America barely has a left.John Magnum wrote:America doesn't have an extreme left.
Help me not be an idiot: writing
Moderator: Moderators
-
Avoraciopoctules
- Overlord
- Posts: 8624
- Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 5:48 pm
- Location: Oakland, CA
I kind of assumed that "sci-fi stuff" was just going to get layered onto whatever the story about one person growing up in a rival political faction's turf was about.
I note that the setting is "America" rather than "USA". Here's another one:
A scientist working on a super-powerful AI ended up scanning the wrong cerebral tissue from the Brain Vault in a series of comical mishaps. Now cyber-Mike Tyson has conquered the United States with his robot army.
Other nations don't want to get invaded by punching robots, and they appease the Central American Robot Empire by sending tribute, including contestants in an annual boxing tournament. The winner gets a bunch of money, and also one request of the increasingly unhinged robot overlord.
The main character is a genetically engineered supersoldier who was vat grown by mad scientists in Bolivia. They want to use her to win the tournament and then secure military aid that will let them crush their political rivals. But a field test goes wrong, and she ends up being raised by less-crazy scientists in Argentina. Eventually, Bolivia succeeds in getting advanced technology from the Central American Robot Empire, and a cackling cyborg warlord begins storming through South America and burning down cities for the evulz. Our protagonist decides to enter the tournament next year and fight for world peace.
In the end, the fate of the world is determined by one girl and her preternaturally powerful right hook.
I note that the setting is "America" rather than "USA". Here's another one:
A scientist working on a super-powerful AI ended up scanning the wrong cerebral tissue from the Brain Vault in a series of comical mishaps. Now cyber-Mike Tyson has conquered the United States with his robot army.
Other nations don't want to get invaded by punching robots, and they appease the Central American Robot Empire by sending tribute, including contestants in an annual boxing tournament. The winner gets a bunch of money, and also one request of the increasingly unhinged robot overlord.
The main character is a genetically engineered supersoldier who was vat grown by mad scientists in Bolivia. They want to use her to win the tournament and then secure military aid that will let them crush their political rivals. But a field test goes wrong, and she ends up being raised by less-crazy scientists in Argentina. Eventually, Bolivia succeeds in getting advanced technology from the Central American Robot Empire, and a cackling cyborg warlord begins storming through South America and burning down cities for the evulz. Our protagonist decides to enter the tournament next year and fight for world peace.
In the end, the fate of the world is determined by one girl and her preternaturally powerful right hook.
http://xkcd.com/1053/
Anyhoo, hooks are ... a metaphor for catching your reader's attention and dragging them into the story by expanding on how ... the hook ... affects your characters and plot and so on. You can't trust people will read long enough to care about anything deep and complicated in your story (even though that's what will satisfy them as they progress), so something needs to grab their attention fairly early and from there connect into what you really want to tell them.
It's associated with other metaphorical fishing techniques such as bait-and-switch, giving them plenty of line, and so on.
Clever authors can hook people into bigger hooks, foreshadowing the later one with the former.
So a dystopia isn't a place, it's a genre. That's good because you don't have to explain every single thing about it, because people already "know" much the same things you do about it through a shared culture. But your dystopia has to have something that stands out to hang your story off.
[*]Soylent Green, what is it?
[*]We've always been at war with Eastasia, since now.
Usually something that's as notable to the characters as it is to the readers so you can naturally insert it everywhere without dropping to narration. Editors will help with that, tell you when you're over- or under-using something.
Note that you can totally drop your hook. Macguffins aren't the plot, they're the comprehensible reason all your characters happen to have come together to experience the real plot and continue to participate in the story at hand. Lazy-ass Macguffins are "CSI: Miami, it's our day-job": don't do that. Or do, whatever works.
Your Macguffin would be the kidnapping, and your actual plot about what that does to everyone and what might change as a result (and in turn what that says about the world, how can a kidnapping really change anything that big). But you could totally tell a story of some other thing with the characters that brings together (action movie, porn, whatever), as long as they (and the reader) maintain some reason to engage with it (emotionally as well as "being there").
But your hook could be any political hot-button issue, for instance. Abortion. Nike Shoes. Gun control. Fake wars with real body bags. Corporate welfare. Something people likely to pick up a left-right dystopia might automatically care about. Don't moralise about your hook though, it's not the story either. Your characters only moralise about the hook if it leads the reader back deeper into caring about the plot, and that's them, not you.
And yes, your hook could totally be the kidnapping event itself, written well. Or the girl, as a uniquely attractive character. That stuff's super-difficult to carry though, and you should likely just be blunt.
So: Why did people not already put my book down and go do something interesting?
Anyhoo, hooks are ... a metaphor for catching your reader's attention and dragging them into the story by expanding on how ... the hook ... affects your characters and plot and so on. You can't trust people will read long enough to care about anything deep and complicated in your story (even though that's what will satisfy them as they progress), so something needs to grab their attention fairly early and from there connect into what you really want to tell them.
It's associated with other metaphorical fishing techniques such as bait-and-switch, giving them plenty of line, and so on.
Clever authors can hook people into bigger hooks, foreshadowing the later one with the former.
So a dystopia isn't a place, it's a genre. That's good because you don't have to explain every single thing about it, because people already "know" much the same things you do about it through a shared culture. But your dystopia has to have something that stands out to hang your story off.
[*]Soylent Green, what is it?
[*]We've always been at war with Eastasia, since now.
Usually something that's as notable to the characters as it is to the readers so you can naturally insert it everywhere without dropping to narration. Editors will help with that, tell you when you're over- or under-using something.
Note that you can totally drop your hook. Macguffins aren't the plot, they're the comprehensible reason all your characters happen to have come together to experience the real plot and continue to participate in the story at hand. Lazy-ass Macguffins are "CSI: Miami, it's our day-job": don't do that. Or do, whatever works.
Your Macguffin would be the kidnapping, and your actual plot about what that does to everyone and what might change as a result (and in turn what that says about the world, how can a kidnapping really change anything that big). But you could totally tell a story of some other thing with the characters that brings together (action movie, porn, whatever), as long as they (and the reader) maintain some reason to engage with it (emotionally as well as "being there").
But your hook could be any political hot-button issue, for instance. Abortion. Nike Shoes. Gun control. Fake wars with real body bags. Corporate welfare. Something people likely to pick up a left-right dystopia might automatically care about. Don't moralise about your hook though, it's not the story either. Your characters only moralise about the hook if it leads the reader back deeper into caring about the plot, and that's them, not you.
And yes, your hook could totally be the kidnapping event itself, written well. Or the girl, as a uniquely attractive character. That stuff's super-difficult to carry though, and you should likely just be blunt.
So: Why did people not already put my book down and go do something interesting?
PC, SJW, anti-fascist, not being a dick, or working on it, he/him.
Avoraciopoctules beat me to the best story lines.
Thanks for all the lovely information on hooks. That's interesting that you suggest political hot-button issues (Nike Shoes). I might throw more of those in there.
Hypothetically stating that America is in fact "split into two extreme factions: the left and the right"--the sci-fi comes in in the form of certain super-soldiers. All other technologies are more or less the same (i.e. communications, armaments, medical, infrastructural). The only differences are aggressivized social movements and super-humans.
The story's something like this:
At the height of civil war between the Right and the Left, America finds itself split between the DROIT and AK factions. Taken from her family, May Forrester is thrown into an enemy prison camp and forced to fight. As she struggles to understand a new society and its people, she finds herself in an ideological purgatory with one question: What is Truth?
Thanks for all the lovely information on hooks. That's interesting that you suggest political hot-button issues (Nike Shoes). I might throw more of those in there.
Hypothetically stating that America is in fact "split into two extreme factions: the left and the right"--the sci-fi comes in in the form of certain super-soldiers. All other technologies are more or less the same (i.e. communications, armaments, medical, infrastructural). The only differences are aggressivized social movements and super-humans.
The story's something like this:
At the height of civil war between the Right and the Left, America finds itself split between the DROIT and AK factions. Taken from her family, May Forrester is thrown into an enemy prison camp and forced to fight. As she struggles to understand a new society and its people, she finds herself in an ideological purgatory with one question: What is Truth?
Last edited by Finder on Mon May 27, 2013 6:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Thank god I'm pretty
I think the first question you have to ask about any sci-fi element is "how does this impact my story?" Since your original question involved avoiding cliches I think that an important point to make is that cliches are what happens when you add an element (like super-soldiers) without thinking it through. Conversely such an element is a great starting point for cool story ideas. For example, you might want to consider whether everyone can be superhuman or only certain people. Maybe only people with certain genetic characteristics can become super-soldiers. How does this affect the world? Also consider how superhuman characters influence the setting. How do people perceive the super-soldiers? Are the respected? Feared? How does this affect how your main character perceives and interacts with the world?Finder wrote:the sci-fi comes in in the form of certain super-soldiers.
Edit: Generally a good starting point for creating interesting stories and avoiding clichés is to question everything you include. I don't mean question whether to include them, but trying to wring as much out of them as possible.
Last edited by Drolyt on Mon May 27, 2013 6:55 pm, edited 2 times in total.
This is also a good point. Thanks, Drolyt.
Also, random question: Is "DROIT/Droit" a terrible name for a faction? How does the word make you feel? Is it too complicated/hard to pronounce? I based it off of the root for "Right" (it is the conservative side in this setting) but I've gotten mixed reviews on the name itself.
Definitely keeping "AK" for the militant left, but I could change "Droit" if I found something better.
Also, random question: Is "DROIT/Droit" a terrible name for a faction? How does the word make you feel? Is it too complicated/hard to pronounce? I based it off of the root for "Right" (it is the conservative side in this setting) but I've gotten mixed reviews on the name itself.
Definitely keeping "AK" for the militant left, but I could change "Droit" if I found something better.
Thank god I'm pretty
-
Avoraciopoctules
- Overlord
- Posts: 8624
- Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 5:48 pm
- Location: Oakland, CA
-
Guyr Adamantine
- Master
- Posts: 273
- Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 10:05 pm
- Location: Montreal
@Avoraciopoctules
There will not be robots in the setting. There might be mechanized soldier-suits (later on in the story) but they have nothing to do with the name.
I am aware of Lucasfilm's trademark on the word "droid" and how that might cause confusion amongst readers.
Simultaneously, I feel that DROIT/Droit/Droite has depth as their faction name because it can mean "the right/the law" which I feel could be construed in the religious sense, which this faction has.
There will not be robots in the setting. There might be mechanized soldier-suits (later on in the story) but they have nothing to do with the name.
I am aware of Lucasfilm's trademark on the word "droid" and how that might cause confusion amongst readers.
Simultaneously, I feel that DROIT/Droit/Droite has depth as their faction name because it can mean "the right/the law" which I feel could be construed in the religious sense, which this faction has.
Thank god I'm pretty
-
Avoraciopoctules
- Overlord
- Posts: 8624
- Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 5:48 pm
- Location: Oakland, CA
Man, if I was aiming for obsure linguistic references, I'd probably reach a bit further. Then again, having a Communist uprising refer to themselves as the Sinistrals might be a little tacky even for me.Guyr Adamantine wrote:"La droite" is the term used for "the right" in french, so you'd get bonus points for pretentiousness, which is always nice in a sci-fi story.
Last edited by Avoraciopoctules on Mon May 27, 2013 11:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
If you're going to write fiction, don't worry about cliches, as people have said. You can get away with almost any story as long as you have good writing. Just avoid writing blatantly offensive and awful stories, and you'll be okay.
As far as good writing, for fiction, the key thing to remember is that your story is composed of scenes. Not sentences, not paragraphs, not chapters. Scenes. Make each scene, and every word, count.
One consequence of that which ruins many amateur efforts, especially in sci-fi and fantasy stories, is that you can't have a huge wall of text that tells the reader all the information that they need to know about your world. You have to present that information, bit by bit, as you tell your story. Even then, it can't be pure exposition. Your reader has to care about the information, and that only happens if the exposition itself is advancing the plot (for a broad definition of "plot").
This is why so many stories in these genres have a fish out of water character (one who doesn't understand the magic, or the technology, or the secret conspiracy, or whatever--often because they're the young protagonist). Such a character provides a convenient excuse for other characters to stop and explain what's going on, when otherwise they'd just act. Again, though, don't let that exposition drag down the scene.
As far as good writing, for fiction, the key thing to remember is that your story is composed of scenes. Not sentences, not paragraphs, not chapters. Scenes. Make each scene, and every word, count.
One consequence of that which ruins many amateur efforts, especially in sci-fi and fantasy stories, is that you can't have a huge wall of text that tells the reader all the information that they need to know about your world. You have to present that information, bit by bit, as you tell your story. Even then, it can't be pure exposition. Your reader has to care about the information, and that only happens if the exposition itself is advancing the plot (for a broad definition of "plot").
This is why so many stories in these genres have a fish out of water character (one who doesn't understand the magic, or the technology, or the secret conspiracy, or whatever--often because they're the young protagonist). Such a character provides a convenient excuse for other characters to stop and explain what's going on, when otherwise they'd just act. Again, though, don't let that exposition drag down the scene.
What? To them it seems what?sabs wrote:To the British, the French.
@Whatever
I've made an effort not to dump information on the reader in large quantities. I do have a "fish out of water" character, but I think I've done a decent enough job in not having Inception-like pauses in the action to have DiCaprio explain to Juno what the hell is going on.
Thank god I'm pretty
To the British, it just makes them think of the French. There is no english speaking audience where having your Political party called Droit is going to do anything but cause head scratching or severe WTF.
The only way it would work, is if your Extreme Right group.. were some secret Norman Society from the time before King John the Worst.
The only way it would work, is if your Extreme Right group.. were some secret Norman Society from the time before King John the Worst.
I'm not sure how it would be offensive, it is certainly better as an acronym than a word. Honestly though I'd come up with something else.Finder wrote:I am fine with this. It could be an acronym (Democratic Republic of Integrated Theocracy?) but I feel like typing DROIT in all caps constantly might be offensive to the reader. Maybe I'm wrong.
-
Username17
- Serious Badass
- Posts: 29894
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
The big problem with doing futuristic dystopia with political extremists is that it is that unlike reality, fiction has to be believable. Consider that the modern main stream Right of the US openly believes:
If you actually articulate their positions, they sound completely insane - because they are completely insane! So if you want a dystopic future, you have to choose between a completely underwhelming faction whose "extremism" is actually milquetoast compared to the actual "respectable" people running for office in the here and now; and a completely unbelievable faction who are more extreme and insane than people who already reject definitional tautologies and accounting identities as being liberal plots.
And either way will strain peoples' suspension of disbelief. A tepid rightwing faction will strain peoples' suspension of disbelief that things could descend into chaos with a faction less extreme than what we have now. And a frothing faction will strain peoples' suspension of disbelief that people could follow something so crazy. I mean, people already can't believe the Republican positions, in that when asked, a majority of self-identified conservatives actually get key Republican positions backwards in polls.
-Username17
- Global Warming does not exist.
- Evolution is a lie.
- Raising taxes would not increase revenue.
- Universal healthcare cannot work.
If you actually articulate their positions, they sound completely insane - because they are completely insane! So if you want a dystopic future, you have to choose between a completely underwhelming faction whose "extremism" is actually milquetoast compared to the actual "respectable" people running for office in the here and now; and a completely unbelievable faction who are more extreme and insane than people who already reject definitional tautologies and accounting identities as being liberal plots.
And either way will strain peoples' suspension of disbelief. A tepid rightwing faction will strain peoples' suspension of disbelief that things could descend into chaos with a faction less extreme than what we have now. And a frothing faction will strain peoples' suspension of disbelief that people could follow something so crazy. I mean, people already can't believe the Republican positions, in that when asked, a majority of self-identified conservatives actually get key Republican positions backwards in polls.
-Username17
Can't I just have the Right/Conservative believe more or less what they believe now? I certainly wouldn't go in the "milder" direction for them. I was envisioning the group as one based on today's conservatives. When left to its own devices (via separation from the left), I imagined the group would become more unified in its conservative, anti-science, anti-socialism, and pro-military ideology. So they'd be fascists, basically.
Thank god I'm pretty
-
Guyr Adamantine
- Master
- Posts: 273
- Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 10:05 pm
- Location: Montreal
Conservatives are anything but unified, and the only reason they work together at the moment is because of the pinko commie Democrats. Left to their own device, they just engage in a pissing contest of "Who's the holiest of them all". For reference, see Conservapedia's staff. What you'd end up with would be something of a witch hunt, led by whichever faction is crazy/scary enough to herd the others in its wake.
You aren't giving enough credit to features of their ideology that all those groups share. The big one is in fact conservatism, which is at its core a desire to maintain the status quo, but there is also authoritarianism and strong in-group favoritism among others. Combined these ideological features make the conservative alliance much stronger than most realize.
-
Username17
- Serious Badass
- Posts: 29894
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm