: Writing for a broad spectrum of readers. How do you engage the elite whilst appealing to the base? I've always struggled with this. I like to write at the top of my knowledge without leaving

Vote Up Vote Down

There have been a wealth of anwswers (most being cliches). I feel that most are not getting the question.

Firstly, lets dismiss the theory that 'popular' = 'good'. For theory to be correct McDonalds would be the world's greatest food and Trump would be a good president.

What we're really talking about here is multi-level writing, the ability to engage the intelligent whilst entertaining the minions. Take this simple Lex Luther quote:

"Some people can read War and Peace and come away thinking it's a simple adventure story. Others can read the ingredients on a chewing gum wrapper and unlock the secrets of the universe."

So, to be a great writer you need to be able to encode the secrets of the universe into a chewing gum wrapper (you need to embed those secrets for the privileged to read it).

So, let's have a look at some very basic examples. In the movie "Die Hard II" Bruce Willis glances at the camera before saying "How can the same thing happen to the same guy twice?" The odds are it can't. Is this the actor or writer saying, "I'm talented. I've got education, skills, and qualifications. I can do pretty much anything but all you want is the same shit over and over?"

Let's take another example: "Lethal Weapon". The main characters are openly discussing the three-act plot: "We got one dead girl and one dead guy. The dead guy kills the dead girl, we kill the dead guy 'cause he wanted us to be dead guys - it's pretty easy to me." Unfortunately we are only half way through the movie - the characters conclude the plot is 'a little thin' and proceed to complicate it.

So, we're writing basic stories for basic people but for the more sophisticated we've got to write a story at two speeds.

Let's look at: "The Taking of Pelham 123". The title of the story immediately informs some members of the audience of outcome of the train hijack - it was easy (easy as 1-2-3). Now you're writing for two distinct audiences - Those who know the outcome of Acts I and II and those who don't. You're wasting your time trying suspense tactics on the smarter reader.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

My advice would be to forget about "engaging" people, not because you don't need to, exactly, but because trying to often gets in the way of successfully doing so (people end up writing stuff that doesn't even engage them, because they think it's what their readers want).

I think it's better to think about communicating. You have a story in your head, and a set of characters, and a world (which might, of course, resemble the real world very closely, but is nonetheless a product of your imagination). Your goal is show this to the reader, and show them why they should care about it.

So, how do you communicate? Do you assume the reader thinks like you, and shares the same interests as you?

If you do, you may be able to rely on shared assumptions and communicate very deeply with people who are like you in these respects, but you may fail to communicate with people who don't think like you or share your interests.

If, however, you assume the reader has nothing in common with you, and try to bridge the gap between you by expressing more universal ideas through more widely understood devices, you may not communicate so deeply, but you will probably communicate further, and with more people.

So, I think there is always a certain trade off between these two, but there's also a continuum between them. Great works, the ones that we remember, that are popular and acclaimed, generally don't fall quite at either end of this continuum (since those that do will tend to end up forgotten or unread) but they usually encompass a large portion of it. Because of the writer's brilliance, they are able to bridge the gap more completely than other works, and connect things that are personal to the writer with things that are personal to the reader.

The trick, then, I think, is to occupy as large a space on this continuum as possible. Whether you choose a portion nearer to yourself ("experimental fiction"), somewhere in the middle ("literary fiction") or nearer to your reader ("popular fiction") is obviously up to you.

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

If you try to please everyone, you please no-one. Finnegan's Wake (Joyce) has gained and retained a reputation as a great classic of the English language, despite working hard at every turn to confound and confuse the reader (and arguably not even being written in real "English").

If your writing is good enough, and if you are true enough to your own personal vision, you are likely to gain at least a niche audience of passionate fans, which has been enough to keep many a book alive for centuries.

Typically, books that appeal to a broad popular audience do so because their authors are naturally at home (or have found a way to make themselves at home) with a broadly popular idiom or genre, not because they have deliberately tried to "dumb down" their work. In other words, they are attuned to the broader audience, not chasing it (and certainly not condescending to it).

(0)

Vote Up Vote Down

You have adopted a complicated, "elite" format, with a surprising "twist" ending to the scene. I'm not sure that you were successful, but you made your point.

You had two interlocking themes, the mundane, (that is the pastor's homily), and the "real" one. There's your distinction between the elite and the least common denominator. The mundane stuff keeps the attention of the average person, while the surprise event captures your intended audience. It'sh hard to execute well, but if you can, you can appeal to both audiences. For instance, I'm not sure how to work the prison angle into your story.

Apparently there are some writers that specialize in these surprise twists. They are hard to execute but can be very interesting when successful You might want to identify and copy these authors. I have the feeling that you are onto something, but haven't yet arrived. Your scene reminds me of one or two in Tom Wolfe's "Bonfire of the Vanities." You might want to consult that book.

(0)