On Writing: Immersion

[EmilyMiller]

But you can have target audiences, it's a pretty standard concept.

In commercial writing maybe. It sounds like marketing to me. Girls just wanna have fun, ya know . I love what I write, a few dozen people agree. I’m good .

 

[anthrodisiac]

In commercial writing maybe. It sounds like marketing to me. Girls just wanna have fun, ya know . I love what I write, a few dozen people agree. I’m good .

So writing for an audience isn't a topic for you to worry about then. It's an important one to a lot of other people though, who can both write for themselves, but also keep in mind that their stories are going to be read, and have particular shapes because they want to impart a particular vibe. A great many people treasure and consider this an important skill to learn. At the very least, it's something to be aware of, even if you personally don't use it.

 

[EmilyMiller]

So this isn't a topic for you to worry about then. It's an important one to a lot of other people though, who can both write for themselves, but also keep in mind that their stories are going to be read, and have particular shapes because they want to impart a particular vibe. A great many people treasure and consider this an important skill to learn. At the very least, it's something to be aware of, even if you ultimately dismiss it.

I have zero interest in writing for an audience. That’s a valid opinion to state. It’s one I have heard many writers here voice, some of them a lot better writers than me. Surely it’s OK to articulate alternative opinions politely, isn’t it? I thought this was meant to be discursive, not didactic.

 

[anthrodisiac]

I have zero interest in writing for an audience. That’s a valid opinion to state. It’s one I have heard many writers here voice, some of them a lot better writers than me. Surely it’s OK to articulate alternative opinions politely, isn’t it? I thought this was meant to be discursive, not didactic.

I didn't say it wasn't. I was simply stating that writing for an audience doesn't seem to be a topic you care for, not that you couldn't contribute. Feel free to privately correct me if I've misinterpreted that. I don't think us pubicly going around in circles, possibly misunderstanding one another, benefits this conversation.

 

[XerXesXu]

This thread requires 'deep reading', like 'immersion' a twin contemporaneous creation of the literary establishment in the last decade of the 20 C. I long for the simple 'discourse' of the French intellectuals of the 60s, when I was young and fun.

 

[anthrodisiac]

I'd like to reset the focus back to the topic of immersion. Knowing your audience is helpful for immersion, but it's an topic that has a ton of nuance and psychology and many varying perspectives and is something worthy of its own thread, rather than piggybacking off of this one (good luck corraling an AH thread, I know; it's almost like I have two different memes for just this sort of thing or something).

If people have thoughts or techniques for how to instill immersion in a reader (given that this is a highly subjective thing, we'll try to move forward with the understanding that no one approach is right or comprehensive), or how different types of immersion play differently (back to story vs. craft, but it's certainly possible there are more categories that maybe haven't yet been addressed). Maybe give examples of plinkage you've found or written, something that made you stop and yanked you out of your reading experience.

 

[anthrodisiac]

With the caveat that this isn't true of everyone, here's an example something that tends to plink a good chunk of people. Overuse of non-"said"/"asked" speech tags. Especially using more uncommon words:

• Parried
• Retorted
• Annunciated
• Intimated
• Divulged

Having a bunch of these tends to catch the attention of a fair chunk of readers. This isn't necessarily a bad thing. Sometimes you want to draw someone's attention to how a thing is being said. These evocative words are wonderful for that, and can be used to great effect. However, overuse of it both dampens the impact of these types of words (start to see semantic satiation-adjacent effects when every speech tag has a special quality to it; if they're all special, none of them are), and makes them incredibly visible, to the point where it can begin to grate on the story.

I've seen examples of people where they have a Said allergy, and so use every word under the sun to avoid it, because it's "bland." Bland isn't always bad. Less standard types of speech tags can be good for accentuation of dialogue, but can also detract from dialogue when the reader is more focused on how something is being said than what's being said when it gets used too much.

 

[XerXesXu]

If people have thoughts or techniques for how to instill immersion in a reader (given that this is a highly subjective thing, we'll try to move forward with the understanding that no one approach is right or comprehensive), or how different types of immersion play differently (back to story vs. craft, but it's certainly possible there are more categories that maybe haven't yet been addressed). Maybe give examples of plinkage you've found or written, something that made you stop and yanked you out of your reading experience.

In the 'attention economy', offer your reader 'affordance'; recognise their agency, lean into their algorithm. Give them something Tik-Tok doesn't.

 

[SavannaT]

Overuse of non-"said"/"asked" speech tags. Especially using more uncommon words:

• Parried
• Retorted
• Annunciated
• Intimated
• Divulged

You got get creative with that stuff..

“No, I said i wanted a soy latte,” he vomited at the sobbing barista with frothing ire.

“This is bologna, I wanted olive loaf,” she shotgunned the sandwich maker’s pained ears with a buckshot of consonants and vowels.

“I’m bored, can’t we move onto the next scene and rising action?” the four year old filleted the ear drums of the minivan driving mom with the finesse of a fisherman shucking an oyster.

 

[StillStunned]

Maybe give examples of plinkage you've found or written

Here are a couple of examples of how breaking meter in poetry can shift the emphasis and focus. Not subtle examples, but examples are usually best when they're clear.

(From Ben Jonson's song: To Celia)
Drink to me only with thine eyes
And I will pledge with mine
Or leave a kiss but in the cup
And I'll not look for wine

The very first word, "drink" departs from the iambic meter. It creates an immediate impression of raising a glass in toast. Compare it with phrasing the line something like "So drink then only with thine eyes": the real version is much stronger, and creates a much clearer picture. (The poem is about unrequited love, with the poet fooling himself into believing that it's mutual. Emphasising the imagined toast at the start of the poem highlights the delusion.)

(William Wordsworth, "She Dwelt Among the Untrodden Ways")
She dwelt among the untrodden ways
Beside the springs of Dove,
A Maid whom there were none to praise
And very few to love:

A violet by a mossy stone
Half hidden from the eye!
-- Fair as a star, when only one
Is shining in the sky.

She lived unknown, and few could know
When Lucy ceased to be;
But she is in her grave, and, oh,
The difference to me!

Here it's the line "Fair as a star, when only one": again, it's the first word ("fair") that breaks the iambic meter. It pauses the flow. It's almost as if the poet is swallowing a lump in his throat.

For an example of plinkage from my own works, another terribly unsubtle on. "Hag-Ridden" is a fairy tale, told in the style of the fairy tales I grew up reading:

Once upon a time, in a fair land where it was always late-summer, there lived a King. This King was wise and just, and his people loved him. But none loved him more than the Queen his wife, and yet she did not love him more than he loved her.

Their people rejoiced for them, knowing that their rulers' bliss was so great that the land around them too was happy. Crops grew lush, livestock grew fat, and the land and its people grew rich with the fruits of their labour.

Yet in the cold dark mountains along the land's northern border there was a cave, and in that cave lived a Witch. As fair and happy as the land was, so ugly and miserable was the Witch. Rarely did she venture forth from her damp dungeon, and when she did it was to spit curses at all that was beautiful and blissful. And the more curses she cast, the uglier she became.

No greater envy did this Witch have than for the King and his Queen. Their love was like a poison in the air for her, turning bitter on her tongue and feeding her hate. And she decided in the black pit that she called a heart to curse them, with spell and sorcery, until their happiness withered and died.

This carries along until the Princes who are the heroes of the tale encounter a Hag (well, first they meet an Owl who makes a few light-hearted jokes). The Hag's speech rips the whole fairy tale thing apart:

"What have we here?" she asked in a harsh, low voice. "A pretty Prince, soft and ripe for the plucking. Plucking? No, sweet one, for fucking and sucking! For teasing, pleasing, fondling, fingering and fucking!"
[...]
The Hag's eyes were fixed on his midsection. Her tongue darted in and out, like a snake tasting the air. "Short but thick, such a nice dick, a dick to lick, licky-lick-lick." And with that she opened her mouth and placed her pale lips over the Prince's manhood.

Obviously this is deliberate, a great big neon sign for the reader that they're not in Kansas Disney a traditional fairy tale anymore. It's intended to wake them up from, perhaps, too much immersion, too much of the dreamlike quality of those old fairy tale, and start paying attention because this is what they came to Lit to read.

 

[EmilyMiller]

I didn't say it wasn't. I was simply stating that writing for an audience doesn't seem to be a topic you care for, not that you couldn't contribute. Feel free to privately correct me if I've misinterpreted that. I don't think us pubicly going around in circles, possibly misunderstanding one another, benefits this conversation.

The topic of this thread is immersion. It’s become reduced to: if your readers are bothered by X, don’t do X. But this is based on an assumption that X bothers all readers when this is clearly not true for many values of X. Different things bother different people. The things that bother one are adored by another.

Also, we aren’t prescient about what readers like and dislike. Mostly what we have to go on is what we like and dislike. This can be an unreliable guide.

I’m severely allergic to generalities, but that’s now twice you’ve asked me not to state my opinion here, so I yield the floor.

 

[crookedletter]

With the caveat that this isn't true of everyone, here's an example something that tends to plink a good chunk of people. Overuse of non-"said"/"asked" speech tags. Especially using more uncommon words:

• Parried
• Retorted
• Annunciated
• Intimated
• Divulged

Having a bunch of these tends to catch the attention of a fair chunk of readers. This isn't necessarily a bad thing. Sometimes you want to draw someone's attention to how a thing is being said. These evocative words are wonderful for that, and can be used to great effect. However, overuse of it both dampens the impact of these types of words (start to see semantic satiation-adjacent effects when every speech tag has a special quality to it; if they're all special, none of them are), and makes them incredibly visible, to the point where it can begin to grate on the story.

I've seen examples of people where they have a Said allergy, and so use every word under the sun to avoid it, because it's "bland." Bland isn't always bad. Less standard types of speech tags can be good for accentuation of dialogue, but can also detract from dialogue when the reader is more focused on how something is being said than what's being said when it gets used too much.

I agree with this. I don't think "said" can be repetitive; it's invisible. Insofar as speech tags are needed (and I don't think they are as much as some think, the flow and the content of dialogue can make it clear who's speaking if done well, even with action breaks), "said" will do nicely just about every time. (I'm not even sure I ever bother with "asked" -- the question mark manages that part.)

 

[lwppp000]

"I can suck cock better than anyone!" she bloviated.
He spurted, "I believe you!"

 

[ElectricBlue]

If people have thoughts or techniques for how to instill immersion in a reader (given that this is a highly subjective thing, we'll try to move forward with the understanding that no one approach is right or comprehensive), or how different types of immersion play differently (back to story vs. craft, but it's certainly possible there are more categories that maybe haven't yet been addressed).

For me, and from comments received, for my audience, my immersion is done by tiny details, grace notes, that liven up the narrative. Observational stuff mostly, like this extract (cited before, but who cares?):

I saw how the back of her hand was lightly freckled, the veins like a river on a map, and ever so slightly blue. Her skin was quite pale. A long scar ran along the side of her little finger, and I imagined some childhood accident, a young girl running inside to find mother, when only a father would do. I saw a tiny pulse on a vein near her wrist, and counted her heartbeats. Her pulse was quite quick, and I lost count at twenty-two.

Maybe give examples of plinkage you've found or written, something that made you stop and yanked you out of your reading experience.

As for plinkage, it never bothers me - dictionaries are so easy to use and hey, there's a new word (although, safe to say, I have a good vocabulary). As for readers not having my vocabulary, that really is their problem, not mine. Again, not something that bothers me because dictionaries are so easy to use, and if I know the right word for the occasion, so can they. If you start down that pandering path, your erotica is Dick fucked Jane, The End.

 

[BeechLeaf]

I've gone back to page 1 and the OP to try to properly understand what this immersion business is. It always felt a bit vague the first time through. Also on that page I named some writers whose craft immersion is impressive, and that's something I definitely can't do in my own writing. So can I do story immersion? That seems easier, and also seems almost a prerequisite for good story-telling.

Well, sometimes I pull the chair out from the immersion: I break the fourth wall or tell authorial jokes. But that's only in some stories. At other times, I want to do a straightforward narrative, one that could be a TV show (except that I also write about people's thoughts). My latest is an example: it is pared down to relevant scenes, and has very few jokes; the lightness is mainly in people's characters. That was a deliberate choice after the exuberance of the previous story. I can't imagine what it's like to have aphantasia, so I think my mix of words and images is fairly conventional in literary tone, and should work.

I think the dialogue is pretty natural. The tags seem unobtrusive (there's my weakness 'demurred' again). One of the characters uses the word 'obfuscating', which is natural for her, a novelist, and I really can't write for people who don't know that word. I have to assume they got bored much earlier on and gave up. But towards the end it changes stylistically, as an overt piece of craft. This, perhaps, will break the immersion even for those who've got this far. But if I didn't do that, it would be duller.

Part of my process of revision, I find, is getting to the point where I can remove my notes to self, 'this is very dull' or 'she has no personality'. That's where it's all three-dimensional enough that I think other people could read it and get (much of) the images and thoughts intended. But of course I have no way of telling.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

I didn't say it wasn't. I was simply stating that writing for an audience doesn't seem to be a topic you care for, not that you couldn't contribute. Feel free to privately correct me if I've misinterpreted that. I don't think us pubicly going around in circles, possibly misunderstanding one another, benefits this conversation.

Keep in mind that if you made a Venn diagram of the people who "don't write for an audience" and the ones who post obsessively about scores and comments... well I'm not saying it would be a single circle... but it would be close.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

With the caveat that this isn't true of everyone, here's an example something that tends to plink a good chunk of people. Overuse of non-"said"/"asked" speech tags. Especially using more uncommon words:

• Parried
• Retorted
• Annunciated
• Intimated
• Divulged

Having a bunch of these tends to catch the attention of a fair chunk of readers. This isn't necessarily a bad thing. Sometimes you want to draw someone's attention to how a thing is being said. These evocative words are wonderful for that, and can be used to great effect. However, overuse of it both dampens the impact of these types of words (start to see semantic satiation-adjacent effects when every speech tag has a special quality to it; if they're all special, none of them are), and makes them incredibly visible, to the point where it can begin to grate on the story.

I've seen examples of people where they have a Said allergy, and so use every word under the sun to avoid it, because it's "bland." Bland isn't always bad. Less standard types of speech tags can be good for accentuation of dialogue, but can also detract from dialogue when the reader is more focused on how something is being said than what's being said when it gets used too much.

For the most part dialog tags should be used sparingly. They distract from the immersion because they aren't a natural part of a real conversation. Use them to establish the conversation and only use additional ones when it may become unclear who is talking.

I agree tylhat over use of the more colorful options is a huge distraction.

 

[EmilyMiller]

As for readers not having my vocabulary, that really is their problem, not mine. Again, not something that bothers me because dictionaries are so easy to use, and if I know the right word for the occasion, so can they. If you start down that pandering path, your erotica is Dick fucked Jane, The End.

This ☝

 

[Cagivagurl]

So writing for an audience isn't a topic for you to worry about then. It's an important one to a lot of other people though, who can both write for themselves, but also keep in mind that their stories are going to be read, and have particular shapes because they want to impart a particular vibe. A great many people treasure and consider this an important skill to learn. At the very least, it's something to be aware of, even if you personally don't use it.

I'm sorry, but I disagree, not entirely, but with a small part of your statement...
I (and this is only my opinion) Don't believe you can write for yourself, and an audience synchronically.
The very first time you change what you wrote because you considered other people's response to it. You have stopped writing for yourself.
If you have altered what you were about to write because you thought about how it might impact your score... You have stopped writing solely for yourself.
If you are actually writing for an audience, because it pays the bills, then yes. Those things are important.
But, I Do not believe the two can run concurrently...

 

[crookedletter]

I don't understand the absolutism about whether or not anyone writes for themselves. I can craft a story based solely on what I would like it to be, and still want to get it out there and hope other people read it and like it. It's not really that complicated.

 

[AStrangeDesire]

I don't understand the absolutism about whether or not anyone writes for themselves. I can craft a story based solely on what I would like it to be, and still want to get it out there and hope other people read it and like it. It's not really that complicated.

^ this!

 

[Britva415]

If people have thoughts or techniques for how to instill immersion in a reader

If one can write stories that one can become immersed in, oneself, in the "write what you would like to read" kind of way, that's the best way. One does this without thinking about techniques, plinkage, "instilling," one just does it with the skills and tools at one's command.

"So what are those skills and tools?" Good spelling and grammar. Anything beyond that is highly individualistic and not remotely easy to teach or even discuss. It's like asking a room full of professional stand-up comics "so, what exactly is 'funny'?" You'll get some answers, some contradictory, but nothing which will make you be funny.

"So what will make you be funny/write immersively?"

Practice. One has to feel it.

 

[Stanfield2025]

I don't understand the absolutism about whether or not anyone writes for themselves. I can craft a story based solely on what I would like it to be, and still want to get it out there and hope other people read it and like it. It's not really that complicated.

Yep. For me, even outside of the readers, sometimes the characters do things outside of what I personally like. For example, it wouldn't have made sense if my FMC from my series never engaged in facesitting at some point. I don't really care for facesitting, but I wrote facesitting scenes because the character demanded them. It was more difficult to write those scenes, but my story was so much better and more versatile because of it. And most importantly, I kept fidelity to the character.

 

[yowser]

I'm sorry, but I disagree, not entirely, but with a small part of your statement...
I (and this is only my opinion) Don't believe you can write for yourself, and an audience synchronically.
The very first time you change what you wrote because you considered other people's response to it. You have stopped writing for yourself.
If you have altered what you were about to write because you thought about how it might impact your score... You have stopped writing solely for yourself.
If you are actually writing for an audience, because it pays the bills, then yes. Those things are important.
But, I Do not believe the two can run concurrently...

I am not sure the two are as binary as you suggest. Yes if 'writing for the reader' is purely for scores, but one can write in a way that takes into account what a reader wants and needs and still be writing for 'yourself.' For me, if I only wrote for myself, there would be no point in publishing, just stick the things in a drawer (or wherever) and I'm happy and nobody knows about them. It would be like creating a wonderful song, sculpture, painting, and then throwing it into a closet.

But I want my works to be read by others, I'd like it to be a communication, and I cannot do that without thinking about a potential or theoretical reader. I want to make a good tale, want it to land suitably (however it might be misinterpreted, read differently than I imagined, etc.) and so I work on my craft to maximise my stories effects on readers. It's not for 'scores.'

 

[Cagivagurl]

I am not sure the two are as binary as you suggest. Yes if 'writing for the reader' is purely for scores, but one can write in a way that takes into account what a reader wants and needs and still be writing for 'yourself.' For me, if I only wrote for myself, there would be no point in publishing, just stick the things in a drawer (or wherever) and I'm happy and nobody knows about them. It would be like creating a wonderful song, sculpture, painting, and then throwing it into a closet.

But I want my works to be read by others, I'd like it to be a communication, and I cannot do that without thinking about a potential or theoretical reader. I want to make a good tale, want it to land suitably (however it might be misinterpreted, read differently than I imagined, etc.) and so I work on my craft to maximise my stories effects on readers. It's not for 'scores.'

I suppose it all comes down to why you write.
I am at best an amateur hobbyist, and I write purely because I enjoy the process. Sitting at the desk, trying to massage thoughts into words, then words into something longer... It is the process I love. I have many stories sitting on my desktop finished, but never posted...
As for being able to please both yourself and a possible audience... No. I do not think they can align. As I tried to explain earlier... Once you have considered changes based on scores, or possible reaction from readers. You have changed your thought, you have altered the story you set out to tell.
Pandering to an invisible audience seems inconsistent with the notion writing for yourself. Merely my opinion of course.
I do have an ego, and appreciate nice comments and receiving a reasonable score, but. THose are never present in my thought processes during the writing of the story.
For me, it is write what you want and be damned with the score.