It was a beautiful story with no purpose. Were drugs being used to keep the working classes under control?
Were drugs being used to keep the working classes under control?Yes. Just like neo-Marxist philosopher Herbert Marcuse predicted with his theory of repressive de-sublimation. The more people are alienated from their environment the worse their "escape attempts" will be.
I don't think the story is about a dystopian society...No, what then? Bad as things are now (and they are bad and getting worse all the time) modern society is not near as bad as the one portrayed in the story. But it's getting there. The degree of impoverishment, isolation and self-destruction described in the story looks to me like a technocratically administered social Darwinist form of political economy and to my thinking is the very definition of a dystopia. Not all dystopias have be the result of ecological disaster, nuclear war, space invaders or meteor strikes. We can (and have) done it to ourselves.
BTW, KenK, I don't think you need to go all the way up the hermeneutic chain to 'One Dimensional Nan' this really seems to be more of a 'Brave New World' sort of question. By choosing to mimic the Victorian fable in such close detail I think it takes some of the bite out of any discussion of this being a riff on modern society.
I would say its a necesity in this world, as it sounds like the only jobs available to those who havent gone through college were the "jacked" jobs, which they were trying to avoid because they sound pretty horrible.
Oh, I forgot to mention that it bugs me when people say "my parents couldn't pay for me to go to college so I couldn't go to college." Maybe it makes sense in this story, and student loans are simply a thing of the past, but in most cases it doesn't make much sense in our world. My parents gave me nothing for college, despite making enough that I couldn't get many of the low-rate federal loans, but I went through college anyway.
I would say its a necesity in this world, as it sounds like the only jobs available to those who havent gone through college were the "jacked" jobs, which they were trying to avoid because they sound pretty horrible.
I would say its a necesity in this world, as it sounds like the only jobs available to those who havent gone through college were the "jacked" jobs, which they were trying to avoid because they sound pretty horrible.
What's a necessity? (sorry, I'm just not sure what you meant)
The word "grok" threw me so far out of the story that I couldn't get back in no matter how hard I tried. SISL was published decades ago and "grok" isn't part of our language pantheon now; how did it get in there in the future? Makes no sense.
The word "grok" threw me so far out of the story that I couldn't get back in no matter how hard I tried. SISL was published decades ago and "grok" isn't part of our language pantheon now; how did it get in there in the future? Makes no sense.
I hear people use "grok" all the time... maybe its not a dictionary word, but its becoming more commonly used, regardless.
I would say... if companies like to hire Jackers at 15, and it doesn't look like your parents will be able to afford to send you to college, do you want to take a chance on missing out on a Jacker job (which apparently pays enough to support a family of three) by going for a scholarship you might not get?
I would say... if companies like to hire Jackers at 15, and it doesn't look like your parents will be able to afford to send you to college, do you want to take a chance on missing out on a Jacker job (which apparently pays enough to support a family of three) by going for a scholarship you might not get?
Like I said before, I don't think it's really a problem with the story. Specifically this is because:
1. It's not mentioned whether student loan programs are still available. With the economic problems it's possible they're not (though it would've been nice if they'd specified).
2. Even if she could get student loans, there's still the question of how her dad will have money to live--unless she could get enough extra to supplement.
3. People complain about not being able to go to college even though their parents aren't giving them a handout nowadays, when student loans are generally available--so there's no reason that this wouldn't continue in the future, even though it annoys me personally.
I have to say, I didn't really take to this story - probably a personal taste as I don't like the idea's of losing control, especially the whole "Sex on Drugs" scene. Add to that, the ending was just sad to me; she lost her self to a sort of hazy void, and her folks where trapped; her mum in a mental cage, her dad in poverty and dispair.
Not the worse, but definitely not a favourite.
The word "grok" threw me so far out of the story that I couldn't get back in no matter how hard I tried. SISL was published decades ago and "grok" isn't part of our language pantheon now; how did it get in there in the future? Makes no sense.
I hear people use "grok" all the time... maybe its not a dictionary word, but its becoming more commonly used, regardless.
Me too. I don't believe I've ever used it, but only because I'm not sure I'd grok the right place to use it (was that correct?). But I hear people say it online all the time, at least on SF forums.
It's always very unsettling when you come across someone who happens to share the same name as you and also happens to be an unsavory human being. Why, Emily, why?
Those saved my butt from a downward spiral of drugs and decoding!
I totally imagined the characters from Ferngully going there to get lit or whatever you kids call it these days.
It's always very unsettling when you come across someone who happens to share the same name as you and also happens to be an unsavory human being. Why, Emily, why?
That's why I'm glad my parents named me Strontium Xantippa.
I totally imagined the characters from Ferngully going there to get lit or whatever you kids call it these days.
Sometimes we still say "get lit". But I think the older you get the more you return to the traditional "get high", I think.
Minor minor minor production nitpick, but it made me laugh.
One day when I first moved to the UK I was about a block away from Quay Street. Someone asked me, "excuse me, do you now where the Opera House on 'Key' Street is?" I said, "sorry, don't know. But the Opera House is a block up on 'Kway' Street." The look that woman gave me was one of pure malice. Turns out they pronounce Key and Quay the same here in the UK. Back in America we all them wharfs.
Today's story: Don't do drugs. The end.
I dunno. I felt like I was watching "Reefer Madness" or something. If you do drugs you'll end up a twitching insane street person and your father and mother will STARVE! I feel like the themes of focusing inward or outward could have been much more profitably and interestingly explored if the story hadn't been so dead-set on its Tragic Ending that will serve as an Example to Others.
Also the bar that is meant to look like the inside of a tree sounded wicked!! I totally imagined the characters from Ferngully going there to get lit or whatever you kids call it these days.
According to the very link you gave, the US has two pronunciations, one of which is "ˈkweɪ".
Merriam-Webster lists three: ˈkē, ˈkā, ˈkwā
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/quay
The trouble with picking up most of my vocabulary from books is that my pronunciations often get screwed up. I think I was in high school before I knew how to pronounce "oasis" correctly. When I read it in a book and said the word in my head it sounded more like "oy-zis" instead of "oh-ay-sis".
The trouble with picking up most of my vocabulary from books is that my pronunciations often get screwed up. I think I was in high school before I knew how to pronounce "oasis" correctly. When I read it in a book and said the word in my head it sounded more like "oy-zis" instead of "oh-ay-sis".
I had exactly this problem with awry; I was pronouncing it "AH-ree" in my head for years before someone - my wife, I think - told me I was somewhat awry.
I think such mispronunciations are a reasonably (though not perfect) reliable indicator of a person who likes to read.
The trouble with picking up most of my vocabulary from books is that my pronunciations often get screwed up. I think I was in high school before I knew how to pronounce "oasis" correctly. When I read it in a book and said the word in my head it sounded more like "oy-zis" instead of "oh-ay-sis".
I had exactly this problem with awry; I was pronouncing it "AH-ree" in my head for years before someone - my wife, I think - told me I was somewhat awry.
I think such mispronunciations are a reasonably (though not perfect) reliable indicator of a person who likes to read.
The trouble with picking up most of my vocabulary from books is that my pronunciations often get screwed up. I think I was in high school before I knew how to pronounce "oasis" correctly. When I read it in a book and said the word in my head it sounded more like "oy-zis" instead of "oh-ay-sis".
I had exactly this problem with awry; I was pronouncing it "AH-ree" in my head for years before someone - my wife, I think - told me I was somewhat awry.
I think such mispronunciations are a reasonably (though not perfect) reliable indicator of a person who likes to read.
It can happen in reverse, too, thinking you know how to spell something because of how it sounds. My wife had trouble with the word "ornery" because spoken it generally sounds more like "awnery". :) Foreign phrases, especially French ones, give me trouble too--I still have to double take anytime someone says or writes "c'est la vie". When it's written I have to go over it twice to link it to the correct association in my head. When I hear it, the same--I remember words primarily by visualizing how they are spelled, so if my spelling is wrong it's very disconcerting for me.
For me it was "misled", which I pronounced as "MY-zull'd", where Y = EYE....
Of course, I was like 8 at the time.
For me it was "misled", which I pronounced as "MY-zull'd", where Y = EYE....
Of course, I was like 8 at the time.
My college music theory teacher confessed to reading that word just the same way when he was first learning English (I believe his native language was German).
BTW I saw your avatar dog in a commercial on teevee tonight ;D
I pulled it as a screencap out of that commercial when it crossed my desk while I was working at The Weather Channel. I just couldn't resist.
I pulled it as a screencap out of that commercial when it crossed my desk while I was working at The Weather Channel. I just couldn't resist.
That image is one of the (probably) most unintentionally creepy things ever.
Considering how picky forumites are about stories, I'm almost glad most authors stay away. Every time people post about how they don't like a story I think about the author and feel bad and hope they aren't reading what people are saying. :p
Considering how picky forumites are about stories, I'm almost glad most authors stay away. Every time people post about how they don't like a story I think about the author and feel bad and hope they aren't reading what people are saying. :p
Been there. It is nice when at least SOME people liked it, but some specific criticism can be useful too. :)
Which is yet another reason (of the many) why we aren't so excited about the "meh" commentaries. Hardly ever useful to the author.
Which is yet another reason (of the many) why we aren't so excited about the "meh" commentaries. Hardly ever useful to the author.
They've also been almost entirely non-existent for years. Not sure what's the point of bringing them up.
Which is yet another reason (of the many) why we aren't so excited about the "meh" commentaries. Hardly ever useful to the author.
They've also been almost entirely non-existent for years. Not sure what's the point of bringing them up.
So if I offer counter examples that created a furor within, say, the last three months, you're shielded by "almost"?
It comes across to me as a periodic and recurring topic of debate in quarters, and this seemed a good moment to remind folks of a downside, while they were putting themselves in the author's shoes, which happens pretty irregularly around here. That may not be enough of a point for you, but it served for me. And, obviously, we disagree about whether the horse is beaten dead or whether he keeps running the race every six months.
No, my apologies, it was the end of a long day and I was tired and grumpy. The sentence you quoted by me above was stupid.
(That said, I do think I have a difference of opinion with you and most of the rest of the EA editors on the balance between how important it is for posts to be useful for the authors as opposed to useful to the listening audience. But that's a different issue and not a justification for me to be rude).
Which is yet another reason (of the many) why we aren't so excited about the "meh" commentaries. Hardly ever useful to the author.
On the other hand, I think it's quite possible that EA's anti-meh policy has fostered a more general culture of detailed commentary here, and that isn't a bad thing.
On that topic, I'm always leery of replying to the audience unless I've explicitly been asked a question; I'll pop in to say thanks if somebody points out, say, an error I should have caught (as my narrator-hatted self did over on the PC forum, when someone corrected a flaw in my Finnish pronunciation), but I feel like butting in to explain my story to my audience is rarely going to go well. If somebody misunderstood a detail, other commenters can probably point it out, and if *everybody* missed it . . . I failed pretty thoroughly at my job.
Heradel -- well, sometimes "meh" really is all I have to say. :-) I suppose that isn't strictly true, but all the meh-reactions generally boil down to the same thing: didn't hook me; characters weren't engaging; plot wasn't exciting; etc. After a while I get tired of finding new ways to phrase "this failed to get any particular reaction, positive or negative, out of me."
When I feel that way about a story, I just don't comment. *shrugs*
I think the concept of a silent chorus of mehs is weirdly very poetic, though.
-- a lot of authors support the idea that the story belongs to the readers, in the interpretive sense.
-- a lot of authors support the idea that the story belongs to the readers, in the interpretive sense.
I used to think that once, too. But High School English beat it out of me. :D
Then I envy you, since you must have had better teachers. :)-- a lot of authors support the idea that the story belongs to the readers, in the interpretive sense.
I used to think that once, too. But High School English beat it out of me. :D
Funny, it reinforced it, for me.
Then I envy you, since you must have had better teachers. :)-- a lot of authors support the idea that the story belongs to the readers, in the interpretive sense.
I used to think that once, too. But High School English beat it out of me. :D
Funny, it reinforced it, for me.
It reinforced it for me because the tendency to allow only one interpretation really sucks the fun out of reading and even more so out of after-reading discussion.