What makes a story...

Weeeeeeeeeeell... Literature may be written in the most profoundly correct way that one can imagine, even going as far as to say that it's a linguistic prescriptivist's wet dream...

But if it lacks substance, if it is not engaging, if the characters are shallow... Then it is still bad in my opinion. Good literature may have some hiccups here and there in terms of grammar or diction or spelling, but that would be due to bad editing, not due to a lack of plot or character development. Yet, if something with a well-written plot has too many grammatical issues or spelling issues, then that would be a bad piece of literature to me.

So, to answer your question, a good plot and well thought-out characters can be ruined by poor editing and/or too many grammatical errors or erroneous spelling and punctuation, but a bad plot and poorly conceived characters cannot be fixed by flawless diction and spelling.

 

Honestly, I don't mind many spelling and grammar mistakes (though I go all Grammar Nazi on it) but still:

If a story has absolutely terrible grammar, spelling and, well, everything, but it has an amazing plot, I don't (really) mind. BUT! If a story has perfect spelling, and is terrible. I'm getting out of there.

 

I believe that in a story, character development and lore are tied as the most important factors in a story, a close second being how engaging the story is. The reader of the story (or if it's a game, the player) has to be able to get to know the characters better in order for the things they do to make sense. For example, if a character does something harmful, and actually has anger issues or something, the writer must include that detail, otherwise, the reader may think that they are something else. Lore and backstory is also pretty important, and goes together with character development. Especially if that character is the antagonist or just really edgy, a character should have a good backstory to why they are like this. When writing a story, you can either drop subtle hints to their backstory, or just dump the entire backstory into the story as, just to list one, a flashback. Now, when making a story engaging, uh, let's put it like this, write in a way that could bring the reader into another world in an interesting way. Make it so that the story and dialogue is interesting, so that the reader won't just be like, "This is kinda boring," and puts it down, never finishing it. Make the reader want to know what the story is, and how it ends. Take this advise with a grain of salt, I'm not the best at literature and story writing, I'm mainly just a beginner. This reply was really long, so sorry about that.

 

What makes a story good is well thought out describing words, such as really putting you in the moment, or explaining a person's appearance without just saying they are tall and thin but give it extra detail and emotion. Also when saying who is speaking, it is so much more interesting when they are described rather than saying their name. At the same time, it can be a negative when it gets repeated such as repeating the younger man said, ect.
What makes a story bad in my opinion is pointless chapters in a story, such as placing them on a mission and instead of it making a character change or affected in a way that, it is just an entire chapter of fluff. It is fine to mention it in a paragraph but personally, I prefer a paragraph or two descriptions and a time skip. Another peeve of mine is when time passing is not stated or explained. Such as events seeming to take place in a week when it has apparently been a half a year. Even mentioning the weather or season could help but this often gets muddled and the passage of time is lost.

 

I used to do a fair bit of work many years ago as an impromptu proof-reader for my friends, so my help would be requested and I would scan the work for any sort of weird anomalies. My process would be to read, stop when I noticed something off, write it down, and keep going. After that, I would present my findings from my proofing, as well as the recommendations on how to fix each one.

Potentially because of that, spelling mistakes have become a rather irksome point of contention for me in stories, especially if they're published works - because it's not something I can ask to be fixed or corrected (it's there for good). Mistakes in works really bother me, since it shows a lack of due diligence on the part of either the writer or the editor. So when I read a book and I notice a grammar mistake, it does not matter how good (or how terrible!) the story and characters are. The only takeaway that I'll be able to remember from the experience is "the writer screwed up".

However, my apprehension to something like that is actually less than when I see a literary cliché, or something thrown into a story just for the heck of it to 'spice things up' - dating scenes, I'm looking right at you. If it doesn't help the overall plot, and if the story could easily survive without it, then don't put it in. (Think: Suppose you removed the scene from the story. Would the overall, overarching plot be really changed much from its removal? Answer this objectively, and if the answer is 'no', it doesn't need to be there.)

I'm sometimes willing to overlook that if the rest of the book is entertaining enough to watch and well put together, such that it 'cancels out' the bad bits. When I try to read stories, I try to do now just to enjoy them - no deep analyses, no trying to pick everything apart, and just a couple guesses of where I think the story will go next. When I proof-read for my friends, it would come at a cost of me only enjoying the story about half as much as I would otherwise (mistakes notwithstanding). It's a frame of mind I'm trying to shake myself out of, but it's still very hard for me to turn a blind eye to something that is very clearly 'off'.

 

For me, a story is made up of a plot, characters, and how engaging it is. Grammar does play a part, because sometimes there are stories out there with amazing characters and a great story... it just happens to be a little unreadable. A for effort???

(For all examples I will be referring to fanfiction since that is my forte and I have not dealt with original stories)

A good storyline is important since it's what drives the story and the characters in a story-driven work. Without a storyline, the work becomes a lame mostly character-driven work: not that character driven stories are bad necessarily, it's just that characters fail to drive a huge story along and it falls more along the lines of a slice of life collection. And even if you have a basic storyline, it needs to be better than good. In most Pokémon fanfics, I see lots of "(protag) wants to become Champion so he will do so by getting eight Gym Badges." Who cares about that? It's been done to death, so a completely original and strong storyline is one of the main factors of writing a good story and actually capturing a reader's attention.

And for the characters? Like the plot, they have to be original and unique as well. It's a little different if you're using canon characters, it's a little different. You can still make them "original" per se, it's just that you have to expand their character within what's already established. And example would be taking a character who's shy in canon but making them a little more outgoing with the people they really know. And please don't make bland OCs. If readers feel no connection to a plain slice of bread, why would they do so with your boring OC? Give your OC personality, flaws, strengths... because that's what all of us humans have! Basically, make your OC a human and not a thing to shove into your story.

 

Oh, umm *slowly sliding away* whoooooops

 

I think the characters matter above all. If the plot's not fantastic, good and well-written characters can salvage the story. I find it much more easier to get invested in a cast of engaging characters in a story with a thin plot than a bland cast of characters in a story with an amazing plot.

 

Grammar and punctuation are a must. How can a story be expected to be good if the author doesn't even have the basics down?

I don't like stories where the characters don't change at all throughout either. There have been stories that I've read with great characters, but they never change at all based on any of the events that happen to them. It just gets boring after a while.

 

Personally, I'm a plot-driven writer. I think characters are incredibly important; in fact, generally, my stories start with one character and are built along that. But in the long run, plot wins out. I'll use the Lord of the Rings as an example. It's viewed as a masterpiece across all boards, except that Tolkien cannot make an interesting character to save his life. Most of his characters were archetypal, stereotypical, and bland. Still, the plot and world-building was so rich and thought out that he gained a massive following. I'm sure if you mentioned the weakness of Tolkien's characters to a fan of his, they would admit that he wasn't the best at character design, but the other aspects of the series outweighed that.

That's my philosophy as well. While characters do need to have some originality and they should be relateable, in the end it's plot that carries a reader through. Even the most predictable characters can be put in a new light if the plot is something that's never been seen before. Still, this generally doesn't happen, so everything has to be balanced out carefully. In the end, an even balance of character and plot development is most likely best. Better character development than plot development will usually turn me off a story; better plot development will keep me interested enough to finish it.

In terms of grammatical errors, there will always be a few, I don't mind finding one or two typos in a novel. Strange things happen in printing, too, and it can be humorous to notice those. But if a book is riddled with errors, it's both distracting and shows a lack of effort on the author's part. This is even more true for self-publishing and fanfiction. If I go on FF, click on a story, and see a person mixing up their, they're, and there, or not indenting for each new dialogue, I'm not going to finish reading the story. I can't. It's too distracting and my inner editor goes insane. As I often read over other people's work, I have to learn to recognize the differences between a mistake that can be overlooked and a multitude of errors that need to be fixed. If an author falls under the latter category and is obviously not making an effort to fix those, I'm not going to continue reading their story.

 

I think that the plot and characters out weigh good spelling and grammar. Grammar can easily be fixed by anyone who knows the English language, but very few can actually write good characters and good stories. Yes grammar should play a part in the overall quality of the piece, but for me and my problems, I just read right over any flaw that might exist and don't even pick it up. Also, grammar doesn't keep you engaged in a story, characters and plot does.

 

Well, to me, what 'makes a story', is just a matter of opinion. Everybody has their own likes and dislikes, and some times, some people can't make up their minds. There's no such thing as the perfect story, since a everyone has diferent taste. Even though, this probably didn't help you, but I believe you should just write what you like to the best of your abilities.