abusedsapphics: i see a lot of quotes from Lundy

via https://ift.tt/2G8tnyx

abusedsapphics:

i see a lot of quotes from Lundy Bancroft’s excellent book Why Does He Do That circulating on this website, but i’ve never really seen the last chapter quoted. So this is an excerpt from it: “Creating an Abuse-free World”. 

(A note: the book is written for women who suffer intimate partner violence at the hands of men, because it is sorely needed and because that’s what the author has professional experience with. However, this insight is valuable for people of all genders, and also in situations in which the abuser is not a partner or former partner.)

“How can I help my daughter, sister, or friend who is being abused?

If you would like to make a significant difference in the life of an abused woman you care about, keep the following principle fresh in your mind: your goal is to be the complete opposite of what the abuser is.

THE ABUSER: Pressures her severely

SO YOU SHOULD: Be patient. Remember that it takes time for an abused woman to sort out her confusion and figure out how to handle her situation. It is not helpful for her to try to follow your timetable for when she should stand up to her partner, leave him, call the police, or whatever step you want her to take. You need to respect her judgement regarding when she is ready to take action - something her abuser never does.

THE ABUSER: Talks down to her

SO YOU SHOULD: Address her as an equal. Avoid all traces of condescension or superior knowledge in your voice. This caution applies just as much or more to professionals. If you speak to an abused woman as if you are smarter or wiser than she is, or as if she is going through something that could never happen to you, then you inadvertently confirm exactly what the abuser has been telling her, which is that she is beneath him. Remember, your actions speak louder than your words.

THE ABUSER: Thinks he knows what is good for her better than she does

SO YOU SHOULD: Treat her as the expert on her own life. Don’t assume that you know what she needs to do. I have sometimes given abused women suggestions that I thought were exactly right but turned out to be terrible for that particular situation. Ask her what she thinks might work and, without pressuring her, offer suggestions, respecting her explanations for why certain courses of action would not be helpful. Don’t tell her what to do.

THE ABUSER: Dominates conversations

SO YOU SHOULD: Listen more and talk less. The temptation may be great to convince her what a “jerk” he is, to analyze his motives, to give speeches covering entire chapters of this book. But talking too much inadvertently communicates to her that your thoughts are more important than hers, which is exactly how the abuser treats her. If you want her to value her own feelings and opinions, then you have to show her that you value them.

THE ABUSER: Believes he has the right to control her life

SO YOU SHOULD: Respect her right to self-determination. She is entitled to make decisions that are not exactly what you would choose, including the decision to stay with her abusive partner or to return to him after a separation. You can’t convince a woman that her life belongs to her if you are simultaneously acting like it belongs to you. Stay by her even when she makes choices that you don’t like.

THE ABUSER: Assumes he understands her children and their needs better than she does

SO YOU SHOULD: Assume that she is a competent, caring mother. Remember that there is no simple way to determine what is best for the children of an abused woman. Even if she leaves the abuser, the children’s problems are not necessarily over, and sometimes abusers actually create worse difficulties for the children postseparation than before. You cannot help her to find the best path for her children unless you have a realistic grasp of the complicated set of choices that face her.

THE ABUSER: Thinks for her

SO YOU SHOULD: Think with her. Don’t assume the role of teacher or rescuer. Instead, join forces with her as a respectful and equal team member.

Notice that being the opposite of the abuser does not simply mean saying the opposite of what he says. If he beseeches her with “Don’t leave me, don’t leave me,” and you stand on the other side badgering her with, “Leave him, leave him,” she will feel that you’re much like him; you are both pressuring her to accept your judgement of what she should do. Neither of you is asking the empowering question, “What do you want to do?”

johnfucksoranges: enrique262: cremsie: Loyalty that surpasses...

via https://ift.tt/2rwCkHD

johnfucksoranges:

enrique262:

cremsie:

Loyalty that surpasses the stars.I have a lot of feelings about space and Laika Patreon

Laika should be reverred as a sacred entity honestly. As with all the animals we have sacrifieced for human acheivements.

i-am-a-fish: doctor-basil-puntastic: i-am-a-fish: gentlemanstallion: i-am-a-fish: sharkbytes: i-...

via https://ift.tt/2PvTJK1

i-am-a-fish:

doctor-basil-puntastic:

i-am-a-fish:

gentlemanstallion:

i-am-a-fish:

sharkbytes:

i-am-a-fish:

calibratedsongbirb:

i-am-a-fish:

mnuj:

i-am-a-fish:

petals-and-cinders:

i-am-a-fish:

gays, lend me your strength

I shall give you my soul, and you will be the most powerful gay to ever gay.

thank you so much.

lesbians, lend me your strength

I give you my heart, so you can have the power of all the lesbians and be even more gay than before

I am forever in your debt.

aces, lend me your strength

I give you my essence, so that why you possess the power of gay as well as having not just one, but many aces of power up your sleeve.

I owe you my life.

transgender and nonbinary folks, lend me your strength

i give you my tiddies because i dont fuckign want them

I could never thank you enough.

bi and pan peeps, lend me your strength

Gun

I am eternally grateful.

now, all remaining LGBT+ members, please collectively lend me your strength

You have our combined strengths and powers. Ascend as a God for there can no longer be forces against us. We are billions as one.

I truly thank you all, from the bottom of my heart thank you.

now,

stultiloquentia: downthepub: stultiloquentia: stultiloquentia: I am reading scholarly works about...

via https://ift.tt/2RXptK4

stultiloquentia:

downthepub:

stultiloquentia:

stultiloquentia:

I am reading scholarly works about Jane Austen and having hearteyes about obscure details in the Pemberley chapters of P&P that indicate Mr. Darcy’s sustainable land management praxis.

Okay, let’s talk about Pemberley!

Austen, as a rule, doesn’t spend many paragraphs describing locations. There’s often information to be gleaned from their names (Sense and Sensibility is full of lurking references to sexual scandals and Mansfield Park to slavery), but Longbourn just means “long stream” or “long boundary,” Netherfield means “lower field,” and Rosings’ original owner was a redhead. Meryton, a pun on “merry town,” is kind of fascinating, given the installment of the militia and the threat to stability and serenity they represent. Partying and shenanigans. Possibly a Shakespeare ref.

Longbourn barely gets any description at all. From the get-go, everyone who lives there is obsessed with other places, with getting out (except Mr. Bennet, who never wants to leave his library, never mind the house). Lady Catherine deems it small and mildly uncomfortable, which is in keeping with the theme of confinement, but also it’s Lady Catherine talking. Netherfield can’t tell us much about Bingley, who is only a tenant. Rosings is expensively, ostentatiously modern and gaudily furnished, though it has a handsome park that Lady Catherine and her stifled daughter never set foot in but Elizabeth and Darcy both frequently escape to during their stays.

So it’s notable and wonderful that Austen goes out of her way to describe Pemberley as an old-fashioned, highly successful, working estate. Its practical old Anglo-Saxon name means “Pember’s clearing.” A pember is a man who grows barley. Darcy most likely still does. As Elizabeth and the Gardiners approach and tour the house, they notice and admire its beautiful surrounding woods, and then when they wander outside, the specific word Austen uses is coppice woods. A coppice is a woodland filled with tree species that grow new shoots from their stumps when you chop them down. Darcy probably has oaks on a fifty-year cycle as well as faster-growing species such as hawthorn and hornbeam for firewood, timber and cattle fodder. Coppice forestry is functional and sustainable, and provides habitat for beasts and birds.

Darcy is the anti-John Dashwood (Dashwood, srsly), the brother in Sense and Sensibility who inherits Elinor and Marianne’s childhood estate of Norland, whose wife immediately starts making plans to hack down trees (not even coppice trees, but big, gorgeous, venerable hardwoods) to make way for a folly. Jane Austen hated follies. Also, it ought to be noted that timber was so valuable in Britain at the time that estates often had inheritance clauses that detailed who was and wasn’t allowed to chop down what.

Darcy’s a food producer and land conservator, prefers nature over fussy, ornamental landscape design, his servants and tenants like him, he gives money to the poor… and… he’s a trout fisherman! He shoots, too, as do Bingley and Hurst and Mr. Bennet, but it’s a particular mark in his favour that Austen singles him and Mr. Gardiner out as anglers. It’s a pastime that signifies a taste for contemplation and quietness and appreciation of nature, as blissfully described in The Compleat Angler; or, The Contemplative Man’s Recreation, a hugely popular travel book first published in the 1600s and reprinted often for 18th C libraries. The plot of The Compleat Angler is about the conversion of a hunter (pastime of the ultra-rich) to a fisherman who learns to love the peaceful sport. We receive ample evidence elsewhere that Darcy is a man capable of swift, decisive action and formidable effectiveness. But at Pemberley, Austen takes care to show us how he’s balanced.

Most of the information in this post comes from Margaret Doody’s Jane Austen’s Names. 

I didn’t know any of this!  I always thought it was a bit odd how her viewing the estate changed her views of the man himself, as if it was about how big the place was.  Instead it was how he cared for the land / people.  Fascinating!  Completely missed that.

It’s literally his character reference! Most women at the time had to marry for financial security, yet marriage was horribly risky, because divorce was almost impossible. If you married someone you didn’t know well, and he turned out to be lazy, irresponsible, or abusive, you were stuck. 

This is why so many Austen heroes are mature, almost frumpy men the heroines have known for years. Local fellows with family ties. They don’t offer breathless romances; the happy endings they offer are happy because they are safe.

Darcy is not a local boy. Darcy is not a fully formed, baggable Austen hero when he proposes at Hunsford, not just because he’s rude af, but because Lizzy doesn’t know him well enough yet. She has no real way of knowing how he would treat her. Austen sends Lizzy to Pemberley not to dazzle her with Darcy’s wealth, but to provide her with good, hard evidence of his treatment of the people under his protection, including his tenants, his sister, and the intelligent, dignified housekeeper who has known him since he was a toddler.

Character references established, we may proceed with the romance.

(n.b. He doesn’t know her either, until she’s rejected him. He proposes, despite his giant pile of reservations, because he’s so horny for her he can’t stand it (at least, to his credit, he’s turned on by her brains as much as her hot little bod), but only after her refusal does he realize how completely he has failed to understand this woman or make himself worthy of her. He falls in love for real only after she has demanded that he live up to his own high standards. Refreshing, ain’t it?)

Lor San Tekka Knew What Was Up, and I dearly wish he'd lived past the first scene of TFA (How dare y

via https://ift.tt/2BayrNa

The truly embarrassing thing is that LST is over here deconstructing and giving the thesis statement to Ben’s entire character literally five minutes into Ben’s introductory scene (one of the most crucial scenes for establishing a character to the audience) and people act like Ben’s characterization is this huge mystery. 

I’m deconstructing the entire scene because I’m petty 

The literal first line Ben ever has:

And the response is:

Read: “You’re better than this; this is not who you are meant to be”

And the response:

Read: “Kylo Ren is not who you really are” (Note he doesn’t even say “Before you became Kylo Ren”, he says “Before you called yourself Kylo Ren”. He’s not even dignifying Ben with the belief that Ben even succeeded in this attempt to kill Ben Solo. He’s almost literally accusing Ben of playing dress-up; of ‘calling himself’ something that he isn’t, and hasn’t become.)

Read: “The First Order rose from the dark side…you did not” (does this need to be explained lol)

….to which Ben tries to show how Dark and Evil he is

To which LST is like

Read:  

To which Ben unwittingly hoists himself by the petard of his own ironic foreshadowing:

Ben at this moment is almost undoubtedly referring to Vader, but we as the audience know (should know) that this is Case 1/1923748 of Ben spouting lines that will come to fruition in some ironic way later, when he accepts his true family– Anakin, Luke, Leia, Han (see: ‘Han Solo can’t save you’; ‘Let the past die…that’s the only way to become what you were meant to be’, which imo will blatantly come into ironic fruition when Ben allows the persona of Kylo Ren, which has kept him chained to Vader and the First Order, itself enslaved to its obsession with the failed Empire, to die, so that he may become his true self, who he was meant to be– which Lor San Tekka told us, in his very first scene, was who he was meant to be).

The thing that gets me with this scene is that it establishes everything important about Ben’s character, through his dialogue with Lor San Tekka:

This character (we know nothing about him yet as the audience) was not always Kylo Ren; Kylo Ren is not his true self

The persona of Kylo Ren is a bastardization of who he really is/should be

That ‘Kylo Ren’ and his family do not come from the Dark (the obvious converse is, he comes from the Light, from goodness)

That ‘Kylo Ren’ will never be able to escape this Light heritage

That ‘Kylo Ren’ unwittingly agrees with LST when LST asserts this

==Redemption.

Like. The whole damn thing is spelled out in Ben’s first scene, entirely through one dialogue. Ben’s characterization has always been extremely straightforward from the absolute beginning when we’re talking about the broad strokes. Antis always like to hold LST against Ben like the purpose of this scene wasn’t to contrast Ben’s actions with this extremely deliberate commentary about these actions. The writers set up this villain, only to immediately (literally immediately, in LST’s response to his first line) deconstruct the very concept that he is a villain in the deep structure of the story. Lor San Tekka doesn’t happen by accident to a story. He’s included with intent and purpose. It’s not a mystery what that purpose was.

(no subject)

I bought "How to Write A Sizzling Synopsis" by Bryan Cohen recently and read it yesterday at a coffee shop, where I had gone because I felt too ill to actually go into the gym even though I'd come into town to do just that.

It's quite a short book, with large text, and normally I come out of these 'how to' writing books with the feeling that I've had maybe one sentence-worth of good advice after having read 100 pages of blather. But this one is really good, and I think quite worthwhile. I've taken on board most of its suggestions and re-written some of my book blurbs, in the hope that more people will be moved to buy my books. For example:

Under the Hill

Old Blurb

Voted Best multicultural fantasy of 2013 by the Swirl Awards, and now presented in one volume, Under the Hill is a contemporary fantasy adventure story featuring dragons, elves and world war two fighter planes.

Targeted for abduction by the Faerie Queen, Ben Chaudhry reluctantly turns to Chris Gatrell and his eccentric Paranormal Defence Agency for help.

But it's hard to keep anything out of the snatching hands of determined elves. Chris himself was abducted from his own time - shot down in WWII, and shot forward seventy years in time, stranded far from his wartime sweetheart Geoff and his Lancaster bomber crew.

When the inevitable happens and Ben is abducted, he finds himself a major player in a game of elven politics that may lead to the invasion of Britain.

Chris has to convince the police he didn't just murder Ben and hide the body. Determined not to lose another sweetheart to the elves’ treachery, he presses the ghosts of his old crew back into action for a rescue attempt.

But Geoff isn't dead at all - he's been on ice in Elfland all this time. Now he has a dragon and he’s not afraid to use it. If only he could be entirely sure which of the elf queens is the real enemy—the one whose army is poised to take back planet Earth for elf-kind.

In the cataclysmic battle to come, more than one lover—human and elf alike—may forced to make the ultimate sacrifice.

~

New Blurb

The fairies at the bottom of the garden are coming back with an army.

Ben is a modern, sceptical man but the fairies are trying to abduct him. When he hires Chris's paranormal defence agency to protect him, he doesn't expect to fall in love.

Chris is a refugee from his own time. He's lost one lover to the elves already. Terrified, but determined that this time he'll do better, he promises Ben that the elves will get him over his dead body.

If only that wasn't looking so likely.

Under The Hill was voted Best Multicultural Fantasy 2013 in the mm romance Swirl Awards. Previously presented in two books, this new edition has the whole story in one volume. If you love KJ Charles' Green Men and Magpie Lord books, you'll love this.

Buy Under The Hill now and prepare to be enchanted.

~*~*~
 

Basically the advice was to simplify everything, focus on the characters, cut as much as you possibly could cut and include a clear call to action at the end. And considering that Amazon now only gives you about 200 words above the cut, you've really got no space to work with. Making it short is the way to go. What do you think?

spacealienstuff:

via https://ift.tt/2ruXI07

spacealienstuff:

on fanfic & emotional continuity

via https://ift.tt/2C56mbB

earlgreytea68:

bigblueboxat221b:

notjustamumj:

earlgreytea68:

glitterandrocketfuel:

earlgreytea68:

meanderings0ul:

earlgreytea68:

nianeyna:

earlgreytea68:

fozmeadows:

Writing and reading fanfic is a masterclass in characterisation. 

Consider: in order to successfully write two different “versions” of the same character - let alone ten, or fifty, or a hundred - you have to make an informed judgement about their core personality traits, distinguishing between the results of nature and nurture, and decide how best to replicate those conditions in a new narrative context. The character you produce has to be recognisably congruent with the canonical version, yet distinct enough to fit within a different - perhaps wildly so - story. And you physically can’t accomplish this if the character in question is poorly understood, or viewed as a stereotype, or one-dimensional. Yes, you can still produce the fic, but chances are, if your interest in or knowledge of the character(s) is that shallow, you’re not going to bother in the first place. 

Because ficwriters care about nuance, and they especially care about continuity - not just literal continuity, in the sense of corroborating established facts, but the far more important (and yet more frequently neglected) emotional continuity. Too often in film and TV canons in particular, emotional continuity is mistakenly viewed as a synonym for static characterisation, and therefore held anathema: if the character(s) don’t change, then where’s the story? But emotional continuity isn’t anti-change; it’s pro-context. It means showing how the character gets from Point A to Point B as an actual journey, not just dumping them in a new location and yelling Because Reasons! while moving on to the next development. Emotional continuity requires a close reading, not just of the letter of the canon, but its spirit - the beats between the dialogue; the implications never overtly stated, but which must logically occur off-screen. As such, emotional continuity is often the first casualty of canonical forward momentum: when each new TV season demands the creation of a new challenge for the protagonists, regardless of where and how we left them last, then dealing with the consequences of what’s already happened is automatically put on the backburner.

Fanfic does not do this. 

Fanfic embraces the gaps in the narrative, the gracenotes in characterisation that the original story glosses, forgets or simply doesn’t find time for. That’s not all it does, of course, but in the context of learning how to write characters, it’s vital, because it teaches ficwriters - and fic readers - the difference between rich and cardboard characters. A rich character is one whose original incarnation is detailed enough that, in order to put them in fanfic, the writer has to consider which elements of their personality are integral to their existence, which clash irreparably with the new setting, and which can be modified to fit, to say nothing of how this adapted version works with other similarly adapted characters. A cardboard character, by contrast, boasts so few original or distinct attributes that the ficwriter has to invent them almost out of whole cloth. Note, please, that attributes are not necessarily synonymous with details in this context: we might know a character’s favourite song and their number of siblings, but if this information gives us no actual insight into them as a person, then it’s only window-dressing. By the same token, we might know very few concrete facts about a character, but still have an incredibly well-developed sense of their personhood on the basis of their actions. 

The fact that ficwriters en masse - or even the same ficwriter in different AUs - can produce multiple contradictory yet still fundamentally believable incarnations of the same person is a testament to their understanding of characterisation, emotional continuity and narrative. 

So I was reading this rumination on fanfic and I was thinking about something @involuntaryorange once talked to me about, about fanfic being its own genre, and something about this way of thinking really rocked my world? Because for a long time I have thought like a lawyer, and I have defined fanfiction as “fiction using characters that originated elsewhere,” or something like that. And now I feel like…fanfiction has nothing to do with using other people’s characters, it’s just a character-driven *genre* that is so character-driven that it can be more effective to use other people’s characters because then we can really get the impact of the storyteller’s message but I feel like it could also be not using other people’s characters, just a more character-driven story. Like, I feel like my original stuff–the novellas I have up on AO3, the draft I just finished–are probably really fanfiction, even though they’re original, because they’re hitting fanfic beats. And my frustration with getting original stuff published has been, all along, that I’m calling it a genre it really isn’t. 

And this is why many people who discover fic stop reading other stuff. Once you find the genre you prefer, you tend to read a lot in that genre. Some people love mysteries, some people love high-fantasy. Saying you love “fic” really means you love this character-driven genre. 

So when I hear people be dismissive of fic I used to think, Are they just not reading the good fic? Maybe I need to put the good fic in front of them? But I think it turns out that fanfiction is a genre that is so entirely character-focused that it actually feels weird and different, because most of our fiction is not that character-focused. 

It turns out, when I think about it, I am simply a character-based consumer of pop culture. I will read and watch almost anything but the stuff that’s going to stick with me is because I fall for a particular character. This is why once a show falters and disagrees with my view of the character, I can’t just, like, push past it, because the show *was* the character for me. 

Right now my big thing is the Juno Steel stories, and I know that they’re doing all this genre stuff and they have mysteries and there’s sci-fi and meanwhile I’m just like, “Okay, whatever, I don’t care about that, JUNO STEEL IS THE BEST AND I WANT TO JUST ROLL AROUND IN HIS SARCASTIC, HILARIOUS, EMOTIONALLY PINING HEAD.” That is the fanfiction-genre fan in me coming out. Someone looking for sci-fi might not care about that, but I’m the type of consumer (and I think most fic-people are) who will spend a week focusing on what one throwaway line might reveal about a character’s state of mind. That’s why so many fics *focus* on those one throwaway lines. That’s what we’re thinking about. 

And this is what makes coffee shop AUs so amazing. Like, you take some characters and you stick them in a coffee shop. That’s it. And yet I love every single one of them. Because the focus is entirely on the characters. There is no plot. The plot is they get coffee every day and fall in love. That’s the entire plot. And that’s the perfect fanfic plot. Fanfic plots are almost always like that. Almost always references to other things that clue you in to where the story is going. Think of “friends to lovers” or “enemies to lovers” or “fake relationship,” and you’re like, “Yes. I love those. Give me those,” and you know it’s going to be the same plot, but that’s okay, you’re not reading for the plot. It’s like that Tumblr post that goes around that’s like, “Me starting a fake relationship fic: Ooooh, do you think they’ll fall in love for real????” But you’re not reading for the suspense. Fic frees you up from having to spend effort thinking about the plot. Fic gives your brain space to focus entirely on the characters. And, especially in an age of plot-twist-heavy pop culture, that almost feels like a luxury. “Come in. Spend a little time in this character’s head. SPEND HOURS OF YOUR LIFE READING SO MANY STORIES ABOUT THIS CHARACTER’S HEAD. Until you know them like a friend. Until you know them so well that you miss them when you’re not hanging out with them.” 

When that is your story, when the characters become like your friends, it makes sense that you’re freed from plot. It’s like how many people don’t really have a “plot” to hanging out with their friends. There’s this huge obsession with plot, but lives don’t have plots. Lives just happen. We try to shape them into plots later, but that’s just this organizational fiction we’re imposing. Plot doesn’t have to be the raison d’etre of all story-telling, and fic reminds us of that. 

Idk, this was a lot of random rambling but I’ve been thinking about it a lot lately. 

“fanfiction has nothing to do with using other people’s characters, it’s just a character-driven *genre* that is so character-driven that it can be more effective to use other people’s characters”

yes!!!! I feel like I knew this on some level but I’ve never explicitly thought about it that way. this feels right, yep. Mainstream fiction often seems very dry to me and I think this is why - it tends to skip right over stuff that would be a huge plot arc in a fanfic, if not an entire fanfic in itself. And I’m like, “hey, wait, go back to that. Why are you skipping that? Where’s the story?” But now I think maybe people who don’t like fanfiction are going like, “why is there an entire fanfic about something that could have happened offscreen? Is anything interesting ever going to happen here? Where’s the story?”

Yes! Exactly! This!!!

This crystallized for me when I taught my first class of fanfiction to non-fic-readers and they just kept being like, “But nothing happens. What’s the plot?” and I was so confused, like, “What are you talking about? They fall in love. That’s the plot.” But we were, I think, talking past each other. They kept waiting for some big moment to happen, but for me the point was that the little moments were the big moments. 

This is such an awesome conversation, but I think there’s even another layer here that makes ‘fic’ its own genre. And it is the plot.

Everyone who’s experienced in reading fic has their little ‘trope plots’ we are willing to read or even prefer in order to spend time with our favorite characters. We know how it’s gonna end and we genuinely don’t care, because the character is the whole point of why we’re reading. And that is unique. That’s just not how mainstream media publication does things.

But there are also hundreds of thousands of fics people might call ‘plot driven’ and they have wonderful, intricate plots that thrill their readers.

But they’re not at all ‘plot driven’ in the same way as other mainstream genres.

The thing about ‘plot’ in fic is that it tends to ebb and flow naturally. There’s not the same high speed, race to the finish you’d get from a good action movie. There’s no stop and start of side plots you get in TV genre shows. The best fic plot slides from big event to restful evening to frantic activity to shared meals and squabbles and back, and it gives equal time and attention and detail to each of these things.

Like @earlgreytea68 said, “There’s this huge obsession with plot, but lives don’t have plots. Lives just happen. We try to shape them into plots later, but that’s just this organizational fiction we’re imposing. Plot doesn’t have to be the raison d’etre of all story-telling, and fic reminds us of that.”

Fic plot moves at a pace similar to the life of whatever character it’s about. Not the other way around. There’s a fundamental difference in prioritization in fic.

I think this only adds to the case of ‘fic’ as its own, distinctive genre. Stylistic choices of writing that would never work in traditional, mainstream fiction novels work for novel-length fic. Fic adventures spend as much time fleshing out the little moments between romances and friendships as they do on that plot twist. The sleepy campground conversations are as important to the plot as the kidnapped princess, because that’s how the characters are going to grow together by the end of the story. It’s not a grace note, it’s not a side episode or an addition or a mention - it’s integral and equal.

That’s just accepted as fact by fic writers and readers. It’s expected without any particular mention. And it gives a very unique flavor and pace to fic that makes a lot of mainstream stories feel like stale, off-brand wonderbread. They are missing something regular fic readers take for granted (and it isn’t just the representational differences, because we all know that’s a whole different conversation). There’s a fundamental difference in how ‘fic’ is written, detailed, and paced that is built on its foundations as a ‘character driven’ genre.  

And it isn’t only action/adventure/mystery plots that have this difference in fic. Those ‘everybody’s human in today’s world’ AUs, those ‘friends to lovers’ slow burn stories have it too. They have a plot, but it’s the life - the grocery shopping, the dumb fights and sudden inescapable emotional blows, those moments of joy with that person you click with, managing work and family and seasons - that’s the whole plot on its own.

And that’s almost impossible to explain to someone who hasn’t really experienced fic as a genre, who’s used to traditional person A and person B work together/overcome differences/bond to accomplish X. In fic accomplishing X might be the beginning or the middle, not the end result of the story, and A & B continue to exist separate from X entirely. X is only relevant because of how it relates to A & B, not the other way around.

Fic is absolutely its own genre and it has a lot to do with plot. I’ve been calling this ‘organic plot’ in my head for months, because I knew something felt different about writing this way, how long fic plot ebbs and grows seemingly on its own sometimes. ‘Dual plot’ could be another option, maybe, though the character plot and life experience plots aren’t really separate. Inverted plot? Hm. I’m sure a good term will develop over time.

OH MY GOODNESS I LOVE THIS. 

I was always fond of saying, about my own fics, that my plots show up about two-thirds of the way through, because it takes me that long to figure out where I’m going, and then I would lol about it, because, ha, wouldn’t it be great if I organized it better. 

And now I read this and I’m like, WAIT. YES. THAT’S WHAT’S HAPPENING. IT’S BEEN HAPPENING ALL ALONG. I NEVER REALIZED IT. The idea that the primary importance is the throughline of the characters, and that’s what we’re following, and the plot is what’s dangling off the side of their story, that is SO IMPORTANT. You’re right, that usually we’re told as writers to construct stories from the plot outward. “Here are the beats your plot needs to hit, here’s the rising action to the climax to the falling action, now make sure your Character A makes this realization by Point X in order to get your plot into shape for Point Y to click in.” It’s *such* a plot-centric way to write and I am *terrible* at it. And I’ve always said, whenever I sit down to “outline” a story, like, How do you this? How do you know where the characters are going until they tell you where they’re going???

But it’s not that I’m “bad” at this, which is what I’ve always thought, it’s just that I’m coming at it from the opposite angle. I can’t plan the plot before the characters because I’m sticking close to the characters, and the traditional “plot” is secondary to whatever’s going to happen to them. And that’s not a wrong way of writing, it’s just a different way of writing. And it’s wrong of me to be thinking that my stories don’t get a “point” until they’re almost over. THEY’VE HAD THE POINT ALL ALONG. What happens when they’re almost over is that the characters come to where they’ve been going, and then the traditional “plot” is what helps shape the ending. The traditional “plot” becomes, to me, like that epilogue scene after the biggest explosion in an action movie, where you’re told the characters are going to be okay. I spend the entire movie telling you the characters are going to be okay, and then my epilogue scene is tacked on “oh, p.s., also they saved the day.” 

There is so much here that I want to say I don’t even know where to begin. @earlgreytea68 you’re not alone. Hit me up. I’ve studied plot and structure forever. Fics are pure, uncut, internal-motivation-drives-everything storytelling and they are so very different from the monomyth that drives most commercial fiction these days that they almost have to exist in a liminal space like fan fiction. I could go on…

LET’S BE FRIENDS. 

Hahaha, this is my week to just want to be Tumblr friends with everyone, all the FOB people, all the fluff people, all the fandom anthropology people, LET’S ALL BE FRIENDS. 

<3 <3 <3

@earlgreytea68 and @glitterandrocketfuel and OP and everyone else who contributed - this is beautiful, and I’m saving it to read and consider again later. probably with a glass of wine or something. <3

Smart idea. ;-)