gacked from several on the flist.
field guide to
hopeful_fiction/you know you’re reading story by
angstslashhope when...
1. more words are used up by description than actual plot progression.
2. run on sentences are more common than Richard Sharpe’s birthplace.
3. the story starts with someone waking up.
4. lines from canon are randomly dropped into places that twist their original meaning.
5. the dialogue is broken up with description of body language.
...and that’s all i can think of right now. feel free to add to the list!
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
1. more words are used up by description than actual plot progression.
2. run on sentences are more common than Richard Sharpe’s birthplace.
3. the story starts with someone waking up.
4. lines from canon are randomly dropped into places that twist their original meaning.
5. the dialogue is broken up with description of body language.
...and that’s all i can think of right now. feel free to add to the list!
no subject
Lol! I seem to recall that as a beta direction from you to me!
no subject
as long as the flow of the dialogue isn't ruined, that kind of thing works really well for building up the story/tone/characterisation solidly.
hee.
no subject
You certainly did not! I got quite a few directions to do more of it :-)
no subject
lines from canon are randomly dropped into places that twist their original meaning.
it's better that way!
no subject
and i agree, it is better that way. i want to POKE THE READER'S BRANE, dammit! or, er, that sounds kinda like i'm talking about skullfucking.
hi!