#asher gray writes

[realashergray]

Seven Sentence Sunday

I was tagged by @toboldlywrite (thanks bud!) to do this so here we go. Basically the game is to post the last seven sentences you wrote. I am technically gonna give a whole ten but that's because it's all one paragraph and if you cut the first three sentences of the paragraph out it doesn't make any sense lmao

Anyway, here it is:

There was something alive about a house. Something hot and squishy and raw. It had organs, a nervous system, blood. Perhaps not in the same sense as a person. But a house had a life of its own that continued after its owners died or moved away. That is why empty houses always feel full of ghosts- its living is louder in the absence of others. That is also why a house always feels warmer when it is loved. Loneliness petrifies its soul. A house does not want to be empty; a house wants to love and be loved. In that way, a house is just like a person.

I hope you liked it! I'm gonna tag these folks to participate as well ( @niva-writes @wallpatternz @writings-of-a-narwhal @sunwornpages ) but if I didn't tag you and you want to do it, please tag me in it! I want to read your stuff! Yes, you! Idk you but I love you!

[realashergray]

[realashergray]

I have a theory about conflict and contentment in a story. Like light and shadow, neither can be appreciated without the contrast of the other. Without darkness, light cannot have value. Yet without light, we cannot see the shades and depths of dark.

In the same way, a story with no conflict is sweet but not compelling, enjoyable but unsatisfying. There is no impetus for action. There is no drive for better. There is no hope for change because the characters do not want it. We need that pain that is born of conflict, of hatred or loneliness or fear, to propel the story forward because comfort stagnates. It is not sustainable. Who would read 80k words of fluff without a drop of conflict? Perhaps there are people who would like that, but I am not among them.

But the soul cannot live on despair alone. Too much conflict, and the audience grows numb to it. They build a wall around their heart, a thick skin of separation between themselves and the story. They stop rooting for the characters in order to protect themselves, and if it gets that far, then you've lost. You need the audience to stay invested. Some of the worst books I've read were not the ones with barely any plot, but the ones in which I did not care one way or another what happened to the characters. Even if a story has the best concepts, plots, and arcs, none of that matters if the audience doesn't care about it.

I try to keep a balance. A section of grimdark pain and struggle is tempered with witty dialogue between characters who love each other. A character's sudden flare of success and hope is followed by that character's tragic death. It is only by loving the character can the audience feel the full impact of the loss. And yet paradoxically the audience will feel no pain if they are given too much of it. Finding the right balance between conflict and contentment- and that balance will differ slightly from story to story- is therefore critical.

[realashergray]

"What am I, chopped liver?"

"No,you're definitely not chopped liver. I like chopped liver."

- the most Jewish insult I've ever written

[realashergray]

sorry I've been awol for a hot second, school is over for me so I can hopefully get back to writing :) recently I've been really thinking a lot about the relationship between the writer, narrator, and the reader. like for example, fourth wall breaks: how does the narrator feel about being a character? how do they feel about the author and the reader? do they want to be read?

I'm working on a few short stories exploring these ideas, might drop some excerpts soon!