Context, character, content questions for everyone

[Tempokai]

In my roast thread, I am always ranting about good opening chapters having good ratio of sequential "context, character, content" going on in them. The part I forgot to ask about is, what do you think those three words mean? I'm genuinely never asked anyone about this. So:


1. What is context and how do make it followable enough for the reader without TMI?

2. What is a character, and how you introduce that without diminishing context? What's the difference between context and character?

3. What is content, and how do you use previous two concepts to advantage, therefore making the reader click "next chapter"?


There are no trick questions here, I genuinely want to know what you think. Even if it feels hard to answer, try. You'll know yourself better that way. I'll write down my thoughts tomorrow.

 

[Little-Moon]

Mhh , I do not know if my answer is useful, but for me a character is an individual/person living inisde the world one creates/refers to.

This persons pov or story is being told. As they area character they need something that makes their story worth telling. A peculiarity, an ability, a profession something, and thah something is the context of the character.

So basically the character is the individual person and their character and the context is the sourrounding the spark that makes rhe story happen.

And my believe is that the key in making someone click -next chapter- is not making the character likable or anything along those lines. A character does not need to be likable, they need to be unique in their world.

Instead what makes many click is the story, the context, the interest into knowing what comes next.

Or at least so my personal belive, which is highly subjective and honestly I do not know if it makes much sense what I am writing but I don't know how to explain it better.

 

[Deleted member 84247]

I will just say that I always do "Character, content, context." I want to get somebody hooked by my character with content. What is the character doing? The context surrounding that doesn't matter as much to get a reader interested.

So basically that's how I see it. Character is the person we're supposed to care about who has their own motive. The content is the plot like what are they doing? The context is the surrounding world. You can't get people to care about the surroundings without first having a character and content, in my opinion.

I will start every story like this without fail. An example would be if I were to start a story about Tempokai. If I was making a story about a witch named Tempokai, I might start it like this.

Tempokai brushed the dust off her pointy hat. It still smelt of old grimoire runes from the witch's enchantments. She frowned, knowing that she'd never wear it again...

Well, I came up with that on the spot, but I always do things like that. There is no context to why she can't wear it or anything like that. There is no imaginary world to surround herself yet. The content is merely about Tempokai and this hat.

 

[RepresentingWrath]

Big brain words.

 

[LilRora]

Context, to me, is the broad idea of the story. Some do tell the entire narrative in narrow confines and ignore or purposefully omit the wider picture, but in general it is important to give the reader some vague idea about the world the story is placed in. This should be done inversely proportionally to the scale (a baseline amount of detail for immediate surroundings relevant to the plot, then less and less information for more and more distant elements), with more details being added as the story progresses.

Why this matters is that it is a natural way to learn (this is also why I strongly dislike the worldbuilding of many isekai stories). When we are first dropped into an alien world, we are faced with immediate questions that need answering. Where we are, who we are, what is happening. Once we are familiar with these, there is leeway to explore different and more distant frontiers, and this actually should be done to keep us engaged. As we learn more and more, a broad picture of the wider world is revealed as we piece together the scraps of information we are able to gather from our small point of view. There are, of course, stories that go against this, but from my experience they tend to be far less engaging.

I'm unsure what you mean by your second point, specifically which definition of "character" you are referring to, so I'm going to hold off on answering this.

I think I have largely answered half of the third question with this as well, but to expand on it - content is, at least to me, the events and everything they are built on, so places where they happen and characters that are involved. The most important thing in this regard is not what is, but what can be. Readers won't want to read a hundredth identical scene, but await in anticipation for what they expect will happen. I'm unsure how to best put it into words, but fundamentally, the reason we read stories does not have much to do with what we've already read, but what we want to read. The key to this is setting expectations and delivering on them, repeatedly and in a controlled manner. Very difficult in practice.

 

[CharlesEBrown]

In my roast thread, I am always ranting about good opening chapters having good ratio of sequential "context, character, content" going on in them. The part I forgot to ask about is, what do you think those three words mean? I'm genuinely never asked anyone about this. So:


1. What is context and how do make it followable enough for the reader without TMI?

Not completely sure what you are asking here. Context is "what happens around the central point or character" for the most part; it is what the reader uses (if the author did their job well) to make sense of the story itself and the characters involved (and should somewhat govern the characters' behaviors)

2. What is a character, and how you introduce that without diminishing context? What's the difference between context and character?

In the Native American unit of one of my college religion classes, a teacher tossed out a great line from one of the tribes, I THINK it was Cherokee but not sure: "Not all rocks are people, but some rocks are people."
Anything that interacts with an observer is a character (or "people" in the language of the quote above) - the main character who goes through all the crap of the story is definitely a character, but so is the sword that runs him through, ending the story abruptly, as it interacted with him.
Some characters (like the sword, or the stone that trips you) are more "props" than active characters, but they are still "people" (while the sword that hangs on the wall and does nothing else, or the rock over there at the side of the rode is not, it is just "window dressing").

3. What is content, and how do you use previous two concepts to advantage, therefore making the reader click "next chapter"?


There are no trick questions here, I genuinely want to know what you think. Even if it feels hard to answer, try. You'll know yourself better that way. I'll write down my thoughts tomorrow.

Content is all of this - characters, context, plot, etc. And you only find out how to make the reader click "next chapter" through trial and error by combining how they all work together, at least in my experience.
That or you just hold a gun to their head - that can be a great motivator, even if a touch illegal...

 

[Corty]

I don't have a clue what those questions mean or what I'm doing; I just write what I feel is fun. I never once thought about it this deeply…

Halp….

 

[RepresentingWrath]

I don't have a clue what those questions mean or what I'm doing; I just write what I feel is fun. I never once thought about it this deeply…

Halp….

 

[Clo]

Context makes me think of the theory of foreground/background in litterature.

Context is everything surrounding the character. The lore, their past, the political climate and situation, the magic and technology level, the year. Context can be spelled out, or it can be derived from—well, from context.

In stories, people generally read for the things happening now. The action (whether it's internal or not). And that's the content of your story. Joe says this. Bob feels that. The spell that blasted blubber beyond all believable bounds.

At school, we were told you need to pay (give the reader) some action/foreground/present tense to afford yourself some background (explanation of the world, past events, systems, memories, etc.)

Not all context needs to be explained or spelled out. You can learn Jason's mother is the type of person who likes to solve math puzzles through an exchange between two characters talking. The narration doesn't havr to pause, and give out a 5-page long explanation of who Carol Davis is, why she picked her husband, why she likes math, and she what thinks of her son. Those are part of the context of Jason's story.

As for characters, I will focus on primary ones, because many characters aren't Characters. They're context (parents, family etc.) or content (the quest giver asking for help, etc.)

Characters are what your focuses on. It doesn't even have to be a person. A poutine in a specific chapter could be so important as to be a character in of itself. But generally, your protagonists and antagonists will be characters.

And in some stories, the antagonist so sometimes just society, cancer, of the passage of time.

Characters exist inside your a world, space, and time. The character has to care about the context in which they live, and that the author introduced, because if they don't, they made the context irrelevant.

 

[Deleted member 84247]

I don't have a clue what those questions mean or what I'm doing; I just write what I feel is fun. I never once thought about it this deeply…

Halp….

Or you're like me. You think about it, but you don't have fancy terms for it. I just think about ways that make my story not boring and fun.

 

[Valmond]

This all falls apart depending on the story.
The changes happens based on the setting, and the context surrounding it.

The character is just a character, the context is what brings life to the setting. Thus, the context surrounding it is what paints the picture and gives weight to the character.

The content now, this is where it varies even more widely.

And gets more complex depending on the subgenres.

Let’s take something that leads more with action, and can have a sub of Slice of Life.

This is especially tricky to do. If you do action, you have an increased risk of turning away Slice of Life readers. The same in vice versa.

This is where a careful combination is necessary.

For instance, what I do. Is lead with the action, with some reflection to the past. The conclusion now, each conclusion would be the Slice of Life section.

As this shows what eventually leads up to the main character’s fall, and clearly shows what caused them to go down their route.

As a result, this form was taken pretty well. Both sides got what they wanted. Now, naturally some will not take to it, but it grabbed a large amount.

Context - The combination of words that builds around one or multiple things. This includes emotions, world, characters, other settings, etc. Too many to list.

Character - The figure that is within the context.

Content - The bulk that forms it.

When joined together, it can create many different scenarios. The content provides the character its bulk, the context shapes the character. And this as a result makes the character central to the story.

It is like a building block.

 

[Corty]

Or you're like me. You think about it, but you don't have fancy terms for it. I just think about ways that make my story not boring and fun.

That assumes me have brain

 

[RainyLiquid]

I ain't smart, failed to understand some words, me big dumb. Me write novel cause me like characters in my novel.

 

[butierHHF]

Context refers to the background or situation in which something occurs. It includes time, place, culture, and circumstances that influence meaning.
Example: A war setting provides a different context than a peaceful village.
Character refers to the people or figures in a story, including their personalities, traits, motivations, and development.
Example: A brave, determined hero is a type of character.
Content is the actual material or subject matter presented — what the story or message is about.
Example: The plot, dialogue, themes, and events are part of the content.

 

[Tempokai]

I had a headache yesterday due to überhinking and fell asleep, waking up few times in the middle of the night. If I were to say, these questions sapped my glucose out of the mind after work, and today I was terrible from that all day. The headache subsided, and I probably can answer these questions. Pardon if the explanation will be headache causing.

So, CCC is not just three random concepts that somehow interact willy nilly with each other. It's a storytelling delivery system that human mind knows instinctively, even if it doesn't know that it knows that it exists.

What is storytelling? Rougly saying, it's a communication of ideas in a fun or interesting way, be it orally or in text, through language. You may ask, why this is relevant for CCC? I'll answer, it's because the basic fundamentals of every story, be it unfinished, fragmented, or downright terrible.

I thought about so much recently while working, and come up the most dumb way to explain the CCC.

Context: everything that happened and is relevant to the narrative.
Character: everything that is happening through and to the narrative agent, right now.
Content: everything that will happen, and reader engagement with "what if's" and "what will be".

Now, I'll answer my own questions.

1. Context is everything that happened in the past, be it a world, character actions, culture, plot, etc. Basically, what happened = context. This context divides into two: known and unknown. Why? Because as a reader, you don't start with everything laid down for you, just think about this for a minute. You either know what you know through the narrative, or don't. Simple as.

So, what are those known and unknown context truly are? I'll start with known. Let's put ourself in the shoes of a reader. Let's say you saw a vampire story about her adventures with a witch. You know the genre the story is in (action-adventure, slice-of-life, drama), the tropes (bratty vampire and mommy witch, fantasy world), and usual story beats (monster hunting, booba measuring contest, magic, etc), just based on title and the synopsis alone. That is known context, you know because you experienced such stories before.

Unknown context, is whatever the author pulls from the ether, that you don't know will happen or know will happen, but didn't happened in the plot yet. To that category the usual worldbuilding stuff will fit just right in. Let's say, for example sake, that the witch is homeless, the vampire is adventuring because she's bored, and witch is wanted in three kingdoms. That information wasn't know before, but that's the part; it happens during the story, where the unknown context becomes known, and therefore the proposition:

Context is what happened before AND the things that will be known further down the story, and your job as a storyteller is to reveal the context in fun and engaging way. The reader knows the basics and doesn't know the precise information; to make the context is to control the story the reader experiences.

Or, in caveman terms: Grug knows wheel, but it doesn't know how it becomes the wheel. Grug understands the wheel after seeing Ug making a wheel.

What makes a proper story a story is the existence of unknown context. Storyteller hints at (subtext), shows crumbs (teasing), and if they're not postmodernists (aka don't suck at storytelling), fully show the context on why the agent of the narrative is in such way. That leads to...

2. Character: everything that is happening right now, your action, your characterization, your ability to put coherent words that readers can understand, in other words, your visible authorial character on the words. Yes, even you, as an author, is a character in your story.

This is where from the tone, style, use of tropes, showing off the personality of characters, and so on, that is happening right when a reader reads the sentences happen. Immediate stuff that affects the reader at the moment.

Back to bratty vampire and mommy witch example. Let's say you describe the witch first, how she's homeless (context), showing her gettig kicked out from her tower (character), but she isn't angry at them because it was her fault (character + context, oh my). She ran away in tears withoit looking where she's going (character) and stumbles upon the castle in the middle of nowhere, accidentally breaking through the barrier (unknown context). She doesn't understand where she is now, but given that she will lose nothing from exploring, she does just that (character). She meets bratty vampire in a kitchen, and screaming ensues (character + unknown context).

As you see, these is two systems interact with each other, and you might argue that the placement of those concepts is different, but I digress. What propels this "story" is how it's delivered, i.e. the description that narrator (and written you behind that narrator, implied author) is giving out to the reader. If you read the previous thread, you'll know that this description divides into two types, external and internal. Or, in simple words, describing the world and describing characters. External description is for expanding the context, and internal for expanding the characters. Therefore, proposition is thus:

Character is the engine that propels the story forward. It takes the unknown context, reveals it, interplays with the character, and makes the reader entertained at the moment. After the "moment" ends, it becomes the context on which reader and you, storyteller, base your actions. The difference between context and character is that the character is happening right now, and context is what happened.

Or, in caveman terms:

As Grug watched Ug carving a wheel, he listened how Ug grunted how he punches the chisel, what stone he used, what tools he uses besides the chisel. Grug is interested more in Ug now than in the wheel, because Ug's explanation is better than the wheel.

How you write as an author, the choices you make to make the story fun, the proper context you reveal at right time for maximum surprise, is what makes the good story good. It doesn't just throw the written words into the face of the reader, it makes the character act while expanding the known context OVER TIME. Yes, over time, if you didn't catch the point I've been making. Storytelling is ephemeral thing that happens in that specific time, while reader anticipates what will happen further. Which leads to...

3. Content: after the known context and the character made their moves, everything that is unknown but can be knowable, and the reader consolidating what happened theorizing what will happen further down the story. That sentence is a mess, so here's stupid version:

Reader read stuff happening to the mommy witch, and the story cliffhangered on her seeing a bratty vampire. Reader knows that they'll be in adventure soon, because you promised in the synopsis, and will think about how you'll do that. Will they fight? Or they will talk to each other? How she broke that barrier? Why the castle in the middle of nowhere, out of sight, why it's there? Why bratty vampire screamed with the witch? And so on, so forth, the questions that have answers, and the reader will answer them or wait for you to answer them.

The reader is engaging with the unknown context. That is the narrative tension that your story had created, which is good, that's engagement with your story. Your job as a storyteller is to find that unknown context the reader is interested in, and answer that in the surprising, fun, or interesting way.

By this point, you are even with the reader. Reader knows what happened, and wants to know what happens next. Storyteller knows that the reader knows the context, so you repeat the character section again, because the context is already established.

And here's the problem you can predict but never understand: the prior context that the reader has. Did that reader read such stories before? What tropes the reader likes and hates? What the reader considers cliché and interesting? And so on. That's your unknown context, that you generalize and wing it.

In other words, you don't know what your reader wants, and your reader doesn't know what you're cooking. If you make a lot of known context, the reader will treat it as a cliché. If you make a lot of unknown context and forget to reveal them because you thought readers already knew that, it's incoherent and postmodern (trash). The proposition is therefore:

Content is a meaning game where you make unknown context known in such a way the reader understands that it's important or meaningful. The reader, therefore, accepts the newly revealed context, tries to understand how that unknown context is structured, and tries to make meaning from it in its own mind. The game breaks when the sides don't understand each other, and hate it for that. How?

As I said, it boils down the context. You know what reader wants from your type of a story, and you follow that trajectory WHILE making it suspensful, surprising, or suspicious. Humans, even cavemen always wanted a thing that looks similar, but interesting. That's the human nature, and you can't go against it (unless you're a postmodernist and want to suck at storytelling).

So, in cavemen terms:

Ug make wheel. Grug see Ug grunt and sweat. Grug feel... emotion. Grug care more about Ug than wheel. Grug now invested in outcome of wheel-making. Even if Ug fails at making a wheel, Grug will follow Ug in other things, like making plant grow.

And that is storytelling. That's CCC. The cycle that happens again, and again, and again, until the story ends, and reader is happy/sad that the story ended. Reader then will make content from the story as a whole and create a new context for themselves. Maybe they'll see a new story that looks like that story about mommy witch and a bratty vampire, but it's in reverse, bratty vampire is now homeless. The reader will judge that story according to that story they read, and will determine if that story is worthy following or not.

When CCC works, it's great, because it's a proper story being told. When it doesn't work because CCC is misaligned somewhere, between the reader and the author. For every new story there's new CCC. For every reader there's CCC behind them. And for every proper author, you need to know CCC, because that's how storytelling works.

Know yourself and your reader, and you'll never lose engagement inside the story. And while the creation is divine, remember that it's not enough, persuasion is survival. Peace.

*dies from lack of sugar*

 

[JayMark]

I thought about so much recently while working, and come up the most dumb way to explain the CCC.

Context: everything that happened and is relevant to the narrative.

Setting. The worldo. Both in the immediate sense of what is surrounding the characters and The Worldo in the grand sense.

Character: everything that is happening through and to the narrative agent, right now.

*Chews grass.*

Content: everything that will happen, and reader engagement with "what if's" and "what will be".

Action! Sometimes dialogue.

Now, I'll answer my own questions.

1. Context is everything that happened in the past, be it a world, character actions, culture, plot, etc. Basically, what happened = context. This context divides into two: known and unknown. Why? Because as a reader, you don't start with everything laid down for you, just think about this for a minute. You either know what you know through the narrative, or don't. Simple as.

Yes. Pretty much. *chews grass* *nods*

So, what are those known and unknown context truly are? I'll start with known. Let's put ourself in the shoes of a reader. Let's say you saw a vampire story about her adventures with a witch. You know the genre the story is in (action-adventure, slice-of-life, drama), the tropes (bratty vampire and mommy witch, fantasy world), and usual story beats (monster hunting, booba measuring contest, magic, etc), just based on title and the synopsis alone. That is known context, you know because you experienced such stories before.

I have an irrelevent comment: I have a love hate relationship with trope expectations. I like the structure that genres provide but sometimes that structure feels like a prison. Like not being allowed to have a moment of levity or humor ever in a dystopian context setting.

Unknown context, is whatever the author pulls from the ether, that you don't know will happen or know will happen, but didn't happened in the plot yet. To that category the usual worldbuilding stuff will fit just right in. Let's say, for example sake, that the witch is homeless, the vampire is adventuring because she's bored, and witch is wanted in three kingdoms. That information wasn't know before, but that's the part; it happens during the story, where the unknown context becomes known, and therefore the proposition:

The stuff in the story outline and the writer notes. But is revealed at a moment where it makes sense so that the context flows with the action.

Context is what happened before AND the things that will be known further down the story, and your job as a storyteller is to reveal the context in fun and engaging way. The reader knows the basics and doesn't know the precise information; to make the context is to control the story the reader experiences.

*Nods* *chews* Moo.

Or, in caveman terms: Grug knows wheel, but it doesn't know how it becomes the wheel. Grug understands the wheel after seeing Ug making a wheel.

What makes a proper story a story is the existence of unknown context. Storyteller hints at (subtext), shows crumbs (teasing), and if they're not postmodernists (aka don't suck at storytelling), fully show the context on why the agent of the narrative is in such way. That leads to...

Such hate for the postmodernists. jsgsdhgsjdhgsdj <------- Give this your own meaning. See, brilliant. I'm amazing. Give me money.

2. Character: everything that is happening right now, your action, your characterization, your ability to put coherent words that readers can understand, in other words, your visible authorial character on the words. Yes, even you, as an author, is a character in your story.

This is where from the tone, style, use of tropes, showing off the personality of characters, and so on, that is happening right when a reader reads the sentences happen. Immediate stuff that affects the reader at the moment.

Unfortunately, I am the least interesting character in my storys. I try to stay out of it as much as possible and keep a dry presence. But yes, interesting point.

Back to bratty vampire and mommy witch example. Let's say you describe the witch first, how she's homeless (context), showing her gettig kicked out from her tower (character), but she isn't angry at them because it was her fault (character + context, oh my). She ran away in tears withoit looking where she's going (character) and stumbles upon the castle in the middle of nowhere, accidentally breaking through the barrier (unknown context). She doesn't understand where she is now, but given that she will lose nothing from exploring, she does just that (character). She meets bratty vampire in a kitchen, and screaming ensues (character + unknown context).

Okay.

As you see, these is two systems interact with each other, and you might argue that the placement of those concepts is different, but I digress. What propels this "story" is how it's delivered, i.e. the description that narrator (and written you behind that narrator, implied author) is giving out to the reader. If you read the previous thread, you'll know that this description divides into two types, external and internal. Or, in simple words, describing the world and describing characters. External description is for expanding the context, and internal for expanding the characters. Therefore, proposition is thus:

Character is the engine that propels the story forward. It takes the unknown context, reveals it, interplays with the character, and makes the reader entertained at the moment.

Character actions primarily. IMO, most character details should be learned through character actions.

After the "moment" ends, it becomes the context on which reader and you, storyteller, base your actions. The difference between context and character is that the character is happening right now, and context is what happened.

Very good.

Or, in caveman terms:

As Grug watched Ug carving a wheel, he listened how Ug grunted how he punches the chisel, what stone he used, what tools he uses besides the chisel. Grug is interested more in Ug now than in the wheel, because Ug's explanation is better than the wheel.

I stole Grug and I'm stealing Ug too.

How you write as an author, the choices you make to make the story fun, the proper context you reveal at right time for maximum surprise, is what makes the good story good. It doesn't just throw the written words into the face of the reader, it makes the character act while expanding the known context OVER TIME. Yes, over time, if you didn't catch the point I've been making. Storytelling is ephemeral thing that happens in that specific time, while reader anticipates what will happen further. Which leads to...

THIS IS SO IMPORTANT! I cry every time a new author spills their entire outline and ideas in the first couple of chapters. And I'm left think, 'oh, what a collection of ideas, tropes, and plot points all smashed together that couldbe written into a proper story'

3. Content: after the known context and the character made their moves, everything that is unknown but can be knowable, and the reader consolidating what happened theorizing what will happen further down the story. That sentence is a mess, so here's stupid version:

Reader read stuff happening to the mommy witch, and the story cliffhangered on her seeing a bratty vampire. Reader knows that they'll be in adventure soon, because you promised in the synopsis, and will think about how you'll do that. Will they fight? Or they will talk to each other? How she broke that barrier? Why the castle in the middle of nowhere, out of sight, why it's there? Why bratty vampire screamed with the witch? And so on, so forth, the questions that have answers, and the reader will answer them or wait for you to answer them.

Action. Action. Action. Use your verbs wisely.

The reader is engaging with the unknown context. That is the narrative tension that your story had created, which is good, that's engagement with your story. Your job as a storyteller is to find that unknown context the reader is interested in, and answer that in the surprising, fun, or interesting way.

By this point, you are even with the reader. Reader knows what happened, and wants to know what happens next. Storyteller knows that the reader knows the context, so you repeat the character section again, because the context is already established.

And here's the problem you can predict but never understand: the prior context that the reader has. Did that reader read such stories before? What tropes the reader likes and hates? What the reader considers cliché and interesting? And so on. That's your unknown context, that you generalize and wing it.

Very, very good point. I'm an easy going reader that doesn't hate or judge based on 'most' tropes. But many readers aren't. Nor can you please everyone.

In other words, you don't know what your reader wants, and your reader doesn't know what you're cooking. If you make a lot of known context, the reader will treat it as a cliché. If you make a lot of unknown context and forget to reveal them because you thought readers already knew that, it's incoherent and postmodern (trash). The proposition is therefore:

The tightrope walk. Beware the jester.

Content is a meaning game where you make unknown context known in such a way the reader understands that it's important or meaningful. The reader, therefore, accepts the newly revealed context, tries to understand how that unknown context is structured, and tries to make meaning from it in its own mind. The game breaks when the sides don't understand each other, and hate it for that. How?

As I said, it boils down the context. You know what reader wants from your type of a story, and you follow that trajectory WHILE making it suspensful, surprising, or suspicious. Humans, even cavemen always wanted a thing that looks similar, but interesting. That's the human nature, and you can't go against it (unless you're a postmodernist and want to suck at storytelling).

Again, balance in all things.

So, in cavemen terms:

Ug make wheel. Grug see Ug grunt and sweat. Grug feel... emotion. Grug care more about Ug than wheel. Grug now invested in outcome of wheel-making. Even if Ug fails at making a wheel, Grug will follow Ug in other things, like making plant grow.

Then Oog comes along. Laughs at Grug for stupid wheel. Wheel rolls away. Can no sit on wheel. Wheel no hold club. Grug stupid. Ug stupid too for like wheel. Oog smart, Oog know better. Oog has many think same. Oog popular. Wheel bad.

And that is storytelling. That's CCC. The cycle that happens again, and again, and again, until the story ends, and reader is happy/sad that the story ended. Reader then will make content from the story as a whole and create a new context for themselves. Maybe they'll see a new story that looks like that story about mommy witch and a bratty vampire, but it's in reverse, bratty vampire is now homeless. The reader will judge that story according to that story they read, and will determine if that story is worthy following or not.

Circle of life.

When CCC works, it's great, because it's a proper story being told. When it doesn't work because CCC is misaligned somewhere, between the reader and the author. For every new story there's new CCC. For every reader there's CCC behind them. And for every proper author, you need to know CCC, because that's how storytelling works.

Moo

Know yourself and your reader, and you'll never lose engagement inside the story. And while the creation is divine, remember that it's not enough, persuasion is survival. Peace.

*dies from lack of sugar*

Ah, don't die!