The story that you don't write.
as a write who has word-flow, an important quality of a writer, my words are often just a flood of thougth that maybe doesn't even work on a reread of it. It might need some improvment.
and I've found that a first draft is often the thing that gives me the most flow. having been taught to not look back while typing, because on the old typewriters you had to just moveon, and fix it later, you get the best flow when you fix the obvious mistakes after you make the spontaneous free-flowing draft. And you hear stories about some guy who got a giant roll of newsprint and he typed out a novel about promiscuous hitchhikers and drug addled guys and the women who sought to tame them (and failed) . . . that was a 'kind of myth' and it 'sort of' was a thing for a while. But others say 'yas, that spontaneous bit is cute but it needs two more drafts, and then hand it to an editor and let them do as they will' because all the jargon that youngster have and those playful words that they used , zing zang zippity zen crap words, aren't used later in life in any real situatin except for crappy throw away writing like this is (yes it is) and all of this here (except for the intention of all of us).
so that's an introduction.
basica point: there is a kind of story that a tasteful writer doesn't get into the details of parts of it. He lets you know that there is 'basement closet creepiness' but he doesn't go into that basement or describe what happend, or dwell within it.
so the story is a meta, it exists within the narrative of a different story.
why? Because some topics are so hard to bare, on a plane with a pulp book , that people do not want to read on when they encounter those topics. their eyes glaze over.
all topics of abortion, and the associated creepy fiction of antiabortion people has to exist as a meta: a story within the story. There is a story that you don't write. You have it as a fiction within another story. You know that if one were to 'go there' they'd be able to craft a story with all of that, but the story is too dark and the details of it would further the idea of the creepiness of what the characters of that narrative were doing.
so I had a story like that and put it in the meta and said 'my antiabortion story about a couple who are happy at her being pregs and then using the fetus to live forever . . . is too creepy and wierd and I won't actually write such a story but a writer guy in side my story will have that story that he will write, with in the play of my narrative, as his story and that would torpedo his chances of being anything real i the fake-world of Manhattan publishing (cause it's all about the money and that is where the money is).
so you say even that story sucks. That story sucks a lot and why bother writing even that one but it lives there in the back of your thoughts and you have it as a back story because you kind of see it all around in the new venture world of money mongering when they gather capital and issue stocks. You read their perspectus' (read the perspectus, they tell you everything, they reveal . . .) and you start to garner and OMG about all that and say 'I just won't invest in that kind of a thing.' geesh . . . and you didn't. (I hope you didn't knowingly invest in baby harvast ventures . . . )