It's Just Fiction!

[sbrooks103]

Okay, I'm going to jump into another subject that annoys me no end!

Often (at least in LW where I usually hangout), criticism of a plot or characters is met my comments saying, "It's just fiction."

Of course it's just fiction, I seriously doubt that any reader with all of their faculties thinks the stories are true, and don't get me started on the authors who begin their stories by claiming that they're true!

I believe that better writers create situations and characters that we believe in and care about. Who wants to write a story where the readers don't give a shit about what happens to the characters?

Look at Game of Thrones, how many people were upset that (Spoiler alert!) that Dany was killed at the end! Some may tell them to grow up, but I consider it a tribute to the show that so many people CARED.

 

[EvelynEden]

Killed me

I unintentionally and automatically read the few words after 'spoiler alert' and I'm crushed. Lol, I mean, it's my own fault but omg that hit hard.

But yes, I agree with your point ahaha

 

[SimonDoom]

The "It's just fiction!" defense arises in different contexts. In some it's more valid than in others.

It's perfectly legitimate, for example, to criticize the plot of a story when a plot twist or incident seems to contradict the rules on which the story has up to that point operated. Many people didn't like the ending of Game of Thrones for this or similar reasons. People had similar reactions to the previous Star Wars episode The Last Jedi -- it seemed to repudiate everything JJ Abrams had been setting up in Force Awakens. This is a perfectly legitimate area of criticism.

It's also legitimate to criticize a story for being so implausible that it makes it impossible to suspend disbelief. This is often a problem when the story introduces what I describe as "too much magic." A reader or viewer can be asked to swallow one or two pieces of absurd, ridiculous magic, but too much magic spoils things. I thought the two Matrix sequels suffered from this problem. The first one was absurd, but it had just the right of magic so it worked. The second and third, to me, seemed to be making things up as they went along to usher the plot along, and they lost me. I can only take so much magic, so many deus ex machinas, etc.

But I DON'T think it's legitimate for a reader to criticize a story's plot solely because the story doesn't match the reader's understanding of the way the world works.

For example, in the Loving Wives context, many readers critical of the "extramarital sex without consequences" stories simply cannot and will not accept the possibility that some marriages can work with sex outside marriage. It's not just that they disapprove; they can't accept that such a thing is possible. That's their problem, not the author's. The fact is that sexual behavior runs the gamut of what's possible, and there are some couples who make this behavior work. I have no idea what percentage of such relationships work or fail, but it doesn't matter. It's a legitimate topic for erotica. If you don't like it, move along. Your moral judgments are misplaced. It's just fiction.

I also don't think it's legitimate to criticize readers or authors of stories on the ground that in the real world the subject matter is objectionable so there must be wrong with people who want to read or write those stories. I see this a lot with people who object to incest. They say that in the Real World incest deals with underage kids and is nonconsensual, so they draw the conclusion that there must be something wrong with people who like these stories. But the fact is that incest at Literotica is, for the most part, not about this at all; it's about adult consensual behavior. Adult men who fantasize about their mothers may be many things, but they're not pedophiles. But even if the incest erotica did touch on morally objectionable themes, it's just fiction -- that people read such stories is not indicative that there's something wrong with them.

We have no objection to people watching prime time TV shows or reading books about gruesome murder. We understand it's "just fiction." It's just entertainment. People should similarly be able to enjoy their erotica as "just fiction" without being judged. The connection between people's fantasies and reading tastes on the one hand, and what they do in the real world on the other, is complex, and we should be careful about the connections we make between the two.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

I don't know how many times I've had to tell some read that what I write is fictional.

So, I guess my pet peeve is those that believe the stories here are about real adventures of me and my wife. I really have to laugh when they leave a comment... "I hope you and your wife die of AIDS."

 

[sbrooks103]

The "It's just fiction!" defense arises in different contexts. In some it's more valid than in others.

It's perfectly legitimate, for example, to criticize the plot of a story when a plot twist or incident seems to contradict the rules on which the story has up to that point operated. Many people didn't like the ending of Game of Thrones for this or similar reasons. People had similar reactions to the previous Star Wars episode The Last Jedi -- it seemed to repudiate everything JJ Abrams had been setting up in Force Awakens. This is a perfectly legitimate area of criticism.

It's also legitimate to criticize a story for being so implausible that it makes it impossible to suspend disbelief. This is often a problem when the story introduces what I describe as "too much magic." A reader or viewer can be asked to swallow one or two pieces of absurd, ridiculous magic, but too much magic spoils things. I thought the two Matrix sequels suffered from this problem. The first one was absurd, but it had just the right of magic so it worked. The second and third, to me, seemed to be making things up as they went along to usher the plot along, and they lost me. I can only take so much magic, so many deus ex machinas, etc.

But I DON'T think it's legitimate for a reader to criticize a story's plot solely because the story doesn't match the reader's understanding of the way the world works.

For example, in the Loving Wives context, many readers critical of the "extramarital sex without consequences" stories simply cannot and will not accept the possibility that some marriages can work with sex outside marriage. It's not just that they disapprove; they can't accept that such a thing is possible. That's their problem, not the author's. The fact is that sexual behavior runs the gamut of what's possible, and there are some couples who make this behavior work. I have no idea what percentage of such relationships work or fail, but it doesn't matter. It's a legitimate topic for erotica. If you don't like it, move along. Your moral judgments are misplaced. It's just fiction.

I also don't think it's legitimate to criticize readers or authors of stories on the ground that in the real world the subject matter is objectionable so there must be wrong with people who want to read or write those stories. I see this a lot with people who object to incest. They say that in the Real World incest deals with underage kids and is nonconsensual, so they draw the conclusion that there must be something wrong with people who like these stories. But the fact is that incest at Literotica is, for the most part, not about this at all; it's about adult consensual behavior. Adult men who fantasize about their mothers may be many things, but they're not pedophiles. But even if the incest erotica did touch on morally objectionable themes, it's just fiction -- that people read such stories is not indicative that there's something wrong with them.

We have no objection to people watching prime time TV shows or reading books about gruesome murder. We understand it's "just fiction." It's just entertainment. People should similarly be able to enjoy their erotica as "just fiction" without being judged. The connection between people's fantasies and reading tastes on the one hand, and what they do in the real world on the other, is complex, and we should be careful about the connections we make between the two.

Simon, I'm afraid I wasn't clear. I'm not referring to general criticism of stories or their lack of realism.

I'm talking about when a reader gets upset about something, and are essentially put down because "it's just fiction." Using GoT again as an example, when one of the dragons was killed in the ambush, many fans were upset. They KNEW that the dragons weren't real, but had developed an affection for them. Those feelings were real, even if the show was fiction, and it's a tribute to the overall story-telling and the art of the special effects artists that we could feel bad that these creatures, that were really nothing more than cleverly manipulated pixels, were killed.

I personally think it's unfair to dismiss these feelings out of hand.

Bringing things to the Lit world, the day that readers don't care what happens in your stories is the time to stop writing.

 

[sbrooks103]

I don't know how many times I've had to tell some read that what I write is fictional.

So, I guess my pet peeve is those that believe the stories here are about real adventures of me and my wife. I really have to laugh when they leave a comment... "I hope you and your wife die of AIDS."

I DO agree that that's getting a little(?) TOO involved with the story!

 

[NotWise]

Someone commented on my Nude Day contest story, "But was she really his sister?"

That confused me. How real did the reader have to think those characters were before they ask the question?

 

[SimonDoom]

Simon, I'm afraid I wasn't clear. I'm not referring to general criticism of stories or their lack of realism.

I'm talking about when a reader gets upset about something, and are essentially put down because "it's just fiction." Using GoT again as an example, when one of the dragons was killed in the ambush, many fans were upset. They KNEW that the dragons weren't real, but had developed an affection for them. Those feelings were real, even if the show was fiction, and it's a tribute to the overall story-telling and the art of the special effects artists that we could feel bad that these creatures, that were really nothing more than cleverly manipulated pixels, were killed.

I personally think it's unfair to dismiss these feelings out of hand.

Bringing things to the Lit world, the day that readers don't care what happens in your stories is the time to stop writing.

My response wasn't meant to be a rebuttal to what you said, just a response and follow up. You opened a door wide open to a big subject.

I agree it's totally understandable -- even desirable -- that readers get emotionally invested in characters, and that they get upset, for instance, when one of the GOT dragons was killed.

But I think readers have a certain duty of open-mindedness and tolerance, as well. It's one thing to be upset because the author killed off a character you like; it's another to trash the author and bomb the story rating because you can't tolerate the direction a story went, or because the morals of the characters deviate from your own.

This whole site is what many people regard as a cesspool of deviance and degeneracy. It seems to me that anyone treading here, whether a reader or an author, ought to do so with some degree of tolerance and open-mindedness. We may not all have the same perversions, but in one way or another we're all in the same boat.

 

[SimonDoom]

I don't know how many times I've had to tell some read that what I write is fictional.

So, I guess my pet peeve is those that believe the stories here are about real adventures of me and my wife. I really have to laugh when they leave a comment... "I hope you and your wife die of AIDS."

You could write a follow up story in which you and your wife DO die of aids, but upon entering the afterlife find it's a place of eternal and blissful wife-swapping. That would be sure to blow some gaskets.

 

[KeithD]

Some of the plot elements I've had readers question were the only elements in the story that had a basis in truth--all the other elements had been devised to serve that one element of truth that was the inspiration for the story. When authors or other commenters use the "it's just fiction" response to another comment, they are usually dealing with one of those readers who can't separate fact from fiction that the OP says there aren't many of.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

You could write a follow up story in which you and your wife DO die of aids, but upon entering the afterlife find it's a place of eternal and blissful wife-swapping. That would be sure to blow some gaskets.

How would that work as far as telling that story? Once we did die, the reader wouldn't be able to... I wouldn't be able to write in the real world, in order to... it would just be so confusing.

 

[Javahead]

Some of the plot elements I've had readers question were the only elements in the story that had a basis in truth--all the other elements had been devised to serve that one element of truth that was the inspiration for the story. When authors or other commenters use the "it's just fiction" response to another comment, they are usually dealing with one of those readers who can't separate fact from fiction that the OP says there aren't many of.

There is a quote I remember reading that may apply:

“There is a word for someone who confuses the views of a character with that of the author. That word is ‘idiot.’”

 

[KeithD]

There is a quote I remember reading that may apply:

“There is a word for someone who confuses the views of a character with that of the author. That word is ‘idiot.’”

I don't think I'd go far. I just think of them as shallow of thought.

 

[KeithD]

How would that work as far as telling that story? Once we did die, the reader wouldn't be able to... I wouldn't be able to write in the real world, in order to... it would just be so confusing.

This would be the "Topper" scenario for those old enough to remember that.

 

[UsuallyPresent]

How would that work as far as telling that story? Once we did die, the reader wouldn't be able to... I wouldn't be able to write in the real world, in order to... it would just be so confusing.

That's the authorial challenge then - how DO you make it work for the audience? How do you get them to accept the unnatural aspects and maintain their suspenders of disbelief unsnapped, no matter how far you stretch them?

 

[UsuallyPresent]

-snip-
This whole site is what many people regard as a cesspool of deviance and degeneracy. It seems to me that anyone treading here, whether a reader or an author, ought to do so with some degree of tolerance and open-mindedness. We may not all have the same perversions, but in one way or another we're all in the same boat.

"To each their own" is both a desirable goal and a dangerous threat.

 

[oggbashan]

This would be the "Topper" scenario for those old enough to remember that.

I remember them well, particularly The Stray Lamb and The Night Life of the Gods. I have first editions of both and other Thorne Smith novels.

 

[oggbashan]

Anonymous doesn't like fiction:

On my story Angela's Christmas Crackers:

She leaves him trapped

And gagged. For an extended period of time. A huge No No for the BDSM set. Bad things like death follow that rookie mistake. Next Xmas she won't have to worry about him as he will have left her and moved far far away from a bat-shit-crazy woman.

1 star

On my story Best Man's Duties:

Badly done

A good friend would have lost and saved him from marriage. And the bridesmaids.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Just got this one on a new story...

xxxxxxxx day ago
Two of A Kind

You were still married when you bedded Carol, I'm assuming without Julie's knowledge. Adultery is adultery, no matter when it happens. You have a twisted sense of decency. You deserved each other.

Seems he thought the story was a true life story.

 

[RubyRedLips]

unfair to dismiss these feelings out of hand.

Simon, I'm afraid I wasn't clear. I'm not referring to general criticism of stories or their lack of realism.

I'm talking about when a reader gets upset about something, and are essentially put down because "it's just fiction." Using GoT again as an example, when one of the dragons was killed in the ambush, many fans were upset. They KNEW that the dragons weren't real, but had developed an affection for them. Those feelings were real, even if the show was fiction, and it's a tribute to the overall story-telling and the art of the special effects artists that we could feel bad that these creatures, that were really nothing more than cleverly manipulated pixels, were killed.

I personally think it's unfair to dismiss these feelings out of hand.

Bringing things to the Lit world, the day that readers don't care what happens in your stories is the time to stop writing.

It is most assuredly unfair to dismiss the feelings of the reader out of hand, since they have paid the supreme compliment of taking your characters so seriously that they are emotionally invested in the plot. If one wants to fully understand the feelings of the reader, just take a moment to recall some book that you loved, and remember the moment at the end, when the story was finished, and you are overcome with sadness that you won't be able to live that fantasy life any longer. At that point, try seeing it as "only fiction".

 

[Bramblethorn]

Just got this one on a new story...

xxxxxxxx day ago
Two of A Kind

You were still married when you bedded Carol, I'm assuming without Julie's knowledge. Adultery is adultery, no matter when it happens. You have a twisted sense of decency. You deserved each other.

Seems he thought the story was a true life story.

You must have a very busy life if all your stories are true autobiography!

 

[Zeb_Carter]

You must have a very busy life if all your stories are true autobiography!

I wish, although I have had a busy life but, not that busy.

 

[oggbashan]

I just had a comment of several hundred words comprehensively trashing my story Jeanie the Genie mainly because the commentator didn't like my version of genies and then - in a genie story - complaining that certain events wouldn't happen like that in real llfe.

He obviously doesn't understand the concept of fiction or fantasy.

The comment has been deleted.

 

[NotWise]

He obviously doesn't understand the concept of fiction or fantasy.

Or real life.

 

[Hypoxia]

I warn my readers that my text may be partly fictional, partly not, but do they all listen? My straight reporting may be unbelievable. Reality sucks, then. There's the truism that fiction must make sense while reality needn't. Were there really all those back-of-the-vehicle orgies? Sure, if I say so.