quote:
I asked the prick for the time and he just scoffed, “You’re a figment of my imagination.” I beg your pardon? “You’re a character in my dream.” He said matter-of-factly, “Why would you need to know the time?” What? What!? What’s worse is, I knew he was right. I’ve seen him around here before, flying like a bloody canary, seducing strangers -- one of whom happened to be my wife. But for that I forgave him. Only because I thought he was God at the time. It was almost an honor. But this...Why would you do that? Tell someone that they’re just a dream? “You’ve been given a gift...from God so to speak. The fruit of knowledge.” He said beginning to vanish, “Now I ask, what are you going to do with it?” What am I gonna do with it!? I’m gonna shove it down his godd*mn throat!
Hmm...can I say "Based on a true story" if the story is actually based on a dream?
This is actually a redux of The Sleep of Gods and Men that's a lot more true to my original dream. I actually like this MC more than the protagonist from Sleep. He's funnier and angrier and he has a lot more room for growth/change.
Well, i guess that's for you all to decide. So, what do you think?
P.S.
And for anyone who was wondering what the Fruit of Persistence was in The Sleep of Gods and Men it was a meme in the form of a fruit that held the knowlege that the MC was a character in a dream. It gave him Persistence, constancy; the one thing that all other dream characters lack. It also imbued him a form of magic called Will. I may work it into Somniloquy somehow.
[This message has been edited by Donelle (edited January 20, 2007).]
quote:
I asked the prick for the time and he just scoffed, “You’re a figment of my imagination.”I beg your pardon?
“You’re a character in my dream.” He said matter-of-factly, “Why would you need to know the time?”
What? What!? What’s worse is, I knew he was right.
quote:
“You’re a character in my dream,” he said matter-of-factly. “Why would you need to know the time?”
LMAO Briggs! Of course I know the conventional way punctuate dialogue, the deviation was intentional. I’ll not go into the specifics of my intent because that would be pointless, but I will ask if it is really a source of confusion or are you just being a stickler? I’ve read similar structures in professional publications without even the slightest confusion. Furthermore, I structure it so that it is not a true dialogue, but rather a recantation of an event with the MC telling his emotional reactions directly to the fictional audience – Not as internal monologue – which mirror his probable responses in the conversation. It’s a very subtle difference, but perhaps too subtle. If more people are confused by it, I’ll change it.
In any case, I’ll try to clean it up a bit for clarity while still keeping this structure. I explain everything in the next paragraph but I’ll try my best to rationalize his motivation for reacting this way within the thirteen lines.
quote:
I tried to strike up a conversation with the pretense of asking for the time but the prick just scoffed. “You’re a figment of my imagination.” Excuse me? “You’re just a character in my dream,” he said matter-of-factly. “Why would you need the time?” What? What!? What’s worse is, I knew he was right. That’s how he could fly around like a bloody canary, bend the universe to his will, seduce perfect strangers –- one of whom happened to be my wife! He got away with it only because I thought he was God. It was sort of an honor. But this... This changes everything! To top it off he says, “You’ve been given a gift.” Are you kidding me!? “The fruit of knowledge.” He began to vanish into a fine mist. “Now I ask, what are you going to do with it?” What am I gonna do with it? I’m gonna shove it down his godd*mn throat!
Does this make things any clearer?
By the way Briggs, and anyone else who read The Sleep of Gods and Men, which story opening do you prefer? Note: the two are different stories with the same basis.
[This message has been edited by Donelle (edited January 21, 2007).]
I find the second version just as confusing.
I liked both fragments. The narrator comes off differently in each one, so it depends what feel you want or which you would enjoy more.
This might possibly come off better deeper into the story, but as the beginning it put me off.
quote:
I needed to talk to God. I walked over to the park where he usually hangs out and I saw him sitting on a park bench swigging a Yoo-Hoo between bites of an impossibly large hoagie. We weren’t on such good terms, God and I, but I sat down next to him anyway. I tried to strike up a conversation with the pretense of asking for the time but he just scoffed, “You’re a figment of my imagination.” His mouth was full so when he scoffed he spit visible chunks of sandwich.“What does that even mean?” I asked wiping pieces of lettuce and provolone from my face.
He swigged from his Yoo-Hoo, took another big bite of hoagie and spoke with his mouth full, “You’re just a character in my dream,” he said matter-of-factly. “Why would you need the time?”
[This message has been edited by Donelle (edited January 21, 2007).]
Now it is snappy and makes me curious to read more. Good revison.
Keep in mind that there is a price to pay for every choice you make when you write. Anytime you ignore the rules, you need a compelling reason to do so, and the skill to pull it off. The price you pay for failure is a whole lotta nuthin... no readers, no book sales, no agents clamoring at your door.
[This message has been edited by Elan (edited January 22, 2007).]
I'm not sure if this story is a metaphor for the human/God relationship, but if so then I'd say its excellent beginning.
Green Writer - Most people I know do whatever the heck they want when they realize that they are dreaming (present company included). I fly around the world, doing as I wish, distorting the world around me to suit my whim -- and the ladies love me. This story is based on a dream where I tell a group of people that they are just characters in my dream. Some cried, others were quietly stunned, and one guy was extremely upset. First he told me I was a moron for revealing it to them… kinda destroys their whole reality. He then blamed me for everything that ever happened to him and anyone else (in his world). This is the story of that guy.
Since then I’ve been casually wondering if dream characters are actually sentient. At first the notion seemed ridiculous, but the more I thought about it, the more compelling the question became. Think; Have you ever been someone else in a dream, in mind and or body? Doing things that you would never even imagine doing in ‘the real world’… Yet in the dream you think you are in reality! While in the dream it may seem perfectly reasonable to kill and maim but that’s not you at all! It brings to mind all sorts of questions about free will & determinism, the nature of the conscious the ‘self’. I want to explore all of this through the lens of the relationship between God and man, using my dream as the tableau…. I’m starting to ramble now. I guess I should save it for the story.
Ouch Chaldea! That Joan of Arcadia reference kinda stung. Not a bad show mind you, just not what I’m going for at all. The God in my story is an avaricious hedonistic creature. He uses the universe for his personal pleasure and he’s jealous, vain and just a little wrathful; shades of God as he’s portrayed in the Old-Testament (especially from the Gnostic perspective). Nothing like the touchy-feely New-Testament god portrayed in Joan . I’m going more for dark comedy, not wholesome didacticism. That's another thing I wanted to come across in the intro, but I guess I have to let it come out gradually.
As the ruler of dreams, God represents the Id. Harold, the protagonist is something of a Christ figure. He represents the super-ego. I’m really really tempted to reveal some of the plot but I won’t. If I do that I won’t be as compelled to write it. I’ll just say I think it’ll be a fun story to write and if I’m lucky more fun to read. That’s where you guys come in!
Slartibartast I'm inclined to agree, but I think it's best to take my time. When I rush, people sense it.
Thanks for all of your critiques! Any other questions/comments/criticisms are welcome.
[This message has been edited by Donelle (edited January 22, 2007).]
On your "dream characters as sentient beings" thoughts: you're essentially discussing a special case of solipsism. One of my favorite (i.e., relevant and productive) discussions of solipsism is here.
By the way, I like the last version quite a bit, and would definitely keep reading. Much better than the first attempt.
[This message has been edited by oliverhouse (edited January 22, 2007).]
In my idea in progress, worlds can be created and populated by a process equivalent to dreaming. I havn't yet considered the implications of "parenthood" in such a system but I do plan on a God character who created the first world and whose subconcious acts as a kind of fate/destiny.
Anyone up for some philosophical brainstorming?
I'd be happy to brainstorm philosophy of an alternative world a little bit. I might nitpick too much, but I also take a solid "shut up" reasonably well. Just don't be too subtle...
If you want to do it offlist, use oliverhouse at gmail dot com.
quote:
intent means bupkis if readability is lost.
Immortal words we should all post on the wall and review daily.
I must say I’ve called myself a solipsist once or twice or thrice. Though I knew solipsism to be an unpopular philosophical standpoint, embarrassingly, I had never read a compelling argument against it myself.
I find it fascinating that the latter part of his argument against solipsism is almost identical to the argument against Creationism. That even the most rigorous form of Natural Theology would simply amount to a superfluous renaming scheme. Deutsch did not make the connection in his discussion, though I think it was implied. Ironically I have made this very argument against God & Creationism while failing to make the connection to solipsism. This is all relevant to my story as it involves both God and solipsism.
Thanks again for the link!
Slartibartfast, I’d be more than willing to dust off the old armchair and shoot the philosophical breeze with you. Just send me an e-mail at the address listed under my user info.
On the other hand, the total irrationalism of solipsism makes it completely immune to rational attack. After all, no matter how clever the arguments my delusions invent, the entire system of logic that allows those arguments to exist and influence me only reflect my desire to believe that I am not all that exists, it is simply my will that there be a somewhat plausible architecture to my private delusion that there is something beyond myself.
Of course, whether or not solipsism is true doesn't matter. If it is true, then it is so hateful to me that I go to extraordinary lengths to hide the truth of my solicism from myself. That I can even concieve of an "I" distinct from the remainder of reality is proof enough that it is "objectively" better to believe that concept. Because if I am all that exists, my "objective" opinion of the matter is obviously that it would be better if something else, anything else, existed with me. And if the truth is that an extrinsic reality does exist, then it is clear that hiding from it is futile, it is better to accept and explore its existence.
True solipsism, being totally irrational, is only really available to the completely non-sentient. Of course, many humans, particularly academics, qualify
That said, there are some very interesting people who are creationists and atheists, and as in life, so in fiction. Creating a character who deeply believes in a philosophy that is compelling but (IMHO) wrong, and showing the ramifications of their belief, is really fascinating. If you can fully commit this character to his philosophy and pull off the idea that he's "real", then I think you've got a wonderful thing going.
quote:
Of course, many humans, particularly academics, qualify
I'll definitely check out Suzumiya. You mentioned Azumanga Diaoh once and it turned out to be quite delightful.
Cheers!
-Donelle
[This message has been edited by Donelle (edited January 27, 2007).]
I read through again and she did! but it was sort of buried. You might write this off as, "Well, some readers don't read closely, nothing I can do about that" -- legitimate -- but I think this would work better:
quote:
...sat down next to him anyway."Do you have the time?" I didn't really care; it was just to strike up the conversation.
He scoffed, "You're a figment..."
I *might* keep reading, but probably not long. I'm interested in God sitting on a park bench drinking a Yoo-Hoo, but the portrayal of Him seems needlessly mean -- spitting sub-sandwich mess when He talks. There's likely a market for portraying God as loathsome, but I'm not it.