Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Is this cheating?
25 views
Skip to first unread message
David Friedman
Nov 14, 2012, 1:09:04 AM11/14/12
to
Another of my limitations as an author is that I'm a wimp‹I don't like
to kill off characters I like, and mostly don't. The way I'm trying to
work around that problem in my current project is to create a situation
where it looks as though the relevant characters, the King and his
brother and heir, are dead, which motivates the necessary action, but
they actually aren't. The question is whether, as a reader, you would
see the way I do it as cheating.
The bad guys are the Dorayan league, a sort of magical late Byzantine
society, rich, decadent, and very good at magic. They want to create as
much chaos as possible in the kingdom of Esland in order to give them
the opportunity to reestablish the network of agents that they use to
control the barbarian kingdoms (as they see them) on their borders, a
network mostly eliminated by the efforts of Prince Kieron over the past
decade or so. They figure that if the King and Prince are killed, that
ought to set off a three way civil war for the throne among the major
factions in the kingdom--one of which they are manipulating through one
of their remaining agents.
The Doray accordingly set up plots to kill both King and Prince and also
arrange an invasion, with their help, by the kingdom to the west of
Esland. The invasion succeeds in taking the capital. Shortly thereafter
two people, Hrolf, one of the king's guards, and Cristina, one of the
queen's ladies, are given horses by the Doray and sent off to the leader
of one of the factions, who Hrolf is kin to.
The nominal reason is for him to take a message. The real reason is that
the Doray have used magic to convince Hrolf that he has seen the body of
the Prince and Cristina that she has seen the body of the King. The
Doray are not actually sure whether either is dead‹their plots might
have failed (in fact did), and the two might or might not have been
killed in the confusion of the attack on the capital. But the belief
they are dead might do almost as well as the reality, especially if, by
the time one or both shows up, whichever faction is winning is
sufficiently committed to its attempt to seize power. That, at least, is
how the Doray see it.
I have given the reader one hint that what Hrolf and Cristina saw might
not be real, much earlier in the book--a description of the League:
³A friend of mine was there with some merchants from the city, making
sure the people they were trading with didn't use magery to swindle
them, one way or another, make them see lead as gold, or glass as gems,
or believe someone they shouldn't. He said the whole place reminded him
of one of the golden birds--magical, beautiful, useless, and not
entirely real. He had a feeling that some day what was left of the
League was going to crumble away into dust.²
If the story goes as planned, various people will act on the belief that
the King and Prince are dead, we will then see a scene involving the
King that makes it clear he isn't--and why the plot to kill him
failed--and at some point near the end discover that the Prince is also
still alive.
Comments? Am I twisting things too far in order to keep my characters
alive?
--
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/
http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
_Salamander_: http://tinyurl.com/6957y7e
_How to Milk an Almond,..._ http://tinyurl.com/63xg8gx
to kill off characters I like, and mostly don't. The way I'm trying to
work around that problem in my current project is to create a situation
where it looks as though the relevant characters, the King and his
brother and heir, are dead, which motivates the necessary action, but
they actually aren't. The question is whether, as a reader, you would
see the way I do it as cheating.
The bad guys are the Dorayan league, a sort of magical late Byzantine
society, rich, decadent, and very good at magic. They want to create as
much chaos as possible in the kingdom of Esland in order to give them
the opportunity to reestablish the network of agents that they use to
control the barbarian kingdoms (as they see them) on their borders, a
network mostly eliminated by the efforts of Prince Kieron over the past
decade or so. They figure that if the King and Prince are killed, that
ought to set off a three way civil war for the throne among the major
factions in the kingdom--one of which they are manipulating through one
of their remaining agents.
The Doray accordingly set up plots to kill both King and Prince and also
arrange an invasion, with their help, by the kingdom to the west of
Esland. The invasion succeeds in taking the capital. Shortly thereafter
two people, Hrolf, one of the king's guards, and Cristina, one of the
queen's ladies, are given horses by the Doray and sent off to the leader
of one of the factions, who Hrolf is kin to.
The nominal reason is for him to take a message. The real reason is that
the Doray have used magic to convince Hrolf that he has seen the body of
the Prince and Cristina that she has seen the body of the King. The
Doray are not actually sure whether either is dead‹their plots might
have failed (in fact did), and the two might or might not have been
killed in the confusion of the attack on the capital. But the belief
they are dead might do almost as well as the reality, especially if, by
the time one or both shows up, whichever faction is winning is
sufficiently committed to its attempt to seize power. That, at least, is
how the Doray see it.
I have given the reader one hint that what Hrolf and Cristina saw might
not be real, much earlier in the book--a description of the League:
³A friend of mine was there with some merchants from the city, making
sure the people they were trading with didn't use magery to swindle
them, one way or another, make them see lead as gold, or glass as gems,
or believe someone they shouldn't. He said the whole place reminded him
of one of the golden birds--magical, beautiful, useless, and not
entirely real. He had a feeling that some day what was left of the
League was going to crumble away into dust.²
If the story goes as planned, various people will act on the belief that
the King and Prince are dead, we will then see a scene involving the
King that makes it clear he isn't--and why the plot to kill him
failed--and at some point near the end discover that the Prince is also
still alive.
Comments? Am I twisting things too far in order to keep my characters
alive?
--
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/
http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
_Salamander_: http://tinyurl.com/6957y7e
_How to Milk an Almond,..._ http://tinyurl.com/63xg8gx
Raymond Daley
Nov 14, 2012, 9:33:31 AM11/14/12
to
"David Friedman" <dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote in message
news:ddfr-6B0686.2...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu...
> Another of my limitations as an author is that I'm a wimp
> to kill off characters I like, and mostly don't.
> Comments? Am I twisting things too far in order to keep my characters
> alive?
Rule 1 - everyone dies.
> alive?
Heck, I wrote a piece with only 3 characters and killed them all.
I suppose I might be a tad more hardened to seeing death than you having
experienced 2 wars during my RAF career.
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Nov 14, 2012, 12:16:11 PM11/14/12
to
On 11/14/12 9:33 AM, Raymond Daley wrote:
> "David Friedman" <dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote in message
> news:ddfr-6B0686.2...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu...
>> Another of my limitations as an author is that I'm a wimp
>> to kill off characters I like, and mostly don't.
>> Comments? Am I twisting things too far in order to keep my characters
>> alive?
>
> Rule 1 - everyone dies.
I have some immortals who disagree with you. And everyone else would
> "David Friedman" <dd...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote in message
> news:ddfr-6B0686.2...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu...
>> Another of my limitations as an author is that I'm a wimp
>> to kill off characters I like, and mostly don't.
>> Comments? Am I twisting things too far in order to keep my characters
>> alive?
>
> Rule 1 - everyone dies.
like to be immortal.
> Heck, I wrote a piece with only 3 characters and killed them all.
> I suppose I might be a tad more hardened to seeing death than you having
> experienced 2 wars during my RAF career.
me a lot LESS likely to kill them when I have control over the universe
they're in.
>
>
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Website: http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:
http://seawasp.livejournal.com
David Friedman
Nov 14, 2012, 12:49:00 PM11/14/12
to
In article <k80jkr$4j9$2...@dont-email.me>,
The more people close to me have died, the more strongly I resent
mortality.
"Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
> I would tend to expect that seeing people die would, if anything, make
> me a lot LESS likely to kill them when I have control over the universe
> they're in.
Agreed.
> I would tend to expect that seeing people die would, if anything, make
> me a lot LESS likely to kill them when I have control over the universe
> they're in.
The more people close to me have died, the more strongly I resent
mortality.
J.Pascal
Nov 14, 2012, 1:39:39 PM11/14/12
to
I don't like killing people off either but sometimes the easy way out is to kill off the character and the hard way is to let them live.
I was plotting a sexy Historical romance where the heir and the widow conspire to get her pregnant and pretend it was her husband's posthumous child. Obviously... the heir eventually decides he wants to be the baron after all, and has a legitimate son of his own who is a teenager who ought to be his heir... and of course the heir and the widow fall in love. So... a dead baby is the easiest, the death solves too many problems. Her giving birth to a *daughter* solves too many problems.
So their plot succeeds, she conceives, it lives, it is a boy.
Having the King and his heir live might not actually be the *easiest* outcome.
-Julie
Will in New Haven
Nov 14, 2012, 4:14:21 PM11/14/12
to
On Nov 14, 12:48 pm, David Friedman <d...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com>
wrote:
> In article <k80jkr$4j...@dont-email.me>,
people off in a story is different. And I think the "not really dead"
plot, if not cheating, has been overdone. And it's cheating. I
remember the only time I ever yelled at a movie screen. I yelled at
Spock "Stay DEAD" and I still wish he had.
Even so, I have killed exactly one sympathetic character so far in
over fifty thousand words. I think we are going to lose three or four
more, one minor, one only partly sympathetic and one important and
very sympathetic. But nothing is certain.
--
Will in New Haven
wrote:
> In article <k80jkr$4j...@dont-email.me>,
> "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seaw...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>
> > I would tend to expect that seeing people die would, if anything, make
> > me a lot LESS likely to kill them when I have control over the universe
> > they're in.
>
> Agreed.
>
> The more people close to me have died, the more strongly I resent
> mortality.
Yes and no. I identity with your statement here 100% but killing
>
> > I would tend to expect that seeing people die would, if anything, make
> > me a lot LESS likely to kill them when I have control over the universe
> > they're in.
>
> Agreed.
>
> The more people close to me have died, the more strongly I resent
> mortality.
people off in a story is different. And I think the "not really dead"
plot, if not cheating, has been overdone. And it's cheating. I
remember the only time I ever yelled at a movie screen. I yelled at
Spock "Stay DEAD" and I still wish he had.
Even so, I have killed exactly one sympathetic character so far in
over fifty thousand words. I think we are going to lose three or four
more, one minor, one only partly sympathetic and one important and
very sympathetic. But nothing is certain.
--
Will in New Haven
J.Pascal
Nov 14, 2012, 8:19:36 PM11/14/12
to
On Wednesday, November 14, 2012 2:14:21 PM UTC-7, Will in New Haven wrote:
> On Nov 14, 12:48 pm, David Friedman <d...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com>
>
> wrote:
>
> > In article <k80jkr$4j...@dont-email.me>,
>
> > "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seaw...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > I would tend to expect that seeing people die would, if anything, make
>
> > > me a lot LESS likely to kill them when I have control over the universe
>
> > > they're in.
>
> >
>
> > Agreed.
>
> >
>
> > The more people close to me have died, the more strongly I resent
>
> > mortality.
>
>
>
> Yes and no. I identity with your statement here 100% but killing
>
> people off in a story is different. And I think the "not really dead"
>
> plot, if not cheating, has been overdone. And it's cheating. I
>
> remember the only time I ever yelled at a movie screen. I yelled at
>
> Spock "Stay DEAD" and I still wish he had.
>
But Spock is a special case. You know he's not really dead, that they won't kill him. So asking you to pretend he's dead for the show is a cheat.
> On Nov 14, 12:48 pm, David Friedman <d...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com>
>
> wrote:
>
> > In article <k80jkr$4j...@dont-email.me>,
>
> > "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seaw...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > I would tend to expect that seeing people die would, if anything, make
>
> > > me a lot LESS likely to kill them when I have control over the universe
>
> > > they're in.
>
> >
>
> > Agreed.
>
> >
>
> > The more people close to me have died, the more strongly I resent
>
> > mortality.
>
>
>
> Yes and no. I identity with your statement here 100% but killing
>
> people off in a story is different. And I think the "not really dead"
>
> plot, if not cheating, has been overdone. And it's cheating. I
>
> remember the only time I ever yelled at a movie screen. I yelled at
>
> Spock "Stay DEAD" and I still wish he had.
>
(The reason that I liked the 2009 reboot better than any other Star Trek of any sort *ever* is that... the planet of Vulcan is gone. Just... gone. And it's not coming back.)
In most cases, though, when an important character is "killed", even when you realize that the show *could* bring them back, you don't know if that character will come back or not. We know that we need to have the body, dead and *rotted*, and even then we know to consider the possibility of substitute corpses. But it's easier to pretend that a character really is dead when they *might* be dead. Unlike Spock.
Take the show Arrow... Oliver is responsible for the death of Laurel's sister. Big deal about that in the show. And maybe someone who knows the Green Arrow comics knows if she ever shows up again, but I don't, but I do know that there was never any body. We know that the two other men on the boat are definitively dead because it happened on screen, but she went into the water, just like Oliver, and we never see her again.
If she is not really dead it's not a cheat.
-Julie
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Nov 14, 2012, 9:15:00 PM11/14/12
to
On 11/14/12 8:19 PM, J.Pascal wrote:
>
> But Spock is a special case. You know he's not really dead, that they won't kill him. So asking you to pretend he's dead for the show is a cheat.
>
> (The reason that I liked the 2009 reboot better than any other Star Trek of any sort *ever* is that... the planet of Vulcan is gone. Just... gone. And it's not coming back.)
>
> In most cases, though, when an important character is "killed", even when you realize that the show *could* bring them back, you don't know if that character will come back or not. We know that we need to have the body, dead and *rotted*, and even then we know to consider the possibility of substitute corpses. But it's easier to pretend that a character really is dead when they *might* be dead. Unlike Spock.
>
> Take the show Arrow... Oliver is responsible for the death of Laurel's sister. Big deal about that in the show. And maybe someone who knows the Green Arrow comics knows if she ever shows up again, but I don't, but I do know that there was never any body. We know that the two other men on the boat are definitively dead because it happened on screen, but she went into the water, just like Oliver, and we never see her again.
>
> If she is not really dead it's not a cheat.
>
> -Julie
In comics, no one's ever dead. Not DEAD dead. For a long time, there
>
> But Spock is a special case. You know he's not really dead, that they won't kill him. So asking you to pretend he's dead for the show is a cheat.
>
> (The reason that I liked the 2009 reboot better than any other Star Trek of any sort *ever* is that... the planet of Vulcan is gone. Just... gone. And it's not coming back.)
>
> In most cases, though, when an important character is "killed", even when you realize that the show *could* bring them back, you don't know if that character will come back or not. We know that we need to have the body, dead and *rotted*, and even then we know to consider the possibility of substitute corpses. But it's easier to pretend that a character really is dead when they *might* be dead. Unlike Spock.
>
> Take the show Arrow... Oliver is responsible for the death of Laurel's sister. Big deal about that in the show. And maybe someone who knows the Green Arrow comics knows if she ever shows up again, but I don't, but I do know that there was never any body. We know that the two other men on the boat are definitively dead because it happened on screen, but she went into the water, just like Oliver, and we never see her again.
>
> If she is not really dead it's not a cheat.
>
> -Julie
was one ironclad rule: Bucky Stays Dead.
Then even that one was violated.
David Goldfarb
Nov 15, 2012, 2:38:05 AM11/15/12
to
In article <k81j74$e90$1...@dont-email.me>,
As someone who has competed in comics trivia contests, I'm about as
big a comics geek as you'll find in these parts...and I don't even know
who this Laurel person is. My guess is that she's a character created
for the series, and so her sister's fate is an utterly open question.
> In comics, no one's ever dead. Not DEAD dead. For a long time, there
>was one ironclad rule: Bucky Stays Dead.
>
> Then even that one was violated.
But Ed Brubaker made it work. Anyway, what about Uncle Ben?
--
David Goldfarb |"Hello, this is Leslie Down with the daily home
goldf...@gmail.com | astrology report.
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | TAURUS: Contemplate domestic turmoil.
| AQUARIUS: Abandon hope for future plans." -- TMBG
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>On 11/14/12 8:19 PM, J.Pascal wrote:
>> Take the show Arrow... Oliver is responsible for the death of Laurel's
>sister. Big deal about that in the show. And maybe someone who knows
>the Green Arrow comics knows if she ever shows up again[...]
>On 11/14/12 8:19 PM, J.Pascal wrote:
>> Take the show Arrow... Oliver is responsible for the death of Laurel's
>sister. Big deal about that in the show. And maybe someone who knows
As someone who has competed in comics trivia contests, I'm about as
big a comics geek as you'll find in these parts...and I don't even know
who this Laurel person is. My guess is that she's a character created
for the series, and so her sister's fate is an utterly open question.
> In comics, no one's ever dead. Not DEAD dead. For a long time, there
>was one ironclad rule: Bucky Stays Dead.
>
> Then even that one was violated.
--
David Goldfarb |"Hello, this is Leslie Down with the daily home
goldf...@gmail.com | astrology report.
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | TAURUS: Contemplate domestic turmoil.
| AQUARIUS: Abandon hope for future plans." -- TMBG
JF
Nov 15, 2012, 2:52:46 AM11/15/12
to
On 15/11/2012 02:15, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
don't die. Someone should write a whole novel about it...
Oh, yes. Idid, didn't I.
JF
It was amateur night in Rosie's Bar and big Jinks Hammer had
cut out his heart for the audience. They were laughing fit to
bust a blood-vessel or two of their own as he fell to his knees,
pitched forwards off the stage and landed in the lap of a
startled punter.
>
> no one's ever dead. Not DEAD dead.
It was like that for a long time on Dub, the planet where people
> no one's ever dead. Not DEAD dead.
don't die. Someone should write a whole novel about it...
Oh, yes. Idid, didn't I.
JF
It was amateur night in Rosie's Bar and big Jinks Hammer had
cut out his heart for the audience. They were laughing fit to
bust a blood-vessel or two of their own as he fell to his knees,
pitched forwards off the stage and landed in the lap of a
startled punter.
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Nov 15, 2012, 7:22:09 AM11/15/12
to
On 11/15/12 2:38 AM, David Goldfarb wrote:
> In article <k81j74$e90$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>> On 11/14/12 8:19 PM, J.Pascal wrote:
>>> Take the show Arrow... Oliver is responsible for the death of Laurel's
>> sister. Big deal about that in the show. And maybe someone who knows
>> the Green Arrow comics knows if she ever shows up again[...]
>
> As someone who has competed in comics trivia contests, I'm about as
> big a comics geek as you'll find in these parts...and I don't even know
> who this Laurel person is. My guess is that she's a character created
> for the series, and so her sister's fate is an utterly open question.
>
>> In comics, no one's ever dead. Not DEAD dead. For a long time, there
>> was one ironclad rule: Bucky Stays Dead.
>>
>> Then even that one was violated.
>
> But Ed Brubaker made it work.
From some people's point of view. From what I know of that storyline,
> In article <k81j74$e90$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>> On 11/14/12 8:19 PM, J.Pascal wrote:
>>> Take the show Arrow... Oliver is responsible for the death of Laurel's
>> sister. Big deal about that in the show. And maybe someone who knows
>> the Green Arrow comics knows if she ever shows up again[...]
>
> As someone who has competed in comics trivia contests, I'm about as
> big a comics geek as you'll find in these parts...and I don't even know
> who this Laurel person is. My guess is that she's a character created
> for the series, and so her sister's fate is an utterly open question.
>
>> In comics, no one's ever dead. Not DEAD dead. For a long time, there
>> was one ironclad rule: Bucky Stays Dead.
>>
>> Then even that one was violated.
>
> But Ed Brubaker made it work.
it would not work for me.
>Anyway, what about Uncle Ben?
means. I don't think they've ever claimed Ben didn't actually die when
he was shot, or had anyone resurrect his corpse, though, so he might count.
John W Kennedy
Nov 15, 2012, 11:50:09 AM11/15/12
to
On 2012-11-15 07:38:05 +0000, David Goldfarb said:
> In article <k81j74$e90$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>> On 11/14/12 8:19 PM, J.Pascal wrote:
>>> Take the show Arrow... Oliver is responsible for the death of Laurel's
>> sister. Big deal about that in the show. And maybe someone who knows
>> the Green Arrow comics knows if she ever shows up again[...]
>
> As someone who has competed in comics trivia contests, I'm about as
> big a comics geek as you'll find in these parts...and I don't even know
> who this Laurel person is. My guess is that she's a character created
> for the series, and so her sister's fate is an utterly open question.
Actually, there are strong hints (including the name "Laurel") that she
> In article <k81j74$e90$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>> On 11/14/12 8:19 PM, J.Pascal wrote:
>>> Take the show Arrow... Oliver is responsible for the death of Laurel's
>> sister. Big deal about that in the show. And maybe someone who knows
>> the Green Arrow comics knows if she ever shows up again[...]
>
> As someone who has competed in comics trivia contests, I'm about as
> big a comics geek as you'll find in these parts...and I don't even know
> who this Laurel person is. My guess is that she's a character created
> for the series, and so her sister's fate is an utterly open question.
is, or will be, this universe's version of Black Canary.
--
John W Kennedy
"The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich
have always objected to being governed at all."
-- G. K. Chesterton. "The Man Who Was Thursday"
0 new messages