As strange as it may seem, I am INCAPABLE of writing and imagining a story without first thinking about the hidden message I want to convey to the reader. And I wonder if I'm the only one in this situation ? Is this a bad thing ? Does a story have to be used to teach a moral ? Perhaps it is due to the nature of the works that I have been consuming since I was little idk. And, even when I look back, All my favorite books, anime, or even games are works with a fairly strong philosophical substance in the background, maybe that's why I feel forced to have one too
For me, a story only needs to be fun, nothing more nothing less. Everything else is toppings on the cake. Morals and such would appear naturally though the narrative and how characters interact.
Most stories with plot involve a protagonist overcoming adversity to achieve some goal. That goal reflects the values of the MC. Or the MC could abandon their first goal and find what they were really looking for.
Or an MC could have a character flaw - and their journey helps them grow out of that flaw.
You don't have to teach anything. It's not bad nor good. If you have a character that grows you'll likely have a moral or hidden message inside of it, but you don't have to start with it (it could be emergent).
TLDR: Having a moral to teach about shouldn't hold you back from building your characters and world. If you write about a character that grows over time, the moral teaching will just be there.
Yes, it's a bad thing. When the first thing on an author's mind is how they're going to preach to their audience, the story will always turn out bad. Entertaining the audience with a well written story is the only thing they need to worry about. Any "lesson" the story teaches will come about naturally via the plot or the arc the main character goes through.
There's not much I hate more than a pretentious artist who thinks that just because they can draw or write, they have the world figured out and need to teach everyone else how to think.
For me, a story only needs to be fun, nothing more nothing less. Everything else is toppings on the cake. Morals and such would appear naturally though the narrative and how characters interact.
Yes, it's a bad thing. When the first thing on an author's mind is how they're going to preach to their audience, the story will always turn out bad. Entertaining the audience with a well written story is the only thing they need to worry about. Any "lesson" the story teaches will come about naturally via the plot or the arc the main character goes through.
There's not much I hate more than a pretentious artist who thinks that just because they can draw or write, they have the world figured out and need to teach everyone else how to think.
Everyone can write so idk why an artist would be pretentious about that. And I dont think it's that wrong to write a story about how important it is for people to love themselve for example. And it is really possible to be just worry about "entertain the audience" ? I could say it's pretentious too to think that people just want to have fun, maybe they also want something to think about ? I understand what you try to say but I think you misinterpreted my post, I am just an overthinking guy and it have an impact on my writing
that's just your style, nothing wrong with it, everyone has a different way of telling their stories, a message or a theme is a good thing, for me the only requirement is that a story makes sense, nothing more, "ofc bc I don't read comedy"
It's a bit of both. It's entirely depending on your intention on writing the story itself. I found myself writing stories about loyalty, survival, order, leadership and progress. And also romance, family and legacy, since I'm a huge sucker for those.
But if I wanted to write for fun, then I could make a "simple" formula, particularly in LitRPG works, then determine the plots behind the scene, and voila, now I write for fun.
I don't think there's anything wrong with starting out with a theme or message. There isn't a right or wrong way to build a story.
Does a story have to be used to teach a moral?
Probably not, as "teach" implies intention. Some people just write whatever shit they find enjoyable, not necessarily paying heed to what they're trying to say, and with no intentions of teaching anything.
But that doesn't mean a moral message doesn't exist, even if you don't consciously intend on conveying one. A story almost always contains characters and situations that bounce off one another. The result of that bouncing off will ultimately be informed by your thoughts and opinions as an author. Readers, though they have no idea what you intend, might pick up on some sort of messaging in what you've written because they're also people with thoughts and opinions (hopefully).
To sum it up before I become even more incoherent, the useful answer you're looking for is: No. Stories and by extension authors don't have to consciously try to teach a message. But a message might be picked up on anyway because you are creating something that is read by others.
Readers will also probably notice if your message (intentional or not) makes no bloody sense, so I'd say you're on the right track by really thinking about your story's themes and messages. If you can naturally incorporate them into your story through solid characters and a decent plot, you'll be closer to Dostoevsky than most webnovel authors will be to you.
I don't think there's anything wrong with starting out with a theme or message. There isn't a right or wrong way to build a story.
Does a story have to be used to teach a moral?
Probably not, as "teach" implies intention. Some people just write whatever shit they find enjoyable, not necessarily paying heed to what they're trying to say, and with no intentions of teaching anything.
But that doesn't mean a moral message doesn't exist, even if you don't consciously intend on conveying one. A story almost always contains characters and situations that bounce off one another. The result of that bouncing off will ultimately be informed by your thoughts and opinions as an author. Readers, though they have no idea what you intend, might pick up on some sort of messaging in what you've written because they're also people with thoughts and opinions (hopefully).
To sum it up before I become even more incoherent, the useful answer you're looking for is: No. Stories and by extension authors don't have to consciously try to teach a message. But a message might be picked up on anyway because you are creating something that is read by others.
Readers will also probably notice if your message (intentional or not) makes no bloody sense, so I'd say you're on the right track by really thinking about your story's themes and messages. If you can naturally incorporate them into your story through solid characters and a decent plot, you'll be closer to Dostoevsky than most webnovel authors will be to you.
that's just your style, nothing wrong with it, everyone has a different way of telling their stories, a message or a theme is a good thing, for me the only requirement is that a story makes sense, nothing more, "ofc bc I don't read comedy"
It's a bit of both. It's entirely depending on your intention on writing the story itself. I found myself writing stories about loyalty, survival, order, leadership and progress. And also romance, family and legacy, since I'm a huge sucker for those.
But if I wanted to write for fun, then I could make a "simple" formula, particularly in LitRPG works, then determine the plots behind the scene, and voila, now I write for fun.
A story does not need to convey a hidden message or moral lesson. Nothing is stopping you from including it, but it is optional and depending on execution, might not even add anything positive to the end result.
As a bit of a side note, I believe it is famously the territory of (traditional) fairy tales, which are supposed to convey cautionary and moral lessons (obey your parents, don't follow strangers, evil gets punished and good rewarded...), and propaganda, which is tailored towards a political message.
Everyone can write so idk why an artist would be pretentious about that. And I dont think it's that wrong to write a story about how important it is for people to love themselve for example. And it is really possible to be just worry about "entertain the audience" ? I could say it's pretentious too to think that people just want to have fun, maybe they also want something to think about ? I understand what you try to say but I think you misinterpreted my post, I am just an overthinking guy and it have an impact on my writing
This really depends on what you're trying to write here.
If it's a story meant to entertain people, then yeah, it should be entertaining, first and foremost.
But not all literature is meant to be strictly entertaining, and not all entertainment is going to be fun for everyone who reads it. We've all got preferences, after all and you really cant satisfy everyone, that shits a pipe dream.
Honestly? Stop asking if others will like something and just write it. If there's an audience for it, it's either going to show up or it's not.
People who think they aren't conveying a message or moral are still doing so implicitly. The space of "Moral Actions" as a human defined category is huge. The exception might be certain informational math and physics texts, though there the moral is still that learning stem is better than not learning stem.
Any character that has to make choices implies moral weight to the choices they've made for your story. People often don't realize they're merely baking their cultural morals into their story when they write. Do I think harem writers, largely from the east (at least initially), are explicitly making a statement about how harems are good? No, but they aren't as Taboo as they were in the west (where Christianity dominates), so the author was just writing. It still bakes in the morals with it.
If your characters have to make choices on what to do, and you as the author either reward or punish them, you're making a moral statement about a behavior, even if you don't realize it. For example, many authors reward the hero's idealistic behavior (such as not killing the weak), while other authors will punish it. This emphasizes a moral choice between idealism and realism philosophical choices.
You have to be an exceptional author to slip in active moralizing without others noticing. Usually, when someone tries to moralize, people catch on and drop the series. What I see more often is that readers from different nationalities often have clashing morals with the author. International websites tend to have these issues. For example, I wouldn't expect a Hindu reader from India to appreciate many western protagonist's moral perspectives because they're rooted in very different moral traditions.
Similar things can be said for Chinese/Malasia/Central African/Middle Eastern readers/authors. As more and more of the non-western world becomes consumers on the internet, western authors are going to become acutely aware that their stories are, in fact, moralizing, even if they aren't consciously aware of it.
Every story, almost definitionally, has moral statements baked in, because you are writing a fictional character in a fictional setting. Even if you imagine the character as real, you're inventing both their choices and the resolutions to those choices. You are deciding what actions are rewarded or punished, therefore you are making a moral judgement on a behavior.
A good example is that in Indian culture, there is a caste system. As a result, those higher up directly helping the poor would be considered a negative thing. They may choose to help indirectly, but don't have a moral obligation to do so. In the west, due to Christian morals, we consider someone who overlooks the poor when directly presented with them to be a negative thing. If you as an author ever present a situation where you have a protagonist help the poor, it is a moral statement.
In short, Christian morals aren't "The Default". Morals are baked into all decision making. If you are telling a story, you're moralizing in one way or another. At their base, that is what stories are. A way of giving people a framework for making moral judgements should hypothetical situations arise. This is why phrases like "sisyphean task", "herculean task", "achilles' heel", "narcissism", "David vs Goliath", "Writing on the wall", "catch-22", "Kryptonite", and so so so many more exist. Stories provide a moral framework to make future decisions with. Some stories may have grander implications than others, but they still make moral statements none-the-less.
Yes, this means that 50 shades of gray is a moralizing book. Yes, you shouldn't be surprised, as it introduced many people to BDSM, which necessarily has moral qualities.
Does that mean you need to think about your moral implications as you write? No. Just be aware that you are making them. More often than not, your story will simply re-emphasize the same morals that have been hashed out in your culture dozens of times already, and that is fine. There will be a few drops of insight from your own moral philosophy in there, even if you don't realize it.
People who think they aren't conveying a message or moral are still doing so implicitly. The space of "Moral Actions" as a human defined category is huge. The exception might be certain informational math and physics texts, though there the moral is still that learning stem is better than not learning stem.
Any character that has to make choices implies moral weight to the choices they've made for your story. People often don't realize they're merely baking their cultural morals into their story when they write. Do I think harem writers, largely from the east (at least initially), are explicitly making a statement about how harems are good? No, but they aren't as Taboo as they were in the west (where Christianity dominates), so the author was just writing. It still bakes in the morals with it.
If your characters have to make choices on what to do, and you as the author either reward or punish them, you're making a moral statement about a behavior, even if you don't realize it. For example, many authors reward the hero's idealistic behavior (such as not killing the weak), while other authors will punish it. This emphasizes a moral choice between idealism and realism philosophical choices.
You have to be an exceptional author to slip in active moralizing without others noticing. Usually, when someone tries to moralize, people catch on and drop the series. What I see more often is that readers from different nationalities often have clashing morals with the author. International websites tend to have these issues. For example, I wouldn't expect a Hindu reader from India to appreciate many western protagonist's moral perspectives because they're rooted in very different moral traditions.
Similar things can be said for Chinese/Malasia/Central African/Middle Eastern readers/authors. As more and more of the non-western world becomes consumers on the internet, western authors are going to become acutely aware that their stories are, in fact, moralizing, even if they aren't consciously aware of it.
Every story, almost definitionally, has moral statements baked in, because you are writing a fictional character in a fictional setting. Even if you imagine the character as real, you're inventing both their choices and the resolutions to those choices. You are deciding what actions are rewarded or punished, therefore you are making a moral judgement on a behavior.
A good example is that in Indian culture, there is a caste system. As a result, those higher up directly helping the poor would be considered a negative thing. They may choose to help indirectly, but don't have a moral obligation to do so. In the west, due to Christian morals, we consider someone who overlooks the poor when directly presented with them to be a negative thing. If you as an author ever present a situation where you have a protagonist help the poor, it is a moral statement.
In short, Christian morals aren't "The Default". Morals are baked into all decision making. If you are telling a story, you're moralizing in one way or another. At their base, that is what stories are. A way of giving people a framework for making moral judgements should hypothetical situations arise. This is why phrases like "sisyphean task", "herculean task", "achilles' heel", "narcissism", "David vs Goliath", "Writing on the wall", "catch-22", "Kryptonite", and so so so many more exist. Stories provide a moral framework to make future decisions with. Some stories may have grander implications than others, but they still make moral statements none-the-less.
Yes, this means that 50 shades of gray is a moralizing book. Yes, you shouldn't be surprised, as it introduced many people to BDSM, which necessarily has moral qualities.
Does that mean you need to think about your moral implications as you write? No. Just be aware that you are making them. More often than not, your story will simply re-emphasize the same morals that have been hashed out in your culture dozens of times already, and that is fine. There will be a few drops of insight from your own moral philosophy in there, even if you don't realize it.
As strange as it may seem, I am INCAPABLE of writing and imagining a story without first thinking about the hidden message I want to convey to the reader. And I wonder if I'm the only one in this situation ? Is this a bad thing ? Does a story have to be used to teach a moral ? Perhaps it is due to the nature of the works that I have been consuming since I was little idk. And, even when I look back, All my favorite books, anime, or even games are works with a fairly strong philosophical substance in the background, maybe that's why I feel forced to have one too
If you wish to follow the traditional structure of storytelling, yes. However, it is your story. It's your choice if you want to ignore good practice. Do understand that literary critics will call your story shit and you can't really argue back because you have no ground to stand on.
Ai-chan is saying this to a general 'you', not as an attack on your personal choices.
