Arcs and flaws

[astushkin]

I recently read some advice for aspiring writers encouraging (1) the development of character arcs (characters being changed by the events of the story) and, (2) the inclusion of flawed protagonists (non-perfect people whose flaw affects the story). As someone who has primarily used the “unmet need” trope to structure my erotic stories, I thought following these suggestions would be a good challenge for my next story, but as I pondered it further, several questions arose.

Are character arcs important? Are they even realistic? In real life, under normal circumstances, most people don’t change in basic character or values --- so why should they in fiction? Considering popular mainstream genres such as crime fiction and romance, the protagonists in these --- the detective and the romantic couple --- don’t usually fundamentally change over the course of the story. Perhaps erotica is a genre that doesn’t require this type of character arc.

What about flaws? In my escapist erotic stories, I haven’t written truly flawed protagonists (perhaps a too nice male, or a shy quiet female). The kind of flaws that remind me of the classic interview question: What are your weaknesses? Answer: I’m too much of a perfectionist. (Or some other humble brag.)

Have you ever written a significantly flawed protagonist who was supposed to be sympathetic? If so, how was it received? What kind of true flaws would you/readers tolerate and still like the character? And would the answer be different for male and female characters?

 

[NotWise]

Are character arcs important? Are they even realistic? In real life, under normal circumstances, most people don’t change in basic character or values --- so why should they in fiction? Considering popular mainstream genres such as crime fiction and romance, the protagonists in these --- the detective and the romantic couple --- don’t usually fundamentally change over the course of the story. Perhaps erotica is a genre that doesn’t require this type of character arc.

You don't really need character arcs in basic erotica, but you can use them if you're telling a story. The changes don't have to be fundamental. The character can remain the character. Maybe they've learned something, or done something that might shape their future.

What about flaws? In my escapist erotic stories, I haven’t written truly flawed protagonists (perhaps a too nice male, or a shy quiet female). The kind of flaws that remind me of the classic interview question: What are your weaknesses? Answer: I’m too much of a perfectionist. (Or some other humble brag.)

Have you ever written a significantly flawed protagonist who was supposed to be sympathetic? If so, how was it received? What kind of true flaws would you/readers tolerate and still like the character? And would the answer be different for male and female characters?

I was accused of not developing my male characters, so I set out to write a story with a bit more effort in the character. The story was hard to categorize (romance and violent sex) and few people have read it, so it's hard to gauge success.

That character (Aaron, in 'Quarter to Midnight') was a rapist and an arrogant jerk. He was the guy that put his life on the line for a girl (Renee), and didn't tell her about it because the outcome let him control her. He was impulsive. He was remorseful.

I took Aaron's flaws to the point that AwkwardMD called him an antihero. I don't think you have to take it that far. But people have flaws, and flaws can produce conflict, and I think all that goes to making characters more real.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Are character arcs important? Are they even realistic? In real life, under normal circumstances, most people don’t change in basic character or values --- so why should they in fiction? Considering popular mainstream genres such as crime fiction and romance, the protagonists in these --- the detective and the romantic couple --- don’t usually fundamentally change over the course of the story. Perhaps erotica is a genre that doesn’t require this type of character arc.

It depends very much on the kind of erotica you're writing. At the "stroke" end of things, I'd agree that it's not necessary (which is not to say that it can't be done). OTOH, at the "story" end of things, character development can be very important.

"Most people" is a distraction here - at any given moment, most people are doing something dull that doesn't make for good erotica. What are interesting people doing? Change is often interesting, and that makes it an attractive thing to read about.

I'd agree with your statement that detective fiction doesn't usually involve character change, but strenuously disagree for romance. Character change is a major element in that genre; "these two schmucks are made for one another but they have to work through their shit and grow up a bit before they can be happy together" is a very common storyline that goes all the way back to "Pride and Prejudice". The one-sided version "can her love redeem this bad boy?" version is also pretty popular, see e.g. 50 Shades of Grey.

It can be played the other way too. One romance I read recently was about two people who've both been badly hurt by life but end up forming a healthy relationship where they help one another work through those individual issues.

What about flaws? In my escapist erotic stories, I haven’t written truly flawed protagonists (perhaps a too nice male, or a shy quiet female). The kind of flaws that remind me of the classic interview question: What are your weaknesses? Answer: I’m too much of a perfectionist. (Or some other humble brag.)

Have you ever written a significantly flawed protagonist who was supposed to be sympathetic? If so, how was it received? What kind of true flaws would you/readers tolerate and still like the character? And would the answer be different for male and female characters?

Nadja from Loss Function is an abrasive bully. Her first introduction to Patricia (narrator and her future wife) is at a point where Nadja is an influential academic and Patricia is just a student helping organise a conference; Nadja insults and belittles Patricia because somebody else stole her lunch.

Part of my challenge to myself for that story was to make Nadja sympathetic, and to get readers understanding how Patricia could end up falling in love with her, without minimising the shitty things that she does. She is a badly flawed person who's learned some pretty toxic lessons - apologising is weakness and weakness is death - but she's also aware of her flaws and trying, not always successfully, to be better. I figured that might be something readers could relate to, both the experience of being that person and the experience of loving somebody like that.

Was she well received? Well, the story was. Always a little hard to pick apart the different factors that go into story scores etc., but I suspect Nadja was a big part of what people liked in that one.

 

[ElectricBlue]

As noted above, it comes down to the length and the weight of a story, and what the characters do within it.

Many of my stories are slices of life, where something spicy happens within the mundane. As a consequence, they're more about mood than plot, and an overall character arc isn't really necessary - ordinary people leading ordinary lives, a meeting, a frisson, a sudden purpose. You just need to be alive to have that.

Longer stories, novella or novel length, obviously lend themselves more readily to more complex character development, but even so, you can have entertainment without it. Or you can have full blown existentialist agony, but that's not always erotic. Use what's fit for purpose, I'd say.

 

[astushkin]

Fair point about romance books --- Pride and Prejudice is a good example (although we eventually learn Mr. Darcy, has always been fundamentally a good guy). I'm probably overly influenced by the recent examples of the genre I've read in which the characters have been disappointingly flat.

Thanks to you and NotWise for pointing out your stories with flawed characters; I'll check them out.

 

[astushkin]

As for where I'd draw the line for flaws in a character to still be likeable? I don't know. I wanted to say cruelty, but there are characters I like who were intentionally cruel to people in their lives because they thought they had to be. I'd say my line moves based on who the character is presented as and the choices they make throughout. If someone is intentionally cruel while continuing to put the blame onto other people instead of looking inward for the problem, that would probably be my baseline for unlikable. It's one thing to be cruel knowingly while accepting that you did a bad thing for what you thought was a good reason, it's another to never accept that you did a bad thing in the first place. I like redemption and second chances so flawed characters have a lot of draw for me.

Yeah --- I was mocking myself for the lightweight 'flaws' I've given my protagonists so far. That's why I'm curious to try something that pushes the boundaries. I agree that cruelty and dishonesty might be a hard no. I was also contemplating whether certain character traits are more likely to have negative implications in females than males. In my own experience as an introvert, I've been criticized/teased for being quiet in social gatherings, while equally quiet males in the room don't get any flak.

I'll likely give the arcs and real flaws a go, especially since I write very long stories anyway. If only I had an idea for my next story...sigh.

 

[SimonDoom]

I think erotica always benefits from a little tension and at least a little arc. So, even in a short erotic story, character A starts at point X, and at the end of the story ends up point Y, and character A has some trait B that creates a barrier to making the passage, making the passage more interesting and (I think) erotic.

So, for example. I've written several 750 word stories. It's hard in 750 words to tell a story that delves deeply into character flaws or creates much of a story arc. But there are things you can do to suggest these things and give more richness and erotic appeal to the story.

In my 750-word story California Dogging, a housewife drives into the hills near her home to have anonymous sex with a group of men. There's not much time to convey character flaws or arc. But I note that she has a husband and kids and that it's her first time. I tried in a few words to convey that her encounter was fraught with conflict and resistance, but that she couldn't help herself. She had the experience, and at the end she had to get back to husband and kids, but she knew she'd be back. So she'd moved from point X to point Y, with some tension, in 750 words. It's much more erotic to me than if it was something she'd done dozens of times in the world and there was no tension or anxiety left.

But others may have different tastes regarding what's "erotic," and that's fine too.

 

[tenyari]

I recently read some advice for aspiring writers encouraging (1) the development of character arcs (characters being changed by the events of the story) and, (2) the inclusion of flawed protagonists (non-perfect people whose flaw affects the story). As someone who has primarily used the “unmet need” trope to structure my erotic stories, I thought following these suggestions would be a good challenge for my next story, but as I pondered it further, several questions arose.

Yeah.

When starting a story the best way to approach it is "what is the problem that we need to resolve?"

And when writing a character the best way to begin is "what is wrong with this person that keeps them from being able to easily resolve the story above?"

That gives you plot and drama right out of the gate.

My stories that have sat unfinished for years usually do so because I missed being clear on those two points when I first started them.


I have a few stories that are a couple of hundred pages of wonderfully consistent, logically held together, highly erotic settings and characters - that all just keep doing 'a day in the life' and which have never been posted / published because there was no drama.

 

[yowser]

When starting a story the best way to approach it is "what is the problem that we need to resolve?"

And when writing a character the best way to begin is "what is wrong with this person that keeps them from being able to easily resolve the story above?"

That gives you plot and drama right out of the gate.

My stories that have sat unfinished for years usually do so because I missed being clear on those two points when I first started them.

Astute observations.

When readers start a story they have all manner of questions about what will happen. Who are these people? What do they want?

Author, tell me something, toss me something, even if you are just teasing me. Let me know you are in control. Make me want to read more...

For the author to start from those standpoints means movement begins immediately.

And I agree with the 'sat unfinished' set of stories, I think you give excellent reasons for what they need.

 

[Jackie.Hikaru]

Yeah.

When starting a story the best way to approach it is "what is the problem that we need to resolve?"

And when writing a character the best way to begin is "what is wrong with this person that keeps them from being able to easily resolve the story above?"

That gives you plot and drama right out of the gate.

This is pretty much my framework for writing.
Rather than thinking about flaws to give my characters, I try to think about what their internal and/or external conflicts are. These will usually manifest as character 'flaws' while writing and often in ways that surprise me (for better or worse).

 

[Lifestyle66]

I wrote my first five stories and posted them here on LitE over a year ago, before I contacted an editor. When the editor gave me some suggestions to change one of the stories by having the wife say or do something else, I replied "That would be out of character for her." His response was "Well, I wouldn't know that because you didn't build her character."

I decided to rewrite my stories and prepared three chapters in the series specifically to build the MC husband and wife to show why they were so open to change from monogamy to a swinging lifestyle later after the kids were out of the house. As my series progresses, I'm further changing the wife to become Bi. And my latest LIFESTYLE CH. 11 - DEMONS PAST shows why she's such an "in charge" bitch ("bitch" is a term of endearment between the husband and wife) but she loves her husband for taking her away from a bad family life and meeting all her sex needs.

So, while erotic short stories don't necessarily need a character arc, longer series or reusing the characters in other stories would require some character consistency and explanations for changes later.

As for flawed characters, I introduced a couple in Chapter 8 specifically for a swinger husband to be insecure and over-controlling his wife's wild behavior to use as a new couple who introduces the MCs to house parties. And in the house party, I have an obnoxious braggart guy for the MC wife to "put in his place". So, in walking this MC couple through their experiences among swingers, the flawed characters they find make the world more real.

 

[NeonRabbit]

I recently read some advice for aspiring writers encouraging (1) the development of character arcs (characters being changed by the events of the story) and, (2) the inclusion of flawed protagonists (non-perfect people whose flaw affects the story). As someone who has primarily used the “unmet need” trope to structure my erotic stories, I thought following these suggestions would be a good challenge for my next story, but as I pondered it further, several questions arose.

Are character arcs important? Are they even realistic? In real life, under normal circumstances, most people don’t change in basic character or values --- so why should they in fiction? Considering popular mainstream genres such as crime fiction and romance, the protagonists in these --- the detective and the romantic couple --- don’t usually fundamentally change over the course of the story. Perhaps erotica is a genre that doesn’t require this type of character arc.

What about flaws? In my escapist erotic stories, I haven’t written truly flawed protagonists (perhaps a too nice male, or a shy quiet female). The kind of flaws that remind me of the classic interview question: What are your weaknesses? Answer: I’m too much of a perfectionist. (Or some other humble brag.)

Have you ever written a significantly flawed protagonist who was supposed to be sympathetic? If so, how was it received? What kind of true flaws would you/readers tolerate and still like the character? And would the answer be different for male and female characters?

Not if you don't want to. I mean the question remains though, why is this happening now?

For me, I see arcs in life all the time, people coming from one state to and go to another. Some go up, some go down, but arcs do happen in life.

As for flawed characters, why not have them flawed? They are more entertaining that way and they're also more relatable. Romance heroines always have some kind of imperfection so the average house frau could relate. There is no difference here. Yes, escapism is important, but your characters still need something to work around. Otherwise why write it?

 

[astushkin]

Perhaps my internal debate is generated by the degree to which I am taking each of these concepts.

If by arcs one is talking about changes in scenery or financial status, then sure, I'm already doing that in my stories. My impression was that the article was advising writers to create arcs where characters change significantly. I understand that notion might be held up as an ideal --- the ability to grow and change. But my observation is that in real life, I rarely see examples of such. In politics, in places like Reddit's AITA --- I've rarely encountered a person who, when confronted by evidence that refutes their stance on an issue, pauses to contemplate it and revises their view; instead, most seem to dismiss the evidence and become even more entrenched in their position (in all political camps). Or examples of behavior on AITA --- do people in such scenarios ever ponder their own behavior and say, "Hey, you know, I might have acted like an asshole." Indeed, many people seem to take pride in sticking to their positions come hell or high water, and deride those whose stance evolves.

I'm just playing devil's advocate in suggesting that this writing advice promotes unrealistic characters. But to play double devil's advocate --- if that idea appeals to readers, then why not use it? Perhaps I should just consider the 'significant character arc' as just another tool in the bag of escapist writing.

As for flaws, I'm wondering how far a writer can go in endowing protagonists with significant flaws. There seem to be certain common, accepted tropes for so-called character flaws in stories (in general, not specifically erotic stories). For males: rebel, bad-boy, womanizer (to a degree), uncommunicative, out-of-touch with his feelings. For females: rebel, sassy, impulsive, shy, indecisive, sexually repressed/hesitant. These being options, of course, not all at once in a single character. (And I'm talking about personality 'flaws', not physical traits that don't match society's stereotypes of 'attractiveness'. Nor am I endorsing that these personality traits should be considered 'flaws'.)

I appreciate all the thoughtful responses. I understand there is no one-size-fits-all approach to writing, especially erotica. I thought it was an interesting topic and was curious how other erotica writers would interpret it. I plan to try it in my next story --- more significant flaws, anyway.

 

[NotWise]

Perhaps my internal debate is generated by the degree to which I am taking each of these concepts.

If by arcs one is talking about changes in scenery or financial status, then sure, I'm already doing that in my stories. My impression was that the article was advising writers to create arcs where characters change significantly. I understand that notion might be held up as an ideal --- the ability to grow and change. But my observation is that in real life, I rarely see examples of such. In politics, in places like Reddit's AITA --- I've rarely encountered a person who, when confronted by evidence that refutes their stance on an issue, pauses to contemplate it and revises their view; instead, most seem to dismiss the evidence and become even more entrenched in their position (in all political camps). Or examples of behavior on AITA --- do people in such scenarios ever ponder their own behavior and say, "Hey, you know, I might have acted like an asshole." Indeed, many people seem to take pride in sticking to their positions come hell or high water, and deride those whose stance evolves.

How much of your opinion are you basing on social media?

An argument on Reddit is probably not going to change anyone's life or opinion. A relationship, an accident, a death, a rise or fall in financial status, incarceration, and any number of other effects can alter a person's direction in life. Even good sex (or bad sex) could change someone's outlook and direction.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Perhaps my internal debate is generated by the degree to which I am taking each of these concepts.

If by arcs one is talking about changes in scenery or financial status, then sure, I'm already doing that in my stories. My impression was that the article was advising writers to create arcs where characters change significantly. I understand that notion might be held up as an ideal --- the ability to grow and change. But my observation is that in real life, I rarely see examples of such. In politics, in places like Reddit's AITA --- I've rarely encountered a person who, when confronted by evidence that refutes their stance on an issue, pauses to contemplate it and revises their view; instead, most seem to dismiss the evidence and become even more entrenched in their position (in all political camps). Or examples of behavior on AITA --- do people in such scenarios ever ponder their own behavior and say, "Hey, you know, I might have acted like an asshole." Indeed, many people seem to take pride in sticking to their positions come hell or high water, and deride those whose stance evolves.

Forum debates are the last place to look for people having reversals of opinion. It's much harder for people to back down from a position after they've publicly declared it and ego lies in the balance, and AITA is a place where people very often go seeking validation.

(But, FWIW, one does see people on AITA changing their minds in response to feedback, now and then.)

As for flaws, I'm wondering how far a writer can go in endowing protagonists with significant flaws.

The Collector; American Psycho; Richard III; Natural Born Killers; Downfall; the later Hannibal Lecter stuff. I can go on but hopefully I've made my point. If anything, I'd have said authors and readers are sometimes too eager to empathise even with outright monstrous characters.

 

[SimonDoom]

The Collector; American Psycho; Richard III; Natural Born Killers; Downfall; the later Hannibal Lecter stuff. I can go on but hopefully I've made my point. If anything, I'd have said authors and readers are sometimes too eager to empathise even with outright monstrous characters.

These examples also point out something interesting, which is that "flaws" and "arcs" don't necessarily go together.

Hannibal Lecter, in Silence of the Lambs, does not in any meaningful way "grow." He has no arc, except to the limited extent that by the end of the film he sees Clarice as someone worthy of his respect that he does not want to kill or eat. So perhaps that's something. Clarice is the main protagonist of the story, but Hannibal in a way is a secondary protagonist, because -- face it -- don't you kind of root for him, as awful as he is, to get away? I think the movie clearly wants you to. You are horrified and repelled by his actions, but there's just a sliver of something appealing about someone who rejects basic morality and gets away with it. There's a little part of most of us that wants to do that. A flaw, treated carefully, can be a way of making us fascinated in a character and even find him or her appealing in an odd way, even if that character never grows in any meaningful sense.

 

[NeonRabbit]

Perhaps my internal debate is generated by the degree to which I am taking each of these concepts.

If by arcs one is talking about changes in scenery or financial status, then sure, I'm already doing that in my stories. My impression was that the article was advising writers to create arcs where characters change significantly. I understand that notion might be held up as an ideal --- the ability to grow and change. But my observation is that in real life, I rarely see examples of such. In politics, in places like Reddit's AITA --- I've rarely encountered a person who, when confronted by evidence that refutes their stance on an issue, pauses to contemplate it and revises their view; instead, most seem to dismiss the evidence and become even more entrenched in their position (in all political camps). Or examples of behavior on AITA --- do people in such scenarios ever ponder their own behavior and say, "Hey, you know, I might have acted like an asshole." Indeed, many people seem to take pride in sticking to their positions come hell or high water, and deride those whose stance evolves.

I'm just playing devil's advocate in suggesting that this writing advice promotes unrealistic characters. But to play double devil's advocate --- if that idea appeals to readers, then why not use it? Perhaps I should just consider the 'significant character arc' as just another tool in the bag of escapist writing.

As for flaws, I'm wondering how far a writer can go in endowing protagonists with significant flaws. There seem to be certain common, accepted tropes for so-called character flaws in stories (in general, not specifically erotic stories). For males: rebel, bad-boy, womanizer (to a degree), uncommunicative, out-of-touch with his feelings. For females: rebel, sassy, impulsive, shy, indecisive, sexually repressed/hesitant. These being options, of course, not all at once in a single character. (And I'm talking about personality 'flaws', not physical traits that don't match society's stereotypes of 'attractiveness'. Nor am I endorsing that these personality traits should be considered 'flaws'.)

I appreciate all the thoughtful responses. I understand there is no one-size-fits-all approach to writing, especially erotica. I thought it was an interesting topic and was curious how other erotica writers would interpret it. I plan to try it in my next story --- more significant flaws, anyway.

I just want to write a good story with dynamic characters who make choices. If they aren't impacting the world around them what's the point of writing them.

Fiction is by design heightened reality. It can reflect society, but it's still a story. The example of Hannibal Lector is a good one because I would argue that he does grow and change. He falls in love with Clarice in as much as he can. He is fundamentally a different person by the end of the film. Clarice too, although there can be some debate to be made that Lector is the true antagonist of the piece. He and Clarice are playing a game where Clarice believes she's learning from him when in reality he played her.

Arcs are important to stories and your characters will be altered by the end even if they discard the lesson they still took the class. Or to put it another way you never step in the same river twice because both you and the river have changed.

 

[astushkin]

Arcs are important to stories and your characters will be altered by the end even if they discard the lesson they still took the class. Or to put it another way you never step in the same river twice because both you and the river have changed.

A great way to put it! The changes in the arc don't have to smack you in the face.

 

[LdyHoneybee]

That is a good question. Something should happen, yes, in a story and often it happens to a character. I have things that I work on offline, and my favorite character/“child” is a very complicated individual who is viewed by some as dangerous and difficult and unpredictably violent (“mad” as he styles himself) and by others as perfectly sane, talented, vulnerable and kind. It is always a risk. Look at how passionately HP and Marvel fans argue about whether Snape and Loki are good or evil. One of the most interesting character arcs I have seen was Jaime’s in GoT. You hate him at first; Martin gives him a viewpoint and he has some misfortunes and learns the right lessons; he becomes a sympathetic person who ended up being the character I, at least, cared most about (and I am appending here the movies because i have decided that Martin has given up on finishing the series himself). They rushed the change in Dany, so it was not successful, but if they had spent another three or four episodes building it, that also would have been interesting.

Is it a requirement for a character to have a character arc, however? I don’t think so. Many successful characters don’t if a story is more plot oriented. But *something* has to happen because change is more engaging than stasis. Just my thoughts..

 

[SamScribble]

Is it a requirement for a character to have a character arc, however? I don’t think so. Many successful characters don’t if a story is more plot oriented. But *something* has to happen because change is more engaging than stasis. Just my thoughts..

I'm pretty much with you, LdyHoneybee. I think that I am quoting the late great Elmore Leonard when I say that 'all readers really care about is: What happened next?'

 

[geekstyle]

Conflicts are a great way to create character arcs. Flaws are especially useful to create conflicts. The flaws doesn't have to be anything major, as long as it creates the conflict and pushes the plot. Especially in sex stories.

By definition, a story usually requires some kind of conflicts. Though with stories about sex, you can do without conflicts.

Compare the two stories:

Story A: Boy likes girl. Girl likes boy. They have sex. No conflict. No flaws. It's a sex story.

Story B:

- Boy likes girl. Girl likes boy. But girl is (unhappily) married. There's the conflict.

- Girl wants to have sex with boy and tried to seduce him (she's flawed). Boy's a virgin. He wants to lose his virginity and really really like girl. But he hated adultery (flaw) because his dad banged the secretary and destroyed the family. Another conflict.

- But boy decides to have sex with girl anyway because he's horny (he's flawed). He convinced himself the marriage was already ruined whether he had sex with girl or not (he's flawed). He had sex with the girl and liked it a lot. He's in love with her. Then he found out the girl was going to try to repair the marriage (conflict), but he didn't want to stop having sex with her (he was flawed).

- At the same time, he saw the damages he had done to her family (conflict).

How he choose to respond would create the character arc. He could either grow (positive arc) or he could decline (negative arc).

A flaw is only useful to create the tension. If your setting's a polyamorous/swinging relationship type, adultery is not a flaw. But in a traditional relationship setting, adultery is a huge flaw.

Summary: Conflicts are a great way to create character arcs. It puts people in situation where they needed to respond. A flaw helps to decide what the character will do in that conflict. A character arc can be positive or negative, depending on what he does in a conflict.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I'm pretty much with you, LdyHoneybee. I think that I am quoting the late great Elmore Leonard when I say that 'all readers really care about is: What happened next?'

AKA "dramatic tension".

I think where "conflict" comes into the picture is that it's a popular and often effective way for creating that tension. Conflict sets up the questions of "which power is going to prevail?" and/or "how will that power prevail?" and there's a lot one can do with those.

I don't think conflict, or even tension more broadly, are absolutely essential to a story. But working without them increases the difficulty hugely, and it's hard to think of successful examples.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I don't think conflict, or even tension more broadly, are absolutely essential to a story. But working without them increases the difficulty hugely, and it's hard to think of successful examples.

I dunno. I've got a bunch of stories that are low on plot, high on mood and the moment, with not much conflict or tension.

I have one story (The Floating World] which AwkwardMD reviewed and said many nice things, but also said there seems to be lots of walking around, not much tension or conflict going on. I replied, that was the point: in Pete Townshend's words,
"Living out a life in sweet ennui
Exquisitely bored in California"

But, it's also my most commented on story, all favourable, so there you go.

 

[LdyHoneybee]

I dunno. I've got a bunch of stories that are low on plot, high on mood and the moment, with not much conflict or tension.

I have one story (The Floating World] which AwkwardMD reviewed and said many nice things, but also said there seems to be lots of walking around, not much tension or conflict going on. I replied, that was the point: in Pete Townshend's words,
"Living out a life in sweet ennui
Exquisitely bored in California"

But, it's also my most commented on story, all favourable, so there you go.

As someone for whom plot is a challenge, I find that inspiring. I have had a whole set up for “the next one” for several weeks, and I still have not worked out “what will happen.”

 

[JGittes]

I dunno. I've got a bunch of stories that are low on plot, high on mood and the moment, with not much conflict or tension.

I have one story (The Floating World] which AwkwardMD reviewed and said many nice things, but also said there seems to be lots of walking around, not much tension or conflict going on. I replied, that was the point: in Pete Townshend's words,
"Living out a life in sweet ennui
Exquisitely bored in California"

But, it's also my most commented on story, all favourable, so there you go.

I couldn't agree with you more. I'm sick of conflict in the real world and sick of it in fiction. A couple of years ago, I started reading romance novels because I couldn't stand the torture porn masquerading as Nordic Noir, edgy thrillers. I don't care if the detective is a glass-ceilinged female who is never taken seriously. It's torture porn.

A long life well lived. Sex with people you care about. Elvis comes to mind. "What so funny 'bout peace, love, and understanding."