#writing examples

[ancientroyalblood]

Mastering Dialogue: Breathing Life into Your Conversations

Dialogue is the heartbeat of any compelling story. It’s through the conversations between characters that emotions are conveyed, relationships unfold, and plots take shape. Mastering the art of writing engaging dialogue is crucial for writers who strive to create narratives that captivate readers. In this blog post, we’ll embark on a journey to explore the intricacies of crafting dynamic and…

[noperopesaredope]

I wish we had more female characters like Eleanor Shellstrop. One of the most unlikable people you've ever met. Read a Buzzfeed article on most rude things you can do on a daily basis and decided to use that as a list of goals. Makes everyone's day worse just by being there. Dropped a margarita mix on the ground and tried to pick it up, only to get hit by a row of shopping carts which pushed her into the road where she was hit by a boner pill delivery truck, killing her instantly. Cannot keep a romantic partner despite being bisexual. Had a terrible childhood but will die before she gets therapy. Best employee at a scam company. Just the worst but also can't help but root for her to improve.

Absolute loser. Girl-failure. Bad at almost everything. Literally perfect female character.

[daisywords]

One of my biggest nitpicks in fiction concerns the feeding of babies. Mothers dying during/shortly after childbirth or the baby being separated form the mother shortly after birth is pretty common in fiction. It is/was also common enough in real life, which is why I think a lot of writers/readers don't think too hard about this. however. Historically, the only reason the vast majority of babies survived being separated from their mother was because there was at least one other woman around to breastfeed them. Before modern formula, yes, people did use other substitutes, but they were rarely, if ever, nutritionally sufficient.

Newborns can't eat adult food. They can't really survive on animal milk. If your story takes place in a world before/without formula, a baby separated from its mother is going to either be nursed by someone else, or starve.

It doesn't have to be a huge plot point, but idk at least don't explicitly describe the situation as excluding the possibility of a wetnurse. "The father or the great grandmother or the neighbor man or the older sibling took and raised the baby completely alone in a cave for a year." Nope. That baby is dead I'm sorry. "The baby was kidnapped shortly after birth by a wizard and hidden away in a secret tower" um quick question was the wizard lactating? "The mother refused to see or touch her child after birth so the baby was left to the care of the ailing grandfather" the grandfather who made the necessary arrangements with women in the neighborhood, right? right? OR THAT GREAT OFFENDER "A newborn baby was left on the doorstep and they brought it in and took care of it no issues" What Are You Going to Feed That Baby. Hello?

Like. It's not impossible, but arrangements are going to have to be made. There are some logistics.

[inkskinned]

i have chronic pain. i am neurodivergent. i understand - deeply - the allure of a "quick fix" like AI. i also just grew up in a different time. we have been warned about this.

15 entire years ago i heard about this. in my forensics class in high school, we watched a documentary about how AI-based "crime solving" software was inevitably biased against people of color.

my teacher stressed that AI is like a book: when someone writes it, some part of the author will remain within the result. the internet existed but not as loudly at that point - we didn't know that AI would be able to teach itself off already-biased Reddit threads. i googled it: yes, this bias is still happening. yes, it's just as bad if not worse.

i can't actually stop you. if you wanna use ChatGPT to slide through your classes, that's on you. it's your money and it's your time. you will spend none of it thinking, you will learn nothing, and, in college, you will piss away hundreds of thousands of dollars. you will stand at the podium having done nothing, accomplished nothing. a cold and bitter pyrrhic victory.

i'm not even sure students actually read the essays or summaries or emails they have ChatGPT pump out. i think it just flows over them and they use the first answer they get. my brother teaches engineering - he recently got fifty-three copies of almost-the-exact-same lab reports. no one had even changed the wording.

and yes: AI itself (as a concept and practice) isn't always evil. there's AI that can help detect cancer, for example. and yet: when i ask my students if they'd be okay with a doctor that learned from AI, many of them balk. it is one thing if they don't read their engineering textbook or if they don't write the critical-thinking essay. it's another when it starts to affect them. they know it's wrong for AI to broad-spectrum deny insurance claims, but they swear their use of AI is different.

there's a strange desire to sort of divorce real-world AI malpractice over "personal use". for example, is it moral to use AI to write your cover letters? cover letters are essentially only templates, and besides: AI is going to be reading your job app, so isn't it kind of fair?

i recently found out that people use AI as a romantic or sexual partner. it seems like teenagers particularly enjoy this connection, and this is one of those "sticky" moments as a teacher. honestly - you can roast me for this - but if it was an actually-safe AI, i think teenagers exploring their sexuality with a fake partner is amazing. it prevents them from making permanent mistakes, it can teach them about their bodies and their desires, and it can help their confidence. but the problem is that it's not safe. there isn't a well-educated, sensitive AI specifically to help teens explore their hormones. it's just internet-fed cycle. who knows what they're learning. who knows what misinformation they're getting.

the most common pushback i get involves therapy. none of us have access to the therapist of our dreams - it's expensive, elusive, and involves an annoying amount of insurance claims. someone once asked me: are you going to be mad when AI saves someone's life?

therapists are not just trained on the book, they're trained on patient management and helping you see things you don't see yourself. part of it will involve discomfort. i don't know that AI is ever going to be able to analyze the words you feed it and answer with a mind towards the "whole person" writing those words. but also - if it keeps/kept you alive, i'm not a purist. i've done terrible things to myself when i was at rock bottom. in an emergency, we kind of forgive the seatbelt for leaving bruises. it's just that chat shouldn't be your only form of self-care and recovery.

and i worry that the influence chat has is expanding. more and more i see people use chat for the smallest, most easily-navigated situations. and i can't like, make you worry about that in your own life. i often think about how easy it was for social media to take over all my time - how i can't have a tiktok because i spend hours on it. i don't want that to happen with chat. i want to enjoy thinking. i want to enjoy writing. i want to be here. i've already really been struggling to put the phone down. this feels like another way to get you to pick the phone up.

the other day, i was frustrated by a book i was reading. it's far in the series and is about a character i resent. i googled if i had to read it, or if it was one of those "in between" books that don't actually affect the plot (you know, one of those ".5" books). someone said something that really stuck with me - theoretically you're reading this series for enjoyment, so while you don't actually have to read it, one would assume you want to read it.

i am watching a generation of people learn they don't have to read the thing in their hand. and it is kind of a strange sort of doom that comes over me: i read because it's genuinely fun. i learn because even though it's hard, it feels good. i try because it makes me happy to try. and i'm watching a generation of people all lay down and say: but i don't want to try.

[genderqueerdykes]

genuinely have had numerous people tell me that as a trans man i'm "a men's rights activist invading trans spaces".

so many people legitimately do not see trans men as trans.

i need people to understand that so many people for some reason have the idea that trans = feminine or woman. it's a real issue.

how are trans men invading trans spaces? this is where we live. and of course we're gonna advocate for our own rights. why wouldn't we? we don't exist to self flagellate because the idea of transsexual and transgender manhood and masculinity frightens you. i'm a trans man. i'm trans. i'm not invading my own community.

[henryscapon]

like, okay, i'm sure this scene has been talked about and dissected to pieces already in this fandom but. BUT. i need to put my two cents in or i will explode.

so, your lord and best friend has just admitted to you that if you die, he will be so beside himself with grief that he might just die too.

the game then gives you THIS option in response.

and you, the player, know how video games work. you know this is the press x for romance button. you expect henry to admit his feelings—a culmination of all the hints he's dropped from the heart options we've chosen before—and kiss him as soon as the button's been pressed.

except henry doesn't kiss hans.

instead, henry places his hand on hans' hand. it's the first moment of physical contact between them in the whole scene...but it's not a kiss. it's gentle. it's intimate. it's tiptoeing the line between comforting a friend and something more...

...but henry leaves it at that. and he gets up and goes to leave.

and in that moment of panic. in that split second of 'this might be the last time i'll ever see you again, please don't go' — it's hans that kisses henry.

and it's henry who pushes hans away.

this is—for all intents and purposes—the opposite of what we, the player, chose.

and to add insult to injury, henry looks conflicted.

he looks SO conflicted that hans believes he's fucked up royally.

that he has completely tarnished their final moments together by acting on impulse—by giving into temptation and desperation and feelings he can't even put into his own words—and henry must be disgusted by him.

and hans believes this because he watches henry turn his back to him. refusing to look at him. and head for the door.

but henry stops before he opens it. and i keep thinking back to the heart option we chose.

the player is not making the choice for henry to kiss hans. we are not forcing his hand.

the player is reminding henry what he's been telling himself throughout the entire game.

don't run away, henry.

kiss him. kiss him back.

so henry does.

[ancientroyalblood]

The Power of Descriptive Writing: How it Brings Stories to Life

In the world of literature, words hold a special kind of magic. They have the power to transport us to new realms, evoke emotions, and ignite our imagination. One of the most potent tools in a writer’s arsenal is descriptive writing. Beyond mere sentences, descriptive writing paints a vivid picture that engages all our senses. In this blog post, we will journey into the realm of descriptive…

[luanna801]

I feel like a thing I wish was more generally acknowledged across fandoms is that "I don't find this character sympathetic" and "This character was not intended to be sympathetic" are obviously connected but are, ultimately, two completely different statements that may not overlap at all.

Ultimately what you think about any given character is a completely subjective issue that has no right or wrong answer. The narrative may be trying to evoke sympathy for them, and you may just feel that it flat-out was not successful in doing that. You may look the author straight in the eye and say "Nope, I see what you're trying to do, but f*ck this guy actually, he's The Worst and that's all there is to it". And no one can tell you that you're wrong for doing so.

But when it comes to picking up on what the story is trying to do, whether you ultimately think it did a good job or not, I would argue there's at least some measure of objective reality. And I feel like people sometimes end up conflating them, so you end up with these posts like "I can't believe people sympathize with this character when the story clearly just wants you to hate them!" and it's like... yeah, I think people sympathize with this character because the story is very clearly and intentionally painting them as sympathetic. I could point you at a dozen different scenes that are clearly meant to evoke sympathy for This Character. You don't have to have found any of it compelling, but at a certain point recognizing it's there is a simple matter of reading comprehension.

[taraxippos]

I think people tend to assume that any criticism of worldbuilding is ultimately a demand for a story to grind itself to a halt and give the reader 20 paragraphs of exposition, and like. Most of the time good-faith criticism of this nature is coming from a core aspect of the story not being grounded in the setting in a way that outright detracts from the story's quality. You fix it not by Explaining but by Showing it passively in the makeup of the world.

Like the last instance I saw this critique in was like 'you can't expect an author to stop and exposit the nuances of gender roles/Queerness in a fictional society' and it's like yeah I don't, and in fact this is actually one of the easiest things to show in the text without exposition. If a society has gender norms to begin with you'll see aspects of these norms baked into EVERYTHING. You'll see it in its stories, its religion, its taboos, its etiquette, its clothing, its family structures, its language, its insults, its labor, its leadership, etc. It will have massive impacts on how characters interact with one another and how they perceive themselves. It will help Shape your characters.

If you do this legwork to begin with for the core facets of your story, you will find very natural places for these concepts to be demonstrated without derailing the plot and with little to no exposition. THAT sort of thing is what's being asked of you.

[abd-illustrates]

Sorry to bother you. I wanted to ask if you were willing to give advice on how to avoid the 'Friends Who Never Hang' tropes? Because I'm hesitant to make more main characters because I'm not sure if I can make their bond close between all of them and you seem to have a grip on the Heartless gang's relationship. Thanks.

I had to google what that trope meant haha - but that's a rlly interesting question!

At least for me and my storytelling preferences, I think my stance would be that there's actually no need to worry about making a close bond between *all* of your main characters at all!

It's a bit hard to articulate, and I'm definitely thinking from more of a manga mindset so bear with me lol -- but trying to make sure that everyone on your main cast all get along with everyone else on the main cast, and feeling the need to give a 'proper' spotlight to every possible combination of characters to convince your audience that 'they really are all friends with a close bond, see how they all hang out!?' Can run the risk of looking like this:

and leave your story feeling bland/stagnant as you kinda slog through unnecessary scenes between characters just for the sake of proving that they do all interact an adequate amount.

Whereas - (again, at least in my experience) - building a group primarily around their ties to your Main-main character(s) like this:

is a method that leaves much more room for you as a writer to both focus on the character that's specifically meant to be at the forefront, while also making it easier to explore which other combos could then actually be fun to give more screen time to in order to *build up* those close bonds, rather than worrying about the end result and just trying to make everybody get along right from the get-go!

(Also! Don't feel like if you start out with a bunch of varied colorful connections that they all have to be turned into bright green friendly bonds by story's end! Making some characters a bit closer over time but still not besties is a-ok! They can unite for a common goal but still get on each others nerves forever! There are no rules! Be cringe, be free!)

[fantastic-nonsense]

Steve Orlando, after writing half of Supergirl Rebirth and fixing Wonder Woman after Robinson's run, in the middle of writing Donna Troy's nth origin story retelling: "bro she saw her planet blown up as a teenager and then got to Earth and her baby cousin was older than her now. it's not hard, go read some of her stories and figure it out"

[doctober-baby-poetry]

Keep telling my head it doesn't matter, Keep telling my heart it gets better My head knows it will always matter My heart knows it doesn't get better. ~V

[genderqueerdykes]

"i'm so delulu" no, you are so ableist. psychotic people can hear you. you're not cute and you're not dealing with a delusion just because you're fixated on something. if you say you hate ableism then do this, you sure the hell do not. psychotic people are not your personal punching bag. stop it.

[vivitalks]

thinking about guard dog characters and attack dog characters. the different ways to protect your people. characters who take the defensive versus the ones who never let it get to that. ones who, when someone bares their teeth, will bare their teeth in return, and ones who need only see the glint of teeth before tearing them limb from limb. it's the difference between "i would die for you" and "i would kill for you." characters who are ready to compromise their life or their morals, who have already made that sacrifice in their mind, who have fangs and claws and are always ready to use them, because ultimately these characters are fundamentally the same: they will protect you, and they will do anything.

[the-raindeer-king]

Going off my headcanon that Ghost doesn't keep up with celebrities or musicians because he just doesn't care. Imagine if he was dating someone famous. Maybe not super famous because I imagine that would be difficult, but maybe famous in the right circles (thinking like Spiritbox or even Mother Mother type famous.)

Like he genuinely has no idea that you're famous. He's never heard of you or your band before. When you first meet and you say something about it, he stares at you before asking if he's supposed to know what that means, voice monotone.

When he talks about you to the others, he never uses your name. You're always just his bird, his love, maybe the missus (regardless of gender). He talks about how hectic both of your schedules are, and they just assume that maybe you work on a different base or you're in the medical field or something. It's always vague enough to keep them all wondering, and he refuses to elaborate.

Now imagine Soap's surprise when everything finally lines up and the team gets to meet Ghost's birdie, and none other than the leader singer of his favorite band saunters in.

(but also imagine if you were super famous. Like how the hell does this behemoth not know who you are? but you're also so relieved because at least you know he likes you for you.)

[sporesgalaxy]

TWO THANGS

when I say "love" with no descriptors, I don't mean romantic by default

when I say "art" with no descriptors, I don't mean visual by default