

[Anonymous No.4460287]

>>4460267
>what makes a 1st person narrator interesting and unique?

Nothing makes it unique, it's pretty common and done to death. What could make it interesting, however, is the direct, no-filter way of receiving the story.

There's no correct answer to your question. It really depends on the work in question and how well executed the perspective is. I personally wouldn't want to write in the 1st person unless I had really visceral, intriguing or unorthodox ideas to spice it up with, but that's just my 2 cents.

[Anonymous No.4460289]

>>4460267
I am incapable of writing in 1st person without my own voice taking over the narrator's very quickly, or rambling in character about irrelevant shit.

[Anonymous No.4460292]

>>4460095

>editor would never pick you up

Nobody said it was a mistake or something to be avoided.

>showing: something you can see as a human being

>telling: something you couldn't know short of magic, telepathy etc

It's seriously not that fucking hard.

[Anonymous No.4460294]

>>4460237
What I'm meaning by telling a characters' thoughts or feelings is: 'Len was surprised,' 'Len is happy,' 'Len is jealous.'

You can show these with his thoughts and feelings depending on the situation.

Surprised: Len couldn't believe ....

Happy : Len imagined flying though the sky to the sound of music soundtrack.

Jealous: Len wanted to shove his hand down that bastards throat and rip out ...


Showing a character's thoughts or feelings is elaborating on or specifying what's going on with the character without just writing 'he was sad' or whatever.

Its a good trick to use when writing because so often you come to a moment where your character is sad, and it gets you thinking of a unique way to write it.

[Anonymous No.4460296]

>>4460101

How do you know Harry wondered about that? BECAUSE YOU'RE TOLD.

When a character does something, like trembling, looking away, etc, you're SHOWN that they're worried, concerned, etc.

>showing = two steps: seeing something, guessing the cause

>telling = 1 step, you're told, period

Do you understand? It has everything to do with how many steps it takes to the desired effect, the actual information.

>show
>step 1, see something, an act, a fact, a stain, whatever
>step 2, derive info from it, a state of mind, an intention, a state of being

>telling
>step 1 and only, telling the info, not making the reader guess

[Anonymous No.4460299]

>>4460123
>Writing novels also teaches you to think larger and fairly soon you don't quibble too much over the small stuff - the kind of hang ups that most short story writers, students and the average unpublished pleb (a lot of you) spend weeks over analysing. You do all that at a later date.

This is gold advice in my opinion.

[Anonymous No.4460304]

>>4460160

That's exactly the review I wrote for it on amazon: too comedic to be all that insightful. I could never write the mistakes included in that book. To be read for lols more than anything.

I originally thought the book contained ACTUAL mistakes from actual manuscripts. I expected more subtlety.

[Anonymous No.4460306]

>>4460234
>If ''kill the dogs first'' is all you can get out of DS, I really doubt you can get much more than 'don't jump under a train' from Tolstoy.
It was a joke, and actually the author didn't write that. I couldn't remember exactly what the author of the article said so I made up a joke to the same effect, namely that War and Peace has more depth, is "enriching", and teaches you about "the range of human existence". You're right to point out that you can perceive both games and literature as being dumber and simpler than they are, but in most games and much genre fiction, there aren't really any deep messages or themes like there are in classics of literary fiction, regardless of your approach to them. Although, while Dark Souls is quite light on plot it does have themes that the author of the article I was paraphrasing seemed to miss; for example, it's very heavy on the theme of isolation.

Here's the article if you want to read it: http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/gaming/2012/02/dark_souls_review_is_a_100_hour_video_game_ever_worthwhile_.html

>Going nuts and killing civilians is not a conscious decisions. There's no morality involved in it. You have to add an element of choice to it somehow, otherwise 'moral choices' are false advertising.
The player character doesn't just go nuts; the player will always be in complete control. I just want the player to have to figure out exactly who he's killing. There will be clues of varying subtlety. But thank you for highlighting that issue. I will have to think about how to include true moral decisions when I flesh the plot out. At the moment I just have a rough character bio and an overarching idea of the plot.

>>4460247
>I don't know how you can diss Dark Souls
I wasn't. I don't agree with the article. Dark Souls is one of my favourite games.

>you don't need reflexes, or in-game skills to beat it fast and easy
Reflexes and skill do play quite a big part; you need to be able to react in the critical time in between a telegraphed attack, and the attack hitting you; and you need to be able to time taking healing potions so that you don't get interrupted or flat-out killed while trying to heal. There is a lot of learning how to predict an attack involved, but reaction speed does come into play and skill definitely does, as well as planning because armours have different resistances and weapons have different effects, and you have to figure out what equipment is ideal for that monster with your play style.

[Anonymous No.4460309]

>>4460236

The problem with plots, to me, is that EVERY STORY SOUNDS LIKE SHIT in plot form. Everything.

If you remember a movie, you'll remember all that matters but the plot is just a spine. If you read a movie's plot without having seen the movie, you'll never think much of it.

That's probably why any plot you may have sounds like ass because there is no flesh around it yet.

[Anonymous No.4460311]

>>4460306
>you need to be able to time taking healing potions so that you don't get interrupted or flat-out killed while trying to heal.


This sounds like a real downer / buzzkill if it takes too much time.

[Anonymous No.4460316]

>have good ideas for stories in exactly the mood and themes i want
>fear it won't be as perfect as i want
>procastrinate
>a year since i last wrote anything
>feel bad
Shit.

[Anonymous No.4460322]

>>4460306
>There is a lot of learning how to predict an attack involved, but reaction speed does come into play and skill definitely does, as well as planning because armours have different resistances and weapons have different effects, and you have to figure out what equipment is ideal for that monster with your play style.

Sounds like the kind of game you could get stuck at often and have to check online how to move on.

[Anonymous No.4460324]

>>4460306
>article stuff

Fair enough.

>>4460306
>Reflexes and skill do play quite a big part

My point was that it wasn't a 100%-reflex based game. A person with very average or poor reflexes can beat it if he can figure out to stack poise and use a strong shield and turtle.

And what I meant by 'in-game skill' wasn't player skill, because that's the dominant factor in the game and it'd be silly if I tried to dispute that.

I meant the power of the character acquired through playing, Soul levels in this example. They don't play a role as big as in some other games.

>>4460311
>This sounds like a real downer / buzzkill if it takes too much time.

Sounds like you need to git gud

[Anonymous No.4460330]

>>4460292
also you can do a lot of the telling THROUGH showing: with dialog scenes between characters.

"Sasha sat stiffly in the dragon-leather saddle, feeling the griffin's massive shoulder muscles surge and tremble in tamdem with the beating of it's mighty wings. from behind her in the dark, she heard the placid low-register tone of Lord Garmon's voice:

"So, I was a pirate for awhile, yeah, but hell, i didn't like it and my girlfriends kept getting kidanpped, sacrificed and shit. Then I tried to be a wizard, but, fuck, you know how much math you gotta do to raise just one fucking imp? My god, those nerds would be better off digging ditches. No, i think the basic heroic champion is best for me: Hot babes, sword fights, treasure and plot armor when you need it. Just try not to piss off the reader. What about you? Whore? Witch? Princess? I can totally see you as a whore, i gotta tell you."

[Anonymous No.4460337]

>>4460294
again, not showing. Just describing something that can't be seen. if you were there in the room and watching and you couldnt see it, then you can't show it to the reader. just using the phrase "he imagined, or he thought or he felt meens youre telling us something. if you want to show, stay out of his head and inside the head of the reader, looking in through the fourth wall.

[Anonymous No.4460340]

>>4460294
your examples are better ways of telling, but theyre still telling.

[Anonymous No.4460342]

>>4460287
In my opinion the first person view is superior as long as you stay out of the characters head and don't start monologing.

[Anonymous No.4460343]

>>4460311
Nah, it takes like two seconds, you just have to either put enough distance between you and your enemy, or if they can only hit so often, time it right, so that the animation finishes before they hit you. Often you might find you heal and then get hit immediately, taking away some or even all of the health you just regained, and sometimes with change. When that happens, I've found that if you take a potion and then take one again partway through the drinking animation, you drink two in almost the same amount of time it takes to drink one, so you heal twice as much in almost the same time. That way, when you get hit while drinking, you've still managed to heal enough to not die.

>>4460322
Yes for getting stuck, no for checking online, because that ruins the game: it's one of those games you have to dive head-on into and fly blind because it's so much more fun. A huge part of the fun for me is running into surprises. Some of the monsters are xbawks hueg and you think "how the fuck am I going to kill that?" and then you do it and you're like "Fuck yeah!"

If you do get stuck, the best thing you can do is to brainstorm tactics. Occasionally summoning is useful, but I've mostly found it either makes the fight way too easy or just makes it harder because bosses get extra health when you summon, and sometimes your summoned character isn't great against the specific boss (or bosses, sometimes they come in pairs or more) you're fighting.

Sorry for derailing the thread into Dark Souls General.

[Anonymous No.4460344]

>>4460330
>also you can do a lot of the telling THROUGH showing:

What? That's the whole point of it... I don't think you understand the terms here.

[Anonymous No.4460350]

>>4460342

How does that make sense? Why use a first person narrator if you're not going to use that? Why not just used a third person narrator instead?

[Anonymous No.4460359]

>>4460340
>>4460337
Your interpretation of 'show don't tell' is limited and stupid.

[Anonymous No.4460372]

I need help. Very bad help. I wrote my first novel, finished at 120,000 words. It is shit and it cannot be saved unless I rewrite the entire thing, and I'll still hate the plot no matter what.

I know which novel to start next, but the depression over slaving over my first novel and it going nowhere is debilitating.

[Anonymous No.4460376]

I'm new at this, but I want to write two stories to test writing in pure showing third person limited for one and first person limited for the other.

Is changing perspective like this while working on two stories a good idea for someone who's just beginning?
Am I going to get kill or gud?

[Anonymous No.4460382]

>>4460372
What's it about?

[Anonymous No.4460385]

>>4460344
>>4460359
when someone tells you "show, don't tell" they're telling you to let the actions, dialogue and descriptive passages tell the story and stop intruing and telling it yourself. It's perfectly fine to show events by having the characters (in third person dialogue ) talk about them. Just don't you do it.

It's not telling when Wendy says "I was afraid, i didn't know if you'd be back." to John. You saying "wendy was afraid: she didn't know if john would be back" or "wendy couldn't keep from imagining terrible things that might have happened to john, and her mind kept racing through hundreds of terrible scenarios." are both telling.

when an author "shows" you something he's showing you something you would see youreslf if you were there. no reading Wndy's mind involved. He might describe her walking back and forth ringing her hands, peeking out the curtains at every sound, trying to read and giving up several times. or even what she does and says when John finally comes home. That's not telling, because if you were there, you'd observe it all yourself.

make sense?

[Anonymous No.4460387]

>>4460350
I don't know, it's just my preference (in reading, I don't write).

[Anonymous No.4460391]

>>4460372
Take from it that you'll be a better writer next time, and the time after that, for having done the practice now. You're not going to be great at something first time. Better to save your best ideas for when you've got the practice under your belt to execute them better. Until then, make with the trite, clichéd drivel with a confused plot and poor characterisation.

[Anonymous No.4460392]

>>4460359

No, friend, you just don't understand what people mean and substitute your own definitions for these terms. I've explained to you early one what the terms discussed actually meant. You insist on using your own meaning for them, so this discussion is futile.

[Anonymous No.4460398]

>>4460372

Then write your second novel.

>sunk cost fallacy

Don't waste time over shit.

[Anonymous No.4460401]

>>4460382
Some tiresome bildungsroman about my old best friend dealing with her terminal illness and her brother dying from the same thing- after she died.
It has far too much edgy angst and just seems like a soap opera.
>>4460391
>Until then, make with the trite, clichéd drivel with a confused plot and poor characterisation.
I definitely learned my lesson, that is for god damn sure. Thank you anon.

[Anonymous No.4460403]

>>4460376

All writing is good practice. I'd recommend finding what your story will be like BEFORE choosing the POV. You choose the pov in function of what you want to do.

[Anonymous No.4460406]

>>4460387

What's a first person narrator that doesn't share his own ideas, opinions, emotions? What's the point? I don't get it.

[Anonymous No.4460414]

>>4460385
No, you're taking 'show don't tell' too literally. Yes it means what the character is doing. But it also means how I explained it relating to thoughts and feelings.

This often happens here at /lit/, so much aspie rigidity.

[Anonymous No.4460417]

How do you feel about devices like a journal being used to express a characters thoughts? I'm having a hard time balancing the switch between third person narration and the journal, but it's integral to the story.

[Anonymous No.4460422]

>>4460414

No, shut the fuck up, you're wrong. The other anon is right. I've tried to explain this shit to you since fucking forever and you won't understand.

Showing = camera mode.

Cameras can't film thoughts or mental activity; microphones can't record thoughts or mental activity.

SHOWING is about what you can get into your fucking head through SENSES.

What makes SHOWING efficient is the two-step process where YOU get the real info YOURSELF, by guessing from the info SHOWN to you.

FUCKING HELL.

[Anonymous No.4460428]

>>4460422
You shut up, you're wrong

[Anonymous No.4460435]

>>4460428

We've shown you what show/tell meant and what people who use those terms mean. We've done so many times. Your own definition is completely meaningless and nobody uses your definition of these terms. Feel free to look it up and realise your mistake. I give up on you now.

[Anonymous No.4460439]

>>4460392
Well, I teach this stuff. I'm used to having to explain it over and over. Believe me you're far from the worst I've had to work with. I've had students sputtring in anger, trying to convince me that anything they wrote was "telling", etc. and that the act of telling a story was telling by definition. You're a bit obtuse, but pretty reasonable for the most part.

[Anonymous No.4460440]

>>4460439

Nice try, but you can't possibly teach creative writing and get the show and tell thing this wrong.

2/10

[Anonymous No.4460443]

>>4460439

hey, teach, learn a fucking thing, you sad moron:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Show,_don't_tell

[Anonymous No.4460445]

>>4460439

Fucking moron....

>favoring instead the use of "specific sensory detail: action, smell, taste, sound, and feeling.

Do you understand, faggot?

[Anonymous No.4460449]

>>4460417
I think that can work, as long as the shifts between third person and the journal aren't too frequent for the reader to get settled in either.

[Anonymous No.4460453]

So how exactly do I land a job as an editor? Do I take some courses, read some books, what? Its what I want to do for a living.

[Anonymous No.4460454]

>>4460439

Dude, you got rekt. If you're really a teacher, better hit the books again.

>>4460443

[Anonymous No.4460458]

>>4460406
It just works for me.

[Anonymous No.4460462]

>>4460440
sorry was talking to this guy: >>4460414
and clicked the wrong post

[Anonymous No.4460463]

>>4460454
Actually that definition proves my interpretation correct. Read and weep fags

[Anonymous No.4460472]

>>4460458

What I mean is: what the hell is a first person narrator that doesn't do anything that first person narrators do? Are we talking about the same things at all? A first person narrator that never makes any reference to himself, his opinion, his own voice, what the hell is it?

Give me examples of the FPN you're thinking about, novels, stories, etc.

[Anonymous No.4460473]

>>4460449
I've been trying to work it in naturally, but it's hard to always find time for my protagonist to write in her journal at times when it's needed. The story feels like a mess. I guess it's just going to take a lot of reworking to get it all in order.

[Anonymous No.4460476]

>>4460462

Then we're in agreement. That other anon has utterly pissed me off with his/her stupidity. I'm a teacher too, by the way, but I use all my patience on my actual students, not fuckheads on the Internet.

[Anonymous No.4460481]

>>4460463

No, it doesn't.

>focus on sensory input

>"henry wondered"

What sense do you use to perceive henry's mental activity? Eyes, ears, skin, tongue?

None, thus your definition doesn't fit the real definition. Go hide yourself.

[Anonymous No.4460482]

>>4460476
I am also a teacher. I teach women about the dick.

[Anonymous No.4460491]

>>4460472
It's should feel like the first person narrator tells the story to the reader. You shouldn't have direct access to his mind, but only what he wants to tell you. I currently read Gulliver's Travels. It's like a report. The story should be a communication between first person narrator and reader.

[Anonymous No.4460492]

>>4460481

Show, don't tell is a technique often employed in various kinds of texts to enable the reader to experience the story through action, words, THOUGHTS, senses, and FEELINGS rather than through the author's exposition, summarization, and description.

Focus on sensory input? I'm trying to help you here, but you won't listen : )

[Anonymous No.4460495]

>>4460492

NOT THOUGHTS YOU FUCKING MORON. YOU CAN'T PERCEIVE THOUGHTS WITH YOUR SENSES, ASSHOLE.

YOU CAN ONLY TELL SOMEONE'S THOUGHTS BECAUSE YOU CANNOT SHOW THOUGHTS, THEY HAVE NO FUCKING SHAPES, YOU CAN ONLY TELL THEM IN WORDS, WHICH IS NOT SHOWING, BUT TELLING.

God, you're fucking stupid.

[Anonymous No.4460497]

>>4460492

Read the fucking definition. Anon wasn't telling you to focus on anything, fucking idiot, but that you're supposed to focus on senses when you show and avoid telling.

[Anonymous No.4460500]

>>4460495
>>4460497
So much cognitive dissonance, I'm laughing at you as I type.

[Anonymous No.4460517]

>>4460491

Are you telling me Gulliver doesn't share his opinion, his interpretation, his ideas, his experience?

[Anonymous No.4460521]

>>4460500

read

"favoring instead the use of "specific sensory detail: action, smell, taste, sound, and feeling."

That's the definition according to Wikipedia and the authors who use this method.

[Anonymous No.4460527]

>>4460473
There's nothing wrong with that. Iron out the details later and focus on getting to the finish for now.

[Anonymous No.4460534]

it actually is pretty obvious. They had "show and Tell" when i was in second grade. You showed something (a toy, a book, any object) and you told about it. When you show something you just describe what an observer would know if they were present. when you tell, you give insight into the characters unspoken perceptions and opinions, that might not be obvious from their speech and actions. When one of my students says, in a frist person narrative, "Jim was afraid" I ask him: "how would your narrator know? tell us what he sees, and why he interprets it that way. Is he right? how certain is he?"

[Anonymous No.4460535]

>>4460500

You can laugh, but he's right.

[Anonymous No.4460540]

>>4460521
No, that's Chuck Pahlanuik's interpretation.

>>4460521
>>4460535
Read the first sentence again and really think about it this time.

[Anonymous No.4460548]

>>4460540

Show, don't tell, was Hemingway's thing, and that, since the 1920's. It was used exactly that way. Hemingway never tells you what his characters think: he makes you guess by showing their actions instead.

>shot yourself in the foot

[Anonymous No.4460551]

>>4460540

>thinks "favouring" can't be exclusive
>cute

[Anonymous No.4460558]

>>4460540

Just for you:

http://www.sfwriter.com/ow04.htm

[Anonymous No.4460559]

>>4460548
>>4460551
You still don't get it!

[Anonymous No.4460566]

>>4460558
That's nice, but I'll take wikipedia's definition over some loser sci fi dude, thanks.

[Anonymous No.4460575]

>>4460403
I did that already, though.

[Anonymous No.4460581]

>>4460566
they actually don't contradict: the sci fi guy is just using different examples. he's not wrong, just less expressly affective in his "telling" examples

[Anonymous No.4460594]

>>4460566

Pshhh... they're the same...

[Anonymous No.4460598]

>>4460566

>didn't read either
>didn't realise they're identical

[Anonymous No.4460607]

>>4460581
>>4460594
>>4460598

You guys look like you're just jumped in to this argument that's been going all night.

You'll have to read half this thread to catch up, I'm not going to explain it.

[Anonymous No.4460619]

>>4460607
As i understand it, the argument is over whether describing unobservable affective content and interpretation is showing or telling. The best arguments seem to be on the side of "it's just another type of telling" side.

[Anonymous No.4460637]

What say everyone here about writing workshops?
I'm talking uni creative writing courses.
I've been in a couple, debating on doing another one or not.

[Anonymous No.4460653]

>>4460619
Not quite

[Anonymous No.4460700]

>>4460637
bump for this

[Anonymous No.4460818]

>>4460637
>First time at a creative writing workshop last summer
>Run by an energetic black woman
>Looking around at 24 people encircling a huge table
>I was intimidated
>Doctors, scientists, photographers, philanthropists, hobbyist, journalists and a few actual writers and poets
>Its my turn to introduce myself
>Call center worker, 26. Looking to learn narrative, plot and characterization. Like Mystery and Hardboiled crime fiction and existentialism. List books from Camus and McCarthy as inspiration.
>Is this your first time anon?
>Yes
>Well we will make sure to pop your writing cherry
>Oh god
>Read an actual peer reviewed scientific research paper on cancer at the microscopic level
>Told to write a story, any story using some of the highlighted scientific words they use from the earlier handout and incorporate it into the story
>Three other people read what they wrote, I don't
>Skip to the last handout of random inspired pictures
>I get a close up of a computer generated human brain neuron
>Write for 10 minutes only
>Can't remember what I wrote but it was about duality and mixed it with a story I was writing at home
>Told to read mine out
>Finish to applause from everyone
>This never happened before to any other reading
>All clap
>Workshop leader talks about what was good and makes one point about the bad
>Smile
>Old woman critiques my paragraph favorably stating her favorite part
>Leave wondering if they were genuine
>Never been back
>All I do is write now

[Anonymous No.4460823]

>>4460255
As someone who plays video games and takes the time for introspective thought to view them as a medium, I have to agree that ultimately the story you wish to tell is rather hard to tell confined to also giving rewarding and fun gameplay.

A game that seems to have done an approach to what you seem to wish, is Spec Ops: The Line, you as a player does not know his own actions regarding the story until the final plot reveal, and then it gives you thoughts regarding what you actually did and you can derive meaning from that.

However, Spec Ops was ungodly awful.

To even make the story narrative you wish to tell, you would have to have various foils written to accommodate, and even a more fantastical setting a la Final Fantasy Tactics. I wish you the best of luck, but I realize that ultimately you'll realize all of this and abandon the idea.

[Anonymous No.4460832]

>>4460823
The only good story you can tell with a video game is an action movie. Video games can have top tier action movie stories.

[Anonymous No.4460854]

>>4460832
I'll try and analyze this, and why we are intuitively led to believe something like this; why it feels more acceptable for the nature of stories in video games to be like this.

Video game design, chiefly, is about setting up scenarios that reward the player for his actions, and depending on how he does it varies, and that is how you take something out of it.

Perhaps, the best example of exposition I've experienced recently is Bayonetta, making you actively involved in the story through bits and pieces with incredibly involving and fun gameplay. The introduction leaves you wanting, with incredible cutscenes that wow you impressively, and you're left wanting more.

It's easy to see that the upmost importance here is fun gameplay mechanics, it's the means to keep accelerating. If a game isn't fun, I won't play it, it's as simple as that. A perfect example is the Mass Effect series, how the focus shifted from storytelling through gameplay to gameplay through storytelling. After the miserable experience that was ME2, I had no interest in ME3 and never played it.

>Yeah, I have this idea that, in a distance future, video games can have mature, thought-provoking stories as well as decent gameplay (unlike some recent story-based games which had neither). I don't think all, or even most, games should be like that, but I think that video games have an unparalleled potential for storytelling that mustn't be squandered, because no book can write itself as you read it. (pt2)

[Anonymous No.4460869]

>>4460854
Video games should strive to be Die Hard. That's all I want out of a video game experience as far as the story goes.

[Anonymous No.4460875]

>>4460854
pt(2) This, I believe, is naive and hopeful in existance, because with more "dark and mature" storylines, you must have gameplay that accomodates for them, and the more heavily story focused the less varying mechancis for gameplay you are allowed. Imagine if Gone Home's story was done accomodating gameplay by Platinum Games (I digress, because this would be incredible, but hopefully you get the point.)

Imagine The Road, or some other "dark" literary story, it could not at all convert into a rich and rewarding gameplay adventure. This is something easy to observe. Here are a few examples of games that I believe have the perfect understanding of what the medium of video games can use storytelling to do.

Paper Mario 2, Deus Ex, Lost Odyssey, any Hideki Kamiya game, Baldurs Gate, SMT, Persona, Fallout.

The day we forget that the most important thing in a video game is gameplay is the day the medium is dead.

[Anonymous No.4460879]

>>4460869
Play any Hideki Kamiya game (Wonderful 101, Bayonetta, Okami, Viewtiful Joe).

[Anonymous No.4460883]

>>4460879
I guarantee you none of those games have a story and characters as good as Die Hard.

[Anonymous No.4460901]

>>4460883
Well to be fair, the first two Die Hard movies are great for what they achieve, but the rest are absolute garbage.

I don't think the story, or setting, or plot in Die Hard is actually good, its more the execution and old Bruce Willis.

If you're looking for a badass character, Bayonetta or Wonderful 101 will do you justice.

[Anonymous No.4462876]

>>4460875

I think I disagree.

For me, engaging story is far, far more important than gameplay.

Two examples that spring to mind - Fallout New Vegas and GTAV.

I love both. One is a technological masterpiece, a costly exercise that truly epitomises fun gameplay, and it lacks an overarching or vaguely interesting plot. The other is a clumsy, quirky, jerky RPG with arguably poor, unrealistic shooting mechanics, riddled with great lore and intriguing story telling.

Suffice to say, I have spent hundreds of hours playing Fallout, versus a handful playing GTAV.

And then there's gems like Telltale's The Walking Dead and to a lesser extent Heavy Rain. For them gameplay is minimal, for some nonexistent, and yet they are great examples of digital entertainment.

The line is blurring more by the day. For me, computer games are interactive stories - whether those stories are created by the player during instances of gameplay, or written by the developer, or a perfect amalgamation of both. What wins, time and time again, is story.

The same could be said for most art.

[Anonymous No.4462933]

>>4460017

You can't really take 'show, don't tell' too literally when it comes to narratives. It's more about two different kinds of 'telling'.
If you're simply informing the reader of the emotions that are supposed to be there, you're only telling. If you "tell" them about the things that will naturally bring forth those emotions, you're "showing". Don't simply tell them the room is scary, tell them what makes it scary and allow them to feel scared themselves.
Blatant exposition can be perfectly atmospheric and emotional if it's written well.

[Anonymous No.4463785]

>>4462876
>For me, engaging story is far, far more important than gameplay.

You don't understand the fundamental design of games, which is the cancer that is killing the medium currently.

>
I love both. One is a technological masterpiece, a costly exercise that truly epitomises fun gameplay, and it lacks an overarching or vaguely interesting plot. The other is a clumsy, quirky, jerky RPG with arguably poor, unrealistic shooting mechanics, riddled with great lore and intriguing story telling.

This is one of the worst opinions I've ever seen, and it's terrifying. Utterly terrifying that people believe this.

>The line is blurring more by the day. For me, computer games are interactive stories - whether those stories are created by the player during instances of gameplay, or written by the developer, or a perfect amalgamation of both. What wins, time and time again, is story.

Please let it stop. Let it stop.

[Anonymous No.4463811]

>>4460875
>Paper Mario 2
dammit now I'm downloading a GameCube emulator

[Anonymous No.4463817]

>>4462876
>not doing the Heavy rain walkthrough on youtube

[Anonymous No.4463829]

I am currently writing a satire of YA literature, specifically the fantasy genre. It's definitely something I want to write, but I'm finding it very difficult to make it clear to the reader that this is going to be a satire at the beginning of the book. No matter how much I exaggerate all the tropes (names with more than two X's in them, extremely long epithets, what have you), it's still in the realm of plausibility that I'm being serious and actually writing one of the terrible novels I am trying to satirize.

Does anybody have any advice?

[Anonymous No.4463837]

>>4463811
It really is a perfect game.

Except the section with the punies. Fuck that section. So goddamn annoying to get them all to go where you needed them too.

Still, the rest of the game was fantastic. Music rocked too.

[Anonymous No.4463838]

Everyone sucks and should just fucking quit this dream of being a writer and learn a useful skill.

[Anonymous No.4463852]

>>4463829
Don't make it clear to the reader.

Satire doesn't always have to be blatant.

>>4463837
It's a masterpiece, but even masterpieces has its flaws. I was really annoyed by the punie section originally, but after you master it you realize it was done rather well.

[AssuredSultan !XksB4AwhxU No.4463868]

>>4460818
>>4460818

>Come on Lit
>Post Works I've been doing

Yfw Anons on Lit say they're good

It's such a strange happy feeling knowing one of the most cynical and judging places on the Internet likes what you write

[Anonymous No.4463873]

>>4463852
God it is autistic in here.

[Anonymous No.4463875]

>>4463838
>not learning a useful skill while working to become a writer
Some of the best writers never followed a humanities-based career, some of the worst writers did.

>>4462876
You have no fucking idea how much I wish I could take all the retards like you to a concentration camp.

[Anonymous No.4463883]

>>4463852
If it's not obvious satire, literally everybody is going to put it down immediately.

Would you read a novel with the sentence "“YOU SEEK TO BREAK THE UTMOST COMMANDMENT! YOU ARE AN AGENT OF THE D’LATO AND YOU SEEK TO KILL OUR SAVIOR IN HIS OWN WORLD!” in it if you thought it was serious?

[Anonymous No.4463886]

>>4463873
I'm sorry that you view people who enjoy video games as autistic. I just hope you will realize that it's possible to enjoy various mediums and realize what makes them work and what makes them fail.

[Anonymous No.4463891]

>>4463875
I said give up on being a writer and learn something that is actually useful. I didn't say do both, I SAID FUCKING STOP.

[Anonymous No.4463896]

>>4463883
cough* animal farm

[Anonymous No.4463937]

>>4463891
no

>>4463883
idunno, since YA fiction is so formulaic and vapid, you could just scour the wikis of most YA books to know what you're getting into and then read some satire books and some philosopher/linguist's critique of those.

[Anonymous No.4464253]

>>4463829
Trying to be obvious about satire is a surefire way to make satire fail. Your satire needs to have a point, something sharp to draw blood with. It does not need to be garish and plastered with warnings. That insults the intelligence of the reader, and is usually more obnoxious than fun.

[Anonymous No.4464281]

>>4463883
Do what whatever the fuck you want. It is not like it matters, you are going to quit half way.

[Anonymous No.4464858]

>>4463785
Why not actually explain your opinion and perhaps enlighten the world, instead of just complaining?

[Anonymous No.4464928]

>>4463829

Granted I know nothing about what you've actually written, but it sort of sounds like you're just writing something My Immortal-esque. Just a surface level parody, a pinch of intent away from simply being the real thing.

Good satire isn't just "recognise this? Recognise that? Aren't these things so stupid? Look how stupid they are." If there's an actual point you're trying to make, it should shine through on it's own (eg, portraying an undebatably abusive relationship, the kind you'd expect to see on the crime channel, but romanticising it in a way that makes the audience uncomfortable in order to make a point about unhealthy YA romances such as Twilight).

That said, if you're just writing something fun and silly and are content with that, the simplest solution is to be meta about it, insert a straight man, and/or create a tonal contrast in how you frame the story (eg, Andy Griffith's Bum series using the action hero model to tell a story about people's bums uprising against them. Or the most recent Community episode, using the gritty crime genre to tell a story about something as immature and trivial as putting coins down people's butt cracks).

Also consider who you're writing for - are you trying to trick YA readers into learning something about the genre they enjoy, or are you trying to let outsiders have a little fun at the genres expense? Because if it looks too much like the genre itself, you could easily turn away the latter, even if they know it's only a parody. You need to give them something to actually stick around for, otherwise they may as well be genuinely reading YA. Simply pointing out the cliches isn't enough - people who dislike YA know the cliches, they see them and laugh at them already in genuine YA, so you're not really offering them anything new by simply pointing them out.

[Anonymous No.4465117]

>>4464928
I posted the full idea over here (probably should have specified, it's mostly of the fantasy genre, not the Twilight-esque stuff):
>>4464601

It's intended for most of the major points of the plot (good guys aren't actually good, the actions of the main characters are horrific and wrong) to be very obvious to the reader from the get-go, hopefully enough that the reader is made uncomfortable.

Ideally, the novel would also contain a message about how American culture views violence, as well.

Then again, re-reading over my own summary, some of my confidence is lost. It seems a bit... Juvenile, I suppose.

[Anonymous No.4465132]

>>4465117

You had me at tricking the senile uncle. Sounds pretty fun. Would skim in a bookshop, and purchase if well written.

[Anonymous No.4465164]

>don't really write
>bored at work, Internet is blocked
>sometimes write
>finish my story
>count the words, assuming I'm at like 40,000
>at 175,000

Um... Now what?

[Anonymous No.4465219]

>>4460637
I took a playwriting class where everyone wrote one short play that was read to the class and then dissected. I found it very helpful. The professor was a professional playwright from Spain. He shit on just about everyone's plays, but in a very constructive way. I learned a lot about effective playwriting, dialog, and when annotations aren't necessary. It helped me jump out of my comfort zone and actually write something. I'm taking another creative writing class offered by my university this semester. I should mention that both were at the graduate level. I imagine that undergrad writing courses might be less useful, but I have no way to judge that really.

[Anonymous No.4465252]

>>4460004
It's usually very simple for me
Step 1
Think of Great Idea and ending

Step 2
Write beginning of great idea

Step 4
No step 3 and lose steam

Step 5
Re-read what I have

Step 6
realize what I have is shit

Step 7
Drink

Step 8
Go to sleep

Step 9
Repeat step 8

It's not a very effective process

[Anonymous No.4465272]

>>4465252
m8 your problem is that you're stuck in a loop of 8 and 9, you should at least go back to step 1 once in a while.

[Anonymous No.4465302]

>>4465117
Have the main love interest killed near the end of the series by having one of the bad guys delete her mind to "download" his own into her body.

I'll pay you with /d/ollars.

[Anonymous No.4465311]

>>4465117
Needs more of an wacky plot point -a 'tell' that you're taking the piss.

[Anonymous No.4467228]

>>4465311
I think that should happen as well, but I can't figure out what.

>>4465302
I'm considering having their "mentor" character (who they wind up teaching way more than they learn from him) being a minor romantic interest of a side character, then immediately have that mentor be murdered when they get back from their quest because "The prophecy required it"

Close enough?

[Anonymous No.4467283]

>>4460004
>>4460004
"The woman pouted her lips under the drenched feeble umbrella as she longed for the bus.
Desperate to regain moisture to her lips, her heels became wet, a puddle formed below, and her hands died cold under the cover. "

[Anonymous No.4467465]

>>4467228
Nah, I thought of something like having the same girl you had promised for your your protagonist, the girl that the fans look up to and want to see living a perfect life with your MC, getting body-snatched by some old decrepit fuck for shits and giggles.

But maybe that's not sensible if you want to make movies.

[Anonymous No.4467532]

>>4467465
I'll admit, I kinda do want to make movies.

[Anonymous No.4467562]

I'm writing a project for /co/, a cartoon pitch based on an idea about birds. I have enough of the plot, setting, and characters figured out to just write it out in prose format so I've been wondering if I want to try to write it as a manuscript as well and try to go through both pitching/production hell and publishing hell at the same time.

[Anonymous No.4467572]

>get audio recorder
>record fuckton of notes for writing ideas constantly
>plug audio recorder into computer
>too self-conscious to listen to any of them
>tfw

[Anonymous No.4467595]

>>4467532
>tfw your requirements for adaptations would be fucking ridiculous
We all do, anon.

[Anonymous No.4467622]

>>4467532
Don't worry, hollywood will turn all your tragic twists into happy diseny-esque endings.
Also explosions, they will add 1000 explosions and 2345 car chases.

[Anonymous No.4467647]

>>4467622
I think I have some degree of movie potential - There's big epic fantasy LotR stuff, but also lots of guns and violence.

Even if they ruin it, at least I'll probably snag some of the CoD demographic and make some cash.

Does this attitude make me a sellout already?

[Anonymous No.4467659]

>>4467647
You're not planning a highbrow art film, why do you care?
>Although I someone took my work and turned 180 and made a satirical take on it Starship Troopers style, I will actually be proud.

[Anonymous No.4468300]

>>4460017
Show don't tell, is just an overcorrection for the general mistake that people make of telling too much.

After you get practiced you learn that it's not about always telling or always showing, but knowing when to do one and when to do the other.

People here 'show don't tell" and then write disgusting purple prose florid scenes of some random schmuck as he wakes up from bed, starts his morning and survey's his surroundings.

Some things need to be shown, some things need to be told outright, and you need to develop your ear so you can recognize when you've gone too far in either extreme.

[Anonymous No.4468309]

>>4468300
pretty much

Althought, purple nothings are a pleasant break from monotonous, 'he awoke this morning' scenes.

[Anonymous No.4468354]

Showing vs Telling is nothing more than a poor way to try to explain text and subtext to new writers.

Writing is communication, There will be some things that you want the reader to get directly and some things that you want them to get indirectly.
What you have to do is figure out beforehand which do you want to use to reveal which information.

I want to tell people:
>The character is a cop
>The character has a daughter
>The story is set just after christmas

I want to show people:
>The character is idealistic
>The daughter is suicidal
>The character's story is an allegory about optimism and pessimism.

That's just an example. There are all kinds of effects you can get by changing up the way you present information.

[Anonymous No.4468420]

It's not just a matter of showing or telling, you have to do both, it's a matter of deciding when it is appropriate to show and when it is appropriate to tell

For example if someone is eating a chocolate bar, unless the chocolate bar is some sort of incredibly important object that is designed to reflect something to the reader no one wants to read an elaborate description detailing every aspect of the chocolate bar and its consumption

Alternatively no one wants to read a sentence like "Jim had social issues" or "Jim was a psychopath" when you can easily imply this through action

You only want to "show" when it is something relevant to the characters, themes, atmosphere, etc. Otherwise it can end up being unnecessary padding

[Anonymous No.4468643]

>thread about difficulties as a writer
>nearly 200 replies
>ctrl+f
>"synopsis"
>nothing

Seriously? Has nobody on this board gotten as far as actually trying to publish something?

[Anonymous No.4468653]

>>4468300
"show don't tell" is advice that should always be given with an emphasis on characterization

[Anonymous No.4468736]

>>4468643
Eh, I'm undecided, you know.

I can't decide between dedicating myself to deconstruct and reconstruct genres I loathe; or write weird and sad magical realist short stories that reflect our current emotional zeitgeist; or take middle-grade prompts and pass them through Russian realism; or crazy shit like easy to read novellas out of whimsical bildungsromans about teenagers going through crazy shit that are philosophical essays in disguise; or maybe even just write random stories about my hand-made waifus.

I have lots of ideas, synopses and outlines, but shit's hard.

[Anonymous No.4468752]

>>4468736
>deconstruct and reconstruct genres I loathe
Don't do this one. You have to be in love with the genres you satirize or deconstruct, or your piece will just end up hollow.

[Anonymous No.4468785]

>>4468752
Yeah, I believe that I should rephrase that.

What I always used to like about fantasy was its dream-like feeling, feeling that seemed to disappear after the whole pulpification of the genre.
Because of that I had the idea of doing the deconstruct/reconstruct thing as a plead to go back to that and steer away from the gritty fagginess of today's fantasy.

Maybe it is because most fantasy I've actually read was either latin american or old fables, but I just despise how some fantasy writers and readers are all serious business while being one of the most frivolous and shallow literature related groups out there.

I still realize that it is ultimately a suicide mission, though.
No nerds to pander to, no hipsters to which suggest poignancy to.

[Anonymous No.4468795]

>>4468736
>teenagers going through crazy shit that are philosophical essays in disguise
Sounds like my kind of chinese cartoons.

[Anonymous No.4468800]

I'm not really interested in writing literature or poems or any faggy shit like that, all I want to do is write resumes.

How do?

[Anonymous No.4468837]

here is content, crits?

[AssuredSultan !XksB4AwhxU No.4468885]

>>4467572
Write them down In a notebook Anon !

[Anonymous No.4468906]

Who do I get to look over my work? I feel hesitant to get my parents or my sister to do it. They aren't exactly my target demographic. I'm not sure I can trust them to differentiate whether something is subjectively or objectively shitty.

[Anonymous No.4468908]

>>4468795
I get a lot of inspiration from chinese cartoons but I still write basing myself on actual literature.

I'm not sure how it will turn out.

[Anonymous No.4470363]

>>4467659
It still feels very... Scummy, to think that I'd be okay with somebody raping my book if I made enough money off it

[Anonymous No.4470534]

Welp /lit/, I managed to write 3 chapters into my novel, and although I had my friends read it (one of them didn't finish high school, mind you) and say it was okay (they really said the comic book market would suit my pitch), I REALLY feel like they're not analyzing the whole pitch. I'll cut the crap and just bullet-point these concerns.

1. Is writing a book solely for one nihilistic antagonist that you share an agenda with worth it, regardless if the main protagonists have other arch-enemies?

2. Would you forgive a book if they cut character-building filler that only lead into character arcs half the size of the main plot, or drop it and get to the main arc?

3. If an author wants to share with you his personal fears while telling the story, what is the border between "horror" and "cringing revulsions"?

4. What is your personal tolerance of the protagonist being considered the "norm" of the story? Should the protagonist stay away from being portrayed as someone from the creepy/handicapped kid table in school?

With these questions, I can decide if I should pursue publishing from Amazon, or a more traditional publisher. Although publishers' censorship standards have laxed the last couple years, basing most of the horror elements from primal/Freudian features (Alien franchise is a good example) is currently the toughest sell.

[Anonymous No.4471504]

>>4470534
Are you the YA-satire guy?
You should trip.

Well, if you're so
>1. Is writing a book solely for one nihilistic antagonist that you share an agenda with worth it, regardless if the main protagonists have other arch-enemies?
You mean, only writing it until that one villain's arc ends while ignoring the other villains or making it so the villain grows as the story advances so he can be the main villain?

>2. Would you forgive a book if they cut character-building filler that only lead into character arcs half the size of the main plot, or drop it and get to the main arc?
I would, although your audience and publishers most likely wouldn't.

>3. If an author wants to share with you his personal fears while telling the story, what is the border between "horror" and "cringing revulsions"?
eh, mebbe cringe

>4. What is your personal tolerance of the protagonist being considered the "norm" of the story? Should the protagonist stay away from being portrayed as someone from the creepy/handicapped kid table in school?
idunno, I think depends of what kind of story you want to tell.
Making him an outcast could work if you want your audience to feel good about themselves when he achieves something great, although making him an average joe could make him more approachable.
That is just my opinion, though.

[Anonymous No.4471759]

I'm working on a character but I suck at research; what would be a good career choice for a shy, hyperactive girl that has ridiculous stamina and loves to work?

[Anonymous No.4471800]

>>4468643
I don't think I'm good enough yet. I have an alternate history novel about Imperial Japan that I'm going to start submitting places as soon as I'm home from Asia, and I'm going to start working on a redraft of my masterpiece, a science fiction story about Serbian war orphan of ambiguous gender who carries out wetworks for a Communist Russian government with a giant alien robot.

So nyeh.

[Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ No.4471822]

>>4471800
Veteran shock worker Radmilovic!
He's my hero!

>Masterpiece
For your sake you should not being thinking in these terms. It's a favoured project, which you should hope will be eclipsed by future work.

[Anonymous No.4471827]

>>4471822
No, I'm not really thinking about it that way. It's just that it's the idea that got me into writing, about five years ago, and over the years it's mutated into what it is now. I'd feel bad if I didn't get it done to a reasonable degree of quality by this point.

[Anonymous No.4471840]

>>4471759
mangaka, cleaning lady, accountant, chef, construction worker, farmer, assembly line worker, park ranger, zookeeper, medical examiner

hope this helps

[Anonymous No.4471844]

i haven't finished a book yet
i have like, 5 that are 45 thousand words each
but not done

i'm conscidering just mushing them all together to make one massive clusterfuck novel

[Anonymous No.4471971]

Have you ever considered spamming yourself to get recognized? Like making pseudo-blogs and writing pseudo-reviews for your works. Its like samefagging and i think its pretty much effective. You can populate abandoned threads by samefagging, people simply look at the reply counts and get in the thread. You dont have to be a bad writer to do this. Most the time good writers are not recognized until they are pretty old. What do you guys think about this?

[Anonymous No.4471985]

>>4471971
Doesn't work here, as there are ways to view the ip of the poster. Doesn't work on blogs because your voice does seep into posts of the volume needed to make such an effect, giving yourself away.
Astroturfing can, does, and will backfire.

[Anonymous No.4471993]

>>4471985
>you can't change ip
kill yourself retard

[Anonymous No.4471994]

>>4471985

>not using TOR to make blogs and reviews
>not being able to change the tone of your writing

Just give up on writing already.

[Anonymous No.4472019]

Writing a story about six people who each have mental issues entering a world that prays upon their illnesses. Ended up reading about various fairy tales because I like the darker tones. My only fear is being pretentious or edgy.

[Anonymous No.4472024]

>>4472019
I was working on something similar but stopped because it hit too close to home. Am I a bad writer, /lit/?

[Anonymous No.4472055]

>>4465252

It's not quite as simple for me

Step1
Think of a Great Idea and ending

Step 2
Start writing, write about 60% of the story

Step 3
Re-read what i have. Realize the events in chapter 2 logically contradict what happens in chapter 5

Step 4
Rewrite chapter 2.

Step 5
Chapter 2 is now leagues better than the other chapters. Rewrite chapters 1, 3 and 4.

Step 6
Lose steam before reaching chapter 5. Take a week off.

Step 7
Re-read the whole thing. Realize what I have is shit.

Step 8
Start rewriting from chapter 1. Lose steam. Take a week off.

Step 9
Start rewriting from chapter 5. Lose steam. Go play games.

Step 10
Fuck it, it's beyond recovery and the idea was shit. Drink. Go to sleep hoping I never wake up again.

[Anonymous No.4472079]

My method:

Start writing. Write every day until whatever I'm doing is done. If I take the odd break, it's to work one something different for a while before returning to my main project.

Once it's written, cut out all the filler to reduce word count until it's of publishable quality. Then, write the synopsis and start submitting to a publisher.

[Anonymous No.4472083]

>>4471971
One of the problems with that is that doing it effectively will invariably consume so much time and effort that it will take away from your ability to produce quality writing in the first place.

[Anonymous No.4472086]

My main problem is being able to actually begin.

[Anonymous No.4472114]

>>4460101
I actually just laughed out loud at how terribly stupid this post is. I really do hope you are trolling.

[YASatireGuy !!FjgprB4mrmy No.4472357]

>>4471504
That's not me.


Also, tripping as of now.

[Anonymous No.4473071]

>>4471840
>cleaning lady, accountant, farmer, assembly line worker
These might work, thanks.

[Anonymous No.4473705]

I had an idea a couple days ago. I thought it would be interesting to write characters with unusual ways for dealing with stress (urge to chew on something, uncontrollable speech ala Torretts, etc), but that quirk would have no place in the things I'm currently writing without a lot of rethinking.