PC128: Something Wicked This Way Plumbs

[Listener]

When the story began and we learned that the MC was a freelance writer successfully making a decent living and having a decent life... I honestly groaned out loud. Seriously. I gained a little more respect for him when he turned out to be a technical writer -- that stuff's difficult and boring -- but still... I think too many stories have writer protagonists because it's an easy protagonist. Writers know what it's like for writers, they know what they want to happen when they become successful writers, and because the characters are writers it is in character for them to use flowery mental descriptions of things that, say, an electrician might not. (Case in point: it's a lot harder to remain true to the language when your MC is an island princess on an island without more than native technology. Or a child.)

However, once I got past that, I really enjoyed the story... up until the ending, which felt a little rushed. Like, "oh, crap, I'm out of time/hit my word limit and need to end this quickly, so let's just make it a friendly monster." That may not be what happened, but that's how it felt to me. Still, I bet it makes a good pet.

I wonder who the MC was telling the story to. A cleaning person, maybe? Someone who came to pick up his latest manual (or drop off a completed one for galley edits or whatever TWs do)? His girlfriend's kid?

I also really enjoyed the discussion in the forums of where the candy came from.

The reading was good, although Dana's voice grated on me after a while.

[Unblinking]

When the story began and we learned that the MC was a freelance writer successfully making a decent living and having a decent life... I honestly groaned out loud. Seriously. I gained a little more respect for him when he turned out to be a technical writer -- that stuff's difficult and boring -- but still... I think too many stories have writer protagonists because it's an easy protagonist. Writers know what it's like for writers, they know what they want to happen when they become successful writers, and because the characters are writers it is in character for them to use flowery mental descriptions of things that, say, an electrician might not. (Case in point: it's a lot harder to remain true to the language when your MC is an island princess on an island without more than native technology. Or a child.)

I know that's a common complaint, but writing about writers never bothers me overmuch unless it's one particular writer who keeps doing it over and over again.  I have a particular writer in mind whose name starts with an "S" and ends with an "ephen King"--at least 70% writer stories, and 90% stories that take place in Maine, that's just lazy when taken over hundreds of stories.

[ElectricPaladin]

When the story began and we learned that the MC was a freelance writer successfully making a decent living and having a decent life... I honestly groaned out loud. Seriously. I gained a little more respect for him when he turned out to be a technical writer -- that stuff's difficult and boring -- but still... I think too many stories have writer protagonists because it's an easy protagonist. Writers know what it's like for writers, they know what they want to happen when they become successful writers, and because the characters are writers it is in character for them to use flowery mental descriptions of things that, say, an electrician might not. (Case in point: it's a lot harder to remain true to the language when your MC is an island princess on an island without more than native technology. Or a child.)

I know that's a common complaint, but writing about writers never bothers me overmuch unless it's one particular writer who keeps doing it over and over again.  I have a particular writer in mind whose name starts with an "S" and ends with an "ephen King"--at least 70% writer stories, and 90% stories that take place in Maine, that's just lazy when taken over hundreds of stories.

Let's face it, writers are deeply fascinating people (also intelligent, sexy, and well-endowed). Everything should be about us.

Seriously, I actually haven't encountered a preponderance of work about writers. Certainly, they're out there, but I've also read books about musicians and painters and office workers and parents and high school students and chefs and astronauts and dental technicians. Ok, maybe never a book about a dental technician. But the point is that writers exist and they often make cool protagonists. Unless you can think of a reason why it's bad in this story, I am unmoved.

[Unblinking]

Let's face it, writers are deeply fascinating people (also intelligent, sexy, and well-endowed). Everything should be about us.

Seriously, I actually haven't encountered a preponderance of work about writers. Certainly, they're out there, but I've also read books about musicians and painters and office workers and parents and high school students and chefs and astronauts and dental technicians. Ok, maybe never a book about a dental technician. But the point is that writers exist and they often make cool protagonists. Unless you can think of a reason why it's bad in this story, I am unmoved.

You haven't read much Stephen King then?   

[Scattercat]

But the point is that writers exist and they often make cool protagonists. Unless you can think of a reason why it's bad in this story, I am unmoved.

It's lazy, and if you read more initial/amateur offerings, you'd see it a LOT more often.  It's like writing a book where the orcs are Tolkien orcs and the elves are Tolkien elves.  Or worse, D&D orcs and elves.  It's not bad or wrong, per se, but it shows a lack of effort or initiative, and tends to lose you points from connoisseurs who've seen it a million times.

[Talia]

But the point is that writers exist and they often make cool protagonists. Unless you can think of a reason why it's bad in this story, I am unmoved.

It's lazy, and if you read more initial/amateur offerings, you'd see it a LOT more often.  It's like writing a book where the orcs are Tolkien orcs and the elves are Tolkien elves.  Or worse, D&D orcs and elves.  It's not bad or wrong, per se, but it shows a lack of effort or initiative, and tends to lose you points from connoisseurs who've seen it a million times.

I don't know. I think deducting points for using that setting rather than, say, actual story quality, well that doesn't feel right to me. I strongly disagree that its "lazy."  If it feels lazy, I suggest there's something else fundimentally wrong with the way a story is written. Seems to me even reusing the most common of concepts is fine and dandy provided the story it bears forth is interesting and well done enough.

[Scattercat]

But the point is that writers exist and they often make cool protagonists. Unless you can think of a reason why it's bad in this story, I am unmoved.

It's lazy, and if you read more initial/amateur offerings, you'd see it a LOT more often.  It's like writing a book where the orcs are Tolkien orcs and the elves are Tolkien elves.  Or worse, D&D orcs and elves.  It's not bad or wrong, per se, but it shows a lack of effort or initiative, and tends to lose you points from connoisseurs who've seen it a million times.

I don't know. I think deducting points for using that setting rather than, say, actual story quality, well that doesn't feel right to me. I strongly disagree that its "lazy."  If it feels lazy, I suggest there's something else fundimentally wrong with the way a story is written. Seems to me even reusing the most common of concepts is fine and dandy provided the story it bears forth is interesting and well done enough.

Indeed.  It's all in how well it's handled.  However, in the same way that a good story can be spun from "It was a dark and stormy night," the very commonness of the thing biases the experienced reader against it.

More to the point, it's not that "writer as hero" is a trope per se.  Elves and orcs might be misleading in that sense.  It's more that, when you're a neophyte writer, you sit down and think, "What is my protagonist like?"  You are not very experienced, and so you have not yet gained the practice or confidence necessary to envision the world from the point of view of someone very unlike yourself.  Thus, you think, "I know!  I'll make him/her a writer!  I know what THAT's like, ha ha!"  And thus those of us who see it a lot go, "Oh, great.  A writer protag.  Unless the story revolves around something specific to writing, what we have here is either an inexperienced newbie or a lazy expert."  Neither of those impressions, you understand, lend much hope that one is about to read something world-shatteringly awesome.

[Talia]

Would you not say that's more an issue on the reader's end than writer's? I guess what I mean is if you write something that YOU'RE happy with and some people are clearly happy to read, doesn't that make it worth it even if you've turned off some segment of your readership?

I guess I'm saying can't make everyone happy, so the author has to do what pleases himself (and entertains others enough to sell, I guess!).

[Scattercat]

Er, no.  Laziness or inexperience are problems, and ones that should and can be addressed.  A good writer can write a story about a writer and have it be meaningful and important.  That story is not the problem; it's not an issue with writers writing about writers.  However, when you read a story that centers on a writer for no other reason than the author is a writer, then it's not so good.  I feel the same way about anyone who writes about their day job, really, unless they have something more universally applicable to say. 

F'r instance, I just read a story about a teacher in a charter school written by a teacher in a charter school, and while the story as a whole was worth reading, there were a few bits that were pretty obviously self-indulgent.  I guessed well before the end what the author had as a day job, and was annoyed to find my cynical prediction correct.  THAT is what I'm talking about.  Ideally, a story should be written well enough from its chosen perspective that I cynically make such a prediction and am proven resoundingly wrong.  In the event I ever encounter such a story, I will perforce applaud the author with tremendous huzzahs.

[Talia]

Just gonna have to disagree with you on this point, I think. I've read many a story involving  writers and have never, not once, come across what I'd see as an example of what your suggest, so I guess it's just a matter of opinion.

[eytanz]

Just gonna have to disagree with you on this point, I think. I've read many a story involving  writers and have never, not once, come across what I'd see as an example of what your suggest, so I guess it's just a matter of opinion.

I sort of agree with both of you.

On the one hand, I think the whole "writing about writers is lazy" is something you really only hear from other writers. I don't think I was ever bothered by it at the least before I came to these forums, started hanging out (virtually) with writers, and heard this said occasionally. I'm still not bothered by it, though I'm aware other people seem to be.

On the other hand, now that I'm a slush reader, I am exposed to a lot more of what Scattercat is talking about. Specifically, a lot of writing that contains features that otherwise mark it as lazy or unskilled tend to be about writers, or about the author's day job. I have never rejected a story because it's about a writer - nor has it even been a consideration - but a lot of the stories I reject for other reasons happen to be about writers.

So, I guess what I'm saying is, if you've never seen a example of what Scattercat is suggesting, then that's because an editor (or slush reader) somewhere is doing a good job, not because it doesn't exist.

[Scattercat]

Just gonna have to disagree with you on this point, I think. I've read many a story involving  writers and have never, not once, come across what I'd see as an example of what your suggest, so I guess it's just a matter of opinion.

As eytanz said, that is because the stories that do what I'm complaining about are ones written by lazy or unskilled authors, and therefore tend to get weeded out early in the editorial process.  Stephen King is something of an aberration, although you'll notice that he didn't do it nearly so much in his early work, when he had to get by on his merits, whereas now that he can basically belch into a voice-to-text program and sell a million copies, he's gotten a lot less self-vigilant about that kind of thing.

This story, for instance, is not an example of the problem.  While the protagonist being a writer doesn't factor into the story much at all, it's also not distracting or self-indulgent.  It's functionally harmless here, serving only to set off the warning signs in those of us like myself and Listener who have had our radars fine-tuned to notice the Symptoms of Bad Writing.

[FireTurtle]

Tuning in late but, hey, better than never. Very much enjoyed this light-hearted romp. As for main-character as author- I don't know. It worked for me. I mean, how else would you proceed to the technical manual ending. Well done.

Only nit pick- although one that made me drum the steering wheel endlessly in mute irritation: Closing the water main DOES NOT drain the water out of the pipes. The water that was there is still there. Everyone would have to flush or turn on the faucets, etc to get the pipes to drain dry. Ok. I feel better now.

See, this is why I am afraid to write about things I don't know. Or only think I know. And by the way, how could you possibly drag around a pot for a ficus that fills a room. My ficus fills a small corner of the bedroom and I would be hard-pressed to drag its pot around by myself. Just sayin'

Just in case anyone besides me actually reads this- I loved the monster and the whole candy-temptation thing. It was a nice little "microcosm" story. I like those when they are done well (like this one) and don't merely seem like the author couldn't think of any other settings for the characters.

[AliceNred]

I like candy corn. Not enough to crave outside of the wholiest of seasons, but I still look forward to the happy stripy stuff.

I even like bologna sandwiches.

The story was fun, and where no story is perfect, it did leave me with some questions:

Why did they keep the monster and not turn it over to let's say a college to study or NASA even?

Why would a health nut touch bologna?

How did it make the candy? Why would it know what it tasted like, or looked like? And if it could make candy, why couldn't make itself a bologna sandwich?


I personally really wanted the tree to some how come more into play, like a love story between  it and monster.

I know, it's just a silly story, and I should really just relax.

Now the guy who read it was great. Sorry, his name alludes me. He sounded like he would do a great job on some detective stories.

[Unblinking]

Why did they keep the monster and not turn it over to let's say a college to study or NASA even?

free labor!

Why did they keep the monster and How did it make the candy? Why would it know what it tasted like, or looked like? And if it could make candy, why couldn't make itself a bologna sandwich?

That was left up to interpretation, but I suspect that it was able to manufacture something that looked like candy from it's own biological waste, probably with some kind of sedative and/or digestive included.  I'm not sure how it found out what candy looks like, but it didn't necessarily know what candy tasted like--nobody in the story tasted the candy.  I don't think it could make a bologna sandwich because if it's making it from its own bio-waste it couldn't make anything that has nutrition for itself.  It could perhaps make something that looked like a bologna sandwich but would not have any nutrients.

That's just my take though, the story lets you make your own interpretation. 

[DKT]

Why did they keep the monster and How did it make the candy? Why would it know what it tasted like, or looked like? And if it could make candy, why couldn't make itself a bologna sandwich?

That was left up to interpretation, but I suspect that it was able to manufacture something that looked like candy from it's own biological waste, probably with some kind of sedative and/or digestive included.  I'm not sure how it found out what candy looks like, but it didn't necessarily know what candy tasted like--nobody in the story tasted the candy.  I don't think it could make a bologna sandwich because if it's making it from its own bio-waste it couldn't make anything that has nutrition for itself.  It could perhaps make something that looked like a bologna sandwich but would not have any nutrients.

That's just my take though, the story lets you make your own interpretation. 

I *really* don't have the words to describe how disappointed I am that I've already recorded the feedback segment for this one. Because - DAMN. That would've been fun to have said out loud into a microphone 

[Max e^{i pi}]

Why did they keep the monster and How did it make the candy? Why would it know what it tasted like, or looked like? And if it could make candy, why couldn't make itself a bologna sandwich?

That was left up to interpretation, but I suspect that it was able to manufacture something that looked like candy from it's own biological waste, probably with some kind of sedative and/or digestive included.  I'm not sure how it found out what candy looks like, but it didn't necessarily know what candy tasted like--nobody in the story tasted the candy.  I don't think it could make a bologna sandwich because if it's making it from its own bio-waste it couldn't make anything that has nutrition for itself.  It could perhaps make something that looked like a bologna sandwich but would not have any nutrients.

That's just my take though, the story lets you make your own interpretation. 

I *really* don't have the words to describe how disappointed I am that I've already recorded the feedback segment for this one. Because - DAMN. That would've been fun to have said out loud into a microphone 

You just like talking about doody.

[AliceNred]

Why did they keep the monster and not turn it over to let's say a college to study or NASA even?

free labor!

Why did they keep the monster and How did it make the candy? Why would it know what it tasted like, or looked like? And if it could make candy, why couldn't make itself a bologna sandwich?

That was left up to interpretation, but I suspect that it was able to manufacture something that looked like candy from it's own biological waste, probably with some kind of sedative and/or digestive included.  I'm not sure how it found out what candy looks like, but it didn't necessarily know what candy tasted like--nobody in the story tasted the candy.  I don't think it could make a bologna sandwich because if it's making it from its own bio-waste it couldn't make anything that has nutrition for itself.  It could perhaps make something that looked like a bologna sandwich but would not have any nutrients.

That's just my take though, the story lets you make your own interpretation.  

You made some good points.

I do see how somethings should not answered. After it is a short story.

But on occasion, some holes bother me. Maybe I am just hungry?

[Unblinking]

Why did they keep the monster and How did it make the candy? Why would it know what it tasted like, or looked like? And if it could make candy, why couldn't make itself a bologna sandwich?

That was left up to interpretation, but I suspect that it was able to manufacture something that looked like candy from it's own biological waste, probably with some kind of sedative and/or digestive included.  I'm not sure how it found out what candy looks like, but it didn't necessarily know what candy tasted like--nobody in the story tasted the candy.  I don't think it could make a bologna sandwich because if it's making it from its own bio-waste it couldn't make anything that has nutrition for itself.  It could perhaps make something that looked like a bologna sandwich but would not have any nutrients.

That's just my take though, the story lets you make your own interpretation. 

I *really* don't have the words to describe how disappointed I am that I've already recorded the feedback segment for this one. Because - DAMN. That would've been fun to have said out loud into a microphone 

Damn, I should've said it a bit earlier then.  It's always nice to hear my name in the feedback section, and it would've given you the opportunity to talk about candy-shaped poo.  Oh well...   

[LaShawn]

So let's see, I just heard a story about a girl and her blob...now we got a boy and his...er...snot green alien tentacle thing. This one had me grinning all throughout. Love the character voices and the deadpan humor. And I'm so glad he didn't kill the alien. And great shout-out to Vienna sausages! When I was a kid, I used to snarf those up with crackers and cheeze from a can. Mmmm...yummy!

But what I really want to talk about was Dave's intro. I so totally know where he is coming from. Growing up, my mother was the exact same way--Halloween was the devil's holiday, so as a Christian she wouldn't celebrate it. My dad, on the other hand, was just cheap. He didn't buy candy; he gave out stacks of pennies (yeah, imagine all the weird looks he got). He and my mom clashed at times, and oftentimes, really late, he would tell us to get our coats on so we could go trick-or-treating. And because it was last minute, we often had to improvise last minute on costumes. So for most of my childhood, my sisters and I always went as a gypsies because it was the only thing we could think of with our mother's scarves. That is until she started letting us go to the Christian "Harvest" celebrations, where we dressed as Israelite women.

This year, I had the wonderful privilege to go to the American Gods Gathering at the House on the Rock with Neil Gaiman on Halloween weekend. You can find the entire story at my blog, but let me tell you, that weekend made up for years and years and years of not celebrating Halloween. It was magical and mystical and spooky and wild and thrilling and way too many other adjectives I have no room to mention. It basically represented what Halloween 'ought' to be.

P.S. This year, my son went trick-or-treating as a GPS. That was fun.

[acpracht]

Stephen King is something of an aberration, although you'll notice that he didn't do it nearly so much in his early work, when he had to get by on his merits, whereas now that he can basically belch into a voice-to-text program and sell a million copies, he's gotten a lot less self-vigilant about that kind of thing.

Haha... "belch into a voice-to-text program." I'm pretty sure I've read that one.
King went so far as to not only put a writer into the story but also Himself and his own life events and made himself the ultimate source of a universe! (A la Dark Tower). That's the ultimate in navel-gazing, in my opinion.
Also, the master of purple prose. "The grasshoppers jumping in sporatic parabolas" in Salem's Lot. Come on!
And yet, and yet... I keep reading him. Oh, well...  
-Adam




Mod: just edited the link to reflect whose words you were responding to :p
(I knew I hadn't said that.....)

[Listener]

Threadomancy: I found this image. It is relevant.

[Scattercat]

It's all true!  Run!  Save yourselves!!

[Unblinking]

Threadomancy: I found this image. It is relevant.

Awesome!  I wonder if that was inspired by this story or just completely random?

[Gamercow]

It's all true!  Run!  Save yourselves!!

You just want all the gummy bears for yourself.