Young Writers Society

I wasn't going to do anything with this at first because I think it's too long and rambles a bit, but @Lumi suggested it'd be good for the General Storybook Discussion, so I thought I may as well show it here:

Perhaps one of the most significant reasons by which droves of writers, inexperienced or otherwise, young or old, methodical or disorganized, are called into the art of speaking their minds is the expression of some idea. Whether a specific plea, such as demanding an oil facility stop polluting the surrounding environment, or a generic one, like the concept of environmentalism itself, a multitude of ideas are professed in the good majority of stories, poems, and novels. This is not a discussion on those ideas that arrived by accident; they were merely created due to the author's thought process subconsciously imprinting itself on the story and its logic. It is the intentional expression of ideas and concepts, or the purposeful arranging of a story to satisfy an author's thought process. that will be discussed here.

As Storybook writers, we come into our craft with our own prejudices and opinions, and sometimes have that overwhelming urge to discuss them. As these are stories we are talking about, rather than nonfiction essays or editorials, we must integrate such ideas into what we write, and fashion our plot, characters, and setting to represent the theme. How, then, do we do so in a manner that communicates our point to an audience that may have not thought of it otherwise? How do we not alienate that audience while providing an enjoyable and thoughtful story? In my opinion, that can be effectively resolved with two questions - what is the audience you are addressing? How blatant do you want to be about that idea?

These questions are actually quite intertwined with each other. In effect, if you, as the writer, are addressing an audience that already agrees with you on a specific topic, be as blunt as you want. The audience knows what you're talking about, and can relate to you through the discussion of your argument and idea. You don't necessarily have to attract them with an effective or resounding story, so much as you can pull them with your message and ideas. Preferably, if you want to convey this effectively, you might want to be heavy-handed about it, or at least firm and undiluted in your stances. However, that is, by no means, a requirement, and being too Anvilicious, as TV Tropes put it, can just as likely bore your audience. After all, your audience already knows about the topic, and while sensibly preaching to the choir can attract them, you are still preaching to the choir. If you feed them the exact same message that they have already heard, and do not provide them a story, they are liable to walk away having learned nothing, or having not connected to your story at all. If you, as the writer, cannot get people to be interested in your story and the ideas behind it, you have failed.

However, while a stable firmness (without going overboard) can attract an audience that already agrees with you, what happens when dealing with an audience that might feel differently, or is just ambivalent? Here, bluntness can still be the answer, although it depends on what point your readers have come to read the story. If they have come to focus on the idea of the story, instead of the story itself, they might appreciate your being direct and resounding in your stances. This honesty can allow you to connect with your audience by giving them exactly what they came for, and persuade them to at least consider your opinions. However, if they wish to read the story, rather than the ideas behind the story, bluntness is more likely to alienate the audience that disagrees with you. This contrasting reader group feels suffocated by your ideas worming their way through an enjoyable story, and is likely to step away. It does attract the choir, but that was never your point, wasn't it?

In situations like these, be tactful. Your message should be a core piece of your work, because it is what you are trying to convey, but it should be more subtle. Let your readers pick up hints and pieces of it throughout the work, and build up a general set of conclusions as to the point of the work. In that sense, you can enthrall them with your story, and win the hearts and minds of the readers as they relish in the work's successes, and subconsciously absorb the ideas you have expressed. Yes, it is possible that they might complete the puzzle and walk away in disgust, but at least you got them to think and work on constructing the puzzle in the first place. And, in the end, giving your readers a puzzle of ideas to build into a general stance is your point, isn't it?

So, when it comes to a disagreeing or ambivalent audience, how do you decide whether or not to emphasize the story or the idea? The best advice I can give is just to write it down, and intertwine the idea with the story. Consider how blunt you want that idea to be, and what you'd be able to forsake in terms of the idea/story for the story/idea. Then, find an audience, get them to look through what you have written, and ask them what they preferred more. More often than not, as the audience disagrees with your core ideas, they may choose the story. Do not fret; give them what they want, but remember to convey your central idea in a subtle fashion to accomplish your own goals. Remember that, though you are the writer, you are serving the role of a persuader as well, and you need to find what best suits your target group. If it makes you seem conciliatory or subservient, so be it. Though you are the persuader you are solving the role of a writer as well, and you should be able to convey your point regardless. If you, as the writer, simply cannot address a group that disagrees with you in a story in any other way than being blunt and heavy-handed, you may need to work on your writing skills, or reconsider your target audience. A writer should be able to discuss any topic in multiple ways, from blunt to quiet, and do so exceptionally well. Bluntness can still be the solution, especially if your audience has come to debate your ideas, but it, more often than not, can hurt your ability to persuade your audience, and defeat the point of your work. I'd suggest avoiding bluntness, unless it is the entire point of your piece and you do not have enough interest in potential audience distaste to do otherwise, and go for more subtle methods, as hard as they might seem to achieve.

And that's about all I have to say about that.