Anyone break the fourth wall in a story?

[Dnthmn_19]

I could use the help of some real authors and readers. I’m writing a story in which the character is experiencing a very massive and intense prostate orgasm for the first time. Here is how I’m describing it.

I have a longish description of the muscle contractions and feelings before this pgh…

“Fffffffuuuuuuuuucccccccckkkkkkk…” Alan half exhaled, half moaned and a third half cried out… (yes, that makes three halves, that’s how fucking intense it was.)

I’m sort of writing in third person limited perspective, so that might seem jarring or might seem kind of funny. I hardly know the first thing from writing, and I sort of don’t care if it’s acceptable, but have other people, broken the fourth wall?
I’m def gonna keep it in, but interested to hear from other writers.

I'm sorry, you're really going to hate my feedback, but I don't like it. To me, a 66 year old former professional writer, it comes across as vulgar and ignorant.

What does "cccccccckkkkkk" even sound like? Clearing a throat, or hocking a gob? Do YOU do that when you have an orgasm? Yuck.

"(yes, that makes three halves, that’s how fucking intense it was" - I hate when people use "fucking" as a modifier.

I won't go on.

 

[AlinaX]

Characters using it is one thing, but it can be jarring for an author / narrator to use 'fucking' as a modifier, especially when it's directed at the reader as it is here.

 

[Britva415]

have other people, broken the fourth wall?

I feel like 99% of first-person perspective stories break the 4th wall from start to finish. By not providing any in-universe motivation and justification/explanation for addressing the audience, or any in-universe identity for that audience. This automatically means the out-of-universe reader on the other side of the 4th wall is who's being addressed by the 1p narration.

I'm not saying this as a cutesy, pedantic, technical "gotcha." I find this to be a fairly serious flaw in the vast majority of 1pPOV stories.

 

[AlinaX]

Fair point, although I don't think it's limited to first person.

One think that I do feel is important, particularly for first person, is establishing the when of the narration, at least in the author's head if nowhere else.

 

[RejectReality]

I feel like 99% of first-person perspective stories break the 4th wall from start to finish. By not providing any in-universe motivation and justification/explanation for addressing the audience, or any in-universe identity for that audience. This automatically means the out-of-universe reader on the other side of the 4th wall is who's being addressed by the 1p narration.

I'm not saying this as a cutesy, pedantic, technical "gotcha." I find this to be a fairly serious flaw in the vast majority of 1pPOV stories.

In-universe? Flaw?

Who else would the narrator be telling the story to? The "in-universe" reader is the person reading the story.

 

[Britva415]

In-universe? Flaw?

Who else would the narrator be telling the story to? The "in-universe" reader is the person reading the story.

They're telling it to theirself?

I don't buy that - not from a storytelling perspective, nor from a literary criticism perspective.

I mean, I'm not saying a story can't be written that way, but what I am saying is that, if that's what it is, in the particular story, then the story needs to reveal that. If it doesn't, then, that's the very flaw I'm talking about.

Do you have any sort of citation for this idea? The idea that it's a conventional assumption in linguistic literacy that a first-person POV story is automatically intended by the author to be read as a character narrating their own experience or memory to theirself? That this is something readers are supposed to just know, without the story spelling it out?

Or even if un-citable, did someone ever tell you this or is it just an idea you came up with to tell yourself?

EDIT:
Sorry, I read that wrong, I read it as "the in-universe reader is the person telling the story."

But I still have a major problem with the idea that the reader is in-universe. Saying I, the reader, am a character in the story universe, is like saying there's a character who has no name, no identity, no role, no motivation, no action, no description, no relationships, no presence, no nothing in the story. That's completely contrary to what "a character" is.

If the author would give the hearer/reader even just one or more of those things, in the text of the story, that would be a step toward justifying 1pPOV. But they rarely do. Or even if the reader is someone the narrator (or, the in-universe "author") doesn't or can't know, because their intention was to tell the story so that someone, anyone, sometime, anytime, could receive it, that also should be part of the story. The narrator also needs a motivation in that regard.

I'm not saying it's necessarily a fatal flaw to utterly ignore these details, but I can't be convinced that it's not a flaw at all. And I absolutely have read stories where it is a fatal flaw, because the story doesn't make sense without understanding why the narrator is telling it to me.

I mean, I guess that that's a story which has far, far more and greater flaws than just the failure to either justify or make any use of the special potential storytelling power 1pPOV can have, but when a story which is that bad makes me give up and stop reading, it's often with the thought, "Why are they telling me this? Who am I to them? I don't get it and I guess I don't want to anymore."

 

[Britva415]

Who else would the narrator be telling the story to?

That's exactly 100% my point. When the text of the story gives me absolutely no idea at all what the answer to this question is, it's a flaw.

I'm not satisfied that the answer is simply, "well, you, the reader, duhh." (It's not unconvincing, because I can tell there are authors who intend it this way, but it's not satisfying.)

The in-universe narrator can't possibly know me - they're imaginary, c'mon. Unless they show me how, which then creates an imaginary version of me, or else makes me an imaginary person who isn't even intended to be me at all. I also accept that for some of these stories, it's not about me personally at all, but some other imaginary audience - but they're still not showing me who.

For this real-life living flesh-and-blood non-fictional reader, me, to have no information whatsoever about these imaginary constructs the author put into the narrator's world and the narrator is relating to in this way, that's a flaw.

 

[RejectReality]

They're telling it to theirself?

I don't buy that - not from a storytelling perspective, nor from a literary criticism perspective.

I mean, I'm not saying a story can't be written that way, but what I am saying is that, if that's what it is, in the particular story, then the story needs to reveal that. If it doesn't, then, that's the very flaw I'm talking about.

Do you have any sort of citation for this idea? The idea that it's a conventional assumption in linguistic literacy that a first-person POV story is automatically intended by the author to be read as a character narrating their own experience or memory to theirself? That this is something readers are supposed to just know, without the story spelling it out?

Or even if un-citable, did someone ever tell you this or is it just an idea you came up with to tell yourself?

EDIT:
Sorry, I read that wrong, I read it as "the in-universe reader is the person telling the story."

But I still have a major problem with the idea that the reader is in-universe. Saying I, the reader, am a character in the story universe, is like saying there's a character who has no name, no identity, no role, no motivation, no action, no description, no relationships, no presence, no nothing in the story. That's completely contrary to what "a character" is.

If the author would give the hearer/reader even just one or more of those things, in the text of the story, that would be a step toward justifying 1pPOV. But they rarely do. Or even if the reader is someone the narrator (or, the in-universe "author") doesn't or can't know, because their intention was to tell the story so that someone, anyone, sometime, anytime, could receive it, that also should be part of the story. The narrator also needs a motivation in that regard.

I'm not saying it's necessarily a fatal flaw to utterly ignore these details, but I can't be convinced that it's not a flaw at all. And I absolutely have read stories where it is a fatal flaw, because the story doesn't make sense without understanding why the narrator is telling it to me.

I mean, I guess that that's a story which has far, far more and greater flaws than just the failure to either justify or make best use of 1pPOV and the special potential storytelling power it has, but when a story which is that bad makes me give up and stop reading, it's often with the thought, "Why are they telling me this? Who am I to them? I don't get it and I guess I don't want to anymore."

I can kind of understand if you're setting up some sci-fi/fantasy world, but most of what we're talking about here are fuck stories set in what's essentially our world. There's not a whole helluva lot to explain. I can't recall ever writing anything with even the slightest otherworld tangents in first person.

As to who they are, that's up to the reader as well. They've sought out this story by coming to Lit, browsing, seeing something interesting, and clicking on the story. Most of mine are written as if they're exactly what they are — written work — and they're very generically addressing multiple readers over a period of time. So their motivation and setting are exactly what they're experiencing.

 

[Britva415]

I can kind of understand if you're setting up some sci-fi/fantasy world, but most of what we're talking about here are fuck stories set in what's essentially our world. There's not a whole helluva lot to explain. I can't recall ever writing anything with even the slightest otherworld tangents in first person.

As to who they are, that's up to the reader as well. They've sought out this story by coming to Lit, browsing, seeing something interesting, and clicking on the story. Most of mine are written as if they're exactly what they are — written work — and they're very generically addressing multiple readers over a period of time. So their motivation and setting are exactly what they're experiencing.

I didn't realize you were only talking about Lit stories. I was talking about writing in general.

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

I tend to write in a very conversational first person style where the fourth wall is more of a guideline than a code.

 

[RejectReality]

I didn't realize you were only talking about Lit stories. I was talking about writing in general.

The same really applies in general. If the setting is more or less reality, and it's not written to a "you", then what need is there to define the reader? The reader is the person reading, and their motivation is whatever caused them to open the page, the book, the audio book, or whatever.

Honestly, the reality component isn't even necessary. It requires a little suspension of disbelief, but that's required to enjoy a story set in a world not our own in the first place. If someone can't suspend their disbelief sufficiently to put themselves in the place of a reader from that world, they're not going to get far into the story anyway.

I find the whole concept of needing to define the reader baffling.

 

[SoCalAshley]

I have broken the fourth wall in a couple of my stories. This is perhaps my favorite:

At this point, I am sure you are thinking she said there would be sexual activity. No wonder no one reads stories in the Humor & Satire category.

Be patient, I have not turned eighteen yet.

 

[Britva415]

It requires a little suspension of disbelief

Absolutely.

All I'm saying is, there are stories which fail to assist with this (you don't disagree that "suspension of disbelief" can suffer from inadequate storytelling, do you?), and I've seen stories where this is more than a minor oversight/shortcoming/flaw.

One reason can be that there's something about the story which just makes it hard to believe the narrator would... narrate it.

Another can be that the story's just not good enough to overcome this nagging (to me) flaw.

Anyway, the topic is about the 4th wall and I'm just pointing out that without making it real clear that the in-universe narrator's intended audience is also in-universe, then, addressing the reader by narrating to them from 1pPOV is breaking the 4th wall.

People don't have to agree with me on that, but I probably won't be talked out of believing it. Someone could show me some particular story and I might agree that it doesn't apply to that particular story because of how it's framed, but I've seen too many stories which just wear the reader on their sleeve as the result of un-framed 1pPOV writing for any attempt to talk me out of the entire idea to succeed.

 

[RejectReality]

Absolutely.

All I'm saying is, there are stories which fail to assist with this (you don't disagree that "suspension of disbelief" can suffer from inadequate storytelling, do you?), and I've seen stories where this is more than a minor oversight/shortcoming/flaw.

One reason can be that there's something about the story which just makes it hard to believe the narrator would... narrate it.

Another can be that the story's just not good enough to overcome this nagging (to me) flaw.

Anyway, the topic is about the 4th wall and I'm just pointing out that without making it real clear that the in-universe narrator's intended audience is also in-universe, then, addressing the reader by narrating to them from 1pPOV is breaking the 4th wall.

People don't have to agree with me on that, but I probably won't be talked out of believing it. Someone could show me some particular story and I might agree that it doesn't apply to that particular story because of how it's framed, but I've seen too many stories which just wear the reader on their sleeve as the result of un-framed 1pPOV writing for any attempt to talk me out of the entire idea to succeed.

What's an example of it being done wrong? Here, mainstream, or anywhere.

 

[Britva415]

What's an example of it being done wrong? Here, mainstream, or anywhere.

See what you think of this one. It's not important to me if you do or don't recognize or agree with what I've been talking about, but here is a story I discussed last week. It's a recent commercial novel, so, whether you can, or care to, read it for yourself or not is up to you, but here's my explanation of why it failed to work: https://forum.literotica.com/threads/third-person-first-person-third-person.1601387/post-98090830.

I'm also not saying nobody could possibly ever do it well, I'm not dismissing the entire notion of 1pPOV: https://forum.literotica.com/threads/third-person-first-person-third-person.1601387/post-98095219

Anyway, I'm not over here pretending I'm better at this than anyone else, or that my armchair idea is more valid than anyone else's.

I'm not attacking anything anyone (here) has written. It's OK if a person is baffled by another person's ideas. Everyone's different.

I'm not challenging anyone's stories. I assume you have stories on Lit, though I haven't looked at your story page and don't remember if I've seen your name on any stories I've found and read here. I don't know if you write in 1pPOV. I have stories on Lit, and some of them are in 1pPOV, and I haven't overcome this problem, myself - at least, not in terms of framing.

When I write one of these (which I've resolved to stop doing because I haven't framed them well, myself), what I do hope is that I've written a good enough story that, if I personally were to read it (since I seem to be the only person who's sensitive to this), then the absence of frame wouldn't be glaring. And, as the author, I consider these stories of mine to have broken the 4th wall because the audience is not clearly in-universe. Even though they hypothetically could be, it's not framed that way in these stories. It's not framed at all, so, mea culpa.

 

[RejectReality]

Okay, the Peeps I Have Peeped is first person. Where is the failure? I'm reading this story on Literotica. I opened it because you mentioned writing in first person and failing this test somehow. There's the reader and the motivation. What more do I need? What sort of framework is required to put me in this universe? When you talk to the generic "me" through the fourth wall, I know who I am. The very act of you publishing the story and me opening the story frames it. There's no magic portals or weird aliens that I should understand by default as a listener/reader in this universe. It's locations that should be generally familiar to anyone who has left their home since birth.

I simply cannot grasp whatever it is you consider a failure here.

 

[Stimtheone]

Not exactly, but DE has a bit at the end where it essentially contains a threat that from them reading this they have allowed a god into this world (they have)

 

[Britva415]

Okay, the Peeps I Have Peeped is first person. Where is the failure?

I'll assume good faith and proceed as if you didn't put effort into cherry picking the ONE 1pPOV "story" of mine which explicitly is, and is presented as, diary/journal-style retellings of real-life happenings, and aimed directly at readers. Or make a point of picking my lowest-scored story to see if you could find a "gotcha" there.

But to answer your question, for the reasons I just spelled out, I don't consider that particular one to be a flawed 1pPOV story of mine. It doesn't even pretend to be a "story" at all, fiction wise. I barely even consider it "narration," it's more like just me talking. Speaking as the writer, in-universe/out-of-universe is irrelevant to that one, but I don't consider that to be true of my fiction.

I haven't spelled it out before now because I kind of thought it went without saying, but I'm drawing a difference between fictional story craft versus raw documentation, which is how I regard that particular title.

And so I invite you to read any of the "Genie" stories, or the "surprise 69 at a party" one (I forget the title just this moment but that phrase is in the description, easy enough to find).

I don't know if you'll see in those stories what it is that I've been calling, describing and explaining as the flaw, because you already don't see it in any other 1P stories you've ever read. But just to repeat myself, those stories of mine don't justify in any way whatsoever why the narrator is narrating this story, or who he expects to be receiving it, or why, or when, or how. So if you ever see a story - mine, or anyone else's - where any one, some or all of those elements are provided, then that's what I'm talking about when I say that a little effort goes a long way toward eliminating this factor which I'm calling a flaw. It's at least hanging a lampshade on the fact that someone's telling a story to some person for some reason. In my opinion, that fact is part of the fiction, whether it's explained or not.

I simply cannot grasp whatever it is you consider a failure here.

Simple - there's something missing, period, and I didn't fill in the blank. It's as simple as that. You have to realize I'm just explaining my point of view, I'm not trying to convince you you should think the same way. I explained an element which is important to me, and I explained that I left it out. Flaw. There's no more to it than that.

 

[RejectReality]

I'll assume good faith and proceed as if you didn't put effort into cherry picking the ONE 1pPOV "story" of mine which explicitly is, and is presented as, diary/journal-style retellings of real-life happenings, and aimed directly at readers. Or make a point of picking my lowest-scored story to see if you could find a "gotcha" there.

But to answer your question, for the reasons I just spelled out, I don't consider that particular one to be a flawed 1pPOV story of mine. It doesn't even pretend to be a "story" at all, fiction wise. I barely even consider it "narration," it's more like just me talking. Speaking as the writer, in-universe/out-of-universe is irrelevant to that one, but I don't consider that to be true of my fiction.

I haven't spelled it out before now because I kind of thought it went without saying, but I'm drawing a difference between fictional story craft versus raw documentation, which is how I regard that particular title.

And so I invite you to read any of the "Genie" stories, or the "surprise 69 at a party" one (I forget the title just this moment but that phrase is in the description, easy enough to find).

I don't know if you'll see in those stories what it is that I've been calling, describing and explaining as the flaw, because you already don't see it in any other 1P stories you've ever read. But just to repeat myself, those stories of mine don't justify in any way whatsoever why the narrator is narrating this story, or who he expects to be receiving it, or why, or when, or how. So if you ever see a story - mine, or anyone else's - where any one, some or all of those elements are provided, then that's what I'm talking about when I say that a little effort goes a long way toward eliminating this factor which I'm calling a flaw. It's at least hanging a lampshade on the fact that someone's telling a story to some person for some reason. In my opinion, that fact is part of the fiction, whether it's explained or not.


Simple - there's something missing, period, and I didn't fill in the blank. It's as simple as that. You have to realize I'm just explaining my point of view, I'm not trying to convince you you should think the same way. I explained an element which is important to me, and I explained that I left it out. Flaw. There's no more to it than that.

No motive. The description hinted at first person and it was a one-shot. Let me look up your profile again and I'll take a peek at the others.

And again, I see nothing that's a failure. The word Genie is enough to tell me that there's an element beyond realism. I enjoy fantasy ( my other two pen names are primarily fantasy work ) and I even participated in a genie chain story that had mostly real world settings. Not a leap for me at all.

I know I'm the reader, and I know the narrator is speaking to me in that capacity. I understand that there's probably fantasy elements from the get-go due to the title, and that's confirmed when the mention of a genie bottle is introduced not far in. I have all the framework I need. If this was the first ever genie in a bottle story, maybe I might be a little confused, but it's not. From that base, you can expand and move things in other directions and it shouldn't be that hard to follow. I only read a little way into the first page, but I can't see the story spiraling off into some ether that's beyond me from where I am at that point.

That's an example, as I requested. I still don't have even the foggiest clue where you're coming from, but okay. LOL I won't argue, because it's not even about convincing anyone. This narrative of failing to define the reader is where you're losing the plot for me. I can understand your stories just fine. It's whatever you think is wrong with them that has me scratching my head. I don't see it getting any clearer, so I'll let it go.

 

[Britva415]

This is from something I'm currently writing. I guess it counts as fourth-wall breaking, maybe? It's not egregrious but as an editorial aside, that last line strikes me as being outside the flow of the narrative enough that I think it counts. I mean, it's sort of intended to even without addressing the reader.

He started to fidget as the attention caused him to swell. Dressed commando, without underclothes, his jeans were irritating his peehole as his dick grew and moved inside them.

Circumcised life.

 

[LonRivers]

I think that it is only breaking the Fourth wall if the subject of the story addresses the reader directly. A perfect example being when Deadpool looks at the reader or the viewer (such as with the movies) and talks to us directly.

Or "Hey you, yes you, the guy holding your dick right now...save some stroke time for later because I have more juicy stuff coming your way!"

Or in your case: Alan half exhaled, half moaned and a third half cried out… (And, yes, Reader, I know that makes three halves, that’s how fucking intense it was.)

Breaking the Fourth Wall in text form is not as easy as it seems. You have to word it just right. It's easier to do with pictures or on film because you can actually see the character turning to address you.

In a story that I am currently writing the character is getting ready to pound one out in the shower and lubes up with hair conditioner. As the author I slip in a little tip about using Aussie brand hair conditioner. While the character is not breaking the Fourth Wall itself, I take the time to address the reader myself.

 

[Wonderer67]

Thanks for all your thoughts and opinions.

As I originally wrote, I kept my fourth wall breaking in and it’s been my best received story so far with a 4.59 rating.

I used it to describe an intense orgasm, and I guess it succeeded.

That was nearly a year ago.

2023 saw me wrote much more poetry than stories, and I’d like to write more on the story side in 2024.

I know how to write but I know nothing of the technical side of it.

Happy new year all!

 

[KachinaDoll]

Diverging from your question, "Fffffffuuuuuuuuucccccccckkkkkkk" is clunky and is not a sound that anyone can make. You can't draw out the c and the k. Try it vocally yourself. "Fuuuuuuuuck..." Is much better. The ellipsis at the end adds weight to the drawn out nature of the exclamation.

 

[Wonderer67]

Diverging from your question, "Fffffffuuuuuuuuucccccccckkkkkkk" is clunky and is not a sound that anyone can make. You can't draw out the c and the k. Try it vocally yourself. "Fuuuuuuuuck..." Is much better. The ellipsis at the end adds weight to the drawn out nature of the exclamation.

That is exactly what I ended up doing in the story.

Rookie mistake but someone gave me that advice.