[Rhubarb]

If you successfully manage to incorporate all of those elements into something that doesn't suck, you're a far better writer than me.

[Laughlyn]

Jesus VD, do you have to de-rail every thread you post in? My theory about you being Haniibal is becoming less of a joke every day.

A quick word of advice AGAIN; Cool it, stop the angry attention grabbing rant stuff, if you are going to pursue this 'story', host it outside the forums and link to it, because based on your content it's breaking the rules. Hecc's a mod round here, and if you want to be the first person to get banned from Chefelf.com, you're going the right way about it.

Rock_dash: I'm always interested in seeing what people come up with, so why not. That's sort of what the screening room is here for anyway.

[Voodoo Dog]

Actually, its written in the form of a letter from a psychiatrist who was assigned John McCarthy to an author he knows writing a book about serial killers. It's not funny and it's not over the top ranting, its more like a coldly professional letter you would get from a doctor, with a smidgen of warmness because he is your friend. Its not really graphic at all, these things are just mentioned in a clinical manner even though I do want the reader to be upset a little. I don't know if you know this Laughlyn, but the Holy Bible is full of graphic descriptions of rape, incest, genocide and murder, some of these acts are even carried out by God himself. In the bible God's wrath is shown in a positive light, whereas my intention is to state that McCarthy was wrong to carry out these vile acts, even if he thought it was neccesary to save the world. If the ancient hebrew's writings can be accepted by society, why not mine? I even have him flagellating himself in the "I bet it even made Rhubarb wince" way I described before to punish himself for his murders, and the lust he still feels for his little sister, just to get the message across.

Did I derail another thread? Sorry. I'll return to the subject of writing style. Since this is the first thing I've ever written I don't know if it will be typical of me or not, but I don't seem to be a very character based writer. The most memorable character in The Darkness of The Elves is John McCarthy, and the focus is not really on him but on his message. Unless you count being fucked up as a personality trait, in which case he'll probably be the most in-depth character I'll ever create. Is lack of character a good thing or a bad thing? Some of my favourite authors focus more on the situation than the people, George Orwell, Philip K. Dick, Issac Asimov. However, I am also a huge fan of such character based authors as Terry Pratchett and Douglas Adams. I suppose it's not what you write, it's how you write it.

And Dark Elves don't make me Hannibal, Laughlyn. The catholic church on the other hand...IT'S ALL A VATICAN CONSPIRACY TO TAKE OVER THE WORLD! THE INQUISITION, THE CRUSADES, P-2, ALL OF IT! GRAAGH!

This post has been edited by Voodoo dog: 09 May 2005 - 05:14 PM

[Laughlyn]

Atcually VD, I was refering to your forum posts on the whole, and the amount of bad language and caps talk you like to use. Read the rules of posting again.

but you know, that's the last I'm going to say on this matter, because this is a good thread that I'd rather not see locked in a flame war.

[Voodoo Dog]

Gar! Why can't I leave these things alone? I feel I have to respond to your criticisms Laughlyn. This is the last I'm gonna say on the matter too. I hate flame wars as well, even if they are politely worded.

I'm sorry you don't like the way I post. I'll be the first one to admit I can get carried away and ramble on and on. But I think I generally stay on topic, with a few notable and rather unfortunate exceptions, like apologising to Yahtzee for absolutely no reason whatsoever, and declaring my undying love for the lushous Ms. Sherwood along with asking her to spank me. (Ye gods, what the hell was I thinking?!?!?) YOU WERE RIGHT, I DO HAVE A HABIT OF TYPING IN CAPS WHENEVER I GET ANGRY OR ENTHUSIASTIC ABOUT SOMETHING. But I don't think I do it that much. I'm a pretty enthusiastic guy, in case you hadn't noticed, and I like to get express my feelings however I can. If you genuinely can't stand me *sniff* then feel free to scroll down to the posts after mine. I won't mind in the slightest. Regarding the rule, I can't help but notice that a guy called Jon Gutner not only posts here, but has his own forum here. In case you don't know the guy, he talks like this:

i hopee i don regret dis
i don regret dis.
i don regret dis>>
do you liek dairy studff?./? i doo.
sinserialy,,..
BLAHMBABAGO!!!!!

Now call me mad, but I don't like that at all. In fact I can barely read it. But hey, if thats the way the guy wants to write, then its his business. He aint got kicked out yet, so I don't think I will.

Oh god. OH GOD! TANGENT! Quick, somebody post something on writing skills or we're all gonna die!!!!

[Slade]

For the record, I've got no probalo with you, VD. I don't see any aggressive de-railment and you've toned down the amount of times you say "cunt" quite considerably since your entrance.

And I never understood Jon, apparently he was quite endearing to many people. I wasn't around those forums when Mr. Gutner was.

In my current state, I'm trying to figure out the best sort of tone for the story I want to write. I'm not sure which angle to go for, I'll be pondering it.

And everyone is made of sand.

[Rhubarb]

That's probably another question I should ask here - what sort of elements do you people like to incorporate? Myself, I invariably end up with revolutionary-themed plots, with people questioning authority and fighting back against the establishment. Even when I'm not trying to. I also have a lot of hardcore psychological stuff, with lots of headfuckery and psychosis - getting inside character's heads to what makes them tick. And I love my antiheroes. I like to tell the stories of people who would normally be considered the villains in more traditional settings. Straight black-and-white good-and-evil themes piss me off.

I also love weird imagery. The rich, dreamlike, fairy-tale stuff that's just a little bit surreal or discomforting. Like a garden made of glass, or courtyard of creepy sculptures, or an underwater mansion. Neil Gaiman is good at this sort of thing.

[Slade]

Hear hear. There is no black and white, only shades of grey.

[Helena]

The Godawful Fan Fiction forums are great for tips on what to avoid, at least. You can post your stories in the 'In Progress' section for suggestions and constructive criticism (original fic as well as fanfic) - but be aware that the people there will have no qualms about telling you exactly what they really think of your story. (I should know; I'm a member.) So be warned: it's not for the thin-skinned.

[StarWarsIsUs]

I want some of you to read my versions of the prequals.

[Voodoo Dog]

On the subject of anti-heroes, I love 'em but I think they must be one of the hardest personality types to get right. The balance is so hard. They either come off as malicious little villians who just happen to be the main character, or as poor neglected little twerps who had a horrible childhood or something and now have no choice but to commit evil.

Sometimes both of those work but I prefer an anti-hero to be someone working for a cause he believes in and will do anything to achieve it. Little children in your line of fire? Blow the fuckers away! 'Cos if you DON'T, the evil guy using them as a shield will go on to destroy the world. It's the lives of a few kids compared to millions. You may have a few nightmares afterwards but you get the job done. Examples would be Magneto from X-Men, Judge Dredd from 2000 AD and Roland from SK's Dark Tower series.

Was that one okay Rhubarb?

[Rhubarb]

Yes thank you.

And my antiheroes don't generally have agendas. And I've never had any trouble writing for them... in fact, my problem is creating heroes who aren't antiheroes. The way I usually do it is take a villainous stereotype and tell his/her side of the story by giving him/her some humanity (this is what Pratchett did with his character of Death, and with the three witches from Macbeth in Wyrd Sisters, not that I'm comparing myself or nothin'). As Slade says, there are only shades of grey.

One of my favourites at the moment is that creepy guy who lives in the old haunted mansion on top of the hill overlooking the village, the one who's all gaunt and hermit-like and is probably a sorcerer or something, or insane, or maybe just a pervert (this is England late 1800s btw). My version of that character is a sulky, alcoholic artist who's moved into this nasty, lonely, decaying old house in an effort to hide from his mad aristocratic family. He's rather ugly and sneering and antisocial and rude as hell to everyone, but he's likeable (I hope) because he's also rather witty, a bit of a loser in an endearing way, is a rather unhappy person underneath his arrogance, and is essentially a compassionate guy when he's pushed to it (as is evidenced by his treatment of the only other character in the story who's more of a loser than him). He's also the only who who thinks that Victorian societal values are stupid. Incidentally, he's my favourite of all my characters, and the one who I most relate to.

My other main antihero is a psychotic General (the setting is post-apocalyptic future) who as a child was forced into a horrific training regime carefully designed to destroy any positive emotions within him in a (failed) attempt to create a cold, emotionless killer. He's coarse, sadistic, cruel, violent, half-mad, and sees all compassion as a weakness, but he's also deeply hateful of himself, isolated from humanity, and is frequently suicidal. The reader isn't supposed to like him, but they're supposed to feel some pity toward him. He's also one of the only characters who isn't stupid and is contemptuous of his flippant, snobbish, upperclass associates (through which the average reader can relate to him), and he has a deep-seated, almost romantic appreciation of beauty. The story is ultimately one of redemption, in that the General develops affection for another character (which entirely destroys his mental defences and sends him even more insane), and ends with a compromise... he's still a fucking evil psycho, and probably always will be, but he has some compassionate tendencies in there somewhere.

Others have included:
- a gentleman assassin who simply can't relate to other people as living things, but is a thoroughly nice chap so long as you don't get to know him
- a wraith who has no body of his own and thus inhabits the animated corpses of the newly dead, but is the most mild-mannered and intellectual of all my characters
- a miserable and cringing escaped slave with almost no spine to speak of
- a little sorcerer alchemist dude who lives in a tower and has to keep replacing his door because bloody heroes keep breaking in. The heroes never make it far because the sorcerer is on good terms with his undead servants' union.

This post has been edited by Rhubarb: 10 May 2005 - 11:57 AM

[Voodoo Dog]

And of course, who could forget one of the best anti-heroes of all time...TRILBY!!!!!

[Rhubarb]

Trilby's quite cool. I dunno if he's all that much of an antihero, unless you just go by the fact that he's a thief. Quinn is more of a real antihero, what with his cheerful rudeness and his ultraviolent sprees. Not that I want to get into a discussion of YZ's characters on here. It's in the wrong forum and takes attention away from my stuff. >:(

[Icey]

Rhubes, spray us with your characters, please!

Well, to go into my characters, would be... Not quite as much fun. I generally just begin with an idea for a character, that then mutates, twists turns and turns into something entirely different, gains backstory and ambitions as I write them into stories and such. Just to show how my characters do these things...

My first ever character, that had more depth than paper was a priest/vigilante that had his eyes gouged out. He brought justice to the street through his guns. That was three years before Once Upon a Time in Mexico came out, so it was my idea, MY IDEA! At first he was a good, just man with just a little bit extreme opinions on what sinners deserve. He then slowly over time, as I matured, turned into a man incapable of caring for the suffering of others before he begun his career as a vigilante. Afterwards he just turned into a vengeful psycho that used God as an excuse to hide behind while he shot rapists, criminals, child molestors and pagans. It wasn't till the end that realizes that he's a hypocritical fuck, and loses the ability to function without bumping into everything. He then redeems himself with a self sacrifice.

Other character, starts at pretty much the other end of the spectrum. He begun as a cold, demented warlord over a large clan but later turned into my favorite character. He gained a soul as I used him more and more, he never sacrificed his men and when he sent his men out to fight, he was out there with them. He was still morally corrupt, raped a woman to have offspring (reward for saving her life) and extremely cruel and disrespectful on the hands of those outside his clan. But he had that glint of goodness in him that made him just and beautiful to me.