BatCave said: Hey everyone, I'm halfway through my first story series and enjoying the process so far. I've got many hurdles when writing and find myself re-writing sections as they just don't land for myself.

That leads to the the question I've been asking myself, is there a preferred content and degree or believability and realism to the stories that readers like. What about the degree of just complete crazy and highly unrealistic situations.

I love both, and have leaned in to a level of both when writing and the various stories I currently have in progress, but I tend to eventually go heavy on the absurd and over-the-top messes. I think I let my imagination run wild and end up here. Sometimes making me second guess the scenarios I'm creating and the worry that it can't be topped.

I'm keen to understand everyone's thoughts and opinions, mainly out of curiosity but also as this is one my main blocks when it comes to story writing.

Thanks, BatCave.

Trouso said: This is a great topic and question.

Maybe there should be a WAM fiction group?

First and foremost, (as WAM writers) I think we need to convince ourselves that what we have written works in all the ways we want it to. Or else we are somewhat lost when it comes to impressing others. Trust yourself.

Secondly, human beings love stories. The collective wisdom of the ages is that readers are naturally seduced by, and really want to believe, a story. So the question is not, 'what is convincing about this tale?', but rather, 'how am I unwittingly sabotaging it?'

Thirdly, bearing the above in mind, when it comes to WAM keep the description of the mess as direct and concise as possible to make sure some are not held back by the reading. (Think Bill Shipton's prose style. Simple and tabloid-like but juicy and highly concentrated). And allow people some scope to interpret it for themselves.

Fourthly, context and contrast. In short, some bits need to be boring to make the action more exciting!

Hope this helps. It's easier said than done, of course. This all criticism and advice variously levelled at me, by the way, over time.

Trouso x

PieWriter said:
Verisimilitude, not realism. That's what you need for fiction. People can believe absurdity, even if the reality is 6 hours of cleanup that never happens on the page.

The stories need to be believable, not documentary. Hope that helps!

messydice said: I write what I enjoy. It's usually because I have something rattling around my brain. I like ridiculousness and silliness. (So I'm enjoying your stories :thumbsup

Nollvane said: I tend to gravitate toward more overt fantasy and ridiculous situations; I don't know if that's easier for me because it comes naturally or because it's easier to say, "they're magic pies; a ghost threw them." Probably both. I do think the longer a story/series gets, the more important it is to think the logic of your world through, wherever it is on the realism spectrum. But figuring out what your taste is, where you draw boundaries, what you like to do, is part of finding your voice. I've gotten more of a response from stories with fantasy elements, but again that could just be because they flow more easily for me and the reader picks up on that. I don't know.

To your other point, I do worry about repeating myself. I don't want to feel that I'm just rewriting the same story over and over. But to a certain extent it's inescapable when writing about a kink/fetish, especially if you're writing what arouses you. There are just certain story beats, character types, situations, that do it for us, and we're ringing changes on them. We always return to the scene of the crime.

clarinet said: This is a really interesting question, and I second Trouso's suggestion of a fiction group.

Firstly, in my opinion it's best not to worry too much about what readers want. It's not like we're doing this for the money, so ultimately the best way to avoid writer's block is to write what you enjoy. If other people enjoy it, too, then that's a bonus.

Also, I wouldn't necessarily say that re-writing sections is a hurdle to be overcome. For me at least, the initial draft is the easy part. I probably spend more time on the alterations and editing that come after. Where I struggle is in knowing when to stop, as at a certain point you'll see diminishing returns.

In terms of believability, at the risk of giving an 'it depends' non-answer, I do think that the extent to which you can push a reader's suspension of disbelief will vary according to the story's setting and the tone you've established. After all, it'd be easier to have audiences accept a random pie fight in Barbarella than in Gladiator. It'll also depend on the characters. In my view, you can get away with a bit more absurdity so long as the characters respond in a way that's consistent with how they've been written up to that point.

Personally, I think that the ability to include more fantastic elements is part of WAM fiction's appeal, and helps keep it semi-relevant in an age when anyone can order a custom scene of basically whatever they want. The way I see it, a scene from a producer can often cover 'standard' scenarios far better than a story could, but a producer is unlikely to film a mass messy brawl modelled on the battle of Helm's Deep (which is an idea that's been brewing in my mind for a while). Writers are unburdened by budget - if you wanted to, you're free to write a story set in ancient Greece, or about feuding sky pirates, or a Star Wars parody, or a fifty-person pie fight at a 1920's banquet. The only limits are time and creativity.

That's not to say that every story should have absurd elements. One of the other things that can be done in a story, but which might not make financial sense for producers, is to focus on the emotions of its characters. Writers are free to take the time to establish character backstories, friendships and rivalries, and also to delve into their internal monologue and responses in ways that would be difficult in a produced scene.

Sorry, I'm rambling on a bit now. One last thing - while I agree with 95% of Trouso's points, one area where I would respectfully disagree is the point about making descriptions of mess as concise as possible. While this approach can absolutely work well in many situations, I'd argue that it comes down to personal style, and that it's fine to get a little poetic at times.

madmalc said: Going off on a tangent slightly but there was a recent post here re "Splatter dome" series where responses highlighted what I believe is a problem with this site.
Specifically that I believe there are a large number of site users are unaware of the 'stories' link and how you find it.
There have been some fantastic stories covering both the realistic and slightly absurd concepts of the original post.
I just wonder how many people know of their existence? I did suggest to Messmaster some time ago that it would be great if a direct link could appear at the top bar perhaps adjacent to 'videos' rather than having to search via 'people' then 'stories'.
This last sentence for the benefit of those who did not know how to access!!!

Mudandfire said: A cool thing about fiction is that believability isn't necessarily tied to realism. Whether or not something is believable hinges mostly on tonal and internal logic consistency (stories need to follow their own set of rules, even if those rules make no sense in reality). For example, in the anime series Baki, a character can throw super-sonic punches while fighting against a 250 million y/o caveman by simply imagining he has more joints in his skeleton. As the audience, even though we know this is an impossibility in the real world, we still suspend our disbelief because Baki makes it clear from the beginning that imagination training and beast-men are just things that exist in this universe.

What matters most is making the story tonally consistent. Like, if you're setting and tone is grounded and "realistic," maybe don't have a 250 million y/o caveman with a two-foot member waltz in on an iceberg. And remember, setting and tone are NOT the same thing (both Watchmen and Deadpool are in the superhero genre with a c modern city setting, but they have virtually NOTHING in common)

Whether or not the story is more grounded or more outlandish is a matter of preference. The tone is also a matter of preference. Some people prefer it one way over the other, some people like both. Know your audience, and keep things consistent for the particular story you're writing.

NEVER try to please everyone at once. You will end up pleasing no-one. Go all-in on whatever tone/style the specific story you are writing is going for.

As a writer/artist there is always going to be some disconnect between what you want to produce and what the audience wants to consume. Try to focus on the stories you want to write, and hopefully you can garner a like-minded audience. Otherwise you may end up in a situation where you accidentally write a story that you don't care about but it ends up getting more hits than the stuff you actually WANT to write. So if you specialize in fetish stories, don't write a vanilla story in an attempt to reach a wider audience. Because the wider audience won't stay for the fetish content and the fetish audience won't stay for the vanilla, so you'd lose traction

In short: pick a setting, pick a tone, know your audience