Wish-fulfillment

Are you annoyed at the writers or the readers, or rather, as a writer or reader? Either way, how does it impact your writing? (I don't know how to phrase this more politely, but I mean it as a genuine inquiry, not in an accusatory fashion.) Are you worried about not being mainstream enough or that there isn't enough of an audience for your story? Not as attractive for publishing? Missing trends?

I sense frustration (and a touch of snobbishness, "poor, cliched writing"), but what about?

I think it comes down to escapism. People read to escape their normal, perceived boring lives. On the page are people like them, living in an extraordinary circumstance.

Something that's always bothered me about the writing community is this advice of putting your character through the absolute wringer. Anything bad? Throw it at them. Throw everything and the kitchen sink at them and watch as they struggle to get out of it. Just when they manage to crawl out from under it, throw more shit at them! Make their lives a living hell! RAWR RAWR To the point of ludicrousness.

...and maybe many readers don't really want that. They don't want to read and escape into somone's life which is one huge shit pile that never seems to get any better except for maybe at the end, if they're lucky, and the suffering actually has a huge payout.

The struggles that many characters labor under are those struggles we see in every day life and for that brief moment, the reader finally gets to escape into that magical world where it's surmountable and their life becomes easier to manage.

I know for myself I really, really hate reading about crapsack worlds (warning: TVTropes link). Some readers love them and that's great. But not everyone does and I think this trend of wish-fulfillment bears some of that out.

gothicangel said:

So what is it with this 'trend', and what makes it so appealing to readers?

Click to expand...

It's not a "trend". Wish-fulfillment has always done better than realism (on the whole). Genre fiction basically is wish-fulfillment. People want to feel good, and that's why they read books, so it isn't surprising that books that cater to reader needs directly rise above the rest.

I'm always surprised when other writers are shocked at the popularity of these sorts of stories. I figured it would be obvious after, say, Harry Potter, and the depression people experience when these wish-fulfillment stories end.

It's true that books full of conflict and struggle are interesting, but stories are about emotion. If people experience heightened joy all the way through a book (by their desires being met) then they're going to enjoy it more than the brief bouts of gratification they get from a series that focuses more on realistically depicting a character or set of characters' struggle.

bearilou said:

Something that's always bothered me about the writing community is this advice of putting your character through the absolute wringer. Anything bad? Throw it at them. Throw everything and the kitchen sink at them and watch as they struggle to get out of it. Just when they manage to crawl out from under it, throw more shit at them! Make their lives a living hell! RAWR RAWR To the point of ludicrousness. Hahaha!

...and maybe many readers don't really want that. They don't want to read and escape into somone's life which is one huge shit pile that never seems to get any better except for maybe at the end, if they're lucky, and the suffering actually has a huge payout.
This, this and this.

Click to expand...

Bearilou puts it really well.

agree, not a trend. It's the very source of storytelling from the days when we sat around the fire and told stories to each other, aeons before writing was invented. "Grog was stalking the rhinoceros when suddenly (I bet they used that word then ) the rhino wheeled and charged! And Grog (got all heroic and stuff). The end." Both Grog and Storyteller get an extra ration of rhino liver. Everybody's happy.

And when the rhino whirled, and Grog died? Still better to turn it into a story where Grog was heroic first and sacrificed himself so that everyone can eat rhino liver tonight. It also helps recruit the youngsters to more rhino-hunting, else they might start thinking "hmm, maybe rhino liver isn't worth dying over." But a chance to be a hero in a story? Makes the risk more palatable. (I've no advice for what makes rhino liver more palatable.)

"Wish fulfillment adventures" are the original. Everything else is newer and derivative.

lorna_w said:

agree, not a trend. It's the very source of storytelling from the days when we sat around the fire and told stories to each other, aeons before writing was invented. "Grog was stalking the rhinoceros when suddenly (I bet they used that word then ) the rhino wheeled and charged! And Grog (got all heroic and stuff). The end." Both Grog and Storyteller get an extra ration of rhino liver. Everybody's happy.

.

Click to expand...

Sounds like Grog was ahead of his time...


ETA: What - I can't be all nitpickery today?

lol. Yeah, that Storyteller.

lorna_w said:

"Wish fulfillment adventures" are the original. Everything else is newer and derivative.

Click to expand...

I dunno if Greek tragedy qualifies as "newer," but hey, maybe.

But yeah, I think Bearilou makes a good point--there is such a thing as taking it over the top, and making a rather bad trope out of what should be a tension-building technique.

Best way to avoid that is to avoid making your character suffer for no reason. There should be a purpose in any rocks you throw at them--not just because you happened to have a rock handy and it was fun.

(One of these days, I think I'm going to write a rock-thrower's guide; it's actually an art form, and too many people just pick one up and chuck it.)

I don't have a problem with wish-fulfillment stories as a form, and can enjoy them very much (though I'm not in love with the examples cited). It's what many of the old Hollywood classics were all about.

But you can't have a story without conflict. True? Everybody who picks up a book knows there is going to be some kind of conflict, some kind of problem that has to be resolved in the story. And how much wish fulfillment can you have without being gratuitous? Not that I think conflict after conflict makes a story, or anything.

I had a creative writing teacher once tell us, "torture your main character." Was this bad advice?

Okay, I took too long in typing this. I see a valid point above.

Kathl33n said:

But you can't have a story without conflict. True? Everybody who picks up a book knows there is going to be some kind of conflict, some kind of problem that has to be resolved in the story. And how much wish fulfillment can you have without being gratuitous? Not that I think conflict after conflict makes a story, or anything.

Click to expand...

True. And I know for myself I'm not saying no conflict. But...

Kathl33n said:

I had a creative writing teacher once tell us, "torture your main character." Was this bad advice?

Click to expand...

In general, no, it's not bad advice. As you mention above, you need some conflict in a story. My issue, and I suspect the issue of some readers, is that it gets to the point where it's too much. Where writers take this advice and drag it to its extreme.

Sure, there are readers out there who love it. There are just as many examples of popular reading that do. It's not wish-fulfillment that they're enjoying, though, and that's kind of key to the question.

Kathl33n said:

But you can't have a story without conflict. True?

Click to expand...

Very true. Also true that there are different levels of conflict, and it doesn't all need to be agonizing or highly dramatic.

Best example I can think of: An old Soviet movie, Vesna (Spring) is the story of two nearly identical women who switch places. One is a scientist, the other an actress/dancer. It's a very light comedy, nothing tragic or threatening, but there's conflict all the same. Neither woman has been a great success in her chosen profession; both have unfulfilled dreams. There are pitfalls in the masquerade. There's romantic tension--will the scientist win over the handsome director? Can the actress pull off an incredible feat of engineering in front of a scientific audience?

Conflict can be as bloodless as a relationship in jeopardy, or a gimcrack machine that won't operate when it's needed. Or it can be ugly. You choose the type of conflict and the level at which it's applied depending on the purposes and requirements of your story.

gothicangel said:

So, have I not just noticed this before? Is it just poor, cliched writing? Or something else?

Click to expand...

Something else.

Seriously - brave, muscular, smarter than superiors, super-human in his fighting abilities = Hot alpha male. What's not to like?

Sure, I think a lot of that stuff is wish-fulfillment, lowest common denominator. I don't like any of it personally, but the fact it's published doesn't stem from writing quality at all, but from the standpoint of whether it will sell and make money.

I like my characters flawed. A lot of folks do. It's what makes them exciting, more easy to relate to. Human. And there's still a market for that.

I don't care that a lot of that "trash" is out there from a writing/publishing standpoint. So what? It sells. Sure, it's influencing a whole generation of people, influencing their opinion on literature. I don't like that aspect of it at all, but looking at it pragmatically, one has to realize this has always been an issue. There were many a classic written very poorly, and they're likely only classics because they're so friggin' old. After all, neither James Fenimore Cooper nor Grog's storyteller were really any good with prose.

WriteMinded said:

Seriously - brave, muscular, smarter than superiors, super-human in his fighting abilities = Hot alpha male. What's not to like?

Click to expand...

His narcissism.

What's wrong with wish fulfillment? Book like the ones you describe have been around since clay tablets.

And some men are strong, brave, smart, and tough. There's nothing at all worng with writing about them. Such men really do get into battles, win them, and change the world.

How is writing about a weak, cowardly, stupid, softie and better?

It is not wish fulfillment to write about teh kind of people who do stand up and make a difference.

As Louis L'Amour once said, "I think it’s far more important to re-enter the world, tell a story about the settling of a continent and the kind of people it took to settle it, the people who came out and broke the sod for the first time, the people who herded the cattle, who built the homes, who built the country that is out here. I think that’s far more important than what two psychiatric subjects do in bed, which is what a lot of other novels are written about."

gothicangel said:

Okay, it could be the type of books that I'm reading these days, but it seems to me that there is a trend towards wish-fulfillment. Not the typical 'I wish I was having these adventures' stuff, but books like 'Twilight' and '50 Shades', that seem only to function on a level of authorial wish-fulfillment. Another facet I've noticed is in male version Historical Military fiction, the typical MC being a brave, muscular, smarter than his superiors and super-human in his fighting abilities.

Click to expand...

I have noted this for years, and I hate it. As a reader, I can tell you right now that telling me how good/attractive/kind/über-kickass/strangely-yet-inexplicably-loved your MC is, is the absolute best way of making me hate him/her.

I was thinking about which antagonists I had hated most before, and the truth was, the only characters I can say I genuinely loathed are these wish-fulfillment idiocies.

And yes, it was good to get that off my chest.

lorna_w said:

agree, not a trend. It's the very source of storytelling from the days when we sat around the fire and told stories to each other, aeons before writing was invented. "Grog was stalking the rhinoceros when suddenly (I bet they used that word then ) the rhino wheeled and charged! And Grog (got all heroic and stuff). The end." Both Grog and Storyteller get an extra ration of rhino liver. Everybody's happy.

And when the rhino whirled, and Grog died? Still better to turn it into a story where Grog was heroic first and sacrificed himself so that everyone can eat rhino liver tonight. It also helps recruit the youngsters to more rhino-hunting, else they might start thinking "hmm, maybe rhino liver isn't worth dying over." But a chance to be a hero in a story? Makes the risk more palatable. (I've no advice for what makes rhino liver more palatable.)

"Wish fulfillment adventures" are the original. Everything else is newer and derivative.

Click to expand...

Dipped in breadcrumbs, fried with onions and lotsa ketchup on the side. And I'm ashamed to even be thinking of recipes for endangered species.
Although Grog, facing down a rhinocerous, would probably be astonished at the thought that they could be wiped out. And not eaten!

I personally liked twilight for a lot of reasons, because of the love triangle, the character Bella I could identify with, and it's a vampire love story, seemed original to me not cliche at all because it's not all blood and gore like most vampire stories.

But as for your theory that it's wish fulfillment that draws readers, that's a possibility too.I like to live vicariously through characters in books so if their wishes are fulfilled it sort of makes me feel like it's possible for my wishes to be fulfilled.

I think to a certain extent we write because the world around us isn't what it's cut out to be and we yearn to be more than we are. Or perhaps our reality isn't all that it's cut out to be, or even if it is, we sometimes wish we could be someone different. Maybe that's what it's about?

A friend recently confessed that she liked really bad books. She is educated and articulate. She reads good literature when the mood hits, but the majority of what she reads is garbage. She stated that her life is enough of a roller coaster. She doesn't always want to be dragged through an array of emotions when she escapes into a book. She wants to read something light to pass the time sitting in doctors offices and waiting for the kids. She likes books that she doesn't have to think about, and enjoys the stereotypical characters and plot because they are comforting.

A lot of readers simply aren't looking for a good book. They are looking for something to read, to escape into.

If she ever starts a book club I don't think I will go.

scarecrow said:

A friend recently confessed that she liked really bad books. She is educated and articulate. She reads good literature when the mood hits, but the majority of what she reads is garbage. [...] A lot of readers simply aren't looking for a good book. They are looking for something to read, to escape into.

If she ever starts a book club I don't think I will go.

Click to expand...

Your book snobbery is showing.

Honestly, this kind of outlook is the reason why talking to a certain breed of writer always leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth. Reminds me of a Guardian article and a response by the bloggers down at Smart Bitches on reader shaming.

How does catering to an individual's wishes make a book "bad"? How is zooming in on these pleasurable feelings any less noble than trying to evoke any other set of emotions in a reader?

It irks when some people try to make out realism to be inherently better than pure entertainment, especially when it's equally difficult to produce both. Is it because realism is what the "literary" elite deem to be more commendable, or what?

Escapism is just as important to human life as realism. Realism lets us see the world around us more clearly, but escapism reminds us to dream and keeps us sane while we strive to fix what's wrong with our lives. Even the literary elite need to daydream.

I'm sure said book club would do just fine without someone looking down on its members for having individual tastes.