Just Thinking

[TMITM]

In my experience, there are many types of authors. Of creators in general, but we're focusing on writing.

There are the worst kind - the Puppet Authors, who take away their character's individuality to control them to make them do what they want them to do, and the story ends up being a tangled mess of puppetry, strings everywhere, and the control of the character being the eventual downfall of what could have been an interesting story. Puppets are NOT interesting characters.

The 'Progressive' Authors - Are authors that make characters that are usually only defined by their race or gender. For example: Gay. (Netflix.) Woman. (Star Wars Squeals, Mu'lan remake, and so, so many others) and Man. I really don't think we need to talk about these people, because we've seen them, and we've all cringed inwardly at the characters they produce. Now, don't get me wrong, I think strong female characters are great. But as we compare, for example, Ashoka Tano v Rey, and old Mu'lan and new Mu'lan, I think we can all see the difference. Their characters start to unravel if you look at them closely. I was planning to do a bigger explanation for this, but I'm going to save it for another post. (It's gonna be a doozy.)

The Imitation Authors - These people I don't mind as much, because not only is imitation the highest form of flattery, it is the highest form of learning. That's why people imitate, or outright copy, characters and worlds is because, most of the time, they genuinely thing the world or character is cool and want to experiment with something like that.
That's it.
So, these people are learning. They're experimenting. Let them.
The important thing to understand about this is that it's not that other authors don't draw inspiration, We, as authors, must draw inspiration from many different sources, or our creations will become stagnant and stale. We draw inspiration from so many things as authors - but inspiration is not imitation.

The Masked Authors - These Authors are people who hide behind their creations, not daring to show their true self fully, but showing it through the mask that they wear - if you look closely enough. They might act like they don't care, but these people usually are eager to show their creations off - and usually for good reason, as they usually are variations of themselves.

The Shattered Authors - These people are Authors masochistic enough to either shatter themselves, or they were shattered involuntarily, into a million or a few little pieces in which they now see the world. Their characters are usually either combinations of these pieces or they are one big piece. This is a strange and weird topic which I haven't finished fully flushing out, but these people are rare. Extremely rare. Their characters can be parts of them combined that make no sense on the outside but make a lot of sense on some deep level. This is... a highly experimental topic, so I'll save it for later. These Author's characters often have what seems to be free will, and these Authors will usually refer to them as separate beings.

Now, people can be combinations of these, but these are the basic types.
(DISCLAIMER: This was not meant to offend. If something in here offended you, feel free to contact me and we can talk about it.)
If you disagree with any of this, please, feel free to argue with me. Having to defend your opinions is important, I feel, and I don't want to have an unbased opinion.

 

[TMITM]

As Authors, as humans, we like to think we are in control of our characters, these little pieces of ourselves that run around in our minds. We like to think we should have control.
We don't.
We shouldn't.
If your character is truly a piece of yourself, it should take on it's own being, of sorts.
It should surprise you.
Turn into something you never intended originally.
As creators and authors, we can control what situation the characters are in, what items they have, even what condition they are in, but if they are true characters, you won't be able to control them.
The trick is not to let them control you.
I'm not saying environment isn't important, but a story with no characters and just a world would be boring, but a story with no world and just characters could be much more.
Characters, at least mine, take on a mind of their own sometimes. You shouldn't be in control of your characters. You shouldn't be afraid of them like that. You manipulate the character through environmental factors rather than puppeteering the characters themselves because then they become dead, what was once unique becoming stale and stagnant, an empty shell.
Is there really anything wrong with losing 'control' of your characters, and through them, part of the story? It may go in unexpected directions, directions you never intended, you walking this journey with your character, instead if through them.
Now that sounds like a wonderful adventure.

 

[TMITM]

 

[Haze]

damn that's deep af

just let people write whoever and however they want without being so judgey and telling them what they should do instead

minding your own business it's called, i think

 

[MorrisonJericho]

ok doomer

 

[Malachi]

I think I am the sort of writer that goes with the flow and enjoys even the mundane things -- like roleplaying taking a piss. Sometimes, just the scenario can be hilariously funny.

At the end of the day, this is a hobby that is used to have fun, destress, and hang out with friends.

 

[TMITM]

Haze MorrisonJericho - I think you misunderstood the purpose of this post. It's called 'just thinking' for a reason. I'm not trying to be judgy. I'm just barfing my thoughts out.

- And, if you're talking about the 'progressive' authors, I'm not going to mind my own business. That's the exception. To me, it's just as sexist to have a woman in a part just because she's a woman than to have a man in the same part just because he's a man. And it's just as offensive to have a gay person there just because they're gay than to have a straight person for the same reason.

 

[TMITM]

I think there is something very deep about storytelling. Humans have been doing it for hundreds of thousands of years. It's sinked into our bones at this point, and it's a crucial part of entertainment. We want a good story. We need it, or the source of entertainment isn't considered very good. We want to be able to distract ourselves and lose ourselves in what is a good story with relatable characters.

 

[MorrisonJericho]

Look, I was going to reply to this properly, as I didn't think I needed to. But, to be fair, I think it deserves some sort of other constructive reply.

I know what you're saying with the 'progressive authors'. Ignoring the overwhelming amount of cinema and media coming out that has well written characters that aren't sullied by simple characterisations such as their gender or race, the few examples you've provided aren't really in line with this thinking, in my opinion.

I just think they're poorly written. Even bringing up the Rey VS Ahsoka Tano opinion, neither of them had being a female as being a big part of their character. Ahsoka Tano had far more screen time, and was arguably a lot more fleshed out and well written. Rey on the other hand I may not have enjoyed as much, but she certainly wasn't defined by her gender, unless you're viewing some of her actions as being a result of that, which is an entirely different discussion. I think you're more upset at poorly written characters vs well written characters, which I can totally get behind.

And the Gay (Netflix) thing, is just, just wrong. I mean, I can understand that they've changed characters sexual orientation from pre-existing media, and there have been plot points revolving around the conflict of those things. However, they have never been the only things about their character. If you can provide some examples, I'd be interested to look at them, but I really don't see any of them only existing due to their sexual orientation or preference.

I think the wider problem I disagree with are your thoughts on writing style. Now, don't get me wrong, I'd argue most people inject some essence of themselves into the characters they create. If you want to make some commentary on the writing philosophy in general, go for it bud, and you clearly have. But this is ChroniclesRP man. We're a community of writers who enjoy what we do, and we all have fun together, and try to write stories that can enthral and inspire each other. The kind of writing you speak about in 'Shattered Authors', if I let myself believe that they could exist, is not something I'd ever want to exist.

Even if you look at the most depressing fiction, they are still tied to their creator and the world they're in. To separate oneself completely from who they write is to lose sight of why we write. And I certainly don't want that here, and all I've seen from writers on this board in my 2 or so years of writing here, are great, fun stories to inspire hope and emotion in one another.

I think writing your character to walk in their shoes, rather than as an onlooker, is what people are generally looking for. To be able to find other parts of yourself you didn't know you had, and to infuse that in who you write.

Now I think that would be a wonderful adventure. And I know so, because I like to think most of the threads I've been in have been that way, with the characters me and my peers have written.

But that's my two pence dude, I apologise for the crass comment. Thought I'd make my stance clear.

 

[Chaceledon]

TMITM

Right.

So I’ve got to address this.

First of all, let folks write what they want as long as they write it well. I play gay, disabled, old, or non-binary characters almost exclusively. Chaceledon is an excellent example of a non-binary character who doesn’t have that as the entirety of his identity. It’s a byproduct of his culture he’s taken to an extreme due to his situation. IMHO, I’ve balanced him fairly well between his masculine and feminine traits, which was a challenge I took upon myself.

Ive seen non-binary characters played AWFULLY, as well. It’s not that the author is progressive (I’m actually a conservative!) but perhaps they just want a challenge?

Not only that, but there is a huge difference between well-written (Ridley, Rexy, Imperator Furiosa, Vanya) and poorly written wooden constructions (Anastasia Steele, Bella Swan). All concepts can work, even 50 shades (I personally reimagine it as a Hills Have Eyes/ Serbian film horror), they just have to have good authors.

Some authors just want to have fun. I created Jon almost entirely for that purpose. He works well, as he’s got a fairly decent emotional range and can insert himself into combat and drama situations, but he’s strongest in loose, fun threads. Is that bad just because it’s not a deep, Gilgamesh epic? No. It really isn’t.

 

[Velaeri]

Interesting thoughts all around.
For the record, I don’t think anyone here is trying to tell anyone else how or what to write. They’re just thoughts on a page, people, open for discussion of opposing thoughts.

 

[TMITM]

All right, this is kind of annoying me.
Why, please, tell me, why, would anyone wear a sword on their back? Any four-year-old who stuck a stick in the back of their shirt knows that it's horribly hard to get it out in time to do anything with it, and that's with a frickin' curved stick - It doesn't even have a sheath/scabbard!
And I know, I know, you're saying, "Hey, well, maybe they can have more movement -"
Yeah, no. Ninja of ancient japan, and, heck, ninja today wear swords on their hips, and they seem to get along fine.
And, if you were trying to sneak into a place, they would usually bring something else such as a dagger or a chain or a grapple and some rope, or any of them - but usually not a sword. And - because I've had instructors tell me that they would take a sword, don't get me wrong, it can be incredibly useful- if they did, they would always, always wear it on their hip - the quick-draw stuff they were trained to do, and they did it well, would easily outweigh the mobility you may have - and that is without the inconvenience of the sword snagging on stuff.
Of course, you have whatever kinda sword you want. If you think it's cool, fine. It's not cool to me because it's not historically accurate, but if it's cool to you, all power to ya. It bothers me, but it shouldn't, so you do whatever you want. I'm not telling you how to write.

 

[Myrra]

It's not about being practical. It's about sending a message. (insert sunglasses emoji)

I think that every good story, whether it's fictional or non-fictional, will have elements and details to it that won't "fit" sometimes and requires the audience to suspend their disbelief. While, "having a sword on my back," may not be integral to the story it can be an interesting way to establish that a character is 'strong' or 'different' from those traditionally carrying a blade on their hip.

In terms of non-fiction, we have plenty of examples of things that really happened but sound more like science fiction or weapons that seem impractical but they actually do exist.

Obviously all writers are differently and some people are going to prize "realism" (or the interpretation of realism) while others may stretch your suspension of disbelief to tell a good story. If it makes sense "in my head" for a character to wield a giant, impractical, sword on their back then I'm probably going to write it.

Explaining the intricacies of how it works isn't that interesting. Whereas building a narrative around a desperado named Grunka who swings his giant sword first and asks questions later can be in the right context.

 

[TMITM]

That was exactly my point at the end, thank you. As I said, I'm not telling anyone how to write, I'm just saying that realistically it would be horribly impractical. If you, like you say, you 'stretch your suspension of disbelief to tell a good story' - I have absolutely no problem with that.

 

[TMITM]

 

[TMITM]

Remember: the love of gaming is not limited to what you play. A four-year old playing Mario, an eleven-year-old playing Fortnite, a twenty-year old playing Cyberpunk, and an 80 year old playing Minecraft all should be as equal as their respective love for games. It's the same with writing. We all share a love for what we do, and it doesn't matter what we write, what matters is that we all share the love of writing.

 

[TMITM]

“Go into yourself. Find out the reason that commands you to write; see whether it has spread its roots into the very depths of your heart; confess to yourself whether you would have to die if you were forbidden to write.

This most of all: ask yourself in the most silent hour of your night: must I write? Dig into yourself for a deep answer. And if this answer rings out in assent, if you meet this solemn question with a strong, simple “I must,” then build your life in accordance with this necessity; your whole life, even into its humblest and most indifferent hour, must become a sign and witness to this impulse. Then come close to Nature. Then, as if no one had ever tried before, try to say what you see and feel and love and l o s e...

...Describe your sorrows and desires, the thoughts that pass through your mind and your belief in some kind of beauty - describe all these with heartfelt, silent, humble sincerity and, when you express yourself, use the Things around you, the images from your dreams, and the objects that you remember. If your everyday life seems poor, don’t blame it; blame yourself; admit to yourself that you are not enough of a poet to call forth its riches; because for the creator there is not poverty and no poor, indifferent place. And even if you found yourself in some prison, whose walls let in none of the world’s sounds – wouldn’t you still have your childhood, that jewel beyond all price, that treasure house of memories? Turn your attentions to it. Try to raise up the sunken feelings of this enormous past; your personality will grow stronger, your solitude will expand and become a place where you can live in the twilight, where the noise of other people passes by, far in the distance. - And if out of this turning-within, out of this immersion in your own world, poems come, then you will not think of asking anyone whether they are good or not. Nor will you try to interest magazines in these works: for you will see them as your dear natural possession, a piece of your life, a voice from it. A work of art is good if it has arisen out of necessity. That is the only way one can judge it.”
― Rainer Maria Rilke


“The truly creative mind in any field is no more than this: A human creature born abnormally, inhumanly sensitive. To him... a touch is a blow, a sound is a noise, a misfortune is a tragedy, a joy is an ecstasy, a friend is a lover, a lover is a god, and failure is death. Add to this cruelly delicate organism the overpowering necessity to create, create, create -- so that without the creating of music or poetry or books or buildings or something of meaning, his very breath is cut off from him. He must create, must pour out creation. By some strange, unknown, inward urgency he is not really alive unless he is creating.”
― Pearl S. Buck


I feel like the very breath has been cut from my lungs. For me creating is breathing, a necessity as important and intimate as the act of taking in breath, or human interaction, as if putting something out there, pouring pieces of my soul, whether others notice it or not, is taking something in. And every day, I ask myself, in the deepest recesses in my mind, a simple question that is both terrifying and beautiful. This need - this feeling when I create, these characters that are as real as the person beside me, perhaps more, this expansive world that rises and falls at my demand and the responsibility, simplicity, and complexity of that has me thinking... this feeling of just raw creative energy, just, this feeling...
Is this what a god feels like?