The different do's and don'ts when writing stories.

[Discount_Blade]

Nah mate, you don't get it. 3rd person is for switching characters, and first person is for first person stories. Moby Dick was first person with one person view to great effect. Dune was 3rd person with character switching to great effect.

The whole point of first person is to get into the mind of a character, if you're switching characters every few chapters it really destroys immersion as many things the 'MC' shouldn't know is known by the reader dulling the impact and suddenness of events. Or the other perspectives end up just feeling like filler and didn't matter a single bit.

Like Legend of Randidly Ghosthound, all the chapters with other characters just don't matter, and feels like a failing of the author to characterize side characters from Randidly's point of view. You get like 3 to 7 chapters of a side character, then you don't hear about them again for 200-500 chapters. All the side character chapters are just filler.

*looks at bookshelves of books*
Also, how do you know I don't just leave writings that wants to mash third and first person together? Cause I do. When the narrator and thought is the MC, but the perspective is told in 3rd person, suddenly changes to another character. I'm often confused at what I'm reading. Doesn't help that webnovels often fail of punctuation and grammar. I often see 1st person writers having to add in breakers and who's perspective it is at the break just to make it make sense. The ones that don't do that? utterly confusing.

Yes, every writer has their own writing style. Just like everyone that can manually write has their own way of writing letters. Doesn't mean everyone's calligraphy is fucking Leonardo De Vinci. Sometimes that shit is chicken scratch.

Their are professionally published bestsellers with a mix of 1st and 3rd person POV's. I own several. So you're completely wrong there. And other POV's being filler? Bleh. I don't know how to go about explaining how narrow-minded and limited that belief is.....so I'll just say it bluntly.

That belief is narrowminded and limited.

 

[Discount_Blade]

Personally, I say just leave it out. If you must have politics then make them relevant to the world they are in. The fictional one, not ours. If people can't do that and upset others, then they deserve the negative attention this will create for them. Race, gender, and sexual preference are completely irrelevant to that.

Oh don't worry Wohendum. Moonpearl is being her old usual self.

 

[Wohendum-Bluu]

Oh don't worry Wohendum. Moonpearl is being her old usual douchebag self.

Idk dude I do't know her. Sounds like history between you two. I'm sorry? Idk.

 

[NotYourTypicalMan]

Anything that contain real world shit can go to tartarus like putting Real life religion on Novel in a fucking fantasy/isekai is the most retarded thing i've ever read.

 

[Wohendum-Bluu]

Anything that contain real world shit can go to tartarus like putting Real life religion on Novel in a fucking fantasy/isekai is the most retarded thing i've ever read.

I don't know why people do this with real world politics in a fictional story and then get upset when they get angry responses.. You can do as you like, no prob, but you also have to be reasonable and realize it won't be a popular thing. Accept that, and then move on with what you want to do anyway. Easy right?

Like this one girls story I read that had Republicans from America running a secret baby-eating cannibal factory. I'm serious. I forget what the context of it was regarding the rest of ths story but anyway....The girl was surprised she was downvoted to oblivion and removed her story.. She actually posted an author's note asking why all the hate....and then posted a second one calling everyone who downvoted it incels and bigots and racists and some other stuff I don't remember all of it.

LOL you just can't make this kind of stuff up

 

[Moonpearl]

Personally, I say just leave it out. If you must have politics then make them relevant to the world they are in. The fictional one, not ours. If people can't do that and upset others, then they deserve the negative attention this will create for them. Race, gender, and sexual preference are completely irrelevant to that.

What I mean is, what a lot of people call "politics" is just basic stuff to non-mainstream groups. OP says no "identity politics" and no discussions of sexism or class... But a lot of people consider even just having gay or trans characters to be including "identity politics", or will only be okay with it if they never get to talk about their experiences and struggles, ever.

But why would queer escapism fiction avoid using queer identities? I mean, you can write lesbian escapism fiction or trans escapism fiction without using lesbians and trans people, maybe, but... The default would be to include them?
Equally, I know a lot of highly successful stories that touch on the suffering queer people undergo and even have their characters speak about their individual suffering - but they still manage to be successful escapism tales.

Also, I'm pretty sure that escapism stories aimed at women actually talk about sexism a lot - and give their females characters the power to overcome it within the setting. Being able to break out of restricting social roles is a type of escapism in and of itself, so that shouldn't be surprising.
I know the exceptionally successful and popular "Sailor Moon" discusses things like sexism, sexuality and gender, and it's, well... A cultural icon.

Not to mention that there are thousands of successful stories that make use of the "rich people are corrupt" worldview.

Basically, while it's a good idea to avoid talking about your political party preferences, rule #1 actually can't be applied to much of anything.

P.S. You seemed to imply in your comment that you assume we're talking about fantasy settings, but there are plenty of stories set in the real world or in fantasy-modified real worlds.

 

[Wohendum-Bluu]

What I mean is, what a lot of people call "politics" is just basic stuff to non-mainstream groups. OP says no "identity politics" and no discussions of sexism or class... But a lot of people consider even just having gay or trans characters to be including "identity politics", or will only be okay with it if they never get to talk about their experiences and struggles, ever.

But why would queer escapism fiction avoid using queer identities? I mean, you can write lesbian escapism fiction or trans escapism fiction without using lesbians and trans people, maybe, but... The default would be to include them?
Equally, I know a lot of highly successful stories that touch on the suffering queer people undergo and even have their characters speak about their individual suffering - but they still manage to be successful escapism tales.

Also, I'm pretty sure that escapism stories aimed at women actually talk about sexism a lot - and give their females characters the power to overcome it within the setting. Being able to break out of restricting social roles is a type of escapism in and of itself, so that shouldn't be surprising.
I know the exceptionally successful and popular "Sailor Moon" discusses things like sexism, sexuality and gender, and it's, well... A cultural icon.

Not to mention that there are thousands of successful stories that make use of the "rich people are corrupt" worldview.

Basically, while it's a good idea to avoid talking about your political party preferences, rule #1 actually can't be applied to much of anything.

P.S. You seemed to imply in your comment that you assume we're talking about fantasy settings, but there are plenty of stories set in the real world or in fantasy-modified real worlds.

Yeah I meant fantasy settings. I didn't know we were talking about real world or other modern-generic settings. Sorry I must have misunderstood. And also yeah you make a valid point. All about perspective from ones POV. Cheers.

 

[tfes8]

I say do what you want. You're the author. Just stay consistent with the choices you've made. Don't be afraid to take chances just because some people on the internet have opinions.

Besides, politics are OK if you're writing an allegory to current or historical events. The best Sci-Fi franchises are allegories.

And again. Don't listen to anyone in the internet - including me.

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

My advice, never, like never ever never use popular references. They age badly. They might sound good now, but in a few years nobody will know what you are referring to.

The other risk is that they incomprehensible to a significant portion of your readership.

 

[ForestDweller]

Don't name meaningless characters.

Why not?

 

[Zero300]

Why not?

When you name a character that doesn't drive the story or only appears once in the story, it leaves things unresolved. People would wonder about what happened to said character and, if there's no sequel or there's no ending for such characters, readers would claim your ending to be bad. Readers like to relate themselves to the characters in your story, especially the named ones who they would remember more of. Same thing with authors. It's human nature to bond with someone when you know their names or when you named them. If you as an author named a character but neglect it, that's just plain abuse.

 

[Wohendum-Bluu]

Why not?

Yeh I can't agree with that rule. I have several named who are only present for 2-3 chapters at most. Usually they die though so eh whatevs. Doesn't add anything to the story I suppose but it doesn't harm or take away from it either.

 

[Schwab]

I think it only applies to a very particular type of escapism novel, even then.

Power fantasies or escapism novels aimed at people who aren't men, white, straight or cis will probably handle "politics" as the default without chasing away any of the readers they want.

Not really. When you try to escape from reality, that usually revolves around you looking for something that doesn't resemble aspects of the current world. What politics could a black, bisexual trans woman escape to that doesn't currently exist?

 

[Moonpearl]

Not really. When you try to escape from reality, that usually revolves around you looking for something that doesn't resemble aspects of the current world. What politics could a black, bisexual trans woman escape to that doesn't currently exist?

Don't need to escape to politics. As I said earlier in the thread, what people define as "political" is very different depending on how mainstream your own identities are, so "politics" as defined by the OP will appear as non-political to works aimed at other audiences.
Equally, people who struggle in the world enjoy power fantasies where they get to have justice and be on top for once, unlike in the real world (or will even just enjoy fantasies where they get to be "normal").

Again, see my expanded reply above for elaboration.

 

[Schwab]

Don't need to escape to politics. As I said earlier in the thread, what people define as "political" is very different depending on how mainstream your own identities are, so "politics" as defined by the OP will appear as non-political to works aimed at other audiences.
Equally, people who struggle in the world enjoy power fantasies where they get to have justice and be on top for once, unlike in the real world (or will even just enjoy fantasies where they get to be "normal").

Again, see my expanded reply above for elaboration.

I don't know where you are in the world but where I live in America, identity politics is very mainstream. So much so that it's annoying where people argue over something as stupid as pronouns.

Everything is political.

 

[Moonpearl]

I don't know where you are in the world but where I live in America, identity politics is very mainstream. So much so that it's annoying where people argue over something as stupid as pronouns.

Everything is political.

It's not mainstream, it's just more visible.

But characters casually sharing their pronouns would be considered "political" and unwelcome to many people outside of queer culture, and perfectly everyday to people within it.
In fact, when writing fiction for queer folk, that so-called "political" move might be very, very welcome.
Hence rule 1 is meaningless.

Anyway, "everything is political" is a pointless statement here, because now we can't write about anything at all. All books are banned. Scribble Hub shuts down. The end.

 

[OkuraTsukiko]

Anything that contain real world shit can go to tartarus like putting Real life religion on Novel in a fucking fantasy/isekai is the most retarded thing i've ever read.

I agree with @NotYourTypicalMAN , involving real-world occurrence does not fare well if you want your readers to get some flashbacks or shivers down their spine. Or it could end up as something ridiculous or utterly disappointing

 

[Fox-Trot-9]

Nah mate, you don't get it. 3rd person is for switching characters, and first person is for first person stories. Moby Dick was first person with one person view to great effect. Dune was 3rd person with character switching to great effect.

The whole point of first person is to get into the mind of a character, if you're switching characters every few chapters it really destroys immersion as many things the 'MC' shouldn't know is known by the reader dulling the impact and suddenness of events. Or the other perspectives end up just feeling like filler and didn't matter a single bit.

Like Legend of Randidly Ghosthound, all the chapters with other characters just don't matter, and feels like a failing of the author to characterize side characters from Randidly's point of view. You get like 3 to 7 chapters of a side character, then you don't hear about them again for 200-500 chapters. All the side character chapters are just filler.

*looks at bookshelves of books*
Also, how do you know I don't just leave writings that wants to mash third and first person together? Cause I do. When the narrator and thought is the MC, but the perspective is told in 3rd person, suddenly changes to another character. I'm often confused at what I'm reading. Doesn't help that webnovels often fail of punctuation and grammar. I often see 1st person writers having to add in breakers and who's perspective it is at the break just to make it make sense. The ones that don't do that? utterly confusing.

Yes, every writer has their own writing style. Just like everyone that can manually write has their own way of writing letters. Doesn't mean everyone's calligraphy is fucking Leonardo De Vinci. Sometimes that shit is chicken scratch.

I guess you haven't read / didn't like reading Bram Stoker's Dracula, which makes use of multiple 1st person POVs in an epistolary novel format using fake documentation. Other examples of novels using multiple 1st person POVs are Wilkie Collins' The Woman in White and The Moonstone, and Gerald Biss's The Realm of the Unreal, which uses a similar format to Stoker's Dracula.

 

[MajorKerina]

It depends on how much of the author you interpret as reflecting through the work. For instance, I just finished up a story with AI inside peoples heads. Like an episode of Black Mirror, real world politics and allusions to them are inescapable. Now the best kind of works have those elements but they aren’t so overbearing or rigid that the author is preaching to you about one thing or another... Examples, see Hollywood.

Ideally, the reader should be able to find sympathetic points no matter their perspective on more serious topics presented. With respect to my story, I had artificial intelligences that could melt your brain if you committed basically industrial espionage. That presumes certain choices made in the world about the power of certain entities. And hints about global temperature also occurred in this near-future story. But for me it was all background and setting to a characterfocused narrative.

Compare this to blacklist style screenplays I’ve read at random which outright say “if you are a certain sex, you’re not allowed to read this a certain way” literally on the front page of the document.

But I mainly wanted to say kudos to you for this thread topic, very cool and I’m encouraged to see stuff like it on here :-)

 

[Maple-Leaf]

I think it would bother people if you stave away from any and all politics. It gets ridiculously obvious and corny sometimes and taking extra steps to avoid them might just result in even worse writing. Avoiding real problems just draws more attention to any obvious sugarcoating and can have the exact opposite effect than what you’re going for. Escapism isn’t escapism if you aren’t escaping. The reader should be able to enjoy themselves without their attention constantly being drawn to you dancing around sensitive topics as if they were landmines.

Referencing real events too closely can ruin things as well. Shit man, the other day I walked into my mom watching Chicago P.D and everyone was wearing masks and screaming and crying about corona and I winced hard. I don’t watch it so I don’t know how well it was executed, but from what I saw at a glance... Yikes man.

What I mean is, find the middle ground. Don’t dodge the land mines like a ballerina to the point where the reader is thus reminded that they’re in a field of land mines, but don’t bear hug the sea mines either.
Trust your gut. You can probably write well for someone who reads like you do, so focus on doing well for them rather than for the readers who’ve already escaped your grasp. If you want to attract them, try to find their middle ground instead of instantly pivoting to one of the two extremes.

Tl;dr: Do whatever the fuck you want. Nobody cares. And if they do, find someone who doesn’t.