Shown Their Work. A line between realism, authenticity and story.

[Samuel , Director]

One of our group members, Peter Nealen when not writing kick ass genre busting dystopian/military fiction or supernatural novels, has a side gig as what could be described as an essayist.

He writes on many things and his articles can be found in many places. One of those places is his own author website and recently he wrote something that caught my attention.

https://americanpraetorians.wordpress...

[Samuel , Director]

Authenticity vs. Reality vs. Story. Peter was writing about the general trend in contemporary thriller fiction and how every single author in the genre in some way needs things to be reality based.

In a previous book review of my own, I had written about how spy fiction in the 20th century was divided into the Fleming, escapist side and the Forsyth/Clancy realism faction and how the latter ultimately won dominance of the genre.

[Samuel , Director]

Nealen writes about how many authors lose sight of the fact they're telling a story. They get so caught up in all those interesting facts that they soon find themselves consumed by them, the facts acting like an acid that slowly strips the flesh off the story, leaving a boring, barren carcass.

[Samuel , Director]

So, from his title, you can see there's a scale of sorts. One should try aim for the middle.

Reality: Danger zone. Consumed with real world detail to a dangerous degree. If a book starts reading like an ordinance catalog or a policy paper, begin hitting the delete button.

Authenticity: Integration of reality into the story. Using real world details and research strategically and effectively when writing to enhance the story. A way this is not done is by having some dull secondary character vomit the facts out. Try show, not tell.

Story: Final goal. The spark of escapism that you need in a thriller. But it's best that the spark doesn't turn into a raging fire. Because if it does, the plotting and writing can come undone from its morings and the story less cohesive and more absurd.

[Samuel , Director]

So basically, it's all about balance and trying
to not get tunnel vision that locks onto reality and/or story only.

[Samuel , Director]

As Peter himself warns.

"The whole point to writing a thriller is to tell a rollicking story that people want to read. If it’s authentic to the core and as boring as 90% of real-world military operations really are, then you kind of failed."

[Samuel , Director]

Samuel wrote: "

As Peter himself warns.

"The whole point to writing a thriller is to tell a rollicking story that people want to read. If it’s authentic to the core and as bor..."

Plus, he did say he has another article in the works continuing his rumination on the trend.

[Justin]

Spot-on! That's my mistake as a first-time author. It's a good thing I'm self-published so I can delete all those unnecessary trivia and over-explanations. The new version is 16 pages shorter and 1 less chapter.

[Samuel , Director]

Peter continues with part 2 of his ruminations. Tone and how too cynical shouldn't be passed off as realism. https://americanpraetorians.wordpress...

[Samuel , Director]

None of this should be taken as advocating for Pollyanism. Too often in thrillers we find the opposite problem, where the nuke is stopped, the day is saved, and everything goes back to normal. Violence has consequences, and especially plots to blow up tens of thousands of civilians with weapons of mass destruction have repercussions. Even the generally more personal violence found in heroic fantasy, or smaller-scale thrillers, has repercussions. It is brutal, painful, and life-altering when it isn’t life-ending. It shouldn’t be taken lightly.

[Samuel , Director]

Breaking news! Group member Peter Nealen gives us this gift for the new year! A continuation about what a writer should aspire to use the research for. https://americanpraetorians.wordpress...

[Julian]

On this topic you might want to look at ‘The Unbeliever’ by Oggy Boytchev. It’s based on a real Bulgarian Cold War spy by fiction. It’s a good read. It blurs lines between historical reality & fiction.