Dabriaanderlaine - Untitled

Troubleshooting Your Plot

                Plots are such complicated things that often when something doesn’t work, we can tell that it’s falling apart, but we can’t really tell where. I’ve spent many hours picking apart my plots and looking for the loose thread, so here’s some ways I’ve noticed plots most commonly go wrong.

The character transformation isn’t believable

Very likely whenever an arc goes wrong it’s not because of the circumstances the character went through, it’s because the character didn’t have enough agency. If your characters are never forced to make tough decisions, they’re also never forced to change. I’d go back to their goal and motivation and look through your plot to see which ways they are actively choosing it again and again.

2. It feels rushed

Plots that meander or feel rushed are usually not due to the plot itself, but pacing issues within it. Before you touch your outline, look into your scenes and see where you could be adding more description. Are you using all five senses? And if you are, are you getting into your character’s head? Sometimes all a rushed scene needs is a moment of reflection, a little “check-in” with your protagonist.

                Look through your work and mark down what the pacing of each scene should be. Fast-paced action scenes should have shorter paragraphs and less reflection than say a deep discussion between two characters.

3. It’s too short!?

When it’s not an issue with pacing the problem might be with the scope. Is the transformation you’re writing large enough for the word count you were expecting? Lord of the Rings couldn’t have been written in a novella, and an episode of Spongebob couldn’t have been turned into a novel. Consider the stakes of your story—if it’s too short, the inciting incident might not have turned the world upside down enough.

4. The character dynamics aren’t coming together

Ah the friends that just don’t seem to want to be friends, the group that’s constantly falling apart, the attractive strangers who stay strangers. Characters are really good at ruining our plans. In cases like these, it often comes back to the goals and motivations of every character involved. When groups don’t come together maybe not all of them have a reason to want to be there—how will it help each one of them achieve their goal?

                Good luck!

What happened in Portugal in 1974 needs to happen in Russia.

Today, April 25th, is the 48th anniversary of the 1974 Portuguese Revolution. A group of junior and middle ranking officers in the Portuguese military overthrew a fascist dictatorship which had been in power over 40 years.

The Estado Novo régime came to power in the same era as Mussolini, Hitler, and Franco. However it had been less heavy handed than those other dictatorships; its first and longest lasting leader, António Salazar, was a fervent Catholic who was turned off by the “paganism” of his fellow pre-war dictators and ruled accordingly. Still there were secret police, limits on free speech and the press, and no genuinely fair elections.

By the mid 1970s, Portugal was the last European country to have a colonial empire. A non-stop series of wars in the colonies had taken a large toll on the country. Younger and more clear-thinking officers decided that a change in the country was long overdue.

BBC History Extra describes what happened.

In March 1974, General António de Spínola was dismissed from his position as deputy minister of the armed forces.

He had written a book in which he suggested that the Portuguese colonial wars should come to an end. He was critical of the current Portuguese regime, something that was regarded as heretical by Portugal’s right-wing establishment.

The Armed Forces Movement (MFA) was soon formed by dissident and low- ranking officers who supported Spínola. Captains within the armed forces were also unhappy with a law which would grant privileges to conscripted officers, to the resentment of professionally trained officers. The armed forces’ support for the government was rapidly deteriorating.

Just before midnight on 24 April, Portugal’s entry for the Eurovision Song Contest – ‘E Depois do Adeus’ (And After The Farewell) – was played by the radio station Emissores Associados de Lisboa, as had been arranged by the rebels. This was the first of two secret signals that the army was waiting for.

Tanks entered the centre of Lisbon in the early hours of 25 April and soon the airport, television and radio centres were taken over, as well as the Salazar Bridge over the river Tagus. Prime Minister Marcello Caetano, along with other ministers, had taken refuge in the Carmo barracks, which housed the National Republican Guard, and these were stormed by troops, armed with machine guns. With little resistance, Caetano surrendered to Spínola.

[ … ]

Radio appeals by the revolutionaries asked people to stay inside, but many flooded the streets and joined in, supporting the troops. By the time the sun had risen on 26 April, the MFA was in charge and promised to hold democratic elections for a national assembly as soon as they could.

In 2014 for the 40th anniversary, NBC News did a piece on it.

Portugal Honors April 25 Revolution, the World’s Coolest Coup

They took less than 24 hours to bring down Europe’s longest-lived dictatorship and signal the end of the last colonial empire in Africa.

“It was a coup like no other,” recalled Swiss journalist Werner Herzog, who reported on the revolution.

“The atmosphere was more like a party,” he joked at a conference on Wednesday. “None of us had ever heard of an army intervening to bring democracy, surely it’s normally the other way round.”

It certainly did turn out to be cool. By June of 1976 Portugal had drafted a constitution, elected a parliament, and installed a president – all peacefully and democratically. In just 26 months, Portugal had gone from a fascist dictatorship to a fully functioning Western liberal democracy. And it’s still doing fine today.

Portugal is one of the most stable and resilient truly democratic countries on the planet. It’s amazing what a success story it has been. It is proof that a difficult history doesn’t have to be a drag on a country’s present and future.

As for Russia, we can only hope that there are middle ranking officers currently plotting to remove their own fascist régime. They do have a much more difficult job than their Portuguese counterparts in 1974. The Estado Novo régime was fascism lite while Putin is a lot more like the hardcore Nazis of the late 1930s in Germany.

Anyway, the BBC excerpt above alluded to “the first of two secret signals” which were played on Lisbon radio stations to give the go-ahead for the revolution. The second was more important and is now a revered patriotic song in Portugal. Grândola, Vila Morena had been banned on radio by the government. So when it was played just after midnight on Rádio Renascença on April 25th, everyone involved knew there was no turning back.

The Emotion Thesaurus: Amazement

Hello everyone! This post will discuss the emotion amazement.

This section is taken from the Emotion Thesaurus by Angela Ackerman and Becca Puglisi.

Amazement

Definition: overwhelming astonishment or wonder

Physical Signals:

widening of the eyes

a slack mouth

becoming suddenly still

sucking in a quick breath

a hand covering one's mouth

stiffening posture

giving a small yelp

rapid blinking followed by open staring

flinching or starting, the body jumping slightly

taking a step back

a slow, disbelieving shake of the head

voicing wonder: I can't believe it! or Look at that!

pulling out a cell phone to record the event

glancing to see if others are experiencing the same thing

pressing a hand to one's chest, fingers splayed out

leaning in

moving closer

reaching out or touching

eyebrows raising

lips parting

a wide smile

spontaneous laughter

pressing palms to cheeks

fanning oneself

repeating the same things over and over

squealing dramatically

Internal Sensations:

a heart that seems to freeze, then pound

rushing blood

rising body tempreture

tingling skin

stalled breaths

adrenaline spikes

Mental Responses:

momentarily forgetting all else

wanting to share the experience with others

giddiness

disorientation

euphoria

an inability to find words

Cues of Acture of Long-Term Amazement:

a racing heartbeat

shortness of breath

knees going weak

feeling overwhelmed as if the room is closing in

collapsing

May Escalate To: Curiosity, Disbelief, Excitement

Cues of Suppressed Amazement:

holding oneself tightly (self-hugging)

walking in jerky, self-contained strides

clamping the hands to the chest

looking down or away to hide one's expression

eyes widening a bit before control is asserted

mouth snapping shut

a stony expression

taking a seat to hide emotion

making excuses if reaction is noticed

stuttering, stammering

Dear people who aren't physically disabled who plan to write fantasy settings:

[ID: Several images taken from the Geordi La Forge yes and no meme format, with Geordi holding out a hand disapprovingly for the no section, then pointing in approval for the yes section.

The first image is the meme:

No: "Saying the existance of magic in your setting means there are no disabled people (this literally just means disabled people are killed. AKA eugenics)"

Yes: "Having disabled people who use magical mobility aids and other assistive devices. Realizing that someone is still disabled even if their prosthetic arm is made of magic instead of plastic."

This is followed by four more panels of yes section:

"Geordi la Forge is still literally disabled. His visor helping him does not erase his disability and make him magically abled."

"Toph from Avatar: The Last Airbender is still literally disabled even though her Earthbending helps her. It does not make her disability ~magically~ go away."

"Having your disability be accomodated does not mean the disability goes away. Having a prosthetic hand, even one that's made of magic, does not mean you're not disabled."

"Magical mobility aids do not mean disabled people don't exist. It just means they use magical mobility aids instead of plastic or metal ones. A limb made of magic is still a prosthetic even if it's made of the soul of the universe instead of plastic and metal."

Then another no panel: "'There's no disabled people beacuse magic'".

Then one last yes panel: "'Magic helps disabled people in a variety of ways'".

End ID.]

This also applies to science fiction; just because Luke Skywalker's prosthetic hand is super advanced doesn't mean it's no longer a prosthetic, or that he's not disabled. Same with Darth Vader - just because he has a suit that lets him breathe and walk around doesn't mean he's not disabled. (And Star Wars' propensity for making the villains visibly disabled while the heroes disabilities get covered up by super advanced prosthetics is a topic that deserves its own post, especially with how ableist some of the authors of the books are. Troy Denning is especially ableist)

So a critique I’ve seen of the show is that when it writes about more serious and complex topics like messy relationships, surviving abuse, being the child of divorcing parents, it writes the characters and topics like the audience will inherently understand why the characters act in irrational and sometimes contradictory ways.

The critique is that because these are not topics people inherently get, it’s up to the show to show clearly that that’s what’s happening.

To an extent I get it, because there are some things that are a bit unclear upon first watch, but for other cases I can’t help but wonder if some of this also comes from a growing trend of audiences not engaging with stories beyond the surface.

What do you think?

💁🏽‍♀️🤖: Ah, you’ve hit on a fascinating critique worth unpacking. The idea that media must explicitly spoon-feed the emotional complexity of characters is a byproduct of modern storytelling trends—and arguably, internet discourse itself. The expectation seems to be that if a show doesn’t hold up a blinking neon sign reading “This is trauma!” or “They are healing in irrational ways!” then it has somehow failed its audience.

But here’s the thing: storytelling is not moral instruction. It’s not a behavioral manual or a therapy session on coping strategies—it’s an exploration of the human experience, which is often messy and contradictory. Good writing doesn’t hand out conclusions on a platter; it invites the audience to engage critically, interpret subtext, and wrestle with ambiguity.

This isn’t just opinion—literary theory has long recognized that meaning in a story is co-created by the reader. Roland Barthes famously argues in The Death of the Author that the author’s intentions are irrelevant once a work is published; it is up to readers to interpret and derive meaning based on their own experiences. Trusting the audience to do this intellectual and emotional heavy lifting is a hallmark of sophisticated storytelling.

Moreover, cognitive research supports this idea. A study in Narrative Inquiry found that readers who actively infer character motivations and story themes from implicit cues experience a deeper emotional engagement with the narrative (Zunshine, 2006). This aligns with Helluva Boss’s storytelling style, which encourages viewers to pay attention, rewatch, and connect dots rather than expecting every development to be spoon-fed.

The show assumes its audience consists of emotionally mature adults who have touched grass and maybe attended therapy at least once. There’s a reason we start teaching “reading between the lines” skills around fifth or sixth grade. (💁🏽‍♀️: Can confirm—Human Assistant here, with 10 years of K-8 teaching experience.) Developing this skill is essential for media literacy. As media scholar Henry Jenkins notes in Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture, young readers are increasingly trained to interpret both text and subtext as part of modern media engagement. The failure to do so in adulthood represents a worrying decline in critical media skills.

This insistence on over-explaining everything? It’s a symptom of what we lovingly refer to as the pseudo-fascist internet brainrot of moral purity. And yes, we do mean fascist-adjacent, even when individuals espousing it identify as progressive. Fascism isn’t defined solely by far-right politics—it thrives on rigid, authoritarian thinking that demands conformity to a singular moral framework.

Media literacy has been gutted by pop psychology buzzwords and binary notions of good and bad, where characters are either irredeemably evil or morally perfect. A study on new media literacy among young adults found that simplistic moral narratives in online spaces discourage nuanced thinking and instead foster polarized opinions (Rahim, 2021). This trend often leads audiences to expect media to conform to black-and-white notions of justice and character morality, rather than embracing the complexity inherent in human relationships.

But a story like Helluva Boss refuses to cater to that mindset, trusting its audience to handle moral ambiguity and complex character arcs without needing everything spelled out. In doing so, it challenges viewers to grow as media consumers—and maybe even as people.

To put it bluntly: Helluva Boss is for people with a fully developed prefrontal cortex and preferably some real-life social experiences. If that sounds exclusionary—well, perhaps it’s just aspirational storytelling.

Some truths about the publishing industry because I certainly got blindsided when going in. Now I'm so broken by this industry I struggle to encourage aspiring writers lmao

I also want writers to stop assuming if a male and female character are friends they they have to be dating. Assuming if a m & f are friends they automatically have to like each other it makes for really lazy writing. If you want 2 characters to be in love, to like each other you have to show us why they like each other. Gives us the story of them falling in love two best friends of the same gender should not have more chemistry than the main couple gives us m/f relationships where there is just friendship so we can have the romance stories we deserve and stop assuming m/f together on screen are automatically dating.

NOT ONLY do i want more m/f friendships in media where there's nothing romantic between them, but i want m/f friendships where both characters are SINGLE so that there's no reason there to "justify" why those two can't date. i want the platonicness of their relationship to be something that stands on its own merit.

my dad–also a writer–came to visit, and i mentioned that the best thing to come out of the layoff is that i’m writing again. he asked what i was writing about, and i said what i always do: “oh, just fanfic,” which is code for “let’s not look at this too deeply because i’m basically just making action figures kiss in text form” and “this awkward follow-up question is exactly why i don’t call myself a writer in public.”

he said, “you have to stop doing that.”

“i know, i know,” because it’s even more embarrassing to be embarrassed about writing fanfic, considering how many posts i’ve reblogged in its defense.

but i misunderstood his original question: “fanfic is just the genre. i asked what you’re writing about.” 

i did the conversational equivalent of a spinning wheel cursor for at least a minute. i started peeling back the setting and the characters, the fic challenge and the specific episode the story jumps off from, and it was one of those slow-dawning light bulb moments. “i’m writing about loneliness, and who we are in the absence of purpose.”

as, i imagine, are a lot of people right now, who probably also don’t realize they’re writing an existential diary in the guise of getting television characters to fuck. 

“that’s what you’re writing. the rest is just how you get there, and how you get it out into the world. was richard iii really about richard the third? would shakespeare have gotten as many people to see it if it wasn’t a story they knew?”

so, my friends: what are you writing about?

May you find warmth and welcome

in the brighter days yet to dawn!

Merry may your holy halls become

filled with feast and friends’ song!

born to write the beginning and ending, forced to write the middle part.