#tthael

This is a tough one because basically everything I consume gets picked apart and reused in some way. However, I’ll give it a shot:

 I am going to tell you a secret.

I did not learn how to write like this in college.

Most of my creative writing classes (and I only took 4) taught me to read. They were all workshops, and collaborative, and I learned how to read a piece of writing and identify what it was about--and that’s very different from identifying what the writer intended to write. It taught me to read a story about an adult whose divorced mother is remarrying and say, “Okay, but I don’t think that this story is about the capitalist recompartmentalization of families the way that the title seems to indicate. I think that the questions posed by the premise are ‘where are my roots? where does my identity come from? what dynamics do I retreat to when I need to feel safe, and what do I do when that refuge is taken away?’“ And identifying what a story is actually about is a very important part of the writing and revision process. Workshops also taught me to take critique without taking it personally, and to assess what was a critique worth taking, and whether the giver knew what they were talking about and what their opinion is worth.

Most of my literature courses taught me to think critically--in the sense of “identify this and examine what it means.” What does it mean, in Parable of the Sower, that empathy can be weaponized and used to incapacitate others? What does it mean, in RENT, that Benny is offering the protagonists jobs in their fields and they’re eschewing in favor of authenticity and integrity? What does Watership Down have to say about the nature-vs.-nurture argument and its limitations?

But I did not learn how to write like this in college. I learned how to write like this from fandom.

Some things came pre-loaded. I like writing dialogue, and I’ve been told I’m good at it, and I think it’s because eventually I worked out that nobody ever manages to say exactly what they mean and communication is frequently less like an arrow aiming for a target and more like a small boat bumping up against a dock while the people onboard try to tie their ropes to secure it. I like characters over action, and that’s reflected in the stories I tell--all very heavy character-driven stories, where the ratio of introspection to actual events is very high.

Z. Z. Packer’s “Drinking Coffee Elsewhere” taught me to appreciate the way that characterization leads to action; but I never put that into practice until I went on (forgive me) tumblr and started reading meta. dear-wormwoods is one of my biggest sources of Eddie characterization meta, and that has influenced my fics more than anything else in fandom, though we’ve never spoken. When I was reading bagginshield, I read avelera’s meta for them.

But I’ve also found that many of the best meta writers (that I’ve found anyway) are also the best writers I’ve read. I went straight from avelera’s bagginshield literary analysis to their Pacific Rim fanfiction “the only way out is down” and reading their commentary on how they shaped the work during revision. I read amarguerite’s “Some Friendlier Sky” (Les Miserables fanfiction) and then “An Ever-Fixed Mark” (Pride and Prejudice) and I started asking her questions--”you compare Courfeyrac to a cat, and then Mr. Darcy to a cat, even though they’re very different characters. What’s the thought process there?” and she told me and we talked about it. I read chrononautical’s “A Road from the Garden” (The Hobbit) and went line by line picking out the things I liked in the comment, and I had this sudden epiphany about how Tolkien shows the dwarves as sets of brothers, which means that they are technically a race of brothers in their presentation, so it was GENIUS to play around with the brother dynamic in a work like that and reflect on how frequently an individual will tolerate mistreatment of themselves that they would never permit to happen to someone they loved--like, say, a brother.

I learned the basics of literary criticism and critical analysis from college, and from reading the western canon and trying to pick apart things that were useful to me. But it’s so much easier when everything is written in vernacular instead of faux-detached academic writing, and when everyone involved is genuinely excited about and dedicated to the work instead of being forced to dwell on The Old Man and the Sea yet again, and when there’s space for people to go back and forth analyzing and agreeing or saying “but what if” or rejecting and are just united by this love of the content or the characters or the book or the history.

You can learn to write like--well, you would write like you, not like me, that’s how style is. But you don’t have to go to college to do it. My current style is not the product of the institution that gave me my degree--it’s the product of more recent years’ immersion in fanfiction (and more recently some traditionally published original work) and music and content I get for free online. And you can also get a circle of people who are happy to write together, read each other’s work, comment on each other’s strengths and the things they like, make suggestions as to how to improve things. You don’t have to do that in college. You just have to read and write a lot, and the things that you read will influence what writing you produce, and in identifying what you like about the things you read and how they do the things they do, you will be able to look at your own work critically and shape it more towards your satisfaction.

The work I’m writing for IT is some of the best work of my life. TTHAEL is the first long work I’ve completed to my satisfaction. Indelicate is the first thing I’ve written that I feel is really exemplary of my style. Margot’s Room is the first self-contained short work I’ve completed to my satisfaction--and the first explicit sexual content I’ve written that I’m happy with both level of detail and atmosphere. Even Automatic-Mechanical-Pneumatic--which I wrote and posted in the same day, so it’s more of a draft--I look at it and recognize it has pacing issues (you can tell I was racing a clock to get the words out), some of the symbolism is too overt because the characters are too self-aware of it, at one point I tripped up and referred to a character by the real-world inspiration--but that’s a solid draft and it has good parts.

Oh wow that’s so nice, thank you so much. I’ve been very influenced by a number of other writers in the fandom--I just observed on another post talking about the influence of IT the book on TTHAEL that because I wrote TTHAEL so quickly after seeing IT (2019) and reading IT (King), those were the primary influences. Now, I’ve consumed so much other IT fanfiction in the last year that I can definitely feel how it’s influencing my writing, particularly Indelicate. And I’m okay with that--there are a lot of wonderful works in the fandom, and a lot of wonderful writers, and I’ve had a wonderful time in this last year. It has also given me the confidence to look at my written work (and my two and a half completed novels) and go, “Wait, I think I might be good at what I do,” which is a level of confidence I had yet to achieve before I accidentally wrote a novel for the clown movie.

You know, I had been telling myself for a while “okay, just stick with Eddie’s perspective here, and then you can go on to Stan’s perspective, and then the story will be done.” And then there was a scene that I was really looking forward to towards the middle-end of Indelicate, that I was having the darnedest time writing even though objectively it is very fun, and I asked myself, “Why is it?” And the answer was, Eddie’s very passive in the scene and Richie’s very active, and even though Eddie has a lot going on in his internal narrative, he’s being kind of a closed book to Richie and mostly reacting instead of acting, which is what is making it harder to write.

Now, does that mean I should break my point of view for the whole work just because this one scene is fighting me? I mean, I could, but I’m kind of attached to the idea that Indelicate is Eddie’s story in particular. So how do I walk myself (and Richie and Eddie) through the events of the scene?

I have decided to write it in Richie’s perspective first, and then write it from Eddie’s perspective.

Honestly my consumption of the IT franchise went IT Chapter 1 in 2017, IT book in winter/early spring 2018, massive depression and IT audiobook in summer 2019, IT Chapter 2 in fall 2019, writing TTHAEL one week later in fall 2019. So when I look at it, a lot of my perspective on IT--especially the work I did in the Things That Happen After series--is much more relevant to the book than it is to IT fanfiction, which I only tangentially consumed before I saw the 2019 movie and lost my mind a little bit.

I think that since then, a lot of my characterization has been influenced by other IT fanfiction I’ve read--and since I usually read about the adults, it’s very influenced by other people’s perceptions of IT (2019) and common fandom-accepted traits. But I’m almost proud of how fast I created TTHAEL, because it had very little time to be influenced by anything other than myself in a vacuum. I fear that’s not necessarily the case for my current works, but since I still have the audiobook on my phone--if I really want to do something about that, I can if I choose to.

Ha! I like the radio talk show metaphor.

I don’t know if I have a hierarchy of favorites, but I certainly find Richie and Eddie the easiest right now. Probably because I’ve written them the most--Ben and Bev are a little more serious, Bill’s hard to get a handle on because he canonically violates the rules of “third person limited” by reading other people’s thoughts (damn it, Bill), and I haven’t really tried Mike yet. Stan wants to be written soon, though--he was talking to me at dinner. I’m gonna have to go back through his letter and then think about how I want to structure his sentences, because I feel like it would be appropriate for him to have a certain direct practicality that I’m definitely out of practice with since I’ve been writing almost exclusively Eddie since January.

I think that writing Richie makes me funnier in real life? It definitely made me weird to talk to when I was writing TTHAEL, and I definitely made some jokes that had my Partner like “why would you SAY that?” But also the self-loathing is kind of exhausting, so Richie’s got kind of a flat, cynical, oily texture to his inner narrative, and then it’s sharp when he’s making a joke or verbally lashing  out at someone. I love him, but I don’t think I’ve tried to write an uncomplicatedly happy Richie yet.

Eddie, though--Eddie’s fun to write because he has such depth, and he’s prone to flights of fancy, even though he would deny it out loud. (I’m thinking about book!Eddie reflecting on a baseball player having the glory of the cosmos in the strength of his swing; so I translated that to Richie crouched in a visitor’s chair in a hospital room, looking “positively geographic” like a mountain range.) But film!Eddie makes him sharper and makes him talk fast, which means I feel like I  can have longer run-on sentences. I guess that means that, for me, writing from Eddie’s perspective is enabling--and I do enjoy that.

Which fic? Every time I write Richie he comes out a little differently. I tend to focus on different aspects of his personality for each fic I write him in, and I like to write a blend of book and film canon. For instance, I’d say that in Automatic - Mechanical - Pneumatic he’s probably gay, just based on the amount of emphasis he puts on dæmon gender and adhering to the stereotype (which in universe is probably homophobic/representative of internalized homophobia) that same-sex dæmons indicate a same-sex attracted person, and how he feels that a female dæmon allows him to evade notice/hide in plain sight. A-M-P is probably the most film-canon-informed of my fics so far, just based on the pop culture presence he has in that one, which means he takes the most inspiration from Hader’s presence, and if you’ll excuse the simplification, probably the gayest portrayal.

Things That Happen After Eddie Lives and Now What I’m Gonna Say May Sound Indelicate are more ambiguous because they draw more from book canon than others (my logic: I read the doorstopper, I’m gonna use it). In both I think Richie experiences a certain amount of pressure towards compulsory heterosexuality, and has had sexual encounters with women. TTHAEL has Richie describe himself to Eddie as “gay for you,” tell Bill that he’s gay over the phone, and be completely stunned by his first sexual encounter with Eddie because he’s never been invested like that before--in TTHAEL I think I have Richie mention at some point he’s never gone further than drunken kissing with men, so it could be because it’s his first time going that far with a man, it could be because it’s the first time he’s been sober, or it could be because he’s in love with Eddie and that makes sex better, even awkward sex. Also when I write Richie he’s a 40-year-old comedian who’s built his brand on misogynistic jokes and what I see as “sticking it to PC culture” (ugh), so I don’t think he’s uh, woke enough to see any particular nuance in there. TTHAEL!Richie would most likely describe himself as gay once he and Eddie get together/once he comes out, but I didn’t set down to write him as gay or bisexual.

Because Indelicate is still in progress, Richie hasn’t come out yet, and Richie’s previous romantic and sexual history is going to be discussed in the fic, I’m going to decline to answer this at this time.

Anon, I’m also going to give you the benefit of the doubt--because my readers have been so generous in their responses so far, but usually there’s a name attached to the inquiries, so please excuse my wariness--that this question is asked in good faith and is not a form of baiting. I know that there are arguments in the fandom about preferred portrayals of both Richie and Eddie’s sexual orientations, and I know that these interpretations are frequently informed by the different canon portrayals--book fans tend to see Richie as bi, movie fans tend to see Richie as gay, the latter especially when his appearance/description is inspired by Bill Hader’s portrayal.

I have no interest in these arguments. I can tell you that I personally prefer portrayals of Eddie where he’s gay (prefer, as in my personal preference, and not necessarily something I would ascribe to others!), and that I have no strong preference for gay vs. bisexual Richie. I have no interest in discussing other fic authors’ portrayals of these characters where their sexualities differ from my portrayals’ characters’ sexualities. I am interested in literary analysis and queer readings (in the academic sense) of both characters directly from the Stephen King text, but I’ve read plenty of these by other authors and don’t have anything new to add to the conversation. I am less interested in film analysis, probably because it’s not something I’ve studied. I am also not going to insist that any of my interpretations of the characters are correct, because that’s usually not the nature of literary analysis.

So, if you are completely squicked out by reading fic where Richie’s sexuality is up in the air, or where there’s a possibility of him having had a history with women regardless of how fulfilling he found it--you might not enjoy my fic. And that’s okay! I can tell you that in the Reddie fic I’ve written so far (Things That Happen After Eddie Lives and Automatic - Mechanical - Pneumatic) Richie only has in-story romantic and sexual relationships with Eddie, so you are welcome to assume whichever you wish. But I’m not willing to rule out writing fic where Richie identifies as strictly gay or strictly bisexual, and because I draw from both book and film when I write I feel there are grounds enough for either.

Woof, that was one of the ballsiest scenes I wrote for Richie, probably including all the IT fic I’ve written so far. In that particular scene in TTHAEL, I have Richie kind of aware that there’s a mutual attraction between him and Eddie, but also extremely afraid that Eddie is going to put that feeling back in his hat and go back to Myra and live as a “straight” man and forget all about Richie. The reason that Eddie’s response is to curse Richie out (if I remember correctly) is because Richie hasn’t come out to Eddie yet in that scene and Eddie thinks this is one more dig at his wife and his life and his presumed sexuality, and it’s an escalation of Richie’s typical flirtatious and teasing behavior--somewhere between “you know you want me” and Richie’s taunts about his mother and Myra in general.

That moment kind of happens in Indelicate too--when Eddie, realizing that if he’s going to be honest with Richie, needs to call Myra and break things off with her so that he’s in the clear. I think of Eddie as ruled by arbitrary principles and slowly working out which ones are moral and which ones are stupid--behavior classified as “cheating” is wrong, in Indelicate Eddie’s rulebook (which I also agree with), and he has to break that formal contract with Myra before he can admit to Richie what he feels. Richie, on the other hand, interprets this as “we just got too overtly homoerotic with each other and I’m gonna no-homo you by calling my wife,” and that’s why he’s so angry with Eddie that he just kind of chucks his phone at him and leaves without saying anything. So when he comes back and starts joking about Eddie’s heterosexual marriage, Eddie really blindsides him by coming out right there and kind of knocks the wind out of his sails.

Back to TTHAEL: Richie’s about ready to declare himself, to show Eddie the R+E on the bridge, to ask Eddie not to go back to his wife--and he does this after Eddie has already declared his intent to return to New York. If there were a song lyric for this moment (and you know if it’s out there I’m gonna find it), it’s “I would beg if I thought it would make you stay” from “Love You All the Time.” And then Richie realizes that Eddie is just as terrified as he is. And he has this kind of insight into what it means to be loved, for Eddie--his mother’s “love,” which was suffocating and abusive and entrapping--and he realizes that he doesn’t want to push Eddie so much. He just wants to make it clear that Eddie has options. I specifically reference “Love is an Open Door” in that scene not just because I’m Frozen trash, but also because Richie is giving Eddie permission to run if he needs to--not just from Myra and the rest of his life, but also from Richie himself.

Now at this point in Indelicate: Richie’s not out. He’s never actually said the words “I’m gay,” “I’m bisexual,” “I like men,” “I’m in love with Eddie” out loud. The most he’s copped to is (to a medical professional) admitting to having had sexual contact with men in the past, in order to get cleared to give Eddie blood to save his life; and (to Eddie) sometimes having sex with men, which he then qualifies by saying he doesn’t date--so there’s no emotional attachment there, Richie’s trying to make clear. It’s simultaneously an “I am available” and “no homo though.”

However--Richie absolutely went through the freakout at the end of the 2019 movie that he did in Indelicate, with the added stressors of carrying Eddie out of Its lair, performing CPR, injuring Eddie further, Eddie dying on the table not once but twice, and being wrestled into a chair by Ben Hanscom and forcibly sedated by a medical professional. Everyone who saw that absolutely knows that Richie’s in love with Eddie. You don’t see Ben or Bill melting down like that. Richie is thrilled that Eddie’s alive. Richie is obviously in love with Eddie. Richie is ready to dedicate the rest of his life to following Eddie around in whatever way Eddie will allow him.

Richie also knows that Eddie can’t leave. That Eddie needs medical help. That Eddie’s survived serious emotional and psychological abuse by at least his mother, maybe his wife (Richie doesn’t know and I haven’t explored it yet, but let’s assume that Richie thinks Myra is just a clone of Sonia the way I wrote her in TTHAEL). Richie also has issues with feeling out of control of himself--the werewolf shows up again in Indelicate not just as a replacement for Stan’s head, but also as a reminder of that fear that Richie has of being predatory. It’s the internalized homophobia. Richie’s not predatory for being attracted to Eddie, but he feels like it, and he’s disgusted with himself for what he feels is him trying to get at Eddie while Eddie needs support in a very real and practical way. So Richie’s trying to keep things--not professional, but at least consensual. Richie feels that, at this time, any move he made on Eddie would be coercion because Eddie is a little bit dependent on Richie for financial and physical help. And also Richie is deathly afraid of making the first move, finding out that Eddie’s gay but not into Richie specifically, and having to leave Eddie again. It would be better than Eddie dying, of course! But Richie would lose him again anyway.