posted
Just randomn political fiction about the rise of the new Soviet Union. Just want to know what works and what doesn't. It's about 4 words to long though.
Upon the date of November 9, 2061 most of the world twitched at the thought that a long dead enemy had began to come back from the land of the dead.
The former Russian Federation declared that by December 18, 2063, all former Soviet Republics would once again be united to form the world's most powerful state, allowing the re-emergence of communism in the world. This, for the most part was true. Russia started systematic invasions of Kazakhstan and Ukraine, beginning with cutting off their supply of Russian oil.
Without precious oil, the two countries had little fuel other than alternative energies to stimulate their economies. Soon, chaos and strife emerged, as Soviet spies staged a coup de' tat, and over through their respective governments. 3 republics now constituted new Soviet Union.
Not a great way to start. It's passive. It sounds like an encyclopedia entry.
quote:most of the world twitched at the thought that a long dead enemy had began to come back from the land of the dead.
Awkward. Repetative.
quote:The former Russian Federation declared that by December 18, 2063, all former Soviet Republics would once again be united to form the world's most powerful state, allowing the re-emergence of communism in the world. This, for the most part was true. Russia started systematic invasions of Kazakhstan and Ukraine, beginning with cutting off their supply of Russian oil.
Huge info dump. Not interesting because you haven't made us care about the world yet. Sounds like an encylopedia entry.
quote:Without precious oil, the two countries had little fuel other than alternative energies to stimulate their economies. Soon, chaos and strife emerged, as Soviet spies staged a coup de' tat, and over through their respective governments. 3 republics now constituted new Soviet Union.
posted
It's actually supposed to sound like an encyclpedia entry, that's the way I want it to start. Info dumps aren't always bad, I for one like them, as do others, but anything good about it?
Posts: 78 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would say (and most of us would) that only good response to a critique you disagree with is "Thank you." And then you get to ignore it.
I would have to go with Swimming Bird's thoughts here. I think info dumps can be cool if the *right* info to understand the action is dumped, and nothing more. This may qualify, but I doubt it. Whatever's about to happen could probably just be preceded with "In the new Soviet Union, which was reconstituted in 2061 ..."
Now, there's one author I know of that got away with a whole story (well, essay) of info dump, more than once: William Tenn. His short story "The Masculinist Revolt" is nothing but a summary. However, I don't know anyone else that does this, and I didn't like it that much.
Tenn had an idea that was funny and interesting from the beginning. The idea of a reconstituted USSR doesn't grab me, because it's by its very nature a retread of an old idea -- like those video sci-fi shows that would take us to "The Roman planet" or "the Nazi planet" or whatever. I'd rather go to a planet -- or a Eurasia -- with some fresh creation in it.
I'm afraid I have to second...er, third what Swimming Bird and wbriggs said.
Info dump is more than a description of what we perceive. It also bears with it a negative connotation, therefore you can read between the lines that your prospective readers have reacted negatively to this opening.
Maybe some people like info dumps. Personally, if I were looking for something like this, I would pull one of my history books off the shelf. When I'm looking for fiction, it's because I need a break from those books.
posted
I think I see here another example of opening with description (situation, not physical setting or character description, but description nonetheless) and it’s not working for the same reason we sort of came to there in that topic “opening with description.”
You need an underlying purpose to your description. An interesting, storywise purpose not dry political detail.
Your point about the world “Twitched” is a promising angle. As you have it now, I have no idea what “twitched” entailed. However, if you used the details of that twitching instead of what you have, you might make this fly.
Sort of more like this:
November 9, 2061. At 3 am former Russian troops loaded with bioweapons and dirty bombs dropped from the skies above Prague, Krakow, (list a few other recognizable former Soviet capital cities). The network media woke the world to headlines screaming IT’S FINALLY HAPPENED! WORLD WAR III! Oil prices in California, already high, climbed astronomically. “Bike! I’m having to ride a XXXX bike to work,” Harold Malabee, a resident of Los Angles, told reporters.
In the affected areas of Europe, people were warned to stay in their homes as spaspodic fighting broke out in the streets. Countries outside the new Russian perimeter hastily convened their congresses. The old NATO alliances were resurrected. Military families said weeping goodbyes to their loved ones.
These details do not fit YOUR story, but can you feel the difference? These are very specific details. Details a camera could film and a reader’s mind, picture.
A lot of the political details you went on about are not necessary at this moment in the story. Those you can show as the story develops. At least, that's my take on this.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
