![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
lobelia321I don't do rpgs and I have only ever done txt-collabs (and a short office collab with ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
badgermonkey but I did have some thoughts about these things half an hour ago.
Reading the Cambrigde Introduction to Narrative by H. Porter Abbott, I came across some points on collaborative fiction and the implied author.
When reading, we try to locate a sensibility behind the narrative that accounts for how it is constructed -- a sensibility on which to base our interpretations. A good term for the sensibility we seek is the implied author.
Now, a collab might be expected to display a fragmented set of implied authors. But this is not so. Because the implied author is not identical with the actual author or authors. (And the implied author is, of course, not identical with the narrator, either. The narrator can be unreliable, for example, but still we sense some underlying presence in the fic that comments on that unreliability. The whole point about an unreliable narrator is that he or she is *shown* to be unreliable by something else in the text, and that something else is put there by the implied author. This happens quite clearly ineyebrowofdoom's "Flint".)
H. Porter Abbot again, this time on novels written collaboratively, where each chapter is authored by a different person, e.g. "Naked Came the Stranger": These efforts actually give strong support to the idea of the implied author as a functioning construct. even without planning together, each successive writer tries to make his or her chapter consistent with the implied authorial sensibility that seems to be emerging. In others, a dood deal of the fun is tracking the ways in which successive authors undermine the implied sensibility and intentions of preceding chapters.
He goes on to say that one find very much the same effect in 'theatre improv' and in many role-playing games. (Eek! I read the word 'role-playing game in a rl book!!)
This makes sense to me. In my limited experience of writing collab, it has most definitely been the case that I have tried to open myself up to the underlying whatever it is of Wainthropp/Geoffrey.badgermonkey and I had, I think, a consistent tone and world picture going, and that is what kept the momentum up and created a sort of unified narrative.
When it comes to reading, I think it's those collabfics that most successively manage to create the effect of one implied author that work best (for me; e.g. "Twee Slut" byazewewish and <lj user="shinysparkly"). If it's too easy to see the seams and the individuals' takes, as in many rpgs that later get posted, it doesn't work for me in creating that narrative world.
badgermonkey but I did have some thoughts about these things half an hour ago.Reading the Cambrigde Introduction to Narrative by H. Porter Abbott, I came across some points on collaborative fiction and the implied author.
When reading, we try to locate a sensibility behind the narrative that accounts for how it is constructed -- a sensibility on which to base our interpretations. A good term for the sensibility we seek is the implied author.
Now, a collab might be expected to display a fragmented set of implied authors. But this is not so. Because the implied author is not identical with the actual author or authors. (And the implied author is, of course, not identical with the narrator, either. The narrator can be unreliable, for example, but still we sense some underlying presence in the fic that comments on that unreliability. The whole point about an unreliable narrator is that he or she is *shown* to be unreliable by something else in the text, and that something else is put there by the implied author. This happens quite clearly in
eyebrowofdoom's "Flint".)H. Porter Abbot again, this time on novels written collaboratively, where each chapter is authored by a different person, e.g. "Naked Came the Stranger": These efforts actually give strong support to the idea of the implied author as a functioning construct. even without planning together, each successive writer tries to make his or her chapter consistent with the implied authorial sensibility that seems to be emerging. In others, a dood deal of the fun is tracking the ways in which successive authors undermine the implied sensibility and intentions of preceding chapters.
He goes on to say that one find very much the same effect in 'theatre improv' and in many role-playing games. (Eek! I read the word 'role-playing game in a rl book!!)
This makes sense to me. In my limited experience of writing collab, it has most definitely been the case that I have tried to open myself up to the underlying whatever it is of Wainthropp/Geoffrey.
badgermonkey and I had, I think, a consistent tone and world picture going, and that is what kept the momentum up and created a sort of unified narrative. When it comes to reading, I think it's those collabfics that most successively manage to create the effect of one implied author that work best (for me; e.g. "Twee Slut" by
azewewish and <lj user="shinysparkly"). If it's too easy to see the seams and the individuals' takes, as in many rpgs that later get posted, it doesn't work for me in creating that narrative world.![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2003-06-23 02:33 pm (UTC)When it comes to reading, I think it's those collabfics that most successively manage to create the effect of one implied author that work best. If it's too easy to see the seams and the individuals' takes, as in many rpgs that later get posted, it doesn't work for me in creating that narrative world.
I find this in writing, as well. I have written several collabs now, in several different fandoms. Some of them have been an absolute joy to write, and in a couple of cases - most notably with
As for reading, I am in complete agreement. There is a convention in some groups for people to use a line of asterisks or underscores or some other symbol to separate the sections written by individual authors within the same scene. I find this very difficult to read, but maybe that's just me.
Okay. The quest for boring!Orli continues!