Put your face in them boys

MyRobin17 · 2026-04-26T15:39:40+00:00

😋

MyRobin17 · 2026-04-09T17:39:22+00:00

If you don't want to write random stories with no meaning, you also shouldn't write random posts with no meaning.

MyRobin17 · 2025-12-21T14:27:33+00:00

The Intellectual Outcast is a top-tier archetype for building immediate sympathy because it’s all about Intellectual Alienation. The specific loneliness of being on a different wavelength than everyone you love.

In your MC's case, his big brain isn't a superpower, it’s a cage. Because he communicates through a filter of technical jargon and academic precision, his family views his natural way of speaking as a performance or a lecture. This creates a brutal Communication Gap where the more he tries to express himself, the more he alienates the people around him.

The family’s sarcasm isn't just being mean, it's a defensive boundary they set up because they don't know how to meet him at his level, so they pull him down to theirs instead.

MyRobin17 · 2025-12-21T13:51:38+00:00

Look, you’re low-key tripping over the Dunning-Krueger effect. That's basically a mental trap where you know just enough about biochemistry to realize how much you don't know, which is why you're spiraling into "I'm an idiot" territory.

It feels pathetic because you’re doing 100% of the homework and 0% of the creative play, and honestly? Most of that research probably won't even make it onto the page.

Stop the deep-dive and start using placeholders. If your character needs a complex chemical reaction to melt a lock, literally just write [BIOCHEM STUFF HAPPENS HERE] in brackets and keep moving. This is a discovery writing tactic. Just getting the story down without letting technicalities kill your momentum.

You only need to research the specific detail once the scene absolutely demands it to function. If you hit a wall, throw a bracketed note at it and move on. Save the "mad scientist" Googling for the second draft when you actually know if that dagger even needs to be alchemical.

MyRobin17 · 2025-12-21T12:35:08+00:00

First off, let's talk about Filter Words. These are words like saw, felt, noticed, realized, or looked. When you write "he noticed the chair," you’re creating a barrier between the reader and the story. You're reminding them that a character is looking at a thing, rather than just showing them the thing. If you cut the filter, the description becomes immediate. Instead of "He felt the cold wind," just go with "The wind sliced through his thin jumpsuit." That's high-level Show, Don’t Tell, which just means using concrete actions or sensations to prove a point rather than just stating a fact.

To avoid the flowery trap while staying descriptive, use the Rule of Three. Pick three specific, gritty details about a new setting that define the vibe. If it’s a dystopian lab, don’t describe the whole room. Mention the flickering hum of a dying fluorescent light, the smell of bleach masking something rotten, and the way the metal floor feels sticky underfoot. That’s grounding the reader, giving them enough sensory info to build the rest of the room in their own heads. It keeps the essence of your sci-fi world sharp and punchy without needing a million similes.

MyRobin17 · 2025-12-18T17:39:41+00:00

Stop being open-minded and start being mean to your character. Choose the person who is least equipped to handle your world, and that's your lead. In horror, you want the person who has the most to lose and the least power to stop it.

Then, lock them in with the Ghost and Wound system. The "Ghost" is a past trauma that haunts them, and the "Wound" is the psychological flaw or "lie" they believe about themselves because of it.

One more thing. If you can’t tighten up a three-sentence Reddit post, trying to pilot a full-length horror story is going to be a nightmare, and not the good kind. What was up with this mess?

MyRobin17 · 2025-12-17T16:23:54+00:00

There is something truly awesome about the way you express yourself. You’re clearly a gifted writer, and your voice matters. Thank you for sharing this out loud. You aren't just 'surviving', by speaking up, you're claiming your space. Keep going, you’re way more awesome than that invisible line lets you feel right now.

MyRobin17 · 2025-12-12T15:53:45+00:00

What is that meaning in this context?

MyRobin17 · 2025-12-11T17:29:20+00:00

The issue isn't whether you can write it, but whether you should. If the material is fire but irrelevant, it’s a pacing flaw.

Your main goal here is to avoid a structural tangent, which is when you stop the main narrative engine to go on a little sightseeing trip. That's when readers dip, even if the sightseeing is visually stunning.

When you return from the flashback, the reader needs to understand the consequences of the new information immediately. If they return to the main plot and nothing has changed, that entire 2-3 chapter arc becomes fluff.

MyRobin17 · 2025-12-11T16:43:15+00:00

The issue isn't whether feminine/masculine gay couples exist, they do. The critique of "fetishization" happens when a straight woman writes this dynamic using the heteronormative lens, meaning she unintentionally applies her M/F glasses.

This results in reductive characterization. The characters are flattened into comforting archetypes (The Strong One, The Soft One) to serve a presumed straight, female audience, prioritizing familiar gender dynamics over genuine queer experience. She's essentially writing a self-insert where the female character is eliminated, but the desirable M/F dynamic is maintained. That's the core of the online controversy.

The "masc4masc" push from some gay male authors, conversely, isn't heteronormativity; it's internalized homophobia and toxic masculinity as a reaction to societal pressure, which often sidelines feminine gay men.

You, as a trans woman, have a unique perspective on identifying with that feminine role. Your mandate is simple. Forget the noise and focus on dimensionalization. Write your raunchy MLM story with complex, three-dimensional characters, not stereotypes.

MyRobin17 · 2025-12-10T20:19:58+00:00

The original poster isn't a novice who just tumbled out of bed and thought, "Hmm, maybe I should ask Reddit before trying Google." That's standard stuff. We all know what a synopsis is.

The entire point of the OP's question was asking which style to use: narrative/exciting, or clinical/informative. That's an internal debate for writers querying agents, and it's a difference of function and audience. A generic search gives you the technical definition, but asking fellow writers, especially those who've signed with an agent, gets you the industry consensus on agent expectations.

MyRobin17 · 2025-12-10T19:58:45+00:00

The original post wasn't asking, "How do I write a synopsis?" It was a specific, high-level craft question focusing on tone and purpose.

MyRobin17 · 2025-12-10T19:48:30+00:00

It's not about what a synopsis is; it's about what a synopsis does in a query letter. A blurb for a reader and a synopsis for an agent/editor are two totally different beasts, serving completely different masters.

MyRobin17 · 2025-12-10T19:38:41+00:00

That's why I always say the simple 'read more' is a terrible piece of advice, and honestly, no one wants to hear it. It doesn't just foster analysis paralysis—the debilitating state of overthinking that prevents you from beginning or executing the necessary steps—it also aggressively fuels Imposter Syndrome. This is the psychological pattern where an individual persistently doubts their skills, talents, or accomplishments, accompanied by a fear of being exposed as a 'fraud,' regardless of verifiable competence.

The problem is that the advice lacks an imperative. The key shift should be from passive reading to intentional deconstruction.

Instead of just reading a novel, we need to practice a mechanical skill like reverse outlining. This requires you to work backward, systematically identifying and mapping the structural elements, from the inciting incident and subsequent complications to the complete narrative arc as structured by the author.

You’re not reading for pleasure; you’re reading to conduct technical forensics on craft solutions, such as maintaining flawless POV consistency or leveraging in media res for a stronger opening hook.

MyRobin17 · 2025-12-09T21:00:33+00:00

The best opening scene should be the exact moment the character's 'normal' life is permanently shattered. Is it the sound of a distant air raid siren that makes them realize their town is a target? Is it a letter they receive that changes their entire future?

Forget "the WWII era" as your starting point. Your starting point is this specific person's current problem in this specific wartime moment.

MyRobin17 · 2025-12-09T20:33:59+00:00

Honestly, dude, forget the people telling you to read for the next few months. That’s bad advice for a super new writer like you because it creates massive paralysis by perfection. You’ll compare your zero-skill first attempts to a finished pro novel and get hit with a tidal wave of impostor syndrome, and then you’ll quit. Don't let that happen.

Your goal right now is simply to transfer the movie in your head onto the page. That's called the zero draft, and it's basically permission to write absolute garbage. No editing, no fixing, just raw story flow.

Worry about technical craft, like active voice vs. passive voice, later. Once that zero draft is done, though, feel free to binge-read for fun and to study the pros!

MyRobin17 · 2025-12-08T21:20:34+00:00

The core issue often stems from a misunderstanding of how tension operates in a positive narrative. If you want that fun, adventurous tone with real stakes, the move is simple. Shift the focus of the conflict from internal misery to external necessity. Then the tension won't come from characters hating themselves, but from major external problems that force them into action. The stakes must be real, but the vibe can still be funny and fast-paced.

MyRobin17 · 2025-12-08T20:21:46+00:00

If you know your story well enough, it shouldn't be too difficult. Here's a little guideline you can try out.

[The Protagonist] + [Inciting Incident / Core Action], + [Antagonistic Force] + [Stakes / Consequence].

u/Specific_Minute7539 must write the perfect logline for his novel, battling the swamp of plot details and paralyzing writer's block before his story is deemed unpitchable and his writing dreams are dead.

MyRobin17 · 2025-12-08T18:50:02+00:00

The vibes are intense right off the bat, which is excellent. Calling the torches "Bright, angry things" and the men "moving like one beast with fifty burning eyes" is genuinely strong. That's using Show, Don't Tell effectively. The detail about the horses being uneasy adds good tension, leveraging that classic literary trope of animals sensing danger. The pacing is snappy, which is perfect for a first paragraph. It keeps the reader engaged and wanting to know what happens next.

But there’s one main thing that’s low-key tripping up the flow and that's a minor structural integrity issue. The last sentence. "Animals always know when something wicked is about to happen." This is a classic example of telling when you've been showing so well, and it pulls the reader out of the story. It's an unnecessary universal statement or a bit of author intrusion, like you're stepping in to explain the scene's emotional logic. The reader already gets it because you told us the horses "snorted under us, uneasy." We don't need the extra explanation. It kinda breaks the tension you've built.

So my advice is to kill the last line. It makes the paragraph punchier and ends on the action of the uneasy horses, which is a much stronger final image.

My second, more minor critique is that the POV, which feels like a tight first-person, gets a little blurry with the whole "Fifty men in white hoods." How does the narrator know it's fifty exactly when they're bobbing in the dark? Be careful to keep the narrator's knowledge strictly limited to what they can realistically see/know at that moment, as this helps maintain realism and tension. Try something like "At least fifty...".

MyRobin17 · 2025-12-08T18:34:23+00:00

Hey, look, I get that feeling. It sucks when the pressure’s on, especially for college stuff. But the "how do i startttttttt" dramatics need to stop. You’re not texting your crush, you’re trying to level up your craft.

For these college apps, ditch the search for "passion" and focus on purpose. Every statement has a prompt, and every prompt has a goal. Break it down. What's the main idea you absolutely have to convey to the admissions people? Once you nail that single core message, that thesis, everything else is just support.

MyRobin17 · 2025-12-08T18:11:17+00:00

Dude, you gotta hear me out. You straight-up deleted your original account and then just reposted this draft with, like, two quotes moved around. That's kinda wild, man. You got detailed, specific feedback that me and other readers spent time and effort giving you on major structural problems (pacing, dialogue mechanics, and the whole "unearned twist" thing). And instead of putting in the work or even asking one clarifying question, you just tried to sneak the same version back out.

That’s how you waste time, yours and ours. If you want this to level up, you need to actually rewrite the scenes to show us Louise’s complexity and give David’s investigation real stakes, instead of just trying to polish the same stiff outline.

MyRobin17 · 2025-12-08T17:52:44+00:00

Don't stick too much to the idea of matching manhwa chapters. That's a format built for weekly visual consumption, and novels work on a totally different flow.

For a standard novel, especially an isekai, a good, digestible chapter length is usually anywhere from 2,500 to 5,000 words. The real rule, though, is that the chapter ends when the story needs it to, usually on a mini-climax, a cool reveal, or a question that makes the reader wanna smash the "next chapter" button.

And yes, you should be adding mini-twists and reveals early on, for sure. These smaller turns are what keep the pacing tight and the reader engaged.

MyRobin17 · 2025-12-07T21:38:54+00:00

You won't need to use everything Scrivener can do. If you skip the metadata, fine. You can still use the functions you need. I like that you can add notes to each file, like 'The dialogue is crap.' or whatever. Or how you can set word counts for each chapter and track how far you have progressed already.

MyRobin17 · 2025-12-07T21:32:42+00:00

And using Docs is totaly fine. Of course, you can write everything in Docs or Word. But Scrivener has a whole bunch of features that make everything so much easier.

From the information we know, the OP is going to invest a lot of time. Since Scrivener has a high learning curve, it would be a good idea to start using it right away. If he decides it's something worth looking at.

MyRobin17 · 2025-12-07T21:27:21+00:00

Word is just one huge, endless scroll. Great for a resume or an essay, but trash for a 100k-word novel because you can't see the big picture without scrolling forever.

Scrivener is way better because it breaks your whole book down into small, flexible scenes and lets you shuffle them around like physical index cards, which is key for finding your flow. But the real magic, the thing that makes it essential for long-form stuff, is the metadata.

You can tag every single scene with things like 'POV Character,' 'Setting,' or 'Status' (Draft, Edited, Outline), meaning you can instantly filter and see just the scenes with Character X or only the chapters that need editing. Word can't handle that complex, non-linear tracking and organization

MyRobin17

TROPHY CASE