Ego Check: Bad Stories with Good Ratings

[CyranoJ]

Honestly, the stories that prompted this post were mostly in Group Sex and I/T and would likely for most tastes be what is commonly referred to as “strokers.”

People in AH who talk dismissively about "strokers" are kidding themselves. The bulk of Literotica's readership is not motivated by how well your story would go over in a creative writing workshop, they're motivated by how hot they find the story. Erotic connection takes priority, by a long stretch, over literary technique or delivering le mot juste.

Not that I don't applaud people who put in the effort to deliver good writing along with the smut. I've seen some genuinely excellent writers here, whose level of work was and is inspiring. I tried to put in at least some of that same effort myself when writing my stories on here. Still, one should never be under the illusion that a story is going to get a high score on Lit just on account of the quality of the writing. (The corollary is that one should also never get too invested in the notion that having high-scoring Lit stories translates into being an authority on Writing with a capital W.)

 

[Britva415]

I don't know if this is quite what you are talking about - writing average, scores high. But it's not about the writing, it's about the story.

Flip that around, there's a brilliant new writer in LS and EV. Pure poetry. But her scores are mid to low 4s and I think it's because they are emotionally exhausting and readers can't relate or engage.

It's interesting to see you contrasting the story against the writing, but then describe someone's work as "emotionally exhausting."

Is that the writing, or is it the story? It's hard for me to picture just the writing, separately from the story content, as "emotionally exhausting" unless it were either really very ponderous or really very bad, AND it were compulsory to read it. Meanwhile it's very easy to picture emotionally exhausting story content, regardless of how it's written.

I don't know the stories and writers you're talking about, so, I'm taking your word for it.

 

[Britva415]

People in AH who talk dismissively about "strokers" are kidding themselves

You aren't saying that calling them strokers is automatically "dismissive", are you?

 

[NotWise]

Honestly, the stories that prompted this post were mostly in Group Sex and I/T and would likely for most tastes be what is commonly referred to as “strokers.” What hit me as “bad” writing was a real mood killer but clearly many others were not similarly affected.

For what it’s worth (probably not much), from what I’ve seen I would say the general quality of the writing in the Lesbian category, although not what I typically read, is probably higher than any other category.

The voters are generally not critics. The score is not their comment on the quality of writing.

The voters do know what they like. The score is their comment on whether they liked the story.

 

[Britva415]

And just on the subject of writing quality versus story quality:

These are definitely correlated. It's loose, but it's real and it's present and it's often palpable.

I'm convinced that one cannot craft a reasonably good story* without being at least a reasonably competent writer. I haven't ever seen (on Lit) a very good tale written by an under-skilled writer.

Story-crafting and writing quality are both rooted in literacy.

* I'm not talking about verbal stories here.

 

[Voboy]

I’m not so interested in theories about why or how this happens. I’ve seen that discussed multiple times. I’m more interested in how does that make you feel, and how do you deal with those feelings?

I feel nothing. I don't care about other writers' ratings, as others have said. I write what I'd want to read. If I succeed in that, cool. If people give me good ratings for it, awesome; clearly, they're my audience.

But not everyone is. Someone loves Tefler's "Three Square Meals," for example; it sure as shit ain't me, but why would I question the tastes of those who do, or begrudge that story its rating? That story, its writer, and its readers have nothing to do with me.

Pretty sure I’m not alone in finding it discouraging.

Stay around here long enough and you'll likely discover that "ratings" are highly fickle. Way too fickle to determine whether you're encouraged or not.

 

[CyranoJ]

You aren't saying that calling them strokers is automatically "dismissive", are you?

"Automatically"? No. Extremely frequently correlated? Yes.

 

[StillStunned]

I think it helps to realise that the ratings are less an indicator of quality than of popularity. And I for one am used to not being very popular.

 

[designatedvictim]

The voters are generally not critics. The score is not their comment on the quality of writing.

The voters do know what they like. The score is their comment on whether they liked the story.

Exactly.

That's one thing I always try to keep in mind, but I'll admit that it can be pretty tough, at times.

I posted a comment here a while ago about a story I read that I thought was poorly written which was rated in the high 4.7s. I kept thinking "Did I read the same story that they did?" Then, when reading the comments, found one commenter who thought it was written poorly and felt my view was validated. Or, at least, not unique. (Since then, it's rating has dropped some, but it still has a red H.

A more recent example, I've been intermittently visiting this site for, at least, 15 years. Created this account last Fall.

In that time, I have never commented or voted on any stories, even my own, aside from replying to a commentor who had legit criticism of it.

I ran a cross a story about a month ago that I read. Didn't obsess over it - at first - but ran across the same story a few days later and thought "I came to hate that story, everyone loves it. Why? I'm gonna comment and vote."

Left a comment, my very first comment and vote, that said what I thought about it. It wasn't a quick, 'Hated it' drive-by. It was a 350-word comment stating my vote (I gave it a 2 *) and what I didn't like about the story. (I gave it a two rating for multiple reasons: it wasn't badly written, I don't recall any phrasing issues, even typos, so it got a star for that. I also gave it a two because I didn't want a one getting swept. But, the more I thought about the story, the more I hated it.)

It got off on the wrong foot with me being non-con in T/I. Not a particular fan of that genre, so I don't visit that category.

Then I bitched about what I didn't like, ending with 'Completely unlikeable characters, all around.'

I think most of the comments since have alluded to my comment, knocking it, so I guess I ought to add "Learn to read!" to the list of comments I've received.

Always remember, the star ratings are simply:

Hate It
Dislike
Average
Like It
Love It

Writing quality isn't covered, but as I've said before, poor quality writing ought to be a factor in how people enjoy a story. I guess, in the Real World, most people disagree with me.

Just a final thought: This story bugged me after I let it stew for a while after reading it. It got worse and worse, in my opinion, the longer it stewed. It was a weird thing to prompt me to comment, given many of the things I've read here, over the years. It was a strange hill to die on.

 

[Voboy]

Honestly? I've lost count of the number of times that I, as a reader, have cum to some objectively garbage prose on here.

Sometimes, readers are not looking for great literature.

 

[iwatchus]

I look at this on my own writing. I think some of mt early stories are poorly written but they are much more highly rated than most of my recent stories. But the readers disagree. I sometimes think the difference is the amount of sex I put in the stories; my early stories were a lot more graphic. But then my second highest rated of the last twelve is pg rated. The readers like what they like and I am going to write what I want

 

[Gamblnluck]

he key is to remember that ratings are extremely subjective. Readers in different categories vote based on different criteria. Brilliantly written stories on touchy subjects can get lower scores than much poorer quality stories that hit the right buttons. Writers with a lot of loyal followers have a built in advantage. There are a lot of reasons why any given story gets a particular rating. The playing field is never level, so direct comparisons are pretty much meaningless.

The other thing authors have to realize is you are not in your high school or even college composition class. A rating is not always based on how well the story is written but for the content. Whether the reader likes the story at the end.
Some stories that really surprise me are the total jerk off fodder. Many are mere scenes.
Even 'touchy' subjects can get decent approval if they are presented properly. I am presently into the 64th chapter of a story about judicial slavery. i present society as I perceive it would become under such a system. I have three stories in that world. One of which showed the absolute in human behavior. My comments ranged from disgust and argument about characterization to praise for my ability to portray my characters. In fact some of the ones who despise the society I describe are now my beta readers. They are intrigued and follow the story. Most of those chapters (108) of my 3 stories in that world rate above 4.
My point is sometimes it's not if the readers really like what you say, but they have to be drawn in. It has to 'fit' with what they see as a human truth.

 

[Gamblnluck]

The voters are generally not critics. The score is not their comment on the quality of writing.

The voters do know what they like. The score is their comment on whether they liked the story.

Yep and when an author begins with a introduction that says he/she is thumbing his nose at the reader and does not care, he is setting his story up right there to NOT be liked.

 

[lovecraft68]

To second others, stroke stories are not bad stories. To me, they're a bit of their own category or niche, they are simple sometimes silly Penthouse letters style people meet people fuck a good time was had by all.

Like anything else, there are good and bad within those stories, but like everything else, the only set definition of good bad is that of each individual reader.

One of my favorite all time stories here is a foot fetish story that's not much more than a full lit page, very little substance other than a co-worker let's someone indulge in their enjoyment of feet. I've gotten more entertainment out of it than some of these seven page masterpieces some people brag about.

There was a group here who all considered their work "Literary Erotica" they were a cut above and had nothing but disdain for not just strokers, but any story that just didn't reach their lofty standards. Not one of them is here and only one of that group is still writing at all.

I'd rather read a stroker than something from a pretentious-and oft self-deluded-braggart,

 

[lovecraft68]

Yep and when an author begins with a introduction that says he/she is thumbing his nose at the reader and does not care, he is setting his story up right there to NOT be liked.

Doing that in an introduction is tacky, its like Hollywood fan baiting where they do the "and if you don't like this movie its because you're....whatever"

Now, using the story itself to thumb your nose is a different story.

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

One of my favorite all time stories here is a foot fetish story that's not much more than a full lit page, very little substance other than a co-worker let's someone indulge in their enjoyment of feet. I've gotten more entertainment out of it than some of these seven page masterpieces some people brag about.

I write skyscraper heels into most of mine (DUH!!), but haven't gone that way .... yet. Might be a fun twist.

 

[lovecraft68]

I write skyscraper heels into most of mine (DUH!!), but haven't gone that way .... yet. Might be a fun twist.

This is the story, I was wrong, its only one page.

https://www.literotica.com/s/the-game-is-afoot

Now, if I wanted to I could nitpick a few things about it, but the story does its job for me, so what's the point of harping on things? Strokers or short stories without much build up remind me of those guilty pleasure movies. They're no winning awards, they're full of holes, but you sit back go for the ride and have a good time. Swayze's Roadhouse is a great example of that.