How many types of story are there?
In 1895, French writer Georges Polti conceived of 36 so-called "dramatic situations." He believed these encompassed every form of conflict and drama suitable for storytelling. Some have expanded this list to 38 or 39. Given their numbers, they are fairly specific in what the stories are about.
As an example, "supplication" is one situation: one or more people who lack power appeal to someone who is powerful for their aid and deliverance from some peril. The word "supplication" itself simply means, "request." The peril could be imposed by the powerful individual, or could simply be within that person's power to remediate even if they did not directly cause it. The Christian Bible is rife with stories of supplication, since its entire purpose is to direct the reader to turn to God for relief. One of the key features of supplication is that the authority being appealed to has not already made their decision. They must be convinced. The drama is in the effort to do that, and knowing the stakes should the supplicant fail.
"Deliverance" is another, and it is distinguished from supplication in that the deliverer need not have any power or authority, but merely to be at the right place and time to rescue another from a threat. Any "damsel in distress" story is a tale of deliverance.
A third is "crime pursued by vengeance." Les Miserables is perhaps the most famous example of this prototype.
Rounding out this list with a fourth, rather than presenting all 36 situations, consider "vengeance taken for kin upon kin." This is family warfare. A member of the family has been wronged by a member of the family, and so another family member must seek revenge. Hamlet is a prime example, though most Mafia movies would also fit the bill.
The list goes on, but the point is that each situation requires one or more individuals who must make choices or find themselves dependent upon the choices of others.
English journalist Christopher Booker thought the list of possible stories could be reduced to 7:
Furthermore, he thought that every story must follow six stages, specifically:
Additionally, every story is really just about one person: the hero. A hero does not, of course, have to actually be heroic or do heroic things. A hero is simply the person through whose eyes we see the story and whose success we are thus meant to root for.
Still, it is possible to reduce our list of possible stories even more, to four basic types:
Once again we see the hero and the conflict. It may be with another person, with nature, with society, or simply within. But the conflict is essential. Without conflict, there is no drama, and thus no story.
You probably know what "ships" and "shippers" are but on the off chance you don't, a "ship" is a desired romantic and/or sexual relationship between fictional characters, and "shippers" are people who want to see this relationship explored. In many cases, the ship in question never actually appears in the original source material, though it may be strongly implied.
The original ship, believe it or not, was Captain Kirk and Spock of Star Trek. Fan fiction--stories written by fans, of course--were a new phenomenon in the days of Star Trek, but fans voraciously wrote and distributed stories featuring Kirk and Spock in various romantic and sexual situations. That tradition continues to this day. While it is possible to ship any two (or more!) characters, Kirk/Spock (shortened to "K/S," hence the frequent description of this type of writing as "slash fiction") has enduring appeal perhaps because of the archetypes of the character's themselves. Kirk is a man of action; Spock, a man of contemplation. Kirk is emotional; Spock adheres to cold logic. Of course, attentive fans know full well that this is vastly oversimplified, that Spock is in fact torridly emotional, and that the central conflict of his character arc is not with any other character, but within himself, as the logical Vulcan and emotional human parts of his psyche battle for supremacy over his will.
From that standpoint, there is catharsis in seeing him admit to himself and to Kirk that his feelings run far deeper than camaraderie or friendship.
The writers and readers of these stories are typically not gay men, but (usually) straight women. This may sound paradoxical, but by writing about two men, who are ostensibly equal in terms of gender dynamics, it becomes possible to remove gender stereotypes and gender-based power dynamics from the equation. The sex isn't the point, after all: the romance is. The emotional vulnerability, the admissions of long-hidden desires, the final revelation of what these people could be to themselves and to each other.
Far from a niche activity, the writing and reading of fan fiction, of which a fair amount is "slash" fiction or at least concerning "ships," is an enormous part of Internet culture. Possibly a third of all book-related material online is fan fiction, and that's without considering how much of it is being read by others.
What we have come to now is the reduction of all types of stories to a single story. Homeric epics aren't about ancient Greece. Shakespeare did not write about kings and schemers. Shippers who write fan fiction aren't really writing about their preferred characters and what might be possible between them. Every story is first and foremost a reflection of the person experiencing it. A story appeals or fails to appeal based on our interaction with it. We either identify with the characters and situations presented to us, or are at least willing to do so--or we don't, and we aren't.
We read and write stories always for one reason: to reveal something about ourselves. The greatest gift to emerge from such an experience is to reveal something surprising, unexpected. The writer learns no less from the process of writing than the reader does from reading. We distill our thoughts and motives and feelings into words and hand them to others. From there, we have no control. The experience for each person will be unique. It may be beloved, hated, or indifferent--but never the same way twice.
The hero of the story is never anyone but yourself. Even when you disagree with the written hero's actions, you are pulled along for the ride. You feel the tension, the discord. Or you feel the triumph at the hero's well-earned victory. Or you feel shattering heartbreak at the hero's horrific defeat. But the words have no power, no being, without someone to absorb them.
We say that the pen is mightier than the sword, the book is more powerful than the bomb--we say these for good reason. Weapons may only intimidate, maim, and kill. A sword can pierce the heart but can never truly reach it. Books are vessels for change, capsules of revolution, but they mean nothing without someone to pick them up and read them.
A book forgotten and unread is the true death of its author. The sender goes silent.