{ ＩＮＫＬＩＮＧＳ v.4 } A Thread For Writers

[The Worst Username]

@Moon

Hello! This is Worst; I'm from Lazy Writers.

What are your tips for writing good character motivations?

Plan it out beforehand; think up every possible reason someone would do something.

Why are they doing this? Why would they do this? Did they cross the ocean for promises of a better life, or because their daughter lives there, or because their boyfriend wanted them to? Does he protest finding cures for HIV because he thinks it's a gay disease, and he doesn't see gay people as people that deserve not to die of horrific diseases? Did the queen kill the king because she thinks he's a bad ruler? Does he hate feminists because he thinks irrational man-haters, when in reality he'll never understand the problems even first-world women face? (Dang it, I'm ranting again)

Then, I suppose you should just think about that reason every time you do a character development scene in the text. Think about ways to bring up the motivation without it being obnoxious. (E.g., with two people on the boat leaving their home forever, person 1 might ask "why are we doing this? We could've stayed home. It might have gotten better if we'd just..." and person 2 could say "you know it'll never get better there. This is our chance to find something better.")

What is your opinion on stereotypes and cliches? Can they be rewritten to be unique and interesting? Or should they be avoided entirely?

I think cliches are fine and can be done, even without being rewritten to be unique/interesting. Just because your fantasy story has typical fairies, centaurs, and dwarves doesn't mean it's not a good story. Stereotypes should be avoided like the devil for one of two reasons: one, it's something like "the awkward, slightly perverted, white male nerd with a speech impediment", which just creates flat characters; two, it's something like "the strong Black woman", "the damsel-in-distress White woman", "the selfish, amoral atheist", "the rich, greedy Jew", or "the 'psycho killer' depressed or bipolar person", which are terrible, offensive caricatures of religions, ethnic groups, races, genders, et cetera.

For which cliches this is/isn't the case for?

I guess if the cliche in question is a racist/sexist/xenophobic/homophobic/anti-(insert group here) stereotype, then it should be thrown in the trash bin and vomited on, but I'd say other cliches are fine.

[Ranger of the North]

What are your tips for writing good character motivations?
Um... I'd probably have to say 'make them realistic'. And keep in mind that even if something's not plausible for you, your character is in an entirely different situation, and it might make perfect sense to them.

What is your opinion on stereotypes and cliches? Can they be rewritten to be unique and interesting, or should they be avoided entirely?
No, I think you can totally make a cliche interesting! I think it's mainly the execution of a situation that makes it cliche. For example, a prince finds a spell-trapped princess stuck in a tower and guarded by a dragon? IT'S BEEN DONE SO MANY TIMES. But what if the tower is full of booby-traps and obstacles, and is actually higher than it first seems? What if the tower is actually a portal to a planet far out in space where the princess is being held captive by the oogly-boogly tribe? What if the dragon is the princess? What if the dragon was cursed as well, and wants nothing more than to be set free so it can return home? What if you gave the princess a personality and give her the ability to stand up for herself, how crazy would that be?!
Um — *coughs* — I kinda got carried away there XD But no, I think cliches can totally be interesting if you make them original, as wonky as it sounds c;

For which cliches this is/isn't the case for?
Girls are brainless sissies. Get rid of that one asap, thank ye very much -_- I could go on, but that's the main one; no one really wants to see me elaborate on this topic, nahaha

[Livini]

How long have you gone without writing?
Depends what you mean by "writing". I bet I've gone quite long without writing my stories down on paper/computer, but that doesn't mean I'm not writing them in my head. I also tend to focus a lot on the stories I enact with my sister (our more complicated version of children's make-believe), so sometimes this gets in the way of my "writing", but that means I'm still busy developing characters and stuff.


My opinion on stereotypes:
I think there are two slightly different definitions of a "stereotype":

1. A flat character who has only one or two defining personality traits (especially if it's something that you see a lot in stories, like a typical "class clown", or a bully/villain who has no personality other than being a bully/evil, or the "stupid sidekick").
In general, a developed character is more interesting than one of these "stereotype" characters, but it depends what role they play in the story, and what kind of story you're writing. In some stories and situations, a flat character can have a comical effect, whereas in other stories and situations, they may just come across as annoying. In stories with a lot of focus on the psychology of the characters, it may be interesting to have only deeper characters (no stereotypes), or to have characters who seem very flat and then turn out to be something different than they appeared to be, whereas in stories with very little focus on psychology and character development, it could distract from the main plot if every side character's deeper personality is revealed (depends how you do it, of course, so I'm not saying any of this always applies).

2. A character who acts like a stereotypical image of a group (such as the "damsel-in-distress", the "rich, greedy Jew", etcetera, that The Worst Username mentioned).
This can be a problem because the same image of the same group keeps being repeated, but I think it depends a lot on your cast of characters. If there is only one woman in your cast and she acts like a "damsel-in-distress", this can be seen as reinforcing the image of women as weak, dependant, etcetera (again, it depends how you do it: you could be writing satire and presenting stereotypes in a way that pokes fun at them). But if half of your cast consists of women, then I don't see the problem of one of them being weak and dependant.

My opinion on clichés:
As Ranger said, you can definitely add a new twist to make them interesting. As for pure clichés (without being rewritten), I think it depends how much of the story is based on clichés. A lot of stories will contain some clichés. If a story involves young people being sent on a quest to save the world, this is definitely overdone, but this doesn't make it a bad story: if the rest of the story and/or its characters are unique and interesting, then it doesn't matter to me that a certain aspect of the story is cliché. On the other hand, if your story has so many cliché characters and plot elements that it becomes predictable, this is probably to be avoided (unless you're trying to write a cliché or predictable story, of course).

[Coco Bunny]

So!
I've just finished reading 1984

Along with Animal Farm, The Road and The Handmaid's Tale under my belt and a lot more to be read (Fatherland, Rendezvous with Rama, No Country for Old Men and a couple more), I'm apparently wayy above my reading level with all these A-level books!

I was hoping to discuss 1984 with some other people who've read and enjoyed/disliked it! Especially your interpretations on the ending.

[Woogwoo Wren]

@coco Bunny. I've read Animal Farm but not 1984, so I can't help you sorry...


How long have you gone without writing?
Probably the longest I've been without writing since I've started writing more seriously is about a month, maybe two... Even then I'll often write little one-shots/drabbles.


Okay so, I have posted a new story and I'd really like it if people would check it out. It's the second story in my Timeless Trilogy, and you can find it here. (link to book one is under the synopsis if you want to read that one. (:)

[Pyjaks]

What is your opinion on stereotypes and cliches?
I don't have much of an opinion other than I love reading stories that incorporate cliches and put their own twist on them. I'll never not love most cliches, if they're done well and proper.

I'll check it out, Wren ^_^

[lucas.]

what's your opinion on stereotypes and cliches?
if they're well-made, i'd probably love them a lot. i'm a sucker for cliches and stereotypes, if they're put together properly to be honest. if anyone would ever want me to read a cliche story they wrote i'd totally be up for it, they're normally super fun to read.

(@lucas specifically:) i think i saw a couple of your entries for that challenge? (and they're great!) so if you're interested in continuing just know that there's still a glimmer of life left and you're more than welcome in continuing it and helping to resuscitate it!

awh thank you for the lovely comment, you're so sweet! i may consider continuing that again, but it'll probably all be depressing stuff like it was last time. i feel like that's something that is fun for me to write, for some reason? maybe that's a weird thing that i enjoy writing sad stuff, whoops.

[blackbird.]

what are your tips for writing good character motivations?
i guess for me i try to root character motivations in struggle/turmoil. character motivations are the weakest when they're doing something for the sake of doing something, in my opinion. even the traditional "trying to take over the world" thing can be a very complex motivation if there's a history behind it, like the character has something to prove or is just a very broken person who tries so hard to be perfect or is so tired of being invisible. especially evil villains - there are so many reasons for a person to be evil so why not explain it rather than making them just a generic villain? it's one of my pet peeves in stories. i love morally grey characters. the villain who is just going down a road paved with good intentions, the hero who's so completely flawed it's hard to believe they're a hero. so yeah, kinda went off-track a bit, when it comes to motivations, it's a lot more believable and relatable when the motivation comes from pain and suffering.

what is your opinion on stereotypes and cliches?
i always prefer it when writers defy stereotypes rather than conform to them, but i suppose it's very difficult to defy every stereotype. personally i hate stereotypes which are derogatory (there's been a huge debate in my country about the way a certain race has been stereotyped in movies and it's because there's a lot of negative stereotypes that are brushed aside "just for laughs"). a lot of the time stereotypes are used for humour and comedy but there's the danger of thinking stereotypes=truth, especially when there's a lack of exposure to the stereotype group in question. i generally dislike labels on people too, like the "jock" or the "nerd" and while these labels are created to simplify things, people shouldn't write people off as their label because their label isn't who they are. i'm just ticked off when people pretend to know other people based on their label rather than who they are.
with cliches, i'm alright with them. a lot of the time they're necessary when linked to structure, like writers starting out are usually introduced to the 5 parts or 3 parts of a basic story and that's helpful when writers are writing their first few novels, but after that it's good to break out and experiment. even with music, musicians generally use natural chords and chord progressions to start off, then they experiment with different instruments and scales. but the starting out part and conforming to the "accepted" way is important when starting out.

awh thank you for the lovely comment, you're so sweet! i may consider continuing that again, but it'll probably all be depressing stuff like it was last time. i feel like that's something that is fun for me to write, for some reason? maybe that's a weird thing that i enjoy writing sad stuff, whoops.

haha i get it! i love putting my characters into soul-crushing situations too!
i guess if you feel like you're in a rut, it's good to find something to write about and just write (even if you think it's bad, at least you're writing something). but that's just my two penny worth - whatever works for you!
(though i'm not-so low-key interested in reading more of your works cx)

So!
I've just finished reading 1984

Along with Animal Farm, The Road and The Handmaid's Tale under my belt and a lot more to be read (Fatherland, Rendezvous with Rama, No Country for Old Men and a couple more), I'm apparently wayy above my reading level with all these A-level books!

I was hoping to discuss 1984 with some other people who've read and enjoyed/disliked it! Especially your interpretations on the ending.

don't even get me started on 1984. orwell is a life-ruiner i have so much to hold against him really like i get his books are great and thought-provoking and whatever but he messed with my mind and i wasn't ready for it so i guess it was my fault but also not because my school made animal farm my lit text when we were like thirteen and our precious innocent brains weren't ready so why?? and ugh when i read 1984 i just wanted to burn the book and remove it from existence or at least put a ban on it or some sort of warning!

okay but for real - i thought it was a brilliantly-written book but i wouldn't say i enjoyed it. i believe that the person who said they enjoyed it should get a psych-eval because it's not a book to be "enjoyed". it's depressing, but that was the point, wasn't it? it was revolutionary and so iconic and eye-opening for its time, and social scientists love to quote it because of how scary it is, or rather, how scarily accurate it is. to think that it could be a reality is a terrifying thought, and it's effective as it plants that fear in the minds of people, and makes them do whatever it takes to ensure it doesn't become a reality. so in that sense, it's very effective.

but even with all that typical-orwell political discourse i felt it was very one-sided. it was very easy to paint the picture of an "evil"
government which abuses power and oppresses people. the government in itself lacked depth and (like one question asked above) motive.

i thought this was a similar problem with the handmaid's tale, but at least in the handmaid's tale it was discussed why the government became like that and it got the reader to think that the regime actually started out with good intentions, what with that "freedom to and freedom from" and "no more rape culture" and "society dying of too much choice" stuff. sure, it might have been propaganda, but how reliable is Offred as a narrator anyway? how one-sided is her story rather than gilead's?

but back to 1984 - the ending especially, since you asked. (head's up - going to make this transparent so there are no spoilers for those who haven't read it) SPOILERS - please highlight if you want to read: the ending killed me, to be honest. i was rooting for winston so hard and it was so painful to see that he lost the battle. and honestly, i felt that if he had died still questioning "big brother" and being tortured to death, it would have been better. but no. they broke him, and that was the saddest part. the lack of hope in a better tomorrow. because martyrs hold power. to die a martyr is to be fuel for a cause, but big brother ensured that wasn't the case. in so many ways, big brother won, and the most crushing part is the utter hopelessness and despair the reader feels, even if winston doesn't feel it anymore. and in the end, the reader is left to question whether it's true - whether ignorance really means freedom, and whether it's better to know and be tortured, or to be ignorant and live in a false imitation of happiness.

also, on the topic of dystopian novels, i would recommend fahrenheit 451 and a brave new world and v for vendetta (the graphic novel)! it's pretty interesting to compare different dystopian novels imo (not sure if animal farm counts because it's more a historical retelling?)
ack! there i go doing lit analyses again - if you've read until here you're amazing and i appreciate it!

[minimire]

hey guys i have a quick question here, do you think it's good to start writing two different books together?
like i'm currently in the middle of writing one, but i'm thinking of starting another, i already have a few things like plot planned out

[Pyjaks]

hey guys i have a quick question here, do you think it's good to start writing two different books together?
like i'm currently in the middle of writing one, but i'm thinking of starting another, i already have a few things like plot planned out

If you want to, sure! Some people can handle working on multiple projects and some can't. I think it's just a matter of personal preference.