Certainly something to consider, when I get my AF-1 Rev. H finally done, yes...I'll probably just put up a text file as a download, or ask you to fiddle around with it, heheh.

     Just tested it. The color tag idea works in a .TXT file too. Don't forget the closing tag,
[ /color ], at the bottom (omit spaces).

     As for the full justify thing, wait for the software. I gotta learn a little more about how font files
store the data, then grab the Verdana font file and plug it in. The algorithm itself is easy.

     I think the real importance of this is more psychological than anything else. The color
tag does make a story easier to read. But using it sends a message: the writer *respects*
the reader enough to make the effort, to do a little more work so the reader can enjoy the
thing a little more.

     Same with the para first line indent, and the full justification. Although full justify really
does have an impact, which is why almost every piece of text you've ever read is done
that way.

     If it isn't done, what you get is a ragged right margin, with no two lines of text the same
length. That is powerfully distracting to the eye, and the mind. Meaning the readers are
putting in more work than they should have to, and aren't reading as easily.

     FA will kindly word-wrap sentences right to the edge of the screen (or the Comment box),
but the price you pay for that convenience is looooong lines. And on a comp screen
that is death to the reader's attention. Just can't read a lot of text like that. We
can't win.

     Oh yes we can. Knowing it can be done is the first thing. Believing that it's important is
part two. The actual method [to do it] really isn't any more work, not compared to all the
sweat it took to write the story.

     Saving a story as a .TXT file? Using search-and-replace to change the tabs to hard spaces?
Then running the file through a custom-built text formatting program? Finally, adding a couple
of color tags? Oh dear, such labour, should be getting overtime.

     And no, I won't be 'fiddling around' with anybody's story, :- ) I've already written up the
essential key (Indent Trick (Nov 27 Journal)) that talks about the use of
the hard space. The color tag business is right here. I will also be doing a write-up on
the manual method (there's one more trick involved).

     But I don't expect many to jump on the full-justify bandwagon any time soon. If people
start to use the para indent trick and the color tag idea, that'll be a big improvement
right there. The readers will notice.

     It's March. Let's see how many people are doing this by the end of the summer. (And I
won't say I'm expecting a big crowd of company, either).


FB.

I shall take this into consideration also...the color tag would work, yes, increase the
contrast and make things easier to read. Unfortunately, I'm not entirely sure how to
the tab-indent, mainly because I don't use Windows; far too complicated, especially
when Microsoft Word...most recent version has to be the most dense and ridiculous
piece of software I've ever made the mistake of using. So, none of that, just
TextEdit for me.

I do hope that I can find a way to make it work, though...I need all the help I can get
to get my stuff read, I'm sure.

     The color tag thing may not be worth doing for really short stuff (you'll notice
I don't do my sonnets that way). But anything longer is a candidate, at the
small price of posting two versions, one with it, one without.

     That's going to deter people, I'm afraid. And it may look a little fishy too,
posting two copies of the same story.

     Got another way to do this? Nope. Go ahead and post two stories. One will be highly
readable, the other less so. Nothing comes for free. Who's gonna sue ya?

     As for the para indent jazzola, notice that this doesn't depend on Windows, or Word,
or whatever you're using to write.

     Either posting in the Comment box or as a .TXT file, you've got to convert your story
from whatever-it-is to text format (if you're not writing in that already).

     So now all you have to do is lay your paws on that hard space character. In Windows
you can use the Character Map utility. Apple or Linux systems have to have something
like this somewhere, some way to let you get at all the characters you can't type.

     And/or, there should be a way to type it in directly using the Alt key. The hard space
is character #160.

     What I do is select and copy one hard space onto the Clipboard. Then I select a Tab
at the front of a para. I call up search-and-replace (it comes up with the selected Tab in
Find field)

     Then in the Replace field I cntrl-V five times. That's five hard space chars. Punch
Replace All.

     All the Tab characters have been replaced with a string of five hard spaces. Punch
Save, and it's done.

     (In some circumstances instead of Tab chars you've just got a string of blank ordinary
spaces as a para indent. This'll work on that too. Select, then replace with hard
spaces.)

     I can't think of a less painless way to do this. Anybody who can, I'll pay 'em for it. It
beats the snot out of going through the whole story and adding hard spaces, para by
para.

     If this didn't matter, and a *lot*, I don't think I'd waste my time on it. Except it does
matter, and more than a lot, so I don't give a damn how bitchy FA is about para indents.
Ah-ma gonna keep doing it.

     As of last night's stats check, total main page views was 3,253, and cumulative story
views is about 5,400 on 149 subs of all types. I've only been on FA for just under nine months.

     What am I doing right, hmmm? :- )


FB.

Alrighty, then...I believe the relevant utility for me is keycaps. And yes, your
process is rather roundabout, but what else can be done? I mean, you can do
them up like PDF files on SF, but I don't know how to do that either...I'm
frightfully inadequate with these fancy electronical gadgets, I'm afraid.

As for you, you're doing something right. I have on 1755 views on 112
submissions, and I've been here since June of 2007. Funny thing is, when
you look at the stats, the highest number of views are for a story, a picture,
then another story...and I have only two stories on here. So perhaps I might
be doing something right, also. I shall have to see when I put up the revised
version...perhaps even ask for some critiques, even, before rolling out the final
version for the public.

As you've no doubt noticed, I go the downloadable route. That having been said, I recognize the need to grab the reader's attention and I do that via the time honored "Back of the book summary and/or excerpt" which I put in the author's comments.

PDF isn't an efficient file type, but it DOES guarantee that no matter what pdf reader is used on any given platform, the text will look the same.

As for the rest... it's good thoughts. I may jack around with the text formatting just for shits'n'giggles to see just how much of a difference it makes.

Incidentally and on a completely unrelated note... Hunger Games. My goddaughter told me about this and whilst in the B&N with her the other day I picked up a copy and read the first chapter.

FIRST FCKING PERSON!!!!

GAH.

*I* am not a girl, much less a half-starved girl stuck with the responsibility to tend a family in a post-totalitarian regime.

Had to put the book back and unless someone threatens me with something lethal I won't be reading what EVERYONE else is telling me is a good yarn. I don't care. First person is made with premium fail sauce, and I was never a fan of fail. Apparently though fail sauce is on sale because it seems increasingly common. Don't they teach the failing nature of first person in schools anymore?

     Greetings, Ceb, and welcome to hear from you.

     Agreement on three points. The benefit of a PDF-ed story is known readability. And the
reader can tweak Adobe with a but a click to improve that (somewhat). This is important, can
help tip the reading decision forward a bit.

     It also makes the story printable and it can be distributed to others. Mega-important, IMHO,
although it doesn't often factor into the reading decision.

     Which is what it all comes down to: having clicked onto the sub, will the reader go on to read
the story? I think this is where a lot of writers here have a blind spot. A click on a story sub
is not a reading decision.

     It's the [potential] reader trying to *find out* if the story's worth reading. The actual reading
decision happens about 3-5 seconds after the page appears. It's true in journalism,
it's true in fiction: your lead para, and the five after it, either catch the reader or they
don't. If the story's there on the page.



     So agreement second. If the story's a PDF, then whoo-hoo, damn right there has to be
some kind of king-hell effective blurb text right *there* in the reader's eyeballs. In other
words, advertising copy, period full stop, and it must be more carefully written than the
story itself.

     It has to persuade the reader to take that next action: download the story. Non-trivial
problem...

     (May have a couple of tricks to apply to this. Stay tuned.)

     Writing advertising copy is a bitch of a job, one that few writers can do well. So this is
a key reason why download-type stories suffer low readership. The reading decision
is just a little more complicated, one more step. One more way to fail. Reader
reads the poorly-written ad text, then says nahhh...




     We're in this spot, of course, because FA's just sub-par when it comes to displaying story
text. Or writers wouldn't opt for download only (but it's still crucial to have that file available).
They'd just drop their story onto FA, it looks fine, the readers click onto it and say, oh hey, I
like this, and read.

     That's the ideal. We're a long ways away from that right now. Readers simply don't expect
to have an easy time reading a posted story (which dents the reading decision). We
writers wanna do something about that, so we create good-looking .PDFs and
.DOCs and .RTFs. But there's a price, no?

     More, ya gotta notice how it seems that FA's pretty rigid about displaying story text (being
hemmed in by the restrictions of HTML). That's disappointing enough to a writer, as
you look at the finely-crafted text you've got in your WP, then look at the page
FA just horked up.

     And if you're using a .TXT file, to fix any glitches you gotta upload the file again? As all the
readers read your first draft copy and snigger at the boo-boos? Spiffy.

     Using the Comment box is awkward as snot, but at least you can edit the story right there
on FA. Notice just how powerful an editing suite you've got available too. And I used it
and some *heavy* tricks to upload a 65K word novel. Yes, I am mad, what was your
first clue? :- )

     (I do another one like that and I think I really will be).

     The way FA's set up, writers are just a little bit deterred from trying to improve text quality.
Can't do much about it, it's just too much work, FA seems too limited.

     Not true at all. This 'Empty Stub' bullshit I tripped over made it possible to edit 65K words
(glah...) and make 'em come out precisely right. I'm not going to need to go back
in for the boo-boos because there aren't any (I hope).

     Throw in this enhanced text jazzola (advertising, advertising) and I now have a fweepin'
*novel* up on FA that anybody with semi-working eyeballs can actually read. Took work.
For shorter stories, takes much less work. Meaning anybody can do it.

     Of course, if a blizzard of Empty Stubs start showing up on everybody's New Submissions
pages as a horde of writers copy this method, I'm likely to get shot... :- (



     Agreed third and last, there's something deeply fishy about the Hunger Games, something
that just raises the fur on the back on my neck. Didn't know it was 1st person. That makes
me even more leery now (given what 1st person PoV is supposed to do to the reader).

     This is the SF writer speaking, and I know and understand post-apocalyptic dystopias, and
how and why they work. I especially know how and why the characters work, and how and why
they appeal to a reader. See Rollerball for the essential themes and moral messages
that HG is riffing on.

     And see My Comments on Lei-Lani's Journal for a more trenchant analysis, in which
I argue that Collins may/may not be guilty of literary malpractice in framing this juggernaut
as 'youth' fiction.

     It isn't. Not by any stretch. Consider: if this story was done up as a Japanese manga,
would we be so quick to market it to the 8-18 audience? Not in a heartbeat, it being
obvious that this is an extraordinarily potent *adult* story at the core. And a violently
grisly one at that.

     That HG is masquerading as a youth story strikes me as dishonest at best, malfeasance
at worst (and I smell the sulfurous influence of marketing weasels). As much as Collins
has produced a stunningly well-written book that has great literary merit--so it is
said, anyway--that doesn't diminish the indictment, IMHO.

     There: now I've *guaranteed* I'm gonna get shot. But at least I'll have company, right?

     Hey, hey, what...? Where are you going...? Get back here and face this firing squad like
a bull!! (Jeeze, didn't know Tauren furs could run that fast. :- ) )


FB.


PS: I remember your early comments on this, lo, those many centuries ago in 2008. Scappo
too had a lot to say. Allow me to edit the credits section... done.

Oops: last para should read: 'I remember your early comments on Just Drive, lo, those many...'

My objection to HG is pretty much exclusively relegated to the style in which it is written which is to say it is an attempt to put me in the shoes of a character who is so dissimilar from me that in order to immerse I would have to essentially completely embrace the strongest kinds of cognitive dissonance. Some portion of a writer's responsibility is in being able to think like a variety of different characters of both genders.

That is NOT however, a reader's duty, nor should the onus of such powerful dissonance be placed on a reader in order to appreciate any given work.

I've seen the argument made that such stories are designed to be read as though the writer were telling the story, speaking aloud to you the audience, as it were. In certain cases and with certain types of writing this works. When one is reading a Diary for instance (Anne Franke comes to mind...) one can acknowledge that these entries are in fact conversation and/or monologs with/to an invisible audience.

For full works of fiction this does not wash.

I have given your other objection to HG some thought and must concede that it does seem a bit... far-fetched to consider this a youth novel. There are however certain precedents. Consider the Hardy Boys in their original incarnation, racism, bigotry and all. While the revisions were cleaner, the themes in the books were often quite dark. What makes the difference much more powerful is in fact the manner in which the books were written, which is to say in 3rd person omniscient, which gives the reader the requisite distance from the action and the scenarios presented. (Ironically the latest reboot of the Hardy Boys is being written in first person... >,<)

Writing in first person presents several problems and in return confers few and dubious benefits. First, it eliminates the distance that invites a reader to analyze the story and instead tries to force said reader into a position of feeling the same way the represented character does. It gives an action novel an unnecessarily frantic overtone which more often than not ruins some of the excitement and is prone to cause the reader to miss more subtle elements of storytelling. Unless of course it doesn't work in which case the reader, often privy to more information than the POV character, is tapping his/her foot impatiently waiting for the character to reach the obvious conclusion.

First person also puts undo strain on the AUTHOR, because the author of a 1st person narrative still knows the entirety of the plot and must constantly throttle back the information given to the reader. Inevitably (unless the author is masterful, which... *cracks up* I'm sorry, it's just unlikely) this leads to mistakes in perspective; it leads to the character demonstrating a priori knowledge (which the astute reader may or may not notice) and to a certain extent it randomizes the insights of the character such that we're never entirely sure that these are the thoughts a character with such and such a personality and intellectual potency would have vs. the thoughts the author simply needs to insert to move the story along.

First person is more visceral by nature. It is more intense. It is HARDER to write because if you can't lock a reader into the mind of the character telling the tale you and your story are both fcked. Well when a grown man with a lifetime of experience picks up a book and is expected to suddenly be a desperate, cynical girl child... yeah, that fails. The writer who could put me in the mind of that kind of kid hasn't been born yet. Put a mac formatted disc in a pc and what do you get? Nothing but problems.

I tend to agree as well with your thoughts regarding distopian themes; if they exist they should be properly couched (See Dr. Seuss' "The Butter Battle Book"). I wouldn't be so quick to blame the marketers though. It's just as if not more probable that the author of HG intended to present her message to precisely the audience it is marketed to. Unless I see an author's interview where an answer to the question is explicitly provided, I assume that the material is properly (from the author's point of view) presented.

     Shock, horror, I'm gonna agree with you some more (oh dear, will the poor bull's
heart be able to take it? :- ) ). Since we've been around this track before

     The first person mode is a fine line to walk, comes with great risk of flubbing it up.
It can be a cheap conceit on the writer's part, as he/she tries to give the reader a 'privileged'
and inside look at who the MC is. And in the MC's own words, too. You lucky reader you,
you've got something thpecial here.

     At worst this is a manipulation, a deliberate trick to engage the reader's interest when
the story itself isn't really worthy. Rework a lot of 1st person stories into 3rd person and see
what you get.

     HG may or may not be guilty of some of this. Dunno. I'd have to read it. Any volunteers
to hold the 120mm tank cannon to my temple? Be advised, I've got a knife. :- >

     But yeah, agreed, 1st person mode does encourage the reader to erase the line a
little, to identify with the MC, to get a sort of 'resonance' going. The reader can see the MC's
character so clearly, can understand so well the MC's interior life. It doesn't take long for
the word 'I' to morph into 'Me.'

     Or rather, the reader comes to see the MC as someone 'Like Me.' Why of course I'm
going to keep reading. This story's really about me. Isn't it?

     Bullshit. And dangerous, for both writer and reader. The writer has to keep the performance
going right up to the last page, and can't let the MC do anything that might make the reader
say 'Waaait a minute, this MC *isn't* like me at all.' This can lead to a story that locks in
the MC, can't change, can't break the reader's expectations.

     As for the reader, being put into the shoes and mind of the MC this way is going to
mark that person, possibly to the point of influencing their own self-identity. This may or
may not be a positive thing. How exactly do you step out of those shoes when you
close the book?

     For adult fiction we assume the reader can take it. For youth fiction, this assumption
is risky. The nature of the fandom that's blossomed around HG is a big tell. The PMs I
had with one young person (who was heavily spooked out over HG) were a bigger tell.
Would HG be able to do this in the 3rd person? Not likely.

     Ergo, Collins made a deliberate choice to do it this way, in full knowledge of the
effect it would have. And dropped the [youth]] reader into a moral universe that would
make most adults shiver. And not stop for about an hour.

     Or maybe Collins didn't deliberately choose? Speaking from experience, a story that
comes to you in the 1st person can be a very potent hit to the mind. The writer gets to
really, *really* dive into the MC, and in a way that a 3rd person story rarely does. It's a
heady thing to write this way. Quite seductive.

     And quite easy to go over the top, too, as the writer's identification with the MC fuzzifies
the line in a different way. Who the writer is starts to drift into who the MC is. The writer
can lose control of the story as the fantasy of being the MC takes over. Negative good.

     The *only* correct way to write in 1st person, IMHO, is to consider the story as a
soliloquy on the stage. The MC is 'speaking' directly to the reader, is telling the story
of what happened to him/her/it. This angle on 1st person is entirely valid; old, old
storytelling mode, if not the oldest.

     This means there is a fundamental distance between MC and reader. That may be
lessened a bit when the MC talks about actual action, dropping out on necessity into
the present tense. 1st person can convey an immediacy that 3rd person lacks.

     But at all times the MC is *aware* of the audience/reader. And the reader knows that
the MC is aware. The entire story is a speech on the MC's part, a performance, a show. We,
the readers, are merely witnesses to it. We are in no way, shape, or form, being invited
to be *in* the performance. Or to identify ourselves as the MC.

     Knowing this, this is how Just Drive, She Said got written. Weber does not hesitate to
drop in 'asides' to the reader, makes specific reference to 'You' (as in you who are reading
this text). If this were done on stage--or oooo, as animation--he'd be looking at the
audience/camera a lot. And we'd get it, as clear as a bell. The distance between MC
and reader is assured, every step of the way.

     The 1st person story that *doesn't* do it this way: danger, danger. Because the
story is coming to us in a 'real person's' voice, speaking directly to us, we are all the
more persuaded of the reality and authenticity of the story. The MC wouldn't lie, would
he/she/it?

     Again, this is a manipulation. When it works, okay, it works. But let the writer slip for
just a millisecond, let the MC say something doh-dumb, and poof: you've just lost a
reader. The reality and authenticity of the story has vaporized on you. And you're
not getting it back.

     3rd person stories aren't quite as vulnerable to this. 1st person stories have to make
every syllable the MC utters work right. And when it works, okay, it works. But it ain't
easy to make it work. Do ya feel lucky, punk writer? :- )

     Thus endeth this installment of Lit Theory for Fur Writers (well, who else is there
around here?). Stay tuned for the next ultimate-fighting, bare-knuckle battle over
whatever the hell we can find to argue about. Only the strong will survive. *


FB.




* And a pox on you, Collins, for forever ruining that line for me. Why couldn't
ya have just had them settle it with some cutthroat chess or something? :- (

text https://www.furaffinity.net/view/36510407/