Why A Lot Of Writing Advice Fails Writers

[Story_Marc]

This is something I've thought about a lot, when watching writing advice, considering own stuff done in the past, and just... well, this is my current thoughts about it all. Maybe it puts into words what others have experienced. I am curious what people think on this one.

 

[TinaMigarlo]

I agree with the concept.
"the first chapter or intro, needs to be punchy"
the best you can drag out of them, is that it needs to be emotionally hard hitting, to make you feel with and for the MC
then can (almost)never tell you *how*.
yes, I agree many/most "critics" that say your opening chapter "needs to be punchier",
they just learned to say that. and it sounds really pretentious and cool.

my symptom for a long time, was a slow beginning. ramp up as ytou go. standard ramp graph, after all.
so I felt like I was doing what I was supposed to, yet still hearing the "punchy first" with no example.

finally, someone out lined a basic example.

easy explanation, BTW. worked. that story I pulled it off on, started getting view and likes. I picked up my first few readers.

so I agree with the whole premise of the video.

excellent job.

 

[Story_Marc]

I agree with the concept.
"the first chapter or intro, needs to be punchy"
the best you can drag out of them, is that it needs to be emotionally hard hitting, to make you feel with and for the MC
then can (almost)never tell you *how*.
yes, I agree many/most "critics" that say your opening chapter "needs to be punchier",
they just learned to say that. and it sounds really pretentious and cool.

my symptom for a long time, was a slow beginning. ramp up as ytou go. standard ramp graph, after all.
so I felt like I was doing what I was supposed to, yet still hearing the "punchy first" with no example.

finally, someone out lined a basic example.

easy explanation, BTW. worked. that story I pulled it off on, started getting view and likes. I picked up my first few readers.

so I agree with the whole premise of the video.

excellent job.

That is EXACTLY the problem I had with so much for so long and what I've always wanted to avert. Of course, as said, it's easier said than done, though I'm feeling more comfortable with it now.

Such as, take the opening thing. I personally dislike that advice big time. It's why I took the time to look at patterns and found 5 different ones, which work for differing stories and so forth.

Now, I will say, I do think there is value in the noise itself. The emotion they're experiencing still matters. That can be great data. It's just a matter of figuring out what to do with the data. Which, I'd argue, is part of the art of being a creative.

 

[FRWriter]

Did AI write the script of that video? Genuinely curious because the choice of words baffles me at times. Especially compared to your down-to-earth writing in this thread, which looks much more suitable to me.

I think the content of the video is fine, but you could have summarized it in 2 minutes without talking around that topic for 15 minutes, especially with that weird AI voice. All those things you mentioned seem like super obvious to me....

 

[Rachel_Leia_Cole]

I wanted to write a “punchy” first chapter, but it didn’t serve my story overall. It’s a slow burn epic fantasy story, a multi book, multi generational story. So action and adventure immediately didn’t set my tone. Believe me, wrote and re wrote that first chapter for months before finally deciding sometimes mood is more important than punch.

 

[Story_Marc]

Did AI write the script of that video? Genuinely curious because the choice of words baffles me at times. Especially compared to your down-to-earth writing in this thread, which looks much more suitable to me.

I think the content of the video is fine, but you could have summarized it in 2 minutes without talking around that topic for 15 minutes, especially with that weird AI voice. All those things you mentioned seem like super obvious to me....

Nah, though I don't have any issues with AI like other people do. I'm just like that more when I'm in script mode. It's clear even going back to past videos.

And no, summarizing in 2 minutes wouldn't actually explore things and touches into the exact issue I have with shallowness. Though if you wish to prove me wrong, summarize everything in as small amount as possible while covering every point I wanted, including making sure to show what I mean to provide evidence and support the case.

I wanted to write a “punchy” first chapter, but it didn’t serve my story overall. It’s a slow burn epic fantasy story, a multi book, multi generational story. So action and adventure immediately didn’t set my tone. Believe me, wrote and re wrote that first chapter for months before finally deciding sometimes mood is more important than punch.

And it's all a matter of what works best for any given story.

I actually broke down the type of openings to 5 different types, based around pressure: Impact, mystery, fragile order, awakening, and paradox openings. I plan to make a diagnostic system for how to choose the right one, but later concerns. On top of breakdown of how to execute each one even more, compared to what I've done in the past.

It's actually another piece of work that helped me have the breakthroughs I did about scaffolding, seeing as those words by themselves aren't necessarily helpful, but proper breakdowns take time. Hence my point and example using writing an ensemble in the video.

 

[TinaMigarlo]

I think the IDEA of the video is solid gold. I think using ensemble cast was a boo boo. The proper answer should have been, that's an advanced concept, keep it simple until you are ready for advanced work. Addressing the puncy first chapter though, would have been a great illustrative example. and more applicable to the new writers tuning in for his premise.

I wanted to write a “punchy” first chapter, but it didn’t serve my story overall. It’s a slow burn epic fantasy story, a multi book, multi generational story. So action and adventure immediately didn’t set my tone. Believe me, wrote and re wrote that first chapter for months before finally deciding sometimes mood is more important than punch.

are you me? I have a story like that. I need that first chapter too. After a couple days thinking, I found it. What action I can do quick that explains his life and what is was like before my beginning starts slow. Knowing WHAT you want is the hard part. Now its just a matter of brainstorming to get it. Every one of my stories, needs this. I'm on my third "chapter 0" as I call this fix. Seems to work perfect. Stuff that never performed, is now starting to perform a little bit.

 

[writerwolf359]

Writing Rule 0: All writing advice is wrong, find what works for you.

 

[L1aei]

This is something I've thought about a lot, when watching writing advice, considering own stuff done in the past, and just... well, this is my current thoughts about it all. Maybe it puts into words what others have experienced. I am curious what people think on this one.

"Tastes savory with a hint of umami."

Uh, what's the difference? I always thought umami was just a term for savory that's a bit more pungent?

"How do I make my car faster when it's out of gas?"

Paint it red.

The nine steps of a looping failure to resolve symptoms... I disagree on one point. Yes, the advice is not malicious, but if you say it isn't stupid after informing us that we don't know any better? Yo, that's indirectly calling us, them, everybody who made that mistake stupid because they didn't know. You stop being stupid when you, me, all of them put in the effort to gain an education on what went wrong.

Yeah, that second note about incentive, I'm guilty of polishing others' works, but I always set up a disclaimer that I'm having fun with it and in no way should they try imitating my voice; it's my style and it doesn't fit neatly in everybody's box of wonders.

Oi! That third one about causal... causal... shit, I got to rewind it. CRAFT! How the hell did I forget... never mind. About that, you said we can't go into a comment section and point something out? Sure we can. Just be specific about what a character had done and have the author fill in the role as a bystander witnessing the character acting. Then the questions will start popping in "Why they do that?" to get the ball rolling. Things like searching for answers by actually looking around the setting they are in helps first with the foundation; maybe the character was irritable because its cold or wet, maybe the tavern is rowdy and obnoxious enough that the character has to shout over them to be heard, maybe when, as a bystander, you witnessed the character had stubbed their toe and has yet to remove their boot to see the damage, perhaps the author, through the bystander, focused on too much detail around specific anatomy and the character would have a justified reaction to that ogling, and whatever else those questions form into. They aren't answers, they are formulas being generated to produce plausible answers for the readers to conclude on. We get them all the time in the comment sections and I have been wrong with my assumptions; check out my most recent one down in this chapter of Empress of Fire.

Ah... I should've let the video play a little longer to hear about scaffolding. Okay, well, all of that still can fit into a comment section.

Taste calibration... that's a challenge for me. I tend to let characters and scenes go with the flow; if there is a specific atmosphere already in play, then those characters are ingredients to cause a reaction, I describe in detail that temporal imbalance until things settle or explode or... whatever! It's yours and ours imagination that's the limit here, and that is bigger than the sky.

Hey, thanks for giving me a video to engage in; had some fun with it.

 

[CharlesEBrown]

I think some critics assume that a "hook" has to be punchy.
That is the EASIEST way to hook readers, but rarely the best - it draws attention, sure, but if you can't (or, by design WON'T) keep the pace up, it won't do anyone any good. You need to establish an emotional connection to the reader (which is something that I don't think CAN be taught), something that makes them want to see more.
Being "punchy" or "edgy" or even just "shocking" CAN work ... but then you must keep doing that throughout the story or you will lose just as much as you gained before.

 

[L1aei]

You need to establish an emotional connection to the reader (which is something that I don't think CAN be taught), something that makes them want to see more.

Relevance. Yeah, if you can't relate, then what's the point in saying it? I've been interested in non-human characters because I want to know how they interact with a world I've already lived; having them see and engage everything I've had through their perspective interests me.

 

[mythosandmagic]

I wanted to write a “punchy” first chapter, but it didn’t serve my story overall. It’s a slow burn epic fantasy story, a multi book, multi generational story. So action and adventure immediately didn’t set my tone. Believe me, wrote and re wrote that first chapter for months before finally deciding sometimes mood is more important than punch.

I'm right there with you.
Mine's a feel-good story about love and life. There are no punchy bits.

 

[Anonjohn20]

Story Marc makes another banger. 10/10

 

[melchi]

Did AI write the script of that video? Genuinely curious because the choice of words baffles me at times. Especially compared to your down-to-earth writing in this thread, which looks much more suitable to me.

I think the content of the video is fine, but you could have summarized it in 2 minutes without talking around that topic for 15 minutes, especially with that weird AI voice. All those things you mentioned seem like super obvious to me....

Nah not AI IMO, Marc makes scripts in an academic writing style.

I asked co-pilot to make an essay called "Why writing advice Often fails" You can see the difference.

Spoiler: Ai Slop essay

Why a Lot of Writing Advice Fails Writers
Much of the writing advice circulating online or in workshops collapses under its own certainty. Rules like “show, don’t tell” or “write every day” are delivered as universal truths, even though they were born from specific contexts, genres, and personalities. When advice is stripped of the conditions that made it useful in the first place, it becomes rigid dogma. Writers who don’t fit the mold—because of their process, goals, or lived experience—end up feeling like they’re doing something wrong rather than recognizing that the advice simply wasn’t meant for them.

Another reason writing advice fails is that it often treats symptoms instead of causes. Telling someone to “raise the stakes” or “make your protagonist more active” doesn’t help if the writer doesn’t yet understand narrative structure, character motivation, or thematic cohesion. It’s like giving someone a list of advanced cooking tips when they’re still learning how to hold a knife. Without diagnosing the underlying craft issue, even well‑intentioned guidance becomes noise. Writers walk away with a handful of prescriptions but no deeper understanding of how stories actually work.

Finally, writing advice falters because it rarely acknowledges the emotional dimension of creating art. Fear, perfectionism, and self‑doubt shape a writer’s process just as much as technique does. Advice that ignores this inner landscape can feel hollow, even alienating. Writers don’t only need craft strategies; they need permission to experiment, fail, and discover their own rhythms. The most helpful guidance doesn’t dictate a path—it illuminates possibilities and trusts the writer to choose the one that fits.

 

[MFontana]

This is something I've thought about a lot, when watching writing advice, considering own stuff done in the past, and just... well, this is my current thoughts about it all. Maybe it puts into words what others have experienced. I am curious what people think on this one.

Very well said, exceptionally well-presented, and spot on for identifying the problem itself.
I'm sure most (if not all) of us have been guilty of giving some of that poor advice from time to time.
Myself included.
Though I've also taken to putting in the effort to give better advice and feedback when asked about a topic that sits within the scope of my own experiences or expertise as well.

I do agree with much of what you're saying as well, but do have a few nitpicks as well.

The first of them that I'd point out, is the distinct absence of any generalized outline or breakdown of the system you mentioned and put into use in the video to address "causal craft" as you put it. Personally, I feel the video would have had a much stronger impact if it did that rather than focus on a single example craft structure [Ensemble casts] that likely will not apply to everyone.

I feel the system itself should probably have been the focus here as the answer / solution to the problem you so expertly identified and presented. Even if it were only presented in broad-strokes here, and fully detailed externally (Link-in-Description content).

Also on that subject, there's the "link in the description" bit itself and how the link wasn't cross-posted here in your post as well. It may be better to include all relevant links wherever the video is shared / can be watched, for ease of access, and could more easily funnel traffic to those pages (from a web-design standpoint).

Thanks for sharing, and to offer another (similar) topic suggestion: It may be a worthwhile endeavor to create a video on professional-level critiques, and how to provide them. (If this is something you haven't already addressed).

 

[Story_Marc]

Very well said, exceptionally well-presented, and spot on for identifying the problem itself.
I'm sure most (if not all) of us have been guilty of giving some of that poor advice from time to time.
Myself included.
Though I've also taken to putting in the effort to give better advice and feedback when asked about a topic that sits within the scope of my own experiences or expertise as well.

I do agree with much of what you're saying as well, but do have a few nitpicks as well.

The first of them that I'd point out, is the distinct absence of any generalized outline or breakdown of the system you mentioned and put into use in the video to address "causal craft" as you put it. Personally, I feel the video would have had a much stronger impact if it did that rather than focus on a single example craft structure [Ensemble casts] that likely will not apply to everyone.

I feel the system itself should probably have been the focus here as the answer / solution to the problem you so expertly identified and presented. Even if it were only presented in broad-strokes here, and fully detailed externally (Link-in-Description content).

Also on that subject, there's the "link in the description" bit itself and how the link wasn't cross-posted here in your post as well. It may be better to include all relevant links wherever the video is shared / can be watched, for ease of access, and could more easily funnel traffic to those pages (from a web-design standpoint).

Thanks for sharing, and to offer another (similar) topic suggestion: It may be a worthwhile endeavor to create a video on professional-level critiques, and how to provide them. (If this is something you haven't already addressed).

Actually, I've been thinking a LOT on critique and working something out for that. I'm just... not done yet. But next week will be the first half of that equation, with the creator side.

To note, I mostly just wanted to use an example with ensemble thing to show what I meant, not actually focus on it. That's why I really wasn't stressing what I picked, any topic would've worked.

Oh and real quick, since I just didn't have the time earlier in the week, just wanted to say I am legit not calling people stupid there in stuff. XD Ignorance and stupid are two different things and I have a LOT to say about stupidity soon.

Nah not AI IMO, Marc makes scripts in an academic writing style.

I asked co-pilot to make an essay called "Why writing advice Often fails" You can see the difference.

Spoiler: Ai Slop essay

Why a Lot of Writing Advice Fails Writers
Much of the writing advice circulating online or in workshops collapses under its own certainty. Rules like “show, don’t tell” or “write every day” are delivered as universal truths, even though they were born from specific contexts, genres, and personalities. When advice is stripped of the conditions that made it useful in the first place, it becomes rigid dogma. Writers who don’t fit the mold—because of their process, goals, or lived experience—end up feeling like they’re doing something wrong rather than recognizing that the advice simply wasn’t meant for them.

Another reason writing advice fails is that it often treats symptoms instead of causes. Telling someone to “raise the stakes” or “make your protagonist more active” doesn’t help if the writer doesn’t yet understand narrative structure, character motivation, or thematic cohesion. It’s like giving someone a list of advanced cooking tips when they’re still learning how to hold a knife. Without diagnosing the underlying craft issue, even well‑intentioned guidance becomes noise. Writers walk away with a handful of prescriptions but no deeper understanding of how stories actually work.

Finally, writing advice falters because it rarely acknowledges the emotional dimension of creating art. Fear, perfectionism, and self‑doubt shape a writer’s process just as much as technique does. Advice that ignores this inner landscape can feel hollow, even alienating. Writers don’t only need craft strategies; they need permission to experiment, fail, and discover their own rhythms. The most helpful guidance doesn’t dictate a path—it illuminates possibilities and trusts the writer to choose the one that fits.

And pretty much this. Though as I maintain, I'm not actually against AI at all. There's a difference between slop and AI-integrated stuff. But that's not where I used AI.

A good example where I fully admit to using AI is, for example, the descriptions because I suck at handling all that and I frankly don't feel like paying someone hundreds of dollars for something that is a gamble at best.