#CLICHES

[hometoursandotherstuff]

interesting.

[princesssarisa]

My post about whether or not Lydia should be saved from Wickham in modern Pride and Prejudice retellings has gotten more likes and reblogs than I expected. It's made me think of another possibility of why Austen didn't save her from him.

Presumably, Lydia and Wickham's marriage could have been avoided in only three ways that would have left Lydia's reputation intact. The first is if they had only been planning to elope, but it was prevented, as with Georgiana. The second is if they had been found earlier and separated before Lydia lost her virginity. Or else Lydia could have listened to Darcy and left Wickham, and then Darcy could have used his influence to protect her honor: e.g. by claiming that she was kidnapped, or by arranging a decent marriage for her.

If Austen had wanted to make any of those choices to free Lydia, she could have done it without drastically changing the plot. But if she had, it might have felt a bit too "literary" and unrealistic.

I've just been re-watching some of Dr. Octavia Cox's literary analysis videos on YouTube. They reminded me that Austen always loved to skewer the tropes and clichés of other literature, especially Gothic melodrama, whether in outright parody or in subtler deconstruction.

Dr. Cox's video on the elder Eliza's fate in Sense and Sensibility particularly highlights this trend in Austen. She argues that Eliza's story is a classic, clichéd Gothic melodrama (a beautiful orphan, an abusive uncle, thwarted romance, forced marriage to a cruel man, a "fall" into a life of "sin," and ultimate illness and death, all narrated by Colonel Brandon in heightened, poetic language), and that Austen's point in including it was arguably to highlight that this wouldn't be the fate of her heroines. Marianne comes close to it with Willoughby and with her near-fatal illness, but in the end she's saved. Austen's point was arguably to say "Yes, I know all about this type of melodrama, I know all the clichés, but I'm relegating it to the backstory, because that's not what I want to write."

(I don't know if everyone would interpret the elder Eliza's storyline this way, but it's how Dr. Cox reads it.)

Maybe with Lydia's fate, and with the backstory of how Georgiana was freed from Wickham, Austen was doing something similar.

I'm not enough of an expert on Georgian literature to know if the rescuing of girls from predatory men with their virginity and honor intact was a cliché or not. But it does appear in late 18th century comic opera. For example, Mozart's Don Giovanni: the title character is the ultimate womanizer, but he has no success with any of the women he tries to prey on over the course of the opera. His seductions are stopped by the timely, chance arrivals of his enemies, his victims get away unscathed, and he pays for his crimes with his life in the end. Or The Marriage of Figaro: the Count's designs on Susanna are thwarted, and he's humiliated and forced to beg his wife's forgiveness.

If stories of womanizers being thwarted and punished, and their female victims saved with virtue intact, were as common in the literature of the day as they are in opera from that era, then maybe Austen used Wickham and Lydia to deconstruct them.

We definitely see some skewering of poetic cliche in the fact that despite Mrs. Bennet's fears/hopes, Lydia's honor is saved with a bribe instead of a duel.

Maybe like the Eliza backstory in Sense and Sensibility, the backstory of Georgiana's near-elopement can be read as a more perfect "literary" example of a girl escaping a cad's clutches. The elopement was thwarted partly by pure chance, as Darcy paid a surprise visit just before Wickham and Georgiana meant to run off, and partly because Georgiana was a “good victim,” whose conscience got the better of her and who chose her family and honor over her whirlwind romance.

But similar luck isn't on Lydia's side, nor does she make the right, “virtuous" choices. Darcy doesn't find the lovers until Lydia has already been living with Wickham, and like a typical reckless teenager, she cares nothing for either her reputation or her family compared to her infatuation with him. So Darcy is forced to bribe Wickham to marry her, Wickham goes unpunished except that he loses his hope of marrying rich, and all the characters have to live with the results of the scandal for the rest of their lives.

By having Georgiana's successful escape from Wickham be mere backstory while foregrounding Lydia's lack of escape, maybe once again Austen was saying "I could have freed Lydia this way – I know the tropes other authors might have used to free her – but I'm a more cynically realistic writer than that, so I won't."

I have no idea if this is valid or not, but it's a theory.

[prodigal-explorer]

how to write children's personalities

(this is part of my series, how to write children in fanfiction! feel free to check it out if you want more info like this!)

this is the main aspect of writing children that i see people mess up so often, especially in the fandoms i'm in (sanders sides and undertale). children are not adorable little noodles with no brains and no concept besides being cute and silly and crying. children are beings that are just as complex as adults, and they deserve personalities to match. this will make them way more interesting to read about! let's get started!

since there are so many aspects to personality to talk about and i don't want to sit here typing for ten years, we're going to do this guide a little differently. i'm going to divide these issues into archetypes, write a short description, and then make a list of do's and don't's for each one!

archetype one: the cute little baby

okay. babies are cute. we all know this, and i'm not saying it's a bad thing to make your babies cute. a lot of people love reading about moments with adorable little babies. but here are some ways to step this kind of thing up, and some things to avoid if you want to improve upon writing this archetype.

do's:

give the child character another archetype besides this one. though "cute" is the foundation for a lot of child characters, it's not a personality. and if a character is vital to your story, then it needs a personality. that's just a rule. you will read more about other archetypes further along in this post!

make the moments symbolic. though it doesn't seem like it from an outsider's perspective, basically everything a baby does is for a reason, and every action a baby makes can say something about their personality. if you want this baby's personality to be energetic and curious, have them crawl around and explore things, and laugh a lot, and babble. if you want this baby to be more sullen and shy, have them cry quietly instead of wailing, or have them squirm when being held by new people.

make the actions of the baby's guardians affect the mannerisms of the baby. babies act differently depending on how the people taking care of them act and react. for instance, if the baby's guardians are very busy people, then maybe have the baby cry very loudly whenever they want something, since they know that it's the only way to get the attention of their guardians. stuff like that can add depth to a character and to a general story.

don't's:

decide that the baby is cute and call it a day. sweet little babies are cool and all, but they get very boring to read about after a while. this can barely even be considered an archetype because of how bland it is when it's by itself.

keep this archetype around for too long. as babies turn into toddlers and then children, they don't act even remotely the same way. it's strange and off-putting to read about a seven year old acting like a two-year old, unless it's a very clear character choice that is a result of explicit actions and events.

make the baby know that it's cute. realistically, children don't understand the concept of cuteness until they're around toddler age. if then, you want to make the kid be like "i get what i want when i'm cute, so i'll act cute!", then sure, that's hilarious. but when they're two months old, they're not batting their eyelashes because that's their personality. they're batting their eyelashes because they got something in their eye. the main thing that makes a baby cute is that they don't know they're cute. they're just figuring out how to do ordinary things.

make everything a cute moment. while babies are awesome, raising them isn't always sunshine and rainbows. make the baby do something wildly chaotic, because babies do wildly chaotic things all the time. not only does this make things more realistic, but it makes things very interesting!

archetype two: the shy kid

as a former shy kid, i know good and well that these types of children exist, and they are very real and valid. however, there are certain ways i've seen them written that are just terrible because once again, this archetype cannot be considered a full personality on its own. let's get into the do's and don't's.

do's:

make their shyness a deliberate choice. kids aren't usually naturally shy. kids are usually more curious than cautious. is there a reason why the kid is shy? there doesn't have to be a reason why the kid is shy, but there could be a reason why the child is NOT outgoing/curious. try and give something like this some deliberate cause, instead of just making them shy so they can seem more precious and infantilized.

make their shyness manifest in diverse ways. not all shy kids cling to their guardian's leg and sit alone during recess. there are different ways to be shy. you can be aggressively shy, or fearfully shy, or shy due to general unwillingness to change.

make their shyness have realistic consequences. someone who's shy is probably not going to have many friends, if any. not all shy kids magically meet an extrovert who adopts them. someone who's shy probably has underdeveloped social skills, which can lead to them being less emotionally intelligent down the line. this makes the shy kid archetype a lot more three-dimensional than just a wet noodle of fear.

don't's:

infantilize shyness or treat it like it makes the kid some sweet, precious angel. not only is this very uncomfortable for shy people to read, but it's generally unrealistic. shyness doesn't affect how good or bad somebody is - it's a neutral trait.

use shyness as a tool to make characters seem younger. shyness does not indicate age. fear manifests in many different ways, and shyness is not the only way.

rely on cliches. not all shy people have the same journey, and the idea that a shy person becoming more outgoing is the "goal" is not only a bit offensive, but it's very cliche. shyness is not always an obstacle to be overcome.

archetype three: the happy-go-lucky kid

oftentimes, the reason why children characters are written into stories in the first place is to give a little bit of lightheartedness and innocence. to add a unique voice among all the cranky, stingy, burdened adults. but you have to be careful when writing this archetype. i personally really dislike this archetype as a whole, but i'm going to put personal feelings towards it aside because honestly, there's no valid reason to dislike it besides opinion.

do's:

give the kid a trademark. maybe this kid makes a lot of little jokes, or maybe they always see the best in a situation. give the kid one thing that makes them happy-go-lucky instead of just giving them everything because nobody is endlessly happy all the time in every way.

go deeper. while happiness is very often genuine, sometimes, it's a mask that hides something else. this can be an interesting way to sort of spice up your happy-go-lucky kid character. maybe the kid is hiding a big secret behind all those jokes.

don't's:

make the character always happy. while children tend to have simpler thoughts, they don't have simpler minds. this child needs to have thoughts, real, genuine thoughts that aren't just happy things.

see happy-go-lucky as a trait that is exclusive to children. comparing happiness to childhood and viewing them as the only places where the other can exist is just wrong, and it's kind of depressing. maybe give happy-go-lucky kid a happy-go-lucky adult to exchange jokes with!

---

those are the archetypes that i see a lot. but now, i'm going to suggest a few child character archetypes that i LOVE that i don't see enough in fics! feel free to use any of these that you like. alter them, combine them! these are, in my opinion, some of the most fun child character personalities!

the spoiled brat: "i want this, and that, and that, and- why aren't you giving it to me?? if you don't give me what i want, i'll tell on you!". spoiled brats are so fun to read and write about, especially when they have absolutely no reason to be spoiled given the current situation (think riches to rags). they've got everything, humor, angst, and best of all, lots of pockets for personality. think about why the child is spoiled. were they enabled by their guardians? did they grow up rich, with access to everything they wanted? think about whether you want the child to stay spoiled. does something change? do they learn how to improve their materialistic and selfish tendencies? there are so many opportunities to play with the personality of this child!

the know-it-all kid: while i do see a lot of know-it-all kids in media, oftentimes, they don't actually have personality besides bossiness and intelligence. i love know-it-all kids who have depth to them. kids who are constantly spouting information because of their sheer love to learn. kids who have one specific thing that they know everything about, so they never stop talking about it. kids who tell people what to do and act like they know best because they don't have a lot of control over anything at home, so they grasp at whatever control they can find elsewhere. i think this archetype could open up a lot of ideas for personality further down the line. it also has a lot of variety with humor and angst, and general depth.

the serious child: this is an archetype that i cannot get enough of. i love a child that doesn't think they're an adult, per se, and still enjoys kid things, but just has such a calm and regal air about them that isn't learned. it's just natural. think of the kid that doesn't really get excited about things conventionally, but you can tell they're happy by their faint smile. the kid that seems to live in slow motion, and doesn't mind this fact at all. the kid that sits alone at recess just because other kids scare the birds away, and they want to see how a bird acts when it doesn't think its being watched. i love kids who have poignant thoughts, because their thoughts are so creative and different from adult thoughts.

the adult-ified child: now this is another archetype i can't get enough of, but it's for a different reason. this child, on the other hand, does think that they're an adult for one reason or another. maybe their guardians forced them to grow up too quickly. maybe they just wanted to grow up quickly by themselves. but this child has thoughts that are too big for their little bodies. they explore things that aren't meant to be explored when their brains are still so small. they do everything too quickly, they stumble through life as if a clock is ticking somewhere. to me, they're just haunting to read about. it feels wrong and dangerous to just watch them do things that hurt them because they don't know any better, but they're on a page. nobody can stop them. it's just so tragic, i'm obsessed.

the prodigal child: this archetype isn't really as deep or detailed as the others, but i do appreciate it. this archetype is for a child who knew who they wanted to be from an early age. a child who wanders into a ballet class and finds out they're better than the ten year olds by the time they're five. this archetype often pairs really well with the know-it-all kid or the adult-ified child because usually, children don't experience what it's like to be the best at something until they're a lot older. this is just a really cool archetype when you aren't quite sure what to do with that main character's little sister.

the chaotic child: this archetype is so much fun to read and write, to be honest. this is a child that just does as they please, whether it's out of curiosity or for pure enjoyment. think of the crazy stories that your guardians have about you or your siblings being absolutely insane. scribbling in a book and then demanding that the library publish their version. trying to ride the dog like a horse. cutting up clothes in an attempt to be a fashion designer. this one is just plain fun!

---

now, there are so many more archetypes out there, but those are just my spotlights and recommendations! i hope after reading this, you feel more equipt to write child characters that have real, engaging, interesting personalities!

[bonnibellexox]

Writing: Things I Learnt The Hard Way #3

You don’t have to to be unique in every single way. You don’t need to break every cliche and every stereotype. You don’t need to keep dismissing ideas because they’re inspired by something and you don’t need to supress your own taste because its common. Honestly, basic books sell really well so maybe relax and do whatever you fucking want xx

[physalian]

Another 5 Character Types the World Needs More of (Part 3)

Part 1 Part 2

I did not expect these two posts to continue getting notes. So. Here’s some that didn’t make the cut and a few new ones.

1. Character who is immune to everyone else’s bullshit

This can either be funny or a breath of fresh air. I’m talking your drama cast of 15 all losing their minds over “he said/she said” and fixating on so many ridiculous and arbitrary problems… meanwhile Chuck over here is skinned with teflon and completely immune to tropes like manufactured miscommunication or drama, who’s juuust shy of being genre savvy to Get Shit Done like this is their second time around the block and they are not happy to be back.

The first one to pop into my head is Soundwave from TFP. He has no voice actor for 99% of the show and doesn’t have a face and is only the focus character for like, 2 episodes, but whenever he’s on screen you can just see “I’m surrounded by idiots” playing on repeat in his head. This con is brutally efficient, never messes up, and is never wrong and while everyone else is caught up on ladder-climbing and revenge quests, Soundwave is over here vibing and keeping the whole cause together.

2. The Femme Fatale, but a man

This is not sexy suave abusive asshole hero you’re supposed to root for, who’s a male power fantasy. This is literally the exact same trope, but a man. Meaning, he gets the same revealing uniform, the same “I’m letting you think you’re in charge but really I’m pulling all the strings”. Crucially, he’s straight, because most of them are gay-coded (because the man being in the submissive, ‘girly role’ is horrifying, he must be gay). This dude weaponizes toxic masculinity, making the villains extremely uncomfortable and throwing the villain’s own power fantasy back in their face.

This dude unabashedly flirts with his captors just to get in their heads, removes all concepts of personal space, and makes straight villains seriously question their sexuality. He has social engineering down to a science. I’m sure there’s one that exists, but every one I can think of is already queer-coded and that’s not good enough. So just. Black Widow. But a man.

3. Mary Sue/ Gary Stu who becomes the villain

Since these characters are the product of insecurity and lack of self-awareness… the example for this trope is Titan from Megamind. This character is absolutely the hero of their own story, practically perfect in every way. They think they’re the best at everything without trying, flawless in features and personality, and everybody loves them. And genuinely, they are just that good.

So good, that they live long enough to become the villain. Obviously people who write Mary Sues with full sincerity have no idea that anything’s wrong or problematic, but a genuine Mary Sue whose perfection is their greatest flaw without them even realizing it would be an interesting villain because I’m getting sick and tired of “sympathetic” villains who are really starting to feel like excuses for abusers to be abusive because they were smacked around as a kid.

4. Paragon who is wrong, but also right?

Apparently I’m in a Transformers mood today. There’s an episode where the Autobots’ medic/second in command does the whole “desperate scientist tests their invention on themselves with horrible results” trope and he gains the strength and speed he otherwise hasn’t had in like, eons, and starts kicking ass and taking names (and committing war crimes) to the point where his team is like “uh, buddy, slow down a bit, you’re starting to act like a Decepticon”.

The best part of that episode is where Ratchet (medic) completely unloads on Optimus about how he’s too soft, about how he’s had a million chances to end the war and murder Megatron (which is true) and yet Optimus lets the window pass again and again still hoping for Megatron’s redemption… while in the process, countless Autobots keep dying, collateral keeps happening, all because Optimus is stubborn and won’t just get it over with.

We know Ratchet is right, because throughout the next season, Optimus is a bit more… shall we say, ruthless, in trying to legitimately end the war, Megatron’s redemption be damned. But that episode ends with Ratchet nearly dying when trying to kill Megatron himself, and understanding that the Autobots are Autobots for a reason, because they’re “good,” and sinking to the enemy’s level won’t be a good foundation for a peaceful post-war survival of their species. Point being, sometimes being a Paragon is an incredibly selfish virtue.

5. Parents who know what’s up

So, while I am a firm supporter in the dead parent cliché because parents are super inconvenient sometimes, when it’s not that kind of story and the parents are a big part of the plot… while also being idiots (like Disney and Nickelodeon sitcoms circa 2008), just to make the kids sound smarter, it’s just been done to death. Everything you could think of, your parents probably did when they were your age so having competent parents in the plot as a well-meaning obstacle that continues to surprise the hero is pretty rare in stuff like YA. Usually it’s “I must lie to them to keep them safe” meanwhile Sally Jackson is over here murdering her husband with Medusa’s severed head.

They don’t have to join the hero team, but parents painted as bumbling idiots is a disservice to the mischievous teenagers they used to be. Or just the parent who really does know the kid better than they do, like when kids anxiously come out and the parent is like “honey I knew since you were 3 let’s go get ice cream”. I didn't watch Glee but that one dad who was like "son all you wanted was a pair of sensible shoes, I knew." So yeah. Smart parents. More please.

[azutara-lover]

if I write a fanfic based on romantic cliches from teen romance movies???

[justaz]

me: i hate cliches. theyre so predictable and overdone. i just want something new-

every fic ever: character A confidently/impulsively kisses character B who freezes under their touch causing character A to panic and begin to pull back just as character B remembers themself and kisses back with a passion

me, born to ascend, forced to act casual by societal norms:

[byoldervine]

Unoriginal Writing VS Field Trips

A lot of writers worry that their ideas have been done before or rely too much on existing scenarios. And you absolutely do need to be original if you want to write your own book that you intend to publish professionally. But a lot of writers can also take this the other way and start worrying that every single idea they have, no matter how fleshed out and unique it actually is, is just a version of a very broad and generic trope, and so it’s automatically bad and nobody will ever want to read it since it’s all been done before

Let me tell you about what has been dubbed the Peter Parker Field Trip in the fanfic scene

The Peter Parker Field Trip is an incredibly specific type of one-shot fanfiction about Peter Parker visiting Avengers Tower with his class on a school field trip while having to try and hide his status as the Avenger Spider-Man, usually along with hiding the fact that he’s basically been adopted by the Avengers and they all treat each other as family, if not legally having been adopted by Tony. And this is only the summary, it gets way more specific from here to the point where you can follow each story beat by beat and the vast majority of these fics will follow them:

1. Peter discovers that the adults arranged for him to go on the trip despite trying to get out it/telling them not to sign the permission forms. Peter tries to talk his way out of it on the way but fails. Sometimes the teacher will discourage him from lying about having a Stark Internship while they’re there

2. While they’re on the bus Flash teases Peter about how now everyone’s gonna know he doesn’t actually have a Stark Internship, meanwhile Peter’s freaking out about everyone realising he’s more than just an intern

3. The kids arrive at Avengers Tower and pile out of the bus to be greeted by some of not all of the Avengers, usually with Steve and/or Tony leading the introductions. Peter tries to keep his head down but the Avengers either spot him or were actively looking out for him, but at this point they usually don’t acknowledge him too much

4. An actual intern hands out access passes to the kids, everyone has level one clearance except for Peter who has Level Ten Alpha Clearance™️, which is even higher than most of the other Avengers and is reserved for Tony and those closest to him. Peter asks if he can just get a regular pass like the others but the intern says they don’t have any extras, usually while being starstruck at meeting Peter

5. The kids go through a security scanner, through which Jarvis announces their security clearance. Peter has his Level Ten Alpha Clearance™️ broadcast to the entire class, leaving everyone shocked. Flash thinks Peter, resident Poor Kid McOrphanface, bribed Tony Stark, known billionaire, for higher clearance

6. The tour goes ahead. They meet Bruce either in his lab or the medical bay. Bruce has a pleasant chat with Peter, who quickly helps him with something while he’s there. People are shocked that Peter works with Bruce on science stuff

7. The tour goes ahead. They meet Natasha in the training room. She offers to give a demonstration and has Peter come up to fight her. The class are shocked when he doesn’t get instantly thrown on his ass, even though overall it usually ends with him on his ass

8. The tour goes ahead. They meet Thor either on the landing pad as he arrives back home or he’s in the kitchen making an absolute mountain of pop tarts. He’s the one that comes closest to leaking Peter’s Spider-Man identity because he has no social awareness and just wants to wrap the Man of Spiders in a bear hug

9. The class break for lunch. There’s an ungodly amount of coffee machines in the cafeteria. Everyone is talking about Peter. Flash is talking shit. Clint then proceeds to drop out of the vents to ask Peter about either Mario Kart or babysitting his kids, potentially both. Clint then realises the tour was today, apologises and goes back into the vents. Peter can’t even muster up the energy to be embarrassed

10. As the tour continues, Flash is getting more vocal about his dislike for all this. There’s a 50/50 chance he’s going to get physically violent with Peter. If he doesn’t, he’ll ask Tony Stark why he’s let Peter lie about all this stuff only to be told harshly that Peter is Tony’s kid or something similar. The bullying will be discovered and Flash will be kicked out. If he does get violent with Peter, one of the Avengers will stop him, Tony will defend Peter while revealing that Peter is his kid or something similar in the process, then will kick Flash out

I just described to you an ungodly number of fics beat by beat. And people don’t just read one of them and call it a day; we consume each and every one of them despite knowing the exact plot and having read it a gazillion times

And I think that these fics are the most obvious example of the fact that people don’t care about the repeated use of tropes or clichés or plotlines; if they like it, they’ll like it. They’ll be willing to read those tropes a million times over, even if they know what’ll happen at every turn. And that proves that it’s not the use of tropes that matters, it’s the way you use the tropes. Even if it’s just a new way of wording it, people will enjoy it. It doesn’t have to be completely new or original, it just has to be out there

[but-a-humble-goon]

If that's not already on the evil overlord list it really ought to be. 'If my secret entrance behind a bookcase leaves scratches on the floor it is a bad secret entrance. Build that shit with at least a few millimeters of clearance off the ground.'

[lizardsfromspace]

Anyway shout out to nebulously sick children for all they do for melodramas. They truly provide such a service motivating parents to Cross Boundaries to pay for their treatment, bringing feuding couples together, and adding sudden stakes to third acts in stories with no drama. And so many fictional doctors would be out of work if they couldn't rattle off extremely non-specific and vague symptoms to the kid's worried parents. They should really get that cough looked at though

[kaiyves-backup]

It’s kind of funny that after 10-20 years of “many famous people throughout history were part of a secret group or organization and had adventures keeping/investigating ancient secrets” stories (Children of the Lamp, Percy Jackson, Assassin’s Creed, Gods of Manhattan, 39 Clues, the Tomorrowland movie, one of those awful Transformers films, etc.) the National Geographic Society, a non-secret group that many famous people from history really have belonged to for 130 years and had adventures working for, made a kids’ book series, Explorer Academy.

And as easy and natural as it would have been to follow the cliches and have some kind of secret revealed about famous explorers of the past… references to them are mostly just shout-outs and namesakes, and the actual mystery at the center of the globe-spanning treasure hunt is… that the main character’s mother invented a regeneration formula a decade ago and a megacorp murdered her for it.

It actually feels way fresher and more original that the mystery and McGuffin aren’t some ancient whatever that the Society has been secretly looking for for more than a century! Instead, it’s very personal to the main character and something that his friends and teachers don’t necessarily know any more about than he does.

[tikiki05]

you posted about pav being mad at gwen in btsv some time ago and i wanna use it as an opportunity to say that i want pav to be meaner/more sassy in general (including fan content) i think he deserves that

Good morning and thank you for the ask!

No literally, like I said in that post I know how cliche it is for the happy-go-lucky character to have such a turn like that, but it’s a cliche for a reason!! It can be good shit when done well!

And tbh in the current fanfic story I’m writing I’m very excited for Gwen and Pavitr to have that conversation. I imagine he’s just gonna be kinda stern and like “I wish you had told me (about canon events and stuff) and I wish you hadn’t tried to stop Miles from saving somebody I care about, but things are fine now, and I understand why you didn’t”

Writing is so hard, I have to do so many other things before I can get to that part 😭

Thanks again for the asssk new moot✨💕🧚‍♀️

[giveamadeuschohisownmovie]

Based on the following info, what is the plot of your generic action movie?

For your background, if your first name starts with…

A - you’re an ex-CIA spy

B - you’re an ex-SAS operative

C - you’re an ex-hitman/hitwoman

D - you’re an ex-Green Beret

E - you’re an ex-ROK Special Forces operative

F - you’re an ex-DEA agent

G - you’re an ex-MI6 spy

H - you’re an ex-FBI agent

I - you’re an ex-US Army Ranger

J - you’re an ex-GAFE commando

K - you’re an ex U.S. Coast Guard officer

L - you’re an ex-U.S. Air Force pilot

M - you’re an ex-Secret Service agent

N - you’re a mercenary who is unaffiliated with any nation

O - you’re an ex-NYPD officer / NYPD SWAT

P - you’re an ex-LAPD officer / LAPD SWAT

Q - you’re an ex-ATF agent

R - you’re an ex-U.S. Marine

S - you’re an ex-Delta Force operative

T - you’re an ex-Navy SEAL

U - you’re an ex-MARCOS operative/commando

V - you’re a biker gang member

W - you’re a death row inmate in for some type of heinous crime

X - you’re a survivalist living in the woods

Y - you’re an ex-Joint Task Force 2 operative

Z - you’re an ex-bomb disposal unit operative (EOD)

For your tragic backstory, if your last name starts with…

A - lost your wife/husband

B - lost your son

C - lost your daughter

D - lost your brother

E - lost your sister

F - lost your mother

G - lost your father

H - lost your best friend

I - lost your fiancé/fiancee

J - lost your favorite uncle

K - lost your favorite auntie

L - lost your entire team

M - lost your mentor

N - failed to save a civilian in your last mission

O - lost your protégée

P - lost your partner (non-romantic, work relationship only)

Q - just got out of prison after being falsely accused of a crime

R - dishonorably discharged for disobeying orders

S - betrayed and left for dead by your inner circle

T - lost your ENTIRE family

U - shot and went into a coma that lasted several years

V - quit your profession because of the rampant corruption you were witnessing

W - divorced from your lover

X - shot an innocent, although you had reliable information that they were a bad person

Y - spiritual reawakening that made you leave your life of violence and death

Z - developed PTSD after single-handedly saving your team from a dangerous situation

For your movie’s antagonists, if your birth month is…

January - the cartel

February - foreign terrorists

March - domestic terrorists

April - corrupt government forces trying to eliminate loose ends

May - a hostile country that hates your country

June - an elite team of thieves/bank robbers

July - a doomsday cult

August - a powerful corporation

September - the mafia

October - far-right militia / white supremacist gang

November - a private military company

December - a gang led by your nemesis from the past

[physalian]

Do not fear the "Dark and Stormy Night"!

This negative associations with a "tropey book" are frustratingly funny. A trope is just an element of story that appears frequently across multiple works in the entire world of fiction. A cliché is when that trope tends to be overdone or misused to the point of souring the feeling of reading a story by being too predictable or underdeveloped, etc.

Tropes and clichés are not the problem, and the idea of "To be successful I must be completely original at all times" would demand you never having ever sat for storytime, watched a movie, listened to the radio, or read any book ever, so that you didn't ~contaminate~ yourself with somebody's ideas.

Yeah, I like using bad weather to set a scene sometimes. Yeah, rain at a funeral is effective, sue me. I'm a sucker for 'only one bed'. I love found family.

Tropes are fun. They're entertaining. Fanfiction would not exist to be enjoyed without tropes. Original fiction would not exist without tropes. How many Cinderallas are there? Countless. It's not the trope, it's how its executed. Otherwise no one would ever make another Cinderella story ever, if we all inherently knew that they couldn't possibly bring something entertaining to the table.

The problem, I think, comes when you use tropes in place of something meaningful, which is how many modern books these days are unfortunately advertized. "Only one bed" is great, but if the characters involved are cardboard cutouts with no soul, the trope alone isn't going to carry the scene or keep me invested (though it will unfortunately entertain people who've otherwise never picked up a book and lose their goddamn minds over a certain shite romantacy author........).

The problem comes when you trade doing effective character development thinking "the trope is there, you all get it, we can skip the hard part". It's all sugar, no substance and it works for fanfic because we all know those characters from canon. You gotta do the work when nobody knows who your OCs are or what they stand for.

So, yeah, write the "dark and stormy night"! Don't be afraid of the tropes and archetypes! Write your Sassy McBadboy! Write your lone wolf, your geeky scientist character, your favorite romance beats.

...just make sure maybe that they are for *your* characters? Otherwise, I'll just go read the exact same tropes for characters I care about instead and not buy your book.