PC007: Fear Of Rain

[Heradel]

PC007: Fear Of Rain

By Robert T. Jeschonek
Read by Mur Lafferty
Introduction by Rachel Swirsky
First appeared in Postscripts

“Won’t be long now,” he says, his voice a gravelly tenor. “Not long till my
retirement party.”

If you didn’t know better, to look at him, you’d think he was just another little old man hobbling around downtown Johnstown, Pennsylvania. Just another Central Park bench sitting, Social Security check cashing, prescription picking up, stumbling on the curbs, taking too long to cross Main Street old timer. You’d never know the kind of power that boils inside him.

Maybe you’d see him bang his fork on the plate a second time, and you’d hear the thunder, louder than before, but you wouldn’t connect the two. You wouldn’t realize that he’d made it happen. You wouldn’t know what he was about to do next.

But I know. I know all about what’s coming.

Rated PG. Contains drops, trickles, drizzles, torrents, downpour, and flooding.

Today’s sponsor:
Receive your free audiobook at: Audiblepodcast.com/castle


Listen to this week's Pod Castle!

[DKT]

Mur Lafferty twice this week (the latest PP, too)!  wOOt! 

I enjoyed this story and Mur might have been the perfect narrator for it.  Is this part of another run of stories from Podcastle, the way we had Fairy Tales?  These last couple seem pretty mythic, and remind me a bit of American Gods.

[Rachel Swirsky]

We're going from mythic to urban fantasy. I was thinking of this piece as the latter, but I was also using it to transition from Astarte, so I'm glad that it was able to fit into both categories.

[Ocicat]

I enjoyed it - no doubt in part because I listening while driving through a typical Seattle rain, which added great atmosphere. 

This reminded me a lot of the Citytalkers episode of Escape Pod back in December.  Who wrote that again?  Oh ya, Mur Lafferty.  Interesting, that. 

[Chivalrybean]

Neat.

[Darwinist]

I liked this one.  It also reminded me of Citytalkers.  Excellent narration by Mur. 

[Rain]

I am not quite sure what to think of the story, it was interesting and certainly not bad, but it allways bugs me when i read stories about unsympathetic characters and i have a hard time seperating the two things.

[Listener]

The reading was superb, though I did catch a couple of audio artifacts here and there.

I didn't dislike the story, but it didn't really stand out to me as ZOMGAWESOME.  The idea of an elemental deity living as a human isn't really a new one, but I wasn't bored by it, so no problem there.

The title misled me a little.  The citizenry's fear of rain was explained, but they weren't really AFRAID of it, per se.  They were wary of it; they understood what it could do in all its awesome power.  But afraid?  *Data head shake a la "android's bottom" scene in Star Trek IX*

[birdless]

I'm kinda with Rain on this one. And those who were reminded of "Citytalkers." I dunno. It was okay, I guess. Mr. Flood was loony, and I had trouble figuring out why it took Dee so long to figure that out. Dee, in fact, was a puzzling character for me, because if she had been brought up by Mr. Flood for most of her life, I would think his skewed view would have been transferred to her, unless she had contact with other people, which seems to be out of character for Flood (plus I kept thinking of Keepsie ). It was descriptive enough so that I was able to pretty much picture everything, and the mental image the narrative conjured of the frozen-in-place rain was very cool. But, all in all, I couldn't sympathize with the characters. The flood would have caused so much death—much of which would have been the death of children and animals—and the central characters seemed so unconcerned about this that I found Flood repugnant and Dee only marginally better because, while she wasn't excited about the life lost, she didn't seem as concerned about it as I thought she should have been, which is another reason that I felt like she was pretty removed from society, so I wasn't sure why she would sympathize with them... anyway, like I said, I was confused by her character.

[ajames]

I liked the basic idea and the story was creative enough to keep me interested. Some beautiful descriptions of the makings of a flood. I almost felt like I was witnessing the storm at times. But just as I was getting drawn in, often times something would take me right out. Like learning Dee's name was short for Aphrodite near the climax of the story, but not before. That came off as contrived to me. The reverse flood idea was brilliant in some ways, but I couldn't help but think - so millions of gallons of water go up in the air.... and then what? No more gravity? The water is expelled into space? It is evaporated? Or its hanging there forever?

Interestingly, I didn't even think of city talkers until I read the boards, despite the obvious reasons to do so.

[Heradel]

I liked the basic idea and the story was creative enough to keep me interested. Some beautiful descriptions of the makings of a flood. I almost felt like I was witnessing the storm at times. But just as I was getting drawn in, often times something would take me right out. Like learning Dee's name was short for Aphrodite near the climax of the story, but not before. That came off as contrived to me. The reverse flood idea was brilliant in some ways, Chekov but I couldn't help but think - so millions of gallons of water go up in the air.... and then what? No more gravity? The water is expelled into space? It is evaporated? Or its hanging there forever?

Interestingly, I didn't even think of city talkers until I read the boards, despite the obvious reasons to do so.

I had about the same reaction, and I felt like Dee's name was a bit of a Chekhov's gun in terms of the name not really being used meaningfully in terms of the story. Maybe I'm missing something, I'll admit that my knowledge of Greek Lit is by no means complete, but I couldn't see any meaningful parallels or, well, any added meaning by having the female lead named after the Greek goddess of lust/love.

[Biscuit]

I liked it well enough. Mur's reading was nice - great vocal tone of a teenager.

I felt there was too much exposition about the Rain Dance (surely that's the hardest rain in history...wait, no it's even harder! No, wait...even HARDER! By the end, people shouldn't have been able to stand up in the sheer tonnage per second that must have been dumping on them!) and not enough behind Dee's motivation to rebel.

Her parents died? She mentions it fleetingly. She loved the crazy old bugger? She said that LOTS. Absolutely power corrupts? Absolutely. So where did she get her empathy for the people if all her life she was taught that her goal was to kill them?

[Nobilis]

Mur's reading was masterful, and definitely put me in mind of "Citytalkers" along with everyone else, it seems.

The writing, however, was less than stellar.

There was no conflict.  When it came time for Dee to assert herself, she just did, and it happened.

As a result, there were no consequences.  No-one paid a price for anything that happened.

As a result, there was no character development.  Dee learned nothing.  Flood learned nothing.

As a result, there was NO STORY.

At the end, I felt cheated.  I had been set up for some kind of lesson; either where Dee proves that people can be true to themselves without adversity, or else where she learns the value of adversity.  Either would have been good stories.  This one came to a screeching halt in the middle of the highway, took my wallet, and kicked me out on the median strip.

In the rain.

[Hatton]

I enjoyed it - no doubt in part because I listening while driving through a typical Seattle rain, which added great atmosphere. 

This reminded me a lot of the Citytalkers episode of Escape Pod back in December.  Who wrote that again?  Oh ya, Mur Lafferty.  Interesting, that. 

When I landed at Whidbey Island (in the Puget Sound) the pilot said, "Welcome to Western Washington, where it rains 50% of the year.  The rest of the time there's only a 50% chance of it!

Good story, I was reminded of Citytalkers too... funny, that!

I think those who are trying to rationalize or demonize Mr. Flood are missing the point of his role - he doesn't care about power, he doesn't care about life or death and he certainly doesn't care about buildings.  He is something akin to a rain god, his young student there to take his place.  I found his comments, "It's good to know you care; I can't say that I was sad [to see my predecessor go]."

It is the humanity in the girl that makes this story enjoyable for me.  Flawed as she is, she has a heart and uses it.

[ajames]

... I felt like Dee's name was a bit of a Chekhov's gun in terms of the name not really being used meaningfully in terms of the story. Maybe I'm missing something, I'll admit that my knowledge of Greek Lit is by no means complete, but I couldn't see any meaningful parallels or, well, any added meaning by having the female lead named after the Greek goddess of lust/love.

Exactly - after the big reveal, I too was left wondering why the Greek goddess was invoked.

It is the humanity in the girl that makes this story enjoyable for me.  Flawed as she is, she has a heart and uses it.

This is as close as I could come for finding the reason for her name, yet as much as love may have been behind her motivation to act, she seemed far from love personified. And a very far cry from the Aphrodite I am familiar with. The juxtaposition of Aphrodite with "Mr. Flood" was also clumsy, IMO.

Anyway, sorry for being negative here and harping on what I see as the flaws of the story. Even if there were some elements to the story that didn't quite work for me, there were some memorable images and the story made me think. If I were to meet the author in person, I'd thank him for writing this and offer to buy him a cup of coffee (or a beer) and talk about the story (like why he felt it important to name the heroine Aphrodite, for one...).

[hautdesert]

I can't speak for the author, I haven't ever spoken to him.  However.  It occurrs to me that the "Aphrodite" connection might the one I mentioned in last week's intro.  Aphrodite is Astarte, Inanna, Ishtar.

The flood--you know, the whole Noah's Ark thing--also has other Ancient Near Eastern versions.  One of them appears in the epic of Gilgamesh.

Now, I don't think there's any point in looking for exact analogues, and I doubt very much that this is a retelling--it doesn't match, in the end, except for the flood, and a woman named after a goddess who, in the epic linked to above, wept and grieved when she saw the flood.

Incidentally, for a tenuous Goose Girl connection, the god Ea doesn't want all life destroyed by the flood, but he's sworn not to reveal what the gods have said in council.  So he tells a wall, after having suggested to Utnapushtim (the "Noah" of this story) that he maybe hang around and keep his ears open.  (In Goose Girl, the princess' secret gets out even though she's sworn to never tell a living soul.  She tells the stove, and the king is hiding there and overhears.)  Doesn't help the story any, just thought it was kind of funny.  I'm sure I can find Ant King connections too if I look hard enough....

[Rachel Swirsky]

I don't know. Maybe that's what he's thinking... it also seems like a strain, though, for me. Why call her Aphrodite if he's reaching back further?

Maybe he was trying to hit that she was loving? Loving of Mr. Flood? Loving of people? Loving of small towns?

Actually, the detail just doesn't make much sense to me either. So chalk me up as agreeing with the rest of y'all on that issue. ;-)

[eytanz]

So, the first PC story I didn't like. Not horrible, just not very interesting, and I felt the writing was subpar. There was a lot of repetition, a lot of contrived elements, and a pretty unclear viewpoint. It's one thing to have a story where the characters are unclear as to whether the destruction is justified or not, but in the end I felt that the story itself was unclear - the ending felt more like a cop-out than anything else. My overall impression was that the story set up a scenario and lacked the courage to follow through on it - by which I don't mean Dee should have followed through on the flooding, but I feel like the story would have needed to tackle the question of whether the flood was really necessary or not, rather than trump the flood with a cool special effect.

[Yossarian's grandson]

Still no barbarians chopping of heads...no, just kidding, I liked this story. I agree with what has been said about Dee having very little internal conflict and sort of just....doing what was necessary for the story, without any real motivation.

I didn't feel the same way about Mr. Flood. He's not a person, but a force of nature that revels in its own existence. Does rain care? Because he was once human, he has rationalised this by telling himself he's protecting the town from the crazy outside world. But all he's doing is what he's supposed to: unleashing his full powers in an arbitrary way. A true storm god, in the ancient tradition of callous, uncaring storm gods that's even older than the Greek Zeus.

I also really liked the images of the story. Dee and Flood dancing in the air, on hill overlooking a giant flood...I could hear the strains of an orchestral piece in my mind. Great stuff.

A gripe about the intros: the sound quality is still below parr, making Rachel's voice sound rather grating and unpleasant. I hope fixing this is high on the PC-team's to-do list. Just below bringing us a story about barbarians and fireball-casting wizards...

[cuddlebug]

This story was ok, but not great. I have to add though, that Dee having trouble letting go of Mr Flood was very understandable, IMO, as he was the only one she had, a father figure who's judgement she only starts to questions as she grows older culminating in what we heard in the story.

One thing that seemed like a logical slip to me was the explanation/justification used for the floods. Why would flooding the same place over and over again *preserve* a way of life. It seemed to destroy a way of life rather than holding it down, keeping it from developing. That made no sense to me. If a town is destroyed why would it be rebuilt exactly how it was? How would that keep people locked in their old-fashioned way of life/thinking? Would not insurance money and financial support from the government (...?) lead to an improvement of the town's infrastructure/maybe even making it more desirable for professionals to live there. ... On the other hand this actually makes me wonder why people who survived stayed in the first place. Would they not relocate after one of these devastating floods not having any ties left to the town? Would the youth not go away to big cities anyway? That is what usually happens, at least where I am from, rural areas are populated by families and older people and the children move away as soon as they can after having finished school.

Anyway, this is not a nitpick, it was just something that came to mind while listening to the story. But I haven't thought this through yet, obviously. BTW; it did remind me of Citytalkers as well, which I listened to last week and was still fresh in my mind.

[Tom]

I thought this was an interesting story although I found it a little weird to anthropomorphize a flood.
I really want to just make a slight correction for Rachel and Mur. Being that I grew up not far from where the story took place
I though it necessary to correct the pronunciation. This might just be a regional thing. I understand that listeners and readers come from all walks of the Earth. However, trying not to sound pompous or anything, but Johnstown is pronounced exactly as it is spell like John's Town. I mean no offense to Rachel or Mur. I am actually a big fan of Mur's reading. I love all the stories she has narrated, but this one kind of bugged me with the mispronunciation. Otherwise keep up the good work!

[JoeFitz]

I enjoyed this story more or less the whole way through. I don't know what to make of the flood / urination linkage.

I liked that Dee turned the flood upside down, accomplishing perhaps the same thing as Mr. Flood with less loss of life. Her vision of the future, however, seemed a might bit rose-coloured - Mr. Flood may, in fact, be correct.

[cuddlebug]

... On the other hand this actually makes me wonder why people who survived stayed in the first place. Would they not relocate after one of these devastating floods not having any ties left to the town? Would the youth not go away to big cities anyway? That is what usually happens, at least where I am from, rural areas are populated by families and older people and the children move away as soon as they can after having finished school.

By coincidence (? reminds me of the coincidence discussion on the 'distant replay' thread) I just found an interesting site on scienceblogs about "Cities of Death", if any of you are interested.

[ajames]

I enjoyed this story more or less the whole way through. I don't know what to make of the flood / urination linkage.

Sympathetic magic. Like affects like. Magic through analogy. This aspect of the story imbued Mr. Flood, or at least his magic, with a certain antiquity in my mind.

[contra]

I liked this story the most so far out of all the podcastle stories.

It was an interesting take on a something that people always ask 'why' about.  Why one person and not another.  It is never considered that it is for the greater good... unless god is brought into it.
I think she may be wrong about the town.  it will bring a lot of new people to the town, it will bring tourists, it will bring lots of new blood.  We are made to believe that the town has only remained so far because of how the people are brought together, this will not happen if the town is a mystery.  Take Loch Ness.  While the town has remained; it has changed and it not what it once was.  It is now a tourist trap, and the people living there don't work for the good of the area, but for the people that visit.  Do most tourists care about the history of the Loch?  No.  They care about Nessie.  So overall it hurts, and becomes known for only one thing. 
I think the idea of everyone helping eachother is that Mr Flood is trying to protect; not everyone trying to help tourists.

But morally she is right.  Also I don't see small town community as always a good thing.  But having a tourist/mystery trap is not really any better IMO....


As for the whole peeing magic... I think it was something along the lines of getting in touch with the element you are using.  Needing to pee seems like an easy of feeling like the water is a part of you.  Then the release itself is a symbol and something for the mind to focus on to make the rain worse. 

Why do people stay there?  Because its where their history is.  Many people do no want to move on, especially if they are brought closer through an event, like a flood that kills.  They feel that they are now part of the place and want to remain a part of it. 

[shinma]

It took me a while to understand why this story didn't sit well with me.

With some stories (like the Ant King) I could easily identify what it was
that bothered me.  This one took some thought.  Audio stories have two
parts.  The writing and the reading.

The writing wasn't bad.  I disagree with some of the other replies that
state that nothing happened in the story.  Yes, Dee didn't change.  Yes,
Mr. Flood didn't change.  But a town was saved.  And a supernatural
phenomena was instituted.  What bothered me about the story has less
to do with the story itself, and more to do with the fact that I'm using
a very tall yardstick to measure it by.  Of all fantasy, urban fantasy is
my favorite flavor and its unfortunate that I have to compare this story to say
Neverwhere.  In terms of world building, impact, and character it just
felt lackluster.

The reading was very good.  But I realized what bothered me most about
it in both the intro and the story.  I live some 45 minutes from Johnstown,
and every time Johnstown was pronounced like Jonston I
twitched (I think this was mentioned earlier).

So the combination of the two left me feeling like the story lacked punch
and polish.

To add to the 'mention of Aphrodite' discussion.  I don't know if the mention
of the goddess is an allusion to Love of people and the town or not.  I will
point out that Aphrodite (Venus in Rome) wasn't born per se in any greek myth,
but instead created out of sea-foam, and rose full grown from water.  Her
title in greek epic poems was 'Foam-risen' much like Athena was 'grey-eyed'.

Also, many myths (not just greek ones) are often told about heroes (who can
save towns) or to explain natural phenomena that humans didn't understand
at the time (like lighning, or rain falling upwards).

[High 5]

Too little fiction in this one.
My wife can make it rain on days that I go fishing....

[JoshEnglish]

As a result, there was NO STORY.

At the end, I felt cheated.  I had been set up for some kind of lesson; either where Dee proves that people can be true to themselves without adversity, or else where she learns the value of adversity.  Either would have been good stories.  This one came to a screeching halt in the middle of the highway, took my wallet, and kicked me out on the median strip.

I think there was a good story here. Dee, at some point, has to choose between following Flood, or do follow her own heart. The entire buildup of the story was to get her to that critical point of choice, and I think this story did just fine on that account.

Because the major change of the story is limited to one person, it may be a bit more "literary" than fantasy, but the implications of the world being vastly different from the one we live in, and the power of Flood to do things we could only dream of, make this story a great piece of fantasy.

I loved the ending, even though the idea the Dee was essentially handed a magic wand and could wield it perfectly on the first try was a bit too unrealistic. That is, it would have been hard to believe had it been the opening scene of the story, not the payoff.

In that respect, it reminded me of Dark City. All of the sudden the entire world is new, that's the payoff, and I enjoy those kinds of endings  once in a while. What's the point of listening to fantasy if you don't want a little magic now and then?

[Planish]

I liked it. Giving it a 4 out of 5.
I thought it dragged for about 10 or 15 minutes near the beginning, but the grand finale was very cinematic. ("Bullet Time" rain, anyone?) It evoked memories of a lot of heavy rains I've been in. Or maybe they were carwashes.

Not once did I think of Citytalkers. For me, it was EP046: Natural Order.
Oh, also that scene in The Ruling Class - the duel with The Electric Messiah.

One thing that seemed like a logical slip to me was the explanation/justification used for the floods. Why would flooding the same place over and over again *preserve* a way of life. It seemed to destroy a way of life rather than holding it down, keeping it from developing. That made no sense to me.

The same thing bothered me. Then I just let it go, and added more duct tape to my disbelief suspenders.

Mur was a good choice for narrator. Great to hear her again.

[edit]

If a town is destroyed why would it be rebuilt exactly how it was? How would that keep people locked in their old-fashioned way of life/thinking? Would not insurance money and financial support from the government (...?) lead to an improvement of the town's infrastructure/maybe even making it more desirable for professionals to live there. ... On the other hand this actually makes me wonder why people who survived stayed in the first place. Would they not relocate after one of these devastating floods not having any ties left to the town?

I can never figure out why, in hurricane-prone regions, people may have merely decorative fake shutters on their houses, and when a hurricane threatens they all run out to Home Depot and buy up all the plywood they can nail over their windows and fake shutters. Why not install actual working shutters?
Why do Californians build homes on the side of hills that threaten to slide into the ocean/highway/neighbour's yard if they leave their sprinklers on too long? Oh yes, lovely view, while it lasts.
In dry wildfire areas, why not use terracotta tile or steel roofing?
Why doesn't New Orleans drag in 16 feet of fill? (yeah, yeah, the expense)
Building a home in tornado alley without a basement or some kind of well-anchored safe room?
Naples - hey, that's a volcano up there!

[DarkKnightJRK]

My main problem with the story was Mr. Flood's motivation for essentially slaughtering hundreds of people every half a century so that he could slow down progress. Maybe it's just the more sci-fi influenced, futurist side of me, but when I heard that, and Dee's gentler version, I thought, "Well, fuck that noise."

Not a badly told story though. Plus the image of this crazy old man (whom I cast as Jack Nicoloson in my head) pissing and laughing maniacally into the stormy skies was horrifically hilarious.

[Archie]

Sigh sorry but I didn't like this one at all. The end seemed very obvious and the 'wipe out the town' to 'save the town' was such a weak arguement it wouldn't hold up to any kind of discussion. Surely when Mr Flood had, at one time, been sane, he would have realised how crooked the plan was.

Sorry but a big dissappointment.

[Unblinking]

'Twas fair to middlin'.

The idea of a flood personified, passing on his crown was an interesting one, but there were some parts I didn't like.  His idea to destroy the town to save it made no sense in many ways already mentioned.  Dee had too much fine control than someone using the power for teh first time should have.  Triggering and amplifying a natural event is one thing, subverting natural laws is another thing entirely.  I didn't understand her affection for Mr. Flood and her desire to save him.  He killed her parents, and she knew that!

I liked the association between urinating and the rain magic, that was a nice touch.

[Listener]

The end seemed very obvious and the 'wipe out the town' to 'save the town' was such a weak arguement it wouldn't hold up to any kind of discussion.

Generally, gods are pretty single-minded, and they resist change. Terry Pratchett addresses this VERY well in many of his novels. It makes sense to me that Flood thought destroy-to-save was a good idea... G-d did it in the Bible, didn't he? And if it's good enough for Him...

Just a thought.