hey. look at me. there is nothing wrong with presuming competence when interpreting media. you are allowed to look at a plot hole and see if you can fill it with other existing material. you are allowed to make your interpretations in good faith to the writers. not only because not everything in media is surface level, but also there is a genuine joy to be found in pulling the cracks together. if there is a plot hole in your media you are allowed to fill it with your own interpretations. even if that means headcanoning the shit out of a character. even if that means just straight up pulling theories out of your ass. it's media. it's your playground. go play.
Analyze your word choice and writing style to compare with famous writers.
While I am no fan of A/I due to various legal issues and blatant misuse, that's mostly limited to generative ones such as Chat GeePeeTee. This style analyzer is different; it was kinda fun to play with. Rest assured that all your writings are stored locally on your device only; the website has no access to your text!
Depending on the excerpts or chapters I use, the results were... very interesting. I'll only highlight a select few that are worth mentioning:
Ian Fleming
Best known for his James Bond series
Crisp, precise, and dynamic prose; direct, succinct, and remarkably visual narrative style
Short and punchy sentences, injecting a sense of urgency and pace
Never skimps on detail; descriptions are rich with sensory info, while dialogue is used to reveal character's traits, drive the plot forward, with a touch of British witty humor
His style reflects his background in journalism, and his experience in the navy as an intelligence officer. I worked as an intern in investigative journalism many years ago, and I guess that probably bled into my writing for mystery and thriller genres. Of course, I have read almost all of Fleming's novels (I'm not up to date with the movies, though), so I might have been influenced by the author himself too.
Edgar Allan Poe
Pioneer of the detective fiction genre, major contributor to the science fiction genre, best known for his narrative poetry, "The Raven"
A mix of meticulous craftsmanship and psychological complexity, making his works enduringly fascinating and profoundly unsettling
Immersive and haunting quality of his narratives; very careful choice of words, emphasis on atmosphere, and keen use of rhythm
Complex sentence structure, featuring liberal use of punctuation that help build suspense and emphasize thematic concerns, while also shaping the rhythm of his prose
Rich (and sometimes archaic) vocabulary; serves to elevate the tone of his stories, lending a certain gravitas and formality à la the Gothic tradition
Explores complex psychological states and unreliable narrators, blurring the lines between reality and madness; reflects his themes of order and chaos, mirroring the internal struggles of his characters
It's truly a great honor to see his name appearing in some of the excerpts I used for the analysis, but also equally interesting to note that, while those works were originally inspired by Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes stories that I adore so much, somehow I ended up writing stuff that were closer to Poe's style. Many of my works contain dark and disturbing themes, and I do love exploring the human mind and emotions in fictions (while also making good use of what I've learned in psychology and criminology). "The Raven" is one of the poems that got me into poetry writing, which also has a strong influence on my poetry style.
Mary Shelly
Best known for her Gothic novel, Frankenstein
Blending Gothic and Romantic elements, characterized by eloquent prose, complex sentences, and rich descriptive detail
Intricately layered, employing a story-within-a-story framework; challenging the reader's perspective and inviting deeper inquiry into the ethical and philosophical questions she poses
Adept at using a mix of long, elaborately constructed sentences and shorter, more impactful ones to build tension and emphasize key plot moments; variation enhances the rhythm of her prose, and skillfully manages the reader’s engagement and emotional response
Rich (at times, archaic) vocabulary, chosen for their connotative power
Use of literary devices such as foreshadowing, metaphor, and irony contribute to a style that is both intellectually rigorous and deeply expressive
This is both a delightful and surprising result, because I was half-expecting either one of the Bronte sisters to pop up when I tried the analyzer with my more, ahem, "flowery" prose. I had read Wuthering Heights (which I still don't enjoy even now, it's just not my cup of tea), and Jane Eyre for language classes back in my high school days. Admittedly, I do prefer to put more emphasis on the philosophical aspects and compel readers to think deeper about the conflict, rather than just the dramatic and send readers straight on an emotional roller coaster ride. Perhaps it's a reflection of how I perceive the world around me and the various issues plaguing the current society; it's also important to stay rational and objective when working on academic writing.
Link to the analysis site can be found at the top of this post. Give it a try, and you might be surprised at some of the results (like I did)! I've also included links to full description of each author featured on this list, in case you're interested to read more (the bullet lists are a summary of key points taken from those pages).
NOTE: I decided against mentioning any contemporary authors of the modern era due to many of them being involved in various controversies. Owing to this month being a fairly sensitive one to certain groups of people (and I've already seen first-hand how crazy things can escalate in one of the fandoms I'm in), I prefer to avoid unnecessary discourses that have nothing to do with this post, which is supposed to be something fun. I do not welcome unsolicited politics in my personal spaces.
Hey sorry for bothering you, but I really like your writing, and it’s really good. Feel free to ignore this, I know this isn’t the type of thing you normally do, but I think the way you do it is really good.
Could you possibly give me some tips on how to write an unreliable narrator? Like how in “once bitten twice shy” We’re seeing through Peter’s eyes, and so details like “Ben” talking to him, or when he’s on the phone and starts referring to tony as phone (or how even before that he didn’t realize it was Tony) aren’t accurate to what’s really going on?
I’m trying to do something similar in my own fic, but can’t get the incorrect details to be both clear they’re incorrect, and clear what’s actually going on without saying exactly what’s going on.
Sorry for rambling I know you’re probably busy, and get a lot of asks.
- anon
anon, firstly--
THANK YOU. please never ever feel as though you are bothering me about writing questions. i love writing. i love talking about writing! the processes, the technicalities, this is all my favourite stuff in the world. seeing this in my asks was genuinely so exciting.
(additionally, i hardly ever get asks about my writing process and related questions! i wish i did. i would love to talk about it! so thank you thank you thank you for leaving one!)
okay. tips for unreliable narrators. i'll use the example that you gave (one bitten, twice shy) to do a breakdown of the process. apologies in advance if this post ends up being really long and boring. i wasn't kidding, i love talking about this stuff!!!
tip #1: understand your narrator.
so, this fic is a sickfic. why is peter an unreliable narrator? peter is an unreliable narrator in this fic because he's got a crazy high fever, and lucidity is something that comes and goes. okay. first question down.
tip #2: understand your scenario.
now we get to set up the environment. this is where you get to do the actual writing part. what is the scenario? the scenario is peter parker is sick, at home. but he must be sick enough where the reader has to question his reliability, and we do that in a few different ways here:
emphasis on exaggerated action. it's ridiculous to drink from a comically-large sized glass. peter admits that he's doing this because he doesn't want to keep getting up, which implies that he's having a hard time caring for himself and making shortcuts to avoid doing so as frequently.
unorthodox usage of/lack of coherency with ordinary constructs. peter can't tell the time. his brain is so melted with fever, and instead of just saying "yeah, his fever was really high", i'm instead describing how he can't focus on the time of day. using the measurement of tv show episodes, which people generally understand the length of, helps people understand just how dazed he is. it also paints good imagery imo. my personal experience being sick features a lot of watching media and zoning out because i can't actually concentrate on it, or i'm half-asleep watching it.
tip #3: rely on figurative language/literary devices to do the heavy lifting.
okay so i'm sure this is not at ALL surprising to anybody who has read anything i've written before, but i am a massive fan of figurative language, and a bigger fan of literary devices. both of these can play a really big role in effectively writing an unreliable narrator.
in this example, i use the repetition to create a feeling of dissonance and confusion. i'm overloading one sentence with several different details to convey the same 'fuzziness' and hyperfocus that's happening in peter's head. whoever is speaking on the phone is the last thing on peter's mind.
in this example, i use an idiom to describe peter's internal processes and sensations. this is mostly just to really drive home that he isn't fully in control of his body, isn't able to function at top capacity the way he usually would. his words are slurred and don't make all that sense.
in this example, i use personification. personifying the device itself as if it's the one speaking to him only emphasizes how completely muddled peter's mental state is, in this moment. he doesn't seem particularly bothered that he can't fully recognize who he's talking to.
this is a very long post already, so i'm going to cut it short here. i really hope that it's even slightly useful. if you have any questions, or even if you want specific advice on what you're writing, please feel free to send as many anon asks as you'd like! my dms are also totally open.
I hate the fact that the only mentions of Angor Rot & his "Dear Departed Dove" that aren't from me are of people joking about his Dove's death and because this precious pet and owner duo are my roman empire I'm yapping about this; Angor Rot and his pet Dove are so special for one big reason; his Dove is a metaphor for his entire backstory, let me explain; His Dove is a mourning dove specifically (based on the way his call sounded AKA the signature coo of a mourning dove, the coloration of his feathers including the black pattern on his neck like mourning doves have.) and Angor Rot's pet dove carries two specific symbolisms; A sign of not being alone during the events of someone or multiple people you love dying & representing the soul itself...You heard that right his dove is not only referencing how he lost his people (and is his last source of love and bonds period as he has nothing left other than his dove he holds so close to his heart.) it's also referencing how Angor Rot lost his soul to Morgana, because of how he sent the dove in and (unknowingly) sent his dove into a death trap just like how he was tricked into having his soul stolen after giving Morgana the opportunity to rip it from his body, while this all happened at a time where Angor Rot had nothing but his Dove: no family, no friends, no village, no home, no menagerie, nothing but his best animal companion to stay by his side. Angor Rot & his Dove was Angor's last pure bond untouched by the wrath of war that not only represented his past, present, but future as well, when he lost his dearest dove, he lost the last part of himself before corruption, that dove was his best companion and him.
I think Cliche quotes are misused often because they are not iterated on
They just use it without any effort to reframe or use them in an interesting way, whether seriously or ironically, merely using them as a sort of, catch all "I recognize this saying!" to form familiarity, but that's really sort of it, and familiarity is kind of pointless if left on it's own without any connection. The point of a cliche like that is to help immerse the audience into the narrative
You kind of can't do that when you have an isolated saying. "The grass is always greener!" Means nothing if not further connected to the overall plot and narrative in some way other
Whilst the viewer carries parts of their experience with them when entering a fictional work, they are still intrinsically disconnected from those thoughts and ideas without you directly evoking them, and the way in which you evoke those ideas forms the narrative of the world. This is why symbolism is so important. Ultrakill for example takes place in hell (specifically the dantes inferno iteration). Whilst we have cultural associations we bring into Ultrakill based on our knowledge of hell in our world, we still interpret the hell of ultrakill as a different intrinsic thing whether consciously or not. However, Ultrakill does not need or try to connect it to be as close to our hell/dantes hell as possible, this is where the symbolism comes in. Ultrakills hell is used as a symbolic image to help connect ourselves to the story and build our immersion and provoke our thoughts about it's world so we can carry it's messages and themes to better ourselves as people/further our understanding of things. Which is overall the core point of art whether intended or not.
Failure must come from the character’s deepest flaw
Zuko’s deepest flaw is his desperate need for his father’s approval, a wound carved into him since childhood.
So when he fails, it’s not because:
Azula is stronger
the odds are bad
fate is cruel
It’s because his internal wound rises up at the worst possible moment.
Zuko Example:
At the end of Book 2, Zuko betrays Iroh and joins Azula.
Not because he wants to.
Not because it’s smart.
But because his deepest flaw, the belief that Ozai’s love will fix him, overwhelms him.
This is why the audience feels the tragedy.
He fails because of who he is, not because of circumstance.
Failure must contradict what the character wants most
Zuko wants:
honor
belonging
to be a good person
to be free of Ozai’s influence
So the most devastating failure is the one where he chooses Ozai.
Zuko: Zuko wants to be honorable.
He wants to be kind.
He wants to be like Iroh.
So when he betrays Iroh, it creates a collision between:
his intention (to be good)
his conditioning (to obey Ozai)
That collision is the heart of Zuko’s tragedy.
Failure must feel inevitable in hindsight but not predictable in the moment
This is the golden rule of tragedy.
During Book 2, the audience thinks:
“Oh no… he’s slipping…”
“Maybe he can still pull out of it…”
“He’s so close…”
Zuko is right there, on the edge of choosing Iroh, choosing peace, choosing freedom.
And then afterward, when he betrays Iroh, the audience thinks:
“Of course this is how it had to end.”
Because:
his trauma
his conditioning
his longing for Ozai
his fear of being unlovable
were always going to drag him back.
That emotional whiplash is what makes Zuko’s failure compelling.
Help! My trauma is bleeding through the page and creating consistencies in the story’s themes (both intentionally and unintentionally created)!
A few weeks(? maybe a month or two now) ago, me and my partner were reading a vent story I created about 2 years ago and I was explaining and ranting about all the themes and writing choices cuz I love writing and character analysis and I won’t lie, while I did talk about the choices I intentionally made while writing, half of the dots I was connecting were analyzed on the spot and I was realizing in real time that some themes were um. A little more prevalent than I remember.
Anyways, it’s fun to see how my perspective and personal experiences bled through the page whether I wanted them to or not.
