Thread replies: 14
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
Writer here. Simple question, no need for big discussion on what I write or who publishes it, just want a simple answer from people outside the process.
When you read horror do you like the "baddy" or "boogeyman" to be ill defined and mysterious, or do you feel unfulfilled when a writer doesn't explain, or view it as sloppy on the part of the writer to leave it open for interpretation as opposed to giving the reader all the answers
for everyone who says tldr wtvr.jpg
>>
>>18929342
Okay it has to be defined. You are writing meaning you have to be building his lore in between the pages
>>
Not defined- a reader's mind is more scary than anything
>>
>>18929342
Either can be good, nothing wrong with good lore but complete mystery is good too since letting your readers to "fill in the holes" is an effective horror trope.
However, if you're going to give some lore on a boogeyman, don't half-ass it. If you're going to make it a simple concept like "serial killer kills people from beyond the grave" you should at least have readers piece together bits and pieces that you've scattered throughout your story. Giving them a puzzle to put together engages the reader.
>>
>>18929342
I tend to side with the bad guys in superhero movies . I hate when characters are just pure evil and we should hate them just because. They need some motive other than being a psycho killer. Some human side to the killer is more haunting for me
>>
Horror is all about atmosphere and spooky descriptions. It's very important to show, not tell, your readers how your boogeyman/antagonist is like. The more real and believable you make them - the more it will impact your reader.
The crux of your decision is whether or not to make your villain relatable or not. The more sympathetic your villain is, the more the audience will have a tough time not siding with them. The more idealized and "pure evil" they are, the less your audience will identify with them.
>>
>>18929355
>>18929415
>>18929476
>>18929521
This is all basically my dilemma, working on something at the moment and not sure if it would be more interesting to build a lore slowly or leave it a mystery for the reader. Will likely go with an approach that has a vague lore that tells the reader want they need to know to be afraid without giving anything away that will dispell the potential mystery or mystique
>>
>>18929342
it depends on the story. can't give a general-purpose advisement on something like this.
>>
>>18929355
I read this in a bad English accent with *fedora tip* pauses and *drags pipe* pauses. Don't ever attempt to write anything worthwhile, mate.
>>
The monster on Lost was so scary because it was left to the imagination. Also David Lynch goes on about the importance of mystery with evil- hence Twin Peaks. Mystery is the way to go.
>>
Closure is nice, but I don't like for the author to assume I'm retarded and spell it out for me. I think that ideally, details are implied via plot.
>>
>>18929602
>The monster on Lost was so scary because it was left to the imagination
The monster on Lost was "so scary" because you and all the people you talked about Lost with vaguely convinced each other that it was, in order for Lost to be better for all of you.
It was a social construction. Nothing in that show was ever creepy or scary.
>>
>>18929570
You need to know exactly what he is and why he acts like he acts. Extensive author notes. However, what you reveal should depend on what the story calls for. Show, don't tell. I don't care how long you've spent working up his tragic backstory, there's no non-hack way you're going to get that into the story. But his character, strengths, and weaknesses should all be built out of his history, all the same. You're going to have to either do some research or fictionalize the experiences of yourself or someone well known to you.
>>
>>18929342
How does one make baddy?
Thread posts: 14
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1