Backclick Triggers

[dr_mabeuse]

Re: Re: Backclick Triggers

|
From a recent story of mine:
"That's true of all the restaurants on that street. Food
to die for -- restrooms to die *from*."
|
I guess I'd have lost the good doctor.

No. I like that. And using it in diaolgue is fine: it definitely types your character as having a certain kind of not-quite-with-itness.

It just irritates me when an author describes something in terms of how the narrator feels about it. It's the fallacy of the "delicious-looking steak": "She had the most incredible tits I'd ever seen!" (Well good for her, but what did they look like?) And then using a cliche like "to die for" on top of it makes me hit the eject button. Obviously the author's powers of description are feeble at best.

That, more than anything else, is why I like third person more than first person: because first person is more prone to give you that delicious-looking steak kind of thing. When you do get it in third person ("She had the most incredible tits he'd ever seen.") you can be pretty sure that you're dealing with an author who writes in crayon and that it's time to go.

---dr.M.

 

[ffreak]

Re: Re: Re: Backclick Triggers

It just irritates me when an author describes something in terms of how the narrator feels about it. It's the fallacy of the "delicious-looking steak": "She had the most incredible tits I'd ever seen!" (Well good for her, but what did they look like?)

That, I think, hits the problem on its proverbial head (assuming problems only really have heads in proverbs).

Narrators frequently write long descriptions to set the scene, and I don't mind that. But when the narrator never lets the characters describe the scene in dialog or in what they're doing, they're letting story go to produce word length. In order for description to drive the story it has to be necessary. The snippetsville exercises are a great place to practice this principle.

-FF (still working on a piece with my scissors)
ps. Man can I ever stack in the words - everything I write starts out 2-3 times as long as the results you folks see, including posts.

 

[raphy]

Ooh, that's heartening to hear ... The stroke-fest I mentioned earlier (my latest story - submitted, awaiting approval) is written in first person, and written in a *very* conversational style, so the personality of the narrator is very obvious and shines through right from the first paragraph:

So, there I am, standing in this unfamiliar kitchen with my pants around my ankles, my camera round my neck and some cute little Asian chick swallowin' my cock like the apocalypse is gonna come in 5 minutes and she just had to get her daily dose of liquid protein shake before the end. I dunno about the apocalypse coming, but damn I was gettin' close.

Now, I know what you're thinkin'. You're thinkin', 'Lucky man'. Fuck, I was thinkin' 'Lucky man' at the time, too. Okay. So it's a Friday afternoon, right? Let's say it's about 4:30 pm, and let's say that yours truly is the last man standing in the electronics department of the Circuit City down on 12th ave. I'm sure you know the one. I'm sure you know me too. I'm just the average looking guy that wanders round the store and says "Hey, can I help you with somethin'?"

.... is how it starts .. See, flashback story!!! *cringes*

 

[ffreak]

Yeah, but you do it so well.

I think I said: The challenge is to break the stereotype by doing it differently.

Ok, so you started with sex, but you also started with a guy trying to figure out how he got to what has to be a dream come true. You've already prepped us with how it's not because he's God's gift to women (hey that belongs in another thread). You've made it more interesting and given us a reason to want to know what happened before.

See, it's okay. Keep it up (and hurry and finish the damned story, after the teaser I want to know more).

-FF (Asian? Mine would have had long, dark, curly hair, and a knowing smile - which of course we can't tell yet since her expression is otherwise occupied)

 

[raphy]

Eff, it's finished and submitted - Just waiting for Laurel to approve and post. Story title is: "Well, goddamn"... Which I love, because it sums up both the story and the narrator's attitude to stuff.

Well, goddamn.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Eff, it's finished and submitted - Just waiting for Laurel to approve and post. Story title is: "Well, goddamn"... Which I love, because it sums up both the story and the narrator's attitude to stuff.

Well, goddamn.

I wouldn't worry about it Raph. There's not a rule in writing that can't be violated, and lots of times with good results.

I was just thinking about this chapter I wrote for a chain story for Alicia Charms. Somehow I changed verb tense right in the middle of the story, going from past tense to present tense and then back again, and I didn't pick it up in proof-reading. For some reason it got an 'E' rating; the only I ever got on Lit.

---dr.M.

 

[Uncle Meat]

Hey, gang. First post here, ever. This is a topic that inspires me to post because I've been in a lot of creative writing classes, workshops, etc., in addition to reading a lot of amateur work of all types online. Consequently, I've formed fairly strong opinions.

I have to agree with a lot of what's already been said, especially regarding grammar, the mirror scene, and over-the-top language. An insructor of mine used to call it "purple prose."

I don't mind the inventory of statistics too much, depending on how it's done. If the writer just tosses a couple items in, I don't see a problem. If the list goes longer, it depends on context and the character. If you're inside a guy's head, he might very well think in terms of cup size.

A biggie backclick trigger for me is the overly contrived situation. Some writers go to elaborate lengths to set up a completely unreal and unbelievable situation just for the sake of getting characters together for the fuck. I've seen "setups" based on medical conditions that I know very well don't exist, computer problems that I know to be impossible, and so on. My feeling is that (a) setups like that overshadow anything else in the story, and (b) if that's what you have to do to make the story interesting, you need to rethink the story.

 

[raphy]

if that's what you have to do to make the story interesting, you need to rethink the story.

Amen to that!

Oh, and welcome to the AH =)

 

[Icingsugar]

I have to agree with a lot of what's already been said, especially regarding grammar, the mirror scene, and over-the-top language. An insructor of mine used to call it "purple prose."

I don't mind the inventory of statistics too much, depending on how it's done. If the writer just tosses a couple items in, I don't see a problem. If the list goes longer, it depends on context and the character. If you're inside a guy's head, he might very well think in terms of cup size.

A biggie backclick trigger for me is the overly contrived situation. Some writers go to elaborate lengths to set up a completely unreal and unbelievable situation just for the sake of getting characters together for the fuck. I've seen "setups" based on medical conditions that I know very well don't exist, computer problems that I know to be impossible, and so on. My feeling is that (a) setups like that overshadow anything else in the story, and (b) if that's what you have to do to make the story interesting, you need to rethink the story.

You are right on my wavelength there. If two (or more) people are going to get it on, there should be at least some logic to it. I rarely ever get more than half a page into a story where the characters just wants to fuck for no apparent reason, then do it and it doesn't affect anything.

Setups based on totally made-up and unrealistic conditions is a big cringer for me too. Unless we're talking fantasy/sf here, and more so then, it takes some ambition to make the unfamiliar conditions belivable. However, blunt excuses for sex (like this: "I have a rare medical condition. If I don't get a serious deep-dickin twice a day, I won't produce this-or-that hormone, and I'll die.") could actually work, if it is presented in the right context, and with the right attitude. Not one for the seriuos dramatic pieces, but present it in a carefree way as just as something just as weird as it sounds, and I'd buy the setup.

In the right context, there is a place for everything. Write erotic humor, and you'll see how a bimbo admiring herself in front of a mirror can be the most natural thing in the world.

/Ice - joining raphy in a big ol' Welcome!

 

[Stefan_J]

Yup, i gotta agree with all of you (although from time to time i've stepped over the line too, i think most of us have). One of my all-time 'fuck you i'm back clicking' triggers would have to be grossly inconistant characters, or unbelievable ones...I need character development and depth, who likes reading about some empty character named Tom who's just fucking some blonde with big tits called Cindy? Boring.

Even i'll admit i like reading stroke stories every now and then for variation (writing one right now as a matter of fact) but the good ones still have to have characters that are interesting and something of a plot, not just sex from beginning to end.

Oh, oh, and cliched, empty dialogue...but i guess that ties in with empty characters.

 

[Uncle Meat]

You are right on my wavelength there. If two (or more) people are going to get it on, there should be at least some logic to it. I rarely ever get more than half a page into a story where the characters just wants to fuck for no apparent reason, then do it and it doesn't affect anything.

I think there's something to be said for cheap, meaningless sex -- both in real life and in fiction. But if that's what the story's about, it has to be HOT. I'm talking smoke coming out of my monitor. Either that, or show me something truly unusual. Bring out the Little Bo Peep costume, the cleverly modified Black and Decker power tools, the trapeze...

Setups based on totally made-up and unrealistic conditions is a big cringer for me too. Unless we're talking fantasy/sf here, and more so then, it takes some ambition to make the unfamiliar conditions belivable. However, blunt excuses for sex (like this: "I have a rare medical condition. If I don't get a serious deep-dickin twice a day, I won't produce this-or-that hormone, and I'll die.") could actually work, if it is presented in the right context, and with the right attitude. Not one for the seriuos dramatic pieces, but present it in a carefree way as just as something just as weird as it sounds, and I'd buy the setup.

Yeah, that's exactly the type of setup I'm talking about. I agree that it could work if given the right attitude, but I'd also add that I think that type of thing would fall into the category of "trained professionals only; don't try this at home."

Fantasy, science fiction and horror writers, I guess, operate with a slight advantage in this regard, in that readers come to it expecting something not totally real. But still, that just gives the writer a free pass through the door, so to speak. It still doesn't give carte blanche to do any daggone thing you can think of. Any piece of fiction has to comply with the rules for whatever world it takes place in.

/Ice - joining raphy in a big ol' Welcome!

And thanks to both you and raphy for the welcome.

 

[Alex De Kok]

I love threads like this

I always learn something. I also wince at mention of the crimes I've committed in my earlier work. I'm too busy having fun writing new stuff - hopefully having learned my lessons - to go back and resubmit corrected versions.

Alex

 

[Icingsugar]

Bring out the Little Bo Peep costume, the cleverly modified Black and Decker power tools, the trapeze...

...at the same time? Are you flirting with me?

/Ice - Vanilla Ice, actually.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Another backclick trigger: Any author with Li'l in his/her nickname.

---dr.M.

 

[Uncle Meat]

...at the same time? Are you flirting with me?

/Ice - Vanilla Ice, actually.

Hey, I'll tell you what. I just wish I could meet a woman who would consider that flirting.

 

[Guest]

Hey, I'll tell you what. I just wish I could meet a woman who would consider that flirting.

Hello!

Oops, sorry, I forgot. I'm taken.

Lou

 

[raphy]

Hello!

Oops, sorry, I forgot. I'm taken.

Lou

Aaah, and the reminder breaks my heart every single day.....

Raph, trying to keep a straight face.

 

[Guest]

Oops, sorry, I forgot. I'm taken.

Now that's blatant teasing. Good on ya, gurl.

Purrditta

 

[Linbido]

Another backclick trigger: Any author with Li'l in his/her nickname.

---dr.M.

Do we have those?
*goes purging the L section of the Members list*

I'd like to add that anyone what so ever with Li'l in their name should be slapped arround. But hey, that's just Li'l me talking.

 

[KillerMuffin]

Re: Well...

4. muffin.

 

[MathGirl]

Another backclick trigger: Any author with Li'l in his/her nickname.

Dear Dr M,
Any author with "69" as part of the nickname. Also nicknames that declare the namee to have a large wiwi. E.g. Dick Long, etc.
MG
Ps. I haven't decided about the nickname "Uncle Meat" yet. I think I like it. Maybe.

 

[raphy]

Poor Muffie!

 

[Guest]

Poor Love Potion. You excluded her didn't you, Maths?

 

[raphy]

Yannow, that's the problem with generalizations... They're always so damn .. general

 

[MathGirl]

Poor Love Potion. You excluded her didn't you, Maths?

Dear Perdita,
Thanks for reminding me of that. Yes, I like LP, and she's excused.
MG