Unable to sleep and with a headache, I decided to stay up and write this post for the benefit of those aspirant authors out there.
During my time reading, writing, role-playing, and reading, I have learned to judge what makes good storytelling in the written tradition - and believe me, I have read a great variety of writing, from lemons so horrible they induce laughter to poetic prose that seem as though they belong in a spell velum rather than a role-play forum. Through all that reading, I have come to a conclusion: not everyone who writes well can tell a good story, and not everyone who can tell a good story writes well. In fact, on this and many websites, those two qualities rarely intersect.
I feel it is a very important distinction to be made.
Being able to write well means efficient construction and organization of words, a broad and effective use of vocabulary, and a keen grasp of grammar. Good storytelling, on the other hand, requires organization of broad and perhaps intricate ideas, making characters develop into things the reader can feel emotion toward, and maintaining an interesting and relevant plot.
When it comes down to it, the better storyteller than writer will always win my heart over. Despite a weaker vocabulary and poorer grammar, I will eventually be seduced by the tale woven. To make someone love a character, or at least pique some interest in the plot, is what I admire. Even when I encounter poor writing, if the story is good, I will often keep reading just to see what happens next!
Writing well is merely a means to an end, i.e., a mechanism for presenting a story. It makes use of tools like paragraphing, capitalization, and other syntactical elements; it also dresses up the story by painting a more vivid picture of what may be happening, These stylistic elements make the story easier to read, but do not improve the creativity or ingenuity of the storytelling. That is why when I see elaborate, adjective-flooded character introductions and the like, my eyes glaze over and I can’t bring myself to continue beyond the first paragraph or so, regardless of the quality of writing. If there is no thought beyond the self-aggrandizement of the writer’s character, no dialogue or action, no attempt at interaction - well, then I swiftly lose interest.
With that distinction made, white writing is important, focus on the story above all else. One thing that may prove useful in that effort is to form a mental map of how a character will grow, what goals it will accomplish along the way, and what potential relationships or moral revelations there are to be had by it. This doesn’t have to be set in stone, but it really does add to the quality of the story. Instead of being a lost ship adrift at sea or a very weak plot with little basis to it other than an environment (an environment is not a story), make it a riveting series of events that coalesce into something meaningful! And, once you have your goals, don’t try to rush it - work in the details at a reasonable pace so that it stays interesting for longer than a rollercoaster ride. Very often, people seem to think that every post has to have a climax, and be awesome and shiny, but that leads to something called reader desensitization. Eventually, all that flair loses its pizzazz. This is why developmental posts are very important, and while not necessarily as thrilling to write, the payoff in the end is well-worth the delay between climaxes caused by writing them. Those are the posts where one will see character development at its best and a strengthening of the chain of ideas called a story.
This is kind of disorganized, but I hope it proves helpful to those of you out there who are curious as to how to have fun and simultaneously produce good collaborative writing.
Thanks for tuning in,
Circ








