#consistency is key

[wulfhalls]

how it started // how it's going

[deathandnonexistentialdread]

these two argue and nitpick on each other no matter the situation they're in

[lousycapy]

ok I’m done mourning, I’ve deluded myself into believing this weekend was not the worse. Last year there was a p17 quali in Mexico, a crash into colapinto in Abu Dhabi, no pace in Vegas, Brazil, and those mistakes meant significant point losses in multiple races.

But this weekend? All the mistakes at once. All the bad energy out of his system in one go. Better lose one match 4-0 than four matches 1-0. Bonus with Lando not performing that well either, that was minimal losses.

no more point streak to keep alive, no more consecutive laps completed, no more 1st driver to ever complete all laps of multiple seasons, no more brought the car home pristine all year, we are freed from all streaks pressure. Now head down and keep going. He got this.

[letsmakethenaughtylistt]

I will never not think of your OF potential 🫠

if it makes you feel any better, i waste my regular potential too. 👉🏻😎👉🏻

[reincarnationstation]

*I walk into what I assumed to be the only train station around, looking up at the schedule with a quiet hope to get me back to a more "normal" enviroment.*

— @rickastleyanon

{ Stepping down from the car, creature in hand Constance would look up to see none other than... Wait that can't be right. }

{ Rick... Astley? What. Isn't he. }

{ Oh christ, they're staring aren't they? }

[looneygoons]

are y’all giving these white celebrities the same energy you’re giving nicki minaj rn?

[dafunzies]

another day another retirement threats from max

[iphysalian]

The Realism Trade-Off

Was discussing realism earlier and it got me thinking about the inevitable tradeoff you have to grapple with to tell an entertaining story. Which also reminded me of grimdark and why so many people thought it’s what was missing from storytelling.

Grimdark does have one idea going for it: One of its promises is that plot armor is too thick, and anyone can die.

Whether this “roll the roulette wheel” actually happens is another story because the protagonist of grimdark is guaranteed to have plot armor, otherwise arcs would end abruptly and people would be reluctant to invest in anyone. If they stood the exact same chances of death as everyone else, then if catastrophe stuck in episode 2, by grimdark rules they should be dead.

So we suspend our disbelief for things like this, for the sake of a good story.

On the other end of the spectrum is jumping the shark—everyone survives no matter how improbable, making stakes meaningless and danger toothless. Too much or too little plot armor threatens a story’s ability to be compelling and entertaining.

Realism goes beyond plot armor, though. It’s in your medical drama’s hand-waving away of proper medical science for drama (or lack of research by the writers). It’s any niche trade skill being shown inaccurately for either simplicity, or to avoid plot holes. It’s excessively large explosions for spectacle, it’s bright blue “moonlights” over your midnight battlefield for mood (and so you can see the action).

I got some feedback that my environment didn’t hold up to reality. I knew this going in and told myself if X,Y, and Z famous IP can get away with it, then I can, too. It’s valuable feedback and I’m glad to know where I fall on the line of believability in certain audiences who would know better, and where I can consider changes in the future.

It’s just the tradeoff you accept as a creator. How much realism is too much? To the point where experts would say “nah, they’d be dead, end of story”? That’s not entertaining. What if they didn’t die? Or to the point where the pressures of the environment that should be a constant, pressing barrier to plot progression becomes a distraction, and repetitive, if your prose is filled with reminders of how hot it is at the cost of narrative fog—so much time spent on the sensory details that there is no room left for important character progression, or so repetitive that readers get bored because yes, we know it’s hot, please stop telling us.

I love those videos where they bring in experts in their field to critique movie scenes, it’s the nature of the beast and some do their research and lean into realism more than others. Not to mention that there is a ton of cool science you can use to your advantage.

The cost of realism can also be that you spend so much time researching and trying to be exact to a science that your fun little WIP never gets written, too consumed with making the worldbuilding absolutely expert-proof.

So long as you aren’t saying “it’s just for fun” in the same breath as “my worldbuilding is Correct and Perfect” you’re good.

Yes, I did my research for my winter apocalypse. Yes, I took into account the geothermal conditions that I was more familiar with (specifically hydrothermal vents at the bottom of the ocean), because I don’t live in this kind of cold. I knew my lack of lived experience would show to those who live in these conditions. But I didn’t move myself up to Alaska to get it perfectly real in its grit.

And I accepted the consequences. I relied on the magical shenaniganry of my high fantasy setting, and my unreliable narrator of a protagonist, to help blur those lines. Had I written a protagonist who’s a certified arctic explorer with decades of experience and made sloppy mistakes in my geography, that would be different.

My protagonist lives in a cave and has never seen mountains before the start of the book. If he’s wrong in his details and descriptions, he should be. I’m not an expert, and I’m not pretending to write a character out of my depth.

So if you’re stressing about realism and having somebody like CinemaSins go “Aha! Fraud!” storytelling comes with the understanding of suspended disbelief. Artificial gravity on spaceships is a prime example.

I could have a field day with so much of Star Wars. I could nitpick the single-biome planets with no plants that somehow sustain a breathable atmosphere thick enough so everyone doesn’t freeze at night and boil from solar radiation at noon. I could nitpick how every single planet they venture to has the same breathable atmosphere with no ill effects on those who regularly travel between them.

I could nitpick the huge distortion made in humanoid bodies as being the dominant shape of intelligent life and humans somehow being native species to multiple planets with inexplicable convergent evolution (as far as the films have detailed, I’m not digging into the archives of a video game or novelization for this information).

But I accept these leaps in science because it’s fun, because Star Wars isn't claiming to be realistic, and so long as the story believes its own rules, then I will, too.

We accept that “it just is” is a thing, so long as it’s both never over-explained, and never contradicted or called into question by the characters and narrative.

Concern yourself with consistency more than realism. If these are your wacky science-breaking rules, fantastic, but you’d better not ignore them because they get inconvenient.