Help for dummies.

[Cee]

Hi all,
that's me back from my hols and despite being filled with snot, I'm ready to get going again with some writing. (These past few months have seen me spend more time on boring household issues and punting 'Damp Dogs & Rabbit Wee.' But until I get interest stoked in USA, then I feel I should really get my finger out and properly immerse myself in the world of 'Soul Survivor.'

So here's something I could do with guidance on:

I know our mantra is 'Comedy is about breaking rules, but when I popped up my VERY rough first draft on Scribophile, I had a wide range of comments: from all the normal back-slapping 'funny as hell' (which is instantly dismissed) to 'what version of the bible are you quoting the lines from Genesis? (I disregarded this also as I didn't even know there was a sequel.)
I also had a comment on my fictional land of 'Uurth': 'it's obvious you mean 'Earth' so why not just say so?'

I get the point that I need to make things so much more ridiculous as to ensure readers don't think it's a serious piece of fiction, but likes of that and 'why are there no women Gods - this is sexist' and 'Board meetings are not like this ....' make me think that subtle humour (as I see it) is a lost cause.

Where 's the balance between 'ridiculous,' 'funny,' and 'plain stupid,' without appearing to try too hard?

Cheers.

[Will]

Hard to say without seeing the piece. Maybe a link so we can read it?

Comedy is a balancing act. It needs to be close enough to reality that we can all recognise it, but far enough from reality that it makes us laugh.

Take the classic Monty Python parrot sketch:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vuW6...

On the face of it, this is just absurd. But it is based on realistic characters - the smarmy bluffing shopkeeper and the pompous customer. We can imagine a milder version of this scene actually happening. Without the absurdity it wouldn't be funny; without the realistic elements we wouldn't believe in it.

Now to find that balance? Heck, I don't know. You mostly know it when you see it.

On the other hand, what you may have seen is a number of comments which are based on triggers. Some people object to any biblical reference that isn't 100% accurate. Or object to anything which mocks the bible. Others will complain if a given scene doesn't have enough of a certain type of character - male/ female, black/ white, gay/ straight. That's sometimes not literary criticism. It might be someone riding a hobby horse.

[Cee]

Will wrote: "Hard to say without seeing the piece. Maybe a link so we can read it?

Comedy is a balancing act. It needs to be close enough to reality that we can all recognise it, but far enough from reality th..."

Yeah, Will - good illustration regards 'The Parrot Sketch.' I totally get what you mean. Humour is a funny subject. I guess I should just go with what amuses me - it's my book; my Uurth. It's 'fantasy' after all - surely there are NO rules? Or are there?

Perhaps Scribo is maybe not the best place to show-and-tell.

Maybe CLOG can also act as a sounding / reading board. I reckon we're all a little weird on here.
Thanks Will.

[Will]

Don't they say that nearly all humour is about the surprise connection or unexpected reveal? It's when the reader/ listener finds something that they can relate to in a story.

In theory, a fantasy can be about anything. It's fantastical, right? But if it's too way out the reader doesn't have anything to grab hold of. One of the unwritten rules is that every story has to have some link back to reality. There has to be at least something that has the audience saying "ah yes, I recognise that".

Let me give you a fr'instance. My first book was a zombie spoof. One of the ideas I played with was to wonder why zombie books and films only ever have human zombies. Okay, and maybe dogs. But why don't other creatures become zombies?

So I started to play with this idea. I had zombie cows in quite possibly the world's slowest ever car chase. Zombie sparrows. Can zombie birds fly? Zombie cats and dogs. And my main character was a sentient zombie with pacifist tendencies.

The ideas are silly and absurd. But the basic premise is something that hopefully the reader can relate to. Why do we always assume that only humans will turn into zombies?

Of course, we could write just for ourselves and not worry about the reader. There's no harm in that. But I get a buzz when a reader connects with one of my ideas - when someone says "you know, I always wondered why other animals didn't turn into zombies too."

[Cee]

Will wrote: "Don't they say that nearly all humour is about the surprise connection or unexpected reveal? It's when the reader/ listener finds something that they can relate to in a story.

In theory, a fantasy..."

Slow car chase - I like it.

Probably best I revise the first chapter and let y'all see it. It combined 'real life' with the fantastical. But maybe not enough. I'll go again. :)

[Will]

I'd look forward to reading it.

[James]

Humour is subjective. You need to find the right audience, and that is hard as hell to do as before you get there you will probably collect a number of adverse comments along the way. You only have to look at some of the dreadful output from Hollywood, which gets rave US critic reviews, to see that.
So if you think it is right and a few other comedy writers agree then ignore those who are not bright enough to understand the humour.

Either that or else adopt the Sun newspaper philosophy and concentrate on the sex and scandal jokes.

[Cee]

James wrote: "Humour is subjective. You need to find the right audience, and that is hard as hell to do as before you get there you will probably collect a number of adverse comments along the way. You only have..."

Cheers James.
I think you're right. The reviewers on Scribo are not necessarily the type of people who would pick up a comedy fantasy out of choice. This where groups like CLOG can help as we all have one aim in common. maybe I'll redraft and see if anyone here would like to comment.

[James]

My Onedrive is available if you want to open it to all us Cloggers. I can create a sub-folder for your stuff.

[Cee]

What's that? (Sorry - a bit of a philistine when it comes to techy type stuff.)

[James]

Attached to my live.co.uk email address is a cloud storage area. Effectively it means that if you email me a copy I can put it up in a private network where all the Cloggers can see it and leave detailed comments for you, but only those whom I grant access to. Currently that is all the Cloggers on the email distribution list that Rob and I have used to email you.

Your access would be by just clicking a URL in an email or saving it as a bookmark in your web browser.

[Cee]

James wrote: "Attached to my live.co.uk email address is a cloud storage area. Effectively it means that if you email me a copy I can put it up in a private network where all the Cloggers can see it and leave de..."

Cool. That sounds excellent. I'll redraft the first chapter over the next week and get that sorted.. Would be good to have the honest feedback of writers interested in a similar genre. Cheers.