It's not often that I inwardly cheer at the sight of a fictional kiss. The 2014 film Maleficent had one of those rare exceptions.

Those who know me have heard me complain before about how romance - particularly romance between a male and female - seems to be a nearly mandatory ingredient for a happy ending as far as some writers are concerned.

The couple doesn't have to fit well. They don't need to have known each other long, or to have interacted with a way that justifies the swift development of their bond.

They just have to be male, female, and prominent figures in the same story, and there's an excessively high chance that they'll end up together, even if the story doesn't justify it.

Now, don't get me wrong. I have no problem with romance in a story if it's written well.

It's the "if they're male and female, they MUST get together regardless of compatibility, whether or not the romantic subplot is even remotely relevant or necessary, as an obligatory part of a happy ending" thing that bugs me.

This trope seems to be part of a larger societal trend.

Romance is treated as necessary.

Relationships are expected to develop quickly.

And people place so much emphasis on one kind of love that they devalue the others.

How many times have you heard people bemoaning the existence of the dreaded "friendzone"? Yes, being in unrequited love sucks, but comparing an offer of friendship to an offer of a dead dog is pretty gross.

This trend is demonstrated by an argument I recently saw below a YouTube video about Madoka Magica.

I won't name the characters to protect you from spoilers, but suffice it to say, one of them had gone to extreme lengths to ensure another's happiness, and it triggered a debate about whether or not the character in question had romantic feelings for the girl she was protecting.

Some of the commenters made a good point: "If the characters were opposite sexes, a lot of people in our heteronormative society would assume that the protector's feelings were romantic."

I certainly couldn't argue with that.

At the same time, I couldn't help but wonder how much the truth of that statement depended not just on heteronormativity, but on the mindset I mentioned above: that romance is assumed to be the default outcome of close relationships, to the point of devaluing non-romantic bonds.

Some of the commenters scoffed at the idea that a bond so powerful could be anything but romantic. But what does that say to or about asexual and aromantic people?

Does that mean people who can't feel romantic or sexual attraction can't be just as devoted and passionate as people who can?

What about family members? Comrades in arms? Close friends? Nakama?

Can NO other bond besides romance drive a person to go to whatever lengths are necessary to protect a person they love?

That seems to be the assumption.

That's why I found the relationship in Maleficent so refreshing.

The princess is comatose. They've brought in the prince. The three fairies pressure the young man, who has met the princess all of one time, to revive her with true love's kiss.

And, to my great relief... it didn't work.

That's not to say that love at first sight doesn't exist, or that unconditional love for all people regardless of how well you know them wouldn't have been an acceptable explanation for the kiss working. And I certainly don't have a problem with the idea of Aurora and Phillip getting to know each other at a more reasonable pace afterward.

But the expectation that romantic love will blossom after the very first meeting, JUST because they're a male and female of attractive appearance and approximately equal age, is a tired and inaccurate trope that I was happy to see subverted.

And then, to my even greater joy, when Maleficent kissed Aurora on the forehead, the dormant girl stirred.

Now there's a fictional kiss I can cheer for. Because nonsexual friendship and platonic love are just as valid and valuable as romance, and it's high time that more stories - and people in real life - acknowledged that.

Do you think romance has been made too obligatory, at the expense of good storytelling and non-romantic relationships?

Do you have any thoughts to add, or did you notice something I missed?

I'd love to see your thoughts in the comments!

Criteria #1: Is it necessary for the characters' development?

Some of the scenes - and, more importantly, the protagonist's reactions to the events in them - are necessary for the reader to understand how the tragic situation in Timeline 4 came to be.

They develop the characters' personalities and relationships, and they reveal why the human made the decisions they made and how they felt when they were making them.

Even though some of these scenes are partly reenactments of things that happen in the game, the internal reactions add a new layer to them, and lay the foundation for the less strictly canonical events that occur in later timelines.

Speaking of new layers...

Criteria #2: Can you add a fresh twist or insight?

Even if a scene isn't absolutely vital to a character arc, it can be worth including if you can add something new and interesting to it.

Is there a funny addition you want to slip into the dialogue? An intriguing internal reaction, or inner monologue that gives new meaning to the words that were spoken out loud?

If you can add an extra element to the scene, that new ingredient can make it fresh and interesting even for the people who have consumed the source material several times.

In fact, that strategy can even make the scene MORE appealing to that particular crowd. If someone loves a story enough to go through it repeatedly, they probably love it enough that any fresh insight or deeper exploration will be welcome, as long as it's done well.

Personally, I've kept a lot of the canonical dialogue intact, but I've also taken a fair bit of license to let Frisk have reactions that Undertale's silent protagonist doesn't canonically have, and to let the other characters react to it the way I think they would.

This helps to keep the plot on track, while adding something new instead of simply reiterating what's already been said.

Criteria #3: Does it make later scenes more poignant?

Just Cause contains a number of running themes, catchphrases, and callbacks to earlier scenes, as well as bits of dialogue later in the story that reference earlier conversations and interactions.

Sometimes, a scene early in the story, while added partly for its own sake, has its greatest value in the way it sets things up for a later scene to be five times more poignant than it would be on its own.

I don't know about you, but personally, I love it when a story can take a line or element from earlier in the tale and work it into a later scene, in a way that adds new meaning, continuity, or a sense that this running joke or catchphrase is one of the strings that ties a character's personality or relationships together.

What if the scene needs to be included or addressed, but you don't feel like writing the whole thing?

Sometimes, there are scenes that are necessary to move the plot from Point A to Point B, but you just don't feel like thoroughly retreading that ground.

Maybe you have nothing new to add, or maybe that scene simply isn't interesting enough to warrant inclusion.

In that case, one tactic I sometimes use is to have a character reflect on it later, possibly while walking or getting distracted from an activity they ought to be focusing on.

This allows me to delve further into the character's reaction to the event, without having to bog down the narrative with a blow-by-blow description of a scene that didn't deserve to stay in the final draft.

Have you encountered this question in your writing?

While fanfiction does present this challenge more frequently than most other stories, it's not the only place where this dilemma rears its head. Every fiction writer must sometimes face the question of whether or not to include a scene, and I hope this article made the decision easier for you.

And now, it's your turn to share your thoughts!

What methods or criteria do you use to decide which scenes to include?

Are there any types of scenes that definitely should or should NOT be kept in stories?

​I look forward to reading your comments!

In today's distraction-packed world, it can be a challenge to focus on one task for a protracted period of time.

You're just getting into the groove, your train of thought is leaving the station, and you're ready to be productive... and then an email comes in, someone messages you on Facebook, or you think of something else that has to be done, and the next thing you know, you've lost half an hour.

Now, not only are you behind schedule, but you're wasting even MORE time on mentally kicking yourself!

This challenge comes up a lot in my lines of work.

As a novelist, artist, copywriter and coach, I have lots of fields of expertise that require prolonged periods of attention and concentration.

And as a creative type, I'm naturally prone to daydreaming.

Wandering through fictional scenarios is my mind's natural habitat, so depending on my energy levels, it can be a challenge to buck that tendency for long enough to write a blog post, create an email for a client, or actually write a scene instead of just thinking about it.

So how do I stay on task for an hour or more at a time?

As a creative daydreamer, I've had to come up with a few good strategies for staying mentally on track for long periods of time. Here are five things that work for me - hopefully they'll work for you, too.

Strategy 1: Break your tasks into chunks of time.

If you can't concentrate for an hour, don't schedule in a block of time that lasts for an hour.

If you can't think clearly during a certain time of day, whether it's the evening when you've been working for hours, or the morning when you're a zombie slowly shambling out of bed, don't schedule your more challenging tasks for that time period.

Determine which tasks are the most important and mentally demanding, and schedule those in for the parts of the day when you tend to have the most mental energy.

Also, break them into manageable chunks, and schedule brief breaks between tasks, so you can rest your mind, go to the bathroom, grab a snack, and otherwise rejuvenate and be ready to concentrate on your next task.

If your attention span tends to work optimally for half an hour, schedule your tasks in chunks of half an hour.

Whatever you need to do, as much as possible, work WITH your natural mental rhythm, not against it.

Strategy #2: Close unnecessary tabs and programs.

Do your Facebook or email keep interrupting you? Unless you have good reason to believe that someone will contact you through those channels with a legitimate, time-sensitive emergency, turn them off.

Close the tab, log out, mute your notifications - whatever it takes to silence the interruption long enough for you to complete your high-priority tasks.

You can check your inbox between tasks, but if you want to get through your to-do list on time, you can't interrupt your work every time someone wants a piece of your day. Your day belongs to you, not them - prioritize your attention accordingly!

Strategy #3: Use instrumental music.

If you've never tried playing beautiful instrumental music during high-concentration tasks, I highly recommend it as a way to both stay focused and make the job a lot more pleasant.

If you have an album or artist you especially enjoy listening to, it gives you something to look forward to when it's time to start working, and the ambient sound helps to block out the distractions in your surroundings.

It helps if you choose a full album or long compilation, rather than needing to break your focus and switch songs every few minutes. Just look up "1 hour of peaceful music", or "1 hour of (whatever mood you desire) music" on YouTube, and you should have plenty to choose from.

If you'd like a recommendation, here's an hour-long compilation by two artists I especially enjoy.

Strategy #4: Get up and move.

If you've been sitting still for long enough that your butt is sore, your mind is starting to wander, or your body is beginning to feel twitchy, it's probably time to take a two-minute break and move.

Walk around, go to the bathroom, grab a drink - or, if you're like me and your cats are a bad influence, sprint randomly around the house a few times. (Yes, I do that. My family has learned to cross certain paths with caution in case of low-flying writers.)

Don't let this break stretch on and on - that defeats the purpose of me writing a blog post to help you concentrate and stay on schedule.

But you'd be amazed by how much difference the occasional movement break can make in clearing your mind and keeping your body feeling good when you work in a sedentary occupation.

Strategy #5: Don't get distracted by having been distracted.

If you realize that your mind's been wandering and you lost a few minutes, the worst thing you can do is waste even MORE time on beating yourself up about it.

Instead, just pull yourself back to the task at hand, and keep going.

Now it's your turn.

Do you have trouble concentrating on your writing, art, or other work?

​Did any of these tips help you?

How do you keep your focus?

I look forward to hearing from you in the comments!

What's the difference between writing a story you like, and writing a story you're flat-out obsessed with?

Over the last week or so, I've seen the difference firsthand, and it's been really striking.

​For two years, as I worked on Catgirl Roommate, I was writing a story I liked.

I had lots of funny material to share, I enjoyed the way the protagonist's character development caught me by surprise, and it was an interesting challenge to write a genre I'd never written before.

Apparently it worked out well, judging by the fact that when one of my friends was partway through it, he was laughing so hard he couldn't speak.

Unfortunately, I've got a dirty confession to make:

While I did like the story, I wasn't obsessed with it. And although I liked the characters - well, most of them - I wasn't in love with them.

As a result, writing Catgirl Roommate was more difficult than most of my other projects, and I enjoyed the process less than I did when I was working on stories where the characters really tugged on my heartstrings.

After I finished Catgirl Roommate in December, I didn't do much fiction writing for a while, because I had a lot of client projects and I was focusing most of my creative time on my Undertale webcomic, Just Cause.

Now that one, frankly, I AM obsessed with.

Sure, it's fanfiction. Sure, it's not one of my novels. But the relationships that grew inside this story, and the character development that blossomed within those relationships... these are a few of my favorite things.

Some of the characters became so psychologically complex, some of their bonds with each other deepened in such beautiful ways, and there are so many little running themes and symbols (I'll admit, I'm a sucker for those)... I'm just so in love with this story.

But the trouble with telling a long story via webcomic - especially when you feel a compulsive need to add lots of layers of shading instead of just basic cel shading - is that, while a picture is worth a thousand words, it takes a thousand times longer to create.

​It took months of drawing, and several pages of comic, to work my way through what would be a single scene in a written story. And, over time, I began to get frustrated with how long it was taking to get the story out there.

I have so many scenes that are burning in my heart, and I want them out there now!

So I decided it was time to do what I'd been procrastinating on for a while, and start actually writing the story.

When I did, I was stunned by what happened.

I already had an outline, so I didn't need to figure out what was involved in each scene. I could just go ahead and write, and boy, did I write!

​Where it used to be a challenge to get 300 words written in one day - partly because I had to make sure that as many of those words as possible were funny - now, I was EASILY writing 800 to 1,000 words or more. Sometimes over 2,000.

​​This, despite the fact that I'm also running a business that sometimes keeps me busy for 12 hours a day.

Now, going by chapter count, I'm almost halfway through the story. Barring unexpected delays, I should be done by the end of February, easily.

And then I can continue gradually working my way through the comic version of it, one thousand-word picture at a time.

Do I regret spending so much time on Catgirl Roommate?

Not at all. Even though I wasn't as thoroughly in love with it as I am with my current story, I still enjoyed it, and I still believe it was a story worth telling.

People are still laughing until they choke because of it, and who knows - maybe Sam's growth as a person will inspire other people to see where they can grow, too.

In the meantime, I have stories to write, things to draw, a neglected YouTube channel to create music videos for, and maybe even some healthy self-care to squeeze in between my content creation and business-running.

I'm three scenes away from getting to the part of the story where the backstory is revealed, and I've been dying write that backstory for so long... I LOVE the relationship between these two characters...

*Gives a totally undignified squeal and runs off to work out and write*

Now it's your turn.

Have you written stories you liked, and stories you love, and noticed the difference? I'd love to hear from you in the comments!

​2016 was an interesting year. Over the last twelve months, I've lost months of work through a file corruption incident, I've published a humor novel for cat lovers, and I started my first-ever long-running webcomic.

I all but lost one of my biggest clients, and gained several more. I started a business venture that maxed out both of my credit cards and made me wonder if I'd be able to pay the bills, then got enough client projects to pull me back from the brink.

I started a Patreon channel so I could get closer to my top fans and spend more time on my writing, videos and art, I joined Tumblr and DeviantArt, and I learned a lot about myself through the past year's crazy ups and downs.

In particular, I learned about some areas where I was making serious mistakes, and I discovered some things I can do to make 2017 a much better year than the ones that came before it.

Today, I'd like to share what I learned about myself, what I've resolved to do in 2017, and how I plan to make those resolutions stick and get results.

What I learned about myself:

1. I tend to give away too much of my time.

For a long time, I tried to get to my emails right away, even if I was supposed to be doing something else at that time. As a result, I fell further and further behind schedule, watching my free time get eaten by postponed tasks until I was lucky to get an hour or three at the end of the day.

I said "yes" to every project that came along, even if I didn't really have time for it. I found a way to fit it in, often at the expense of my happiness and well-being.

I assumed that people needed things right away, and would often pile extra things into an already full day.

As it turns out, that's not a very good way to live.

Lately, I've been rearranging my priorities. Unless an email is urgent, it can wait until I'm either through my to-do list, or have a lull between tasks.

If I can't take on a project right away, I tell people "I can do that for you, but it will have to happen later this week". Or, in some cases, I simply say "no".

It's a work in progress, and sometimes I still underestimate how much time something will take, or how much time I have. But I'm making a conscious effort to make myself, my productivity and my joy a higher priority than taking on every little thing as soon as it comes up.

2. I have a history of treating my life like it isn't my own.

Knowing things is a strange business. How many things do we know in our heads, and yet not really act upon?

I knew that my life is my own, I only get one chance on this Earth, and I should live my own life, not someone else's.

But I've often found myself seeking permission to take time for myself, to do the things I want to do, and to arrange my working time the way I want to.

I've apologized for, and been embarrassed by, my weird sleep schedule, instead of just embracing it and saying "these are the hours when I work and am available".

And I've treated the things I love to do like they don't matter, and felt like I was wasting my time by spending time on them, when I was really living in my purpose and giving my gifts to the world.

In 2017, I am setting aside more time to do the fiction writing, art and video-making that I love, and treating them like the valuable contributions that they are, instead of a spare-time thing that doesn't make a difference.

3. I wasn't being honest with myself about what I really want.

My coaching and marketing business is a part of me. There are countless coaches, business owners, and visionaries out there who are meant to change people's lives, and who can make an even bigger difference when they can reach more of the people they want to help.

I have a great contribution to make by connecting these people with the clients who need them... but I also have another contribution to make, and it's one I've been neglecting and devaluing, even though it's central to who I am and what I want to do with my life.

For a long time, I've treated making fiction like it wasn't important. But lately, more and more, I've been paying attention to the impact it has on people's lives.

Stories bring people together. Friendships that might never have existed are kindled because of books, movies, TV series, video games, and comics.

Stories bring people solace. How many times have I seen people comment to their favorite artists that "you helped me get through a really hard time"?

Stories bring people hope, and help them to understand themselves better. How many times have you read the story of a character you identified with, watched them struggle and grow through a challenge you share, and gotten a better understanding of who you are and what you want to do next?

Stories inspire people. I see people making art, fanfiction, music, contests and forums based on the stories they love, and I long to inspire that with my own creations.

I want to create more stories, to connect with my fans, and to have the time to engage them promptly and fully when they reach out to me.

For a long time, I acted like that part of me and my gifts didn't matter. But now, I'm coming to realize my love of stories and sharing them is central to who I am. It's my passion, and I believe it's a huge part of what I was born to bring to this world.

If I reach the end of my life with too many of these stories untold, too many readers unreached, and too many beautiful moments of emotion, learning and growth not expressed through the stories that were meant to carry them, then I'll have wasted an essential part of my life.

So in 2017, I am consciously setting aside more time to express this side of my gifts. To make more art, write more stories, make more videos, and connect with more people in the area of my greatest passion and strengths.

I'm still serving clients in the coaching and marketing field, but I'm no longer treating this other side of me as a nonessential spare-time thing.

How am I going to keep these resolutions?

New Year's resolutions are infamous for failing. So how do I plan to keep mine?

Here are 4 strategies I'm going to use, and I encourage you to use them for your own resolutions and goals:

1. Be specific.

Starting next week, I'm going to clearly delineate which hours belong to my coaching and marketing business, and which hours belong to art, writing, videos, and hanging out with my audience.

I'm not just going to "spend more time on my fiction creation". I'm going to get specific about how much time I'm going to spend and when.

2. Put it in my calendar.

Your calendar can eat your life, or it can set you free. It all depends on how you use it.

When you create your to-do list for each day, give each item a specific time slot. This will help you to know how much of your day is already booked, and whether or not you can fit more stuff into it.

It'll also help you to be more efficient. I've often found that tasks expand or contract to fill the time I give to them. If I give myself too much time, I find myself working slowly and letting my mind wander.

So give yourself enough time to do a good job without stressing yourself, but not so much that you'll end up letting a 45-minute task eat an hour and a half.

3. Tell people about my strategies and goals.

Promises you make only to yourself are easy to break. But when you have people who know what you're doing and why, who believe in your dream, and who check in with you on a regular basis, it's harder to break your promises.

4. Go easy on myself.

Maybe there will be days when I overschedule by accident, or something takes longer than planned, or an emergency comes up.

After years of overscheduling, underestimating time requirements, and treating my time like it wasn't my own, I don't expect to get it perfect instantly.

You'll probably also have days when you fall short of your own expectations. Maybe you'll eat too much. Maybe you'll lose your temper after promising not to, or won't go to the gym as often as you planned.

At times like these, you may feel tempted to feel like you've failed, and to think there's no point in trying anymore.

But while your past influences your future, it doesn't determine it.

Every day, every moment, you have a choice.

Each time you look at your schedule and think of adding one too many things, each time you think about eating another donut or skipping another day at the gym, each time you talk with someone who tempts you to slide back into your old habits, you have a choice to make.

No matter how many times you've failed in the past, you have an opportunity to say "that was then; this is now, and now, I choose to do the thing that will move me closer to my goals and dreams".

Making a shift toward your goals is seldom permanent. It isn't a "one incident fixes all" deal. It's a series of choices that you make, one opportunity at a time.

But as you make the right choice over and over again, it gets easier to do it the next time.

Now it's your turn.


What did you learn about yourself in 2016?

What are your New Year's resolutions?

And what steps will you take to make sure those resolutions stick?

I look forward to your comments.

Don't you love that moment when a supposedly smart character does something so dangerously stupid that you feel compelled to facepalm, headdesk, and roll your eyes at the same time?

...Yeah. Me neither.

I recently wrote a guest blog post about 5 stupid mistakes characters frequently make, why writers have them make those mistakes, and what to do instead.

If you're a writer who wants to avoid these embarrassing errors, or a reader who wants to laugh and say "I know, right?", click the button below to check out the article.
​

​When it comes to weighing morality in fiction, different types of characters seem to be measured on very different scales.

Some character types can get away with things that others can't, while others can be subjected to far more violence with less moral outrage from the audience and other characters.

1. Sparing the top villain is more important than sparing the underlings.
​
The heroes have done it. They've cut, burned, shot and bludgeoned their way through the enemy horde, and they've finally reached the person behind it all. The one who's been sending all the minor enemies into battle.

The one person whose death would make the biggest difference toward ending the conflict for good.

But... "No, you can't! Killing is wrong! If you kill him, you'll be just like him! You're the good guy - you're supposed to be a role model of mercy for all the impressionable children watching this!"

The fact that they just killed dozens, if not hundreds, of underlings in order to get to this guy might not even be mentioned. Those guys are generic and disposable. (Yes, I'm looking at you, movie adaptation of Prince Caspian.)

But Heaven forbid that the heroes kill a NAMED villain with a personality. That would be un-heroic! They should stick to slaughtering the nameless, preferably masked or helmet-wearing underlings who are more easily dehumanized - that's just fine.

And if a few hundred or thousand more civilians have to die, because the important villain was allowed to continue their villainy a bit longer?

That's just the price of family-friendly villain handling.

​
2. One protagonist is worth more than ALL the 'bad guys'.

When a protagonist dies or gets hurt, there's drama. There's sadness. There are images of loved ones mourning or worrying, woeful music, and unhappy feelings in the audience.

But when an entire enemy base gets blown up, it's awesome. The light show is great, the music sings of heroism, and the corpses and bereaved loved ones are probably not shown.

If this destruction was critical to preventing the enemy from launching a campaign of violence, the reaction makes sense. But what if most of the people on that base were just living their lives and doing their jobs, with no malicious intent...

And what if the people who were killed outnumber the people who were saved?

It's only natural to care more about the characters you've spent time with and bonded with. But if the lives of minor enemies were treated with the same value as the lives of protagonists, a lot of stories would have a very different tone.

3. Revenge is only OK for (some) protagonists.

Whether or not revenge is endorsed depends heavily on the writer, but if the person taking revenge is an antagonist, you can probably count on it being portrayed as tragic at best, or evil at worst.

​On the other side of the coin, there are times when minor characters are created and killed specifically to give the protagonist a reason to seek revenge.

In the case of a heroic avenger, sometimes it will be pointed out that revenge won't revive the dead or give the vengeful party closure. But the odds of revenge being painted as a worthy and heroic goal are a whole lot better if you're the protagonist.


4. Fighting dirty vs teamwork.
​
Sometimes, a hero being drowned in a zerg rush of minor enemies is just a chance for them to show how badass they are. Sometimes, it's a portrayal of how the enemy is willing to fight dirty by ganging up on a lone victim.

But how often do you see a villainous team-up being portrayed as the Power of Friendship and Teamwork in action?

Granted, the fact that they're villains makes them less likely than a hero to be motivated by camaraderie.

But I don't think I've ever seen a collaboration of antagonists being celebrated in-story the way a heroic loner is when they finally swallow their pride and allow their friends to help out.

Have you noticed any other double standards when it comes to fictional violence?

I look forward to reading your comments.

Some stories shove their lessons down your throat, often with so much force that you're so busy choking down the moral of the story that you can't even care about the story itself.

Others simply portray a scenario, and let the lesson teach itself.

A few years ago, I re-watched one of childhood favorites, Once Upon a Forest. The rating on Rotten Tomatoes notwithstanding, I remembered it being good, except for the over-the-top swamp birds.

But as a child, I hadn't fully recognized the emphasis it placed on humanity's impact on animals and the environment.

Looking back, I attribute that largely to the fact that, instead of getting on a soapbox and explicitly lecturing its audience, it simply displayed the experiences that its cast endured as a result of humanity's mistakes.

The characters were likable, and they didn't take a backseat to the lesson that was being taught. The mood of each scene was convincingly set - I never felt like it was simply a vehicle for the writers to grind an ax.

To me, that commitment to maintaining the quality of the story, rather than allowing the tale to be drowned by its own moral like a baby bird in a swamp, was the difference between an enjoyable movie and a lecture with delusions of being a story.

Would I still enjoy Once Upon a Forest, if I watched it today? It's been a while, so it's hard to say, but I like to think I would.

Either way, I consider it a good example of a teaching story that kept its priorities in the right place, and a reminder to me to do the same whenever I want to communicate something through my writing.

Have you ever watched or read a story that you felt was trying too hard to teach its audience a lesson?

What do you think it could have done differently to keep being a good story, while still making its point?

I look forward to reading your comments.

Whether your story element is a character with superpowers, a high-tech sci-fi gadget, or a bizarre space phenomenon, there's one dilemma that always arises when your story includes something beyond what science can currently explain:

Do you offer a scientific-sounding explanation, knowing that you're going to get the crap debunked out of you if you don't research the matter thoroughly enough, or if future scientific discoveries counter your explanations for currently impossible technology?

Do you give a half-assed explanation that you KNOW is already pretty much debunked, like "radiation creates superpowers" or "genes let you control the weather"?

Or do you just include the element, forego specific explanations, and hope nobody asks too many questions?

I've seen examples across the spectrum, from stuff like Mass Effect that sounds plausible to a layperson like me, to the technobabble in Star Trek that sometimes induces face-palming in even the moderately knowledgeable, to superhero stories' obviously bogus belief that genes and radiation can do anything the plot demands.

Some stories, like Farscape, choose to avoid explaining technology for which science currently has no explanation, thereby escaping a descent into meaningless technobabble and inevitable scientific debunking.

And me?

I've struggled with that question several times lately.

When I was writing Heroic Lies, one of the dilemmas I encountered was, Do I try to explain Zorei's technology? Or do I just let him use it, without going into the details?

I ended up going with the second option. The way his tech worked wasn't important to the story, and I'm not mechanically savvy enough or interested enough in machines to go into the nitty-gritty details of how his gear operated.

Heaven help me if I ever write a story where the mechanical operations of a spaceship become important to the plot.

​I also encountered the Explanation Dilemma when I was writing Catgirl Roommate. Why does Nyla exist? How did a human-shaped person come to have the ears, tail and mindset of a cat?

And is there any explanation for such a being that wouldn't be total and obvious BS?

Once again, I ended up just letting the story element be what it is, without stretching the bounds of scientific plausibility any further than I already had. Explanations were unnecessary, and even if I did come up with one, it would probably be darker than the tone I was going for.

While editing the first part of Catgirl Roommate, I've run into an interesting question:

How many bad things can happen to a character before it stops being funny?

In the case of the hapless furball above, most of his pain is self-inflicted, so we're free to laugh at his fur-scorching, face-flattening antics without guilt.

But what about cases like straight-arrow college student Sam, whose suffering is caused by his innocently misbehaved catgirl roommate?

In many of the scenes I recently edited, Sam's pain was limited to exasperation and frustration, but there were a few instances when he actually got hurt. Not few enough, I soon concluded, which led me to alter several scenes to remove or soften the physical consequences of Nyla's shenanigans.

After all, we're supposed to be laughing at his minor misfortunes like the crowd of softcore sadists that we are, not cringing at his actual physical pain.

While contemplating the line between funny farces and the laughter-crushingly cringeworthy, I thought I'd get your opinion on the matter:

Where do you draw the line between hilarious misadventures, and stuff that's too painful to be funny?

Does it largely depend on the degree of the damage, whether it was self-inflicted and/or deserved, or some other factor I haven't mentioned?

I look forward to reading your comments.