When Readers get "IT"

[GoldenCojones]

Comments on my stories are way down, but I've received a couple of email responses that really made my day. Both of these readers got "It." They understood the message in the story. I'd crafted my "Coke" story to appear like one story but be another.

Because of the lack of comments on my story, I don't know how many readers got it, but these two did, and it made me feel good.

 

[sr71plt]

Yep, that's a great feeling. When a reviewer in the marketplace "gets it" (and actually got it better than I did), that's an even better feeling. I posted such a review of my recently posted "Home to Fire Island" over on the story announcement board a couple of weeks ago that left me thinking "wow," I wish I realized I was doing all of that.

 

[GoldenCojones]

Yep, that's a great feeling. When a reviewer in the marketplace "gets it" (and actually got it better than I did), that's an even better feeling. I posted such a review of my recently posted "Home to Fire Island" over on the story announcement board a couple of weeks ago that left me thinking "wow," I wish I realized I was doing all of that.

LOL That's funny!

 

[Hypoxia]

Is the 'it' something subtle and tricky that 99.99% of readers will miss?

 

[sr71plt]

I don't think that GC is talking about something the author was trying to hide.

 

[lovecraft68]

Yep, that's a great feeling. When a reviewer in the marketplace "gets it" (and actually got it better than I did), that's an even better feeling. I posted such a review of my recently posted "Home to Fire Island" over on the story announcement board a couple of weeks ago that left me thinking "wow," I wish I realized I was doing all of that.

That's because whatever it is you 'did' came naturally and when it does that's when its best.

That's whymy head has begun to hurt from all the eye rolling I've been doing over the great voices and their groupies making every sentence here into some type of major writing challenge and event.

The best stories come from the heart or muse if you use the term, they don't come from reading how to write books and imitating others or from thumping one's chest and yelling "I'm literary dammit!"

 

[GoldenMaia]

Comments on my stories are way down, but I've received a couple of email responses that really made my day. Both of these readers got "It." They understood the message in the story. I'd crafted my "Coke" story to appear like one story but be another.

Because of the lack of comments on my story, I don't know how many readers got it, but these two did, and it made me feel good.

So cool! I like when readers connect the dots or are paying enough attention to more than just the smexysmex!

 

[SecondCircle]

That's because whatever it is you 'did' came naturally and when it does that's when its best.

That's whymy head has begun to hurt from all the eye rolling I've been doing over the great voices and their groupies making every sentence here into some type of major writing challenge and event.

The best stories come from the heart or muse if you use the term, they don't come from reading how to write books and imitating others or from thumping one's chest and yelling "I'm literary dammit!"

Even when stories come from the heart or natural talent they can achieve something "literary". Just because they come natural doesn't mean they can't be observed or talked about like most art.

I tend to talk a great deal here about different elements in writing and different literary aspects, characterization, story arch, plot development, dialogue, symbolism, etc.

Doesn't mean that when I set off to write, that I pause any more than you do. Doesn't mean anything I do comes any less naturally.

Just means I like discussing the craft. I like observing stuff from different angles. Stories can accomplish many things in the minds of a reader. They may see "what you did" when you weren't even trying to do anything. This is on par for ART.

Wait. What? Porn stories? Art? Pfft.

Nevermind. I forgot it's cocks and pussies and anal beads. Just do it.

 

[sr71plt]

I've commented here before that my stories expand in review, not contract. This is when I see connection and concepts that can be expanded that my mind laid in the initial write but only later showed that deeper meaning can be expanded into the original draft. Cutting original drafts just isn't in my style.

 

[SecondCircle]

I've commented here before that my stories expand in review, not contract. This is when I see connection and concepts that can be expanded that my mind laid in the initial write but only later showed that deeper meaning can be expanded into the original draft. Cutting original drafts just isn't in my style.

Happens that way with me as well but also as I go along. Often as I'm writing, something insignificant in previous paragraphs becomes a key feature in the plot later in the piece, sometimes even bringing something full circle. Sort of like those movies like "The Sixth Sense" where there's all these tiny little clues early on that he's dead that you had no reason to pick up on before the twist.

 

[sr71plt]

It's probably from having written so long, but I'm ever tuned in to the later/greater use that can be made of little gems of observation dropped along the way in drafting the first version that weren't particularly meant to have significance later. I unconsciously try not to leave anything unused or any thread dangling--and I think, after all of these years writing, I usually succeed in that.

 

[GoldenCojones]

Is the 'it' something subtle and tricky that 99.99% of readers will miss?

I didn't think so. I'm about as subtle as a chainsaw and my writing is the same. In this case it was pretty simple. The story was NOT about the main character. Coke was a setup to tell the story of Lilly and Don. It's very possible, even likely, that 98% of the readers got it, but two took the time to send me feedback telling me they got it. And that made me feel pretty good.

 

[GoldenCojones]

It's probably from having written so long, but I'm ever tuned in to the later/greater use that can be made of little gems of observation dropped along the way in drafting the first version that weren't particularly meant to have significance later. I unconsciously try not to leave anything unused or any thread dangling--and I think, after all of these years writing, I usually succeed in that.

That is one of the precepts of writing, if you have a gun on the wall in chapter one it must go off in chapter three, or something like that. That is the one reducing revision I do frequently. If I've left an Easter egg and I don't use it later in the story then I take it out. Or sometimes I instead find a way to use it. It depends on the egg and how much I really like it.

 

[legerdemer]

That is one of the precepts of writing, if you have a gun on the wall in chapter one it must go off in chapter three, or something like that. That is the one reducing revision I do frequently. If I've left an Easter egg and I don't use it later in the story then I take it out. Or sometimes I instead find a way to use it. It depends on the egg and how much I really like it.

Not to be accused of being too literary here, but you've just quoted Chekov. Or at least the gun over the fireplace quote is attributed to him.

"Chekhov's gun is a dramatic principle that requires every element in a narrative to be irreplaceable, with anything else removed.[1][2][3]
Remove everything that has no relevance to the story. If you say in the first chapter that there is a rifle hanging on the wall, in the second or third chapter it absolutely must go off. If it's not going to be fired, it shouldn't be hanging there.
— Anton Chekhov[3][4]"

- from Chekov's gun

Any evidence of making that kind of connection with readers is worth a drink and a victory dance! Congrats!!

 

[sr71plt]

Can't completely agree with Chekhov on that. A rifle over the fireplace can help establish something in the story, like character or setting, without having to go off at any point.

 

[TxRad]

Can't completely agree with Chekhov on that. A rifle over the fireplace can help establish something in the story, like character or setting, without having to go off at any point.

I agree with that. Sometimes a gun is just an object like a lamp and I've never heard of one of those going off unless it was over someones head. Going on that principles, a hell of a lot of people should have a headache.

 

[GoldenCojones]

I agree with that. Sometimes a gun is just an object like a lamp and I've never heard of one of those going off unless it was over someones head. Going on that principles, a hell of a lot of people should have a headache.

I think the principal is sound, but understand what you and pilot are saying. If the gun isn't an "easter egg", if it is just a prop, then there is no reason for it to go off, but if you make something important in a scene; if you stress it or mention it multiple times, then whether it is a gun or a lamp or a condom there should be a reason it is important in the scene. I think that is what he meant (even though I couldn't remember who said it: in my defense college creative writing was nearly thirty years ago)

 

[SecondCircle]

Not to be accused of being too literary here, but you've just quoted Chekov. Or at least the gun over the fireplace quote is attributed to him.

"Chekhov's gun is a dramatic principle that requires every element in a narrative to be irreplaceable, with anything else removed.[1][2][3]
Remove everything that has no relevance to the story. If you say in the first chapter that there is a rifle hanging on the wall, in the second or third chapter it absolutely must go off. If it's not going to be fired, it shouldn't be hanging there.
— Anton Chekhov[3][4]"

- from Chekov's gun

Any evidence of making that kind of connection with readers is worth a drink and a victory dance! Congrats!!

Relevance is the point of Chekhov's observation. I agree wholeheartedly that we should only include things relevant to the plot or the story in general.

I understand it's kind of a meme to demonstrate that relevance matters, lest we drone on and ramble in our stories. I do find it troubling how these literary memes are received or interpreted. For instance... who decides what is relevant to the story? In the case of the rifle hanging on the wall... does it need to go off in chapter 3 to be relevant? Or could it tell a reader about a character's personality based on what they have hanging on the wall? Were I to walk in to a guy's house and he had fish and deer and other animals mounted on the wall... I already know a shit load about the guy without him speaking a word. Which could serve to characterize, develope setting, form atmosphere, or even mislead a reader.

A dim quiet room for example. A woman sits at a metal table. Her eyes are swollen from weeping. It's silent. So silent she notices the ticking of a clock. She can't ignore it. It's driving her fucking crazy. The room is cold as fuck. She's trembling. That damn clock keeps ticking. It's like the thing is mocking her. Is it counting how incredibly long she's been waiting? Or is it counting DOWN? It isn't helping her nerves. Then, finally a detective walks in to interrogate her.

Now, because the clock (or the ticking) could be mentioned quite a lot while she's chewing the nails off of her fingers with worry, does this mean that later in the story she should grab that clock and knock the living fuck out of the detective? Or that she hid an electronic device to trigger a bomb in that clock? Sure. You can make that clock that crucial. I'd read those stories.

OR the clock was used to demonstrate her irritation and worry. It could build the mental tension in her head that we might be feeling through her POV. It could very well be a metaphor for just how long (it seems) that she's been waiting in that interrogation room. Or symbolic of how little time she has left with her freedom. Or it's a clock, one of the only items in the cold empty room, a piece of a barren setting with which we derive the mood of the story.

Some readers might say "jesus it's just a fucking clock." Others may get "it" and see the subliminal use of a clock as a sort of "tale tell heart" within the fiction. So which reader is correct in measuring the relevance of said clock? Or does the one that pulls the strings of the puppet (the writer) decide which strings are relevant to pull? Or would he be too biased in his view from above stage?

I don't think it's a matter of whether we shoot the guns on our walls at some point, but just that the gun be meaningful in some way to the story instead of just being rambling useless filler.

 

[GoldenCojones]

Relevance is the point of Chekhov's observation. I agree wholeheartedly that we should only include things relevant to the plot or the story in general.

I understand it's kind of a meme to demonstrate that relevance matters, lest we drone on and ramble in our stories. I do find it troubling how these literary memes are received or interpreted. For instance... who decides what is relevant to the story? In the case of the rifle hanging on the wall... does it need to go off in chapter 3 to be relevant? Or could it tell a reader about a character's personality based on what they have hanging on the wall? Were I to walk in to a guy's house and he had fish and deer and other animals mounted on the wall... I already know a shit load about the guy without him speaking a word. Which could serve to characterize, develope setting, form atmosphere, or even mislead a reader.

A dim quiet room for example. A woman sits at a metal table. Her eyes are swollen from weeping. It's silent. So silent she notices the ticking of a clock. She can't ignore it. It's driving her fucking crazy. The room is cold as fuck. She's trembling. That damn clock keeps ticking. It's like the thing is mocking her. Is it counting how incredibly long she's been waiting? Or is it counting DOWN? It isn't helping her nerves. Then, finally a detective walks in to interrogate her.

Now, because the clock (or the ticking) could be mentioned quite a lot while she's chewing the nails off of her fingers with worry, does this mean that later in the story she should grab that clock and knock the living fuck out of the detective? Or that she hid an electronic device to trigger a bomb in that clock? Sure. You can make that clock that crucial. I'd read those stories.

OR the clock was used to demonstrate her irritation and worry. It could build the mental tension in her head that we might be feeling through her POV. It could very well be a metaphor for just how long (it seems) that she's been waiting in that interrogation room. Or symbolic of how little time she has left with her freedom. Or it's a clock, one of the only items in the cold empty room, a piece of a barren setting with which we derive the mood of the story.

Some readers might say "jesus it's just a fucking clock." Others may get "it" and see the subliminal use of a clock as a sort of "tale tell heart" within the fiction. So which reader is correct in measuring the relevance of said clock? Or does the one that pulls the strings of the puppet (the writer) decide which strings are relevant to pull? Or would he be too biased in his view from above stage?

I don't think it's a matter of whether we shoot the guns on our walls at some point, but just that the gun be meaningful in some way to the story instead of just being rambling useless filler.

In your example, the clock is important, it contributes to the scene. That is enough. I doubt the point of the gun going off two chapters later should be taken literally. It is a metaphor for being important in some way.

If your character looks out the window and sees a woman walking her dog and then looks out again and sees her returning home without the dog, that is an Easter egg, a rifle on the wall so to speak, and you should either do something with it or remove it. Just my opinion.

 

[sr71plt]

Relevance is the point of Chekhov's observation. I agree wholeheartedly that we should only include things relevant to the plot or the story in general.

I understand it's kind of a meme to demonstrate that relevance matters, lest we drone on and ramble in our stories. I do find it troubling how these literary memes are received or interpreted. For instance... who decides what is relevant to the story? In the case of the rifle hanging on the wall... does it need to go off in chapter 3 to be relevant? Or could it tell a reader about a character's personality based on what they have hanging on the wall? Were I to walk in to a guy's house and he had fish and deer and other animals mounted on the wall... I already know a shit load about the guy without him speaking a word. Which could serve to characterize, develope setting, form atmosphere, or even mislead a reader.

And expansion of what I put in my last post, so I vote for the latter.

 

[SecondCircle]

In your example, the clock is important, it contributes to the scene. That is enough. I doubt the point of the gun going off two chapters later should be taken literally. It is a metaphor for being important in some way.

Aye, I noted as much. Which is actually the point. Lotta times when folks see this kind of metaphorical advice, they tend to take it quite literally. One might have looked at my clock and said, "That clock had nothing to do with the story, so scratch it." While missing the very point of the clock being symbolic. Or missing the point that rooms can have clocks. Which is "setting".

I agree about your lady walking the dog. This is often what happens to me as I spoke of earlier. I might include a simple "lady walking her dog" just as simple setting or nuance. Later I may take that simple little thing and weave it right into something crucial... like, she walks her dog and was actually the key witness that found the body that the protagonist has to return to (this will happen midstream often with me, as opposed to a drawing board scenario). Then it becomes an Easter egg as you say.

 

[Hypoxia]

The firearm on the wall could be symbolic of a player's military or police past, or hunting or marksmanship prowess, or aesthetic sense (if any), or collecting proclivities, or sexual orientation (if it's a blunderbuss). Or it might only be a random bit of an author's laziness.

I like plot gerbils that establish atmosphere. (Plot gerbil: trivia that chews its way into the story.) One of my characters raised tarantulas when she was a girl; they escaped and infested the house, much to the chagrin of family and neighbors. This account only serves to show that she's determined and nutz. (The reality was lizards.) I could and did SAY that she's determined and nutz, but the description helps SHOW that.

I'm not sure that I write any "IT" into my stories for readers to find. I'm only spinning tales or expostulating or being snarky, hopefully being somewhat entertaining.

 

[legerdemer]

Ummmm...

met·a·phor
ˈmedəˌfôr,ˈmedəˌfər/
noun
a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable.
"“I had fallen through a trapdoor of depression,” said Mark, who was fond of theatrical metaphors"

synonyms: figure of speech, image, trope, analogy, comparison, symbol, word painting/picture

"the profusion of metaphors in her everyday speech has gotten pretty tiresome"
a thing regarded as representative or symbolic of something else, especially something abstract.

"the amounts of money being lost by the company were enough to make it a metaphor for an industry that was teetering"

Thank you, Google.

 

[sr71plt]

lit-er-al-ly
adv.

How seven-eighths of Literotica writers take forum writing guidance.



Thank you, reality.

 

[TxRad]

lit-er-al-ly
adv.

How seven-eighths of Literotica writers take forum writing guidance.



Thank you, reality.

The one thing that makes me highly suspicious of writing advice from the pros is the price tag on the book. Not to mention the fact that if they had a true secret, they wouldn't part with it for any amount of money. It would be truly priceless.

Writing is more or less common sense and what works for you. Even the fantasy parts.