Forum: Story Discussion and Feedback

I honestly have sympathy with her there. I mean, my spouse and I delayed getting married because we were sick and tired of being asked when we were going to, and finally started answering "a year after the last time someone asks us." Reader expectations is one reason I'll never start posting a story I haven't finished.

And if sex scenes aren't giving you joy, don't write 'em. Advance the story with other means.

For example a particular author writes westerns. His westerns have a gun fight every third chapter and the gun fights have a copy and paste feel to them. How is that any different?

I don't think it's different. The point, maybe, is that too much of anything spoils things. In the Western - is the point of it the gunfights? Or is there a bigger story? It's not just that 'here's another repetitive gunfight to slog through', it's 'why aren't we advancing the cattle rustling and mining subplots at all in this space?'.

Which, looping back to sex scenes, is the point. If the story isn't a 'sex story' -- i.e. it's about sex, too much time spent on sex scenes is crowding out the rest of the story. In the western, if the story isn't about a gunfighter and his/her gunfights, they're crowding out the rest of the story.

It wouldn't really matter if they were distinctly unique. If they're not the point, they're still not the point, no matter how well done.

but you aren't going to be getting a lot of character development in those sex scenes either.

One of the crucial parts of character building is the relationships that exist between characters. There's a lot of that in a good sex scene.

There's a lot of that in a good sex scene.

which are extremely rare in SoL stories.

Those comments would be really useful if you could point us to a sex scene on SOL that you think is well done.

I don't think it would be apparent if just the sex scene was posted. When you're talking about character relationships, it's what leads up to the sex as well as the sex itself, and often what happens after the sex.

Those comments would be really useful if you could point us to a sex scene on SOL that you think is well done.

Due to the Gestapo issue I had and the current court orders arising from it meaning I can't view any stories with sex scenes until the court order runs out in some months time, I can't right now. I also doubt I'll be interested in digging this up when I can do so.

However, while some of the sex scenes in my early works with sex scenes, some of the scenes in the later stories of mine would fill the bill as I'd improved in that regards with practice. Finding Home is the first story that comes to mind for you to read.

https://storiesonline.net/s/66183/finding-home

the plot, the whole plot, and nothing but the plot makes for trash stories

Completely agree. Character development obviously matters. And I support 'fluff' - optional detail that adds to the world.

But, whether it's the gunfights or sex scenes or whatever, a repetitive scene isn't advancing the story, isn't advancing characterization, and isn't really adding interesting 'fluff'.

The point really is where to draw the line between what's 'repetitive' and what isn't, and what's 'too much' and what's not. That's where the nuances come in. One person's boring and repetitive might be another's happy place; one person's 'too much' might be another's 'just right' (and yet another's 'way too much').

We have diverged here to the point where you're saying things I agree with as if I disagreed with them.

His westerns have a gun fight every third chapter and the gun fights have a copy and paste feel to them.

This was the premise for 'repetitive'. It's explicitly not 'distinctly unique'. I agree - if they're distinctly unique, it'd be unfair to call them repetitive and they might well serve an important role.

In another thread I wrote:

[...] about sex scenes. The sex is important because it's another important character interaction, not because it's hot people getting it on. I don't find sex scenes interesting to write, or read, when they're between people who have an established relationship unless something new and different and interesting is happening, either physically or emotionally or on whatever level.

So, I think we're having an agreement here. The point I was trying to make is that copy-and-paste repetitive content doesn't advance plot or characterization regardless of whether it's sex or gunfighting or anything else. The key is the 'copy-and-paste' nature, not what the content involves.

I'm not at all anti-sex scene (other writers in the same thread were). My point is that - like other things in the story - unless what you're writing is about sex, the point of sex scenes is to advance the story/characters/etc.

And that would be a perfect example of why I am often leery of knowing more about authors whose work I like, despite most of my friends being in the industry. Ouch.

I never read the story or anything by GMW.

Ditto. On the advice of an editor I started posting some of Caz's and my stories to her story site. However, she insisted on certain changes being amde or she wouldn't post them. I pointed out the items she wanted changed weren't against the site rules, and all I got back was a very long response that, when abusive words were removed, said "Do as I say or get lost." My response was to tell her to cancel the story posts and the account. As far as I know nothing by Cazna nor me are on that site. If they are they should be removed.

Ernest are control freaks, and that it was her site - well, some things are inevitable.

I don't mind changing things to suit the rules, but when you suit the rules as listed then have new rules applied without any prior advice of their existence and then get abused by for asking why. Well, inconsistency and abuse from a what seems to be a nutcase means I don't want to stay there, and I didn't.

My site, my rules is something I completely accept. I've been a forum moderator and the First Amendment doesn't apply on private property. That said, consistency of rules and even handed treatment of all is needed if you want a wider group of contributors and the audience they bring.

That's exactly how I felt. I abided by the rules set, then got hit by rules never listed. Not being able to tell, in advance, what was and wasn't acceptable made me decide not to even try.

Since he was in a hurry, he never saw the out-of-control car that was bearing down on him until it was too late.

Funny, we've just had a thread decrying the overuse of automotive accidents as a plot device.

How about: Since he was in a hurry, he didn't notice Claudine's errant Lego brick until his bare foot landed squarely on it. Recoiling in agony, he slipped and hit his head on the toilet bowl. Knocked unconscious, he drowned in three inches of water.

AJ

every unfinished story could end: "The next day, he left the house to catch his bus a little late. Since he was in a hurry, he never saw the out-of-control car that was bearing down on him until it was too late."

Or that could be the beginning of a DoOver story.

I think we all want the characters to whom we relate to live happily ever after. The "happily ever afters" are few and far between in real life.

Which was one of the things I set up purposefully once I had to get rid of the first girlfriend in "Country Boy". I decided to make it closer to real life, where a lot of the relationships just did not work out, for various reasons. Not that there was anything wrong with either of them, they just realized that things were not working out, or would never progress past a certain point.

I think that's precisely why they're desired in fiction - because while we know we (as readers) won't have that, at least the characters we've invested in can.

Of course, then you have the other end of the bar.

Most of the Brother's Grimm stories were really dark. And I myself have a series I created that are the same way. Don't dare read any of them, if you are looking for the "happy ending".

In the original Rapunzel, she gets knocked up, and the Prince is thrown out of the tower and blinded. Rapunzel gives birth to twins, and lives her life in a remote shack in poverty as he wanders as a beggar.

Almost the same with Sleeping Beauty. She is raped as she sleeps, and wakes up when her new twins are nursing. In Cinderella, she is horribly mistreated, and her step-sisters mutilate themselves to try and wear the shoe. In the end they are blinded, and the mother is forced to wear hot iron boots and dance until she dies.

Most people have no idea how sanitized the "Disneyfied" versions of fairy tales are. Anybody who read the original Hunchback would know that for sure.

Me, I have a fascination with dark tales, such as those, or even TV shows like The Twilight Zone. Where such simple phrases as "Time enough, at last!" or "It's a cookbook!" can still cause some to shudder.

Has anyone ever actually explained the US limits that allow a young adult to fight for his/her country, but not legally buy a drink upon (hopefully) returning home?

Well, back when we had the draft, the age was 18 for both. Since then, we've gone all volunteer for the military, and the franchise age is also 18. But the Federal government tied highway funds to the drinking age and raised the minimum age to 21 to purchase alcohol.

Quite frankly, there's a hell of a lot of 18 year olds that I wouldn't trust to buy alcohol OR to vote responsibly. But if they HAVE signed up and volunteered for the military and do serve, then chances are they're going to be able to purchase alcohol simply by showing up in uniform.

Just because you COULD do something doesn't mean you're entitled to anything special if you DON'T do something.

According to the US Census Bureau, there are approximately 12.7 million in the 18-20 year old range.

According to the best DOD estimates I can find, there are approximately 1.3 million TOTAL US Active Duty military, with approximately 800,000 National Guard and Reserves, giving a TOTAL of 2.1 million in the military. The actual number of 18-20 year olds actually serving on active duty or in the reserve is approximately 250,000.

That means you've got 12.7 million kids that primarily binge drink, since just because you can't legally buy alcohol doesn't mean you can't get it, and less than 2% of the total that actually HAVE volunteered to fight for his/her country.

Outside of facilities that are part of a military base, any bar, restaurant or store that sold alcohol to an 18-20 year old soldier would be risking their liquor license, even if they were in uniform.

Actually, that depends on the base.

Having been in the military for decades, I have seen this come and go and change many times.

When I first joined (1983), The age on base was 18. And there was also an active club system that were very popular. Every base had them, some had 6 or more clubs.

But then during the Clinton Administration, things changed. The drinking age was raised to 21, and because the club system was seen by some as "promoting drinking", most of them were closed down. Which I always though was a bad move, as now instead of walking there from the barracks, if you wanted a drink you had to drive somewhere.

In the last 20 years, it has bounced around a lot. On some bases it is 18, others 21. But as most of the clubs are gone, the base bowling alley has replaced that function. And because of a lot of drinking incidents over a decade ago, most training bases returned the age limit to 21.

Me, I have long said that they should return the clubs on all bases. If nothing else, because then you had at least some supervision when drinking. Have too much, and expect 2 of your buddies to walk you back to the barracks and leave your car in the parking lot. Make an ass of yourself, then odds are your Sergeant would be there and you would get talked to the next day about drinking responsibly.

Not able to drink responsibly, and expect to be banned from the club and have nowhere to drink at all.

I know that at my first duty station, we went over 2 years without a drunk driving incident. Today, most units can not go a month without one. But back then, if "drunk stumbling with your buddies 300 yards to the barracks" was a crime, many would have been guilty of it.

In the 1980's, you could not miss the clubs on base. Camp Lejeune had at least 6 of them that I was aware of on Mainside, and at least a dozen more on the various subcamps. An "All Ranks" club that anybody could go into, and various other ones broken up by rank. And we all watched out for each other.

I was never a heavy drinker, but on 2 occasions I had way too much, and had buddies walk me home. It was simply what we did for each other.

Which I always though was a bad move, as now instead of walking there from the barracks, if you wanted a drink you had to drive somewhere.

This is true for civilians as well. When I was in graduate school, the police made a big point of raiding the bars near campus, doing sting operations, etc to curtain service to 18- to 20-year-olds. It worked; bars got paranoid about checking IDs.

Drinking didn't go down, though. People went to 'townie' bars or got a 21-year-old friend to buy for them at a store. Drinking and driving went up; so did binge drinking in apartments and dorms.

I'd much rather have people drinking in places which will cut them off when they're blasted, and from which they can stagger home, then have people drink themselves to death (literally, in a few case) in their residences or risk everyone else's lives driving to and from bars they couldn't walk to.

Of course, my attitudes may be colored by having been legal at 18, illegal at 18 1/2, legal at 19, illegal at 19 1/2, then legal at 21. Or by always looking older than I was, so that, even at 18 1/2, I was the one buying alcohol at the grocery story because no one ever carded me (the first time I was ever carded I was 23, and it was a result of the aforementioned sting operations which led to anyone shy of 50 or so being carded).

any bar, restaurant or store that sold alcohol to an 18-20 year old soldier would be risking their liquor license, even if they were in uniform.

Things may have changed, but when I was in, if you went in uniform into any VFW or American Legion, half the time you didn't even HAVE to buy your drink, because someone would buy them for you.

AFIK, VFW or American Legion posts still need local liquor licenses to serve alcohol. And if they do, and they get caught serving someone under 21, they could lose said liquor license. That they were serving a uniformed member of the military will matter not at all to the cops or the local licensing agency.

Same here. In fact, if you were not a member you could not even get into the VFW or American Legion. They only started to ease up on that in the 1990's as the WWII generation started dying off and there had been few eligible to join after Vietnam.

Myself, I would never go to either one in uniform. After boot camp leave, I almost never wore my uniform somewhere unless I had to.

AFIK, VFW or American Legion posts still need local liquor licenses to serve alcohol. And if they do, and they get caught serving someone under 21, they could lose said liquor license. That they were serving a uniformed member of the military will matter not at all to the cops or the local licensing agency.

Were you still in when the Feds coerced the states into raising the drinking age to 21?

No, as far as for being in when the drinking age was raised to 21.

However, and this is the big one, in doing more research into the National Minimum Legal Drinking Age law, there are assorted loopholes and exceptions, where states hold primacy. Yep, 21 is the legal age to buy a drink, but the state can make exceptions.

For example, religious purposes, parental consent, medical reasons, educational purposes (seriously, you can't go to culinary school and not learn about wines without tasting them, right?) and private functions or private clubs.

VFW and American Legion posts fit the definition of private clubs.

Also, 31 of the 50 states allow family members to furnish alcohol to underage members of their own family, 29 states (not the same list) have family exemptions, meaning you can't necessarily furnish them alcohol, but they can drink at your family party, and 14 of the 50 allow minor consumption with no restrictions.

Purchasing as a minor at a private event / private club is allowed in 31 (again, slightly different list) states. One example I found was that in Texas, if you're a minor and you're with your parents in a restaurant or bar, and your parent permits it, you can buy alcohol.

That means you've got 12.7 million kids that primarily binge drink,

Carl, I've not gone looking for the stats about the issue, but there are many countries where the drinking alcohol age is 18, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia are just a few. What you may want to dig out the stats for, if you can find them, is the proportion of 18-21 year olds involved in alcohol related issues in those countries and compare them with the USA stats for the same issues.

Here in Australia we do have some binge drinkers, but they're the sort of people who do binge drinking regardless of age, so you'll find them still binge drinking when they're in their 50s etc. However, binge drinking in the 18-20 year old group isn't that high as a group.

Do you know if there are countries that take an incremental approach? Beer and wine at age X and liquor (distilled spirits) at age Y where X is less than Y.

This used to be the case in Idaho.

You could but beer at 18, but for anything harder you had to be 21. Before the 1990's when the Feds forced them to change, they had some rather liberal laws.

Drivers license at 14, drinking at 18. But they also tied the responsibility in very closely. Get caught drinking and driving under 21, and you lost your license until you were 21. And the points for moving violations were almost double if you got a ticket under 18. The first moving violation infraction included a mandated drivers safety course.

And it was very effective, I always liked "carrot or stick" approaches like that. "We are going to give you some leeway. But if you violate that, you are getting slammed."

And even to this day 40 years later, everybody knows that if I have had a single drink, I am staying home for the rest of the night.

compare them with the USA

Oh, there's almost no comparison. If you teach your kids right, and don't make a huge deal of it, then it's not that much of an issue. The United States is well behind the rest of the modern world in this issue.

I have the finished version. It is lacking a bit. The Stroke was well over ten years ago as I recall it. Strokes tend to make life hard, even on writers when you can't hit the correct keys when you want to. Back then, mentioning Spitfire was a non no on her site.