The only thing was...I kept wanting to Google Image search the (real) paintings referenced so I could see the image.
I read a lot of fiction like this in book form but would usually file it under literally fiction, maybe magical realism*. In fact, I am not sure how well it fits into PodCastle's portfolio, especially right after Conan. I usually delete past episodes from my iTunes, but this one will definitely stay on my playlist. It's one of the more distinct pieces of the last months.
* i.e. fantasy for people who think that genre fiction isn't art. ;)
Oh man. This story. Oh man... It kind of blew my mind. I don't even know what to say. It was beautiful, strange, and... yeah, it worked. It took a while for the format to colonize and oppress my brain to the point that the narrative flowed, but it was totally worth it. Thanks for taking a chance on this one, Dave and Anna.
Oh man. This story. Oh man... It kind of blew my mind. I don't even know what to say. It was beautiful, strange, and... yeah, it worked. It took a while for the format to colonize and oppress my brain to the point that the narrative flowed, but it was totally worth it. Thanks for taking a chance on this one, Dave and Anna.
Fixed this for you :)
And you're welcome! ;D
[...]
I read a lot of fiction like this in book form but would usually file it under literally fiction, maybe magical realism*. In fact, I am not sure how well it fits into PodCastle's portfolio, especially right after Conan. I usually delete past episodes from my iTunes, but this one will definitely stay on my playlist. It's one of the more distinct pieces of the last months.
* i.e. fantasy for people who think that genre fiction isn't art. ;)
I'm floored by Peter's stunning performance, and I also think that Dave was at the top of his game on this one. I was moved by his personal perspective on these ideas, and wasn't expecting the Van Gogh quote at the end, which got me sniffling all over again.
What I was mainly after was the dissonance between the narrative voice and the reality of the events in the story. I wanted the reader to become increasingly uncomfortable with the curator's cluelessness about what was happening to Latimer, especially the superficiality of his (I think of the curator as male) understanding of her emotional life.
I kind of doubt you're going to answer this, but now that I've experienced the story without the taint of your outside opinion, what did you imagine was going on with Latimer? Or was this story all evocation, with no tale at the heart of it?
BTW, my folks live in RI and I used to live in Providence so I loved narrating a story where I could envision, so clearly, some of the settings. Next time I'm visiting, I'd like to buy you a drink of your choice. :)
Interestingly, among my beta readers, the fantasy element of the story was blindingly obvious to some, and completely obscure to others. It split about evenly.
[...]
I read a lot of fiction like this in book form but would usually file it under literally fiction, maybe magical realism*. In fact, I am not sure how well it fits into PodCastle's portfolio, especially right after Conan. I usually delete past episodes from my iTunes, but this one will definitely stay on my playlist. It's one of the more distinct pieces of the last months.
* i.e. fantasy for people who think that genre fiction isn't art. ;)
I agree it's a distinct piece and certainly one I'll be brooding on for a while, but I'm going to nitpick about this definition of magical realism. For a while, I also thought it was a way for English students and professors to refer to fantasy they don't want to admit is fantasy or a label the marketing department of publishing houses threw on to get a review by The New Yorker. Instead, I've discovered "magical realism" is mainly used to refer to political fiction that uses a surreal or meta lens. Magical realism novels are usually set against a background of social upheaval, like Gabriel García Márquez's One Hundred Years of Solitude, Catheryne Valente's Deathless, and Toni Morrison's Beloved. Characters have problems that they're either unable to talk about openly or too traumatic to contemplate, so conflicts are written in a "coded" language. Allies and antagonists in these works become ghosts, monsters, and living folklore characters, just depicted in a "factual" or reporter-like way. There's an extra layer of metaphor wandering around.
So I do think magical realism is its own category not just a phrase slapped onto "literary" fiction. While I like Schneyer's piece, I don't think it entirely fits this category.
I would be honored! Trinity Brewhouse, perhaps?
I kind of doubt you're going to answer this, but now that I've experienced the story without the taint of your outside opinion, what did you imagine was going on with Latimer? Or was this story all evocation, with no tale at the heart of it?
I'm conflicted about whether to answer, because the evocation is so much of what I was after, and because I think that the author's notion of "what the story's about" is less important than the story that played out in the reader's head.
That said, I'll give a brief answer under the spoiler mask, if you still want to read it...
This is the story that got me hooked on PodCastle, and I'm having a lot of fun going through the archives now. =]
This is the story that got me hooked on PodCastle, and I'm having a lot of fun going through the archives now. =]
Okay, Peter and I are both choked up now. What a wonderful thing to say! Thank you.
[...]
I read a lot of fiction like this in book form but would usually file it under literally fiction, maybe magical realism*. In fact, I am not sure how well it fits into PodCastle's portfolio, especially right after Conan. I usually delete past episodes from my iTunes, but this one will definitely stay on my playlist. It's one of the more distinct pieces of the last months.
* i.e. fantasy for people who think that genre fiction isn't art. ;)
I agree it's a distinct piece and certainly one I'll be brooding on for a while, but I'm going to nitpick about this definition of magical realism. For a while, I also thought it was a way for English students and professors to refer to fantasy they don't want to admit is fantasy or a label the marketing department of publishing houses threw on to get a review by The New Yorker. Instead, I've discovered "magical realism" is mainly used to refer to political fiction that uses a surreal or meta lens. Magical realism novels are usually set against a background of social upheaval, like Gabriel García Márquez's One Hundred Years of Solitude, Catheryne Valente's Deathless, and Toni Morrison's Beloved. Characters have problems that they're either unable to talk about openly or too traumatic to contemplate, so conflicts are written in a "coded" language. Allies and antagonists in these works become ghosts, monsters, and living folklore characters, just depicted in a "factual" or reporter-like way. There's an extra layer of metaphor wandering around.
So I do think magical realism is its own category not just a phrase slapped onto "literary" fiction. While I like Schneyer's piece, I don't think it entirely fits this category.
See, but that's how I interpreted this piece. There is child abuse and a relationship that the parents are not fond of (and which in current times would be non-mainstream, the story suggests that in the future it will be more accepted), and then ghosts show up. This to me is pretty close to your definition of magical realism. I do have to admit that I never defined magical realism the way you just did, but I am not a literature expert anyway.
So touching! I've never been an "art" person, but boy, I'll be damned if I didn't wish I could see these paintings...
Ken Schneyer has actually made me interested in art!
And the narration by Peter Wood was great! It could have been somewhat dry, but he brought a warmth to it that helped bring the paintings being described to vivid life. Wonderful!
Ken Schneyer has actually made me interested in art!
It seemed like most people were convinced that this was a ghost story rather than just metaphor in painting. Anyone care to elaborate on that? Given the format, I don't think there's any way to tell--every bit of the painter's life that we know is portrayed in the paintings which means it just had to come from her mind not necessarily reality, but maybe I'm wrong.