#Like I think even if you're not a writer there is value in learning how to put into words your thoughts and feelings on things

[i-will-physically-fight-you]

The other day I was having a "struggle day" with writing. Nothing I write is coming out fluid, it is sluggish and stilted. I spent a majority of my time writing outlines, trying to tether abstract images that flicker like a distorted slideshow across my brain to a more concrete tangible form.

But if I was to tell certain people in my life this, their first suggestion would be, "If you're struggling with writing, you should use ChatGPT to help you!"

Pushing past the ethics debacle aside for a moment, I don't know how to describe how much that doesn't help with my plight. As much as I dislike creating a rough draft, it is where the idea takes birth. It's through writing the initial scene where I discover a character's motivation or a facet of the world that never crosses my mind until I begin carving away at its rough edges.

The machine doesn't understand the way I'd take a plot point and expand upon it. The machine can't capture my exact phrasing. Technology hasn't developed enough to take a vague idea sloshing inside my skull and glimmer it into existence in front of me in exactly the way I wanted it to be.

I don't always enjoy the rough draft process, but it is a crucial part of the process. I don't want a "paint by numbers" experience. I want to start with a blank canvas and finish with a nauseating, illustrative kaleidoscope of my innermost thoughts and feelings. I want my hands to be stained by the ink and sweat of my own efforts.

I don't care if I get "lost in the past" for wanting that, I'd rather let my words be unfettered and untainted by the uniformity of what a machine thinks is the most "right" way of phrasing words based on trillions of words unrightfully seized by avarice.

[akajustmerry]

Do you have any personal advice on writing good romance? People have vast tastes on the matter but I wonder what your personal takes are

hello!

honestly, I've been studying writing romance for a while because i want to maybe write a rom com novel and while I grew up writing fanfiction I don't think it's the same as actually crafting romance from scratch. I don't have a tonne of experience with it yet, but these are some strong feelings I have on writing good romance that i've gathered in my journey so far;

when you find a romance you really love, take it apart piece by piece like a clockmaker would a clock until you understand why it compels you. if you find a romance you hate, do the same thing. you'll learn a lot about your tastes from this and you'll also learn what "good romance" is to you because it's different for everyone.

I firmly believe all good romance is a portrait of 2 characters (or however many characters are involved). Again, this is just my opinion, but I hate reading or watching romance where I don't know the characters that well because then I'm just sitting there asking why they're even interested in one another. Focus on characters more than tropes. i think there's way too much focus on tropes in recent years.

this is VERY just my opinion but I think when writing a romance it's good to think about how and why the characters would interact if they couldn't be physically intimate. What do they share (values, goals, opinions, conflicts) with each other besides having the hots for one another? And look, for some audiences, having the hots is enough, but for me i don't like when a relationship feels so flimsy that a week of social distancing would break it.

i used to feel really self-conscious about writing romantic scenarios i hadn't experienced, and apparently this is very common for romance writers. it's very important to remember that most authors in fiction genres are not writing about things they've personally experienced either. do your research, write with confidence and compassion and you should be fine <3

MY BIGGEST BIT OF ADVICE IF YOU FORGET EVERYTHING ELSE IS sincerity. just sincerity. so many current or modern romances are so irony-poisoned and self-referential. it takes the immersion and joy out of it. unless you're doing something intentionally meta like lovers being trapped in a movie or something, there's no need for them to reference tropes or hating tropes or whatever. have your characters be sincere and write sincerely.

anyway, i hope this helps! i know you sent this a while ago but i really wanted to think about the answer. hope that's okay 💖

[mykmi]

txt as your boyfriends (sfw)

pairing: txt x gn!reader genre: fluff, headcanons warnings: none ig? tell me if there's anything btw!! a/n: i hope it was worth the waiting :(( i have writer's block constantly so i try very hard to not make y'all wait for too long, sooo enjoy!!!

| choi yeonjun |

likes to show up together at every event or party

he just likes the idea that you both belong with each other, he's so proud he has someone like you so why not show you off a little bit? and if course he likes it vice versa ;))

loves to take care of you, especially when you're tired or sick

tries cooking for you but the kitchen is a total mess... he's not necessarily neat so cleaning is mostly on you.... he's just too clumsy for it

very affectionate and communicative about his feelings

he's very emotionally available and every time there's a problem he's ready to talk it out and solve it together, so you almost never argue

probably confessed first

no but like i really do believe he's someone who would make the first move, who would take you out on fancy restaurants dates and shopping dates, who would confess his feelings first and just would do most of the work lol

needs a lot of reassurance about his work and appearance

he's sometimes insecure and too harsh on himself, as he's a very hardworking perfectionist, so he needs support and some nice words from time to time just to feel better

| choi soobin |

professional yapper

yaps to you all the fucking time. when members are tired of his yapping, they just send him off to you. “take it, it's yours” they say, pushing him into the room to you and closing the door. and what else can you do besides just listen to all of that?

dates by him are usually calm

every time he plans a date, it's usually something that wouldn't take a lot of energy, so you'd spend more time talking

very genuine with you

he just lets his guard down whenever he's around you, and it means he's relaxed the most with you. he's childish, giggly, and honest

lets you take the lead

y'all i believe he'd rarely make the first move, and it keeps on going. he can take the lead, but he'd rather not, especially in something like going out or talking to the waiters

nerdy af

spends 90% of his free time playing video games, showing off his skills to you and teaching you how to play (it's a bonus if you're a gamer like him); he likes a gf who is interested in learning ab his hobbies ^^

| choi beomgyu |

encourages you to step out of your comfort zone

he is the kind of person who will help you and try something new with you, even if it's stressful or scary for both of y'all. he will encourage the hell out of you so there's nothing left to do than to try

words are his weapon

no matter if it's about the volume of his words or the value, but both ways, they're very significant ;)

very attentive

buys you the best gifts, prepares the best dates, and remembers everything about you; he thinks it's important to show how much you matter to him

needs some private time

he's an introvert and no matter how loud he is, he's sometimes tired of being in a company. gyu needs to be alone pretty often, but he will make this up to you when he recharges

the best listener

he loves listening to you and doesn't really care what specifically you're talking ab.. sometimes he spaces out, but most of the time he listens :)))

| kang taehyun |

acts of service is his love language

he doesn't really say 'i love you', but he shows his love through small and not-so-small actions. he plans dates for anniversaries, gifts you flowers every now and then, and is a gentleman ^^

shares his knowledge with you

it's not a secret that he's very smart, and he loves sharing his knowledge with you; he only does this, when you ask ab something tho

impresses you all the time

no matter if it's his magic tricks, his physical appeareance or his knowledge and if he does this on purpose or not, but he does constantly impress you

plans his future with you

he shows how serious relationships are to him and includes you in his future, your future house, your future pet, and possible future family :)))

is never boring

he loves adventures and excitement, and he bring those into your relationship too. you'll go on spontaneous trips, some exotic places or concerts just to have fun

| huening kai |

sharing is caring

shares his things with you, whether it be hoodies, plushies, or food, he shares and sometimes doesn't even notice this

quiet and embarrassed 90% of the time

he doesn't like talking ab himself, so he listens to you. he's not so self-confident, so he gets embarrassed a lot. he'd be thankful for lots of reassurance, or else he might doubt himself :((

loves physical affection

it's easy for him to show how much he loves someone by touching them. he loves hugging, holding hands, kissing you, caressing your tummy, and anything related to physical affection

babies you a lot

loves treating you with special care and treatment, doing everything for you (including chores), and taking care of you all the time

the most supportive

is interested in everything you do, attends any events that are important to you and always praises you for your good work ^^

✉ thank you for reading ✉

[ofbreathandflame-archive]

With the rise of booktok/booktwt, there's been this weird movement against literary criticism. It's a bizarre phenomenon, but this uptick in condemnation of criticism is so stifling. I understand that with the rise of these platforms, many people are being reintroduced into the habit of reading, which is why at the base level, I understand why many 'popular' books on booktok tend to be cozier.

The argument always falls into the 'this book means too much to me' or 'let people enjoy things,' which is rhetoric I understand -- at least fundamentally. But reading and writing have always been conduits for criticism, healthy natural criticism. We grow as writers and readers because of criticism. It's just so frustrating to see arguments like "how could you not like this character they've been the x trauma," or "why read this book if you're not going to come out liking it," and it's like...why not. That has always been the point of reading. Having a character go through copious amounts of trauma does not always translate to a character that's well-crafted. Good worldbuilding doesn't always translate to having a good story, or having beautiful prose doesn't always translate into a good plot.

There is just so much that goes into writing a story other than being able to formulate tropable (is that a word lol) characters. Good ideas don't always translate into good stories. And engaging critically with the text you read is how we figure that out, how we make sure authors are giving us a good craft. Writing is a form of entertainment too, and just like we'd do a poorly crafted show, we should always be questioning the things we read, even if we enjoy those things.

It's just werd to see people argue that we shouldn't read literature unless we know for certain we are going to like it. Or seeing people not be able to stand honest criticism of the world they've fallen in love with. I love ASOIAF -- but boy oh boy are there a lot of problems in the story: racial undertones, questionable writing decisions, weird ness overall. I also think engaging critically helps us understand how an author's biases can inform what they write. Like, HP Lovecraft wrote eerie stories, he was also a raging racist. But we can argue that his fear of PoC, his antisemitism, and all of his weird fears informed a lot of what he was writing. His writing is so eerie because a lot of that fear comes from very real, nasty places. It's not to say we have to censor his works, but he influences a lot of horror today and those fears, that racial undertone, it is still very prevalent in horror movies today. That fear of the 'unknown,'

Gone with the Wind is an incredibly racist book. It's also a well-written book. I think a lot of people also like confine criticism to just a syntax/prose/technical level -- when in reality criticism should also be applied on an ideological level. Books that are well-written, well-plotted, etc., are also -- and should also -- be up for criticism. A book can be very well-written and also propagate harmful ideologies. I often read books that I know that (on an ideological level), I might not agree with. We can learn a lot from the books we read, even the ones we hate.

I just feel like we're getting to the point where people are just telling people to 'shut up and read' and making spaces for conversation a uniform experience. I don't want to be in a space where everyone agrees with the same point. Either people won't accept criticism of their favorite book, or they think criticism shouldn't be applied to books they think are well written. Reading invokes natural criticism -- so does writing. That's literally what writing is; asking questions, interrogating the world around you. It's why we have literary devices, techniques, and elements. It's never just taking the words being printed at face value.

You can identify with a character's trauma and still understand that their badly written. You can read a story, hate everything about it, and still like a character. As I stated a while back, I'm reading Fourth Wing; the book is terrible, but I like the main character. The worldbuilding is also terrible, but the author writes her PoC characters with respect. It's not hard to acknowledge one thing about the text, and still find enough to enjoy the book. And authors grow when we're honest about what worked and what didn't work. Shadow and Bone was very formulaic and derivative at points, but Six of Crows is much more inventive and inclusive. Veronica Roth's Carve the Mark had some weird racial problems, but Chosen Ones was a much better book in terms of representation. Percy Jackson is the same way. These writers grow, not just by virtue of time, but because they were critiqued and listened to that critique. C.S. Lewis and Tolkien always publically criticized each other's work. Zora Neale Hurston and Langston Hughes had a legendary friendship and back and forth with one another's works which provides so much insight into the conversations black authors and creatives were having.

Writing has always been about asking questions; prodding here and there, critiquing. It has always been a conversation, a dialogue. I urge people to love what they read, and read what they love, but always ask questions, always understand different perspectives, and always keep your mind open. Please stop stifling and controlling the conversations about your favorite literature, and please understand that everyone will not come out with the same reading experience as you. It doesn't make their experience any less valid than yours.

[unlivresanstitre]

Soooo ✨

3 months ago, I finished the first draft of my first book (yay!!). I wanted to share some of my experience, knowing there are a lot of writers here. Maybe it could help some of you. I hope it will 🫶

It took me 3 years and 2 months to reach this point. From the world building and research to the writing part, it has been painful, frustrating, exhilarating, humbling, enriching and another tone of adjectives that i cannot list here (even if we love them, as writers)

I have some pieces of advice that stick to me after this agonizing experience. They are completely personal but if they resonate with someone here, I'm happy to share them :

Write : I know how it sounds. But there is no best advice for me. "You want to write a book ? Write it" yeah, absolutely. Write the 3 sentences that come to your mind in the middle of the day. Write the silly ideas that "nobody is going to like". Write 10 words a day. Write even if it doesn't make sense. One day, it will. So write. Sometimes it can be painful and I think it's okay. Most of the time, it's wonderful and liberating.

Your writing doesn't define your value : If you think it's not the best time to write then don't. I know, I said to write RIGHT ABOVE. But : listen to yourself, your feelings are valid and you're not defined by the number of words you wrote everyday. Sometimes, it's not the best time in life to write a book. A book is a massive project that requires time, investment, energy. You can always come back to your project when you have the right mindset

Listen to your heart : write and write what you like. Never forget that you write for yourself. Even if you want to publish. Write what is dear to your heart, be authentic. I'm convinced you'll find your audience

The first draft is bad : and it's FUCKING OKAY. The first draft is just here to exist. This is its ONLY job. If it's already good, great. If it's bad, that's normal. You're still learning about everything in your story. Especially in the case of a first novel !!!!

Talk about your story : I know how it can be difficult because it makes you vulnerable. I don't say to share every part of your story. Sometimes, talking about critical points offers you POV that you didn't have yourself. If you don't have anybody in your entourage, I think you can ask here

Take a step back : go outside (alone or with friends), play video games, read a book, take a nap, learn new skills. Leave your writing in peace. It needs to rest. And so do you

Stop following every advice: if you need advice, read them, then make them yours, but don't turn them into a holy rule. Your writing is yours. Writing is a creative hobby. It's too sad to kill this creativity with too many rules

Keep writing and take care 🩷

[thesulkycroissant]

So there's this saying that the only time you see the middle of the road is when you're going from ditch to ditch, and that most of the time is how I feel about the canon v fanon debate.

Genuinely, I feel like people get so stagnanted in this idea that something isn't canon - which, what is comic canon anyway? I strain to unravel the mystery of which comics get to "count" and which do not - and focus on it so much that they miss any aspect of nuance.

Tim's parents are a great example. Tim's parents exist in the way they do for a simple out-of-universe reason: the writers wanted to avoid the mistakes they made with Jason by both differentiating him from Dick (making him not an orphan) and giving him a "buy-in" with Dick (something to connect them -> the circus). (Their logic was that Dick was the key to getting readers to like Tim, and that neglecting his buy-in was their misstep with Jason.) At the same time, Tim having parents is a problem because what parent is not going to notice their kid being gone all the time playing midnight vigilante? Solution: absentee parents. But now the shift to in-universe happens. Tim's parents are gone all the time, but it's not malicious; they're just kind of clueless. They love Tim. Tim loves them. But they are not around. And this out-of-universe choice, once you enter into the universe, logically can - maybe even should, if you're taking the characters seriously - effect how a character reads.

Tim's parents are gone all the time. There's every probability that would cause trauma. Unintentional, but fun to explore! The comics do a very little. I think fandoms can often make the mistake of believing subtle abuse (like neglect) is not sufficient, so it gets elevated to something physical. But your parents loving you and also causing you trauma is a relatable experience, I think. Even your parents doing their best and still causing you trauma is.

Jason being the angry Robin is another rough one. Because yeah, I agree, Scott Lobdell did some wacky and unkind things to Jason's backstory. But Jason, even going back to his original (not original, but his original non-just-Dick-but-blond) backstory, is a traumatized orphan willing to take the risk and steal tires from the Batmobile as a means of survival (in Gotham! In Crime Alley!). Why can't Jason be angry? In the throes of adolescence, at a time when he feels safe with Bruce, doesn't it make sense for his trauma to find its way out in anger? Can't he both believe Robin is magic and be angry? Can't he be sweet and angry both?

Dickie and anger. Yeah, anger plays a role in certain story arcs of his. In NTT, and in the first 80s Nightwing run, the stories take pains to show that the anger is triggered by something and channeled into brutal focus. And that it does not serve him. Dick's relationship with Kory in NTT nearly falls apart because of his anger. He treats her very poorly. I see a lot of people saying they want Dick to be angry, but not allowing Dick to learn how to control his anger is not giving the character his dues either.

And Damian. Shoot. Reading the One Bad Day comic for Ra's al Ghul kinda ruined me a bit because of how much Ra's obviously loves and respects animals, and how can you not see the echo of that in Damian's love of animals? Damian's League trauma is such a thing worth exploring, and I think the value of exploring it only goes up when you add in the complicated factor of the fact that Talia and Ra's do love him, and he does see them when he looks in the mirror, and every day Damian has to decide which parts of his family - his whole family - are good to keep and which are not.

Anyway. There's probably more, but this post is already pretty long lol. Nuance is cool, that's all.

[chrysanthemumgames]

Hi! I just finished my first play through of FoA and I’m just… flabbergasted by the scope of choices and branching and OPTIONS that the PC has. I LOVED my first play through and I’m so excited to do more and see how many more possibilities there are in this amazing world you’ve let us be a part of!

So my question is: how do you keep track of everything? What choices branch where, how they overlap, stuff like that. I’m sure there’s more that I can’t even comprehend to think of to ask but I think you get the gist haha. And how long did planning and writing take you - I saw on hosted games FoA was released in September! And I don’t mean that as an unsubtle “when is the next book coming out” way, but from someone who also loves writing and interactive fiction. I’m just very impressed as both a reader and a writer, and the writer part of me is mind boggled and impressed and curious and… yeah! Everything felt so smooth and seamless and I’m just very impressed in how it came to be, and interested in your process! If you’re comfortable sharing :)

Well, FoA started, in a very messy and disorganized way, around the 10th of August, 2020. So... it was four years from "yeah, actually, I'm going to do that greek myth adaptation if" to its publication. That said, it was very much my first time getting a solo project from start to finish, and I was very inefficient about it in a lot of places, and it took a lot of time to build up my 'system,' so the same project would definitely take me much less time now.

(I'm hoping BotL, which will probably be slightly smaller, will take me around two/two and a half years, for example.)

That's one thing I would definitely prepare for—a learning curve. Unless you're already a published author, getting from an idea to release is going to be very surprising in a lot of ways, and even more work than you think. If you are a published author, there will likely still be a lot of things to get used to with the format.

One of those things is definitely tracking variables. I personally have a large spreadsheet in which I do this as I go, where I sort them by category (e.g. "here are all the variables related to the PC's relationship with Charon"), and then list all of them, the possible values they can have, and a really rough summary of what each one means.

I also outline before writing, which, even if it's just "here's the second main plot beat for Hermes's route, where X happens" helps keep me organized. There's definitely still a lot of things to work out about how X happens, and that's where a lot of the significant details emerge, and where they do I try to find ways to refer back to them later.

If you're telling the kind of story that has a structure where the player's actions actually cause things, that part's usually not too difficult to do. That doesn't mean the story has to be action and high drama, of course—FoA is certainly not that. But the way the PC approaches their relationships with people, the problems in front of them, does tend to have effects on the future, be it of those relationships or related to that little subplot.

But really, it was a lot of learning as I went. :)

[peargor]

Not quite sure if sent the message cause bad internet connection so i'll just paste the whole thing here again incase:

Hey peargor!(donno if you're still using tumblr bt whatever) Let me Congrats ya for your coming completion on Touhou project first (yay恭喜)

Here's the wandering dude from mainland china(typical netizen lol)and randomly clicked into ya website while visiting webrings & link collections.Lotta ideas jump through my head and letme say a few words below: BoTWR's really a good series from my perspective,like,Dispite having gaps when understanding the lore,i still can kinda understand the characters,from core to spirit(Cantonese's partly cognizable for mandarin viewers so it kinda fun when lookin' zoey swearing lol)I guess a variety of mainland audience would like it too.Like,it even inspired me to have a look back into the history and mess 'n hongkong on the "great firewall" and made me sorta think deeply about all these mess……but anyways,here's imaginary non medal stickers：

"Mandarin approved"and

"i concerned for la nation"(just kidding),

and i'll keep focusing on the series(actually the others' quite adorable too,sure it took me a while to realize that you actually deeply involve in internet meme culture,after the shock when i found you do made the pogchamp meme gosh)

Btw Just wondering,did the reading disorder cause you to use more english in written form stuff?

Looking forward for the upcoming new chapters yet a few more words:

1:LIT ' O TOMMIE DESERVES ＢＥＴＴＥＲ Yo

Poor tommy,hope he 'll get a chance to be a man

2:mmm how and what would zoey's dad be…… He's sorta a villain for now but i hope he's just a dude who failed to correct his own fault by force or "internal error"?

3:that color can be some exposure of one's emotion thing.yeah classic "into head" thingy but perhaps it means more deep than what it seems?Maybe Blue represents the sadness,niche thoughts,hopeless rational thinking,Yellow's cheerfully craziness,Red's cruelly dialectical greedin' justice,and BLACK's something unresist-able unless you learn some real floyd's philosophy thing?

You can get some new referencing idea from the old HK's TVB show like "大时代"(The Greed of a man),also some new from mainland that accidentally have more coverage report on hk which apple dailys' doesn't(?),Trust me,gotta be good for setting both character and lore

Whatever,Best wishes on not getting perished by cops!(pretty sure you won't be cause you probably haven't spoke something politically for at least 2 years on the public internet and you won't be caught for drawing "china virus girl?" and political comments too early haha)

PS:Try to get yourself a fan-base besides the old social meida the X,patron,like a mewe,discord group somethin' alike for a better place for talks 'n discussion i suppose?

Hi fellow netizen! I'm sure the mainland would like to read the comics but that really opens up a can of worms that I'm not prepared to deal with yet, so for now I'll refrain from translating the comics.

1: Tommy has the happiest life compared to the rest of the main cast I wouldn't worry too much about him lol

2: mm it's much more complicated, I also think my audience expects a political opinion from me. It ties to my own experiences with asian culture in general. I am very critical, but I think the public expectation to what I'm critical of is kinda skewed at the moment. There's so much nuance to this story I hope people have a healthy discussion over the conclusion of Zoey's arc in the future.

3: Yellow, Blue and Red are the key colours. What they represent is up to your own interpretation. To me yellow is the self/your values, blue is career/ambition, and red is religion/community/family. There's more colours down the road but these are the most important ones. If there's going to be discussions over the story please feel free to create those spaces! I haven't done so because I am the main writer and I would like these things to happen naturally in the future. It feels wrong for me to create a space as someone with complete authority over the story.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on IWBTWR! Sorry it took so long to respond, I've been trying to find the words to convery my thoughts properly.

[miraculouslbcnreactions]

Having the statue scene be what caused Adrien to fall in love with Marinette feel like one of many spite moves from Astruc. Like once again, he saw how much people hated that scene but instead of addressing the criticisms he instead just point blank tries to force us to like the scene.

I'd go with arrogance over spite. I don't know much about the man, but the quotes I've seen and my limited knowledge of the industry are why my standard take is that he and the writing staff are genuinely trying to tell a good story. While we think they're failing at it, they don't. They think it's good. You're not going to sway me to their point of view, but I do understand how they could get into that mindset.

It's incredibly rare to get professional writers who want to punish the audience. It's incredibly common to get writers who are so far up their own ass that they think they shit gold and anyone who disagrees is just a hater who can't understand their vision. While that viewpoint isn't ideal, it's not a terrible trait for a creative. You're unlikely to succeed in a creative field if you can't get into some version of that mindset.

Speaking as a writer, if you want to succeed in a creative field, then you do genuinely need to be your own biggest fan and learn to ignore criticism. Not because you're above criticism, but because:

Issue 1: A lot of people struggle with the difference between personal taste and actual flaws, leading to some really shitty "criticism". That doesn't mean that it's bad to talk about a thing in terms of personal taste, it just means that your criticisms maybe be highly subjective opinions and not objective flaws that the creator needs to know about. It's why things like book reviews are for the audience and not the author. I know people who have found great reads based on negative reviews because those reviews talked about the book in question in an objective enough way for those people to realize it had things that they loved. That means that those were excellent reviews, they let people know if they'd like the book or not, which is what a review is meant to do! It also means that the reviews were pretty worthless to the authors because there was nothing that needed changing. It was all a matter of personal taste.

Issue 2: Taking point one a step further: more objective, "good" criticism isn't necessarily valuable to a creator. Sometimes creators are willing to include "flaws" because their creation doesn't fit their vision without those "flaws". Creators can get away with that because different audiences will care about different things and you're never going to be able to appeal to everyone. This is not the greatest example, but I think it gets my point across, so I'll use it here anyway. As someone who prefers reasonably healthy couples, if I were to read a story with an awful romance, then I'd probably hate it and have very clear, logical reasons why. But if the author is totally aware that the couple is awful and needed them to be such for the story they wanted to tell? Then my critique has no value to them. It's why good critique is so hard to get and give. Good critique is not about shaping a story into what you'd call good, it's about shaping the story the writer wants to tell into its best form. It's super hard, but also fun and a good learning experience.

Issue 3: A lot of criticism is highly situational and public feedback will only ever come after a work is done and available to the public. That makes it questionable how much value you'd get from reading feedback at that point. For an ongoing work where only a part is done, you might get something useful, but for a finished one? It's questionable if there's any point in reading negative comments. For example, I've received unsolicited critical feedback on fics that are several years old. I have no idea what the goal of those comments is. Even if I agree with them, I'm not going to rewrite the fic for them. I even asked one of them what their goal was and they couldn't tell me. They just wanted me to know and the button said "comments" not "positive comments."

Issue 4: You're never going to be perfect, so even a great work will have flaws, but it's unhealthy to dwell on them. Listening to a thousand people point out what you got wrong is not going to help anyone improve. That's why good creatives are open to feedback, but they tend to have a select group that they go to for feedback during the creative process. They then ignore most other feedback. In most cases, that is the healthy way to approach the creative process. It's why I don't agree with those who complain about someone blocking critics on twitter. Block and move on isn't just advice for the plebs. Successful creatives are allowed to prioritize their mental health, too.

Of course, there is a double edged sword in action here. Because creatives need to be their own fans and develop that ability to ignore criticism, they are always at risk of forming echo chambers that lead them to create lesser works because everyone in their core team thinks the same way they do. They may not even have a core team! It takes a lot of humility and luck to find people who give you good feedback.

The echo chamber issue is especially true when creatives are successful as it's hard to want to change when you're making money off of whatever crap you put out. Once you reach a certain level of success, there will be a whole lot less push back on your terrible ideas. If it's going to make money either way, then why worry if it's total crap? (This is a major problem in the publishing industry, btw. People with large social media followings can get a book deal with relative ease and publish almost anything they want because the publisher knows it will sell and it's not their name that's going to be looked down on.)

Generally speaking, this is what I think happened with Miraculous. The show is incredibly successful so there's no reason to listen to criticism or expand the creative team. Until the show stops making money, it doesn't matter how bad it is, so there's no reason for the writers to question if they've become blind to their own flaws. And by the time the show goes too far and stops making money? It will probably be too late to fix the problems so the show will just die. That's just how this trend works.

In summary, I would not be shocked if the writers genuinely think they're writing wonderful stories and that the critics just can't see it because we're the spiteful ones, not them. People can develop really weird standards for what is good, especially when they're immersed in the industry. For example, it's not like Disney wanted to ruin the Star Wars brand or have their 100th anniversary film - Wish - be universally panned. Studios want to make money. Writers want to tell stories people like. Spite it's rarely the answer when they fail to do those things.

The one caveat I will give to the above is if you're referring to the kind of spiteful arrogance where someone creates a thing, people criticize said thing, and so the person makes more of said thing in retaliation because that's 100% spite. But it's not the kind of spite where they're making a thing bad on purpose. It's them saying, "no, this was good and I'm gonna make more of it because you're wrong and I'm right." People do that shit all the time and, once again, it's not an inherently bad thing. Like all emotions, spite is a neutral force and a powerful motivator. It can lead to great things and terrible things. I can think of spite projects that were wildly successful and spite projects that totally flopped. (Relevant Tumblr post)

If that's the argument you're making when you say "spite", then I could totally see the statue scene choice happening because the writers heard people dunking on it and they went, "No, you're wrong, that scene was awesome! In fact, to show you how awesome, we're going to have that be when Adrien's crush started!" Spite? Yes. Ruining the show on purpose to get back at haters? No.

[utilitycaster]

What do you mean (from your latest post) that you think that many actual play failures are failures of ambition?

Usually, when an actual play show doesn't click for me, it's because the GM or players aimed very high or tried to push the boundaries (of the medium or system) and it didn't quite land right. It's a pretty new medium, and while I've been very openly disparaging of how much many writers in the AP space focus overmuch on novelty over consistent quality, I do think these failures are important! I think it's good to play with what the medium can be! I just think that sometimes, it does indeed fail.

Examples off the top of my head:

Too much plot for allotted length: EXU Prime was fun to watch but I think this plot really needed to be a 16-20 episode season, not an 8 episode one, which meant that we never really learned Myr'atta's motivation or the deal with Ted until years later in the real world despite that being the core plot. Similar issues have come up with various D20 seasons; I think running a one- or two- session story isn't too hard to do, or running a longform campaign isn't too hard to do, but 8 or 10 or 20 episodes can be really difficult to plan for properly, and a lot of people overfill.

Trying to bend the system too far: I wrote a long-ass post I cannot find about this for a few D20 seasons as well (notably Neverafter) and I've fallen off of WBN for a few reasons but in part because it really increasingly feels like D&D is the wrong system - the classes of D&D support the worldbuilding, but the pace and style and magic system of D&D increasingly feel like they and the narrative are in conflict.

Trying to fit in An Important Message: the infamous Rusty Quill Gaming Everything Changes [now make a monumental decision we have not once explored in 7 real world years of telling this story, in the last half of the last episode] is a big one here. This is not unique to AP (this is why Battlestar Galactica's ending is widely panned) but I think the nature of actual play makes it more likely because to some extent you as the GM must relinquish a good degree of control.

Not realizing what you need to plan for: ultimately, in my opinion, the failure of Campaign 3. I don't think the problem is that Matt wanted to bring everything together across multiple campaigns; I don't think this is a cheap setup with a pre-determined outcome (though I could be proven wrong); I think the problem is that there needed to be a much more stringent character creation process and on-rails early plot to actually get from point A to point B in a way that felt natural within the story.

Trying to break production value records while neglecting story: With the caveat that I hated nearly every second of the hour of Kollok I watched, I have yet to see a review that talks about anything it does other than how good the production values are (*whisper* they're not even that good). Burrow's End had some really good aesthetic/filming choices and some really not good ones on top of having a story I found weak; the season of Candela Obscura I thought had the strongest story had no split-screen film edits. This could just be that my AP introduction was TAZ Balance followed by simultaneous C1 and early C2, but like...I've heard incredible actual play with no music and no fancy lighting and no sound effects and no official character art, and I've watched some heavily produced stuff that had the plot of a fucking Ed Wood movie and was utterly joyless to boot. Story first; accessibility production values (clean and clear sound, transcripts, making all speakers visible if you're a filmed production) second; anything else should ONLY come after that.

[elbiotipo]

So when it comes to distance in a fictional setting, is metric king? I wrote some fantasy post-apoc recently where the protagonist measured it in Oranges and Aevums (the latter being their own name), but more generally speaking is it worth it to hash out bespoke measurement systems for fictional cultures, do you think?

Oranges as a measurement unit sounds so funny, and a measurement based in... yourself makes surprising sense, given all the measurements based on body parts. Why not YOURSELF?

Well, I would think in a real post-apoc world metric would be king indeed, scientific and technologic instruments are in metric even in the US and you could always get a ruler from a school or scales from a grocery store, so eventually you could get back on track to reforming the metric system. It would be interesting, though, if every society during isolation had slightly different measurements for the same units because of faulty equipment (say, ohms or amperes or even grays) and they had to make a congress to clear things up.

Returning to your main question. My perspective here is the same as conlangs. It's very, very fun to have them, but it's not fun to force your audience to read them. When I write something set in a fantasy or science fiction setting, in my head I'm assuming the characters are speaking different languages and I DO explain them and even give examples of them, but the story itself is written, for both the reader's and the writer convenience, in a language we can understand (Spanish in my case, and then it can be translated). Same with units of measurement. I seldom use direct units of measurement like writing "the ship was 110.3 meters long" (in science fiction, it's often a trap as they force you to stay true to them), when more descriptive language can be used...

In any case, you could do, for the kind of immersion I love, say something like "she was 14 oranges* tall, rather small for her age" and do an asterisk like "*A.N. : 1.39 meters tall". This is very fun when used sparingly, because it gives the worldbuilding obessed reader something to play with, you can do the conversion yourself and learn more about the world, without interrupting the story. Some understandably dislike this approach, but I think that if you know what you're doing, you can hide some pretty deep lore behind it. In one of my favorite retro games, The Ur-Quan Masters, there is an alien race called the Slylandro who live in a gas giant. When they tell you their ancient history, they use their own system of measurment based on the rotation of their planet with its own names like Dranhasa and Dranh. The game actually provides you with the rotation time on "Earth" time, so some dedicated fans did the conversion, and found out the dates fit with major events in the game's past. I thought that was an awesome bit.

But I digress again. Does this mean you should not talk about measurements in your story? No, it can do for very fun plots and digressions, as well as make things more realistic and beliveable. A fantasy world sharing all the same measurement units can be as unplausible as everybody speaking "Common". Let's remember that the current metric system is a modern invention which took a long time to be adopted (and some, well one, country, still resists it). Just take a look at the many, many historical systems of measurement:

This was especially prominent in places like the Holy Roman Empire, where every statelet, county, principality, free city, prince-bishopric, duchy, archduchy, etc. may and most often did have different measurements from each other. Just take a look at how measurements varied from each German region, it's crazy. The systems of weight where particularily important. Before the introduction of standarized coinage, coins also varied not only between kingdoms, but between regions, and even towns, and coins made at different times with different alloys had different values. Rather than money in our modern sense, you could think of them as some kind of 'asset' that could vary in value depending on the circumstances. What's more, those values had to be checked by people who knew what they were working with. Silver and gold content could be weighed, ah, but you need good scales and weights, and someone who knows how to work them! And these people could easily rip you off, or you could lose value accidentally if those scales weren't done just right or fiddled with on purpose. In fact, this is where the word 'Mark' comes from.

It wasn't as easy to take say a 100 something bill and get the change in 1 something coins. There is a very interesting subplot in the anime Spice and Wolf where Lawrence, the trader character, has been paid in gold coins, and he has to trade them into lesser denominations. However, he has to be REAL careful so that nobody scams him given all I told you above. Even getting 'gold' coins was a gamble before modern coinage and banking (another long topic). How much of that is REALLY gold and not an alloy with silver or other metal? Who can you trust to tell you how much your coins are worth? Are they compatible between borders or even time, is this version worth as much as the others? Things that characters in fantasy who have just plundered a dragon's hoard almost never think about. Except in Spice and Wolf.

(here is a gif of Holo to break the wall of text)

This all of course, as again you can see in Spice and Wolf, can make trade very tedious and even unstable. This was one of the reasons why the metric system was so quickly adopted in Europe and then elsewhere; consistent units just allow for easier trade. Lots of other things involving measurement can have a major impact on your story. For one, you NEED consistent and accurate measurement to create even the most basic industrial and scientific equipment. You can wing it for a time like alchemists (and even they knew their measurements) but eventually, you need to measure things to understand them. To have working steam engines, steel production, chemical industries and more, you need to know your temperature is. If you want to do electricity, you need measurements for current, resistance and charge. If you're doing engineering, you need to have lenght, weight and volume very, very clear, or people will die. They don't necessarily need to be universal like the metric system (though it has lots of advantages, being coherent between units and decimal so it doesn't jump between different denominations) but they need to be standarized and measurable.

Most of the above, unless you're writing some kind of encyclopedia about a fictional scientific revolution (BASED BASED BASED) will not affect your characters directly. But IT IS worth keeping in mind for what kind of world your characters are living in. The standarization of measurement units always means SOMETHING in the state of your society, the strenght of the state and centralized authority, the state of scientific understanding (one could say that trying to measure the world was perhaps THE scientific revolution, "Man as a measure of all things"), the capability for industry and the standarization of coinage and trade.

Even if you don't have your characters interact directly with those things, they will interact with them. It's also, like I've said in the examples, fun to imagine characters having to learn or deal with different units of measurement, just as it is fun to imagine them learning new languages or cultural quirks. It's something I've done in the past, in my space opera setting, the worlds descended from the United States STILL use the imperial system, much to the frustration of the rest of the metric human sphere. There is also an alien character who has a hard time to learn human measurements, and that makes her melancholic about her past, as they can't intuitively see the now-extinct measurements she does. Again, man as a measure of all things... this does include other thinking beings...

There's more I could talk about here regarding time, but I did a post about that, though I'm not satisfied with it and will probably redo it in some time at the future. In any case, there's lot to talk about why every calendar in science fiction has 365 days and 24 hours.

As always, if you found this interesting and helpful, I would be very thankful if you gave a tip to my ko-fi! And feel free to ask about anything you'd like!

[nalyra-dreaming]

Hi!! I have a question about lestats love for the arts. Since we know he greatly values music and even values humans who perform music, does he feel the same about other art forms? Does he value humans who participate in any art forms such as acting, dancing, etc?

I think all the vampires do love humans who excel or love the things they do, especially maybe the arts.

Humans... are beautiful to them - and food. A difficult dichotomy. :)

I'm... not sure if there are any specific instances in the books of Lestat "sparing" a human because of their art... which is what I think you're going for here?!

And in the show we have not seen Lestat('s part of the tale) yet.

Lestat loves the arts, and skill and craftmanship. There's whole passages about the colorings/art in Wynken de Wilde's books in "Memnoch the Devil". When he burns down Louis' hut in "The tale of the Body Thief" he goes and brings the paintings to safety first. He comes to love the architect who brings his vision of the village close to the chateau to life in the later books, and brings him over.

He loves the theater, and the performers, but that is something he also did in his human life.

He does not adopt a ballet dancer like Armand and Daniel do in the books :)

But, for example, when he leaves Paris, he tries to keep all the actors save (the next quotes are all from "The Vampire Lestat"):

Before Eleni and the others I told him he would get nothing from me unless I had the promise that no actor or actress of Paris would ever be slain or seduced by the new coven, that Renaud and his troupe would never be brought into the Theater of the Vampires now or in the years to come, that Roget, who would hold the purse strings of the theater, must never come to the slightest harm. 

Because...

"Actors and actresses make magic, " I said. "They make things happen on the stage; they invent; they create. "

and

"Actors and musicians-they're saints to me. "

Saints to him :)

So yes, he values them. Very much so, and often from safe distance... and (unfortunately maybe) from outside time, because he has the time.

There is also a little bit in "The Tale of the Body Thief" I find intriguing here, because it implies... so much:

"I wrote it off to Goethe's Romantic optimism, and the fact that he had been so old by the time he wrote the end. The work of the very old is always extremely powerful and intriguing, and infinitely worth pondering, and all the more perhaps because creative stamina deserts so many artists before they are truly old."

This means Lestat does read and ponder all kind of works. Ponders the point of life the writer wrote it at, too. Considers what it must have meant to them. And what that means for the art/written piece.

He reads a lot, btw. And a lot of foreign books, too, learning the languages as he goes. There's a little comment in the later books where he states that he knows something is not Sanskrit because he knows Sanskrit, for example. And the new laws of the vampires are written in Latin.

But that just as a note.

Yes, Lestat values humans in other art forms / with other skills. The proof to that is strewn all through the chronicles - and I very much look forward to see how they put it into the show (arguably they hinted at that already in 1x01, obviously :))

[jackwhiteprophetic]

Idk if I've said this before but Buck's season 4 arc is so fucking interesting and the way they CHOSE to have it essentially "completed" in the finale by Eddie is so intentional and beautiful AAAAAAA

So basically we open with Buck in therapy, this leads to his parents coming and Buck begins and such, where Eddie is consistently there for Buck to go to, and we have the iconic "I know you did", where we as the audience see how much Eddie understands this side of Buck, and how Eddie gives Buck the space to talk and to be angry and process without pushing him to be anything else (which contrasts to Maddie this season, though I love Maddie and I don't think the effects of her childhood on her have been given enough time in the show).

And he doesn't properly finish this self sacrificing thing here, when his mum says "you're doing what you were born to do" this is exemplified, and Buck is affirmed in his purpose being the saviour.

And then we have a kind of cyclical arc with the shooting, where Buck has to confront again how he feels like he's a shitty replacement for something, and that he's reckless and he immediately reverts to his learned perspective of "I shouldn't be here and someone else should and I now I have to make sure that it's only me that gets hurt" that he picked up in his childhood, even when not knowing about Daniel. But this time Eddie stops him, and he tells him that he's not expendable, and that he has a family who need him, and that he has a permanent place in their life.

Which is literally all Buck has ever wanted.

ALSO the conversation with Bobby in 4x14 is so interesting because it feels like there's something missing, when Bobby only reprimands Buck for being reckless and is so nearly at the point, which is that Buck does not value his life and he needs fucking help, but he MISSES it, and the audience sees that, and the scene feels incomplete, and this is simply because they wanted to save that line for Eddie. ANYONE in that episode could have pointed it out, have been given that line, because it was obvious to the audience what Buck was doing. And the writers very deliberately let our frustration at the other characters for missing it build, so that the will conversation was massively highlighted and very narratively satisfying and conclusive.

It has been SO intentional and I am obsessed with it so much

[raven-at-the-writing-desk]

I'm not sure if I asked this question before 🤔 (I've been thinking about asking for a while but I genuinely don't remember if I already did), but do you have any favorite authors/authors whose work you think influenced your writing style?

One thing I love about your writing is just... how the words flow. I don't know the proper term for it but the way you construct scenes and just... lead the reader through them is so nice and it has a certain charm to it. So I ask this to try and understand more were you might've gotten some of your writing style from, since I want to push myself to read and write more this year and I'm going around asking this to people whose writing I admire (will I actually end up doing it?? Who knows. New years resolutions... 😭)

(But don't feel pressured to answer right away or answer at all! I'm aware you have a lot of things on your plate right now. Just answer if you're in the mood for it)

I don't think I've actually been asked this before, so no worries ^^;;

First of all, thank you for the writing feedback! Really appreciate it. I'm so happy that it sounds like I've been able to replicate that casual "fairy tale" ease and charm in your eyes :> When I write my analytical posts, I try to structure them "like a garden stroll" where I take the reader by the hand and systematically guide them through a garden and point out the various flowers and plants along the way. When it comes to creative writing pieces, I try to convey the feeling of sitting someone down to an afternoon tea. There's different courses on the menu, but each is designed in such a way that one leads into the next and the flavors and textures don't clash with one another. That way, the reader has a smooth, connected experience throughout the "meal" and the words flow almost like a freshly brewed tea. Very quaint, very cottagecore-y.

Mmm... When it comes to inspirations, I'm not loyal to specific authors. I honestly don't even remember the names of most authors I read. Part of it is I want to avoid developing my own overly parasocial relationships, and the other part of it is that I want to judge an author's individual works rather than let expectations of their usual quality cloud my judgment for newer things they put out. I also feel like there's more room for growth by diversifying what I read rather than sticking to the same people (even if those same people are great at their craft).

I think there's value in not just "good" books or books you like, but also "bad" books or books you didn't like too! Maybe the characters or plot aren't great, but you liked how they described scenery. You can look at various works and pick and choose what aspects of each one you like and then smash them together to form your own style. Sometimes the most interesting things I've read aren't even from traditionally published authors, but from fanfic writers or people just talking off the cuff. Different genres have different strengths and weaknesses too! As for myself, I developed my own style by absorbing a lot of visual novels, romantasy books, food essays, short stories, fanfiction, and fairy tale content. What I'd recommend is always keep your eyes and ears open! Be willing to explore new things. Break things down into smaller components and ask yourself, "What can I learn from this?", "What do I like about this and why?", etc.

I hope you find this helpful on your own reading and writing journey~!! Good luck.

[rippleclan]

I absolutely do want to hear about your guidelines when it comes to writing about suicide. Especially as someone who has been suicidal before in my life, I really want to address the subject in my own writing, but I'm afraid of stepping over some line given that I know my own experiences aren't the classic kind. I am kinda scared of fucking something up and offending others who have been in similar situations haha 😅

Opening with a personal note; I think it is so important to write about suicide in fiction, and not as a shock value thing. When I was in middle school, I loved the angst of it (like how other people love reading about their favs getting tortured in fanfic), but I knew it was a serious and often poorly portrayed topic. I started doing research into proper suicide depiction in the media and grew to understand how it can play an effective role in a story while not demeaning it or, God forbid, endangering others. I’ll try to add links to stuff when I can.

I’m not going to add trigger tags to this post, just be careful with reading it if this stuff is overwhelming.

First things first, let’s dive into the intention and purpose of the suicide, just as we would any other plot point. This is not the sort of topic you want to add in for shock value. It would be insulting to the trauma of it all and could actually hurt people. The big thing to consider with writing about suicide is suicide contagion. This is the phenomenon where, after learning about a recent suicide, others are driven to kill themselves as well. It's also called the Werther effect due to the number of copycat suicides following the publication of a popular 1774 novel called The Sorrows of Young Werther. Treating suicide as something to be highly publicized and dramatized incentivizes people to commit suicide as well. It's our responsibility as writers, and really as people, to not contribute to this.

It wouldn't be right to perpetually ignore suicide in literature and media, though. It's real and life-changing and personally, I just love stories that include it. So when should we include it in our stories?

You'll need to be analytical as you design this plot point so you can be careful in your approach. Forgive me for blunt and technical language here, but this is for the sake of education. Suicide can prove an interesting plot development for characters with deep-seated mental health issues or crises. You need to consider the character's mindset and situation, and how this would alter the rest of the story. When Trumpetspore died in-game, after these moons of chaos, I considered her character. Her trait was "nervous", she grieved deeply, she likely inherited depressive tendencies from her grandmother and the trauma of her youth. Changing her death from rogue attack to suicide made sense thematically, especially compared to upcoming plot points.

For another example, look at Anya from Mouthwashing (amazing game, would not recommend to those with lots of triggers tho). Her suicide was an excellent choice from a narrative perspective. She's trapped on the ship, she's pregnant, trapped with her rapist, she's trying to care for a dying man and it is traumatizing. Her choice to die by suicide supports her story and the themes of the game. All in all, if a character is going to make that choice, you as a writer should at understand it, even if your characters/audience are left in the dark.

Now onto the actual suicide. I learned about the intriciacies of writing about the event via recommendations on reporting on suicide. This advice is geared toward the discussion of real life suicide, so not all of the information here applies to fiction. However, I've taken this advice and shaped it for my own use in suicide fiction.

If you can, try to avoid bringing up the suicide method. This can vary depending on the circumstances of the story and what you're trying to accomplish, but if there's no need to know the method, it's better not to say anything. This helped me with Trumpetspore, because TBH I was very stumped on how I wanted her suicide to occur. In the end, though, not telling anyone heightened the intensity and serves to protect readers.

If you let the audience know how the victim died, don't show the moment of death. Sometimes knowing how someone died is important for the story! In The Politician, it is narratively important that River uses a gun so that we can see the emotional toll it has on Payton, but you never show someone actually shooting themselves or swallowing pills or landing on the ground from a dozen stories up. In writing, you can do this with a bland, non-descriptive statement, like "And then he shot himself." In a visual medium, if you actually show the moment of death, you are risking an increase in actual suicide rates. Do not do that.

Add links to suicide prevention resources at the end of your work. I've seen multiple TV shows do this whenever suicide is brought up, and its becoming good form.

Answer important questions, but don’t explore the preparation. Let’s say you want your character to try hanging. In a modern setting, there’s no need to explore where they got the rope or the knots they tied, those sort of answers are usually simple. But let’s say it’s a child; how would a child get rope? Or let’s say in Warriors, a character eats deathberries. Did they come from the forest or the medicine den? The answer changes the story. Still, don’t dive into the character’s quest to obtain the right items and prepare for their attempt.

Ask yourself, does it need to be a completed suicide, or can it be an attempt? Attempts naturally offer a more hopeful story with the promise of recovery. Does the character need to die for the sake of the plot? Or does making it just an attempt fulfill the same goals?

From there, it’s mostly about treating the incident with respect. Explore the reactions, explore the recovery after the fact, don’t be afraid to let a character or two screw up in handling the situation, and don’t be afraid that your own experiences aren’t universal. They’ll make your story better because they’re your own.

[heyftinally]

Okay, I almost ranted about this on a reblog, but it can (and probably should) be it's own post.

Fiction effects reality and fiction does not effect reality are BOTH true.

Yes, I'm going to elaborate in the most unedited, covid-fueled rant I can, as tumblr intended. Hold on to your butts, grab a soda, and strap in.

First and foremost, I need all of the piss on the poor readers to stop their feral response typing - READ what I'm ACTUALLY SAYING before you start bitching about what you're pretending I said. Got it? Good.

This is going to involve nuance. Yes, I know, this website is allergic to nuance. Pop a Benadryl, you'll be okay.

Now, for real:

Fiction DOES effect reality BUT

Only in subtle ways. Absolutely nobody is going from your average normal Sarah to a cold blooded mass murderer because they played silent hill or something. People who become murderers always have some other motive, usually long term and/or severe (ie years of abuse, victim of trafficking, untreated psychological disorder usually paired with abuse, etc).

When I say fiction influences reality, I mean kids who grew up hearing Disney's Pocahontas say "you think the only people who are people are the people who look and think like you, but if you walk the footsteps of a stranger, you'll learn things you never knew you never knew" are more likely to be accepting of diversity than the kids who exclusively grew up on South Park and Family Guy.

I mean reading stories of real people's struggles with disabilities not being accommodated will make you more likely to notice inaccessibility in your daily life, and make you more likely to be accommodating to those who need it.

I mean reading about how a character was skeptical of or easily misled about something via the media can make you more critical of what you read.

Fiction effects reality because if you only consume one kind of media, we assume that's the only way things are. If we consume a vast array of media, we learn to explore different possibilities.

Fiction does NOT effect reality IN THE WAY THAT

Reading a fanfic (or even a published novel) with dubious themes is inherently going to normalize those themes in your reality.

Millions of people watched Hannibal, but cannibalism didn't surge.

Lolita is a rather famous novel, yet I've never heard of it being the sole reason someone suddenly condoned pedophilia out of nowhere.

Horror movies do not routinely make people murderers.

Fiction is not enough to make someone completely change their morals.

So where is the line?

Exactly where your critical thinking ends.

Because yes, there are people who watch shows like South Park and Family Guy and take the crass, bigoted, and otherwise truly vile jokes at face value, and find the humor in that. There are also people who watch it and see the jokes as hyperbole emphasizing just how terrible the people in the show are. Yes, some of this also has to do with the show writers, but again - your critical thinking is what tells you "is this show promoting being racist, or is it showing this character as racist to drive home what an absolute shitbag they are?"

The other aspect is your personal moral compass and ability to adapt.

Yes, I'm talking about echo chambers.

If you can NEVER accept being wrong, or if you refuse to change your mind on a specific topic (again, like racism), so instead of adapting you seek out people who are more likely to agree with you, you may find yourself starting to agree with other viewpoints that previously you wouldn't have.

And this can be good OR bad - if being friends with someone who agrees with you that racism is wrong, they may influence you to also start believing homophobia is wrong, and that's a good thing! But the reverse can also happen, and that's bad.

But media alone didn't do that - it was one of MANY contributing factors, including race, religion, disability (or lack thereof), income, how you were raised, where you live, and more.

So whenever I see people talking about "pro-ship" and "anti-proship", all I can think is

Shipping is only one tiny thing that media can influence you on - why is shipping your sticking point, but not murder?

You aren't capable or willing of engaging with the media you consume in EITHER direction.

Being anti/proship is irrelevant. If anything you're just telling me whether or not toxic purity culture is part of your specific flavor of media illiteracy. It means nothing of substance.

Instead of worrying about who ships what, worry about how your views and actions shape how you percieve and impact those around you.