Realization Crisis

[polymath]

Sure, human beings are involved, in writing and in reading. Nothing's perfect, at least not by the denotative meaning of the word perfect. One of my pursuits has been why one manuscript becomes a breakaway bestseller and another misses the starting gate. The best answer i have is because the former artfully melds structure and aesthetics, the latter lacks one or both. Structure is quantifiable and qualifiable. Aesthetics aren't. There's too many variables in play, approaching an infinite number of variables.

Anymore, with an endpoint in my pursuit of structure in sight, now I'm turning back to aesthetics. Instead of quantifying or qualifying aesthetics though, I see the way forward as a narrowing of choices. Fewer paths to follow, more limitations and restrictions, and counterintutively, more liberation that fitting a well-chosen form encourages.

[Guardian]

Sure, human beings are involved, in writing and in reading. Nothing's perfect, at least not by the denotative meaning of the word perfect. One of my pursuits has been why one manuscript becomes a breakaway bestseller and another misses the starting gate. The best answer i have is because the former artfully melds structure and aesthetics, the latter lacks one or both. Structure is quantifiable and qualifiable. Aesthetics aren't. There's too many variables in play, approaching an infinite number of variables.

True. Also in my opinion aesthetics is capable to exchange structure in some special cases and sometimes it's a better approach. But in most cases it can't be accepted as an excuse as many used to put aesthetics into the foreground and sacrificing structure itself and handling it as a secondary element. Maybe this is the difference between breakaway bestsellers and the ones that are misses the starting gate. Maybe balance is the key between structure and aesthetics... but this is just a guess from my part.

For example a crisis is born from both; from good structure and from good aesthetics elements. If you leave one of them;
#1 the crisis will be beautiful, but presumably confusing if you work only on the aesthetics but you leave the structure behind.
#2 the crisis will be dry and boring if you leave the aesthetics and you put all your effort only into the structure.

And as I always believe in a third option;
#3 the crisis can be beautiful and foremost interesting if you're using always the necessary amount of aesthetics and structure which depends from the situation; sometimes more aesthetics and sometimes more structure. This is the "write as you feel" option, where the writer must feel which is needed the most in certain scenarios.

Anymore, with an endpoint in my pursuit of structure in sight, now I'm turning back to aesthetics. Instead of quantifying or qualifying aesthetics though, I see the way forward as a narrowing of choices. Fewer paths to follow, more limitations and restrictions, and counterintutively, more liberation that fitting a well-chosen form encourages.

Fewer path to follow is meaning you already do know more variables and you keep them in mind. That's also narrowing your path, but I wouldn't say they're limitations and restrictions. You just know exactly what you're looking for. That's good.

[polymath]

Self-imposed limitations and restrictions that guide consistency, is what I mean. Like using structural considerations to shape plot, using aesthetics like voice characteristics to enhance meaning, some of which are structural qualities, most of which are aesthetic qualities.

Like which of a host of multicultural sides to take an opinion standpoint from, subjective yea or nay, approving or disapproving, then whether to use negativity or positivity adverbs and adjectives to express commentary, perhaps ironical commentary, perhaps forelorn commentary, perhaps upbeat commentary, perhaps sarcasm, perhaps attitude, whatever method works best. Or objective, just the facts bereft of commentary and therefore rigid limitations and restrictions of adverbs and adjectives for expressing commentary.

So many choices to select from, finding the best variables for any given narrative and point of view and voice for any desired effect is a matter of trial and error. When consistency matters, and it does so narrative point of view remains settled, conscious self-imposed limiting and restricting decisions are indicated.

Frankly, I"m partial to reading and writing from the perspective of the villain of the piece, the much maligned antihero who insuperably strives against all comers with the courage of convictions contrary to the complacent, apathetic norm resistant to change, even though change is called for. Subtle nuances and aesthetics play a vigorous role in antihero genre.