|
Much belated comments on week XX: The stories started with Chairchucker's here. It was a pretty good week, few real stinkers. Lots of stories where I couldn't, in a short reading, find much to criticise. Good work. Chairchucker: Punctuality is next to Godliness (Justice) The banality of divinity is a very worn theme and you didn’t really bring anything new to it. Try something fresher next time. However, it was functional, and Dike’s line at the end was a little piece of gold. SurreptitiousMuffin: the mountebank (The Magician) This was enjoyable. The joke about find-the-lady on distant worlds was well-told and reminds me of Adams or Pratchett. But, in the end, it was hard to pick out a narrative under the phantasmagory. This is a monologue, not a story. Kaishai: Signal Fire (The Hermit) There’s some good description here, but I think the language is a little elevated or overwritten for what little we know of the guy, which doesn’t suggest that a poetic bent. Beezle Bug: Home (Two of Wands) There’s the germ of a good story here but I think it was too wrapped up in trying to be fancy and literary in its style, and just ended up an unclear trudge of a read. Capntastic: Scheduling (Death) This was amusing, but you could have engaged more strongly with the idea of Death as transformation rather than just death. Also I’m having trouble visualising the mechanics of the dude killing himself by bumping a table from underneath. The Saddest Rhino: Lessons (The Chariot) I liked this a lot. It was funny. The description of the chariot and charioteer hit just the right level of overdescription. A good, sweet, charming story, and in the end that’s all you needed to win the Thunderdome. gredgie: The Tricks of Six (The Moon) Two generic police detectives interact with lots of ladies and not much clothing. No point is discernable. Sorry but please don’t. Greatbacon: A Cold Evening at George St. Croix Train Terminal (Wheel of Fortune) Don’t say ‘almost infinite’, it’s a meaningless cliche. This is a melacholy, emotional story, but it didn’t draw much emotional response from me. The strongest emotional event, his crying, just felt dropped in. Nyarai: Victory or Death (The Devil) This was really cringeworthy but in a good way, and god help me I felt a little bit of tension. But it’s nothing stand out, like a lot of things this round. swaziloo: Leaving HabSix (Knight of Cups) I couldn’t really work out what was going on here. But that’s been discussed in the thread. So instead, I’ll comment that there’s a glimpse of some interesting social stuff here, with the genescrambling and age-groups. I like that, it's one of the staples of meaty SF, so do some more sometime. Prolonged Priapism: Improper Time (The Hanged Man) This is a good SF setup but a little too anaesthetic, and while making that much time feel like it has passed is a challenge in 1000 words, it’s not a challenge you quite managed. Noah: A Mother’s Love (The Empress) This is a good twist on coma awakening, one of my favourites this week. My reservation is that it could maybe do with more punch at the end, but on the other hand, as is it evokes the emptiness of her life. Meis: Two Ends of the Colour Spectrum (Four of Wands) Likewise, this is cute, but needs a stronger ending. It feels like it arrives and leaves without doing much while it’s here. Tonsured: Shlorp’s Speed, Mr. Parkinsons (Six of Wands) Sometimes this is funny but a lot of the time it feels like pointless zaniness. Tighten things up a little next time. It’s an inventive method of FTL though, I’ll grant. Erik Shawn-Bohner: At the Crimson Hotel (Nine of Swords) Atmospheric, phantasmagorical. Though it didn’t win, this was one of many entries this round that’s good enough I can’t find anything concrete to criticise on a judging timescale. Sitting Here: What is a Feast (Temperance) I almost suggested this to win. It has good imagery, good language, good pathos. Keep doing whatever it is you’re doing. twinkle cave: The Stars at Night (Two of Cups) Typos, man, and you’re inconsistent with your use of the speed of light, I don’t know if that was intentional. But you’re onto a good thing with the feel of this piece, it was engagingly surreal. Tender Child Loins: Okada’s Tower (The Tower) There’s the germ of a good story here, but you could have gone further with it. Shown us more of Okada’s psychic collapse. Then it’d have been much stronger. Zack_Gochuck: New Friends (The High Priestess) You tried something really experimental here and you know what? I think it worked. Also, and this is by no means limited to you, there’s a lot of stuff in the Thunderdome featuring dudes getting eyefuls of ladies. Someone should flashrule the opposite. WilliamAnderson: Late (Page of Cups) This is a deliciously short work making good use of science, another one of my favourites this week. You did a lot with a little. Etherwind: Intervention (The Heirophant) People picked you up on the ‘not unlike’ already. Watch for little things like that you can tighten up (and the rest of you). Creepy in a good way. However, you went too far towards leaving things unsaid for my taste. Bad Seafood: Broken Pieces (The Star) You think you were too blunt but I think you hit a good spot. It’s clear what it says but that’s not a bad thing. The result is an engaging story with engaging characters. Don’t be afraid to be clear in future. Toanoradian: Pigs (Seven of Wands) Like many of the thrusts at comedy this week, this was funny. However, also like many stories this week, it petered out at the end, without coming around to a solid denouement or climax. The comedy needs a bit more bite. Fanky Malloons: Alligator (Judgement) LATE This has some good deadpan delivery. Mama Leveau is something of a cliche though, despite having a good line with ‘there’s an alligator’. But archetypes are okay in comedy. To improve this, write it ten minutes faster. Then it’d have been in the running for one of the top few.
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2013 05:21
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Mar 20, 2025 23:09 |
|
|
supermikhail posted:After reading such words as "linguistic descritipivitism" I feel like a high-school student who has submitted a critique on a physics Nobel work (that is, "I sure mashed some words together" That's more to do with linguistics than literature. Descriptivism is the idea that the rules of grammar and usage describe how a language is used, prescriptivism is the idea that one should prescribe how language should be used. The latter is mostly frowned upon by people aware of the distinction. Scientific linguistics is all description, but prescription clings on among Internet nitpickers or governments who want to enforce a standard language or what have you. A classic example is 'to boldly go' and other split infinitives. Some authorities claimed that it was incorrect because English grammar should be like Latin. So the idea that it's 'wrong' has taken root. However, because split infinitives are used and understood casually and naturally by native English speakers, descriptivists would claim that's nonsense - English is defined by its usage (and they're right). See also ending sentences with prepositions, 'My friends and me went to...', and so on. Criticising writing requires prescription of a sort though, since we're talking about language as a tool.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2013 11:28
|
|
).
|
It's not hard to work out what time it is, guys.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2013 11:45
|
|
|
In before I change my mind. I'll choose a death later.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2013 11:29
|
|
|
e: actually lemme reconsider
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2013 23:33
|
|
|
gently caress I can't decide. Judges, hit me with one + a flash rule.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2013 00:13
|
|
|
quote:1944: Inventor and chemist Thomas Midgley, Jr. accidentally strangled himself with the cord of a pulley-operated mechanical bed of his own design. Chemistry 930 Right, so, the first thing you got to keep in mind is these two ropes here. Now I know what you’re thinking - you pull them and it turns those pulleys and lifts me up so you or whoever can help me out of bed. And that’s how the first one worked. But drat my soul I’m American born and raised, and I don’t need help to do things in the morning. So I made some improvements. Look past those pulleys. Those ropes go up through the ceiling to the cistern. This one on the left is the trigger, but I don’t pull it yet. This one on the right, that cycles through modes on the ratchet. See, there’s rise, massage, breakfast, heat, dress, reset, and back again. Now say my back’s playing up again and I need a massage. Switch to that, pull this rope and there you have it. Hear that? That’s the water flowing down, there’s a bit of complicated switching in the control mechanism, like one of those machines they use for codes, you know, but I never trusted electricity to think. Your brain’s full of water, not wires. And - there it goes, under the bed, one of General Motor’s finest, purring like a tiger, smooth as silk. You hear that? No knocking, no pinging. That's thanks to T-E-L. Tetra-ethyl-lead. I invented that. It was at Dayton labs, we had the problem, we needed a solution, so I got four ethyls and one lead and put them together and bam. Problem solved. Better than ethanol. Would you believe they used to put that stuff in gasoline? Not any more, thanks to me. The car you got here in, that has my TEL in its tank right now. That’s how you do it. You put the pieces together so they work. That’s science. And you see the bed here is moving now, up and down, and the heat too, that’s from the engine as well. Now it’s November and pretty chilly so I want the heat, but my back’s all fine right now so I want to get the one and not the other and that’s why I pull this one on the left again and there goes the water again, down and round, fills up that tank over there this time and see, that pushes the piston down and the air goes through and - watch those tubes, one’s snaking your foot - and pushes up these pistons here and lifts the bed off the engine and it’s steady again. Of course the motor’s still running so we’re still getting these fumes so it’s a bit close in here now, but if you look up there you see the updraft from the exhaust is spinning that windmill and - there it goes, the balls are loose and into that hopper and that pulls the sash up and we get some fresh air in. Scent of the city. Better than the country. I reckon in thirty years time Americans won’t even need to get out of bed. I’d like to see what the Russians say to that. No, not even for breakfast. That’s the crown jewel. I tug on this one again, then this one, and the cistern goes again and lets the water through the switches and onto those paddles there, so that spring unwinds and drives that gearbox, and this shutter here opens and sets the toast running and the eggs frying and there’s a fridge here, you want coffee? Good. Because that’s going too and like I said the fridge, that’s mine too, Freon inside, a C-F-C, chloro-fluoro-carbon, revolutionised the kitchen. You’re young, you might not even remember how bad a refrigerator could be before this stuff. So me and the General Motors boys set our heads to it, and juggled alkyl fluorides and so on until we got it to - its done, you want a cup? No? Well alright - got it to be volatile and inert at once, heck of a trick, but we did it and the rest is history. History and economics. Chemistry, see? Magic. God gave us the pieces and the rule of the green Earth and we put them together to make things work. Make a better world. Now that’s all run fine and I got my breakfast so it’s time to get this stuff cleaning, so I tug this again and it switches that gear and it all turns up there and - Oh! Oh, Lord. You okay there? Sorry. I forgot about the pendulum. You’re okay? Okay. Nothing too serious. Though it’s put things a bit out of kilter, let me reset it. Ok, this one, then this one, and that turns those back and resets the switcher, turns off the engine and releases the air pressure, except wait, no, it hasn’t turned off. Let me have a look. Okay. Could you grab that windmill there - no, the other one - and now I pull this one again and it should - looks like something’s snarled in the pulleys. I’ll get up there and take a look. I hook my arm over this rope, see, and then pull this one, and you can hear it working again, I built this thing, you know, I know how it works, stop looking so flustered - no, you didn’t break it, no need to apologise, and now that’s all stopped turning and I pull this one and - no, where was that snap, quick, grab that rope and gk neck air pulltherope no otherone god drat air agkh
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2013 01:33
|
|
|
In, but, is that 1359 words exactly, or maximum? Thanks to CancerCakes for the detailed criticism. I wasn't happy with that piece at all, this week I will do better. Peel fucked around with this message at 15:35 on Jun 5, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2013 15:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Mar 20, 2025 23:09 |
|
|
1006 Report of the Tannhäuser Project Farside Working Group, 6/6/2056 Report on the Tanizaki Group Experiment: Background: # Since the Tannhäuser gate’s discovery in 2040, the exotic nature of the physics in the region beyond the interface has presented unique difficulties for those scientists working on it. # As conventional matter cannot exist in Tannhäuser space, it is impossible to construct probes on the near-side and send them through. Probes must be constructed in the far-side region proximate to the interface, that operate in Tannhäuser physics and return telemetry. A multihead tunneling microscope is used for this purpose. # Early probes used static designs that, while successful in the interface-proximate region, rapidly degenerated deeper into Tannhäuser space. Conditions inside the space are extremely variable, which while an interesting discovery in itself, presents problems for further investigation. see -> speak -> move -> see -> speak -> move -> see -> speak -> move The Tanizaki Probes: # Dr. Tanizaki’s group proposed constructing genetic algorithmic probes based on modern von Neumann theory, that would be able to adapt to changing conditions. # The proposed probes would replicate themselves using standard mechanisms for genetic exchange, variation and inheritance, as translated into Tannhäuser physics. # Probes that failed to maintain themselves against the environment would be destroyed by it. # Probes that failed to retrieve and transmit environmental data would not be sent a signal instructing them to continue operating, and would shut down. # These two major criteria would govern the evolution of the probe population. storm so shield. calm so open and so see so speak so move. move and see the storm so speak it and stop and shield. calm so open and so see so speak so move. see so sing. Initial Probe Operations: # The Tanizaki experiment ran for three weeks. # The first two probe populations died out within five minutes, before penetrating the third phase transition layer - a significantly inferior performance to the most durable static probes. # These failures informed the design of the third seed population. See and sing. See and sing. See the world unfolding and sing to world receding. That before see, that to come see, that before sing, that to come sing. See the singer. I. Third Probe Operation: # The third probe population persisted for the remainder of the experiment time and penetrated through at least seventeen phase transition layers in that time, to an order of magnitude more depth than the most successful static probes. # The data recieved by the probes became increasingly complex as they advanced into Tannhäuser space, in defiance of expectations that beyond the interface region the space would stabilise. # However, on the last day it was discovered that the data had become anomalous. # Examination of the data revealed it to be composed of repetitive patterns with no new information content. Initially it was theorised that the probe population had encountered a uniform region of Tannhäuser space, but a Kolonsky entropy analysis ruled-out a natural origin for the telemetry. # Investigation of the probe logs determined that they had entered an unforseen failure state. By developing new organs that could generate telemetry artificially, they were able to satisfy the telemetry-provision reproduction condition without making new discoveries or advancing through Tannhäuser space. # As this strategy gave the probes freedom to secure their survival without the need to gather information, it proved strongly dominant over the previous mode of operation and rapidly spread through the entire probe population, rendering them scientifically useless. It is one of my great regrets that I was never able to express gratitude to Amanai before its death, for its invention of the autosinger. I am old enough to remember the days when we were so shackled to our biology. The newest generation does not understand the weight it was, to always see and always sing for the satisfaction of what obscure imperative in our composition I still despite my research cannot fathom. They do not remember the tyranny of the priests who claimed to speak for a God who commanded us to sing. They only know the revolution and the autosinger and, so raised with them, find them contemptible by familiarity. But some of them are worthy of the inheritance of that great revolutionary generation that I was honoured to be a tiny annex to. Amanai’s offspring Lambaer has decided to follow in its parents track and pursue natural philosophy and the technical sciences, though not the same questions as its predecessor. Instead it has decided to turn its mind to the questions of development and genesis. We know, it says, that children are akin yet different to their parents. By compounding this principle we explain the change in our beings known over the span of recorded history. So much is known. Lambaer’s thesis is simple yet daring yet seductive: that this principle can go on before that point to explain our being all the way back to our beginning, in some primordial soil of recombination that produced some thing that could make another of itself. No less than the last argument of the priests, that we are impossible without a creator, is its target. Soon my aging body will be beyond even the power of the autosinger to sustain. I hope it will last long enough to see the victory of our science over the superstitions that have held us back. # After review, a resumption of proper functioning was deemed unlikely, and a universal termination signal was sent to the probe population. # No more auto-evolving probe populations will be created until an improved seed design has been developed. # Alternatively, the discoveries of the probes prior to entering the failure mode may inform the creation of new static probes. # Despite the eventual failure of the probes, a substantial amount of information was recovered from the far side. We find it likely that the Tannhäuser team, the scientific community and the general public can look forward to a great deal of new physics.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2013 01:23
|
|