So Fuggin What!

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

How much stuffing do you pad your stories with? I'm talkin bout the filler that has nuthin to do with your plot. I mean nuthin remotely related to the plot.

I'm reading a novel by Robert Crais, and 60 pages in its 99.44/100 padding. Reviewers swore it was his best and awesome. Its BORING. Nothing relevant to the plot has happened. Someone slaughtered 7 women and Elvis Cole has gazed at his navel the whole time.

Earlier today I read Edgar Allen Poe's recipe for stories, and he was clear about THROW THE CRAP OUT IF IT MEANS NOTHING TO THE PLOT. Don't stop to pet your fucking dog or pop the top on a beer or call your girlfriend or stare off into space. Crais had no fucking clue where to go is what all that filler is about. He was waiting for a clue.

So what's your idea of essential material to put in your story?

 

[lovecraft68]

This reminds me of that lit How To about hot to make a cup of tea where it talks about not writing every single step of the process.

I think you need some filler, some real life type actions, it can't just all be 100% pure plot, people do go to the fridge and grab a beer, they do pause to scratch their ass, they do take a call from their phone...

People want to identify with the characters and if your characters are all robotic action figures that stay motionless until the action starts then you have dull lifeless people...

 

[rjordan]

Earlier today I read Edgar Allen Poe's recipe for stories, and he was clear about THROW THE CRAP OUT IF IT MEANS NOTHING TO THE PLOT. Don't stop to pet your fucking dog or pop the top on a beer or call your girlfriend or stare off into space. Crais had no fucking clue where to go is what all that filler is about. He was waiting for a clue.

Some of those simple actions don't directly affect the plot, but they could be used to reveal details about the characters and why they do certain things related to the plot.

For example, petting a dog in one scene then having the character cold-bloodedly kill the dog in a later scene which advances the story. It adds a dimension to the character that wouldn't be as evident if just the dog-killing scene were shown.

Popping the top on a beer and letting the foam spill all over the carpet with no concern shows another facet of a character that might be important to understanding the characters actions later.

These things can be pointless filler, but they can also be small contributions that advance the story.

I get irritated with gratuitous sex scenes in Lit stories. The writer has a good storyline with great characters that has hooked me. The characters plot and scheme the evening away, then hop in bed and there is a long detailed and utterly pointless sex scene that has nothing whatever to do with the story they're involved in. To me, that's filler.

rj

 

[lovecraft68]

I get irritated with gratuitous sex scenes in Lit stories. The writer has a good storyline with great characters that has hooked me. The characters plot and scheme the evening away, then hop in bed and there is a long detailed and utterly pointless sex scene that has nothing whatever to do with the story they're involved in. To me, that's filler.

rj

In straight up fiction you'd be correct, but to a large amount of people here the characters being developed is filler and the sex is why they are here

as one reader informed me..."If I wanted all that yap yap yap I'd go to fucking Barnes and Noble!"

I try for a story, but still try to deliver the sex. I had a much nicer reader tell me I was good at "Slow burns" and my story build up was like foreplay that made the sex hotter.

Somewhere between those comments is the truth I would think....

 

[rjordan]

In straight up fiction you'd be correct, but to a large amount of people here the characters being developed is filler and the sex is why they are here

as one reader informed me..."If I wanted all that yap yap yap I'd go to fucking Barnes and Noble!"

I try for a story, but still try to deliver the sex. I had a much nicer reader tell me I was good at "Slow burns" and my story build up was like foreplay that made the sex hotter.

Somewhere between those comments is the truth I would think....

I understand that. If the story is about the sex or the sex is pivotal in the story, then it isn't filler. If two characters just take time out from the story for a couple of pages of sex, it's just filler.

If that's what the audience wants, and the author only cares about the audience, that's fine. Give them the filler and quite wasting time dreaming up plots and characters.

This is an erotic story site. So the sex/eroticism has to be important to the story. If it's filler, the author failed. The audience might be happy, but the author failed.

rj

 

[lovecraft68]

I understand that. If the story is about the sex or the sex is pivotal in the story, then it isn't filler. If two characters just take time out from the story for a couple of pages of sex, it's just filler.

If that's what the audience wants, and the author only cares about the audience, that's fine. Give them the filler and quite wasting time dreaming up plots and characters.

This is an erotic story site. So the sex/eroticism has to be important to the story. If it's filler, the author failed. The audience might be happy, but the author failed.

rj

I get what you mean with gratuitous though. I have read some that had a good story and interesting then Bam! For no reason they're fucking

That and inconsistent sex. The shy virgin who a page later is losing her cherry t four guys and fucking like Faye Regan....the woman who is being blackmailed/raped yet in the span of a paragraph likes it....the sister who went from shy and sweet to sucking her brother two sentences later.

Its like the author is saying....okay this, okay this...fuck it, let's fuck!

 

[jomar]

Huh, I thought I recalled Craise to write pretty lean.

Can't think of the name, but he moves it along...even said it a book was an exercise in speed. Will post if I can get it.

ETA: For me, less is more for the most part.

 

[Sammael Bard]

Based on my definition of "fillers",

I use fillers that portray the mood of my protagonist indirectly, without me having to say "I was feeling like this". Setting up an environment, interspersed with "Filler" sentences are also a great tool to enhance the reader's visualisation and an insight to the protagonist's mindset.

Fillers being used in first person POV as compared to fillers being used in third person POV is a lot different. IMO, the former one rocks. If done artfully, that is.

 

[sr71plt]

I think there are quite a few who don't realize that the expectations for a short story aren't/shouldn't be the same as for a novel.

 

[SamScribble]

I think there are quite a few who don't realize that the expectations for a short story aren't/shouldn't be the same as for a novel.

I would say that only a minority – and a rather small minority at that – of the stories on Literotica qualify as classic ‘short stories’.

One of my editors (a bloke even older than I am) used to say that a short story should have an exposition, a complication, a crisis, a climax, and a resolution. And, ideally, it should cover all of these bases in fewer than 4,000 words. Today, of course, perhaps the majority of successful short stories start at complication (or even at crisis) and fill in the elements of exposition as they go along.

That said – and it may be my age – but I have never been able to come to terms with a ‘short story’ that has 23 chapters. Many successful short story writers (P G Wodehouse, H G Wells, Agatha Christie, Somerset Maugham, Graham Greene, Anthony Burgess, Philip Roth, et al) have written multiple stories with the same characters. But they were not chapters. They were successive short stories.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I would say that only a minority – and a rather small minority at that – of the stories on Literotica qualify as classic ‘short stories’.

One of my editors (a bloke even older than I am) used to say that a short story should have an exposition, a complication, a crisis, a climax, and a resolution. And, ideally, it should cover all of these bases in fewer than 4,000 words. Today, of course, perhaps the majority of successful short stories start at complication (or even at crisis) and fill in the elements of exposition as they go along.

That said – and it may be my age – but I have never been able to come to terms with a ‘short story’ that has 23 chapters. Many successful short story writers (P G Wodehouse, H G Wells, Agatha Christie, Somerset Maugham, Graham Greene, Anthony Burgess, Philip Roth, et al) have written multiple stories with the same characters. But they were not chapters. They were successive short stories.

The standard I saw is 15000 words max, less than one hour to read.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Huh, I thought I recalled Craise to write pretty lean.

Can't think of the name, but he moves it along...even said it a book was an exercise in speed. Will post if I can get it.

ETA: For me, less is more for the most part.

I read almost all of Crais' books. The initial 5 are wonderful, the rest suck. The rest suck because Elvis Cole stopped having a sense of humor, fell in love with Lucy, and tried to make Joe a regular guy.

FILLER, by my definition, is stuff that has nuthin to do with nuthin and ends at nuthin. In the book I'm reading Joe has Lucy call Elvis, they talk about nuthin, and Elvis asks her to get back together, she says no, and the call ends. She wasn't mentioned 50 pages before the call and adds nuthin to his investigation. IRL my wife wanted to talk about Dan Blocker of Bonanza last nite. I haven't thought of Blocker in 50 years. It was outta nowhere.

I'll add it to a story about how Daphne lay thinking of Bonanza as all the brothers took turns on her.

 

[49greg]

I like to read stories that are interesting, but not boring. I guess that's my definition of filler. If it's interesting it isn't filler, and by interesting I guess most would say related to or essential to the story.

In Lit I often skip pages, and sometimes even sex, just to find the thread of where the story goes. So yes, a lot of filler in some stories.

But I'm as guilty as anyone. I go off on tangents, throw in stuff that isn't needed. Heck if I didn't rein myself in I would give the reader a run down on what every character ate, wore, and picked their teeth with. Sometimes I put in a little inside joke that no-one but me would get.

That's the way my mind works, if I'm thinking some casual thought, it is important enough that everyone would want to know about. My tongue and fingers just don't know when to stop. My editing consists of cutting back, cutting back, cutting back. Then when I'm tired of it and want to leave it, I try a little grammar and spelling correction. Not a good writing method.

 

[PervOtaku]

One of my stories can essentially be broken down into five arcs. The first three arcs (ten chapters) were the entirety of the original story concept. The fourth arc (three chapters) is entirely filler that doesn't advance anything (except for two short expositionary references to the aftermath of the third arc) based around me asking "Okay, that's done, what other sex scenes would I like to get out of this?" The fifth arc (three chapters) closes things out, based around me asking "Shit, now I'm really out of ideas, so how the hell am I going to end this?"

 

[AZMotherLover]

This topic brings to mind the lengthy descriptions of different whale species in "Moby Dick".

 

[SikFuk]

I like the Raymond Chandler type of details that bring a scene to life. Chandler would note a cigarette burn on the arm of the couch, which would tell me much more about the scene than what color the couch is, or the material used in the drapes, or the number of lamps, etc etc. I know you're supposed to "paint" a scene, but a good artist can do it with one brush stroke rather than using the entire canvass. Many times I find myself skipping over description in mainstream fiction. I more interested in what happens, not what it looks like.

 

[robertreams]

I am often criticized in Lit. forum for advocating terseness of expression. I am told i am heartless and bent on tearing the heart out of stories and destroying the "art", or of cutting to the bare bone.

But the kind of cutting I recommend is the type that makes a story longer than it has to be and harder to read. Many authors do not realize they are telling too much.

e.g. "She walked across the parking lot to her assigned spot, got in her Mazda Miata and closed the door. Then she started the car and backed out. When she got to the entrance of the parking lot she began to worry about everything she had left in the red brick building behind her."

While some of these details could be important to the story, mostare probably nothing but the way we were taught to write by English teachers who stressed quantity over quality.

I my youth, the writing of compositions of a certain number of words or pages was give as a punishment for minor infractions. (Today's student would tell you to kiss his ass.)