LooNEY_DAC, [...] I have always enjoyed reading your works, but seldom have anything to offer in return. Is saying "I enjoy your writing" enough to start with?

In today's edition of "stuff LooNEY_DAC should have posted long ago", I turn to this comment.

Upfront TL;DR for @Buteo : Yes; thank you; and I’m sorry this is so late.

But… this comment lets me do a deeper dive on the various types of feedback that writers need, desire and receive from those with whom they share their writings.

Since as a writer I am constantly trying (maybe not succeeding, but still trying) to improve my writing, I have sought out what other writers have to say about writing, and in this search, I came across a work entitled “The Company They Keep: C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien as Writers in Community", by Diana Pavlac Glyer. In this work, Glyer breaks down the interconnected web of feedback the Inklings gave to one another, analyzing the roles each played with various others in a system derived from that of another author named LeFebvre. I highly recommend Glyver’s work for anyone interested in these matters, but here’s my brief take on her analysis:
LeFebvre organized the various ways people influence/give feedback to writers into four roles: Resonators; Opponents; Editors; and Collaborators, with Glyver adding a fifth: Referents. I’ll explain each role in brief in the next section, but an important thing to note right away is that a single person can fill any or all of these roles in their feedback (possibly excepting Referents; I’ll explain why when we get there), either simultaneously or over time.

I don’t want to make this too much of a wall of text, so I’ll be brief in my definitions of the roles.
RESONATORS: @Buteo is a prime example of this critically necessary role, providing encouragement and support to the writer.
OPPONENTS: @JoB is likely to fill this role, challenging the writer on perceived points of error or weakness so that the writer can make the work stronger.
EDITORS: Those who say, “Wouldn’t it be better phrased like this?”
COLLABORATORS: Those who suggest, “What if this happened?”
REFERENTS: Those who wind up in the work as a character; a famous example here is Tolkien patterning Treebeard after Lewis. (This is why it wouldn’t happen in straight feedback.)

Now, every writer wants feedback from a Resonator, but most are at least hoping for an Editor, or even an Opponent; as I stated, one person can give feedback filling all three roles at once.

And now I ask for feedback on the ideas in this post, be it from Resonators, Opponents, Editors or Collaborators. Any thoughts on the matter?

Gil likes to live dangerously. Why else would he keep Bang around?

-- though I suppose telling her to leave might be even more dangerous, come to think of it.

Mag is such a slow learner. I kinda love that about her. It's so easy to fall into the trap of thinking that because a character has learned a lesson, they have to immediately change their behavior. I've certainly caught myself thinking that way. And in fairness it is a bit frustrating to see Mag respond to every new scary thing by insisting there's no way it could possibly work the way Id says it will. But you know what? That's life. Heck, that's me. We all fall back into the same habits even after we should know better. And this is probably a pretty minor spoiler, but...

EDIT: And then shortly after...

Also, FYI, Widdershins is back from hiatus and just updated today! (The 22th, according to the URL.)

Two quick fun links before I disappear on two weeks' worth of travel ... :

There seem to be cooks getting into the footsteps of master chef Madsen now.
Also, there's some more intel about the origin of squirrel cookies available.

Resurrecting this thread to vomit out my thoughts on a specific story type that seems to me to be denigrated or disregarded entirely in modern "how to write" literature et al, sparked by the declaration at a panel at a conference for writers that "the hero must choose to commit to the story"; being a natural contrarian, I immediately thought, "when did Dorothy make any such 'choice' in the movie The Wizard of Oz?" So here's some less-than-coherent thought on the matter.

Narratives of necessity

Narratives of necessity: protagonist is thrust into the situation of having to act; if they chose something, the choice seemed innocuous until they were too far in to go back, or the choice wasn’t a choice; singular objective (usually “survive”); only way out is forward/through; important thing is: they are home at the end, whether original or made (why “horror twist” ending is unsatisfactory and unsatisfying); NOT Hero’s Journey for protagonist (maybe for side character(s))

Usual structure: prologue showing “normalcy”; disaster strikes/the gauntlet is thrown; alternating challenges and downtime; the last hurdle; ending (see below)

Variations include: multiple protagonists w/potential group problems; no bad guy; multiple bad guys; pick up allies on the way; pick up bad guys on the way; split group so intercut between plot lines

Ending 1: Back home: the protagonist has overcome everything thrown at him and returned to where he was at the beginning (probably improved circumstances).
Examples: the Wizard of Oz; Finding Nemo; Back to the Future; Forbidden Planet; Nothing but Trouble; TRON; Escape from NY/LA; XXX; Return from Witch Mountain; Minority Report; Star Trek (films); the Prisoner; Speed; Predator; Jurassic Park; Sean of the Dead; Commando; the Terminal; Krull; Hakon Hakonsen

Ending 2: Still trying: the protagonist has overcome the current obstacles, but still needs to make their way home.
Examples: Flash Gordon; Lost in Space; Sliders; ST:Voyager; Nowhere Man; the Lost Continent

Ending 3: Here to stay: see subtypes below.
A: the protagonist has overcome all the obstacles, but finds a compelling reason to stay/return.
Examples: Lone Star Planet; The Time Machine (film); Kindergarten Cop; American Dreamer
B: there was never any chance of returning, just surviving/building a new life for themselves.
Examples: Buck Rogers; Lord Kalvan; Planet of the Apes (film); Terminator franchise; Total Recall; the Running Man; Bourne franchise; Charade; most robinsonades
C: the whole point was to get away.
Examples: the Horse and His Boy; Escape to Witch Mountain; the Mysterious Island; Swiss Family Robinson

Ending 4: Everybody dies: Either the final obstacle requires a heroic sacrifice or there’s a twist ending (usually unsatisfying and unsatisfactory).
Examples: Impostor; Phantom of the Paradise; most zombie movies

Well, there's as much as I've articulated on the matter. Does anyone else have thoughts they wish to share?