"Stories" VS "Vignettes"

[Djmac1031]

As I put the finishing touches on my newest story today, I again have come to realize how, with more time, effort and talent, it could probably be much longer.

I think many of my stories could more properly be labeled "vignettes."

There are hints at much longer, deeper backstories for characters, but instead I only really focus on the nuggets that matter, leaving it to the reader to fill in the blanks.

Which can be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on what the reader wants.

There is certainly a place for stories with pages dedicated to fleshing out characters, providing backstory and history, creating their world and environment in great detail, etc.

I'm just, frankly, not that good at it.

But I do feel I give enough for readers to at least understand who my characters are and what motivates them, even if I don't spell out every little detail.

I envy writers with the ability to write massive, sprawling stories, rich in details.

Maybe someday I'll get there lol.

For now, I content myself with writing my own little tales the best I can.

 

[alohadave]

I'm the same. I write scenes, not stories.

I have a couple of WIP where I'm taking my time trying to build them longer. I'm taking my time on them, not rushing them out. But most of what I write is very short compared to most stuff here.

But I'm trying and working on it.

 

[NotWise]

I don't think the backstory or the detailed characterization make the difference between a story and a vignette.

A 'story' contains the elements of a story, which I take as: setting, characters, conflict, plot, and resolution. Other people might add or subtract from that list. The characters don't have to be drawn out in fine detail to create a story. They aren't in short stories, which depend on tight writing to adequately characterize the players in the fewest possible words.

In a vignette, parts of a story are missing or under-represented. Conflict, plot and resolution are often minimized. Settings and conflict might be omitted. Stories for Lit are often just a setup for one or more sex scenes, and they don't contain much else.

A short story can still be complete, but it takes some skill to get it all together and balanced.

 

[Voboy]

I don't believe a story needs to be 100% "complete" in order to be a story.

As in many things writerly, I ponder Tolkien. His LOTR is clearly a story, but he provided a very clear sense that things (MANY things) happened before it, and other things happened after. He even alludes to that within the story, when Sam is encouraging Frodo by reminding him that someday people will tell stories about them, even as they themselves tell stories about earlier events that Tolkien only tangentially references (in LOTR, anyway).

In a way, I suppose you can call LOTR an extended vignette then. Still well worth reading, however.

I invent many things about my characters that do not come out in the text of my stories, and they do other things in unpublished writings that inform their choices within the ones that do get published. I don't think there's any requirement that a writer include EVERYTHING they've devised as backstory within the text.

Subtext makes every story better. Your stories, OP, don't necessarily need more "length" if they've got "depth."

 

[ElectricBlue]

This is why the 750 word challenge is a good writer's exercise - can you get something self-contained and still satisfying to read in so few words? Almost by definition, something that short can only have one or two scenes, so it will be a vignette, but it can still capture character, mood, or action, and be a short story. They can, of course, continue into a longer story, but the moment should be captured, complete.

As an aside, I don't think backstory is necessary for a story to be deeper, richer. It's the story that matters, from the point you choose to tell it, going forward, not the stuff that went on before (which might be as dull as dishwasher, no story).

 

[yowser]

The huge majority (vast) of Lit pieces are vignettes, usually fantasies, and that's likely fine for the readership.

That makes it so refreshing as a reader - exciting and satisfying - to find the occasional well-executed story with clearly (as others note, not necessarily excessively) drawn characters and an absorbing story line.

It's gratifying when a writer in their Lit career transitions from writing porn scripts to intriguing stories. Now we're cooking.

 

[Bazzle]

I think one scene vignettes are probably liked more?

The longer and deeper the character development is, the less likely the story is going to be finished and voted on?

 

[NotWise]

I think one scene vignettes are probably liked more?

The longer and deeper the character development is, the less likely the story is going to be finished and voted on?

Readers' tastes are all over the map on that.

 

[PastMaster]

Readers' tastes are all over the map on that.

Absolutely - how many times have you heard FTDS ?

 

[Djmac1031]

In a vignette, parts of a story are missing or under-represented. Conflict, plot and resolution are often minimized. Settings and conflict might be omitted. Stories for Lit are often just a setup for one or more sex scenes, and they don't contain much else.

Perhaps I'm using the word "vignette" wrong; wouldn't be the first time lol.

I do feel my stories are complete, or at least as complete as they need to be.

Do I often see parts that could be fleshed out, expanded on? Sure. All the time.

And sometimes, a story just ends where it ends.

Reminds me of the scene in Stand By Me; Gordy finishes his story, his friends love it, but then Vern asks "what happens next?"

What happens next?
Nothing. Everything. Use your own imagination. Mine got you this far

 

[PastMaster]

What happens next?
Nothing. Everything. Use your own imagination. Mine got you this far

I have to use that to feedback to some of my commentators

 

[NotWise]

Perhaps I'm using the word "vignette" wrong; wouldn't be the first time lol.

I do feel my stories are complete, or at least as complete as they need to be.

Do I often see parts that could be fleshed out, expanded on? Sure. All the time.

And sometimes, a story just ends where it ends.

Reminds me of the scene in Stand By Me; Gordy finishes his story, his friends love it, but then Vern asks "what happens next?"

What happens next?
Nothing. Everything. Use your own imagination. Mine got you this far

For some readers, stories are never complete. I just write the story as I see it and put a bow on it. There are methods for doing that, but they won't stop people from asking for more.

I was reading a couple weeks ago about how to end stories, and had a thread on the subject. Resolving the main issue and ending the story with side questions unanswered is supposed to be a way to get readers to think about the story.

Here, that prompts them to ask for more. It may be like KeithD said on that thread, that Lit readers are lazier than readers in the market place and they don't want to think about it. Or it could be that if it was as easy as it is here for readers in the market place to insist on "more," then they'd be doing it too.

 

[EmilyMiller]

As I put the finishing touches on my newest story today, I again have come to realize how, with more time, effort and talent, it could probably be much longer.

I think many of my stories could more properly be labeled "vignettes."

There are hints at much longer, deeper backstories for characters, but instead I only really focus on the nuggets that matter, leaving it to the reader to fill in the blanks.

Which can be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on what the reader wants.

There is certainly a place for stories with pages dedicated to fleshing out characters, providing backstory and history, creating their world and environment in great detail, etc.

I'm just, frankly, not that good at it.

But I do feel I give enough for readers to at least understand who my characters are and what motivates them, even if I don't spell out every little detail.

I envy writers with the ability to write massive, sprawling stories, rich in details.

Maybe someday I'll get there lol.

For now, I content myself with writing my own little tales the best I can.

You can argue that it requires great skill to paint a convincing picture of a slice of the World in 2,000 words.

Em

 

[12oclocktales]

Here's some good advice about how to tell a story:

A story should be judicious, clear, succinct;
The language plain, and incidents well linked;
Tell not as new what everybody knows;
And, new or old, hasten to a close.
-- Cowper

 

[ronde]

Perhaps I'm using the word "vignette" wrong; wouldn't be the first time lol.

I do feel my stories are complete, or at least as complete as they need to be.

Do I often see parts that could be fleshed out, expanded on? Sure. All the time.

And sometimes, a story just ends where it ends.

Reminds me of the scene in Stand By Me; Gordy finishes his story, his friends love it, but then Vern asks "what happens next?"

What happens next?
Nothing. Everything. Use your own imagination. Mine got you this far

I have a rather simplistic view of the two. In my opinion, a "vignette" is a relating of what happened with maybe a bit of character introduction. A vignette is more about the action than the characters, and I've read vignettes where the characters are just bodies together in bed with no real personality. One I still remember started with words to the effect of, "I saw her walking on campus and knew I had to fuck her. I introduced myself and then told her that and she said she wanted to fuck me too, so we...". The rest was just the infinitesimally described details of sex in multiple positions with a shattering orgasm for both about every three minutes. At the end, both told the other it was the best sex they'd ever had and that they wanted to do it again. As I remember, neither character even had a name other than "I" or "Me" and "her" or "she". I don't remember the word count, but it was really short, like maybe 2000 words.

A "story" is what happened but includes who the characters really are, how they met, why they ended up doing what happened, and maybe a bit of what happened afterward. The ending should leave the reader with a sense of completeness unless the writer has a sequel in mind. Then the ending can become both an ending and a "hook" that hints at more to come.

Both can have an ending, but to me a vignette is more of carnival corn dog while a story is a steak.

 

[LupusDei]

I think the most principal difference between what I would call "vignette" versus a "story" is what questions the writing answers.

A vignette deals with the "what?" only, or little more than that. It doesn't care what conclusions readers would draw, and what unanswerable questions they are left with.

A complete story at least make an attempt to provide material for one or more ways to answer the "why?" of an imagined reader.

The "why?" can be split in two very different aspects:
-- why those events happened?
talking about what makes the events possible (believable):
---- the character traits
---- the character relationships
---- the character motivations (beliefs, wants)
---- the world they inhabit

-- why it is remarkable that this happened?
talking about what makes the events interesting, or why the author is sharing the words they have written (also called the story's "moral" or "goal"):
---- maybe the most straightforward or desirable outcome wasn't the most likely at some point (as they say, what was the "conflict" the story had)
---- maybe the events changed one or more of the participants (character "growth") or made lasting changes of some other sort (a "myth")
---- maybe it did attempt or pretend to shed light on some actual or hypothetical historical events, actual practices or circumstances (speculation, education)
---- maybe it's an example, parable, simile told to offer indirect commentary on something (to put it rudely, "propaganda" and yes, everything always is that to some extent)

Surely, providing direct, subjective answers to all those aspects would likely make one sound old fashioned, boring and didactic unless an unreliable narrator is intentionally giving bogus answers the actual story refutes, maybe. Nowadays it's preferred to "show, don't tell" what means that the authors are advised to manipulate readers into making the desired conclusions themselves. However, one could easily err at that by assuming readers who think in a certain way, know the same facts, or make the same associations and assumptions the author did, and end up writing just a verbose vignette that may contain an emergent story for some informed or imaginative readers.

 

[SirBurnInside]

I'd love to be able to write a George R.R. Martin - Song of Ice & Fire - style tale, that just builds a world so brilliantly you feel like you're actually in it and has massive backstory and history and is populated by incredibly complex characters... but I'm no where near good enough a writer nor that creative!

I know what I do best, which is write pretty graphic sex that is intended to make the reader aroused and able to visualise exactly what is happening so they can enjoy themselves whilst they imagine it, and that is what I shall stick to!

 

[Emilymcplugger]

I thought a vignette was what I used when I made a salad?

 

[alohadave]

nor that creative!

I imagine you are that creative. Expressing it in words is a different matter, but not being good at that doesn't diminish your creativity.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Vignettes are basically what the readers are looking for even if they don't know it. Novella stories aside, readers don't like plot and character development getting in the way of their kinks. Just give them skanky unicorns performing their favorite kinks the way that they want them, presented in the simplest or most contrived settings. Don't waste time with buildup.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Vignettes are basically what the readers are looking for even if they don't know it. Novella stories aside, readers don't like plot and character development getting in the way of their kinks. Just give them skanky unicorns performing their favorite kinks the way that they want them, presented in the simplest or most contrived settings. Don't waste time with buildup.

You're either being provocative, or you have a very different set of readers to me. Those are nonsense statements, frankly.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

You're either being provocative, or you have a very different set of readers to me. Those are nonsense statements, frankly.

I may have used hyperbole, but it's all true and you know it.

 

[NotWise]

I may have used hyperbole, but it's all true and you know it.

Nope. I'm with EB on this. The readers are all over the map in terms of what they want. A good proportion of them want the story, and they'll comment and down-vote little sex-only vignettes.

There are also readers who'll just roll their eyes and move on when they see a story much over a Lit page, Pick your audience.

 

[ElectricBlue]

I may have used hyperbole, but it's all true and you know it.

Suit yourself. My readers tend to point out that they like the slow burn emotional detail, as well as the hot sex in the end. Your readers might not like the slow burn (they might not like my portrayal of sex, either), but it's silly to assume all readers are the same.

 

[SimonDoom]

I may have used hyperbole, but it's all true and you know it.

It's not at all true. If you look at the data--a fair sampling of the stories that have the highest scores, most favorites, highest views--you'll see that there's abundant evidence that many Literotica readers like character, plot, buildup, etc.