~~ too subtle for this post.

[reenka]

In my 'Fantasy & Folklore' class, we were told the the main signs of Good (Academic??) Writing were a) clarity, b) economy & c) euphoniousness. Hahah, gotta love that word, especially since the professor immediately went on to define 'euphoniousness' as some form of purple prose (i.e., 'prettier sounding' means more elaborate? er? why?).

To me, clarity & economy are basically ways of saying the same thing, in a way-- writing should be no more and no less than what is enough to communicate the meaning. I would add another axis to that, though-- d) subtlety. Please, please god, let there be more subtlety in the world. It doesn't take away from clarity, either-- basically, in creative writing it means that you're allowed to form your own responses and opinions as the reader, without just being 'lectured' by the text.

This is my number one Reader's Pet Peeve, in other words: being lectured. Nothing turns me off more. Nothing. And yet I understand where it comes from-- it's a byproduct of academic writing and the analytical, or even business-type mindset behind it-- things must be 'clear'-- crystal clear-- and that's a Good Thing, right? It really appears that when the problem isn't sheer inexperience in a writer as far as technique & style (and this is actually easier to bear for me, personally), it's the confusion between creative & academic-style writing. If you're writing a paper, in other words, you'd want to construct a series of directly worded linear proofs, but such bluntness isn't necessarily desirable in a story if one wants the reader to suspend their disbelief rather than prove anything to them. And again and again, I feel that some of the most supposedly 'well written' & popular fanfics are trying to prove something to me about the characters (especially by means of repetition).

For instance, I really find I have to suspend my disbelief when it comes to fics where Harry willingly (happily) submits sexually to Draco from start to finish. I mean, it's not that I can't see it happening sometimes or even often, if the dynamic remains somewhat tense and it's a question of shifting vulnerabilities and temporary victories-- but since I definitely see submissive Harry as out of character, the scenario has to be handled subtly, focusing on the emotions involved and avoiding rationalization. Emotionally, one can play the correct keys in almost any sequence successfully, because it's not a linear, rational process-- one can believe in a character's emotions as long they seem to 'follow' on the most basic level. Describing the situation and having the characters be well-aware of this situation forces me, as the reader, to 'remember', which breaks any hold their emotions would have had over me.

The trick, I think, to reading things you don't believe in face-first, is for the writer to sneak them in. That's really at the heart of 'show don't tell'. It's not about subtlety or finesse for the -sake- of subtlety or finesse-- it's really because when I, at least, read a story, I don't want to think about what it's trying to tell me. In terms of romance fics, I really feel like starkly rational thought isn't necessarily one's best friend.


I don't want to stop and snicker knowingly about the author's motivations in making X character say or do X to another. I mean... what it comes down to, for me, is that I don't want to be a critic; I want to enjoy a piece on all levels, and have it make me feel and make me think at the same time, but neither so overwhelming that it distracts me from the sheer -presence- of the narrative which sweeps my self-conscious ego off its metaphorical feet.

I never ever want to read a story and start arguing with the -narrator- (or author) rather than the characters. I mean, arguing with the characters-- interacting with the characters-- that's what's it's about, to me, that's the emotional involvement I have showing through. But whenever one sees a bold statement that basically tells you what things are 'like'-- that baldly states, from the outside, how a character feels or who they are or what they need-- especially in a fanfic, I can easily start thinking, 'but that's not true! he's not like that at all!' And then it's just like seeing the puppeteer moving the hand-puppets-- the man under the table is now visible, and I, at least, can't help my perverse urge to watch -him- instead of the show.

To me, it all comes down to the balance between clarity and subtlety-- clarity for easy processing and subtlety to bypass the more direct analytical side of one's brain. In a way, purple prose (over-use of metaphors and adjectives/adverbs/descriptives/etc) is also more analytical than naturally flowing in that way-- if a writer states things in an overly flowery or ornate manner, I pay more attention to the framing (the words) than to the content. And one would have to be -very- good at the framing for the elaborate frame to match the picture it borders in interest. Therefore, I don't want to think about -language- either, and formal speech is just as 'unnatural' as overt judgments like "this character is like this" (vs. "this character feels/believes this") would be in 'natural' thought. That is, most people just react rather than thinking & analyzing every little thing, so a natural narrative would reflect that unless we're dealing with very analytical and self-conscious people.
    I'd really like to hear the case for either Harry Potter or Draco Malfoy being such introspective thinkers.

I'm just really tired of reading OOC fics I might have enjoyed if not for them being written in a lecturing tone that makes me feel as if the writer distrusts their audience and doesn't expect them to 'get it' unless every little detail of the dynamic is verbalized and spelled out. There's 'clarity', and then there's 'the stark light of reason' which does little to benefit a wildly romantic love-story between two boys who should hate each other, to say the least.

...I'm such a bitter old fanfic queen, I swear I am. It's only been 2 and a half years, too....
~~

EDIT - After shaggirl's cripple!Draco drabble was followed by black_dog's second and Aja's third, I couldn't resist. Draco's so pretty when he's broken.

Comments

[bookshop.livejournal.com]

I really find I have to suspend my disbelief when it comes to fics where Harry willingly (happily) submits sexually to Draco from start to finish.

Me too. It's not that I can't see Harry as being a physical submissive, but personality-wise, if ever someone would top from the bottom, it would be Harry, especially if it were with Draco. I mean their whole relationship, even if you pit them as equals in every way, is about Draco pushing Harry and Harry refusing to take shit from him, haha, so it's really tough to see Harry, um, lying down and taking whatever Draco dishes out, if you know what I mean--and god, this whole entire sentence just sounded wrong beyond belief so I'm shutting up now. you get the idea.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Hehehe yeah! He should totally top from the bottom or at least... assert himself in -some- way, and even if he didn't it wouldn't be so bad if the narrative wasn't so bloody crystal-clear as to Harry's submission and how natural to his character this apparently was ^^;;;

I don't think Draco's a full submissive either-- he'd totally whine & struggle until he was... er... reined in. So to speak >< Eheheh. Watch my so-called 'professional distance' evaporate into smoke :>

I mean, -my- fun is the push-pull between them and even if that's not everybody's cup of tea with H/D (ahahaha though I'd claim that means they should really think about some other pairing, but anyway)... er... I'd at least want the writer not to make -statements- all the time and make it seem as if Harry was in his right (rational) mind, at least. heh. I could see a completely zonked out of his mind with lust submissive!Harry. Sometimes :>

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I think I do know what you mean...I remember one time reading some fantasy book where I just felt *suffocated* and I was longing for some Diana Wynne Jones because I felt like she created these worlds and casually dropped in information, leaving lots of space for you to walk around and explore by yourself. With the other book, whatever it was, I felt like everything was being nailed down by the author.

It's the same thing in fics with thought processes. I mean, as you say, Draco doesn't seem introspective and we know Harry isn't, so to have them hyper-aware of these little shifts in feeling is unrealistic. (In fact, I remember complimenting Cinnamon once in the way she had a scene where Draco noticed something was up with Harry from his look, which I believed, but then didn't have him able to tell what it was. So many fics act like you can look into someone's eyes and know without any doubt everything from how they feel about their mother to what they're having for lunch next Tuesday.) Anyway, you do feel like the author's having to do so much explaining so that you won't just look at the characters are realize they aren't doing anything themselves, just waiting for the author to give them the next step.

[cellia.livejournal.com]

So many fics act like you can look into someone's eyes and know without any doubt everything from how they feel about their mother to what they're having for lunch next Tuesday

So. True.

I've often thought this, but have never put it so well!

To be fair, this turns up in pro literature all the time as well. :(

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Ooooh Diana Wynne Jones style world-building. I don't even -notice- it to wonder at it. Man, she's good at that, come to think of it-- and the main sign is that I don't notice. Though that's exposition of plot/set-up-- more bearable than exposition of character, which drives me bonkers. I really want to shake the writers who tell me what their characters are like in some supposedly 'objective' fashion. Like, that or yell at their betas ^^;;; Have you read Patricia McKillip-- oh, and Peter Beagle-- and Neil Gaiman-- and Nina Kiriki Hoffman-- unsurprisingly, all my favorite fantasy writers are really great at subtle set-up :D

The thing I was really railing against was just the overall logical construction behind people's writing-- the obviousness. Like, it's not just the characters know too much, but that the writer isn't even having it be the characters thinking these things-- often as not, it's just narration telling the -reader- what to think of what's going on. Like, "Draco is happy" except the whole fic is like this in every possible way. But yes, it's that sense that they're not doing anything themselves, because the over-rationalization of every little thing has sucked the life out of everyone.

[cellia.livejournal.com]

WORD.

Now, even though I agree with every word up there, some other thoughts that I have that are still a bit tangled up in this:

Sometimes I think that any fic is an argument in a way. And that it's not an original story, but a *fan*fic, makes it even more narrowly and measurably so. Because it's not just a take on life, but on the canon as well (ie Ron and Hermione would get divorced, Harry is actually the most selfish thing ever, Draco is just misunderstood, Snape's hair is not really greasy).

Some things are such a reach as to be eye-rolling, and some are just too obviously speaking to our wish-fulfillment fantasies or prejudices that they'll make any slightly sophisticated reader uncomfortable: "I want to meet the characters and have everyone like me!" or "I hate heroes/bigots, see how much they suck!" or "I love underdogs, I love losers see how they're really great and no one ever noticed...."

I don't think a story can help but have an argument. Isn't that kind of its reason for existing (after all, it's not just about the characters wandering around aimlessly and bumping into each other, right?). I think the problem is less in making the argument and more in how subtle/interesting the "point" *itself* is, and how well it's made. The best and most persuasive argument doesn't feel like one.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Oh totally-- it's all about the subtlety -because- there's always going to be that thread of plot/argument/thought-- and thought is -good-, it's just... a question of not beating me over the head with it especially in the case I disagree (but also if I agree). Like, say I don't believe Harry's a sub-- you could write the same scene just having Harry -be- a sub & having believable reactions/responses, or you could beat me over the head with telling me how Harry's oh-so-child-like and vulnerable and how he luuurves giving up control. Yeah.

...Though most of my stories are written without a conscious argument/thought or... er... conscious intent of any sort, really, but I'm just a random babbler and not an ideal of writerly virtue :> That's the difference between analytical (that is, conscious logical process) and intuitive (the vision of some 'truth' that coalesces in some imitation of a natural process). Natural storytelling, maybe that's it, though it's hard to tell writers to 'be more natural'. I think they'd look at me as if I was a loon. Which I am, of course :>

God, but business-model writing pisses me off ^^;;

[notrafficlights.livejournal.com]

I don't really have much constructive thought to add to this post, since my brain is currently now teh ded from crack assignments, but the title makes me think of Draco saying something like it.

Draco: OMG I AM 2 SUBTLE FOR U POTTER!!1one
Harry: Keep telling yourself that Malfoy.

And don't worry about being picky and bitter. I've only been in the fandom, um *counts* a couple of months (scary, eh?), and I'm already so right there with you.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

heheheh!
yeah, malfoy's too subtle...
FOR A HERD OF RAMPAGING RHINOS :D

[malafede.livejournal.com]

Nobody understands Draco's Arte! He's too subtle for (this) school.

[sarahtales.livejournal.com]

My starkly rational thought tells me that neither of them would at any time ever agree to submit.
and then my starkly rational thought gives me a picture of wrestling. Lots and lots of wrestling.
Me and my logic, we had some troubles in the beginning, but now we're really making it work.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

MY LOGIC REALLY KIND OF LIKES YOUR LOGIC.

SUBMISSION IS FOR HUFFLEPUFFS!!1 *evil laugh*

...Though I really do think Draco just needs a big enough bribe, and possibly some liquor.

[sarahtales.livejournal.com]

and watch Potter get ONE MORE THING that should RIGHTFULLY BE DRACO'S (/end Draco-thoughts).
Draco has all the money and quite probably all the alcohol he needs. you can't buy pride.
which, for Draco... More's the pity.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

AHAHAHA PRIDE IS WHAT KEEPS HIM FROM BOTTOMING??? ahahahahahaha HE'S SUCH A WANKER. (/Harry-thoughts)
...Now I see the allure of Veela fics ;))

[malafede.livejournal.com]

SOMETIMES I THINK EVERY FIC WOULD BE BETTER WITH ZERO INTROSPECTION AT ALL.

STREAM OF CONSCIOUSNESS IS FOR EUPHONIOUS PUSSIES.

(Side: Draco is a sub, and I will now refrain from correcting anyone's assumption than sub=wuss. Oh c'mon, you didn't really expect me not to say.)

[shaggirl.livejournal.com]

I think Draco's a natural sub, too. He'd fight it with Harry, tooth and nail, but ultimately he'd be a happy boy.

[malafede.livejournal.com]

Draco's the bestest kind of sub because he never stops to push back! HE NEVER STOPS! BUT RESISTENCE IS FUTILE, MALFOY! Still, it's what gets Harry hot.

[shaggirl.livejournal.com]

We are of one mind, grasshopper.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Man, I like introspection done well, as with all things in life :>



Heheh it's just that I like him fighting it every step of the way, and he'd probably think it was for wusses himself until Harry... er... taught him better /:)

[malafede.livejournal.com]

You tricked me, you fool!

[stellabelle.livejournal.com]

It's just you, slapper.

Sorry, haha, I'm so mean OMG. No, I know what you mean. I agree with what you're saying in the sense that I'm a firm proponent of "show not tell" in the stuff I read. But then, I can never tell if I put it into practice in my own writing, so I might be sort of a hypocrite? Heh. But I mean, for example, I don't necessarily need to have a detailed physical description of the character in whatever I'm reading in order to feel like I know them/see them/relate to them/whatever. So yeah.

And also, this has nothing to do with anything (cause I'm also a firm proponent of randomness, y'know) but do you know anything about Prague? I'm asking everyone this, lol. Cause I've started this fic which takes place there, who knows why, and then realized I know nothing about Prague, so I've spent the whole morning researching it. I AM SO LAME. And also I've been researching guns for another fic, cause clearly we could all use some more violence and gore. Except not. I am obviously Not Right In The Head, but then I never have been, really, haha.

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

Heheh I think I know random things about Prague but nothing concrete I can summon at will. Sort of like, 'well, it has Communist statues....' Er. Man, doing research for a fic almost always means I intimidate myself and never finish it ^^;;; Best of luck, though! :>

I haven't really noticed The Problem with you. It's not that all exposition is EV01 OMG!!1 it's just... a question of how you approach said exposition, and whether you use the pov correctly, and whether you say things directly which are not -supposed- to be said directly, like if it's an emotional issue and especially if the whole fic is written like a bluescript of some sort. Like, that example of "Draco was amazed and so aroused that Harry would give up all his power to him and let himself be fucked" (paraphrasing).

...I'm starting to think this post didn't make sense in quite the way it did for me 'cause I didn't provide context. But then, who really wants me to point at specific (popular, 'well-written') fics and say, 'here, see! THIS IS BAD!' But, I mean, I think that would've helped.

[stellabelle.livejournal.com]

Dammit! I expect people to know random shit when I ask it of them. Well, not really, clearly, but it would be nice. :) Two of my friends were like "Dude! Cheap beer!" so, haha. I'm so totally supposed to be doing actual work which is not happening cause research for fun writing is so much more fulfilling.

I meant to ask...d'ya like your fantasy & folklore class? I was thinking about taking something like that next semester - it's already time to think about registering, aghhh! I, like, stalk my advisor, but man, she's no help at all. She's like one of those New Age chicks who's like, "You should do what you want. It doesn't matter what other people think. Have some tea." Seriously. And I'm thinking, "I'm not asking for life advice. I'm just asking if I'll have to write a lot of papers in this class. You're my advisor. ADVISE ME, DAMMIT!" *ahem* Clearly I've been dealing with this all day.

I sort of get what you're saying. (I think?) Or at least I understand what you mean in theory. (Shhh, you could e-mail me what ones you meant, I won't tell...er. Haha.) I'm only kidding, and since I probably haven't read most of them, I wouldn't really get it, anyway. I think...I just think that people approach things differently, and some people feel compelled to explain everything, and some people just don't. I know I tend to vacillate between 'not enough' and 'way too much' in terms of explanation. Or, I think...at least I used to, when I was younger. Um. So I understand where that compulsion to explain everything OMG! comes from. Y'know? But then I tend to actually enjoy reading stuff that's more...stark or spare, I guess?...in its description. But then it entirely depends on the context and the author and other factors as well. Dude. If you even got what I meant, cause I totally just confused myself too. Heh. :)

[yourpoison.livejournal.com]

I think the class would really depend on the school & professor that's offering it...? The real way to figure out what it's like is to talk to the professor that teaches it, not your advisor :> What school do you go to, btw? :>

Hum... I really think that 'voice' is the most important thing to consider in terms of exposition. I think I really should've mentioned that in the post, come to think of it-- that it's really about what -fits- rather than the content, per se. I think I tried to say that...? It's about whether the way the information is presented 'works' to allow me to suspend my disbelief at the scenario, rather than the specifics of the scenario itself. Meaning... it's not the amount of information or the type of information, but the -subtlety- of the information as it's being presented. So you can definitely explain things-- a lot or a little (yeah, I mean, it does depend on the circumstance and writer), but I always think that subtlety makes for a better story, and it's not a question of clarity (understanding) but rather... er, style, I suppose.

[stellabelle.livejournal.com]

Yeah, but I always like to ask around anyway. :) That is how I shall plan my academic future henceforth - from the advice of random people!! Ahaha, or not, y'know, but it sounds funny.

Yes, ultimately it's about "what fits", like you said. I think that's it exactly - just not forcing stuff that doesn't work in the story. When I first started writing seriously...I think I was like 10 or something, I remember one of my favorite teachers would always tell me that. She was the one who first told me "show don't tell" - and I never truly got what she meant till years later. :)