Feedback and Response: Who is This? – 2 of 3

So, I wanted to share this little convo and JL’s comments because they’re well thought out and intelligent. Even in that he disagrees with the gentleman who asked for a sequel, and then himself, debates the possibility of a sequel. Enjoy!


JustLooking9000 from the Free Catfight Forums: “Hey! I was just re reading your story “Who’s this?” and I had to send you a message to again compliment you on how the story is. Very deep descriptions, the feelings of the girls are well fleshed out and while at times one girl has the upper hand, you made it look as if the catfight was even throughout the story. It’s a level of detail I can’t just match in my stories, and I won’t try (One of my readers told me that the characters I put feel like masturbation fodder that are more or less the same. Which is very true and how I like it). As I was reading the story again, I noticed there was a chain of comments in which you mentioned you felt very tempted to do a sequel but in the end you didn’t.

Even though I’d have loved to see a sequel, I feel you made the right decision in the end. The purpose of the story, as I understand it, was to show you could write a story were the “bad girl” wins. Doing a sequel would either mean Lauren wins, in which case it defeats the purpose of the original story OR Claire wins again, which would be hard to stomach for you. But, since I’m pretty sure you’ve given it some thought, I’d love to hear your ideas of how it would have gone. The excuse Lauren would use to get a rematch, David’s reaction, Claire’s disgust, the type of fight they would engage on and what would you like the result of the catfight to be. I’m sure you thought of several concepts before deciding to discard the sequel and I’d love to hear them.

As for me, I feel while you described David as a little cold towards his wife, he has feelings for her and he’d be torn between the two. Depending on his personality, he might be chagrined he didn’t get to see the fight and demands another fight in front of him. After her sadness was gone, I guess Lauren would try to justify to herself making another go at David. Sure, she and Claire had agreed that the loser would leave David’s life. Claire won, but that “verbal agreement”  no legal force, and in the end the true decision maker is David. Moreover, I’d guess Lauren would argue that Claire “cheated” in the end, by making it look like they were going to make some sort of peace or truce or a sexfight. That way, Lauren can justify that the original catfight didn’t “count” and the need of another fight to settle things once and for all.

Claire for her part would argue that’s bullshit. Lauren was clear what she was getting into and decided to trust there was some sort of informal truce and love making session in what was clearly was an anything goes catfight. It was Claire own fault to think otherwise, especially since David was at stake. Claire would be furious at what she sees Lauren clearly breaking the rules (I can already imagine Lauren’s riposte: “There’s a social agreement not to go  after taken men and you  broke that too. Why is it ok for you to break the rules but  not for me?”). But since it’s a furious she said she said situation and David doesn’t know what really happened apart from “Lauren lost”, I feel he’d be pushing for a rematch before he picks one  woman in the end….”


My Response: I tried to find the response I sent to JL, but apparently though there is a sent section in the FCF mailbox, it is empty? So … basically I gave him a rundown of the blog post I made last night, with a mention of how hard it would be to make a follow-up as good as the original?


JustLooking9000: “Hey. Sure you can post my message in your blog if you want.I read your blog entry and I think you explained very well your reasons for not doing a sequel. I’ve been in the same situation as well ie writing what was supposed to be a one shot only to then think maybe I should do a sequel, and then going back and forth on the idea. In one hand, you’d love to continue the story. On the other, you know you have to maintain the same quality as the first story while trying to maintain the essence of the original yet ALSO introduce new elements to prevent the sequel from being too repetitive. It’s a very tough act to follow if you didn’t have a sequel in mind in the first place.I think the sequel isn’t a good option (even though I’d love to read one). You’ll have to spend a lot of time to write something of the same quality, and you’ll be constrained by what you wrote in the original. What I think you could do, if you were so inclined, is to write a blog post with some thoughts/scenarios of what you think would happen and the reasons. Focus on the details you want to write about and go back and forth on how the fight would go, the motivations, the excuses, etc etc etc. I actually did this to address some points in a story I made and I knew I wouldn’t pursue further in a long time: I started throwing a lot of hypothetical just for my own amusement. It’s ok because it’s not really a sequel and you’re not committing to anything, but at the same time teasing the readers with what could a rematch look like, were it to happen. I actually found such exercise at some points even more enjoyable than writing a complete story, since I didn’t have to think how to go from point A to B to C. I just jotted down what points A, B and C were and that was it.If you were ever to write such a blog post with additional details, or hypothetical sequel scenarios, I’d love to read it, even knowing it’d never become an actual sequel.”JL9000


So, with all that said, I think I am going to do as JL9000 suggests, writing out my ideas for possible sequels. Who knows, maybe it will rid me of my desire to write said sequels.

1 thought on “Feedback and Response: Who is This? – 2 of 3

  1. Drew Powell says:

    I think I never did publicly comment on this, but here goes nothing.

    There’s an option to expand the affair without hurting the integrity of the original story. One of the biggest jokes of human history is how people are attracted to populism as it seemingly projects strength, but once you can peek behind the curtain (as it was recently revealed in the Ibiza Affair) you see that in reality they’re just a loud and insecure cheerleader in bad need of a clique that justifies her existence as a b*tch on wheels.

    Very similarly in the last century, superpowers had enough deterrent to literally and mutually destroy each other, and here’s the meat:

    The possibility to create a character, who engages in a proxy conflict. Important: this is not implying do it, nor that if you do it this is how to do it, just a description of how it would expand, had it been my story. She would have an agenda of her own, even unknown to the wife, back as college friends David rejected her advances. It was success that turn David into a horndog.

    One drunken night the girls decide to create a chain of messages where the wife does her best to emulate her ex’s mannerisms to instill fear into the new partner that David just can’t stop being a horndog while on “business trips”.

    It works, and the two women meet and fight viciously. That way, the former winner would go down the same path the wife did (which means she loses even if she wins), a conflict could seem like a ruse but can become genuine without the wife learning about it.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Skip to toolbar