What We Owe The Readers

[Paul_Chance]

This is just a great line. I'm going to start using it in place of commenting on the weather.

"Hi fellow human being who shares space with me, just checking in to confirm that things between us continue to be amicable and there is no drama going on". @Bramblethorn

 

[Paul_Chance]

It's been interesting reading the variety of responses, so I'll add some comments here for consideration.

One of the first things that happened is people zeroed in on "owe", which led to the amusing diversion into contracts and contract law, which was not my intention.

I meant the word in its simplest meaning - to have an obligation to someone else for something given.

Out of sheer curiosity, among those who objected to or focused in on the word - what word would have made the initial post more palatable to you?

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I meant the word in its simplest meaning - to have an obligation to someone else for something given.

That's what I meant by contract too, but I understand that people can't not think of money and law when the word contract is used (and I have admitted such), but I really don't think the discussion diverted all that much. Really the only thing that happened was that the topic widened from what writers may 'owe' readers to also include what readers may 'owe' writers.

 

[TadOverdon]

I assume the writer of the essay was talking only about popular commercial genre fiction.

 

[Paul_Chance]

I assume the writer of the essay was talking only about popular commercial genre fiction.

That would be a correct assumption, the original author was not talking about posting to a free site for free readers.

Several of the contributors to this thread did a good job of lining out our particular environment on Lit. I liked @Comshaw response differentiating between work for pay (incurs obligation) and work for free ("as is" or "it is what it is", no obligation). @lustychimera and @Cagivagurl also spoke to that difference.

 

[Paul_Chance]

I also think those that pointed out it's a three body question, inserting the publisher/web publisher in the mix, had a valid point. In the relationship between the author (creating the work) and the reader (consuming the work), the publisher sits with their own obligations (in the looser sense) to the author and the reader. That kind of gave me food for thought, so thanks to @KeithD and @ElectricBlue for pointing that out.

 

[Cagivagurl]

That would be a correct assumption, the original author was not talking about posting to a free site for free readers.

Several of the contributors to this thread did a good job of lining out our particular environment on Lit. I liked @Comshaw response differentiating between work for pay (incurs obligation) and work for free ("as is" or "it is what it is", no obligation). @lustychimera and @Cagivagurl also spoke to that difference.

Changing the word from owe, to obligation doesn't affect the outcome. In my opinion...
To be obliged or owe somebody something assumes a relationship between the two parties.
In this instance, there is no relationship.
A story is written, I assume because the creator had a moment of inspiration and extracted a certain amount of joy from the process of writing it.
The story is submitted and then posted on a free web site where people can choose to read or not read the posted piece.
That is the extent of the writers relationship... No debt, no obligation aside from legal ones, and site rules.
As the writer you are under no obligation apart from the ones you place on yourself.

History.... Ah yes... Once you have written a few stories, and gathered a few followers. It could be argued the readers who follow you have expectations based on previous works... That is their issue, not yours....
Their expectation is not your obligation...
Cagivagurl

 

[Britva415]

One of the first things that happened is people zeroed in on "owe", which led to the amusing diversion into contracts and contract law, which was not my intention.

I meant the word in its simplest meaning - to have an obligation to someone else for something given.

Out of sheer curiosity, among those who objected to or focused in on the word - what word would have made the initial post more palatable to you?

I think just as many if not more responses took "owe" in the spirit you intended rather than the contract tangent.

I think everyone else focused on the word in the sense of "obligation," just as you intended.

Not to speak for everyone, but that's my impression based on them having spoken for themselves. Someone spank me if I'm wrong.

So:
For people who objected to the word "owe" on the basis that it represents an obligation, and to the extent that they object to the notion of obligation at all, I don't see an answer to your question. If you didn't mean "obligation," we can't know what you meant. If you did mean "obligation," then the objections to "obligation" are not going to go away.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I think that we have a good number of writers here blowing the horn of "I write what I want and don't pander" claiming that they owe the reader nothing, yet at the same time are chasing down that Red H like a cheetah in the African Savannah. If you want the Red H that badly, then you do owe the readers what they want. If you say that they owe you nothing, talk the talk, walk the walk and don't cry when you get a downvote or someone leaves you an anonymous critique.

 

[Kumquatqueen]

I think that we have a good number of writers here blowing the horn of "I write what I want and don't pander" claiming that they owe the reader nothing, yet at the same time are chasing down that Red H like a cheetah in the African Savannah. If you want the Red H that badly, then you do owe the readers what they want. If you say that they owe you nothing, talk the talk, walk the walk and don't cry when you get a downvote or someone leaves you an anonymous critique.

Giving readers something a bit different, that still gets the recognition of a red H, is thus more of a mark of approval, no? Much more of a challenge.

I tried to write an incest story which both satisfied my desire for realism and lack of abuse, and got a red H, to see if I could construct a story to please those readers, while being totally uninterested in the topic. It was a fascinating exercise, skimming high-scoring stories and borrowing phrases. It did quite well, people liked the dialogue, with the main criticism being 'they didn't stay together'. Which was the point.

Though if you write stories which get fewer readers or voters, your scores are much more vulnerable to swinging about. That's one nice thing about I/T as a category - your score likely represents a real opinion of readers, given 1000 votes isn't unusual. In other categories you might get 10k views over a few months, but only 10 to 20 votes - those scores mean little.

Laurel used to award a few stories a green E for Editors Choice. They were always something a bit different (as well as well crafted). I read most of them and would love to see more, because they were generally the kind of writing I aspire to (but rarely achieve, partly because I publish when I can't be bothered to edit any more).

 

[Cagivagurl]

I think that we have a good number of writers here blowing the horn of "I write what I want and don't pander" claiming that they owe the reader nothing, yet at the same time are chasing down that Red H like a cheetah in the African Savannah. If you want the Red H that badly, then you do owe the readers what they want. If you say that they owe you nothing, talk the talk, walk the walk and don't cry when you get a downvote or someone leaves you an anonymous critique.

There may be a few writers who feel that way.
The red H means nothing to me...
I write for my own pleasure.
I'm not saying I don't enjoy it when I get one. I simply don't covet it.
We are all clever enough to know what's required to earn the red H... Most categories have a fairly simple recipe for success.
Some of us write what we want regardless...
There's not enough room in your pigeon hole for all of us.

Cagivagurl

 

[pink_silk_glove]

There's not enough room in your pigeon hole for all of us.

One, the hole is far bigger than a pigeon, and two I never named any names, you just assumed that you're in that group, which I guess means that you are. Purely by your deduction, not mine, so don't blame me.

 

[Cagivagurl]

One, the hole is far bigger than a pigeon, and two I never named any names, you just assumed that you're in that group, which I guess means that you are. Purely by your deduction, not mine, so don't blame me.

I didn't think you were talking about me directly.
I felt it was a catch all statement reflecting on all.
I made my comment not defensively, but as an explanation of my philosophy.

Cagivagurl

 

[Inkent]

I've only recently returned to Lit to write, to begin with I didn't feel I owed the reader anything. I write simply for my enjoyment, by publishing on Lit I am giving others an opportunity to share my enjoyment by having the option to have a read. After a few stories I do now feel I owe the reader something, that's the opportunity to not read my works.

I'm a liberal person so made the assumption that anyone into erotica was of the same ilk, but that's far from the case. There are individuals out there with mindsets that live within a narrow bandwidth of subject material that the find acceptable, something that I've learnt around the stuff I've published. I now try to make an effort to give an indication as to the stories content, without divulging the plot so those that want to steer clear can, can.

There is something else too, I published a piece where the MC was on the cusp of suicide, I made no mention of it, and was pulled up in the comments, so I now look at my works and will point out subject matters that may upset people outside of erotica on top of the genre/possible content. It seems to work, someone thanked me for noting a story played on the death of a child, and it was something that they had experienced. I owed that person the opportunity to skip my story (which they did).

Literotica relies on mutualism we have a platform to share our hard work as authors, those that read within the various genres have a steady supply of material, so it's a win-win as far as I'm concerned.

 

[WrongFrog]

My opinion, take it for what you pay for it:

I owe my readers a relatively error free draft of an entertaining story. Hopefully they'll enjoy it enough (or hate it enough) to give me some feedback.

That's it.

I'm not getting paid for any of my writing currently, so everything I post is for fishing purposes- cast out my bait, see what pulls in the reactions, refine my technique. At this point in my life, I'm writing to save what's left of myself and maybe find my bearings in the writing world again. I used to love what I wrote and published, it used to be fun and a place of joy and peace for me to settle in front of my computer and start typing. It's been a very long time since that was true, and I want to get back to that person.

 

[Areala-chan]

I don't think of owing readers so much as I think of owing myself. If I'm going to write something other people are going to read, then I owe it to myself to be true to the styles and themes I have chosen to touch on in that story. I have the story in my heart already, so I have to communicate it to the reader in the way that keeps it true to the characters and their intentions, even when those intentions may be at odds with what a reader might want.

If there's anything I truly owe the reader beyond that, it's a manuscript as error-free as one error-prone human being can produce, honest tags, and the ability to tell me, either in public or in private, what worked and what didn't so I can get better.

But this is just a hobby. I have no illusions about earning money from my craft. I like telling stories. If I find people who enjoy reading the ones I've chosen to tell, then I've been truly blessed.

 

[KeithD]

I do believe that the reader is owed a completion of a published story--or it shouldn't be offered at all. That's not an issue for short stories. This means to me that something that is chaptered should be ready for publication before publishing of any part of it starts. If the author dies before it all can be delivered to the publisher, that would be an understandable exception. It shouldn't be happening often, though. It's a standard I'll keep to in my own writing and if I invested in a read that just petered out, I'd probably not read that author again. This doesn't hold with series of separate, standalone works.

That's just for me. Others can (and do/will) have their own views without me slitting my wrists over the issue.

 

[Comshaw]

It's been interesting reading the variety of responses, so I'll add some comments here for consideration.

One of the first things that happened is people zeroed in on "owe", which led to the amusing diversion into contracts and contract law, which was not my intention.

I meant the word in its simplest meaning - to have an obligation to someone else for something given.

Out of sheer curiosity, among those who objected to or focused in on the word - what word would have made the initial post more palatable to you?

Even with your clarification of the word, I still do not think we "owe" the readers anything. When I freely give something I don't owe the recipient anything IF they accept it. It's a gift. As such once offered and accepted, it comes with no conditions on either side.

Yes I'd like every reader to vote and/or leave a comment, but it isn't required. I do not expect every reader to like or finish a story I wrote. In reverse, I do not believe the readers are owed anything for a freely given gift. I can make it as raunchy or as terribly constructed as I want.

Sure I want them to enjoy it. I want them to like it. But that comes from me and my desires, not a sense of owing them that.

Comshaw

 

[Bramblethorn]

If the author dies before it all can be delivered to the publisher, that would be an understandable exception. It shouldn't be happening often, though.

Not more than once per author, one expects.

 

[32aa]

We owe the reader our best effort, nothing more, but nothing less.
We owe ourselves the joy (and agony) of creating something that is yours and yours alone. If your not emotionally linked with your work, why bother?

The last sentence says it all. "Why bother?"

 

[jehoram]

I read an interesting article today about what authors owe readers and it made me think of lit.

The author puts forward that, in general, in exchange for the readers time, authors "owe" the readers five things:

1. A good "Character" that the readers can follow, interesting, distinct and developed.

2. A good "Voice" for the narrator of the story, that supports the tale and is consistent fpr the reader.

3. A good "World" for the story, again, consistent and interesting for the reader.

4. A good "Problem" for the character to resolve. The more interesting the better for the reader.

5. A good "Event" for the character to participate in and the reader to come along through.

I would call that list "what we owe to ourselves as authors."

 

[intim8]

Does courtesy demand a "thanks" if someone does something nice, like hold open a door for you? Are they right to feel slighted if you don't give it?

If so, any argument based on "this is a free site" is moot and irrelevant.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Does courtesy demand a "thanks" if someone does something nice, like hold open a door for you? Are they right to feel slighted if you don't give it?

If so, any argument based on "this is a free site" is moot and irrelevant.

The answer is no. So it's completely relevant.