How much disbelief can you suspend?

[jaF0]

but I find I can still enjoy it if the author makes at least a modest attempt to explain why family member A and family member B get together beyond,

I did a thing once. Guy goes into a strip club. I made it a point that it was a dark place like most are and the bright stage lights, costumes and his drinking made it hard to see faces clearly. On stage, she was focused on the money/tips and sort of zoned out as to who was offering it explaning that it was part of how she coped with it all. They go into a special back room that some clubs reportedly have and engage in some stuff, still not really aware of who was who, even at close contact quarters. It wasn't until after they were actively engaged that she recognized a mark on her brother's neck.

 

[SimonDoom]

I did a thing once. Guy goes into a strip club. I made it a point that it was a dark place like most are and the bright stage lights, costumes and his drinking made it hard to see faces clearly. On stage, she was focused on the money/tips and sort of zoned out as to who was offering it explaning that it was part of how she coped with it all. They go into a special back room that some clubs reportedly have and engage in some stuff, still not really aware of who was who, even at close contact quarters. It wasn't until after they were actively engaged that she recognized a mark on her brother's neck.

I think that works. Shakespeare's comedies are full of examples of misidentification, or one person passing himself/herself off as someone else. Obviously, audiences by and large accept it. A few artfully placed details can carry a reader through the unbelievable part.

 

[StillStunned]

I think that works. Shakespeare's comedies are full of examples of misidentification, or one person passing himself/herself off as someone else. Obviously, audiences by and large accept it. A few artfully placed details can carry a reader through the unbelievable part.

The oldest story I know of someone passing themself off as someone else was a Greek legend, where a king goes off to war, and his wife disguises herself as a shield bearer to follow him. She saves his life, and as her reward she asks to spend the night with him. It's only when they're getting it on that he realises the truth.

(I might have some of the details wrong. It's been at least 35 years since I read the story.)

 

[NotWise]

An example of a Spielberg movie that did NOT work in this regard was War of the Worlds. That movie, to me, felt like a mish-mash of expertly crafted and visually stunning set pieces that worked great individually but made no sense as a narrative. The whole idea of the enemy craft being underground the whole time just made no sense and it never did, even though it made for a great initial scene. And it made no sense at the end when the aliens, who obviously were technologically superior, were oblivious to the risks of infection on an alien planet. Silliness.

I wouldn't blame Spielberg for the resolution. It was inherited from HG Wells' original, and it's been a feature in every version I've seen or heard.

 

[Mogrem]

If an author can make a story dream-like enough, a fascinating bewilderment of the senses, then I'll swallow more or less anything (much like the characters...) I think it helps if I get a strong sense that I am specifically inside either the protagonist's or the author's fantasy and/or dream.

London Dreams by Donna Cooke is a perfect example of this.

 

[SimonDoom]

I wouldn't blame Spielberg for the resolution. It was inherited from HG Wells' original, and it's been a feature in every version I've seen or heard.

It was dramatically problematic even then, but our knowledge of germs back in the day was so rudimentary that one could get away with it. It's too dramatically unsatisfying now.

Spielberg changed the ending of Jaws to make it more cinematically satisfying, even if it was much less believable. I thought it worked. The film was better than the book. I felt like the ending of his WOTW film seemed very "meh." Unimaginative.

 

[theWollstonecraftWoman]

I can believe in the most impossible stories if they are written well. If not, I can't believe in half the shit out there.

 

[THBGato]

I am happy to suspend a lot of disbelief (I read lots of fantasy) BUT I prefer not too. I am most moved by stories that, to quote Simon Armitage, are "near to the knuckle, in the here and now". Further, in Erotica, the less I have to suspend my disbelief, the closer I feel to the action and the sexier it is.

 

[Wifetheif]

This is something I take personally. I write lots of non-consent stories but there has to be plausibility. There has to be a logical background on which the story unspools. Even my fantasy tales must have internal and consistent logic. As Mark Twain said, "Truth is stranger than fiction. It has to be. Fiction has to make sense." A really good author can throw out a string of improbabilities but if you buy them in universe, you will follow that author anywhere. I try very hard to keep everything on a believable level.

 

[jaF0]

If an author can make a story dream-like enough, a fascinating bewilderment of the senses, then I'll swallow more or less anything (much like the characters...) I think it helps if I get a strong sense that I am specifically inside either the protagonist's or the author's fantasy and/or dream.

That's sort of where I was going. Neither party was hiding or trying to be someone else and not be recognized. They were just so wound up in their own moments, they were completely unaware.

 

[Euphony]

Dungeon
Crawler
Carl

was a seismic shift in my understanding of suspending disbelief.



Running Man style death tourney, talking cat, disembodied sentient sex doll head, so many animal/human/alien hybrids you surrender to just about anything.

Not my genre, fell into it on a Goodreads thread about books subverting expectations. Boy does it ever.

Why it works: It's absurdist from the jump and rarely cuts against that grain. When it does so, it's for little moments of humanity (audience's reality grounding) and then regrounds its stated throughline/absurdist intent.

It never takes itself too seriously but is running through razor wire careful to not make a joke of itself and, most importantly, the readers commitment and buy in.

That's what makes bonkers stuff fly and more grounded stuff read as even worse M Knight Shyamalan fanfic. Less to do with the underlying realities (or not) and more with how the author honors the story and the reader.

There was nothing drawing me to this book and everything working against it (not into fantasy, absurdity, gore, etc.) yet it is an incredible example of the power an author has to craft the experience well beyond setting and underpinnings.

We all have our own comfort level of un-reality (not a word) we can manipulate and confidently write. This series convinced me as much or more than any other that an author's buy in to their world and material (legitimate giving themselves over to it not just " I wrote the thing = I'm obviously ok with it." ) bends the reader experience of the story even beyond their own usual limitations.

I know "be authentic to your concept" is nebulous AF but I really do believe we have an ability to sniff out wavering in authors stories, it quickly reads unbelievable/unnatural.

I don't think it's as much about the underlying themes, concepts, realities, etc. as we'd like to think. Talent and "commit to the bit" carries a ton of the "meet reader expectations" weight and are skills worth broadening. (so read way outside your usual bounds. Ya ain't gotta write the next great American Hucow Mom novel but maybe you write the best version of a reality pressuring concept you have.

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

Well, I predominantly write about transgender women in loving and supportive relationships and environments with lots of acceptance. My stories always have somewhat Harlequinesque happy endings. Unfortunately, I guess I can suspend a lot.

 

[MillieDynamite]

I believe everyone when they say they aren't using AI. I believe that Ben in Lost was too hard on himself at the end of the series. I believe Fringe is real when I watch it. I read Dracula, Salem's Lot, with all the lights on in the house, because, you know, vampires are real when I read them. I believe Nash Bridges has a photographic memory and only forgets things because the writers made him. I keep looking for historical references to Woodrow F. Call, Augustus McCrae, Jake Spoon, Lorena Wood, and Clara Allen every time I read any of the books in the series. So, I'm pretty gullible when I read or watch.

 

[lovecraft68]

As long as whatever is in the story stays consistent, I can buy in. I also tend to like to keep things as plausible as possible, but know that at some point fiction has to fiction and when it comes to erotica I will catch myself mid story thinking, "And now is where he venture into porn absurdity." Because like Thanos says in End Game, I am inevitable.

 

[Senor_Smut]

I agree with most of what others have said, but I'll add one thing. Once the writer draws the lines around how things are, no matter how weird those lines might look from the outside, then the writer needs to 1) color inside those lines, or 2) make the story about why they're not doing so.

I'll give an example. If a writer establishes that magic in their setting always requires an extensive ritual that takes at least 15 minutes and then has a character cast a spell in seconds, then the rest of the story must revolve around why that character can upend the rules of magic. If it passes uncommented, unpursued, and unexplained, then the reader's suspension of disbelief collapses like Tacoma Bridge.

This is an ironclad law, and it is broken so often in print and film that it makes the head spin. So often it happens just because the writer got themselves into a corner and can't see another way out, but sometimes it's just sheer stupidity and laziness. Either way, it's fatal to suspension of disbelief.

 

[MillieDynamite]

You had me at magic. Speaking of Magic, that was in a creepy movie; that puppet sure knew how to pull the strings on the pupateire. Wait, I mean, that dummy sure knew how to work his vantrillaquest.

 

[Bazzle]

Just this week I published a story about a woman who meets three beings called the Aspects of Orgasm. They send her on a journey through time and space to give orgasms back to people who deserve them more.

I still wanted her responses to be realistic though.

Hmmm was your protagonist a sexual Scrooge?
The three beings "Foreplay" before, "Wet" during sex and "Hug" on the cum down afterwards?

Showing your protagonist the benefits of ass and tits?

 

[joy_of_cooking]

What I've found in discussing sci-fi stories with others is that people differ in the topics on which they are willing to suspend disbelief.

Some people are extremely picky about realism in character-building. They want people to act like the people they know, even if that's anachronistic. These are the people who will complain about implausible motivations in a Bronze Age shaman (or, closer to home, a consensual swinger).

Other people will accept poor characterization as long as the science is consistent with our current understanding, or the economics, or whatever.

 

[StillStunned]

Hmmm was your protagonist a sexual Scrooge?
The three beings "Foreplay" before, "Wet" during sex and "Hug" on the cum down afterwards?

Showing your protagonist the benefits of ass and tits?

You missed an opportunity there for referring to her as Screwge.

The Aspects are in fact Arousal, Climax and Satisfaction. And the story is even shallower that you describe: One Orgasm At A Time.

 

[jaF0]

What I've found in discussing sci-fi stories with others is that people differ in the topics on which they are willing to suspend disbelief.

Some people are extremely picky about realism in character-building. They want people to act like the people they know, ...

I once read (and have never been able to find again) that Roddenberry insisted that aliens be generally similar to humans ... limbs, eyes, nostrils, ears, etc.

Yet there were exceptions like the rock creature in the mines, the space whale and various energy entities.

 

[MillieDynamite]

He also insited on no buttons, zippers, or pockets. Where the fuck do you put your credits (which, of course, federation credits are also a form of money which we wouldn't be using, and yet it's there), your ID, that data file you're taking home to work on? Men wouldn't be bald, women would all be beautiful, and never a tear would shed because unhappiness is outlawed.

I once read (and have never been able to find again) that Roddenberry insisted that aliens be generally similar to humans ... limbs, eyes, nostrils, ears, etc.

Yet there were exceptions like the rock creature in the mines, the space whale and various energy entities.

 

[Bazzle]

You missed an opportunity there for referring to her as Screwge.

The Aspects are in fact Arousal, Climax and Satisfaction. And the story is even shallower that you describe: One Orgasm At A Time.

I was flapping around trying to find a pun and didn't find Screwge. I had Suege at one point and failed.

 

[intim8]

To what degree are you willing to suspend disbelief as a reader? How far do you push your readers as an author? What things do you do as an author to try to keep your readers on board?

To me, the question isn't about quantity, but quality. I can suspend exactly as much disbelief as the story requires and as much as the author tells me up front I will have to.

The most absolutely impossible, even ridiculous things will fly, but the author has to communicate it pretty quickly as the story starts. If the world itself or the situation of the plot is unbelievable - there's magic or impossible tech or unbelievable political or social situations, or unrealistic sex - let me know with some initial example of what I'm in for.

Include some small details that signal the kind of world it is. Or foreshadow something about the world and the story. Or tell me with tone. Or lanpshade the hell out of it on the first page. Or any combination of those. But it usually has to be done before (or at least simultaneous with) any significant plot elements or secondary charactes come in. (On Lit, title, category, description, and tags will often suffice, if it's that kind of disbelief).

And don't make it gratuitous (unless it is the kind of story where gratuitous ridiculessness is part of the deal, but you have to let me know that up front too). If I'm here suspending my disbelief and find out it didn't matter, I'm going to have words with you, even if you never hear them.

I don't usually think about SOD explicitly while I'm reading, but in retrospect - or if the author violates the terms he himself set - I will think about it, and it will affect how and if I recommend it to others.

 

[intim8]

I published a story about a woman who meets three beings called the Aspects of Orgasm. They send her on a journey through time and space

You know, in light of my above comment, when I told you 'You had me at 'Sensationalizer'", I think that was me subconsciously recognizing that you met those criteria.

 

[SimonDoom]

This is something I take personally. I write lots of non-consent stories but there has to be plausibility. There has to be a logical background on which the story unspools. Even my fantasy tales must have internal and consistent logic. As Mark Twain said, "Truth is stranger than fiction. It has to be. Fiction has to make sense." A really good author can throw out a string of improbabilities but if you buy them in universe, you will follow that author anywhere. I try very hard to keep everything on a believable level.

Nonconsent is probably the toughest category for this issue, because to pass muster here at Lit the story has to pass the "victim enjoys it" test, and that's a challenge. I've been working on and off on a nonconsent story, and it's very challenging to do it in a way that satisfies my believability standard.