Storytelling

[AwkwardlySet]

This thread is inspired by so many posts in so many threads.

We often comment and focus on grammar and punctuation, sentence structure, exposition, pacing, and so on. When one asks for feedback, we often focus on these things - on how well-written the story was in our opinion. Even in review threads, reviewers' focus is most often on these elements. In most cases, there is an assumption that the author "wanted to tell that exact story" and there is often a reluctance to criticize that part of the craft, except when there is obvious inconsistency with the plot, or characters acting completely out of character.

Although intertwined, "writing well" and "storytelling" are two separate abilities of an author, in my opinion. As an extreme example, we can imagine an author with a beautiful style writing a story with a dull plot and bland characters. We can also imagine an excellent story with a great and dynamic plot, twists and turns, and imaginative characters but riddled with grammar errors, sentences that don't read well, chaotic style, bulky exposition, etc.

Well, in this thread, I would like to start a discussion about storytelling alone. Is this more of a natural gift thing? Can you "learn" to be more imaginative, to come up with interesting plots and characters? More importantly, what are the key elements, in your opinion, that a story has to have to be engaging and interesting?

For me, it's:

1. Characters.
Many authors love creating quirky characters in order to make them more interesting. That's fine but not necessary, in my opinion. Readers can identify just fine with regular characters, as long as you make them consistent and you make them evolve in a logical way as the plot progresses. Assuming a longer story, if at the end your character is exactly the same as at the beginning, then you failed in this regard. There has to be some evolving of the character, some change, some growth or breaking down.
As a personal thing, I can't imagine a story where there is no romance whatsoever. I'll always create a romantic interest but I also like adding some kind of tension, some conflict or power struggle, something to counterbalance the attraction. I think that makes the dynamic more interesting and it can enhance the plot of the story.

2. Plot
I can't read a story if the plot is boring, no matter what. For me, there has to be an interesting idea and a proper progression of that idea. Usually, it consists of setting up relations and conflict and then making it grow. I like adding mystery to the plot to make a reader guess; I like trying to misdirect his suspicions. Twists and turns are a must if you want to keep the attention of the reader. A plot that leads to a predictable outcome, well, sucks. It doesn't even matter if you are writing about a planetary war or about purchasing a donut. If the reader can easily guess how the plot will progress from start to finish then yeah, that isn't much of a story.

3. Worldbuilding
Depending on the type of story, this part is optional, in my opinion. For epic fantasy and scifi operas, it's a must. The imagination of an author is so important here. Many good scifi and fantasy authors struggle with this, in my opinion.
Worldbuilding is also desirable and enriching for many kinds of novels. But there are also cases where it's completely unnecessary and even detrimental to the story. For example, I can remember reading a fantasy story here where the author spent some time describing the setting, describing the elven village, etc, only to make the story about one elf running into an orc and then after some struggle, the two of them banging, the end. I mean, what the fuck? Why did I have to read about what the village looks like and who rules the village if the story was going to be about an elf and orc running into each other and having sex? More isn't always more.

I tried to be brief. Please share your own thoughts and feel free to criticize if you disagree with anything I said here

 

[THBGato]

2. Plot

I suspect that on Literotica, plot is the most crucial of all. Many readers (myself included) are chasing stories with a particular twist or kink. Thus, if that is absent, it doesn't matter how much we like the characters, the story will fall flat for those readers.

 

[BubbaHyde5]

I don't think you can learn to be more imaginative but I do think you can learn ways to better describe things to create more interest for the reader

 

[BubbaHyde5]

In my extremely limited sample size here I'd say Plot is the number one driver of likability for a story. Many negative comments seem to be people disagreeing with their personal belief of how the story should go.

 

[SimonDoom]

Things that I like in erotic stories:

1. Jumping into the story in a deft way, rather than leading up to it with an info dump.
2. Establishing a character's need quickly. Characters don't have to be fascinating, but I want to care about what they are doing and what their need is right away. Need drives the plot. It makes me wonder, "Where is this going and what's going to happen next?"
3. Dramatic conflict. This makes erotica more erotic. Two people willingly, happily having sex may not be erotic. But if one is thinking or saying, "I really shouldn't, but . . . " and the author knows how to pull it off well, then it's much more deliciously erotic.
4. I like a certain economy in storytelling. I want the author to tell me everything that needs to be told to propel the story, but not more.
5. Good, clever dialogue is a huge plus. But also, not too MUCH dialogue. Just the right amount to keep the story going.
6. I see plot and character as intertwined. Character drives plot, so it must be drawn sufficiently to make the plot interesting and plausible. At the same time, I don't need to know more about the character than is necessary to drive the plot.
7. Build up and anticipation are important elements in a good erotic story. By the time the main characters have sex, I want to be eager for them to have sex. I want to feel their need. I want to feel like I'm there in the scene, desperate to see the lacy thong come off.
8. For most stories, I don't need much world-building or setting.
9. I like a strong sense of the kink involved. The kinkier the better. I enjoy the forbidden and the taboo and the naughty.

 

[Kumquatqueen]

Some stories are straightforward - A meets B, there's some initial barrier, but they get it on. Sex is the climax of the story. Hoorah, the end.

Some are more complex - A and B and maybe C all get to know each other, events happen, miscommunication, eventually a destined pairing get together. Being Lit they may have sex but only later realise they are meant for each other. Eventually, happy ending.

Some stories - including rather a lot of mine - introduce A and B, they do a bunch of interesting stuff if you're interested in that sort of stuff, and then they kinda stop. For fans of the characters (including me, because obviously I love the characters), this is all good entertainment. But it doesn't in itself have the arcs of story, with varied emotional tone and making essentially a character study into a story.

Sometimes I manage to put a bit of 'story' in - my Summer story ramblings had some structure added, by making the story about one of our friends-with-benefits having some more emotions turning up and trying some geeky awkward romance, which culminates in a kiss as a climax, and the pair agreeing they'll try a relationship. If I'd had another month it might have even become a well-structured story, but I didn't and it isn't.

Though sometimes I'm writing self-indulgent porn and dont worry about a story. Naked Bisexual Lube Wrestling copies the 'Snakes on a Plane' school of titles. There's a ten naked women, a party, and lube wrestling. What on AO3 gets tagged 'PWP', which means both 'porn without plot' and 'Plot? What plot?'

Personally I think there's a bunch of stories which would be better if they didn't try to pretend there was a plot any deeper than "Hello Mr Plumber, my clothes appear to have fallen off!", but that's just my taste.

 

[Bazzle]

My problem is that I dream up scenes rather than stories.

Which is why people think my stories info dump and are too long.

 

[lovecraft68]

Way back in High School I took a creative writing class, and the teacher would always give two grades for each assignment. First was storytelling, second grammar and technical writing. Everything for me was always A or B over a C or a D.

Nothing has really changed. My grammar has gotten much better over time, but I'm still a storyteller over being technically sound.

 

[AlinaX]

I can remember reading a fantasy story here where the author spent some time describing the setting, describing the elven village, etc, only to make the story about one elf running into an orc and then after some struggle, the two of them banging, the end.

That makes me so angry when that happens. Don't excite me with possibilities only to discard them all.

 

[Plathfan]

Storytelling is certainly a gift that can be refined through practice. Creativity alone doesn’t make you a good storyteller; having great plot ideas doesn’t mean you can present them effectively. Being gifted doesn’t guarantee you can wield that gift at will--some stories bring out your best, while others do not.

The opening usually showcases the author's skill.

"My name is Trudy. I’m 26, 5'6", blonde, round in all the right places, and I’ve been very naughty lately,"

is not only a lame opening line but also a lazy way to skip exposition and jump straight into the juicy parts. Unfortunately, such stories are quite common and may even perform well in ratings (if those "juicy parts" are satisfactory), which brings to mind the eternal debate about ratings: while statistically, a 4.8 story is likely better than a 4.5, whether that 4.8 story is genuinely good is debatable.

The true art lies in catching the reader's attention subtly and effortlessly:

"I knew I shouldn’t have kicked that poor dog."

Why did you kick the dog? What happened next? What kind of person does that--impulsive, remorseful, violent? A few words can convey so much.

If you start with dialogue, ensure it’s relevant to the story and propels it forward.

We can discuss writing tips and storytelling techniques endlessly, but the truth is, the ability to execute them is intuitive--you either have it, or you don’t.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

In my extremely limited sample size here I'd say Plot is the number one driver of likability for a story. Many negative comments seem to be people disagreeing with their personal belief of how the story should go.

That does not mean that the plot wasn't good. It only means that the writer failed to recite the reader's fantasy back to him. In these cases it usually means that the writer tried to deliver an interesting plot, but the reader simply wanted the predictable formula - ie not actually interested in plot.

 

[BubbaHyde5]

That does not mean that the plot wasn't good. It only means that the writer failed to recite the reader's fantasy back to him. In these cases it usually means that the writer tried to deliver an interesting plot, but the reader simply wanted the predictable formula - ie not actually interested in plot.

That’s what I was intending to mean.....people let their rooting interest in how they think the story should go or what this person would have actually done or said impact their judgment of the quality of the writing/story

 

[Comshaw]

Way back in High School I took a creative writing class, and the teacher would always give two grades for each assignment. First was storytelling, second grammar and technical writing. Everything for me was always A or B over a C or a D.

Nothing has really changed. My grammar has gotten much better over time, but I'm still a storyteller over being technically sound.

This ↑. I took a college-level creative writing class because I've always wanted to try writing stories. The instructor told us while introducing the class that it wasn't an English class. She wasn't going to be correcting our stories for that kind of thing. She said she would ask us to take an English class first if it appeared we had major problems in that area, but that her class was focused on the construction and telling of the story. I learned much from her about such things.

I've always been a voracious reader and I can still get lost in other worlds through the pages of a book. As a kid and young adult I would construct complete stories in my head. The only difference between then and now, is now I put them down in writing.

I was also exposed to some fantastic verbal storytellers as a kid. Most of them weren't told in absolutely proper Engilsh. They were told in the lexicon of those I was raised around, sprinkled with colloquial words and sayings, ain't's and other "improper" English. But those tales could keep a kid riveted to his seat wide-eyed with wonder.

So to me, like a good pie, the vessel of a story is less important than the filling.



Comshaw

 

[THBGato]

That does not mean that the plot wasn't good. It only means that the writer failed to recite the reader's fantasy back to him. In these cases it usually means that the writer tried to deliver an interesting plot, but the reader simply wanted the predictable formula - ie not actually interested in plot.

Totally agree. But then that's the problem with writing for this medium. The categories and tags encourage readers to approach stories with certain expectations and those stories that defy them aren't going to be as well received as those that conform.

My personal feeling is that originality on Lit can only really come with the characters. But in order to get readers to engage with unusual characters you need to place them within a plot frame that the readership is comfortable with. Several commenters have said that my "Love is a Place" is "one of the most original stories" on Lit (a quote from Ripley, no less). But it's just a Roommates-to-Lovers story, like hundreds of other Lesbian Sex stories. Nothing original about that. What those readers find original about it is the fact that the main character is neurodivergent (and presumably those same readers have never read Lafayette Hills by AwkwardMD). Similarly, some of the most affecting stories I have read here are those that feature women with bodies outside the norm, either in terms of size (Beautiful) or ability (Wheels in Motion). They are ranked 6 and 21 respectively on the all time Hot List for Lesbian Sex (which they well deserve in my view, as the writing is superb). Nothing particularly original about their plots, but the main characters defy the norms for the genre. Perhaps that's correlation rather than causation. But maybe not.

 

[Bramblethorn]

My personal feeling is that originality on Lit can only really come with the characters. But in order to get readers to engage with unusual characters you need to place them within a plot frame that the readership is comfortable with. Several commenters have said that my "Love is a Place" is "one of the most original stories" on Lit (a quote from Ripley, no less). But it's just a Roommates-to-Lovers story, like hundreds of other Lesbian Sex stories. Nothing original about that. What those readers find original about it is the fact that the main character is neurodivergent (and presumably those same readers have never read Lafayette Hills by AwkwardMD).

Having read both Lafayette Hills and, now, part 1 of Love is a Place (the rest to follow shortly, I suspect ;-) I'd disagree here. Yes, they both feature autistic-coded protagonists, but you're exploring different aspects of that to the ones AwkwardMD explored - and while the outline may fit a standard plot, the execution is its own thing.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

I suspect that on Literotica, plot is the most crucial of all. Many readers (myself included) are chasing stories with a particular twist or kink. Thus, if that is absent, it doesn't matter how much we like the characters, the story will fall flat for those readers.

Is the kink the same as the plot?
I don't think it is. You can take a story with a great plot and change the details of the actual sex and the story doesn't change much.
Obviously there are exceptions, with Incest it's kind of baked in, but even there you could change some details in many IT stories and still have the same plot as a simple romance.

 

[Cagivagurl]

Story telling....
It's an art.... A gift, if you will.
Some people have it. Others don't. You can't learn it. Either you have it or you don't.
One of my favourite performance arts is the singer songwriter.
They can sit on stage, or in a corner, a street if they're busking.
They keep you entertained not only with their music, but their stry telling between songs. Good ones can keep me enthralled happily for hours.
In writing, for me it's all about the story.

I don't care about spelling or grammar. What I want is a story told well. It must have luscious rich dialogue, intriguing characters, and of course a plot.

Stories have often been told a thousand times. There has to be a uniqueness to it. Something that holds me....

Grammar, punctuation, spelling. You can learn that....

Being a great story teller is the unique individualistic part of the puzzle. Without that skill or ability. The rest means nothing....
It might be technically perfect, but if the writer has been unable to hold my attention. I just hit the back button...

Just my opinion of course.

Cagivagurl

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Story telling....
It's an art.... A gift, if you will.
Some people have it. Others don't. You can't learn it. Either you have it or you don't.
One of my favourite performance arts is the singer songwriter.
They can sit on stage, or in a corner, a street if they're busking.
They keep you entertained not only with their music, but their stry telling between songs. Good ones can keep me enthralled happily for hours.
In writing, for me it's all about the story.

I don't care about spelling or grammar. What I want is a story told well. It must have luscious rich dialogue, intriguing characters, and of course a plot.

Stories have often been told a thousand times. There has to be a uniqueness to it. Something that holds me....

Grammar, punctuation, spelling. You can learn that....

Being a great story teller is the unique individualistic part of the puzzle. Without that skill or ability. The rest means nothing....
It might be technically perfect, but if the writer has been unable to hold my attention. I just hit the back button...

Just my opinion of course.

Cagivagurl

I think your singer songwriter analogy is spot on.
Think of how many great singer songwriters don't actually have a particularly good singing voice. I'm looking at you Bob Dylan, yet people still love their music and turn out to hear them perform.
It's that other, intangible factor.

 

[Britva415]

what are the key elements, in your opinion, that a story has to have to be engaging and interesting?

An important one is pacing, sequence, and timing. (Let's pretend that's all one thing.)

Storytelling to me is the art/craft/science of knowing when to say what, when to reveal which detail of the story. Getting the timing wrong kills interest and engagement.

 

[Bramblethorn]

1. Characters.
Many authors love creating quirky characters in order to make them more interesting. That's fine but not necessary, in my opinion. Readers can identify just fine with regular characters, as long as you make them consistent and you make them evolve in a logical way as the plot progresses. Assuming a longer story, if at the end your character is exactly the same as at the beginning, then you failed in this regard. There has to be some evolving of the character, some change, some growth or breaking down.

I'd mostly agree with this. Almost everybody has the potential to be interesting if well written, but a lot of authors make the mistake of equating "would be interesting to do in real life" with "would be interesting to read about". I'm sure being a Navy SEAL (or whatever Special Ops branch is currently fashionable) would be a very interesting experience, but making one's protagonist a SEAL is not a shortcut to making them an interesting character, especially when so many other authors are doing the same.

I do think it's possible to tell a good story where the character is exactly the same at the beginning as at the end, but that story is probably a tragedy where the character's inability to change is the point of the story and not just an oversight. Possible examples: John Fowles' "The Collector" and the films "Memento".

As a personal thing, I can't imagine a story where there is no romance whatsoever. I'll always create a romantic interest but I also like adding some kind of tension, some conflict or power struggle, something to counterbalance the attraction. I think that makes the dynamic more interesting and it can enhance the plot of the story.

2. Plot
I can't read a story if the plot is boring, no matter what. For me, there has to be an interesting idea and a proper progression of that idea. Usually, it consists of setting up relations and conflict and then making it grow. I like adding mystery to the plot to make a reader guess; I like trying to misdirect his suspicions. Twists and turns are a must if you want to keep the attention of the reader. A plot that leads to a predictable outcome, well, sucks. It doesn't even matter if you are writing about a planetary war or about purchasing a donut. If the reader can easily guess how the plot will progress from start to finish then yeah, that isn't much of a story.

Twists have their place, but I think a lot of authors put too much weight on them as a gimmick. (Assuming that their objective is to cater to my preferences and my preferences alone ;-) A really good story has people wanting to reread it, even after they know exactly how it turns out, and there are plenty of great stories that telegraph their endings.

One of the pitfalls of twists is that they can make characters feel inconsistent. I've read stories that went something like this:

- Bob is a professional killer
- Bob spends his day murdering people
- Stuff goes wrong, Bob nearly dies, he doesn't
- Bob goes home PLOT TWIST to his loving wife and darling child

I get the attraction. There's some interesting dissonance between the Bob who is a ruthless murderer and the Bob who loves his family, and the author gets to feel clever for tricking the reader.

But impressing readers with one's cleverness doesn't necessarily make for great literature, and keeping the twist secret from the reader also prevents the author from actually exploring that dissonance. When Bob thinks he's about to die, the author can't get into angles like "does he feel sad about his kid growing up without a dad?" because they can't reveal to us that the kid exists. Compare to something like "Shoot 'Em Up" where the villain is going through marital difficulties and keeps getting calls from his wife at the most inconvenient times; in that film it's mostly played for laughs rather than serious character exploration, but at least it can be played for something.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

I'd mostly agree with this. Almost everybody has the potential to be interesting if well written, but a lot of authors make the mistake of equating "would be interesting to do in real life" with "would be interesting to read about". I'm sure being a Navy SEAL (or whatever Special Ops branch is currently fashionable) would be a very interesting experience, but making one's protagonist a SEAL is not a shortcut to making them an interesting character, especially when so many other authors are doing the same.

Good point.
Playing the "job defines who a character is" card tends to make characters LESS interesting, not more.
I work around lawyers all day, and I will be the first to tell you that if you think making a character a lawyer gives you some deep insight into his personality you are crazy. All it tells you is they are smart enough to pass the bar exam, in some cases after multiple tries.

 

[madelinemasoch]

My problem is that I dream up scenes rather than stories.

Which is why people think my stories info dump and are too long.

Both of those issues (info dumping and verbosity) can be fixed with practice and time. Those are issues with technique, not with how you get the ideas. I often see the ideas in my head as scenes instead of whole stories as well.

 

[Cagivagurl]

I'd mostly agree with this. Almost everybody has the potential to be interesting if well written, but a lot of authors make the mistake of equating "would be interesting to do in real life" with "would be interesting to read about". I'm sure being a Navy SEAL (or whatever Special Ops branch is currently fashionable) would be a very interesting experience, but making one's protagonist a SEAL is not a shortcut to making them an interesting character, especially when so many other authors are doing the same.

I do think it's possible to tell a good story where the character is exactly the same at the beginning as at the end, but that story is probably a tragedy where the character's inability to change is the point of the story and not just an oversight. Possible examples: John Fowles' "The Collector" and the films "Memento".



Twists have their place, but I think a lot of authors put too much weight on them as a gimmick. (Assuming that their objective is to cater to my preferences and my preferences alone ;-) A really good story has people wanting to reread it, even after they know exactly how it turns out, and there are plenty of great stories that telegraph their endings.

One of the pitfalls of twists is that they can make characters feel inconsistent. I've read stories that went something like this:

- Bob is a professional killer
- Bob spends his day murdering people
- Stuff goes wrong, Bob nearly dies, he doesn't
- Bob goes home PLOT TWIST to his loving wife and darling child

I get the attraction. There's some interesting dissonance between the Bob who is a ruthless murderer and the Bob who loves his family, and the author gets to feel clever for tricking the reader.

But impressing readers with one's cleverness doesn't necessarily make for great literature, and keeping the twist secret from the reader also prevents the author from actually exploring that dissonance. When Bob thinks he's about to die, the author can't get into angles like "does he feel sad about his kid growing up without a dad?" because they can't reveal to us that the kid exists. Compare to something like "Shoot 'Em Up" where the villain is going through marital difficulties and keeps getting calls from his wife at the most inconvenient times; in that film it's mostly played for laughs rather than serious character exploration, but at least it can be played for something.

Personally, I like characters to be ordinary people. It is the situation they find themselves in which provides to intrigue, the tension. Ordinary people responding to a situation which carries them out of their comfort zone...
What dio they do, why do they do it. Does it frighten them, arouse them. Are their actions reasonable???
That's where the growth comes from.
If a story is intricately wound, carrying the characters into new pastures. They can't help but grow, develop, blossum.
If they are the same at the end as they were at the start, then they haven't been affected by what happened to them.

In my opinion of course....

I want to read about people who have been deeply affected by circumstance... Then watch them uncover a pathway forward. How they deal / accept / grow into the new situation. Hopefully it is filled with tension, emotion, confrontation.

Cagivagurl

 

[THBGato]

Is the kink the same as the plot?
I don't think it is. You can take a story with a great plot and change the details of the actual sex and the story doesn't change much.

I meant this in the sense that the plot must enable the kink.

For instance, my kink (if it deserves that label) is women realising/admitting to themselves for the first time that they are attracted to other women, and acting on that. So the plot must allow for this. There's no point me reading a boy-meets-girl plot (I do read those, but not usually on Literotica). I'm looking for straight-girl-meets-girl.

I imagine this is generally true of many kinks, though I'll happily admit to ignorance here as I really don't read much outside the Lesbian Sex category.

Having read both Lafayette Hills and, now, part 1 of Love is a Place (the rest to follow shortly, I suspect ;-) I'd disagree here. Yes, they both feature autistic-coded protagonists, but you're exploring different aspects of that to the ones AwkwardMD explored - and while the outline may fit a standard plot, the execution is its own thing

You're too kind.

 

[StillStunned]

A few random thoughts:

Writing is a craft. You can learn it, you can get better at it, you can slip into routine and recurring patterns. You can work on any weaknesses you know about, but that usually means someone has to point those weaknesses out to you and you have to recognise that they're right.

In sci-fi/fantasy, the setting becomes a character in its own right. It can further the plot, it can reflect the plot or a character's state of mind, done properly it can even affect the reader's state of mind as they read. That said, don't use your stories as a vehicle to describe this amazing world you've built. No-one really cares about the world, only how it affects your story.

I suck at plotting and characterisation. My plots tend to be heavy-handed, and my character development either non-existent or over the top.

Unlike many other people here, I think grammar and spelling are important. I don't read stories purely for the language, but too many mistakes will take me right out of the story. I also think that language should be used to enhance your story: sounds, rhythms, images all help to paint a picture for your reader and make your story come alive.

Sex scenes, finally, should be an organic and intrinsic part of the story. They should make sense in the scene and for the characters and grow naturally from what's gone before.