Write a controversial opinion

[NuclearFairy]

You could change that!

I could. But I'd much rather write about gnomes trying to keep their poor little farms hidden from the humans.

 

[Statius]

I could. But I'd much rather write about gnomes trying to keep their poor little farms hidden from the humans.

That works too!.

 

[GuiltyCowboy]

It's probably because they made cough syrup taste like root beer.

Are these the same people that made Hershey’s Kisses taste like vomit?

 

[StillStunned]

There are no rules. Passive voice, second person, tell don't show, prose loaded with adverbs: it can all work if you work hard at it and do it well.

Hear hear! I have a 2P story with a red H.

That said, it's probably a good idea to understand why people say those things.

 

[crookedletter]

Hear hear! I have a 2P story with a red H.

That said, it's probably a good idea to understand why people say those things.

Absolutely. Learn to write internalizing all the "rules," then figure how best to break them.

 

[Eisenloewe]

(1) Most literary tropes and cliches, including within erotica and without, are perfectly serviceable. When people criticize writing as using a trope or cliche, what they usually mean, but are too nice to say, is that they think the writing is poor. A practiced author could take any of the tropes in the Most Hated Tropes thread in this forum (https://forum.literotica.com/threads/your-most-hated-tropes.1629917/), or even more than one of them at once, and make a fine work of them.

(2) The hardest world to worldbuild within a story is the real one. If you set a story in a fantasy castle or cyberpunk corporate headquarters, your imagination has a lot more room to work, for better or worse. If the reader's vision is different than the writer's, neither will know. If you set a story at Auburn University, someone who has been to Auburn or knows the campus will pick up on any liberties you're taking, and you have to subtly signal that you're taking liberties rather than simply describing the campus and getting it wrong.

(3) Apples exist in a strict hierarchy. Fuji, then Honeycrisp, then everything else, then Granny Smith.

(4) A story without dialogue is not a story, it's a Wikipedia article.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Hear hear! I have a 2P story with a red H.

That said, it's probably a good idea to understand why people say those things.

Me too, we should start a club.

 

[iwatchus]

Me too, we should start a club.

I didn't know 2P stood for two people.

 

[Statius]

(1) Most literary tropes and cliches, including within erotica and without, are perfectly serviceable. When people criticize writing as using a trope or cliche, what they usually mean, but are too nice to say, is that they think the writing is poor. A practiced author could take any of the tropes in the Most Hated Tropes thread in this forum (https://forum.literotica.com/threads/your-most-hated-tropes.1629917/), or even more than one of them at once, and make a fine work of them.

(2) The hardest world to worldbuild within a story is the real one. If you set a story in a fantasy castle or cyberpunk corporate headquarters, your imagination has a lot more room to work, for better or worse. If the reader's vision is different than the writer's, neither will know. If you set a story at Auburn University, someone who has been to Auburn or knows the campus will pick up on any liberties you're taking, and you have to subtly signal that you're taking liberties rather than simply describing the campus and getting it wrong.

(3) Apples exist in a strict hierarchy. Fuji, then Honeycrisp, then everything else, then Granny Smith.

(4) A story without dialogue is not a story, it's a Wikipedia article.

What about a story with 2 sentences of dialogue at the very end?

 

[Kelliezgirl]

For many authors here, this delve into writing smut was their first attempt at writing altogether. It was so for me too. It takes time to hone the skill, and this is only a hobby for many authors. Being an amateur isn't an excuse; it's the truth for most of us here.

The one thing I do mind here is the excessive praise with which some people shower each other on the forum. There's being positive and supportive, and then there's the AH over-the-top praise that completely loses its point. We ARE amateurs here. There are good stories here, but they are not THAT good.

The reason I criticize such an approach is because when you do nothing but praise and praise and praise, it all loses its sense and potency. There have to be some mediocre or simply decent authors and stories, too. There's too much coddling here that kills the critical word.

I would understand it if this were the place for teenagers, like AO3 is in good part, but the median age here is 50 at least. Why do senior adults need so much coddling and ego stroking? The teacher in me can't support such an approach, even if I'm mostly resigned to the reality of AH.

Based on the way some people gush it is a minor miracle that all the major publishers aren't in a bidding war for the denizens of the AH.

 

[SamanthaBehgs]

And some people flourish with positive reinforcement.

Based on the way some people gush it is a minor miracle that all the major publishers aren't in a bidding war for the denizens of the AH.

And some people just have a praise kink and it makes them gush.

 

[SamanthaBehgs]

What do they get if they don't ask for cereal soup?

Just... dry cereal?

Yep, just dry cereal. Imagine eating Chex like it's popcorn.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

The population of the AH is not representative of:
Writers on Lit as a whole.
Readers of Lit as a whole.
The general public.

 

[AG31]

(1) Most literary tropes and cliches, including within erotica and without, are perfectly serviceable. When people criticize writing as using a trope or cliche, what they usually mean, but are too nice to say, is that they think the writing is poor. A practiced author could take any of the tropes in the Most Hated Tropes thread in this forum (https://forum.literotica.com/threads/your-most-hated-tropes.1629917/), or even more than one of them at once, and make a fine work of them.

(2) The hardest world to worldbuild within a story is the real one. If you set a story in a fantasy castle or cyberpunk corporate headquarters, your imagination has a lot more room to work, for better or worse. If the reader's vision is different than the writer's, neither will know. If you set a story at Auburn University, someone who has been to Auburn or knows the campus will pick up on any liberties you're taking, and you have to subtly signal that you're taking liberties rather than simply describing the campus and getting it wrong.

(3) Apples exist in a strict hierarchy. Fuji, then Honeycrisp, then everything else, then Granny Smith.

(4) A story without dialogue is not a story, it's a Wikipedia article.

1 - Goes without saying.
2 - Probably true, but my opinion is worth nothing, as I'm not into world building in stories, fantasy or real.
3 - No, there's another one that's at the top, but I haven't been able to remember the name in, like, forever.
4 - The only opinion here that might be controversial, but like most (all???? sic) opinions that apply categorically, there are certainly exceptions. The more I think about it, I think this opinion of yours is so blatantly wrong that it doesn't qualify as being controversial.

 

[AG31]

The population of the AH is not representative of:
Writers on Lit as a whole.
Readers of Lit as a whole.
The general public.

How can this be controversial????

 

[Britva415]

I'm a "dumbfuck" [...] because I didn't read the first post?

I didn't see anyone make an accusation of "malicious intentions," but regarding the rest of it, yeah, you asked for it.

 

[Britva415]

I've seen stories with thousands of words of pointless dialogue. The author would likely claim it was necessary for character development.

There are a lot of stories which are full of dialog which seems like the author's fantasy of "witty repartee," like see-how-this-person-got-seduced. But it's cringey as hell because it's not witty and it's not even flirty because the author clearly doesn't know how to do that. This is what your "pointless" comment made me think about. Though, "worse than pointless" could also apply, here.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

There are a lot of stories which are full of dialog which seems like the author's fantasy of "witty repartee," like see-how-this-person-got-seduced. But it's cringey as hell because it's not witty and it's not even flirty because the author clearly doesn't know how to do that. This is what your "pointless" comment made me think about. Though, "worse than pointless" could also apply, here.

There are also long blocks of dialogue when an author wants to "show" something, some dynamics, intimacy, a specific relationship, set a scene, something, but instead of showing us an interesting excerpt of the dialogue, it ends up being hundreds, even thousands of words of absolutely boring back and forth.

As an example, I'll mention what I did with two of my characters who were in a D/s relationship of a sort. I showed them in a teasing argument about LotR, where the sub defended her opinion and threw jabs at the domme for her opinion about one of the characters in LotR. The point was to show that even though their relationship was a d/s one inside the bedroom, and in some other circumstances, they were still equals when they just socialized or went out, etc. I did it with like three sort of witty lines from each of the characters. It was enough to "show" my point without making it a long and nerdy, and possibly dull discussion about LotR.

 

[Robin_Starveling]

(4) A story without dialogue is not a story, it's a Wikipedia article.

Since the title says “controversial opinion,” I’ll cut you some slack, but I will say this:

Although dialogue can be a very effective tool when handled properly, it’s also the go-to outlet for the lazy. It takes minimal skill, and you can churn out thousands of words of it in one sitting. It’s the mother of all “tell, don’t show,” and it can get excruciating when the characters are as boring as their creator.

Laziness is the inevitable refuge of the incompetent.

 

[Britva415]

when an author wants to "show" something, some dynamics, intimacy, a specific relationship, set a scene, something, but instead of showing us an interesting excerpt of the dialogue, it ends up being hundreds, even thousands of words of absolutely boring back and forth.

and the reader has no idea what it was they were supposed to have been "shown" because it was too out of focus or it was like finding Waldo.

Y'know, I'm going to start using Waldo in show-don't-tell discussions from now on. Like - you gonna show me the picture, or, you gonna tell me where Waldo is? Sometimes one is called for, sometimes the other. And if you do insist on showing, show by pointing, not just by holding up the open book with hundreds of people in the picture.

 

[Cuteapplepie]

Just for fun sometimes I liked to intimidate in order to get a kinky confession under interrogation

 

[AwkwardlySet]

and the reader has no idea what it was they were supposed to have been "shown" because it was too out of focus or it was like finding Waldo.

Y'know, I'm going to start using Waldo in show-don't-tell discussions from now on. Like - you gonna show me the picture, or, you gonna tell me where Waldo is? Sometimes one is called for, sometimes the other. And if you do insist on showing, show by pointing, not just by holding up the open book with hundreds of people in the picture.

Yeah, subtlety and not holding the reader's hand are all good and nice in theory. The problem is that those scenes kill pacing - an important aspect of every story. In Sanderson's own words, showing instead of telling is great, but it takes so many more words. You have to use it responsibly and when it really achieves something.
Making the reader wade through blocks of boring dialogue just to make some subtle but not important point in a relationship is not using it responsibly. Telling is a legit tool, one that a writer should use just as often.

 

[SkyBubble]

I was going to write a witty comment about pineapple and pizza or cereal being soup, but then I saw AG31 coming in hot and heavy. Nope, I'm outta here.

Well, coffee is arguably a form of soup. It's beans in water.

 

[Britva415]

Telling is a legit tool, one that a writer should use just as often.

More often.

You can't show anything without telling something, so, even when you're showing, you're telling.

 

[SimonDoom]

Alfred Hitchcock is overrated.