Reader Agency?

[nice90sguy]

In a games forum, one developer wrote:

"I actually made this game to be a femdom game. But then I realized it was far easier to write maledom (the player's agency vs. things happening to the player)."

That led me to think whether there's such a thing as "reader agency". In a game, the player is expected and invited to make choices. In a story or VN, they're more or less either along for the ride, or they get off the bus.

But is there a way for an author to make the reader feel like they are really involved in the story, and more than just observers? So rather than being strapped in and taken on a journey, the reader almost feels like they're "driving the bus"?

My guess is that the best writers do manage this, but I can't really figure out how they do it.

 

[Bamagan]

In a games forum, one developer wrote:

"I actually made this game to be a femdom game. But then I realized it was far easier to write maledom (the player's agency vs. things happening to the player)."

That led me to think whether there's such a thing as "reader agency". In a game, the player is expected and invited to make choices. In a story or VN, they're more or less either along for the ride, or they get off the bus.

But is there a way for an author to make the reader feel like they are really involved in the story, and more than just observers? So rather than being strapped in and taken on a journey, the reader almost feels like they're "driving the bus"?

My guess is that the best writers do manage this, but I can't really figure out how they do it.

All I can say with confidence is that second person POV is not the answer. Unless the reader is the bus being driven.

 

[TheLobster]

Damn, I thought this is about a reader agency, where you solicit the services of readers to read, vote, and comment on your stories. I got excited for a second there

 

[Bamagan]

Damn, I thought this is about a reader agency, where you solicit the services of readers to read, vote, and comment on your stories. I got excited for a second there

An unexploited market niche appears!

 

[nice90sguy]

Damn, I thought this is about a reader agency, where you solicit the services of readers to read, vote, and comment on your stories. I got excited for a second there

Feel free to discuss that instead - I agree, that's probably a more interesting thread

 

[StillStunned]

One way might be to leave a big question unanswered, and let the reader decide what the outcome is. Based on what they believe happened, the rest of the story could have very different implications even if the wording is the same.

 

[mildlyaroused]

'Agency' is a tricky thing to gift readers - nigh impossible in conventional storytelling. For better or worse, we have the agency as authors (even more so than film makers).

Maybe I'm a sucker for those conventional structures, but I reckon the best way to give a reader "agency" is to create an environment in which they are utterly empathetic to the characters they are following. I think Breaking Bad is more flawed than most people give it credit for, but the way it makes you root for Walter despite his obvious, increasing evil is very effective. We can make a reader align with our characters without giving them agency. This can make readers feel like their emotional motives and whims are being fulfilled even if they're not objectively in the driver's seat.

Also, as @StillStunned said - interpretation is key. Allow moral grey space. Allow emotional grey space. Let the characters act as they would, without exposition, and let every character feel real. Even if readers can't actually have agency, they can choose (consciously or not) what they want to sympathise with, and that makes them feel invested in whatever they're reading. They can discover their own personal agency and meaning within a predetermined structure.

Think of video games. I can approach many games however I want, and form whatever conclusions I want, but I still have to operate within the laws set out by the developers. Same goes for conventional writing - if you inject nuance, readers will come away with what they feel to be a unique interpretation of the story. That's definitely a sort of agency.

If you aren't afraid of tedium, I'd suggest writing every scene from the POV of every character - if that's a sex scene, write it in full from both characters' POVs. If that's a larger novel, write it from every POV (at least in broad strokes). Write essays, pretending your writing was internationally renowned, as if you were a student. Pretend you're about to hit that high school deadline. It won't give your readers agency, but creating a story where everyone feels like they're acting in a real, human way, with lots of nuance, will do magnitudes for that illusion, and will let your reader prioritise whatever moments they want to.

That's agency of interpretation, which I think offers more nuance than actual agency in reader-choice-based narratives (which I often find too keen to explore the surface level of many choices, rather than the complexity of a set story).

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Reader agency on lit? The majority of readers are looking to self-insert and have their fantasy handed to them on a platter with no friction or tension whatsoever. There ya go. That's your reader agency.

 

[SimonDoom]

I think there are some things you can try to achieve this.

First, the POV. Write either in first person or a "close/free indirect" third person in which you narrate events just as the character would see and experience them. This will reduce the distance between reader and character.

Second, make your POV character a sympathetic character that the reader can relate to -- that the reader can put themselves in the shoes of.

Third, pay careful attention to what the POV character thinks and feels, and express that. A good narration of the character's feelings will further immerse the reader in the character.

Fourth, keep it somewhat realistic, so you don't throw the reader out of the story. You want the reader to think, "I could see myself doing this and making these choices."

Fifth, add mystery and surprise, with foreshadowing. Make your reader interested in "what's around the corner."

 

[Bramblethorn]

'Agency' is a tricky thing to gift readers - nigh impossible in conventional storytelling. For better or worse, we have the agency as authors (even more so than film makers).

Maybe I'm a sucker for those conventional structures, but I reckon the best way to give a reader "agency" is to create an environment in which they are utterly empathetic to the characters they are following. I think Breaking Bad is more flawed than most people give it credit for, but the way it makes you root for Walter despite his obvious, increasing evil is very effective. We can make a reader align with our characters without giving them agency. This can make readers feel like their emotional motives and whims are being fulfilled even if they're not objectively in the driver's seat.

I'd also recommend Natalie Zina Walschots' "Hench" and George McDonald Fraser's "Flashman" series as examples of how good writing can create sympathy for even a reprehensible character.

 

[BobbyBrandt]

I feel that by writing teasingly erotic content, where "fade to black" build up leaves the perceived sexual action to the readers' imagination, I do provide them with agency.

I have had zero complaints from readers about them having to fill in the blanks and a lot of feedback indicating their enjoyment.

 

[StillStunned]

I'd also recommend Natalie Zina Walschots' "Hench" and George McDonald Fraser's "Flashman" series as examples of how good writing can create sympathy for even a reprehensible character.

I have a few stories with awful but relatable characters - Rulk the Rat, for instance, is a murderer, traitor, thief, rapist, bully and more - but I wouldn't call that reader agency.

 

[NotWise]

There's always the "pick your own story" genre. They used to be fairly common text games.

 

[THBGato]

Perhaps just minimize description of characters down to what is absolutely necessary? That way you are giving the readers agency over how they imagine the characters.

One way might be to leave a big question unanswered, and let the reader decide what the outcome is.

Yeah, agreed. Not so much as leaving the story on a cliffhanger, but leaving it open. Having what is probably a one-night-stand end with them exchanging numbers so the more romantic readers can imagine them possibly seeing more of each other, for instance.

 

[Rob_Royale]

So rather than being strapped in and taken on a journey, the reader almost feels like they're "driving the bus"?
My guess is that the best writers do manage this, but I can't really figure out how they do it.

I disagree. I think the best writers make the reader want to go on the journey. They get on the bus and see the crazed expression on the drivers face and think, "Well, this won't be boring.'

 

[BobbyBrandt]

I disagree. I think the best writers make the reader want to go on the journey. They get on the bus and see the crazed expression on the drivers face and think, "Well, this won't be boring.'

But how enjoyable is the journey when the windows are blacked out so that the riders only experience what the driver shares with them. They can't see the scenery for themselves to help understand the route, how far they have traveled and which direction they are headed.

I think that the best stories present a balance of information, and room for imagination.

 

[Rob_Royale]

I think that the best stories present a balance of information, and room for imagination.

Agreed, but I don't see that as the same thing the OP is suggesting.

 

[Rambling_Chantrix]

But is there a way for an author to make the reader feel like they are really involved in the story, and more than just observers? So rather than being strapped in and taken on a journey, the reader almost feels like they're "driving the bus"?

My guess is that the best writers do manage this, but I can't really figure out how they do it.

Not one of the best writers, of course, but my first thought is that reader agency is something the writer can't really take away. The reader decides whether to read. The reader interprets the text the way they will—the writer can try to shape that, of course, that's what rhetoric is, but ultimately it's the writer contending with the reader's entire worldview. There's no way to fully control the audience's paradigms. My instinct is that the 'best' writers are those who can more consistently affect the reader's experience, while those with less expertise simply release their texts to the whims of the reader?

 

[AG31]

My guess is that the best writers do manage this, but I can't really figure out how they do it.

Can you give us a couple of examples?

 

[AG31]

One way might be to leave a big question unanswered, and let the reader decide what the outcome is. Based on what they believe happened, the rest of the story could have very different implications even if the wording is the same.

Boy would I be pissed off!

 

[StillStunned]

Boy would I be pissed off!

I'd hate to read more than a few stories that did it, and it would have to be really well done. But imagine a he-said-she-said scenario, with two characters giving their version of an event. The versions are pretty close, and either is plausible from the narrative and dialogue. The only difference is in how the nuances are interpreted. The reader gets to decide which version to believe.

Or, if it hadn't become a cliché, two people living in the same house. One's a ghost, but which one?

Like I said, it's not something I'd want to read often, but I reckon it could be done, and done well.

 

[THBGato]

One way might be to leave a big question unanswered, and let the reader decide what the outcome is. Based on what they believe happened, the rest of the story could have very different implications even if the wording is the same.

Boy would I be pissed off!

Here's a recent example: https://www.literotica.com/s/a-brides-choice

I mean, it should be an obvious choice, right? But then, what's to say she'll stick to it?

 

[AG31]

I'd hate to read more than a few stories that did it, and it would have to be really well done. But imagine a he-said-she-said scenario, with two characters giving their version of an event. The versions are pretty close, and either is plausible from the narrative and dialogue. The only difference is in how the nuances are interpreted. The reader gets to decide which version to believe.

Or, if it hadn't become a cliché, two people living in the same house. One's a ghost, but which one?

Like I said, it's not something I'd want to read often, but I reckon it could be done, and done well.

Nope. No way would I enjoy such a denouement.

 

[Kumquatqueen]

But how enjoyable is the journey when the windows are blacked out so that the riders only experience what the driver shares with them. They can't see the scenery for themselves to help understand the route, how far they have traveled and which direction they are headed.

I think you've explained why Destination X hosted by Rob Brydon was a disaster, despite being a mash-up of the hugely successful Traitors and Race Across the World. Along with the tasks and clues being thought out in one minute before deadline and the whole thing being edited by the teenage intern...

 

[AG31]

I keep thinking about this thread. I can't imagine wanting to feel agency in a book I was reading. Do they do that? This is why I asked @nice90sguy for a couple of examples of such books. I can see wanting agency in a video game, but absolutely not in a book. My presence in the story would be totally distracting.

Does anyone else feel this way?