Suspension of disbelief

That is okay! We can agree to disagree! Perhaps my point might have been better expressed. Sometimes it is necessary for the reader to possess an imagination as well as the writer! Otherwise we had better all stick to the tried and tested (dare I say well-worn) themes. If the reader has a very literal, matter of fact mind this is difficult! There are, I believe, worse things readers can say to a writer than "I don't believe a word of it!"

I think that it works to explore in a story the question "what if [something unusual] happened?" The reactions of people to this [something unusual], though, should be within the realm of believability, based on who they are and the circumstances. Unless the story is farcical, you can't have one unbelievable occurrence after another, nor can you have a the unbelievable surprise pop up at the end. If there is a surprise ending, that surprise must be explainable when looking backward. That is an art of storytelling.

I am not talking about farce, which is, I am sure a difficult thing to write. Of course the stranger the twists and turns of the plot, the cleverer the writer must be, if he is to convince the reader. The dialogue must sound authentic, an individuals character can change dramatically if an epiphany of some sort takes places, as in The Christmas Carol. As you say NJ it must be explained. Coincedences though do happen, unlikely events follow unlikely events! I am not disagreeing that sometimes it is hard to believe in some of the stories you read on the forum. Perhaps that is because the writer lacks conviction. However there are worse crimes in fiction than being over imaginative and I wouldn't like writers to be scared of outlandish plot scenarios. Who cares if some boring old bugger says "But that could never happen in a million years!"

I think you're misunderstanding what "realism" means in this context. There's a difference between narrative realism and the practical reality we live in.

Thanks for all the input. And I can now see that when you have set up a consistent world with characters with their own personalities, the characters occasionally take over and dictate where the story will go. Sort of - it is a stream-of-consciousness writing that, for once, has some discipline about it.

I shall now go revisit my pile of discarded half-finished tales and see if any of them can be salvaged.

Every story I compose results from my asking myself "what if [this unusual thing happened] or [a world existed in which...]". That's where imagination comes in. It can be fantastic, like sci-fi or a world in which there is magic. However two things are necessary. It's own rules have to be internally consistent and human beings have to act in ways that are consistent with those rules. If the setting is 1900 rural America, people act a certain way--if it's 14th century Europe, people act a certain way, if its stardate 2567, people act a certain way. In other words cultural norms must be taken into account. This is why bare bottom paddlings at the local high school for female teenagers in America in 2010 defy belief and when I see a plot unfold like this, I cannot suspend my belief because the author has given me no reason to do so.

This is the difference between what I think Arthur is talking about and what SNM and I are talking about, narrative realism and practical reality. And BTW, I believe the characters in Arthur's stories---they seem very real to me.

This is why my stories tend to be longer. It takes me some time to set up the back story that ultimately makes the action sequences believable, especially if the setting is contemporary America.

Finally, as SNM said, humor trumps everything. If it's a farce like LSF The Movie or one of Rick's clever tales like The Spanking Bug, just throw all reality out the window.

oops--above I should have said "suspend my DISbelief"

We live in a strange world filled with strange people, who try to make us believe, that they are ordinary. If a story can make the readers imagnation follow the writer's whims. Then all is well with me.

Well, AFAIC there's a difference in plot elements being unpredictable--the mother who supposedly went to her garden club slipping back home on foot to catch her kids smoking, for example--and a character's behavior being unpredictable--a girl who finds spankings purely punitive suddenly trying to provoke her babysitter into disciplining her OTK, for example.

Unless there's a solid explanation for a child whom it's been established genuinely dislikes being spanked 'reversing her field' and intentionally earning a spanking, the author is going to lose me at that point. OTOH, Mom stealthily entering the kitchen through the back door while Billy and Susie are puffing away at the table, that's simply an unexpected but hardly implausible turn of events.

My stories frequently use the same characters in different parts of their lives, so I feel justified in having the characters and their interrelationships gradually evolve over years and decades, but AFAIC that's quite different from having a particular character act in opposition to his/her established personality and value system within one specific story--unless a plausible reason is provided, of course... --C.K.

Am I misunderstanding? I thought it was you!!!?