Via Sarah Rios. This is what noblebright fantasy is all about, and why we called our boxed set Light in the Darkness. Darkness in the darkness isn’t any more interesting than light in the light.
Originally shared by Kay Solo
This is a good post. I’ve seen this said about tragedy, and I’ve seen this said about conflict. They’re idealized as crucial building blocks in the storytelling formula, and while they have their place, it’s very easy to fall into the trap of adding tragedy for the sake of having tragedy, thinking that these are guaranteed forces to drive your story forward in a compelling way.
This often leads to your “grimdark” stories that many people escape by reading/writing purposefully over-the-top happy things because there’s an overwhelming amount of tragedy and hurt and depressing fluff. These are not the only ways you can keep a reader interested. Moderation in all things, and that applies especially here. It’s possible to be bland, but equally possible to go too far in the opposite direction.
It’s like “everything is better with bacon” except bacon. Adding bacon to bacon is just more bacon.
It’s like “everything is better with bacon” except bacon. Adding bacon to bacon is just more bacon.
It’s like “everything is better with bacon” except bacon. Adding bacon to bacon is just more bacon.
It’s like “everything is better with bacon” except bacon. Adding bacon to bacon is just more bacon.
It’s like “everything is better with bacon” except bacon. Adding bacon to bacon is just more bacon.
I coined the phase #dishopian (dis-hop-ian) to describe fiction where everything is better than good.
I coined the phase #dishopian (dis-hop-ian) to describe fiction where everything is better than good.
I coined the phase #dishopian (dis-hop-ian) to describe fiction where everything is better than good.
I coined the phase #dishopian (dis-hop-ian) to describe fiction where everything is better than good.
I coined the phase #dishopian (dis-hop-ian) to describe fiction where everything is better than good.