Tailoring to a Demographic

An (I hope) acceptably on-topic version of this thread.

I've seen a lot of discussions that take for granted the idea that different demographics—different genders in particular—place markedly different values on different aspects of a story.

Basically... you're painting your stories pink and expecting everything with a vagina to come crawling. You expect some magical girl-lure to exist. It's even worse when you list (as "things girls like") elements that any good story should have ("Characters" maybe.) because the idea of it, the pursuit of a unifying female interest, remains, and throwing around half-baked psychology only shows how seriously you're all taking this sexist garbage.

edited 25th Jan '11 10:50:50 PM by DaeBrayk

I think you've got a good point about creative honesty in there somewhere, but its buried under a good deal of insulting invective. Prepare to be flamed hard, and I can't say with certainty whether or not you will deserve it.

{Address the topic, not whether you think it's a stupid topic or not. —Madrugada}

... I will just say that there does exist something called market segmentation and catering to different market segments with different marketing messages in my Marketing classes. Such theory does exist in professional practice, and experts have done researches aplenty on it. Take that what you will.

edited 25th Jan '11 10:59:30 PM by Madrugada

This post was thumped by the Shillelagh of Whackingness

This post was thumped by the Stick of Post Thumping

But (and I am speaking as a troper and a reader, not a mod or a writer, here) it's frustrating to see folks asking about what they should or shouldn't put into a story to attract this or that audience, how they should handle something in order to avoid angering this or that group of possible readers. Unless you are writing to a formula because that's what you are contracted to do, just tell the story. no large group is monolithic and trying to tailor the story to some imaginary "they" is a good way to lose the story amid allthe trappings. you added to please "them".

Again, the OP had a good point that got buried beneath a heap of sarcasm. Unfortunate, really.

^^^^^^^Valid point, we'll see how things go.

^^^^^^"Locked" isn't the same thing as "resolved".

On market segmentation— is that what a story is to you? Something to be marketed and sold? I hope you hold literature to a higher standard than you do beer commercials.

edited 25th Jan '11 11:02:12 PM by DaeBrayk

^^ And talking about the old thread isn't helping to unbury it. This thread is not about the other thread. I suggested that he try again without the sarcasm and vitriol.

edited 25th Jan '11 11:01:25 PM by Madrugada

I point back to my statement about professional marketing practice. The marketers in large corporate bodies, despite their unsavory reputation, do indeed carry out particular marketing ploys to attract certain demographic. And you can't say it doesn't work at all.

Although, in writing the only thing I think should apply is that you should try not to offend people.

@ Last point: I do hold a story in higher standard to commercials, thank you very much. But at the bottom line, a story is not just art, it is also a product. And a product is there to be marketed.

edited 25th Jan '11 11:03:20 PM by ArgeusthePaladin

The OP isn't about only selling a story. If all you care about is selling to a target demographic, by all means follow a formula that some marketing department came up with. Don't be surprised if you get called derivative or a hack, though. Presumably, not everyone here is worried about selling their stuff.

I was only speaking of this thread, having not read the old one, but fair enough. Since a serious discussion seems to be the desire, I'll stop messing around.

@OP: I think the other threads' existence points up a sad, sad chapter in today's writing; the need to avoid offending people. I struggle with this in my own writing...worrying about whether my work will be misinterpreted. Before you say "fuck 'em, do what you want"....how many people read or don't read a book based off what they hear? As an example, how many twilight haters have actually read the damn book they're bashing?

Avoiding offense towards various racial, social and gender groups is a very real concern, and no better way exists to get a group riled up than an accusation of catering to stereotypes.

Yes, its stupid.
Yes, creative freedom is under attack.
No, Writers unfortunately cannot ignore it.

YMMV with this. Personally, I think writing a good story is all fine and good, but even the authors with the least thought on the market should also strive to avoid such travesty as this.

^ Exactly. You can't just go "Nuh-uh, my story is good and my character is three-dimensional" and expect it to be sold, or at least respected.

edited 25th Jan '11 11:09:11 PM by ArgeusthePaladin

I wish we lived in a world where creative honesty is respected, but the fact remains...we don't.

If you want absolute freedom, write for yourself. If you want to make a living at it, cater to the market (at least a little bit) or expect to be disappointed. It makes me sad to say, but I don't think I'm wrong.

That said, the OP has a point in that too much catering can also cause disaster.

(^Nvm, clarified)

^^...if you've got a three dimensional character and a good story, then I don't see any reason it shouldn't sell. If it doesn't sell, then the story, almost by definition, wasn't good enough, and I don't see how changing the story to fit the steryotypical desires of a demographic will help you. If it's good, people will read it. If people don't read it, it wasn't good.

edited 25th Jan '11 11:27:10 PM by DaeBrayk

Slightly off topic, but I have never felt "writing for yourself" as a satisfying way to write. My deal is this: I have a story, my only channel to communicate to the world (or at least that portion of the world that cares) of my ideas, my plot, my characters... my world. And for that I wish it to be read. Whether I get any coin for that does not matter - what matters is that such ideas are communicated to those who care to pick it up.

And for that, the most basic principles of the market has to be at least acknowledged, if not respected. Up to and including the theories of the invisible hand and market segmentation. In both case, respecting Political Correctness is an integral part.

... that's my opinion. Feel free to rip me a new one for being a cheap, sold-out hack.

^ Oh, yes, it does happen. You forgot to acknowledge the fact that art is very subjective in nature. What a person sees as "good", the next person may not think the same. I would like to say that each person's taste is different, but that would simply be rehashing the old points.

It could be because of Squick. For example, An American Crime is a movie based on the real life torture and murder of a teenage girl at the hands of her foster mother and their children. Sound like fun? Most people don't think so, even if the movie is genuinely well-made.

Other times, it's because the concept is unique, but in a way that scares away audiences rather than grows them. For example, Avatar The Last Airbender, about kids and young teens going on adventures to save a fantasy world, is a hit with both kids and adults, due to the generally light tone and the complexity of the story, and a theme that has broad appeal. On the other hand, Fox's Peter Pan and the Pirates was by comparison a failure and was cancelled in less than 2 years. It featured young children going on adventures in a fantasy world, had complex characterization for the time, and took itself seriously and got quite dark at times. But instead of growing its audience, it shrunk it. Older kids think Peter Pan is beneath them, while younger kids would find the cartoon scary or intimidating (and it did have its share of Nightmare Fuel).

From the trope page on Audience-Alienating Premise. Emphasis mine.

edited 25th Jan '11 11:30:12 PM by ArgeusthePaladin

if you've got a three dimensional character and a good story, then I don't see any reason it shouldn't sell.

That's the way its supposed to work, at least...

@Paladin: Sure, gotta watch the accidental alienation. No arguments here, which is why its good to at least keep one eye on the rest of the world. But keep the other on your vision of what a good story is or, like the OP says, you're just a hack with delusions of importance.

I guess the answer here is balance between two extremes, as it so often is.

^ Exactly.

My point is that while making a good story, the author must not close his eyes to the little things that may turn others away from his work despite his good work.

IMHO, political correctness is greatly overrated and is damaging the basic tenets of social communication, but I digress. It is OK to have some "little things" and considerations into view, but you shouldn't start wrecking your own story so that it fits a set of foreign, fear-imposed concepts that are not even exactly well defined. Unless you care more about the product being sold than you do the product being yours, that is.

No matter what you do, you are always going to offend someone. And if they aren't offended, they'll find a reason to complain anyway. While it makes sense commercially to reduce the number of offended people to a minimum, there's a point where reducing such amount starts depriving the story of value (both intrinsic and commercial). I'd posit that such equilibrium point is around the point where no people is unduly offended, no matter that some other people may have to feel so.

Of course, all that applies mostly if you write a realistic setting, 20 Minutes into the Future at most. I don't see a practical way how anyone could claim political uncorrectness in a story about a velociraptor civilization learning to build submarine cities in order to escape the radiactive effects from the remains of alien spaceships that are crossing the planet's orbit.

Agreed wholeheartedly.

Saying that anything will sell as long as it is well written is really unrealistic. I think we can all agree that there are badly written works that are incredibly popular, while there are also good written works that didn't make much money for the author. (Edgar Allan Poe, for example, died in complete poverty, if I'm not mistaken.)

And while I agree with what's been said above (Be as inoffensive as possible as long as you don't seriously alter your original work), I think that this shouldn't be a matter of concern to US.

Sure, if you want to get published and make money you should be extra-cautious, but we're on Tvtropes here. Unless I've got the wrong impression, most of us here don't have any thoughts of going commercial, at least not any serious thoughts. Sure, most people wouldn't mind being published, and they can always dream, but these dreams are about their long-term future. Even if someone among us does publish something, it's almost sure that it's not going to be the same work they are working on right now. So what I'm saying is, maybe we are overthinking this. Maybe it's better to just write whatever you want and don't think at all of the chance that someone out there might find offensive that the bad guy was a Mexican rapper.

But (and I am speaking as a troper and a reader, not a mod or a writer, here) it's frustrating to see folks asking about what they should or shouldn't put into a story to attract this or that audience, how they should handle something in order to avoid angering this or that group of possible readers. Unless you are writing to a formula because that's what you are contracted to do, just tell the story. no large group is monolithic and trying to tailor the story to some imaginary "they" is a good way to lose the story amid allthe trappings. you added to please "them".

Once again, Madrugada proves the voice of wisdom!

Tailoring to a demographic doesn't work, pure and simple. Writers aren't psychic—they can't possibly know what their audience wants (unless you're writing to a very narrow and specific audience, like how I sometimes throw things in that I think will appeal to Tropers). You can analyze market trends, but to be honest there's a load of codswallop in that "science."

edited 27th Jan '11 4:19:41 AM by MoeDantes