quote:well, what do you think of this... this portion of the story is very info-dump, but i can, i think, get away with it because this is a science convention. i try to make the dumping as interesting as i can though. the person speaking in the second paragraph is Dr. Genki Sue Gaia, an escapee from the labs that created the monster, and a host herself trying to, uhm wait, i shouldn't reveal that, as it isn't revealed yet at this point in the story, haha. you can know about her being a host tho, that is revealed right in the second paragraph of this excerpt had i been able to show you all 15 lines of the 2 paragraph chunk
One of the worst of these creatures, the mortvers, was a horrible cross between mammal scavenger, parasitic worm, and genetic games. Not only did the lab responsible give it the abilities to scavenge food from the living, dying, and dead. They also gave these creatures intelligence, and then drove them mad in experiments. The entire facility soon became a nesting ground for the things. The humans who had once experimented on them become the hosts for their young.
“I know what we are all thinking of, the caedius mortvereus. Yes, that is probably the one creature we have created in ignorance that is representative of all the wrongs done in genetics in recent years.”
anyways, rip me up about how evil it is to do info dumps, even when disguised as a science convention.
On that note, it's important to also show the reactions of your characters to the information. In X-Men, the reactions of those hearing the report is integral to advancing the plot and explaining Magneto's continued assertion that mutants will never be accepted into human society.
quote:
Not only did the lab responsible give it the abilities to scavenge food from the living, dying, and dead. They also gave these creatures intelligence, and then drove them mad in experiments.
should be one sentence separated by a semicolon or change/add words to form two complete sentences. As they now stand, the first is a fragment.
I'm not especially grabbed or thrilled by this, which I guess is a problem with the science convention idea. Perhaps if it were a press conference, the reporters could ask really outlandish, sensationalist, and just plain ignorant questions. The scientist character has to deal with that conflict in the midst of an attempt at exposition, and that would liven things up.
One nit-pick: " Not only did the lab responsible give it the abilities to scavenge food from the living, dying, and dead. They also gave these creatures intelligence, and then drove them mad in experiments. "
These two sentences should be one, I think, because of the way you phrased it. Not only x, but also y. It's a long sentence, but I think it should all be together.
Of course, if your scientist isn't really speaking "as" a scientist--if she is expressing her personal feelings about her experiences with these creatures, for example--then she can speak however she likes. In that case you might consider having other scientists react negatively, perhaps talking behind her back about how incompetent or unscientific her lecture was.
I was also interested by the press conference idea. That would be a fun way to provide the information.
i should have explained that things really are nothing like they are now, these people are in a perpetual state of war, with each other, with various lab experiments gone awry, and with other countries which have NOT fallen apart to the same degree...
in such an environment, and with having some of the mortvers within you, growing as though they were your own children, how professional do you expect a person to be? i don't think any of the scientists are in the same kind of mindset that any of our current scientists are. pure objectiveness in this kind of environment is likely to get you killed.
so yes, they pretty much are more activist than scientist, everyone is more activist than their claimed profession, whether they are activists about genetic science, physical science, or computer science, whether they are activists about science at all or are activists about militarism, it's really all the same.
that said, i suspect that i have adequately presented this in the section that this excerpt is from, before this portion of it.
quote:that's part of what the first paragraph is, actually it's the story-teller barging into his own story and expounding upon the thoughts and feelings of the crowd...
On that note, it's important to also show the reactions of your characters to the information. In X-Men, the reactions of those hearing the report is integral to advancing the plot and explaining Magneto's continued assertion that mutants will never be accepted into human society.
quote:actually, uhm, no, that's how i phrased it, i couldn't come up with anything else, "genetic games" is a story-teller's version of genetic manipulation... if it is poorly placed, i will replace it with the more accepted
Two issues. First, is I don't see how a creature can be a cross with a game. That must be a cut & paste error.
quote:i thought such, but my word processor failed to comment, so i failed to correct. it is now corrected
should be one sentence separated by a semicolon or change/add words to form two complete sentences. As they now stand, the first is a fragment.
quote:won't work... she is famous and can get away with speaking however the heck she wants, that is my excuse for it within the monologue, outside the monologue, it's the narrator speaking, and the narrator is not Sue, but the aforementioned storyteller of the inner story, you can hardly blame a storyteller for making things sound subjective, subjectiveness is the storytellers art
Of course, if your scientist isn't really speaking "as" a scientist--if she is expressing her personal feelings about her experiences with these creatures, for example--then she can speak however she likes. In that case you might consider having other scientists react negatively, perhaps talking behind her back about how incompetent or unscientific her lecture was.
-----------
well it appears that no one minds the convention idea, the only thing i should try to do is make it more objective, possibly...
i'm not entirely sure if i will, i may go ahead and work on Sue's monologue to try to make her less subjective, but i definitely do not think i'm going to make the narration objective, that'd destroy the pattern i've made for my storyteller, and i can't do that
as for making you see and feel the mortvers, that is for another time, right now we are only discussing how it came to be, i'll have little bits and pieces of the science of it revealed in other parts of the story as well, and there will be a point in this chapter in which i will describe a mortvers physically, of course, each time anyone encounters one i'll need to describe it, because no two mortvers are exactly alike, since they take on certain attributes of the host used in their parasitic stage... hmm, that reminds me, i broke off suddenly when the Vinesley's encountered a mortvers, so when i return to them in the same time period (i do some hopping in time, but i warn the reader when i do it) i need to describe that mortvers
quote:
"genetic games" is a story-teller's version of genetic manipulation...
That's fine. It makes my point even more valid, actually. Two creatures can be crossed with each other, but a creature cannot be crossed with a game. Using the word game to mean genetic engineering doesn't make that sentence make any more sense at all. It's got to be rephrased in a different manner.
how about this:
quote:
... horrible cross between mammal scavenger and parasitic worm, woven together in a fabric of genetic games.
[This message has been edited by dpatridge (edited November 22, 2004).]
I think the problem stemmed from the word "with." When you said crossing this with that and then right on the heels of that you said with genetic games. Only the second "with" was meant in the sense of "through" or "via." But because it comes right after the same word used the other way, the reader's going to read it in the same way. When you say a rat crossed with a parasite, I imagine a horrible creature, as intended. When you say a rat crossed with a game, I imagine a Scrabble board with fur, fleas, and a tail.