#but it's narratively satisfying to me with the new structure | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

Visit Blog

Explore Tumblr blogs with no restrictions, modern design and the best experience.

Fun Fact

When “GIF” was named word of the year in 2012, Oxford Dictionaries U.S.A. credited Tumblr for pushing the word.

#but it's narratively satisfying to me with the new structure

fiona-fififi · 1 month

Note

could you explain to me why you think bucktommy forever would be narratively satisfying but there's no possibility of them introducing a love interest for eddie that would be satisfying? i don't understand

I DON'T think bucktommy would be narratively satisfying.

I DO think there is more potential in the current narrative structure for them to make bucktommy endgame work in a reasonably narratively satisfying way (IF Eddie's story wasn't a factor, which it is).

I also don't necessarily think it would be impossible for them to bring in someone for Eddie if I'm imagining they have all the time in the world to make that work. But the reality of the current narrative is that I don't think they have all the time in the world. And as talented as these writers are, I don't see any way they could introduce someone entirely new, with no connection to the current narrative, and make me buy that person as Eddie's endgame. There just isn't time. A couple of years ago, I would have said that I thought Eddie could have an interesting and satisfying ending to his story if he learned that he didn't need romantic fulfillment to be happy. Since then, however, they've really doubled down on Eddie's loneliness and desire for a romantic partner AND they went for the queer Buck storyline. When you add to that all of Eddie's history with Buck and the way he's welcomed Buck into his life and embraced him as a partner both in his own life and in Christopher's, I don't see any way for them to disentangle that story and introduce someone else (unless it was Tommy, maybe, but nobody's going to want to hear that).

It would just take SO much work and time that I'm not sure they have because it would take several seasons, I think, for it to really reach any level of satisfying.

The difference with bucktommy is simply that it would take very slightly less work (though still a TON of work) for a few reasons.

First, Buck is just Buck. With Eddie, there's also the Christopher of it all to contend with, which adds a complicating layer that extends the work that needs to be done in Eddie's story in a way that doesn't exist for Buck's story (as important as Christopher is for Buck, it's very different from what would need to happen for Eddie who is literally Christopher's parent). So Buck's story has fewer complications to contend with, especially since they've already gotten it off the ground with Buck's queer awakening and introducing his relationship with Tommy already at this point in canon. So there would literally just be less time involved.

Beyond that, Tommy is already an established character in universe. They don't need to do quite as much work to help us get to know him, because we already do, even if only peripherally. But he is established as significant to the stories of other characters beyond Buck. He had a role to play in Chimney's, Hen's, and Bobby's (and hell, even Eddie's!) stories long before he ever became significant to Buck's. So, developing his place among the team and their extended family is not nearly as complicated as it would be with someone entirely new—and even someone from Eddie's past wouldn't have the history with the team, so still, more complications there.

So, yes, I think bucktommy has more potential in the current narrative structure (if—and ONLY if—completely divorced from Eddie's storyline, which it can never be).

But not only do I not actually think either could be a satisfying ending for either Buck or Eddie in the current narrative, there actually isn't anything to suggest that the show is doing the work it needs to to make that potential a reality, either. Because they are not separating out Eddie and Buck (frankly, they're entwining them further). And they aren't even doing any work to flesh out Tommy’s character. I know fandom has grown really attached to him, but the reality is that the character is currently just being used as a pawn to move Buck's story forward. Tommy has a past with the 118 that creates a lot of potential, but that potential is not being used. The character is, frankly, pretty flat at the current moment. They haven't even tried to bring him back into the 118 fold—the only people he's really interacted with since his reintroduction are Eddie and Buck, when there has been plenty of opportunity to fold him back into the team in ways that would at least have him vaguely interacting with the others (like, I don't know, Chimney actually inviting him to the wedding or Hen even acknowledging him at the bachelor party). Their relationship is cute and sweet, but there's nothing that indicates it's any deeper than any of the other relationships Buck has had thus far, and they are actively juxtaposing the bucktommy relationship with the buddie relationship in a way that makes very clear just how surface level that relationship really is when compared to the depth of Buck and Eddie's relationship with one another.

So, no, I don't think bucktommy are going to be endgame, nor do I have any interest in them being endgame. But I recognize that there is currently—literally, in the canon narrative—more potential for bucktommy to work if the show really wanted to make it happen and put in the work, mostly because of Tommy’s history with the rest of the 118.

On Eddie's end, there is no current canon potential. There's no current love interest they could turn around (especially because Edy is a shit human being and people would riot if they actually made Marisol Eddie's endgame). There's no past love interest they could bring back that wouldn't somehow have to be worked into the rest of the team. There's the additional complication of the Christopher of it all and how much that changes where Eddie's story can go and how quickly it can be developed.

It's quite literally just the difference in time. If Buck's relationship with Eddie wasn't a factor, I think they could do it in two seasons for bucktommy. For Eddie and this currently non-existent love interest, I think it'd take a good three or more, and even then, I think it would have to be someone they introduce as a part of the team (Lucy? Ravi? Tommy?) because anyone separate wouldn't have any room to develop sufficiently.

But the reality is that, frankly, the ONLY narratively satisfying ending for Eddie and Buck is one another. Any other option would require dismantling so much beautiful storytelling that I cannot see how it would ever be worth it.

#in short: i am reading the narrative as it currently exists in canon #and bucktommy are there and a love interest for eddie who is not buck is not #anon #asks answered #buddie #bucktommy #911 discourse #i guess??#i don't understand why this is apparently a controversial opinion #like. it's a narrative. i'm reading the narrative. as it exists.#as it currently exists buck is the only answer #i'm not going to rest my narrative satisfaction on making up hypothetical love interests outside of the current narrative

191 notes · View notes

ladyluscinia · 7 months

Text

Ok, I think I might be exiting the "are you fucking kidding me?" period and ready to make a real argument, so lets talk about Three Act Structure!

Is OFMD S2 just the "Darkest Hour"?

A very common explanation I've been seeing for some of the... controversial... aspects of S2 is that it's meant to be that way. That the middle act is where the protagonists hit their lowest point. Where we get the big failure point. Where everything looks kind of shit.

S2 is supposedly just that point. It's The Empire Strikes Back. People have been making that comparison since before the first episodes even dropped, telling everyone to expect something that could be disappointing or unsatisfying - it's just a matter of needing to wait for S3 to pull it all together.

It's not a baseless framework to consider the show through - I'm pretty sure David Jenkins has mentioned it in interviews (or at least mentioned he planned for three acts / seasons) so it's certainly worth asking how he's doing at the 2/3rd mark.

So - quick summary of Three Act Structure:

Act 1 introduces our characters and world. It includes the inciting incident of the story and the first plot point, where a) the protagonist loses the ability to return to their normal life, and b) the story raises whatever dramatic question will drive the entire plot. Act 2 is rising action and usually most of the story. The protagonist tries to fix things and fucks them up worse, in the process learning new skills and character developing to overcome their flaws. Act 3 is the protagonist taking one more shot, but this time they are ready. We get the climax of the story, the dramatic question gets an answer, and then the story closes.

If you want examples, the Star Wars Original Trilogy is a very popular template. And, hell, he said it was a pirate story... the main Pirates of the Caribbean trilogy also does a solid job with their three acts.

Let's compare. (Spoiler: I'm not impressed 🤨)

---

First thing I need to establish... Wait. Two things. First is that Three Act Structure is flexible, so we can't really analyze success or failure by pulling up a list of necessary plot beats that should have been hit in X order. Second is that if you tell me you are writing a romance with a Three Act Structure - where "the relationship is the story" - the first thing I'm going to do is ask you how you are adapting it. Because while there's not necessarily anything preventing you from applying this to a character driven plot, most people are familiar with it as plot structure for externally driven conflict.

Unless there's a reason the status of the main relationship is intrinsically tied up in the current status of the war against the evil empire, a standard Three Act Structure is going to entail either an antagonistic force that absolutely wants your main couple apart being the main relationship obstacle OR the romance aspect being a subplot to the protagonist's narrative adventure. None of those sound like how the show has been described.

So how is OFMD adapting it?

---

Act 1

(Can't figure out how well Act 2 is doing if we don't start at setup.)

Right out the gate, OFMD breaks one of the main "rules" for a story where the Acts are delivered in three parts. Namely the one where the first Act is treated as an acceptable standalone story, with it's own satisfying yet open ended conclusion.

In Star Wars, A New Hope ends with the princess rescued, Luke finding the Force, Han finding his loyalty, and the Death Star destroyed. The Empire isn't defeated, the antagonists still live... the story is not over, but this one movie doesn't feel unfinished.

Similarly, Curse of the Black Pearl gives Jack his ship back, Elizabeth and Will get together, and Norrington has the English Navy let them all off the hook and give Jack and the pirates one day's head start.

OFMD's final beat of S1 being Kraken Arc starting is not that, even if Stede returning to sea is still a pretty hopeful note. Now... I don't necessarily think this was a bad call. At least, not if the story is the relationship. It's easy to close on a happy ending and then fuck it up next movie if the conflict is external and coming for them. Not so much if you're driving the story with your protagonists' flaws, in part because it should be really obvious at the end of setup that your main characters need development and can't run off together right now. I actually like that they were risk-takers and let S1 look at the situation clearly vs doing a fragile happy end, because it takes into account the difference between a character-driven and plot-driven narrative.

I think OFMD's Act 1 actually ends at maybe the Act of Grace? Well, there through the kiss on the beach, counting as our "first plot point" before everything goes wrong, basically.

At that point, they have setup the story and characters. We've been introduced to Edward and Stede's current issues. Signing the Act of Grace does make the intertwined arcs between them real - it's no longer a situation that either one of them could just walk away from like it was in 1x07 - and we narrow in on the (alleged) driving question of the show:

It's not about "Will Stede become a great pirate?" or "Will we develop a better kind of piracy for the crew?" - the show is the relationship and the big question is "What is Stede and Edward's happy ending?"

Act 1 ends on their first solution, being together and making each other happy and admitting it's more than just friendship. Act 2 starts, appropriately, by saying both of them are currently too flawed for that to go anywhere but crashing and burning.

Now... looking back, what does Act 1 do well vs poorly?

I think it's really strong on giving us the foundation for BlackBonnet's characters and flaws. We aren't surprised Stede goes home or Edward goes Kraken (or at least... we weren't supposed to be surprised. There are still a lot of holdouts blaming Izzy for interrupting Edward's "healing" despite how at this point in the story it doesn't make sense for Edward to have the skills to heal... but I digress). The relationship question is compelling at the end of S1, the cliffhanger hooks, and the fandom explosion of fics did not come from nowhere - the audience was invested.

I also think Act 1 does a great job of settling us in the universe. We understand the rules it abides by, from how gay pirates are just a fact of life to how there's no important organs on the left side of the body. Stede has a muppety force field. Rowboats have homing devices, and port is always as close as you want it to be. Scurvy is a joke. The overblown violence of pirate life is mostly a joke, but we are going to take the violence of childhood trauma seriously.

Lucius's fake-out death, while technically part of Act 2, works well because Act 1 did a good job of priming everyone to go "obviously this show wouldn't kill a crew member for shock value, and we're 100% supposed to suspend disbelief about how he could have survived getting flung into the sea in the middle of the night." And we do. And we get rewarded for it.

Regarding antagonists - a big focus of any setup - the show is deliberately weak. The one with the most screentime is Izzy, and he's purposefully ineffective at separating our main couple. Every antagonist is keyed to a particular character, and they function mostly to inform us of that character's flaws and development requirements. The Badmintons tell us about Stede's repression and feelings of inadequacy, and Izzy tells us about Edward's directionless discontent and tendency to avoid his problems. Effectively - the show is taking the stance this will be a character driven narrative where Stede and Edward's flaws are the source of problems and development the solution. No person or empire (or social homophobia) is separating them...

...which leads me to something not present - there nothing really about the struggle of piracy against the Empire. Looking at Curse of the Black Pearl... we see piracy is in danger. The Black Pearl itself is described as the last great pirate threat the British Navy needs to conquer. Hangings are omnipresent - Jack is sentenced to die by one almost as soon as he's introduced to the story, when his only act so far had been to wander around and save Elizabeth from drowning. OFMD tries to invoke this kind of struggle in 2x08, but there's no foundation. Our Navy antagonists are Stede's childhood bullies, and so focused on Stede the crew isn't even in danger when they get caught. The Republic of Pirates is getting jokes about being gentrified, not besieged.

Even the capture of Blackbeard by the Navy is treated as a feather in Wellington's cap but not a huge symbolic blow against piracy... because we just do not have that grand struggle woven into Act 1. You only know the "Golden Age of Piracy" is ending if you google it, or have watched a bunch of pirate shows.

Overall, a solid Act 1, well adapted to the kind of story they've said they were looking to tell - a romance in the (silly-fied) age of piracy, instead of a pirate adventure with a romantic subplot.

---

Now, Sidebar - Where is the story going?

The thing about the dramatic question - in OFMD's case: "What is Stede and Edward's happy ending?" - is that a) there's normally more than one question bundled up in that one + sideplots, and b) while you aren't supposed to have the answer yet, you can usually guess what needs to happen to give you the answer.

Back to our examples... Luke's driving question is "Will the Empire be defeated?" Simple. Straightforward. Also: "Will Luke become a Jedi?" The eventual climax of our story from there is pretty obvious... the story is over when Luke wins the war for the Rebellion in a Jedi way. That's the goal that they are working toward.

Pirates of the Caribbean is a bit more complicated. We're juggling more characters and have a less defined heroic journey, but there are driving questions like "Is Jack Sparrow a good man?" and "Is Will Turner a pirate / what does that mean?" and even "Will the British Navy defeat piracy?" They get basic answers in Curse of the Black Pearl, and far more defined ones in At World's End. Still, this is another plot-driven narrative. They've laid the foundations for the Pirates vs Empire struggle, and when that final battle turns into the trilogy climax then you know what's happening.

OFMD is not doing a plot-driven narrative. To judge how they are doing at their goals, we have to ask what they think a happy ending entails in a character sense.

Clearly it's not the classic romantic sideplot, where the climax is the first kiss / acknowledgement of feelings. They've teased a wedding in Word of God comments a lot, so that's probably our better endpoint. Specifically, though, a wedding where both of our protagonists aren't ready to flee from the altar (big ask) and where they've both grown enough that their flaws / mutual tendencies to run away from life problems won't tank the relationship.

In Stede's case it's still massive feelings of inadequacy and being too repressed to talk about his problems. Also he ran away from his family to chase a lifelong dream of being a pirate - "Is Stede going to find fulfillment in being a pirate captain, or will the real answer be love?" Edward meanwhile expresses a desire to quit piracy and retire Blackbeard, but we also find out he's struggling with massive self-loathing and guilt from killing his father - "Is retiring what Edward wants to do, or is he just running away?"

If they are going to get to a satisfying wedding beat at the climax of their story, what character beats do we need to hit in advance?

Off the top of my head - both characters need to self-realize their flaws (a pretty necessary demand of anyone who runs away from problems). They are set up to balance each other well, but also to miscommunicate easily. They have to tell each other about or verbally acknowledge that self-realization so it can be resolved. Stede has to decide how much being a pirate means to him. Edward has to decide if he's retiring and what he wants to do. They both need to show something to do with getting past their childhood traumas given all the flashbacks. Through all this, they also need to hit the normal romance beats that convince the audience they are romantically attracted to each other and like... want to get married.

Oh, and this is more of a genre-specific sideplot, but once they demonstrate a behavior that hurts the people who work for them, they need to then demonstrate later how it won't happen again. Proof of growth, which is kind of important in a comedy where a lot of the humor is based in them being massively self-centered assholes. Stede doesn't earn his acceptance in the community until he kicks Calico Jack off the ship, making up for causing the situation with Nigel in the first episode. A workplace comedy can get a lot of material from the boss as the worker's antagonist, but if you want the bosses to stay sympathetic you have got to throw them some opportunities to earn it.

All that sounds like a lot, but like - the relationship is the story, right? If we spend so much time on establishing flaws big enough to drive a story, we also have to spend time on fixing them. Which is where the turning point hits.

---

Act 2: How it Starts

This is where the full story reality-checks your protagonist. Glad you saved your boyfriend and embraced new love in Act 1, but his repressed guilt means he's about to completely ghost you, and your own abandonment issues and self-loathing are about to make his dick move into everyone else's problem.

Again, it's a non-conventional choice OFMD has this start at the very end of S1 rather than with a sudden dark turn in the S2 premiere, but it's still pretty clearly that point in the Three Act Structure.

In Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back opens with a timeskip to our Rebellion getting absolutely crushed and hiding on a miserable frozen planet. The Empire finds them as the plot is kicking off and they have to desperately flee. They get separated. Han and Leia try to go to an ally for help and end up in Vader's clutches. It's a sharp turn from the victorious note that A New Hope ended on.

Pirates of the Caribbean's Act 2 starts dark. Dead Man's Chest opens with our happy couple Will and Elizabeth getting arrested on their wedding day for the "happy end" escape of the last movie. Jack has not been having success since reclaiming his ship, and we'll soon find out he's being hunted by dark forces. As for the general state of piracy, we get a horrifying prison where pirates are being eaten alive by crows, and a new Lord Beckett making the dying state of piracy even more textual. "Jack Sparrow is a dying breed... The world is shrinking."

The key here is making a point that our heroes aren't ready. This is the struggles part - things they try? Fail. The odds do not look to be in their favor.

Now, OFMD apparently decided to go all-in on flaw exploration, especially with Edward. The first 3 episodes of S2 are brutally efficient in outlining Edward's backslide. In S1 you could see he had issues with guilt and feeling like a bad person. S2 devolves that into a destructive, suicidal spiral where Edward forces his crew into three months of consecutive raids, repeats his shocking act of cruelty with Izzy's toe offscreen (more than once!), escalates it with his leg, and finally they state directly that Edward hates himself for killing his dad so much that he fears he's fundamentally unlovable and better off dead.

Stede's struggles are subtler, but most definitely still there. He's deliberately turning a blind eye to tales of Edward's rampage, half from simply being too self-centered to care about the harms Edward causes others, and half from being unable to face or fathom that he had the ability to hurt Edward that much. Upon reunion he wants to put the whole thing behind them, not addressing why he left in the first place. Very "love magically fixes everything" of him, except Stede is no golden merman.

Interestingly, here, BlackBonnet's relationship dysfunction has very clearly been having a negative impact on the surrounding characters we care about. Make sense, since it's the driving force of the story, but that also adds a lot more relationships we need to make right. Like... Edward is the villain to his crew. The show focuses on their trauma and poisoned relationships with him. And then draws our attention even more to Stede taking his side to overrule their objections to him.

For a story where the conflict and required resolutions are primarily character based, and the setup had already given the main couple a good amount to work with, dedicating a lot of S2 to adding more ground to cover was... a choice. Potentially very compelling on the character end, certainly challenging on the writing end... but not a complete break with the structure.

Bold, but not damning.

---

Act 2: How it Ends

Now it is true that Act 2 tends to end on a loss. Luke is defeated by Vader and loses his hand, and Han has been sent away in carbonite. Jack Sparrow for all his efforts cannot escape his fate, and he and the Pearl are dragged to the locker.

But the loss is not the point. The loss is incidental to the point.

Act 2 is about struggles and failure, but it's also about lessons learned. There's a change that occurs, and our cast - defeated but not broken - enters the final act with the essential skills, motivation, knowledge, etc. that they lacked in the beginning.

Luke Skywalker could not have defeated the Empire in Return of the Jedi until he'd learned the truth about his father and resisted the Dark Side in The Empire Strikes Back. (Ok, confession, I'm using Star Wars as an example because literally everyone is doing so, but frankly it's a better example of formulaic Three Act Structure repeating within each movie because on a trilogy level - relevant to this comparison - it is a super basic hero's journey in a very recognized outfit and as such the Act 2 relevance is also... super basic "the hero tries to fight the antagonist too early" beat where he learns humility. Not really a lot going on. So, for the better example...)

Dead Man's Chest has a downer ending with the closing moment of the survivors regaining hope and a plan against an enemy now on the verge of total victory - a classic Act 2. But in that first loss against Davy Jones we get Will's personal motivation and oath to stab the heart, Jack finally overcoming not knowing what he wanted and returning to save them from the Kraken (being a good man), Elizabeth betraying Jack (being a pirate), Barbossa's return, and Norrington's choice to bargain for his prior life back. The mission to retrieve Jack from the World's End is the final movie's plot, but things are already on track to turn the tables back around as we enter the finale.

Now, relevant sidenote - one major difference between Three Act Structure within a single work vs across three parts is that Act 2 continues into Part 3, and only tips over into Act 3 about midway through. This is because obviously your final movie or season cannot just be the climax. That's why both movie examples start with a rescue mission. They have to still be missing something so they can get the plot of their third part accelerating while they go get whatever that something is.

But if you wait until the 3rd movie / season to get the development going at all - you're fucked.

Jack's decision in the climax of At World's End to make Elizabeth into the Pirate King goes back to the development we saw in the Pearl vs Kraken fight in Dead Man's Chest. So does Elizabeth's leadership arc. Will's whole arc about becoming Captain of the Dutchman gets built upon in the third movie, but it starts in the second. Not just as an idle thought - he's actively pursuing it. Already consciously weighing saving his father vs getting back to Elizabeth as soon as he makes the oath. Everyone is moving forward in Act 2. Their remaining development might stumble for drama, or they might be a bit reluctant, but I know that they know better than to let it stick, because they already faced their true crisis points.

I'm not sure we can say the same about OFMD.

S2 does a good job of adding problems, yeah, but there's not really any movement on fixing them. Our main couple stagnates in some ways, and regresses in others.

Stede opened Act 2 by running away in the middle of the night back to his wife without telling Edward anything. We know he did it because of feeling guilty and his core childhood trauma of his dad calling him a weak and inadequate failure. Now in S1 he actually speedruns a realization of his shitty behavior with Mary, but what about S2? Well...

He continues to not talk to Edward about... pretty much anything. My guy practiced love confessions galore but Edward only finds out about going back to his wife via Anne, and it gets brushed aside with a love confession. He seems to think Edward wants him to be a dashing pirate, or maybe he just thinks he should be a dashing pirate. Idk, it doesn't get examined. Regarding his captaincy, they give him an episode plot about Izzy teaching him to respect the crew's beliefs, but this is sideplot to a larger arc of him completely overruling their traumas and concerns (and shushing their objections) to keep his boyfriend on the ship so. That.

Stede kills a man for reasons related to his issues, shoves that down inside and has sex with Edward instead of acknowledging any bad feelings. At least this time Edward was there and knows it happened? Neither Chauncey's death nor his dad have been mentioned to anyone. He gets a day of piracy fame that goes to his head, gets dumped, and ends on a complete beat down by Zheng where he learns... idk. Being a boor is bad? He's still wildly callous to her in the finale, and spends the whole time seeking validation of his pirate skills. He reunites with Edward, kisses, and quotes Han Solo.

Where S1 ended on a great fuckery, his S2 naval uniform plan after they regroup is ill defined except to call it a suicide mission - and we don't get to see what it would have been because it devolves into a very straightforward fight and flee. And gets Izzy killed. Quick cut funeral (no acknowledgement of his S2 bonding with Izzy), quick cut to wedding (foreshadowing), quick cut to... innkeeper retirement? Unclear when or even if BlackBonnet discussed Stede's whole driving dream to be a pirate and live a life at sea, but I guess that got a big priority downgrade. Despite the fact he was literally looking to Zheng for pirate-based compliments in the post-funeral scene.

I guess he's borderline-delusionally dogged in his pursuit of love now - so unlikely to bolt again - but he's also got at least a decade of experience mentally checking out in a state of repression when he's unhappy. And he's stopped being as supportive and caring toward the crew in that dogged pursuit, while arguably demonstrating a loss in leadership skills, so, um, good thing someone else is in charge?

And if Stede is a mess, Edward's arc is so much worse.

As established, they devote the Kraken to making Edward worse. He literally wants to kill himself and destroy everyone around him in the process because Stede left, and this is fixed by... Stede coming back. That's it. The crew tries to murder him and then exiles him from the ship (and Izzy takes the lead on both, indicating exactly how isolated Edward has become), but it's resolved in half a day by Stede just forcing them to put up with his boyfriend again. Like they think he murdered Buttons and still have to move him back in???

The show consistently depicts Kraken Era as a transgression against the crew, but they also avoid showing Edward acting with genuine contrition. He admits he historically doesn't apologize for anything, and then mostly still doesn't. It's a joke that he's approaching probation as a performance (CEO apology), and then the only person he genuinely talks to is Fang - the one guy cool with him - and the only person who gets a basic "sorry" is Izzy - the guy he really needs to be talking to. Edward's primary trauma is guilt, but apparently he only feels it abstractly after all that? He's only concerned with fixing things with Stede, despite Stede being about the only person around who hurt him instead of the reverse.

Speaking of primary traumas, Edward hating himself doesn't really go anywhere after the beat of self-realization. Apparently Stede still loving him is enough of a bandaid to end the suicide chasing, but he doesn't like. Acknowledge that. Edward is maybe sorta trying to go slow so he doesn't hang all his self-worth on Stede again (you can speculate), but they a) absolutely fail to go slow, and b) he doesn't make any attempt to develop himself or another support structure. Just basically... "let's be friends a bit before hooking back up." And then we get the whiplash that is Blackbeard and/or retirement.

Kraken Era is Blackbeard but way worse, like no one who has known Blackbeard has ever seen him. In the Gravy Basket Edward claims he might like being an innkeeper, before destroying his own fantasy by having the spectre of Hornigold confront him over killing his dad. The BlackBonnet to Anne & Mary parallel says running away to China / retiring makes you want to kill each other - burn it all down and go back to piracy. Stede rightfully points out prior retirement plans were whims. Edward gets sick of the penance sack after a day and puts his leathers back on to go try "poison into positivity". But also claims to be an innkeeper (look - two whole mentions!) when trying not to send children to be pirates after teaching them important knife skills.

Killing Ned Low is a serious, bad thing that prompts ill-advised sex and then going hardcore into retirement mode - leathers overboard, talk about mermaid fantasy, get retirement blessings from Izzy, end up dumping Stede for a fishing job instead of talking about how he's enjoying piracy. The fishing job, however, is also a bad thing and a stupid decision because Edward is a lazy freeloader fantasizing about being a better person. We have an uncomfortable, extended scene of "Pop-Pop" weirdly echoing his abusive dad and then sending Edward to go do what he's good at - disassociate, brutally murder two guys, fish up the leathers, rise as the Kraken from the sea. He continues with comically efficient murder but also he's reading Stede's love letters and seeking to reunite with him so... wait, is this a good thing? Post makeout / mass slaughter he's trading compliments on his kills with Zheng so. Yeah. Looks like it. Murder is fine.

Wait, no, skip ahead and Izzy is dying and Edward suddenly cares a whole lot as Izzy makes his death scene about freeing Edward from Blackbeard. Now being a pirate was "encouraging the darkness" because Izzy - a guy who had little to no influence over Edward's behavior - just couldn't let Blackbeard go. Murder is bad again, and he is freed. Minus the little detail that the murder he explicitly hates himself over was not related to Blackbeard or piracy whatsoever, so presumably haunts "just Ed" still. Anyway he's retiring to run an inn with Stede now, as the "loving family" Izzy comforted him with in his dying moments sails away from the couple that can best be described as the antagonists of their S2 arc. Also Edward implicitly wants to get married. It's been 3 days since making out was "too fast". He's still wearing the leathers.

So most of the way through Act 2 and Edward's barely on speaking terms with anyone but Stede, who he has once again hung his entire life on really fast? Crushing guilt leads to self-hatred leads to mass murder and suicide, but only if he's upset so just avoid that. He's still regularly idealizing Stede as a non-fucked up golden mermaid person (that maybe he personally ruined a bit) because he barely knows the guy. His only progress on his future is "pirate" crossed out / rewritten / crossed out again a few times, "fisherman" crossed out, and "innkeeper ?"

Just.

Where is the forward movement?

It's not just that the inn will undoubtedly fall apart - it's that the inn will fall apart for the near-exact same reasons that China was going to at the beginning of Act 2, and I can't point to anything they've learned in the time since that will help them. I guess Stede realized he loved Edward enough to chase after him, but that was in S1! They should be further than this by now. You can't cram another crisis backslide, all the Act 2 development, and the full Act 3 climax into one season. Certainly not without it feeling like the characters magically fix themselves.

If they just fail and keep blindly stumbling into the same issues because they don't change their behavior, then Act 2 doesn't work. You're just repeating the turning point between Act 1 & Act 2 on a loop.

---

Where Did They Fuck Up?

Actually... lets start on what they did right.

The one consistent aspect of S2 that I praised and still think was done well in a vacuum (despite being mostly left out of the finale) was the crew's union-building arc.

With only 8 episodes and more to do in them than S1, side characters were going to get pinched even if the main plot was absolutely flawless. That was unavoidable. With budget cuts / scheduling issues, we regularly have crew members simply vanish offscreen outside of one scene, meaning cohesive arcs for your faves was not likely. Not to say they couldn't have done better - my benefit of the doubt for the TealOranges breakup and Oluwande x Zheng dried up about when I realized he was literally just her Stede stand-in for the parallel - but something like Jim's revenge plot from S1 was realistically not on the table without, like, turning half the crew into seagulls to afford it.

The union building works around this constraint really well. They turn "the crew" into the side arc, and then weave Izzy's beats in so that they aren't just about Izzy. The breakup boat crew working together to comfort each other and protect him turns them into a unit, and Stede's crew taking it upon themselves to address the trauma vibes while the captains aren't in the way solidifies it across all our side characters. The crew goes to war with Stede's cursed coat and wins, they Calypso their boss to throw a party, and they capitalize on a chance to make bank with an efficiency Stede could only dream of.

We don't get specific arcs, but Frenchie, Jim, and Oluwande are defaulted to as leaders in just about every situation, and Roach is constantly shown sharing his inventions with different characters. Individuals can dip in and out without feeling like the sideplots stutter. Any sense of community in S2 is coming from this arc - even if there are cracks at the points where it joins to other storylines (Stede and Edward, Zheng, etc.)

So why does it work? Well, because it's a workplace comedy, and you can tell they are familiar with working on those. They know where the beats are. They know where to find the humor. They know how to build off of S1 because they made sure the bones were already there - an eclectic group of individuals that start as just coworkers, but bond over time in the face of their struggle against an inept boss who they grow to care for and support while maintaining an increasingly friendly antagonism because, you know, inept boss.

OFMD does its best work in S2 when it's being true to its original concept... and its worst work when it seemingly loses confidence in its own premise.

"The show is the relationship," right? It's a romance set in a workplace comedy. The setup of Act 1 was all about creating a character-driven narrative. So given that... where the hell are we getting the dying of piracy and a war against the English Navy?

That's not a character-driven romcom backdrop, it's an action-adventure plot from Pirates of the Caribbean or Black Sails. It's plot-driven, creating an antagonistic force that results in your characters' problems. Once the story is about the fight against the Empire, the dramatic question becomes the same as those adventure stories - "Will the British Navy defeat piracy, and will our protagonists come out the other side of the battle?"

Forget the wedding. The wedding is no longer the climax of the story, its back to the happy ending flash our romantic subplot gets after winning this fight.

Except, of course, trying to pivot your story to a contradictory dramatic question near the end of Act 2 can be nothing short of a disaster, because either you were writing the wrong story until now, or you've completely lost the plot of the real one. I shouldn't even be trying to figure out if they are doing this, because it should be so obvious that they wouldn't.

And yet.

What do the Zheng and Ricky plots add to the story if not this? Neither of these characters have anything emotionally to contribute to Stede and Edward - they truly are plot elements. It's a hard break from the S1 antagonist model, but it also takes up a lot of valuable screentime. This was considered important, but still Zheng's personality and motivation only gets explored so far as it's an Edward-Stede-Izzy parallel with Oluwande and Auntie, and they only need the parallel for Izzy's genre-jumping death scene. Which follows a thematically out-of-left-field speech about how piracy is about belonging to something good (workable) and how Ricky could never destroy their spirits (um...?). And then David Jenkins is pointing to it and saying things about "the symbolic death of piracy" and speculating S3 might be about the crew getting "payback"??? An idea floated by Zheng right before our temporary retirement, btw.

Fuck, the final episode of S2 didn't have time for our main couple to talk to each other because it was so busy dealing with the mass explosion of Zheng's fleet and Ricky's victory gloat. We get lethal violence associated with traumatic flashbacks until they need to cut down enemy mooks like it's nothing, at which point we get jokes with Zheng. The Republic of Pirates is destroyed outright, and it feels like they only did it because they got insecure about their "pirate story" not having the right kind of stakes. Don't even get me started on killing a major character because "Piracy’s a dangerous occupation, and some characters should die," as if suspending disbelief on this aspect makes the story somehow lesser, instead of just being a fairly standard genre convention in comedy. Nobody complains about Kermit the Frog having an improbably good survival record.

Did someone tell them that the heroes have to lose a battle near the end of Act 2, so they scrambled to give them one?

Just... compare the wholly plot-driven struggle in 2x08 to Stede and Edward's character-focused storylines in 1x10 and tell me how 2x08 is providing anything nearly as valuable to the story. Because I can't fucking find it.

At best they wasted a bunch of time on a poorly integrated adventure plot as, like, Zheng's backstory or something, and just fucked it up horribly by trying to "step up" the kind of plot they did for Jim. In which case the whole thing will be awkwardly dropped but damage is done. Otherwise, they actually thought they could just casually add a subplot like this because they've done something wildly stupid like think "pirate" is a genre on the same level as "workplace comedy" and can just trample in-universe coherency while you draw on other media to shore up their unsupported beats.

Bringing us to the most infuriating bit...

---

"...end the second season in a kinder spot."

If this was the goal, the entire season was written to work actively against it in way that is baffling and incompetent.

The really ironic thing is that the reason that the Act 2 part typically gets a downer ending is because of the evil empire that OFMD did not have to deal with until they pointlessly added it. A plot-driven story has an antagonistic force - a villain - that the heroes need to defeat. Something external working against them. The story ends when they beat the thing, and it's not much of a climax if they do most of the defeating before you get there. Ergo, they have to be outmatched up to the climax. Ergo, the second part cannot end on them feeling pretty comfortable and confident going into the third.

The same rules do not apply in the same way to a character-driven arc.

We already established Edward and Stede declaring their love is not the end of the story. Nor, necessarily, is both of them confidently entering a relationship. Even once they've developed a bunch they will have to show that development by running into the kinds of problems that would have broken them up before and resolving them better.

David Jenkins keeps talking about this idea that S2 is getting a hopeful open ending and S3 will get into potential problems, and like... I don't see any reason why they couldn't have done that successfully. They didn't, but they could've.

If S2 grew them enough as characters and then had them agree to try again in the last minute of the finale, they absolutely could have had a kind and hopeful ending where you were confident they could do it. And then a potential S3 can show that. It's a bit rockier than they were counting on, but they have learned enough lessons to not break up. And then the overall plot can build to proposal (start of Act 3) and wedding (the romantic climax). It doesn't have to be a blow out fight to be emotionally cathartic.

(Hell, the main rockier bit that they overcome in the S3 Act 2 portions could be marriage baggage. I'm sure they both have some. It would work.)

In the same way focusing on our character's long term flaws and character-driven conflict makes an Act 1 "happy ending" more difficult, I suspect it makes an Act 2 "happy ending" easier.

Instead they wrote an Act 2 that failed to convincingly start development and got confused on its direction, and then presented a rushed finale ending in a copy of the predictable disaster from S1 as though it's a good thing. They yanked the story at least temporarily into an awkward place where a romcom is trying to sell me on a bunch of serious drama / adventure beats that it has not put the work into, and inviting comparisons to better versions of those same beats in other, more suited media that make it look worse. The need to portray everyone as reaching happy closure overrules sitting with a major character death and using it for any narrative significance, while still letting it overshadow those happy endings because a romcom just sloppily killed a major character with a wound they've literally looked into the camera and said was harmless.

If I'm being entirely honest, Dead Man's Chest ends effectively at Jack Sparrow's funeral and then cuts to the British Navy obtaining a weapon of mass destruction, and it still feels kinder and more hopeful just because I leave with more faith the characters are actively capable of and working toward solving their problems.

OFMD S2, in contrast, has half-convinced me our main couple would live in a mutually obsessed, miscommunication-ridden horror story until they die.

---

Additional Reading

Normally I link stuff like this in the post, but that requires more excitement than I'm feeling right now. Here's my alternative:

Where I thought they were going with Edward - really outlines the mountain of character development they still have unaddressed

Where I thought they were going with Izzy - touches on a lot of themes that might be dead in the water & also context that's still probably relevant to why Izzy got a lot of focus in S2

My scattershot 2x08 reactions

An ask where I sketched out the bones of this argument, and another where I was mostly venting about the fandom response

This one, this other one, and this last one (read the link in op's post too) about genre shifts and failure to pull them off

The trauma goes in the box but it never opens back up - the whole point of Act 2 is that they needed to start opening shit like that - and also they focus so much on needed character growth and so little on following through

They can't even carry through on character growth that we got last season???

Why Izzy's death feels like Bury Your Gays ran smack into shitty writing

EDIT: Oh and this post is REALLY good for outlining the lack of change in way less words than I did

#our flag means death #ofmd #ofmd s2 #ofmd s2 spoilers #ofmd meta #three act structure #character arcs #blackbonnet #genre #blackbeard ofmd #stede bonnet ofmd #my meta #ladyluscinia #ofmd critical

257 notes · View notes

valentinedagger · 15 days

Text

i have a bit of a hot take: "you have to read novels to improve your writing" is technically, literally true insofar as you're talking about, like, prose structure and style. however, if you're already satisfied with your prose itself, i do not think that's true and i think prose writing sincerely benefits from a multidisciplinary approach that one might get from studying writing across art forms other than novels.

comics, film, television, video games, web-based unfiction like ARGs, concept albums, and pretty much any other narrative art i can't think of right now--they're all fertile ground for developing your understanding of character work, framing, pacing, establishing symbolism and other motifs, setting work, pretty much everything i would consider the fundamental building blocks of narrative fiction. you can learn just as much from picking apart the narrative structure and choices in your favorite manga as you can from doing the same with your favorite novel.

more than that, i think taking a multidisciplinary approach to studying fiction can result in better, more interesting novels--breaking away from your medium of choice allows you to think about art using different lenses entirely and examine your own medium in new ways. studying a TV show could give you insight into how serial, episodic writing differs structurally from trad published novels, and could allow you to take a fresh structural approach on writing a series of novels. studying a comic might cause you to think about your choices of visuals and visual framing, and to be intentional about your "directorial style" in-text as much as you are intentional about your prose style. et cetera and so on and so forth!

i do appreciate where the sentiment "you have to read novels to improve your own writing" is coming from--i mean, for one thing, i agree that the best art tends to come from a genuine enthusiasm for the medium you're working in--but quite frankly, narrative fiction is narrative fiction. we're all working with the same basic toolkit, there's just different ways to use those tools based on medium.

full disclosure: i, as an author, am not a huge reader of novels. i get through 2-4 novels a year, on average. i am, however, a voracious enthusiast of multimedia web-based fiction, comics, animation, and television, and i do the vast bulk of my artistic criticism and analysis in those mediums. i do study prose through the novels i read, but on the whole, even my prose improvement tends to come from studying poetry (something that is painfully obvious in my writing at times, and is not to everyone's taste). don't get me wrong--i am not saying i produce outstanding quality work that should be compared to that of lifelong professionals or anything, but my writing is generally acceptable, and i continue to make marked improvements over time--because my course of study is intentional, regardless of medium.

tl;dr: narrative is narrative, if you set out with the intention to understand what makes a narrative tick, it doesn't matter what medium you're studying, you're still learning.

#certified dagger original

57 notes · View notes

swordfright · 2 months

Note

Tell me about how the structure of the medium impacts the story 🔫

My brother in Christ, prepare yourself for the most boring essay you could possibly imagine. I'm going to over-simplify a few things here for the sake of Getting To The Point, so bear with me.

I think a good starting place is that DSMP is an example of New Media. The go-to definition most folks use is this one: that New Media are stories told via "communication technologies that enable or enhance interaction between users as well as interaction between users and content." In other words, NM is basically this category of stories made up of convergent elements, which satisfy a multimedia requirement, and are heavily reliant on both participatory fan culture and recent advances in technology that allow creators/audiences to communicate with one another instantly.

There's a couple ways you can understand DSMP as a New Media, but as far as I'm concerned, one of the most interesting is prosumption. The term "prosumption" describes a creative situation where a piece of art is being produced (at least in part) by the same people that consume it; they're both audience and creator. DSMP is a really great example of this phenomenon, because A) it's serial and therefore the CCs had ample opportunity to respond to and engage with the audience's reception of their story; and B) because the chat feature allows CCs to interact directly with their audience during roleplay rather than after the fact. These features, among others, kinda set the stage for DSMP to function as a highly prosumptive piece of media.

In particular, the stuff that interests me is the stuff to do with storytelling convention (genre, perspective, etc) and how prosumption turns all that on its head. There are a number of altercations in DSMP canon where the course of the story is altered because of real-time interactions between the CCs and their chat - particularly times when a CC's chat warns them about events happening at the same time elsewhere in the server. In this kind of scenario, the CCs are static, they can't really leave their own stream. Their viewers, on the other hand, are able to jump between streams and talk to each other to figure out what's happening in the overarching story. When this happens, viewers have choices to make: are they going to tell a CC what's going down on the other side of the server? If so, how are viewers going to communicate those events? Viewers are biased, they directly inform CCs, and the information they divulge (as well as how they divulge that info) goes on to influence CCs' actions and thus the events of the story, to some degree. In my opinion, this is a pretty new and exciting way to prosumptively construct a narrative! Media has always been interactive to some extent (especially serial works), but the interaction being live and in real-time is pretty significant in my view because it can exert unique pressures on a narrative.

Speaking of audience choice, that brings me to the next thing I want to yap about: ergodic storytelling, a term that refers to stories “negotiated by processes of choice, discernment, and decision-making.” For reference, a good non-MCYT example of this would be hypertext fiction, because it's generally characterized by the ability of the interactant (that's the reader, in this hypothetical example) to explore material provided by someone else, either as a kind of conceptual landscape (think setting in a video game), or as puzzle pieces that must be put together in order to give the interaction the "big picture" of the story. Basically, with hypertext fiction, there is a core text (the main document that forms the skeleton of the story) and there are multiple hypertexts branching off of the core text - and whether the reader ends up reading those branches, and in what order, inevitably shapes that reader's perception of the whole story.

So here's where it gets tricky. In the case of DSMP, where is the core text located? Is there any one identifiable core text at all? Or is it more appropriate to consider each individual stream or VOD as its own singular core text, with the related Twitch channels and Youtube recommended in the sidebar being "branches"? Alternatively, if the streams and recordings distributed on the server members’ official channels are the central text in the grand hypertext fiction that is DSMP, then can adjacent spaces where audiences do the work of creating and archiving lore be considered their own story branches? I don't have answers to these questions. No one does. That's part of what makes DSMP exciting.

To translate the above quote out of Academia Hellspeak: in an ergodic story, the audience has agency, but the agency enabled and allowed by the text varies in its intensity and mode. Yes, stories told ergodically necessitate choice — and therefore enable agency, turning the reader or viewer into interactant — but that element of choice doesn't always look the same. Some hypertexts are more choice-reliant than others, or are choice-reliant in different ways. So, rather than being a choose-your-own-adventure story, DSMP is more closely analogous to a story where the audience chooses the perspective through which they view plot developments, in addition to having some influence over how plot developments unfold.

(☝️From a 2021 Polygon article, if you think I sound crazy☝️)

The web of choices DSMP presents to viewers is very complex, even compared to other forms of choose-your-own-adventure game. Because each CC approaches the task of story-creation from their own angle (bringing their own narrative baggage to the writers’ room, so to speak), those shifts in perspective this Polygon article describes often also constitute shifts in genre. For instance, cc!Wilbur brought his music production experience and interest in musical theater to the server, cited operas and stage musicals as some of his main inspirations; and accordingly, much of c!Wilbur's most crucial arcs observably draw from those sources. When you watch a c!Wilbur stream, you’re watching a story about statecraft, about revolution, about the triumphs and tragedies of ego that play out during the process of nation-building. On the other hand, cc!Quackity has repeatedly identified Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul as his primary influences; accordingly, his RP character’s story is closer to a piece of gritty prestige television in some places (especially LN series). Unlike with c!Wilbur, a lot of c!Quackity's tension does not revolve around a romanticized fantasy of revolution but around more personal conflicts: securing your place in a new regime, navigating exploitation as both exploited and exploiter, etc. In terms of both plot beats and character arcs, Wilbur and Quackity’s respective storylines embody many of the genre conventions the content creators are working within.

Moreover, a shift in genre often entails a shift in style or mode. Because cc!Wilbur was heavily inspired by musical theater, the presentation style of his character’s storyline is correspondingly both theatrical (i.e. only loosely scripted, nearly always televised live, and improv-heavy) and musical (featuring multiple instances of Wilbur singing in-character ballads and anthems.) On the flipside, Quackity’s streams (especially the later ones, since I'm mostly focusing on Las Nevadas era here) demonstrably mimic the prestige TV shows the CC draws his inspiration from, with lore sessions being pre-recorded rather than televised live, featuring distinctive sonic and visual aesthetics popularized by neo-Western thriller dramas. So, where a piece of media like DSMP is concerned, shifts in perspective entail shifts in genre, which in turn entail pronounced shifts in style. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say it's an entirely new story depending on which character the viewer decides to follow. In that regard, what initially appears to be a single choice (whose perspective to watch a plot event through) has the power to determine a wide array of other elements, as viewers’ responses to the options presented to them will decide the overall tone of the section of the story they're about to watch.

While I think the genre-switching is genuinely super cool, lately I'm a lot more interested in perspective-switching and how it's related to viewer empathy. One side-effect of DSMP being televised live is that yes, you can watch a plot event from 30+ different POVs, but you can't watch every POV live. Typically, you either have to switch between multiple streams, or you need to pick one streamer to watch live and maybe later you'll watch other characters' POVs as you see fit. This has an impact on your perception of how that plot point went down because watching something live feels very different from watching something after-the-fact. I haven't done study on this, so what I'm about to say is mostly conjecture, but I wouldn't be surprised if viewers felt greater empathy for (and greater degrees of kinship with) characters whose POVs they watched live.

The choice of which character to follow also has observable impacts on other kinds of narrative conventions (who is the main character of DSMP? the boring answer is c!Dream because the server's named after him, but the real answer is the protagonist is whoever's POV you watched most of the major plot events through) but to be honest, those questions don't interest me as much.

So, going back to perspective and empathy. I think viewers' reactions to Exile are a really solid way of exemplifying the thing I'm trying to say, so this is the part of the yapping where we gotta bring up the dreaded Exile discourse.

Even though the Exile VODs are available and new viewers can go back and watch them, those viewers experience the Exile arc in a way that is fundamentally different from the experience had by viewers who had to wait in between updates as the videos were being streamed serially in real-time. I would argue that viewers who were “present” during the whole arc noticeably felt the brutality of c!Tommy’s treatment to a greater degree, because the audience was effectively forced to sit in exile alongside Tommy’s character - stewing in anxiety, looking forward to the possibility of appearances from other characters, and living in fear of Dream’s next visit, etc etc. Obviously you could also make this point using c!Dream's time in Pandora as an example, but I'm using Exile here because I've actually seen a lot of fans bring this up when discussing the arc: "people who didn't watch live Don't Get It," "the reason newer fans don't see Exile as scary is because they didn't have to watch it live," that sort of thing. And while I have certain qualms with some of the implications here, I do think these are really fascinating responses! These sorts of responses show that viewers consciously perceive their viewing experience as having been fundamentally different from others' based on a temporal element that's unique to serial fiction!

This instance of a divergence in collective fan experience is an example of choice being rendered unavailable to viewers by virtue of the story’s structure and means of distribution; audience members who happen to accidentally miss streams or who begin following the story after major events have occurred will never be able to engage with and witness those events as LIVE viewers, merely as retrospective ones. They don’t get to make that choice, but they do get to make choices about which perspective (and therefore genre) they get to experience the story through. So it follows that each aspect of DSMP, a semi-ergodic story, can be categorized as either ergodic or non-ergodic, and whether a particular storytelling element is ergodic can change depending on WHEN the viewer began tuning in to the story.

I have a lot more shit to say (shocker) but I'm gonna cap it here for now. Though I do want to add that this is kinda why I have a lot of patience for the crazy diversity of interpretation you tend to get in DSMP fandom. If you took a random sample of fans and asked them what they think of various arcs, characters, and plot events, chances are they would all have fairly different things to say. To me, that's a feature, not a bug. Obviously I have my own opinions, and obviously I do think it's possible for a given interpretation to be "bad," i.e. not grounded in the text - but I have a lot more patience for it here, in a fandom where agreeing on what "the text" EVEN IS presents a challenge. We can't all agree on who the main character is, so I don't ever expect us to agree on more nuanced questions of theme and conflict resolution in the narrative. Again, that's a feature, not a bug. I don't think it was ever possible to reach a consensus with a piece of media like DSMP because of how inextricable the audience is from the story.

#dream smp #tw cc!Wilbur mention #in case anyone wants to avoid that right now for obvious reasons #sorry for yapping for so long but I did warn you #also sorry for letting this sit in my inbox for ages #I got so busy and it was hard finding a spare moment to sit down and collect my thoughts #dsmp exile arc #asks #long post

54 notes · View notes

neuroticbookworm · 8 months

Text

Incoherent Old Fashion Cupcake ramblings

I watched Old Fashion Cupcake last night and I've been in a delicious drama brainrot ever since.

This show is brilliant in every way, from acting to camera work to music to incorporating food into the character interactions to body language (y'all know what I'm talking about *smirks*)

gif by @itachis (I'm never gonna get over this scene, btw)

As writing, narrative and character arc fiends, @lurkingshan and I ramble a lot about how shows wrap up all of its plotlines, how satisfying it is, and more importantly, how seamless it feels.

Old Fashion Cupcake has an office romance right at its core. Nozue and Togawa are co-workers, and Togawa is Nozue's subordinate. Which means as soon as they get together, Togawa working under Nozue will be a HR violation. One of them must be reassigned so there is no overlap in their reporting structure.

Now, this is in NO WAY a central conflict that the characters have to work through. But for me, as a viewer, it is a tiny, albeit noticeable problem that will arise wayyyyyy later in the narrative, and it would be oh-so-satisfying to have that plot thread resolved and tied up into a pretty bow within the show's runtime, without it taking focus away from the other, more important themes going on in the show.

And how do the writers do it? Nozue accepts a promotion as the head of another, newly-created department that will also relocate him to a different building. But his decision to move on to a different role is not motivated by the workplace rules, AT ALL. It is beautifully tied into how Nozue *wants* new experiences in his life now, thanks to Togawa.

The HR violation is a tertiary, almost nit-picky problem when compared to the major themes and character arc developments in the show. But it was not ignored and it was resolved exactly how it should be: as a happy coincidence that came with the closure of the main character's arc. So beautifully seamless that I want to cry.

I was rambling about this show to @waitmyturtles and she pointed out that the show's strong writing was certainly helped by the brilliant manga it was adapted from, created by Sagan Sagan. And now I'm very intrigued and might check out the manga (but in the far-off future, I am drowning in my drama watchlist atm lol). Also -- big shoutout to the screenwriter Miyamoto Takeshi. I know Japan is a pro in adapting from print/digital media to TV/movies, but to do it with such a grace? Ooooooof, all the flowers.

I highly doubt that my brainrot for this show ends here and I bet I will go on multiple OFC ramble sprees in the future. Until then, enjoy the resident OFC hamster who has no business being this fucking adorable and sexy.

gif by @bubblegeon

#look how normal i am being about this show #old fashion cupcake #old fashion cupcake meta #takeda kouhei #kimura tatsunari #togawa x nozue

122 notes · View notes

thewriteadviceforwriters · 6 months

Note

Hello! Thank you so much for your time and content you bring into this confusing world.

I’m currently on the starting road to creating a canon-divergent fanfiction but noticed I have trouble with pacing and sentence structure. I don’t have a clear grasp on when to slow down and sit within the scene(s) the characters are in or when to go on and move on to the next scene of the story.

As well as chapter structuring and to keep it consistent at a comfortable pace yet keeping the story going.

I am at the very beginning of my write journey and as fun and exciting it entails, it’s also scary, intimidating, and feels like I’m doing everything wrong despite just pushing through. Any advice or suggestions is so so SO much appreciated, thank you once again for your time <3

-/ Yours Truly, D.F

Crafting Captivating Scenes and Chapter Structure: A Writer's Guide

I'd absolutely love to help you on your journey, congratulations and I wish you the best on your writer journey to create the book of your dreams. If you ever need anymore help just contact me in my inbox!

(If you'd like me to create a scene template for you to use and fill-out. Please let me know. I'd gladly create one for you.)

Today, I want to dive into the art of structuring scenes and chapters in a novel. As we all know, a well-structured story keeps readers hooked from start to finish. So, let's unravel the secrets behind creating compelling scenes and crafting an engaging chapter structure.

Scene Structure:

When it comes to structuring scenes, it's all about capturing the reader's attention and propelling the story forward. Here's a step-by-step guide to help you master this crucial aspect of storytelling:

Establish the Purpose: Every scene should have a clear purpose, such as advancing the plot, revealing character traits, or building tension. Determine what you want to achieve before diving in.

Set the Stage: Transport your readers into the scene by painting vivid descriptions. Engage their senses and create a strong atmosphere to make them feel like they're right there with your characters.

Introduce Conflict: Conflict is the fuel that drives any story. Whether it's an internal struggle or external obstacles, inject tension to keep the readers on their toes. Conflict adds depth and makes scenes memorable.

Build Momentum: Keep the pacing in mind. Start with a strong hook and gradually intensify the scene's stakes. Balance action, dialogue, and introspection to maintain a dynamic flow.

Climax and Resolution: Every scene should have a satisfying resolution that leaves the reader eager to turn the page. It could be a revelation, a new dilemma, or a cliffhanger. End with impact!

Chapter Structure:

Now, let's focus on the structure of your chapters. Chapters act as mini-arcs within your novel, creating a rhythm that keeps readers engrossed. Here are some tips to help you craft an effective chapter structure:

Determine Chapter Length: There's no strict rule, but shorter chapters often create a sense of urgency, while longer chapters allow for deeper exploration. Find a balance that suits your story's pacing and style.

Establish a Theme or Goal: Each chapter should contribute to the overall story arc. Decide on a specific theme, goal, or event that drives the chapter's purpose and ties it to the larger narrative.

Vary Intensity and Tone: Just like scenes, chapters should have their own rise and fall of tension. Alternate between intense action, quieter moments for reflection, or even comic relief to maintain interest.

End with a Hook: Leave your readers wanting more by ending each chapter with a compelling hook. It could be a revelation, a question, or a surprising twist that propels them into the next chapter.

Transition Smoothly: Ensure that your chapters flow seamlessly. Use transitional elements like time jumps, shifts in perspective, or recurring motifs to link chapters together cohesively.

Congratulations! By mastering the art of structuring scenes and chapters, you're well on your way to crafting a captivating novel. Remember, scene structure drives the microcosm of your story, while chapter structure shapes the macrocosm. Experiment, find your style, and above all, let your creativity soar!

Happy writing, and may your scenes be compelling and your chapters unputdownable!

-Rin T.

67 notes · View notes

hayatheauthor · 9 months

Text

Everything You Need To Know Before Editing Your Manuscript

Finishing your manuscript is a big accomplishment, but that’s only the start of your writing journey. Now that you have a manuscript to work with it’s time to start your editing process and perfect your story. Editing might sound easy enough, but it involves a lot more than just correcting your SPAG.

If you’re a new author unsure about how to start editing your manuscript, here’s everything you need to know, from a self-published author.

Self-Editing: The First Step

Editing your own work can be both challenging and rewarding. When you take on the role of a self-editor, you gain a deeper understanding of your writing and the opportunity to refine it to its fullest potential. Self-editing helps ensure you cut down on noticeable mistakes before sending it out to an actual editor so that you can receive more productive feedback.

I would honestly hate having to pay someone just for them to tell me ‘you misspelt xyz’ which is something I could have caught with a quick read-through. Once you’ve finished your manuscript here’s how you can start off with some self-editing:

1. Take a Break Before You Start

After completing your initial draft, it's crucial to distance yourself from your work. Give it some time to breathe. This break can be a few days or even weeks, depending on your schedule. When you return to your manuscript, you'll approach it with a fresh perspective.

2. Read Your Manuscript Aloud

One of the most effective self-editing techniques is reading your work aloud. This process helps you identify awkward sentences, pacing issues, and grammatical errors that might go unnoticed when reading silently. It also allows you to hear the flow of your writing and the nuances of your character's voices.

3. Focus on SPAG (Spelling, Punctuation, and Grammar)

Before delving into more complex edits, address SPAG issues. Look out for common mistakes such as typos, subject-verb agreement errors, and misused punctuation. Utilize grammar and spell-check tools, but don't rely solely on them.

4. Assess Overall Structure and Flow

Consider the broader structure of your manuscript. Does the plot progression make sense? Are there any plot holes or inconsistencies? Verify that your story flows smoothly from beginning to end. Ensure that transitions between scenes and chapters are seamless.

5. Dive into Character Development

Characters are the heart of your story. Analyze each character's arc, motivations, and growth throughout the narrative. Ensure that their actions and dialogue are consistent with their personalities and the story's themes.

6. Refine Your Writing Style

Pay attention to your writing style and voice. Is it consistent throughout the manuscript? Make sure your unique voice shines through, and refine your prose to eliminate unnecessary repetition or verbosity.

7. Trim Excessively Long Sentences

Long, convoluted sentences can confuse readers and disrupt the flow of your narrative. Identify and break down lengthy sentences into more manageable segments.

8. Seek Feedback

Consider sharing your work with beta readers or critique partners at this stage. Fresh perspectives can uncover blind spots and provide valuable insights for improvement.

Remember that self-editing is an iterative process. After completing these initial rounds of edits, repeat the process as necessary until you're satisfied with the manuscript's quality

Types of Editing

When editing their manuscript authors often direct their focus to the way things are written and then call it a day. However, SPAG corrections are only the start of your editing process. Unsure of other ways to better your manuscript? Here are some types of editing I think every author should consider when self-editing:

SPAG Editing (Spelling, Punctuation, and Grammar)

SPAG editing, often considered the foundation of all editing, involves meticulously combing through your manuscript to correct spelling, punctuation, and grammatical errors. This stage is essential for ensuring the clarity and professionalism of your writing.

Tips for Effective SPAG Editing

Use Spell-Checkers Wisely: While spell-check tools can catch many errors, they're not foolproof. Pay close attention to context; for instance, "their" and "there" are both valid words but have distinct meanings.

Proofread Carefully: Rely on your eyes and proofread your work systematically. Reading backward, from the end to the beginning, can help you catch spelling errors.

Punctuation Matters: Proper punctuation enhances clarity. Study punctuation rules, including the use of commas, semicolons, and quotation marks.

Avoid Homophone Confusion: Homophones, such as "your" and "you're" or "its" and "it's," can trip up even experienced writers. Double-check these tricky pairs.

Consistency is Key: Be consistent in your use of tense, style, and formatting throughout your manuscript.

Consider a Style Guide: Depending on your project, adhere to a specific style guide like AP Style, Chicago Manual of Style, or your publisher's guidelines.

Line Editing

Line editing is where the magic of storytelling truly begins to shine. This stage of editing goes beyond correcting surface-level errors and focuses on enhancing the overall writing style, clarity, and impact of your prose.

Tips for Effective Line Editing

Sentence Structure: Evaluate sentence length and structure. Vary sentence lengths to maintain reader interest. Look for run-on sentences and fragments.

Word Choice: Opt for strong, precise verbs and nouns. Eliminate unnecessary adverbs and adjectives. Avoid clichés and overused expressions.

Consistency in Tone: Ensure the tone of your writing remains consistent throughout the manuscript. Be aware of shifts in tone that may disrupt the reader's experience.

Show, Don't Tell: Replace telling phrases with descriptive scenes and actions to immerse readers in your story. For example, instead of saying "She was nervous," show her trembling hands or racing heart.

Dialogue Polishing: Make sure your characters' dialogue sounds authentic and serves the story. Remove redundancies and refine conversations to convey subtext effectively.

Eliminate Repetition: Identify and eliminate unnecessary repetition, both within sentences and across paragraphs.

Read for Rhythm: Pay attention to the rhythm of your writing. Read your sentences aloud to ensure they flow smoothly and have a pleasing cadence.

Example: Line Editing in Action

Before: "He walked slowly into the dark room, and it was filled with an eerie silence."

After Line Editing: "He tiptoed into the dark room, which echoed with an eerie silence."

Line editing transforms a plain sentence into a more evocative and engaging one.

Plot and Structure Editing

Plot and structure editing is where the big picture of your manuscript comes into focus. It involves assessing the overall narrative flow, character arcs, and thematic coherence of your story. This stage ensures that your readers will be captivated by your tale from beginning to end.

Tips for Effective Plot and Structure Editing

Plot Evaluation: Review your plot to identify any inconsistencies, gaps, or unresolved subplots. Ensure that your story has a clear and engaging trajectory.

Character Arcs: Analyze the development of your characters. Verify that they experience growth, change, or transformation throughout the story. Characters should face challenges and evolve as a result.

Pacing: Assess the pacing of your narrative. Balance action scenes with moments of reflection. Avoid overly slow or rushed sections that may disengage readers.

Transitions: Ensure smooth transitions between scenes and chapters. Use transitional elements like hooks, cliffhangers, or thematic connections to maintain reader interest.

Foreshadowing: Check for effective foreshadowing to create anticipation and intrigue. Ensure that events and revelations are set up in advance to make them more satisfying for readers.

Climax and Resolution: The climax should deliver on the story's promises and conflicts. The resolution should tie up loose ends while leaving room for reader interpretation.

Character Development Editing

Character development editing is the key to creating characters that readers will connect with, empathize with, and remember long after they've finished your book. This type of editing focuses on making your characters three-dimensional and integral to your story.

Tips for Effective Character Development Editing

Character Profiles: Create detailed character profiles that include physical attributes, personality traits, backgrounds, motivations, and flaws. Refer to these profiles as you edit to ensure consistency.

Character Arcs: Analyze each character's journey throughout the story. Ensure that they experience growth, change, or development in response to the plot's events.

Dialogue Authenticity: Pay attention to character dialogue. Each character should have a distinct voice and speaking style that aligns with their personality.

Internal Conflict: Explore each character's internal conflicts, desires, and fears. These internal struggles add depth to their characterization.

External Conflict: Consider how characters interact with one another and their external conflicts. Ensure that their actions and decisions are in line with their personalities.

Consistency: Maintain consistency in character behavior, beliefs, and values throughout the story. Avoid abrupt character shifts unless they are well-motivated and explained.

Style and Voice Editing

Style and voice editing is the stage where your writing truly becomes distinctive and memorable. It involves refining your unique writing style and ensuring that your narrative voice shines through consistently.

Tips for Effective Style and Voice Editing

Identify Your Writing Style: Reflect on your writing style. Are you descriptive and poetic, or concise and direct? Understand your natural tendencies.

Consistency is Key: Ensure that your writing style remains consistent throughout the manuscript. Abrupt shifts in style can be jarring to readers.

Narrative Voice: Identify your narrative voice. Is it first-person, third-person limited, or omniscient? Make sure your chosen narrative perspective aligns with the story's needs.

Character Voices: Pay attention to the unique voices of your characters. Each character should have a distinct way of speaking and thinking, contributing to the overall narrative texture.

Finding a Professional Editor

Writing a book is a deeply personal journey, but when it comes to the final steps of polishing your manuscript, it's essential to bring in a fresh perspective. This is where a professional editor comes in. They can help transform your work from good to outstanding, ensuring that it's ready to captivate readers. In this section, we'll explore how to find the right editor for your project.

When to Consider Hiring a Professional Editor

While self-editing and feedback from beta readers and critique partners are valuable, there comes a point when seeking professional editing assistance is crucial. Here are some key indicators that it's time to hire a professional editor:

After Self-Editing: Once you've gone through multiple rounds of self-editing and received feedback from beta readers, it's time to consider professional editing. You've taken your manuscript as far as you can on your own.

Before Publishing: Professional editing is essential if you plan to publish your work, whether traditionally or through self-publishing. It ensures your manuscript is in top shape, ready to impress agents, publishers, or readers.

For Complex Projects: If your project is particularly complex or requires specialized knowledge (e.g., technical writing, academic papers, historical accuracy), a professional editor with expertise in that area may be necessary.

Types of Professional Editing Services

Professional editors offer various types of editing services, each addressing different aspects of your manuscript. Here's an overview of the most common types:

Developmental Editing: This type of editing focuses on the big picture. Developmental editors help you shape your story, refine your characters, and ensure your plot flows smoothly.

Line Editing: Line editors dive into the nuances of your writing. They focus on improving sentence structure, style, and narrative flow, making your prose shine.

Copyediting: Copyeditors are meticulous about grammar, spelling, punctuation, and consistency in style and formatting. They ensure your manuscript is error-free and conforms to industry standards.

Proofreading: The final stage of editing, proofreading checks for typos, formatting errors, and minor issues that may have been missed in earlier rounds of editing.

How to Choose the Right Editor

Finding the right professional editor is a crucial step in your publishing journey. Here's how to make the best choice:

Research: Look for editors with experience in your genre. Explore their portfolios and read client testimonials. A track record of successful projects is a good sign.

Sample Edit: Many editors offer a sample edit or consultation. Use this opportunity to assess their compatibility with your manuscript. Check if their editing style aligns with your vision.

Communication: Clear and effective communication with your editor is paramount. They should understand your manuscript's genre, themes, and your specific goals for the project.

Budget: Get quotes from multiple editors and consider your budget. Editing can be an investment, but it's essential to find a balance between quality and cost.

Contracts: Before starting the editing process, sign a clear contract that outlines the scope of work, deadlines, fees, and any additional services. A well-defined agreement protects both you and the editor.

Choosing the right professional editor is a partnership that can significantly impact the quality of your manuscript. Take your time, do your research, and find someone who truly understands your work.

Editing Tools and Software

In the digital age, writers have access to a wealth of editing tools and software that can significantly simplify the editing process. These tools not only help catch grammar and spelling errors but also provide valuable insights into your writing style.

1. Grammarly

Grammarly is a widely recognized and user-friendly tool that checks your writing for spelling, grammar, punctuation, and style errors. It provides real-time suggestions as you write in various platforms, including web browsers, Microsoft Word, and Google Docs. Grammarly's premium version offers more advanced features like style improvements and plagiarism checks.

2. ProWritingAid

ProWritingAid is an all-in-one writing assistant that goes beyond simple grammar checks. It offers in-depth reports on readability, overused words, style issues, and more. The tool integrates with popular word processors and even has a Scrivener plugin for authors who use this writing software.

3. Hemingway Editor

Named after the renowned writer Ernest Hemingway, this tool helps you simplify your writing. Hemingway Editor highlights complex sentences, common writing errors, and suggests alternatives to improve readability. It's particularly useful for authors aiming for clear and concise prose.

4. Scrivener

Scrivener is a comprehensive writing and editing software designed for authors. It provides a flexible workspace to organize your manuscript, research materials, and notes. While Scrivener isn't an editing tool in the traditional sense, its robust features can streamline your editing process.

5. Google Docs

Google Docs is a versatile cloud-based platform for collaborative writing and editing. It offers real-time collaboration, commenting, and revision history tracking. Authors can easily share their work with beta readers, critique partners, or professional editors.

6. AutoCrit

AutoCrit specializes in helping authors improve their fiction writing. It analyzes your manuscript for issues like pacing, dialogue, and repetition. It provides recommendations to enhance your storytelling and writing style.

7. Hemingway App

Similar to Hemingway Editor, the Hemingway App identifies complex sentences, adverbs, and passive voice in your writing. It offers immediate feedback to help you simplify and clarify your prose.

8. Evernote

Evernote is a powerful note-taking and organizational tool. While not an editing tool per se, it's indispensable for keeping track of ideas, research, and notes during the writing and editing process.

9. Reedsy Book Editor

Reedsy Book Editor is an online tool that helps authors format their manuscripts for publishing. It's especially handy for self-publishing authors looking to create professional-looking ebooks.

Common Editing Mistakes to Avoid

Editing is a critical step in the writing process, but it's essential to be aware of common editing mistakes that can hinder your progress. By recognizing and addressing these errors, you can refine your editing process and elevate the quality of your manuscript. Let's explore some of the most prevalent editing pitfalls and how to avoid them.

1. Editing Too Soon

One of the most common mistakes writers make is editing their work too soon after finishing the first draft. While the enthusiasm to refine your manuscript is commendable, it's crucial to give your writing some distance. Take a break before diving into the editing process. This allows you to return to your work with fresh eyes and a more critical perspective.

2. Neglecting the Big Picture

Focusing solely on grammar and spelling (SPAG editing) during your initial editing rounds is a mistake. While these aspects are vital, it's equally important to assess the overall structure, plot, character development, and style of your manuscript. Neglecting the big picture can result in a polished but fundamentally flawed story.

3. Overediting

Yes, you read that right—overediting can be a problem. Constantly revising your manuscript without a clear plan can lead to a never-ending editing cycle. Strive for a balance between thorough editing and knowing when your work is ready to be shared or submitted.

4. Ignoring Feedback

If you've enlisted beta readers or critique partners, their feedback is invaluable. However, it's a mistake to ignore or dismiss their insights. Be open to constructive criticism and use it to refine your work. Remember that not every suggestion needs to be implemented, but each one should be considered thoughtfully.

5. Relying Solely on Editing Software

While editing tools and software are powerful aids, they are not infallible. Relying solely on automated editing tools without human oversight can result in errors going unnoticed. Always use these tools as supplements to your own editing process, not replacements.

6. Rushing the Final Proofread

Proofreading is the last line of defense before publishing. Rushing this step can lead to embarrassing typos and errors slipping through. Take your time to meticulously proofread your work or consider hiring a professional proofreader for the final polish.

7. Neglecting Style Consistency

Consistency in style, tone, and formatting is vital, especially in longer works. Neglecting these aspects can create a disjointed reading experience. Create a style guide or checklist to maintain consistency throughout your manuscript.

8. Dismissing Your Gut Feeling

Sometimes, you might receive feedback or advice that conflicts with your vision for your manuscript. While it's essential to be open to suggestions, don't dismiss your gut feeling entirely. Ultimately, it's your story, and your voice should shine through.

9. Not Celebrating Progress

Finally, don't forget to celebrate your editing milestones. Writing and editing can be long and challenging processes. Take moments to acknowledge your accomplishments and keep the motivation flowing.

Beta Readers and Critique Partners

I want to finally end this blog post by talking about beta readers and critique partners. While some people might argue they shouldn’t be mentioned in an editing blog I think it’s important to also include them.

As an author, it's easy to become deeply immersed in your work, making it challenging to spot its flaws and areas for improvement. This is where beta readers and critique partners come in—a fresh set of eyes and perspectives to help you refine your manuscript.

Why Beta Readers and Critique Partners Matter

Objective Feedback: Beta readers and critique partners offer an objective viewpoint on your work. They can identify issues you might have missed due to your familiarity with the story.

Diverse Insights: Different readers bring unique experiences and preferences to your manuscript. This diversity of perspectives can highlight both strengths and weaknesses in your writing.

Identifying Weaknesses: Beta readers and critique partners can pinpoint areas that might not be immediately apparent to you. Whether it's character inconsistencies, plot holes, or pacing issues, their feedback is invaluable.

Tips for Working with Beta Readers and Critique Partners

Select the Right Readers: Choose beta readers or critique partners who have an interest in your genre and can provide constructive feedback. A mix of avid readers and writers can offer diverse insights.

Clear Guidelines: Provide clear guidelines or questions for your readers to focus on while reading your manuscript. This can help you receive specific and actionable feedback tailored to your needs.

Consider Diversity: Seek feedback from a diverse group of readers to get a range of perspectives and opinions. Different backgrounds and tastes can lead to well-rounded feedback.

Be Open to Criticism: Be prepared to receive both positive and negative feedback. Constructive criticism is essential for growth, and it's a sign that your beta readers care about helping you improve.

Take Your Time: Don't rush the feedback process. Give your readers ample time to read and provide their insights. Rushing can lead to incomplete or superficial feedback.

Ask for Specifics: Encourage your beta readers or critique partners to provide examples and specifics in their feedback. This makes it easier for you to understand and address their suggestions.

I hope this blog on Everything You Need To Know Before Editing Your Manuscript will help you in your writing journey. Be sure to comment any tips of your own to help your fellow authors prosper, and follow my blog for new blog updates every Monday and Thursday.

Looking For More Writing Tips And Tricks?

Are you an author looking for writing tips and tricks to better your manuscript? Or do you want to learn about how to get a literary agent, get published and properly market your book? Consider checking out the rest of Haya’s book blog where I post writing and publishing tips for authors every Monday and Thursday! And don’t forget to head over to my TikTok and Instagram profiles @hayatheauthor to learn more about my WIP and writing journey!

105 notes · View notes

wordsnstuff · 1 year

Note

Hello! I see you’ve answered questions on outlining chapters for stories/novels, how to begin chapters, and chapter length, but my question is, when should your fan fiction be a one shot or a multi-chapter work and if you make it a multi-chapter work, how do you decide where to split everything up into the chapters? If you’d like, I can PM you a sample of my current WIP so you can see what I mean. Thank you!

Selecting the placement of chapter breaks...

There are several factors you should consider when strategizing the chapter structure of your story, and the ending is by far one of the most critical. The way you manipulate the breaks in the narrative is imperative to holding your reader's attention and maintaining the addictive quality of the story. This concept is easily extended to fanfiction, and fanfiction is one of the best places to examine how people organically utilize this device, as it is episodic in nature and often updated over lengths of time, mimicking the experience of media like television.

For the purposes of this discussion, I'm going to focus on how one would approach this in a traditional novel format but please remember that these principles can be applied to multiple formats including fanfiction and even television scripts.

When approaching the end of a chapter, your goal is to build tension and anticipation in the reader. Essentially, you need to make whatever might happen next seem too intriguing to walk away from. You want to leave a question (old or new) unanswered but make it clear that their curiosity will be satisfying if only they stick around a few more pages.

You can also elicit this feeling by resolving something within the narrative that creates a moment of satisfaction, and this feeling will leave them in search for more. Like giving them a taste and promising that on the other side of the next chapter header, there is more of that feeling to indulge in. It is simply good practice to consistently weave these satisfying chapter endings throughout the story, otherwise the reader may become frustrated with a lack of perceived payoff to the build-up.

Overall, a chapter should serve as somewhat of a container. Identify what your chapters are designed contain, and then correspond the chapter breaks to that design. For example, if the chapter is primarily about progress in a character's arc or a major new event in the conflict, centralize the chapter on that factor. As you approach the ending, create some kind of resolution to the central factor while leaving a loose string that the reader will definitely notice and desire to pull on in the next chapter.

I hope this helps, and of course if you have any further questions my ask box is always open.

x Kate

–

Masterlist

If you enjoy my blog and wish for it to continue being updated frequently and for me to continue putting my energy toward answering your questions, please consider Buying Me A Coffee, or pledging your support on Patreon, where I offer early access and exclusive benefits for only $5/month.

#writing #writeblr #writespo #writing advice #creative writing #structure #plot development #editing #chapter organization #qna

132 notes · View notes

bettsfic · 1 year

Note

betts do you have advice on finding your way to narratively satisfying endings? i struggle to end stories in ways that don’t feel abrupt or dropping the ball plotwise in some way

i have bad news for you: almost no one is good at writing endings. i would say less than 10% of what i read has a decent ending. and around 1% has a good one. i'm looking at my bookshelf right now and the only one i can see with a great ending is lord of the rings. the rest of them either have bizarre endings (the english patient), actively terrible endings (white oleander), and endings i didn't even get to because the story lost all structure and conflict at the halfway mark (a lot of them). in fact bad endings have disenchanted me so thoroughly that this year i've only read nonfiction.

that doesn't mean you shouldn't aim for a satisfying ending, but that you're not alone in struggling with them, and you shouldn't feel too much pressure to nail the landing. there are some stories where the ending isn't as important as the beginning.

the reason, i think, that so many endings suck is because the personal stakes of the characters are weak. i don't necessarily prescribe to the obligation of character motivations, but i do think what often repels me as a reader is that the characters don't really care about anything, and therefore neither do i. if your character wants something, then you have a naturally occurring ending: they get what they want, they don't get what they want, or (my favorite) they get what they want and there are consequences.

another reason i think endings fail is that a lot of stories i read are missing a third act or a final escalation. they reach the first climax and resolve, rather than reaching the first climax, addressing the aftermath, and escalating to an even higher climax. not all stories are set up this way, but a lot of them can be improved if the writer asked themselves, "and then what happens?"

that said, here's the theory as i see it:

because narrative is innate to human nature, there are natural instincts we have to types of endings, namely happy and sad. comedy and tragedy. it's a binary, yes, and i generally avoid those, but for me anyway it's often the first question i ask myself when i start plotting a story: will this have a happy ending or a sad one? do i want to invoke emotional satisfaction or cathartic sadness? if neither, do i want to aim for something complicated or bittersweet?

i try not to obligate myself to any particular direction, but in having a rough idea of the answer, i can at least begin forming a conflict. the big difference between a happy ending and a sad one is whether or not you're asking your audience to root for the success of the characters' plight. for example, let's say your story involves around the development of a romantic relationship. if it seems like the characters, after completing the obstacles of the story, have a chance to have a healthy, happy relationship, then your audience will be eager for them to get together. but if you write it in such a way that your audience thinks, "oh no they're awful for each other," then your audience will be waiting for the breaking point*. either way, you're establishing the anticipation of your audience. if it's a little of both, then your ending is going to be somewhere in the middle, which is fine. the point is, your characters' motivations are being addressed. that's all an ending really is.

*there are genres where the delight is wanting two characters who are toxic to each other to stay together, like darkfic. but i think that's a different conversation, because that's a specific lens through which to read.

okay, now that the big picture stuff is out of the way, here are some general tips/ways i help writers figure out their endings:

process of elimination. write down all the ways it doesn't end. then write down all the ways it could end. then narrow that list into one that works.

extreme stakes. what is the greatest possible ending? does the character die? does the universe end? these probably won't be the right ending, but they'll at least help you aim high.

start with the ending. personally my best work has always come from stories where i know the ending before the beginning, and therefore everything that happens in the story is actively driving toward that ending. and by "know the ending" i mean i have the final image in my head. (most of the time this doesn't end up actually being the ending, but i like having something to work toward.)

harmonize your conflicts. the resolution of all conflict is its opposite: harmony. that doesn't mean a story necessarily has to end that way, but it's at least a good question to ask yourself. how do your characters return to a state of peace?

stack your conflicts. the more threads you open, the more that needs to be tied up at the end, the longer and more satisfying your denouement.

take your time. my favorite endings are ones that slowly slide down the falling action because the stakes reach such intense heights earlier on. a lot of people seem to believe that rising action is more important, building tension and whatnot, but i also think it's good to interrogate that, and try to see your work in the opposite light. what happens if your protagonist gets what they want asap, with no trouble at all? how do they handle success? success is a complicated thing: the good always comes with some bad. what does that look like? (this is the reason lord of the rings has such a great ending. it really honors the characters and the story.)

let your characters do what they want. if you build strong enough characters, their choices will eventually lead you to an ending. give them agency to fuck up and force them deal with it.

work toward an illuminating moment. an illuminating moment is a reveal at the end of the story that casts all the rest of it in a different light, so that when you reread with the illuminated context, the story becomes something new. doing that involves working in a mystery of some kind. shorter stories tend to rely on the illuminating moment, where longer ones rely on the reader knowing what's going on in order to be invested for the long haul.

outside input. have a friend read it and ask what they care about most and what they're expecting to happen. maybe you want to address those expectations or maybe you want to subvert them, but either way it'll help you see more clearly what you're tasking your reader to care about.

steal from shakespeare. everything i learned about how to end my stories i learned from shakespeare. that doesn't mean his endings are how all stories should end, but that i admire them and those are the sorts of endings i want for my own work. it might help to reread/rewatch your favorite things and pay particular attention to how they end.

what do you want? if you're emotionally invested in your own story, how do you want it to end? what would make you most satisfied with your own work? often what drives me forward in my own writing is wanting my characters to be happy but starting them in a place where happiness isn't even a real concept for them, and so they have to go through the process of addressing the things that have happened to them and fight for themselves and what they want.

my big caveat here is that a "good" ending is subjective. people think Lost had a good ending but i'm still angry i spent five years of my life waiting for a payoff that didn't come. in workshops i almost always hear the advice, "you don't want your ending to be *too* neat." bitch yes i do. i want it to be a neat, tidy bow, every single thing accounted for, every thread woven back in.

but that's me. your taste is different and your readers' taste is going to be different. you're never going to satisfy everyone, so it's best to honor your own aesthetic and hope your reader understands where you've come from.

#writing advice #endings #structure #conflict

89 notes · View notes

transmutationisms · 1 year

Note

hi caden, i love your blog. you completely changed my understanding of succession when i first stumbled upon your writing. i wanted to ask what you thought of the use of pete seeger's 'which side are you on?' in season 1. it is one of the only overt gestures towards anticapitalist politics in the show and maybe the only one that comes to mind where the show calls in in other media (because one of the only other times that i can think of is ewan's anticapitalist lawyer) so it feels more 'real' to me, if that makes sense, because 'which side are you on?' has had a real-world role in anticapitalist politics in a way that ewan's lawyer has not lmao. i was wondering what you thought of that choice narratively/stylistically/etc. thank you! hope you're well.

hi! honestly, i read that as one of the most cynical moments in the entire show. the whole premise of the seeger song is that there's an inside and an outside to capitalist class interests: you'll either be a union man or a thug for jh blair. so, choosing a side makes an actual difference: are you defending or opposing capitalist class interests? with kendall and the vote of no confidence, obviously, there is no analogous choice. kendall and logan are both fighting for the same thing, namely control of the company. picking one of them over the other does nothing to alter the underlying power structures the way unions do, or are supposed to. the song pokes fun at kendall for having styled himself a revolutionary in order to make his media conglomerate power grab.

narratively and stylistically, i find this scene intensely satisfying. lines like "come all of you good workers" playing over footage of a billionaire wandering wall street are an extremely effective way to convey both how removed kendall's world is from that of struggling kentuckian miners, and how kendall is trapped by his own outrageous wealth and inability to imagine an escape from the company or his father. it's not an entirely unsympathetic sequence, but it's certainly not a flattering one. the joke here is that kendall wants to engage in the picture-book heroics of taking down the big evil boss, but he has no interest in why that boss exists in the first place. so, unlike striking miners, he's simply trying to maintain the same class structure but with himself at the very top of the hierarchy. even being logan's son and very much a member of the capitalist class isn't enough for kendall; he needs the actual ceo position. that he sees this as a way out of his father's abuse and control, rather than an avenue to his own perpetration of the same things, is indicative of how little he thinks of anyone besides himself and logan as a person with interests and needs.

the contrast between the shiny new glass and bustle of manhattan, versus the old-recording sound of the song, also points to some way in which union politics from the 1930s tend to falter when confronting the labour laws and practices of the 21st century. gig economies, cyberspatial capital, &c don't speak exactly the same language as unions modelled on organising tactics of nearly a century ago; kendall thus looks doubly absurd, trying to fancy himself not just a rebelling worker but one whose strategies simply seem incommensurable with the functioning of a modern media conglomerate (in deleuzian or foucauldian terms, the labour union is an effective strategy when dealing with a disciplinary society with disciplinary workspaces, like a factory; if it is to achieve anything in the control society with its corporations and neoliberalisation, it needs to update its tactics).

politically this is a good example of how the show typically leans more on satire of capitalism than on active or positive engagement with anti-capitalism. i also remember that the first time i watched the show, this was one of the moments where i felt like it was clear how the general trajectory for these characters is going to go. kendall is always going to pursue logan's empire; he's never going to seek a way out, and his actualisation, which is loganification, will always come at the expense of countless unnamed other people. he will never get the victorious moment he dreams of because his narratives for understanding the world are extremely limited and simplistic, and he can only cast himself as a few heroic archetypes that don't exist and that certainly wouldn't be him if they did.

for me this sequence is emblematic of both the show's strengths and what many leftists ultimately find frustrating about it, namely its refusal to engage with anti-capitalism beyond using it to mock the capitalist class. the song ends up telling us a lot about kendall and his relationship with logan, but isn't really trying to link the show up with actual alternatives to the capitalist systems of control that pen kendall in. it's a gesture toward awareness of proletarians (like the shots scattered through the show of domestic workers, event staff, &c) but is ultimately limited by the pov characters' own refusal to think about such people in any sustained capacity. again, i think this works incredibly well and succinctly as a piece of character work for a billionaire; but for people who want the show to engage more directly with labour politics and anti-capitalism, rather than such character study (& i can certainly understand that position), it's also a moment that sums up the fundamental problems of the premise and the writers' overall approach to politics.

#tripping the light fantastic

125 notes · View notes

thelordofgifs · 6 months

Text

Writing Year Wrapped

Thank you for the tag @eilinelsghost - what a lovely idea!

3 Favourite Fics You've Written This Year

the fairest stars (T, 78k, in progress). So much of myself has gone into this fic since I started writing it all the way back in February. I love all the characters (Maedhros and Maglor my beloveds!!), I love how much it's taught me about plot and structure and evil cliffhangers, and I love sharing it with all my wonderful kind enthusiastic readers!

Ilimbë (T, 15k, complete). This was a new venture for me, both genre and ship-wise, but it was just so much FUN. I like writing things that make me feel clever, and this is probably my most unabashedly pretentious fic. But also baby Fëanor is everything to me now.

in the breaking (G, 2k, complete). I used to call this my best m&m fic, although tfs is probably my best m&m fic. But in the breaking is still one of my favourite explorations of their tragic tender codependent dynamic.

3 Fics That Stretched You the Most

Inflection (G, 10k, complete). This one was SO hard to write - getting the first draft out was very much blood, sweat and tears. The nuances of the kidnap fam dynamic are very hard to get right, balancing the canonical love with Elrond and Elros' genuine trauma. I'm still not entirely sure I got it quite to my satisfaction, but I'm pleased with the final result all the same.

the fairest stars. Yes I'm listing it twice. I'm very fond of tfs, but plotting it out can be SO hard sometimes (which is one of the reasons why part 31 is taking a while to write). I just counted and there are TEN separate plot threads to keep track of at the moment, which is... a Lot.

the salt of the sea (E, 2k, complete). Shoutout to my first proper smut! Definitely a new venture for me (I hadn't written this pairing before, either). People were very kind about it, though.

3 Favourite Lines You've Written

Maedhros has never loved anyone without making of them a god – it is all tangled together in his mind, worship with affection, ardour with idolatry. (tfs, part 29)

To love Maedhros, he has long known, is to grieve him. (tfs, part 22)

Fëanor had never been kissed before. It took him a moment to respond, but then he found he was kissing Nerdanel back and it was the easiest, most familiar thing in the world; her messy curls were brushing his face and one of her strong sure hands had travelled down to rest against the small of his back and there was nothing that had ever been more real than the warmth of her pressed against him; she was certainty itself, as solid as marble, no crafted thing to be shaped and changed, but a maker and a preserver and a promise of forever; and her mouth against his was hot and sweet and golden as the taste of a Laurelin-ripened peach. (Ilimbë)

3 Characters You Enjoyed Writing (that surprised you)

Lúthien! I didn't have many thoughts about her before starting tfs, but she's one of my favourite characters in it now, and so essential to the themes of the story.

Fëanor was a struggle to wrap my head around initially: in my opinion one of the biggest flaws of all those that follow, for example, is the way Fëanor only appears at the edges of the narrative, when I could really have stood to flesh his relationship with Fingolfin out a lot more. Writing Ilimbë really helped me gain a much better understanding of what makes him tick, which was very satisfying, and I do think his characterisation is one of the biggest strengths of that fic.

gonna cheat slightly for the third one and say all my little baby OCs from the glassmaker! OC-centric fic isn't something I'd tried before, but I'm very fond of them now.

3 Unexpected Inspirations

Maedhros' hair in in the breaking is this whole important thematic thing, but the truth is. I also have very long and silky hair and it is a PAIN to deal with. You cannot picture the number of times I have sat on my bed at 1am furiously yanking a hairbrush through it and gone "DID it take long hours to brush out to smoothness again? you fucking bet." Sadly I do not have a codependently devoted sibling to tenderly brush my hair for me, so I have to do it myself.

tfs was initally inspired by some tumblr discourse about Beren and Lúthien's motivations in stealing the Silmaril! which I think is kind of neat. It strikes me as very indicative of the collaborative nature of fandom: a couple of people have a debate, and then someone else goes away and writes fic about it, and then people draw art of the fic... and on the cycle goes.

an ancient song is a very small little ficlet, but it was also inspired by some tags on a tumblr post! Always fun when that happens.

3 WIPs You're Excited About in the Upcoming Year

Ooh, now I feel like I'm committing to having these finished in the next year...

The Unburied: the longfic I am very slowly working on, and managed to put 20k words towards in November. It follows Fingon as he crosses the Helcaraxë and Maglor as he rules in Mithrim, ending with the first rising of the Sun. I am excited about this fic, but it's an ambitious project and very challenging! Also my brain can't really handle working on two different longfics at once, so it's on the backburner until tfs is finished, and who knows when that will be tbh.

boats against the current: another rather old WIP that is complicated and difficult to plot out. This one is the "Maedhros doesn't swear the Oath" AU. Still very attached to the idea! Maybe I'll get somewhere with it soon.

sore must be the storm: my shortest WIP! Surely I can sit down and finish it in the next few weeks (I have been saying, for months). Just some (messy and complicated) russingon after Fingolfin's death.

3 People Tagged to Share Theirs

No-pressure tags for

@searchingforserendipity25

@that-angry-noldo

@welcomingdisaster!

#tag game #my writing

28 notes · View notes

scoobydoodean · 2 months

Note

i’m trying to write a s15 fix it fic and i’m kinda stuck on what the ending for heaven should be. along with other smaller details i have figured out, i know jack’s not gonna be god, and neither will amara, but that means heaven can’t keep functioning as it has been, smth needs to change. i do have a few ideas, but i’m interested in what someone like you, who has a much more comprehensive knowledge of spn than i do, thinks. like how you wish the ending happened (other than dean living ofc), how you wish they handled the cosmic consequences of taking out chuck?

and ofc i won’t like steal your ideas! i’m just looking for inspiration and another perspective in order to flesh out my basic ideas

Well... to be honest, when I read fix it fics I often skip the world building aspects surrounding "new heaven structure". Honestly I'm more the kind of person to feel that part of the fun of fic is not having to do complicated world building and getting right into the character-oriented portions of the story. 😂

As far as my own wishes: I am a HUGE proponent of an open ending for Supernatural. Because Supernatural is about a battle between the concepts of Free Will and Destiny, and the final season, in particular, is about an evil author/god writing the characters lives, I feel the only narratively satisfying conclusion is one where even the irl author sets the characters free from their vision (after a certain point—obviously we want to have our fun and set the characters up for success). This is a HUGE issue with the actual series finale in my mind—that it attempts to write out the entirety of the characters lives even into eternity, entombing them in the author's vision with absolutely nothing left to the imagination when this show was MADE for a "ride off into the sunset" style ending because it's about free will. 15.20 simply was not that—it was far FAR too intrusive.

I mean to be totally honest because of its negative narrative significance, I kind of think heaven should simply implode. I think it would be very cathartic for everyone involved. The Winchester's provided (imo) an excellent landing pad for a fully canon-compliant fix-it fic where Dean once again tears apart the script. And yes—to me heaven is still someone else's script in 15.20, whether that was the authorial intent or not. Even if one isn't "Chuck won" truthing, one still has the line, "Cas helped" in 15.20—meaning that at the very least, Cas and Jack are trying to write paradise. They are trying to write The Future. (I discuss my criticisms of that here). This is also why the summary for my own WIP fix-it... looks like this:

Castiel abruptly drops the cassettes onto the kitchen table in a clatter, barely avoiding Mary’s morning coffee. “I need help understanding your son.” Much to Castiel’s consternation, Dean… isn’t happy with the heaven Cas and Jack have designed and built for him. If that wasn’t clear enough from his preference for universe-hopping to alternate worlds over spending time in the heaven literally designed to be his personal peaceful paradise, or his in turns defiant and despondent attitude when grounded (read: when he hasn’t quite figured out how to chew through the plastic of his “cage” yet again)… it would be impossible for Cas to miss the fact that Dean will barely speak to him. Instead, he afflicts Castiel with one-track cassette tapes.

On a symbolic level, to me, heaven in SPN represents false paradise. It represents Free Will losing to Destiny. It’s a hopeless, helpless, ultimate: “No matter what you do, you will always end up here”. Even if you succeed at defying The Man in life, you will ultimately be forced back into a heaven where someone else’s vision for your life plays out for the rest of eternity, sold as "paradise". You will always end up back in The Beautiful Room. The afterlife doesn't have to be conceptualized that way, but I think the "new" heaven in 15.20 still heavily misses the mark for me in this regard, especially given the surrounding context.

All of that said, in a more general sense, I think what you do with heaven in a fix-it fic really depends heavily on what relational/emotional themes you're exploring in the fic. For example, say I want to write a fic where Dean reflects on his life being full of responsibilities that were too big and how this deeply warped his sense of self-worth. Say though that I largely explore Dean's feelings and reflections on this through Jack, in the present, cracking under the pressure of being expected to be God. A narratively satisfying ending to that fix-it might intentionally leave the question of what exactly becomes of heaven an open question, because the catharsis in the end is that it isn't Jack's (or anyone else in TFW's) responsibility to figure that out. To have Jack say "I'm trying so hard to make everyone happy everyone wants me to make paradise and I don't know how and I'm drowning", and for Dean to say "You don't have to make paradise. You don't have to do any of this. It isn't your job." Could be a very emotionally poignant conclusion to a fic that focuses on that theme.

I wonder if taking even a further step back would also help? By which I mean: the concept of a heaven as a whole, or hell, or purgatory... they're all assumedly of Chuck's design, and while that doesn't make having four afterlife locations (including The Empty) inherently bad, it also doesn't make make for inherently good design either—practically or ethically. The angels were having trouble keeping the lights on upstairs as their numbers dwindled, Purgatory is an absolute mess (think about where Garth and Bess and their kids will end up...) The only place possibly doing okay in the end is Hell, under Rowena's rule. Death had lots of concerns about balance between the various afterlife areas and I actually think it would be hilarious to give Death... 4.0? a heart attack by just being like "Well... what if we just got rid of some of these places? What if we were trying to stay upright and balance on a seesaw instead of on a ball that can turn in any direction? Do we really need a separate afterlife for monsters? Can heaven and hell just both be in the same place and Rowena and a few other people run it?" Though the need for a new Death could also mean... a new one comes in with a new idea about how to structure the afterlife, but then you also have to ask yourself how intricately you want to detail any of this. If your primary goal is to build the most comprehensive possible fix-it fic that addresses any conceivable question a reader might have about the new reason of the world, then you might finely detail the new concept of the afterlife. On the other hand, if you're more interested in exploring an emotional theme, it might make sense to have whatever happens or doesn't happen with heaven symbolize or relate to an emotional/relational theme within in your story.

Idk that was very rambly sorry I hope it helps a little with brainstorming!

#mail #spn finale poo poo

13 notes · View notes

nevermeyers · 2 years

Text

I don't know if this opinion is something "radical", but here goes. I wish TR was a seinen.

[there aren't spoilers here or anything related to the leaks, don't worry + this is just an opinion, if you don't wanna see this just keep scrolling]

I wish it, because it would have given us a deeper exploration of the obscurity of gangs, youthful drug use*, sexual violence**, prostitution*** and the yakuza clans****. I wish it was darker. That doesn't mean it can't have a happy ending ofc!

* haruchiyo. I have the hc that he threw himself into drugs 1) because of the environment in which he moved, because when someone close consumes there is a probability that you will also do so and 2) because having memories of another timeline was unbearable for him

** remember the raped girl in the arch of moebius? or would senju ever be harassed? What about Yuzuha?

*** it only gives us hints about the prostitutes with the first meeting of draken and mitsuya, where mitsuya and one of the girls talk

**** Wakui respected the typical pyramidal structure of a mafia, with its leadership leadership, in the Bonten arc. It was very interesting to see

I only know that if TR had been a seinen the treatment towards certain moments would have been very different and all those shonen clichés (like in these last chapters where they left aside the importance of all the characters just to highlight the relationship between Takemichi and Manjiro) would disappear, leaving a much larger and emotionally stronger work.

If it had been a seinen, the work wouldn't have been directed by and to sell copies. I mean, yeah, it's an industry that only seeks money, but the exploitation of the shonen genre is much greater than the seinen genre, or it gives me that impression.

For example, shonen usually have protagonists of adolescent ages so that the viewer feels identified. We see this in TR with characters who clearly don't act their age.

(I'm just referring to their way of dealing with that environment and making some decisions. Let's remember that there are actually teenagers involved in gangs and if you deny that it's because you probably live in a enough privileged place not to open the news and see they have stabbed a fourteen year old boy)

Shonen are aimed at young audiences who consume and quickly forget. Shonen must satisfy the huge needs of these teenagers, either with fanservice or putting the usual clichés because they know they work.

Things in seinen are much more serious and don't usually focus on constantly pleasing the audience.

If TR was a seinen he probably wouldn't have been as famous as he is, maybe it wouldn't even have had an anime. But, maybe then his ending wouldn't have been so rushed and Wakui would have been able to explore all the hints he gave us throughout the series that things are much bigger than they seem (example: hanma's role in the history + fix the plot holes).

Also, Wakui is an author used to writing seinen. If I'm not mistaken, this is his first shonen and it's just where his narrative (specifically at the end of the story) has weakened. I'm convinced that it's not his fault, because he had been doing great until then.

With this I do not intend to detract from his work! TR is great and I will always appreciate his work. It is my favorite manga precisely because of the things it has made me feel (let's say that my favorites are measured more by the sensations than by the plots, lmao) and its characters feel unique and real.

I'm honestly not mad at this ending. I just think it could have been handled in a much better way, because that's what TR deserves.

On the other hand it makes me be in conflict with myself. I look at the characters and think they're not the same, because they have not lived everything they lived in the other timeline. And all of a sudden I say to myself "wait, are you wishing someone went through trauma just to satisfy you?" it's so strange :')

I have to say that the S62 are the most similar characters to the other timeline. Look at those smiles of enjoying the cruelty hehe I love them

So I'm just saying that maybe it would have been more coherent being a seinen and of course maybe Wakui would have felt more comfortable writing it, since that's what he's used to

He has worked very hard, he himself has said this year that he has had his first week off in a long time, and that he suffers from kidney pain (magazine comments). He deserves all the love and respect.

I don't think any of you like it when a job you've put hours into is detracted just because of its ending. So always remember to say things with respect!

Take care <3

#tokyo revengers #tokyo revengers spoilers #@meyers #ken wakui #—meyers»talks🌸

208 notes · View notes

theinquisitxor · 1 month

Text

April 2024 Reading Wrap Up

I read 6 books in April, which is honestly more than I thought I would get to at the beginning of this month. April's are historically slow reading months for me, and while this was another slower month, I'm happy with what I read. Audiobooks really saved me this month! I read 2 fantasy books, 3 nonfiction (who am I?) and 1 literary fiction.

1.The Book of Doors by Gareth Brown (3.5/5 stars) This was an anticipated new release for me, and I was very intrigued by the premise. This was enjoyable, but there were some things I didn't really care for. This was engaging and easy to read, and if you liked The Cartographers or The Invisible Life of Addie LaRue, I think you'd like this. Adult low fantasy

2.The Wager: A Tale of Shipwreck, Mutiny, and Murder by David Grann (4/5 stars) I really enjoy survival stories and seafaring stories, so I knew I was going to like this. The audiobook was great, and I liked how this was a shorter nonfiction. I'm not sure how much I like the narrative nonfiction that Grann writes in. Either way, this was a super engaging and entertaining read. Nonfiction audiobook

3.Atomic Habits by James Clear. I was not planning on reading this book in April, but I randomly go interested in it. Overall enjoyable, and interesting to see how we structure our lives around habits.

4.Who Cooked the Last Supper: The Women's History of the World by Rosalind Miles (4/5 stars) I read this 80s feminist nonfiction on audio, and while this could get pessimistic and difficult, I found it to be an engaging read with flashes of humor throughout. I would be interested to see what this book would be like published in the 2020s vs the 1980s. Nonfiction audiobook

5.The Bloody Throne (Hostage of Empire 3) by SC Emmett (5/5 stars) This was the fantastic conclusion to one of my favorite new series. Everything came together in this book and delivered an ending well worth the series. I wasn't sure how the series would end, but it was satisfying and bittersweet. I'm going to be talking about this series for a while. Adult fantasy

6. The Wall by Marlen Haushofer (4.5/5 stars) This is a translated dystopian fiction book about a women who is stuck behind a wall while the rest of the world as ended. She only has a cat, dog, and cow as her companions. She must learn to survive and cope with loneliness. I deeply enjoyed this novel, and found many passages that really stuck with me. Parts of this book got me very emotional.

That's it for April! I'm hoping for a strong reading month this May and summer!

May TBR:

The Familiar by Lehigh Bardugo

The Winners (Beartown 3) by Fredrik Backman

The Language of Trees: A rewilding of literature and landscape

Desert Solitare by Edward Abby

Brave the Wild River (nonfiction audiobook)

The Hedgewitch of Fox Hall by Ana Bright

Song of the Huntress by Lucy Holland

The Witch Collector by Charissa Weaks (my Random TBR Pick for May)

#reading wrap up #april 2024 reading wrap up #the book of doors #gareth brown #the wager #who cooked the last supper #rosalind miles #the bloody throne #hostage of empire #SC Emmett #the wall marlen haushofer #my post

18 notes · View notes

reddbuster · 7 months

Text

I think one thing that Bridge to the Turnabout (and the rest of the trilogy building up to it) does extremely well is the way it structures it's antagonists. If you've done some reading on character writing and structuring of stories you might have heard of the concept of hero-mirror-other. It's basically this character structure where you have your hero/protagonist, one antagonist that's sort of a corrupted version/foil of said character, and another villain that's just the complete opposite of everything the hero stands for. For example, in aa1 this structure could apply to Phoenix, Edgeworth and Manfred Von Karma. Phoenix and Edgeworth both started off as idealistic believers in justice and then in Edgeworth those beliefs were twisted and used wrongly. When we're seeing them face off in aa1 the contrast between them highlights how much they've changed and how different they are at this point in the story. Then there's MVK, who isn't a perversion of justice so much as he's a guy who on the surface just doesn't give a shit about it. Hence why he's the "other". And I think AA3, whether intentional or not, uses this structure efficiently, because it does so multiple times in multiple ways with the same characters, and this overlapping conflict gives a more satisfying conclusion. Let me explain.

So, Phoenix, right? (pun not intended) He's obviously the main protagonist so there are a lot of characters that act as "foils" to him in some way or another. And I think one of these characters is Godot. I think the connection and the main difference between them (and what BTTT really focuses on) is Mia, esp the ways they each respond to her death. Phoenix responds with action. He doesn't have time to brood or stew in his grief like Diego does. He couldn't save Mia, so he saves Maya instead. And soon enough, Maya becomes more than just Mia's sister or a way to atone for her death. She becomes a genuine friend to him regardless of her family, and they're both better off for it. Diego, though, never gets that chance. He wakes up only to find that he has nothing left but the residual grief of the life he left behind. Diego is someone characterized by inaction, whose desperate need to imprint his will onto the world eventually leads to his downfall. The "other" imo applies to both Morgan and Dahlia. These are both characters that are also defined by their feeling of powerlessness or lack of agency, except unlike Godot, whose powerlessness was a consequence of outside influence (being in a coma), for Dahlia & Morgan a lot of it is self-imposed. They both give up on themselves way too early and dedicate themselves to revenge. Actually writing this is making me realize how similar Godot and Dahlia are but that's another post my point still stands that they serve different roles in the story in relation to Phoenix. Godot is there to make him reflect/to cause more internal conflict and Dahlia is an outside force causing external conflict.

Now Trials and Tribulations is special in that you ALSO get so play as Mia, in multiple cases spread out through the game. She's still not as central to the game as Phoenix, but you play as her enough to get personally invested in her arc and want a satisfying end to her story. The aforementioned structure can be applied to Mia's story as well. Except, in her case I would argue that it's swapped. I think that Mia and Dahlia are really interesting when viewed as narrative foils. They're both Fey girls that left their family after being left behind themselves and dedicated themselves to revenge, albeit in very different ways. For Mia, her pursuit of revenge was an almost excuse or sorts. It was a reason for her to leave home and pursue a career in law. Mia's revenge opened up new opportunities for her and allowed her to start a new life because she channeled (hah) that vengeance into her desire for justice. For Dahlia, this desire for revenge was self-destructive. She gave up on herself and put everything into getting back at the people who hurt her because she thought it was all she had left. It didn't matter if she took herself out in the process, as long as she left a mark on the ones who ruined her. As for Morgan, she represents everything that Mia feared becoming; the disgraced older sibling who took out her bitterness on her younger sister. Diego, on the other hand, has just become... completely separate from everything Mia stands for. He’s stopped caring about justice, or the truth. He doesn’t even really care about revenge. He’s just a sad, empty, bitter man desperate for anyone and anything at which to direct that bitterness.

anyway I may have gotten a bit off track here I just have. Many thoughts.

#fey girls tag #ace attorney #aa3 #dahlia hawthorne #mia fey #diego armando #prosecutor godot #morgan fey #phoenix wright

31 notes · View notes

Last Seen Blogs

fuckingbunny-o

∞ Carpe Diem

meu-pe-de-maracuja

Meu Pé de Maracujá

explcsivcs

s i l e n c e

weetbeex

🐝

dfwblackcarservicellc

Untitled