How to Write a Good Fanfic

7.0.0 - Bad Writing Ideas Do Exist

I think one of the things writers dread is hearing that their awesome idea is somehow a bad idea.

In fact, there is one group in fandom who would try to argue that there is no such thing as a bad idea, that this idea that something is a bad idea is based solely on the readers inability to suspend their disbelief given an idea.

Does this argument bear any merit?

I don't think it does because I wouldn't say this is simply just a matter of the reader being unable to suspend their disbelief given a given idea, but writers as well—because sometimes these bad ideas come at us writers as pitches for us to write and those of us who are good writers decide to forgo said pitch for the very reason that said pitch is a bad pitch, that there is something about the idea that doesn't work.

For example, one of the story ideas which drives me up the wall has to do with the abandonment of kids and/or kids randomly running away from a bad home situation. In fact, there is a plethora of these type of stories in the Harry Potter fandom, with me having to roll my eyes at how the writers also over exaggerate the abuse Harry suffers at the hands of the Dursley family.

And, the latter—the exaggeration of the Dursley family always leaves me feeling like the writer didn't do their research, that they're relying on abuse myths. Not to mention the way fandom over exaggerates the abuse Harry suffered feels like fandom is saying emotional abuse and basic neglect don't count as abuse, just like society often does. But why would fandom care about this when nobody cares about understanding those who went through emotional abuse and basic neglect were abused.

Which, I wonder how much of that comes from the fact compared to physical and sexual abuse, one is actually likely to encounter an abuser who actually never intended harm, such as an overprotective mother, or a father who simply thought they were toughoning their kid up so they can face the real world without understanding how harmful their behavior actually is.

Yet the reason I bring this up happens to be because I'd come across a prompt where a rich kid character's parents acted in an unrealistic manner in that one of the loving parents killed the other, which if the prompt had stuck to this and let me make the decisions on where to take the AU of the parents having strife they didn't in canon I would have been fine.

But then the prompt started talking about the rich kid ending up in the foster system because the rich parents neglected to name an heir.

And, my thoughts instantly were, "that's not how it works", because neglecting to name an heir doesn't mean there isn't one, and in this case it would be the biological child who was the heir regardless of whether an heir was named.

To which the person putting forth the idea often argues, "but what if I say that's not how it works" excepting that answer to fly with both reader and the person they are prompting without coming up with a logical explanation such as the government being corrupt and any time an heir isn't named, the heir becomes the government, which also might explain why the parents behavior doesn't match what it is in canon.

Because the truth is, the person coming up with the idea doesn't want to think about the why—why the difference in canon may be happening, or even why the difference in what is reality, in this case an unnamed heir not being heir simply because they were unnamed. They simply think the idea is cool and amazing. With the reader, there is an expectation of the reader suspending their disbelief, while with writers, they either expect the writer taking on their prompt to expect the same of their readers, or to come up with the answers regarding how the awesome idea works for them.

But here's the thing.

The person being pitched to and the reader – it's not their job to do it for you. Well, there are some writers more than will to take on such prompts because they find them to be a challenge, but most writers don't. And it's not because they don't want a challenge, but because they don't want the extra work. Readers don't want the extra work as they read of trying to figure out how an impossibility is possible.

Yet there is this expectation by some to put the work on others.

Which, ironically, one of Mark Twain's rules of writing actually covers this. Says Mark Twain, "the personages of a tale shall confine themselves to possibilities and let miracles alone; or, if they venture a miracle, the author must so plausibly set it forth as to make it look possible and reasonable."

What makes an idea a bad idea is this—it's not properly and thoroughly thought out. And to try and argue that an idea that isn't properly and thoroughly thought out actually is—that makes no sense, and yet that is what those who argue there is no such thing as a bad idea are in fact saying. Of course, there is also this belief that the criteria we judge writing by is objective – based on personal preference – rather than subjective.

It's actually quite subjective, based on using facts though, but facts can be hard to refute, so the other side will often rely on objective counter arguments which is a form of logic fallacy.

More importantly, the best ideas are well thought out. True, a person can think up an idea in a matter of minutes, like seconds, but the more complex the idea, the less likely said idea is going to be a good idea. To which I also want to address the rush to get an idea out there, as if fearing someone else might come up with the idea even though ideas by themselves aren't copyrightable—it's the execution that matters. And I also want to note some of my ideas were in my head for months, some even years before I started working with them.