How much you went all out to create your story?

[Ral]

The thing for me is that I think many of your issues can be broadly generalized to almost any genre.

Plot holes, unrealistic plot, inconsistencies, contradictions... etc... they plague every genre, and it's not limited to fantasy.

For instance, consider sci-fi with severely flawed science, historical fiction that is ridiculous, and then even modern-day fiction that is grounded in sheer errors on behalf of how the author simplistically views the world. Consider almost any hollywood blockbuster movie like James Bond, National Treasure... everything is riddled with glaring errors and misportrayals so long as you know enough about the real subject.

I kind of scratch my head when you seem to implicate "fantasy" for these issues implying that it is somehow better in other genres.

I don't necessarily think that's the case.

For most authors, you're much safer writing with a fantasy setting than attempting to write about a modern-day story located in St. Petersburg when you (the author) have personally never visited the country... and could be glaringly wrong in case your readers are more enlightened than you are.

And that is kinda a good point. I was only advocating good writing here.

While yes, you can't get everything correct, you can't do anything to perfection, you still have to do the effort right? Alice specifically advocate to not bother with world building when you add fantastical stuff. You don't know how women take care of their hair in medieval times? Don't bother with research just say they use magic. A fairy and human fall in love with each other? Don't bother with the complications that concept brings, just ignore it.

She even expand it to other things like girl love. Two girls falling in love with each other. She imply that you don't have to bother the homosexual aspect of the relationship. How could you even do that? I mean, even if you write regular Heterosexual Romance the aspect of gender would pop up.

And I agree that it is somewhat easier to make things up that look thing up/research, but setting the story doesn't actually make it easier. It just make it difficult in a different way. You could still f up. I already talked about this but the least bad thing you can do is make your setting uninteresting, the worst is those elements ruin the story you are telling by adding plot holes, inconsistent details, ass pull magic Deus-ex-Machina and other stuff.

 

[Ral]

that was a big jump from civil discussion to the backstabbing of julius ceasar, but instead of friends he jumt stabbed himself

I do try to keep things civil but then someone comes and spout one liners that imply very nasty stuff. They don't even bother to explain themselves. Like that one-liner is all you need to say to shot people down. One-liner = a win!

I just so hate these kind of stuff. My berserk button. I put lots of effort in my words and it is all swept away by some vague loaded sentence?

 

[Deleted member 266]

I do try to keep things civil but then someone comes and spout one liners that imply very nasty stuff. They don't even bother to explain themselves. Like that one-liner is all you need to say to shot people down. One-liner = a win!

I just so hate these kind of stuff. My berserk button. I put lots of effort in my words and it is all swept away by some vague loaded sentence?

Thanks for the confirmation.

err...You are welcome?

We seem to be having a different discussion here... and I am not quite sure what you mean by moving the goal post...or how it applies to me. From my point of view, we are just having two concurring discussions, vaguely related... but kind of also... unrelated at all.

Think of it as a thread about a sci-fi movie about aliens and I reply with a clip where Captain Kirk fights a man in a lizard man suit.

And Just to say, I have very little concern with... anything you or Alice are saying to do with the topic. That is why what I commented on was specifically the sentence and only the sentence

If you write a fantasy story, then put effort to it.

It's only... vaguely related to what is discussed. So if you are feeling like its not something you wanted to talk about then just stop talking about it. You could have ignored it, right away, after all, it was only one line. So don't make me type another reply based in a single musing

Altho, this idea of goalpost... I'd like to believe, it's a forum, discussion leads to more discussions. I'd like to think we free to pursue multiple ideas at the same time. and You, an intelligent individual, don't have to stop what you are saying to other people, just so you can talk to me. So this goalpost ideal is only possible if this is a game with a winner and a loser, sides people are on, with rules and stuff.

But to me there isn't, there are only discussions and point of views.

And, you are right, I didn't read too deeply into what @AliceShiki said or what @flucket said or what you said, I don't care, not really

Also, I am not so enamoured with right or wrong or needing to appear clever or stupid, I think I just want to know what people think about matters and understand how people work. So point of views, and paradigms and the like are just a change of clothes for me.

I just found it interesting you choose to use those words specifically. In that way. Since as you say "put lots of effort in my words." I wondered if you purposeful engineered that meaning or stumble into it.

Tho, I do find it strange, that you someone of obvious intellect and is someone that choose their words carefully, like to throw around words like "retarded" and "stupid", adding a superficial additive to a something, when just stating what is wrong and what you disagree with would suffice.

As I pointed out before, "unnecessary" if what you say holds water, you can just say it, calling it stupid is unnecessary or calling something retarded when you disagree with the method is also unnecessary.

I'd say that if you find me or anyone disagreeable than just say what you think, without the bells and whistles. And as I have said, we don't have to interact if it makes you "berserk" as you put it, just don't reply, don't tag me, if you KNOW you are right, then just leave it as is and GO be RIGHT!

But before I go, I'd say.

one-liner is all you need to say to shot people down. One-liner = a win!

One-liner does not equal to a win, nor should they shoot people down. Oneliners are just one sentence, there is not need it to frame it in such a way. Me, Tom, dick, Harry, Sally or Jane... anyon can write one-liners on the internet. If a person can be convinced by one line, then... they could be convinced again by another.

So have more confidence in your ideas, have more faith in other people. No one line can sweep away all the points you put up. If one line can shoot down a wall of text, then there are problems with the text.

If you find one-liners disagreeable or offensive just ignore them. Other people of the same mind as you will ignore them too. One the other side of the fence, If a person wanted to get in on the discussion in earnest, they would not have written one line.

AND I will say it again. DON'T engage with this path of discussion, you obviously only want to talk to Alice, and them about what THEY want to talk about, with your "goalposts" and such.

I have said this! You only want to talk about what you want to talk about, stop talking about this, you don't want to talk about this.

Over here, is the absurdist and semantics corner, we are only concern with how people deliver ideas and what people mean not what people say...

At least ... today... that's what we are doing...And we are playing with that. If you'd don't want to play this game, don't play this game.

Coz, this game ain't got no rules, my dude!

The is no points to score, there is no spectrum of right and wrong, only shitty lines.

So do you understand the "game"? Do you know, why I quoted the line and only the line?!?!?

Don't reply, IF YOU DON"T WANT TO PLAY!!!

 

[yansusustories]

I'm not gonna pop into that fantasy discussion since I'm already completely confused by all that agreeing and disagreeing going on there but I feel the need to respond to this (and the similar remarks about the subject before this that I'm too lazy to look for among all these responses):

She even expand it to other things like girl love. Two girls falling in love with each other. She imply that you don't have to bother the homosexual aspect of the relationship. How could you even do that? I mean, even if you write regular Heterosexual Romance the aspect of gender would pop up.

I'm really having real trouble understanding this. Like, where does the aspect of gender pop up in romance? It's a story about two people falling in love, having some difficulties (jealous exes, their families, a love rival, some misunderstanding, etc.), maybe breaking up and finally getting back together. IMO this seldom has anything to do with gender. Men and women alike can have families that don't agree with the choice of their partner, they can have the jealous exes or people infatuated with them, and they are all able to misunderstand stuff. Where does the gender come in here?

In the same vein, that is precisely how you write a homosexual romance: You take two people who happen to be of the same gender, make them fall in love, give them trouble, maybe have them break up, and finally get back together for the happy end. Where does their homosexuality influence that?
Yes, they could have trouble because they are homosexual. Like, if they are living in a hostile environment. But at the same time, they could have an understanding family that doesn't care about whether or not they're homosexual and just disagree with this specific possible partner.
So I fail to see why you shouldn't write a gay/lesbian romance without focusing on the homosexual aspect. It works.

 

[Ral]

I'm really having real trouble understanding this. Like, where does the aspect of gender pop up in romance? It's a story about two people falling in love, having some difficulties (jealous exes, their families, a love rival, some misunderstanding, etc.), maybe breaking up and finally getting back together. IMO this seldom has anything to do with gender. Men and women alike can have families that don't agree with the choice of their partner, they can have the jealous exes or people infatuated with them, and they are all able to misunderstand stuff. Where does the gender come in here?

In the same vein, that is precisely how you write a homosexual romance: You take two people who happen to be of the same gender, make them fall in love, give them trouble, maybe have them break up, and finally get back together for the happy end. Where does their homosexuality influence that?
Yes, they could have trouble because they are homosexual. Like, if they are living in a hostile environment. But at the same time, they could have an understanding family that doesn't care about whether or not they're homosexual and just disagree with this specific possible partner.
So I fail to see why you shouldn't write a gay/lesbian romance without focusing on the homosexual aspect. It works.

I think this is also my fault. What I mean was things like our culture and attitude and what not when we deal with gender.

Specifically things that appear in the details. Take Pride and Prejudice for example. Take a look at the motivations of the characters. It handles a lot of things that deals with gender roles and such. It is what makes it a classic because it talk about these things instead of ignoring them. It add layers to the narrative and romance.

You can just look closely at the details. Why did this girl like this man? Because he is handsome. strong, rich, powerful and most importantly a hot hunk . . . things that is typically asociated with what women wants in a man. Of course there is also criteria for women. They should be beautiful and sexy. Gosh, there should also be the part where the woman is put into distress and the guy has to come and rescue her. Or that the girls should use her pureness or something to change the man into the perfect guy. Or if you have the modern take of the romance then you might get some feminist take like girl needing no man, but of course only to find the man (or men) she needs or things like the man liking this woman because she is so very unlike other woman who is weak and tame, because those very feminine women are so meh. The strong and wild is sexy.

Things like that. Things like these just pops up not essentially because you focus on these things but because they just come with the package. Of course you could try writing a romance story without bothering with this things but that only result to your story lacking in nuance and complexity and hence uninteresting. You actually have to put effort to avoid them.

Also, you would also miss the opportunities here. If you are going to write a romance about a homosexual couple, why won't you use the homesexual aspect to improve the story? To make it unique and different from other romance? Have your take of it? Or in a reader's perspective, you advertise that your story is about a homosexual couple only to find that the homosexuality element don't matter at all? It is just wasting very interesting possibilities.

 

[Ral]

We seem to be having a different discussion here... and I am not quite sure what you mean by moving the goal post...or how it applies to me. From my point of view, we are just having two concurring discussions, vaguely related... but kind of also... unrelated at all.

Think of it as a thread about a sci-fi movie about aliens and I reply with a clip where Captain Kirk fights a man in a lizard man suit.

And Just to say, I have very little concern with... anything you or Alice are saying to do with the topic. That is why what I commented on was specifically the sentence and only the sentence

Wow your idiocy is astounding. You just shouted to the world that you really have no idea what we are talking about. Good job!

Altho, this idea of goalpost... I'd like to believe, it's a forum, discussion leads to more discussions. I'd like to think we free to pursue multiple ideas at the same time. and You, an intelligent individual, don't have to stop what you are saying to other people, just so you can talk to me. So this goalpost ideal is only possible if this is a game with a winner and a loser, sides people are on, with rules and stuff.

And your ignorance is astounding too. Moving the goalpost is a logical fallacy. You are actually thinking I'm talking about actual goalposts?

Coz, this game ain't got no rules, my dude!

The is no points to score, there is no spectrum of right and wrong, only shitty lines.

So do you understand the "game"? Do you know, why I quoted the line and only the line?!?!?

Don't reply, IF YOU DON"T WANT TO PLAY!!!

Tl:Dr. Whoooa! You could really type.

But I do love this kind of play. I love arguing with idiots like you who can't seem to stop shooting themselves on the foot. It is one of the best entertainment there is.?

 

[Ral]

View attachment 1757

Cute bear! Love it!?

But really I see your point. She never did say that. My bad.

 

[yansusustories]

I have a lot of issues with this response. Where should I even start?

I'm not going into Pride and Prejudice. That thing was written a long time ago and I don't think it should be used to judge writing romance nowadays because a lot of societies have changed drastically since then. So when somebody writes a modern romance (or a romance inspired by modern values) these changes will play an important role in what can be and can't be done which brings me to this point:

But not essentially because you focus on these things but because they just come with the package. Of course you could try writing a romance story without bothering with this things but that only result to your story lacking in nuance and complexity and hence uninteresting.

Not adhering to gender stereotypes won't make your story 'lacking in nuance and complexity'. Instead, it can (and probably will) enhance it. You just need to give your characters a fucking personality (and background). Gender roles and whether or not or to which degree they conform to them may be a part of it but it is hardly all there is to a character (and with them, to the story).

In modern societies where women have the same options as men, there is hardly a need to use these gender roles and stereotypes to write a story. And that is especially true for romance. Yes, your absolutely gorgeous actress can fall in love with the rich CEO. But you know what? Your female plumber can also fall in love with the male delivery boy and he doesn't even need to be handsome for it.

The thing is: As the author, the only thing that limits you is your imagination. If that stops at stereotypes ... well, that's a real pity but it doesn't mean it does for others. You can write a very good, very interesting story without relying on those.

Also, you kinda missed the opportunity here. If you are going to write a romance about a homosexual couple, why won't you use the homesexual aspect to improve the story? To make it unique and different from other romance? Or in a reader's perspective, you advertise that your story is about a homosexual couple only to find that the homosexuality element don't matter at all? You are not making use of your concept.

I think it's the other way around. You're kinda not seeing the issue: If a queer person wants to see problems, they just need to take a look around them or at the news. A lot of them would very much like the good-old-trope-y romance novel with queer characters because that is what they never got. Only het people got that and it's time that is being changed.
And that is precisely where the homosexual element matters: It's two guys/two women in love. It's what we call 'representation'. And it matters by just being there even without including any of the problems that such a couple might face in real life. It's in the fact that there can be a 'normal' romance novel about them - something that was impossible just some years ago.
So that is not a missed opportunity, in fact, it is everything but that.

 

[AliceShiki]

But not essentially because you focus on these things but because they just come with the package. Of course you could try writing a romance story without bothering with this things but that only result to your story lacking in nuance and complexity and hence uninteresting.

No offense, but I seriously doubt you read romance. This is pure nonsense.

A romance story focuses on feelings, what matters are the characters by themselves and their relationship. Sure, there is probably a plot out there and outside factors that might intervene with the romance, but those are not the point. The point of the story is to focus on the feelings of the characters involved.

My story won't lack nuance and complexity nor be uninteresting for as long as my characters are well developed. And I don't need to focus on societal issues to do that.

Also, you kinda missed the opportunity here. If you are going to write a romance about a homosexual couple, why won't you use the homesexual aspect to improve the story? To make it unique and different from other romance? Or in a reader's perspective, you advertise that your story is about a homosexual couple only to find that the homosexuality element don't matter at all? You are not making use of your concept.

From my own experience, homosexual romance that focus on the issues caused by the fact both partners are of the same gender are actually the norm, not the exception. I can count on my fingers the amount of GL manga that I read that didn't involve the girls questioning themselves, how they felt about their love, about how loving another girl is "wrong", about how they hide their relationship, how they don't want their friends to find out, about how they're scared of being seen as weird...

I actually love reading about all that tbh, primarily because I love reading drama and those scenes are always filled with drama... But it's not like the story can't exist without it, and it's not like those are the only ways you can cause drama within a romance.

So... When I write a GL story, if I don't feel like I want to focus my story on those aspects, then I won't. As simple as that. Not all girls go through all those things after all. (I mean, when I realized I liked girls, I certainly didn't spend hours and hours and days and days worrying over it, and my family and friends were also pretty cool with it, so... Things went on pretty smoothly.)

 

[Ral]

I have a lot of issues with this response. Where should I even start?

I'm not going into Pride and Prejudice. That thing was written a long time ago and I don't think it should be used to judge writing romance nowadays because a lot of societies have changed drastically since then. So when somebody writes a modern romance (or a romance inspired by modern values) these changes will play an important role in what can be and can't be done which brings me to this point:

But, Alice sets her story (She actually wrote a story though I didn't read it yet. They said it was good.) set in medieval setting, well, medieval fantasy. You would even have a more restrictive culture of that time.

And even if you have the freedom to just do whatever you like, It was here story, you are still not making use of the appeal of the homosexual romance. Something that should have make for more interesting read.

Not adhering to gender stereotypes won't make your story 'lacking in nuance and complexity'. Instead, it can (and probably will) enhance it. You just need to give your characters a fucking personality (and background). Gender roles and whether or not or to which degree they conform to them may be a part of it but it is hardly all there is to a character (and with them, to the story).

In modern societies where women have the same options as men, there is hardly a need to use these gender roles and stereotypes to write a story. And that is especially true for romance. Yes, your absolutely gorgeous actress can fall in love with the rich CEO. But you know what? Your female plumber can also fall in love with the male delivery boy and he doesn't even need to be handsome for it.

The thing is: As the author, the only thing that limits you is your imagination. If that stops at stereotypes ... well, that's a real pity but it doesn't mean it does for others. You can write a very good, very interesting story without relying on those.

But even if you try to subvert these thing you only just fall into the same place.

So now you have this female plumber because you are trying to escape stereotypes, you now then fall into female stereotypes about a woman can do a mans job and what not and women can do what men can. Your boy is now not handsome because who cares about what society says about what women should look for their men? Of course might fall into the tropes of women are better than men. Really, by taking the opposide side you end up talking about the issues in the end.

I think it's the other way around. You're kinda not seeing the issue: If a queer person wants to see problems, they just need to take a look around them or at the news. A lot of them would very much like the good-old-trope-y romance novel with queer characters because that is what they never got. Only het people got that and it's time that is being changed.
And that is precisely where the homosexual element matters: It's two guys/two women in love. It's what we call 'representation'. And it matters by just being there even without including any of the problems that such a couple might face in real life. It's in the fact that there can be a 'normal' romance novel about them - something that was impossible just some years ago.
So that is not a missed opportunity, in fact, it is everything but that.

There you go. By writing it, you are saying something about it. How could you write about homosexual couples without saying something about homosexuality?

 

[yansusustories]

But, Alice sets her story (She actually wrote a story though I didn't read it yet. They said it was good.) set in medieval setting, well, medieval fantasy. You would even have a more restrictive culture of that time.

And even if you have the freedom to just do whatever you like, It was here story, you are still not making use of the appeal of the homosexual romance. Something that should have make for more interesting read.

But even if you try to subvert these thing you only just fall into the same place.

So now you have this female plumber because you are trying to escape stereotypes, you now then fall into female stereotypes about a woman can do a mans job and what not and women can do what men can. Your boy is now not handsome because who cares about what society says about what women should look for their men? Of course might fall into the tropes of women are better than men. Really, by taking the opposide side you end up talking about the issues in the end.

There you go. By writing it, you are saying something about it. How could you write about homosexual couples without saying something about homosexuality?

Your problem is that you're looking at this in a black-and-white manner. Not taking the literal stereotype does not mean subverting it and doing the opposite (or substituting it with another one). There are endless possibilities to go about this and you can take a mix of everything with stuff being not on the extreme ends of the spectrum.

Like, your female plumber can just happen to be a plumber because, well, she likes plumbing? Her dad was a plumber and she admired him or wanted to be close to him because he died young and she missed him? There's nothing about feminism there and trying to say it is, just means - once again - that you weren't creative enough with whatever you came up with.
Also, she could fall in love with the delivery boy because he has a great sense of humor or likes the same novels she does or she likes those effing dimples he has when he smiles. That says nothing about society but about that potential plumber falling in love. That's all. Everything else might be your assumption as the reader but is not necessarily any social commentary from the author.

And you write about a homosexual couple without saying something about homosexuality by ... just writing a love story about two people of the same gender? Or do you actually want to tell me that writing about a heterosexual couple is the same as saying something about heterosexuality? Because if you do, then yeah, we're not on the same page there, like, at all.
Edit: At most, I'd say you mention homosexuality by writing about them but you don't actually deal with the subject.

 

[Deleted member 266]

it is one of the best entertainment there is.?

When one wants to make a good yarn, a good coherent character can be created with world building and understanding.

A soild narrative can be created when one understands a character's motivation, therefore creating the understanding of what drives a person's emotions, in turn their actions.

In my opinion any way.

 

[Ral]

No offense, but I seriously doubt you read romance. This is pure nonsense.

A romance story focuses on feelings, what matters are the characters by themselves and their relationship. Sure, there is probably a plot out there and outside factors that might intervene with the romance, but those are not the point. The point of the story is to focus on the feelings of the characters involved.

My story won't lack nuance and complexity nor be uninteresting for as long as my characters are well developed. And I don't need to focus on societal issues to do that.

I'm not offended.

And I do read romance. Lots of it actually.

I'm not saying that you focus on those things like social issues and such. You just inadvertently talk about them by write girl love. It comes with the territory. Say you write this girl love in a world where it is accepted, you are already presenting you point about girl love. That it is not destructive, or should be encourage or something like that. You should it in your world building by essentially showing that girl love is fine and should be accepted or something. It is in this acceptance where the nuance of the relationship come from.

My confusion merely stem from the fact that you write girl love and you said you don't want to bother about girl love. Only in later discussion it become clear to me that you want a world where these things are accepted, hence no societal issues and such. But even without the societal issues you are still talking about it, essentially about acceptance or the joy of girl love.

This is why I talk about with the building a house analogy. You don't want to make a castle, you want to build a home with medieval flair.

There is nothing with your approach. Writing a story where those homosexual issues doesn't exist is a valid world building approach and a valid approach in tackling girl love. What you just need to do it to build it properly like suddenly having people having issues with girl love or the characters suddenly not liking girls. As long as you build it well, then you done great.

From my own experience, homosexual romance that focus on the issues caused by the fact both partners are of the same gender are actually the norm, not the exception. I can count on my fingers the amount of GL manga that I read that didn't involve the girls questioning themselves, how they felt about their love, about how loving another girl is "wrong", about how they hide their relationship, how they don't want their friends to find out, about how they're scared of being seen as weird...

I actually love reading about all that tbh, primarily because I love reading drama and those scenes are always filled with drama... But it's not like the story can't exist without it, and it's not like those are the only ways you can cause drama within a romance.

So... When I write a GL story, if I don't feel like I want to focus my story on those aspects, then I won't. As simple as that. Not all girls go through all those things after all. (I mean, when I realized I liked girls, I certainly didn't spend hours and hours and days and days worrying over it, and my family and friends were also pretty cool with it, so... Things went on pretty smoothly.)

This is really great. It is like a response, your reaction to these kind of stories. It is essentially your voice in terms of the subject.

I was just so confused that you said you don't want to bother with aspects of girl love when it was supposed to mean that you don't want to write about issues and such.

 

[yansusustories]

I'm saying that you focus on those things like social issues and such. You just inadvertently talk about it by writing about it. Say you write this girl love in a world where it is accepted, you are already presenting you point about girl love. That it is not destructive, or should be encourage or something like that. You should it in your world building by essentially showing that girl love is fine and should be accepted or something. It is in this acceptance where the nuance of the relationship come from.

No. On so many levels. Like, I could write a very beautiful story about a world dominated by a nazi regime and all the stuff they do and even have that praised by the nazi officer who might happen to be my MC but that does not mean - at all - that that is what I believe to be a goal our world should strive for. You can't conflate the setting of a story with the author's point of view. They might coincide but they could also be completely contrary.

 

[AliceShiki]

I'm saying that you focus on those things like social issues and such. You just inadvertently talk about it by writing about it. Say you write this girl love in a world where it is accepted, you are already presenting you point about girl love. That it is not destructive, or should be encourage or something like that. You should it in your world building by essentially showing that girl love is fine and should be accepted or something. It is in this acceptance where the nuance of the relationship come from.

My confusion merely stem from the fact that you write girl love and you said you don't want to bother about girl love. Only in later discussion it become clear to me that you want a world where these things are accepted, hence no societal issues and such. But even without the societal issues you are still talking about it, essentially about acceptance or the joy of girl love.

This is why I talk about with the building a house analogy. You don't want to make a castle, you want to build a home with medieval flair.

There is nothing with your approach. Writing a story where those homosexual issues doesn't exist is a valid world building approach and a valid approach in tackling girl love. What you just need to do it to build it properly like suddenly having people having issues with girl love or the characters suddenly not liking girls. As long as you build it well, then you done great.

The point is, you're wrong in how you're viewing the way I write things. If you want to read a GL story in which same gender relationships are accepted and normal, Itou Hachi does a good job at it, but I did no such attempt in my own stories.

I plain and simply didn't touch the subject. My lead characters didn't care about the issue and nobody tried to discriminate them for it. Not because prejudice didn't exist and this kind of relationship is considered 100% normal, but simply because I didn't want to focus on these issues.

It's not a black and white thing, you don't need to either make a world in which there is prejudice and you actively play with the prejudice, or you can make a world where there is no prejudice... You can make a world where the prejudice exists, but the characters just don't care for it, and as such the prejudice is not given screentime.

 

[Ral]

Your problem is that you're looking at this in a black-and-white manner. Not taking the literal stereotype does not mean subverting it and doing the opposite (or substituting it with another one). There are endless possibilities to go about this and you can take a mix of everything with stuff being not on the extreme ends of the spectrum.

Like, your female plumber can just happen to be a plumber because, well, she likes plumbing? Her dad was a plumber and she admired him or wanted to be close to him because he died young and she missed him? There's nothing about feminism there and trying to say it is, just means - once again - that you weren't creative enough with whatever you came up with.
Also, she could fall in love with the delivery boy because he has a great sense of humor or likes the same novels she does or she likes those effing dimples he has when he smiles. That says nothing about society but about that potential plumber falling in love. That's all. Everything else might be your assumption as the reader but is not necessarily any social commentary from the author.

And you write about a homosexual couple without saying something about homosexuality by ... just writing a love story about two people of the same gender? Or do you actually want to tell me that writing about a heterosexual couple is the same as saying something about heterosexuality? Because if you do, then yeah, we're not on the same page there, like, at all.
Edit: At most, I'd say you mention homosexuality by writing about them but you don't actually deal with the subject.

Yes there are endless possibilities but each of those possibilities say something. If you have a female plumber because he likes plumbing, then it says something about what you think woman could like instead of what the society says that women should like (fashion, design, caregiving and such). You are making a statement by making your female a plumber instead of usual job women are supposed to take.

And that girl fall for the delivery boy beaus of great sense of humor or the dimples. It can say something like appearance (or wealth or power) is not the to necessary criteria for being attracted to a man. You don't need traditional male characteristics.

I guess this falls into the concept of Death of the Author. The readers can create interpretations of the work and these interpretations are as valid as the author's. Essentially, intent is one thing. What is accomplished is a different matter.

 

[yansusustories]

By this point, I am wondering if you're trolling ... Like, that's precisely what I meant when I wrote

Everything else might be your assumption as the reader but is not necessarily any social commentary from the author

The author doesn't need to say anything about any kind of subject with what they write. Heck, considering we're on SH here where people come from lots of different countries and backgrounds, it's a very big assumption to think just because they had X in their novel, that relates to what society thinks. Like, do you even know which society the author is from? That society might say something completely different from what your society says (or nothing at all). It's all in your head as the reader, coming from a PoV of your background. Don't push that on the author.

And - just to make that clear - the author was what we were talking about here (check the original post if you've forgotten) so what the reader thinks should not be the topic here. The author's intent is.

 

[Ral]

The point is, you're wrong in how you're viewing the way I write things. If you want to read a GL story in which same gender relationships are accepted and normal, Itou Hachi does a good job at it, but I did no such attempt in my own stories.

I plain and simply didn't touch the subject. My lead characters didn't care about the issue and nobody tried to discriminate them for it. Not because prejudice didn't exist and this kind of relationship is considered 100% normal, but simply because I didn't want to focus on these issues.

It's not a black and white thing, you don't need to either make a world in which there is prejudice and you actively play with the prejudice, or you can make a world where there is no prejudice... You can make a world where the prejudice exists, but the characters just don't care for it, and as such the prejudice is not given screentime.

Yeah. We are threading Death of the Author here.

And I didn't view your way of writing wrong but more of I misinterpret what you said.

If I want to make a Girl's Love Story, I don't need to have a greater reason for it to be Girl's Love. I don't need to play with the fact they'll be unable to have children, nor do I need to deal with the prejudice that two girls loving one another might go through... Sometimes you can just make a Girl's Love Story because you want it to be Girl's Love.

I interpret it in the context of world building since we are talking about world building. This analogy just doesn't work. I mean, if you apply it back to world building, why add fantasy elements and not bother with its effect in the world? Not dealing with prejudices and issues about girl love is fine, but not dealing with the effects of magic in your fantasy setting is not.

And, now I understand. You don't actually mean you don't want to deal with girl love; you just don't want to deal with the usual issues and hardships associated with it. This is a very valid approach.

I don't mean that you should tackle those heavy subjects or not do it the way you do it.

It is just not applicable to world building. There was just so much confusion there.

 

[Ral]

By this point, I am wondering if you're trolling ... Like, that's precisely what I meant when I wrote

I might actually have missed that. Sorry.

The author doesn't need to say anything about any kind of subject with what they write. Heck, considering we're on SH here where people come from lots of different countries and backgrounds, it's a very big assumption to think just because they had X in their novel, that relates to what society thinks. Like, do you even know which society the author is from? That society might say something completely different from what your society says. It's all in your head as the reader, coming from a PoV of your background. Don't push that on the author.

And - just to make that clear - the author was what we were talking about here so what the reader thinks should not be the topic here. The author's intent is.

But I did said that you are saying something by merely writing about it.

And I don't mean about what society thinks but what you, the author, thinks. After all, writing, like any form of art is a form of expression. You are just doing it unconsciously.

Back to your examples, by writing about a woman that is a plumber you did provide a voice of what you think a woman is. It clearly isn't about the classical stereotypical woman but something. It might be as simple as a woman working as a plumber is okay. I'm just making interpretations because I'm a reader and can't read your mind, but you do have some background in your life or something that makes you want to write about such a woman. Why you find it appealing.

Just think of it. If you lived in the past like in the Victorian era, would you be able to think of writing a story like this? Of course not, because that era has a different culture about gender and you would have different idea of what it is being a woman. That would reflect in your writing. Writing such a woman might not even come to you.

As I said, intent is one thing. What is accomplished is another.

 

[yansusustories]

We should agree to disagree because I still think this is complete bullshit and this discussion is getting more ridiculous with each post.