As Long as You Both Shall Argue · 12:20am Oct 19th, 2017
My recent story, As Long as You Both Shall Live, is currently topping the Feature Box. Swag. 
Lots of Fimfiction readers believe they (the readers) deserve to live forever. Who knew?
But I'm not linking this blog entry to that one. Instead, I'm linking it to Back to Normal. This is a post about that story, and how it differs from my new one.
You see, Back to Normal is the only story I've ever written which is more controversial than my current success. I don't think it's Dark, but bookplayer was so disturbed by the ending she held my story hostage with a downvote until I agreed to add the Dark tag. It might not immediately be obvious where the controversy comes from if you see the comments, because I accidentally deleted the original comments when I revised the story. The short version is that everypony lost their shit over the ending.
Before I go into detail on why, I should qualify why I think As Long as You Both Shall Live is a "success"... and it's not just because I topped the Feature Box today. One of my biggest barometers for "was I successful as an author" is how stridently ponies argue different points of view in the comments section. 
No, seriously, I'm not trolling. If people have strong feelings from a story, and those feelings are direct opposites, that means I did something right. I made people think, and with my artistic pickaxe, I exposed an issue where two groups of people can't believe the other group disagrees with them.
This is precisely why I write fiction.
Back to Normal is a fascinating example for the same reason that religious dogma is often fascinating. Consider the Catholic Church which believes in transubstantiation: the bread literally becomes partly flesh and the wine becomes partly blood. (Never mind that scientific tests show this is false—that's a separate issue entirely.) Now compare this with consubstantiation: the bread and flesh exist 'alongside' literal flesh and blood, in the same space. Those two things have no operational difference (there is literally no way to tell them apart—perhaps even philosophically), yet people have murdered each other en masse over them! They can't even define the meaning of the difference and yet they kill because of it. Britain even used to deny people public office if they believed one versus the other.
In Back to Normal, there is no operational difference provided between the outcome that happens and the outcome that might have happened, yet people were livid in the original comments as though the difference were tangible and all-consuming. This is absolutely fascinating to me. Unlike As Long as You Both Shall Live, the controversy caught me completely by surprise.
I'm planning a sequel for Back to Normal, but I doubt it will be nearly as successful. I can only try. 
Let it never be said I shy from controversial content. I'm going to make you think, whether you like it or not—and especially when you don't realize it's happening. 
See, this is one of the things that annoys me about you as an author(another being bad characterization, but you knew that already
). You purposely write stories to be as controversial as possible, then act surprised when the readers react the way they do. A lot of people take their horsewords very seriously, so of course they're going to argue in the comments. You have no one to blame but yourself.
Honestly, keep up the good work. It takes talent to piss off that many people. More power to you.
4701806
I don't write stories to be controversial. You've misunderstood.
I write stories to make people think. This leads to blind spots over ethical issues coming to light in the comments.
4701832
Yes you do.
See that? You are directly striving for controversy. Don't say you're not, because that's a lie. Making people think in two opposed directions is the very definition of stirring controversy.
That's why it annoys me so much when I see comments like the one you just made: you come off as some smug know-it-all and we're all just dumb for not seeing things the way you do.
4701859
I'm not making them think in two opposed directions. I'm making them think, and this exposes a difference in opinion that already existed. I don't want ponies to argue, I want them to realize which "obvious truths" they are taking for granted.
4701863
...and again, that is controversial. What part of this are you not getting?
This reminds me of how when Batman v superman came out, a lot of people it seemed were upset about Batman killing people. Which he did.
In his own mind, he was innocent, because he never directly killed them. Even when his actions directly led to their deaths, there was always an extra step, a layer of deniability. Some fans agreed with that, others did not. And yet, from a purely objective standpoint, Batman could be held responsible for their deaths if anyone dared to try.
...
And now I wait.
4701859
I don't think anypony is dumb.
Ugh. I apologize. I honestly am just bad at conveying my feelings. I was happy because I got people dialoging about stuff they'd never thought about before, that's all.
Imma take a break from FF for a while
4701868
I'm not trying to insult you! I just want you to be honest. As I said in my first comment, it takes talent to anger that many people. It's a good thing.
Well, I mean, Catholic beliefs are kinda weird. (Just my opinion as a Baptist)
But as to what you're writing about, I have noticed that quite a few of the most successful stories (real novels and otherwise) are highly controversial.
Take, say, The Call of the Wild by Jack London. Some people hate it for being so radical and it's even been banned in Italy. Others, such as me, really enjoy it for the story, while others still agree with the very ideas the book is hated for.
Or, perhaps, the Harry Potter series (J.K. Rowling). Banned and even burned in some countries for the teachings of witchcraft and wizardry, renowned by others as a great adventure tale of a boy thrown into an unknown world with many dangers he must overcome -- a "don't give up" story.
Basically, to make people think is a good thing, and one of the many marks of a great author. Good job. And actually, this is part of why I like your stories and first followed you, I was forced to think.
4701962
Thank you (for the entire thoughtful post).
The last sentence literally made me laugh.
This is why you are my type of author
Your work got me and still got me thinking about things like right and wrong, society, sexuality, personality and how all of that are interconnected with each other.
However there is one thing that I have never heard an author talk about and I do not know if it has a different name or if it just is not a thing. I call it "Reader intelligence". Stories that have hidden meanings, clues, deep philosophy, "witty", advance math, economics, physics and deep character interaction (I don't have a better word for when you are supposed to just understand what the character means and does). Things that require knowledge, understanding or perhaps some intellectual "ability" like abstract thinking or (my favorite) openness in order to fully understand the story.
Some of your stories are easy to read and understand but for me the stories Broken Symmetry, Irreversible and Mission of Mercy were harder to understand. I gave up on Broken Symmetry because I did not understand the physics, Irreversible is starting to be a bit advanced and Mission of Mercy I just did not fully grasp.
I guess I want to ask if you know about something like this "Reader intelligence" I have been thinking about and your thoughts about it. Because you seem to try and coax it out of your readers and appeal to the readers with "high reader intelligence".
I can't tell if this makes me your best or worst possible audience. On the one hand, I always appreciate food for thought. On the other, I try not to read the comments on other people's stories, and even when I do, I try to avoid debates on the Internet.
Congrats as always on making the feature box. ^.^ I admit I avoided reading this one--sometimes I'm down for unhappiness sometimes I'm not, ya know?
Reader reaction to controversy is interesting. It's been a while but if I recall Twilight makes a morally questionable decision at the end of Back to Normal, and readers always seem to react to that kind of thing when the story either condones it or is neutral or silent on it. I'm certainly not immune myself. I think it betrays something about either the function stories serve, or maybe what we expect of them, the sort of social contract, that we take it so personally when one violates our sensibilities or ethics in some way. We get as angry as if we let a neighbor into the house and they peed on the rug. It's really interesting when you think about it.
4702747
I sincerely believe if you give Broken Symmetry a second chance, you'll be glad you did. You don't need to understand the science to understand the story, and as it progresses, the geekery is explained to the audience. Try to view the science like it's Star Trek technobabble.
That said, it's an interesting observation you have, and most of that focus isn't conscious on my part. They say write what you know, and I know too damn much when it comes to most things. This makes it easy for me to overestimate my audience's ability to track things, and I suspect it's one of my more glaring flaws as a writer.
4703305
It's to bad then that I do not understand the explanations either. And I have never watched Star Trek. You see (although this is just my personal feeling) when I do not understand something in a story and this can be something from a word I never heard before to, like Broken Symmetry: physics. This can create a problems for me. If I can not understand it after quite some time of research then I feel bad. Thats what happened with Broken Symmetry for me, I felt like "less", stupid, unintelligent and yeah, I do not like not understanding things. Abstract thinking is not my strength.
It is not a bad thing to demand reader intelligence however. I know at least one of your readers that likes to pause and Google new things they find in stories and stories with depth usually gets a lot of praise. I think it is also a matter of taste.
I once asked one other author about reader intelligence because I thought her story was a bit advanced and she said that her story rewards reader intelligence rather then demands it.
4703314
I guess it depends on where you left off in the story...?
4703315
I gave up after chapter 4.
4703316
Ah, that's way too soon.
You're not expected to understand what's going on at this point. I can almost assuredly promise you that if you read the entire story you'll be glad you did. Unfortunately, the fifth chapter contains an explanation of a theory the characters have that is a little confusing (I need to add a diagram), but chapters shortly after this describe what's happening in a way that increasingly easy for the audience to follow, particularly once you hit chapter eight.
I'm actually in the process of revising the story because it's about to be posted to EQD, and concerns like yours were one of the things I wanted to fix up. Specific feedback on places you felt lost would be super useful to me.
4703323
.
Well then I guess I should get started
4703324
I'm currently drawing a diagram to help with the fifth chapter, but see what you can get through.
And thanks!