scrape_r_rational/data/cache2/3aewab.md

## We need a guide for new writers(and readers)

* Author: u/raymestalez *
* URL: https://www.reddit.com/r/rational/comments/3aewab/we_need_a_guide_for_new_writersand_readers/
* Score: 18

* Created: 2015-06-19T15:49:16

### Post:

Now that we have Weekly Challenges, I think that the most valuable thing to expand this commmunity would be a guide for new writers that would clearly explain what rational fiction is, list the central works that define the genre, and gather advice on how to get good at writing it.

It would really help the new writers to start participating in competitions.

TVTropes has an unfinished [article](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/SoYouWantTo/WriteTheNextHarryPotterAndTheMethodsOfRationality) on the topic, maybe we could contribute to that, or better yet - make a wiki page on this subreddit for that.

### Comments:

> **u/alexanderwales** [+6]  *Time flies like an arrow* (25 minutes later)
> 
> Yeah, I agree. I've been idly trying to write something that can capture the ethos while also not stepping on too many toes, but I've got a lot of other stuff going on. If we want to cross-post to other places, we also want a strongly-typed definition that people can immediately understand (if not internalize).
> 
> Ideally, there should be a one-sentence hook that's mildly inaccurate but at least gets the point across. Something like, "Fiction with rules", but ... better.
> 
> The side bar is the starting point, but I don't think it's enough; too many of the characteristics of rational fiction are characteristics of good fiction *generally* and I don't think you could reconstruct the subgenre from those rules alone.

>> **u/xamueljones** [+3]  *My arch-enemy is entropy* (54 minutes later)
>> 
>> "Fiction *without* the Idiot Balls."
>> 
>> "Where problems are solved with cunning instead of the POWER OF HUMAN SPIRIT^TM."
>> 
>> "Everyone's a hero in their story. Everyone's a villain in someone else's story. Everyone is an actual person."
>> 
>> Just a couple of ideas for that one-sentence hook. I don't think any of them are good, but they all follow a pattern that we might want to take advantage of.

>>> **u/brandalizing** [+4]  *Reserve Pigeon Army* (56 minutes later)
>>> 
>>> Rules that make sense + people making decisions that make sense = story that makes sense

>>>> **u/Kishoto** [+3]  (6 hours later)
>>>> 
>>>> Although, to be fair, people's decisions don't even have to make sense. But they need to not make sense for perfectly viable reasons, that we can deduce ourselves or are later explained.

>>>>> **u/brandalizing** [+4]  *Reserve Pigeon Army* (7 hours later)
>>>>> 
>>>>> They need to make sense in the context of the person making the decision. As in, the decision being made not just because the plot demands it. Not necessarily that it was a *good* decision, just that it makes sense *for that person* to make said decision.

>>>>>> **u/redrach** [+2]  (7 hours later)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I think it needs to be said that there should still be people acting irrationally in the story, including even the protagonist (at times). Rational fics should be about the process of overcoming those biases, not just starting with superhuman intelligences.

>>>>>>> **u/brandalizing** [+2]  *Reserve Pigeon Army* (8 hours later)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I agree. The character shouldn't *always* act rationally. But there should always be a *reason* for them to make whatever decision they're making, regardless of how rational said decision is. As long as the reason for them making a terrible decision is "they were scared, they're family was being threatened, and they hadn't slept in 36 hours," as opposed to "they needed to end up at that place at that time in order to catch that guy stealing that thing," then you're good to go.

>>>>>>>> **u/None** [+2]  (13 hours later)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> One might even say that, if a character was in that situation, them making a rational decision would make no sense.

>>>>>>>>> **u/brandalizing** [+1]  *Reserve Pigeon Army* (13 hours later)
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Absolutely. If you as the reader ever go "Now why the *hells* would he do *that*?" and you are never given an answer (assuming you're not just missing something), then that is not okay. If you go "Now why the *hells* would he do *that*?", and then at the end of the chapter say to yourself, "Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh," then, again, you're good to go.  
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> In the end, there has be *some* way for the character to end up at that place at that time in order to catch that guy stealing that thing--just make sure that it makes sense within the context of the story for him to do so. Otherwise, you made to do some replotting, or simply let that guy get away with stealing that thing. After all, its only that thing that that other guy made out of that stuff. It's even That Thing!

>>> **u/None** [+3]  (8 hours later)
>>> 
>>> > "Where problems are solved with cunning instead of the POWER OF HUMAN SPIRIT^TM."
>>> 
>>> Sometimes THE POWER OF SPIRIT is in fact the most cunning thing you can wield.  For one thing, no-one ever expects your hot-blooded hero speech to end in a massive drill to their face.

>>>> **u/noggin-scratcher** [+1]  *I am a happy tree* (2 days later)
>>>> 
>>>> Although then technically you're winning by the power of massive facial drilling, rather than the human spirit thing.

> **u/brandalizing** [+1]  *Reserve Pigeon Army* (15 minutes later)
> 
> The sidebar does a pretty good job of defining the genre, and the differences between rational and rational*ist* fiction.  
> 
> We had a thread a while back that gathered the defining works, most mentioning HPMoR, Luminosity, as well as works by Vernor Vinge and Charles Stross.

---