What's unique or different about your style?

[TheRedChamber]

Oh, you're assuming that I'm talking about my own work. I have not been talking about my own work (other than Simon's review of my piece) not once have I mentioned my own scores or how I feel about them.

This is about the writers in general claiming and believing that since they get a high score, their story must be high quality. The truth is that your story might be high quality, it might not be. The only thing that the high score tell you is that it's popular.

...

If you truly love writing, write from your heart. Connecting with your audience will matter, absolutely, but sitting back waiting for their approval and affirmation so that you can have that chuffed feeling so you can say that it makes you good is a totally different thing. That's your ego stepping forward. Know the difference and you will be a happier better writer.

Look, Lit is stunningly complicated when it comes to votes, especially if you are writing across categories. In some categories, it seems like every new story has a H, whereas in others it's very challenging to get a H and dependant on you writing a certain type of story.

I get the impression that most writers on this forum do care about the quality of their work, but also quite like the validation that Red H's bring - I'd certainly include myself in this. But you always need to put the score in its proper context. I've been pushing out a series of drafts I had sitting for months this week and, without wanting to brag, I managed to get 4 H's out of 6 stories - of the 'failures', one story is sitting at 4.47 and the other is 4.17. Thing about the .17 is that I published it despite feedback from my beta readers saying they didn't like the downer ending and that the sex was weak. It was also published in a Literotica category that I was a virgin in. Thing with that story was I did try to add a happy ending onto it, but gave up writing it because it didn't feel right to me and I kept the sex as low-key as possible because that seemed true to the characters I'd created. I published that one knowing I hadn't 'maximized' the score, but despite this being happy with it.

And yeah, occasionally, I look at scores that other stories, published on the same day and in the same category as mine and with a comparable or higher score, and think 'What are voters doing here?' I obviously think my own stories are quality, because I pay attention to the things that are important to me in a story. There's a danger in looking at the high scores that 'rubbish' gets and being jealous, but there is also a danger in looking at your own low scores and insisting that your work is quality despite all the metrics (flawed as they are) telling you that people aren't enjoying it

(This is not a comment on any of your stories specifically, if you want feedback for any of them I'm happy to give it)

 

[SimonDoom]

The OP's original post was about STYLE, so I'll address that. Before, I talked more about the content of my stories.

I like a fairly straightforward prose style, and that's what I try to do. I try to keep grammar, punctuation, and spelling in conformity with standard American conventions. I use the Chicago Manual of Style as a guide. As a reader, I dislike reading nonconforming prose style unless the author REALLY knows what he or she is doing, and that's almost never the case at Literotica when authors don't conform to style conventions.

I agree most of the time with Elmore Leonard's advice on writing. Elmore Leonard is my idea of an author whose works are excellent for a starting writer to read to understand what a really simple but good fiction prose style is.

I am very much of the "use 'said' and 'asked'" school of thought and I dislike when people get too cute with how they handle dialogue tags. "I'm a great guy," he smiled. Yuck Yuck Yuck. You cannot "smile" dialogue.

I dislike comma splices and try to avoid them. A comma splice is when you join two sentences with a comma. E.g., "He kissed her, she kissed him back." I try NOT to do this.

I've been focusing on verbs to improve my style. If you choose the right verb in a sentence, more often than not it takes care of having to think about adjectives and adverbs. Let verbs do the heavy lifting.

I will get flowery, or try to, in scenes where I think it will strike the right mood.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I get the impression that most writers on this forum do care about the quality of their work, but also quite like the validation that Red H's bring

Yes they do, but this idea is flawed.

It's difficult for most to understand and 10 years ago I would have dismissed it entirely myself until I learned.

Everything that one does in one's life involves energy. Physical material life is a hunt for energy 24/7. Even sleep is recharging energy. There are many types of energy but all energy can be placed into two camps: positive and negative. The ego feeds on negative. The heart is a conduit of positive. But the energy that you allow into you depends on how you align yourself. If you act upon the ego's desire, you attract negative. If you act from the heart's desire, you attract positive. If you try to do both at once, you will attract 50% positive and negative. The doorway is only so wide. If you aim it a little more one way than the other, you will attract 60-40, or 53/47, or a little more 75/25, or a lot 90/10. What you cannot do is take in more than 100. You cannot align to 100% heart and 100% ego at the same time. It is not possible to write fully from the heart ... and add in a little ego too. Once you seek that gratification, you are taking a couple of percentage points from the heart and giving them to the ego.

Getting accolades feels great because it's a strong energy, but it's a negative energy. There's nothing wrong with negative energy but it fizzles over time, leaving one ultimately unfulfilled. Coming down, so to speak, so you have to seek the next high - as quickly as possible - a bigger and bigger dose. From your first smoke to two packs a day. On the other hand, positive energy is ever present and doesn't die. The joy of creating and sharing that creation by genuinely connecting with others is positive energy.

If you strive to write quality stories that you believe in and feel strongly about but also want that thrill of the Red H, well then your ego is creeping in. Maybe you're at 95/5 in favor of the heart. Maybe 85/15, maybe 98/2. That's the ego creeping in and having influence over your art.

There is no good and bad here. There is nothing wrong with writing from the ego to collect applause. But I strive to be as close to 100% heart as possible in all of my creations. I don't do this because I'm better than anyone or so that I can look down my nose at anyone. I do this because I have learned that this is without a doubt, in the long run the most satisfying way to create. It is the best benefit to me and also allows me to offer my best to whoever else connects with it. If you think about it, if you start writing what the audience wants rather than what you truly want, really you become a slave to the whims of others.

So ask yourself, what percentage of your motivations is you loving to write, and what percentage is just an addiction to scores and applause? The two sides will always add up to 100%, never more, never less. You can't cheat creation and you can't cheat karma.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I am very much of the "use 'said' and 'asked'" school of thought and I dislike when people get too cute with how they handle dialogue tags. "I'm a great guy," he smiled. Yuck Yuck Yuck. You cannot "smile" dialogue.

Yes you can. You say this.

I've been focusing on verbs to improve my style. If you choose the right verb in a sentence, more often than not it takes care of having to think about adjectives and adverbs. Let verbs do the heavy lifting.

"I'm a great guy," he smiled. <- does exactly that. It's using a verb to tighten the flow and say more with less. 'Smiled' does the heavy lifting, efficiently. The alternative would be -> "I'm a great guy," he said with a smile.

I dislike comma splices and try to avoid them. A comma splice is when you join two sentences with a comma. E.g., "He kissed her, she kissed him back." I try NOT to do this.

Interesting. I use them all the time. How else can one use multiple subordinate clauses? Just make sure that the clauses don't step on the original subject and predicate to avoid the run-on. A paragraph of all short sentences reads as monotonous. Likewise, a paragraph of all long sentences reads as monotonous. Monotony is bad for flow. Throwing in a nice long sentence between short direct ones really helps the flow, and I have found that connecting up multiple clauses works great for that. It usually does take some skill to keep them sorted out though.

I will get flowery, or try to, in scenes where I think it will strike the right mood.

Absolutely. I have always said, imagery and immersive detail is great. Just pick your spots.

 

[SimonDoom]

"I'm a great guy," he smiled. <- does exactly that. It's using a verb to tighten the flow and say more with less. 'Smiled' does the heavy lifting, efficiently. The alternative would be -> "I'm a great guy," he said with a smile.

The better alternative is "I'm a great guy." He smiled.

"Smiled" is not a tag. It's part of narrative.

Some may disagree, but this is a hill I die on. I hate this kind of dialogue writing. Hate it. To me, it's the number one sign of an amateurish writer.

 

[EroticCupcake]

The better alternative is "I'm a great guy." He smiled.

"Smiled" is not a tag. It's part of narrative.

Some may disagree, but this is a hill I die on. I hate this kind of dialogue writing. Hate it. To me, it's the number one sign of an amateurish writer.

I will take this under advisement. I'm trying hard to cut all unnecessary words. If the only difference is a period versus comma and one is more correct than the other... Why not?

 

[joy_of_cooking]

The OP's original post was about STYLE, so I'll address that. Before, I talked more about the content of my stories.

Okay, fair. In that case, I don't think I have a distinctive style, and I think that's good. I want to develop the skill of telling each story how it needs to be told.

If I want to put the reader into the narrator's head, then I want my style to be whatever is correct for that character, whether that's "highly-educated office worker" or "underprivileged teenager".

And sometimes I want to be transparent to the reader, in the way that many typographers try to make their work invisible.

Having said all that, I do think I made an unusual stylistic choice with all of my published stories so far: I have never named my characters. I have four stories that are "he" and "she," and another two that are "I" and "she". Super weird, not intentional, not going to keep doing it.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

The better alternative is "I'm a great guy." He smiled.

"Smiled" is not a tag. It's part of narrative.

Some may disagree, but this is a hill I die on. I hate this kind of dialogue writing. Hate it. To me, it's the number one sign of an amateurish writer.

And I can argue that smiled as a tag is more accurate because separating the line into two sentences makes it sound like he spoke first all straight faced, and then smiled. Smiled as a tag leaves no ambiguity.

 

[Wifetheif]

Plausibility. Even in my SF it's grounded in reality. I also like to take average conservative Christians and corrupt them. Again, that happens through appealing to the flaws in their personality. We all have personality flaws. I was once a conservative Christian, and I have also been in female-led relationships. My characters are profoundly human. I'm known for my nonconsent stories. To do those effectively requires a velvet touch. There are ways in that are realistic. A journalist investigates the BDSM world for a story and signs up for a year of slavery to be "authentic." I also strive for natural-sounding dialogue. The whole reason I started posting here was to work on dialogue. I'm a nonfiction writer and the nonfiction I write uses little dialogue.

 

[XerXesXu]

but this is a hill I die on.

Can you explain why? There are things I'll die on a hill for, but nothing so inconsequential as a stylistic variation.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Can you explain why? There are things I'll die on a hill for, but nothing so inconsequential as a stylistic variation.

Oh come on, man. Hill to die on is just an expression. You know that.

But I will challenge further. (snicker)

"I'm a bimbo," she giggled.

No good? And I suppose this one is right out too.

"I'm a bimbo," she giggled and then she shmooshed her big soft tits up against him.

Shmooshed is not even a word let alone smiled or giggled is a tag. But it works perfectly here and everyone who reads it can picture exactly what she did (and the image probably just popped a couple of boners too ).

"I aced that test," he fist-pumped.

Aced was never a word until someone started using it and it caught on. Ace at one point was not a verb. Then it became one. Even the word word at one point was not a word until someone made it up.

Now I will give you that there are certain 'words' that aren't words and never should be. Irregardless ... is just wrong. The word is regardless. Irregardless is nothing but a self-negating redundancy that grates the nerves. It doesn't matter how much people use it, it will never be a word because it it serves no purpose. Smiled as a tag serves a purpose and serves it well.

 

[XerXesXu]

Oh come on, man. Hill to die on is just an expression. You know that.

He has history. He means it.

 

[SimonDoom]

Oh come on, man. Hill to die on is just an expression. You know that.

But I will challenge further. (snicker)

"I'm a bimbo," she giggled.

No good? And I suppose this one is right out too.

"I'm a bimbo," she giggled and then she shmooshed her big soft tits up against him.

Shmooshed is not even a word let alone smiled or giggled is a tag. But it works perfectly here and everyone who reads it can picture exactly what she did (and the image probably just popped a couple of boners too ).

"I aced that test," he fist-pumped.

Aced was never a word until someone started using it and it caught on. Ace at one point was not a verb. Then it became one. Even the word word at one point was not a word until someone made it up.

Now I will give you that there are certain 'words' that aren't words and never should be. Irregardless ... is just wrong. The word is regardless. Irregardless is nothing but a self-negating redundancy that grates the nerves. It doesn't matter how much people use it, it will never be a word because it it serves no purpose. Smiled as a tag serves a purpose and serves it well.

Nope. Nope. Nope. Both totally unacceptable. You don't giggle a word, and you don't fist-pump a word. You say a word. You can also giggle or fist-pump, as an action separate from the utterance of the words. This is what periods are for.

I'm with Elmore Leonard on this one, and I know exactly where he would stand on these examples.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Nope. Nope. Nope. Both totally unacceptable. You don't giggle a word, and you don't fist-pump a word. You say a word. You can also giggle or fist-pump, as an action separate from the utterance of the words. This is what periods are for.

I'm with Elmore Leonard on this one, and I know exactly where he would stand on these examples.

Admit it. You know you want to get a bimbo shmoosh, though.

 

[ElectricBlue]

The better alternative is "I'm a great guy." He smiled.

"Smiled" is not a tag. It's part of narrative.

Some may disagree, but this is a hill I die on. I hate this kind of dialogue writing. Hate it. To me, it's the number one sign of an amateurish writer.

Copy this. You cannot laugh words, you can't smile them either. You can speak, then smile or laugh, but they're separate actions.

I won't die on Simon's hill, but I will think, there's a writer who needs to learn what a speech tag is.

The bimbo smoosh though? Is she intelligent, behind the facade? Then yes, otherwise... maybe.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Copy this. You cannot laugh words, you can't smile them either. You can speak, then smile or laugh, but they're separate actions.

I won't die on Simon's hill, but I will think, there's a writer who needs to learn what a speech tag is.

So stodgy.

Writing, in fact creating in general, is about rules ... and knowing the right moments to bend or break them.

 

[XerXesXu]

I won't die on Simon's hill, but I will think, there's a writer who needs to learn what a speech tag is.

But if they could tell a story, would you care? I wouldn't care, and I'd read the story.

 

[XerXesXu]

So stodgy.

Writing, in fact creating in general, is about rules ... and knowing the right moments to bend or break them.

Remember 'The exception proves the rule'? If there's an exception, there's no rule. How do you become a rule-giver or rule-taker in art and creativity? Anyone know? Anyone know who promoted SD from an aspiring kink lord to a kink lord? It's all a mystery.

 

[MillieDynamite]

Elmore Leonard wouldn't Justify any fist-pumping as a speaker's tag.

Nope. Nope. Nope. Both totally unacceptable. You don't giggle a word, and you don't fist-pump a word. You say a word. You can also giggle or fist-pump, as an action separate from the utterance of the words. This is what periods are for.

I'm with Elmore Leonard on this one, and I know exactly where he would stand on these examples.

 

[SimonDoom]

Anyone know who promoted SD from an aspiring kink lord to a kink lord? It's all a mystery.

Somebody had to do it.

I applaud you for your attentiveness.

 

[joy_of_cooking]

Thinking about this more, I realize I did try to write "prettier" for one of my stories:

Tormented By My Muse (750 words)

 

[MillieDynamite]

Leave my DoomMister alone, @XerXesXu, or there will be blood.

Remember 'The exception proves the rule'? If there's an exception, there's no rule. How do you become a rule-giver or rule-taker in art and creativity? Anyone know? Anyone know who promoted SD from an aspiring kink lord to a kink lord? It's all a mystery.

 

[FeralSmile]

Okay, fair. In that case, I don't think I have a distinctive style, and I think that's good. I want to develop the skill of telling each story how it needs to be told.

If I want to put the reader into the narrator's head, then I want my style to be whatever is correct for that character, whether that's "highly-educated office worker" or "underprivileged teenager".

I enjoy first-person writing precisely because I can delve into the thought processes of my narrators, and imbue them with unique personalities and quirks. My "Clone-a-Willy Adventures" series was narrated by a nurse with a hygiene fixation, and she tended to rely on anatomical terminology to the point where it was honestly a little unusual, which led to me including a glossary at the start of the first chapter just to be safe. But then I've known people who spoke like that, and it felt realistic to me to give her that approach. My more recent "Possession is 9/10 of the Law" story was narrated by a sex demon who leaned heavily on colloquialisms and treated the reader with a bit of disdain; he made a lot of insulting comments about "you mortals" and urged the reader to keep up. He also constantly used new nicknames to refer to the host body he possessed, which could in theory be confusing but there were only three characters of note in the story (not counting the narrator). These two narrators have completely different affects, styles, and voices, which made them fun for me to write.

More generally, I tend towards compound-complex sentences and have to deliberately force myself sometimes to shorten and simplify my structures to avoid rambling and discursion. I tend towards conversational and informal writing styles that match my natural speech patterns, for better and for worse.

 

[FeralSmile]

Remember 'The exception proves the rule'? If there's an exception, there's no rule.

"Prove" in that aphorism is an older version of the word, and doesn't mean "demonstrates the truth of" but rather "tests". That form of "prove" is largely gone in modern English, and survives in a handful of phrases like "proving grounds".

The exception TESTS the rule; it doesn't show that the rule is valid.

How do you become a rule-giver or rule-taker in art and creativity? Anyone know? Anyone know who promoted SD from an aspiring kink lord to a kink lord? It's all a mystery.

I assumed it was his well-deserved win in the latest story contest that led to his promotion.

 

[TheRedChamber]

"Prove" in that aphorism is an older version of the word, and doesn't mean "demonstrates the truth of" but rather "tests". That form of "prove" is largely gone in modern English, and survives in a handful of phrases like "proving grounds".

The exception TESTS the rule; it doesn't show that the rule is valid.

I assumed it was his well-deserved win in the latest story contest that led to his promotion.

I had the phrase explained to me in the following way a few years ago.

If you are passing a fancy restaurant and see sign outside saying "This Friday is Dress Down Friday - no need to wear a tie." It is reasonable to assume that the restaurant has a rule about wearing ties the rest of the time. If the rule didn't exist, there would be no need to make an exception for it.