Not the side you thought it was
Tina Hall
Perhaps this would be better placed in rasfc, but that's got a
handful of writers versus a countless number of readers here. Plus,
if you know of any existing books, I can see whether they are
available as audiobook at the library.
What I'm wondering is that:
You start reading a book, and it gives you the impression that
you're following the side of the 'good guys', with glimpses of the
'bad guys' that are convincing. At some later point it turns out
they're actually the bad guys, and the others the good guys. What
you've seen was still true, but perhaps misinterpreted (preferably
by you), or just not containing all information. (I'm not talking
about an unreliable narrator; I'm not seeing any narrator at all,
only the reader being a witness to actions and character thoughts.
What you see is what truly happens, what the character thinks is
their true thoughts.)
How could that be done?
(No, it doesn't matter whether you personally like it.)
--
"Being raised by the secret order of not-being-very-informative
doesn't mean you can't tell us."
-- Ranes, Magic Earth 7/6
Excerpts at: <http://home.htp-tel.de/fkoerper/ath/athintro.htm>
plausible prose man
> Perhaps this would be better placed in rasfc, but that's got a
> handful of writers versus a countless number of readers here. Plus,
> if you know of any existing books, I can see whether they are
> available as audiobook at the library.
>
> What I'm wondering is that:
>
> You start reading a book, and it gives you the impression that
> you're following the side of the 'good guys', with glimpses of the
> 'bad guys' that are convincing. At some later point it turns out
> they're actually the bad guys, and the others the good guys. What
> you've seen was still true, but perhaps misinterpreted (preferably
> by you), or just not containing all information. (I'm not talking
> about an unreliable narrator; I'm not seeing any narrator at all,
> only the reader being a witness to actions and character thoughts.
> What you see is what truly happens, what the character thinks is
> their true thoughts.)
>
> How could that be done?
You start reading "The Chronicles of Narnia," and then you invite
Phil Pullman over to dinner, and he brings Christopher Hitchens with
him and you start talking about it.
Arthur
> Perhaps this would be better placed in rasfc, but that's got a
> handful of writers versus a countless number of readers here. Plus,
> if you know of any existing books, I can see whether they are
> available as audiobook at the library.
>
> What I'm wondering is that:
>
> You start reading a book, and it gives you the impression that
> you're following the side of the 'good guys', with glimpses of the
> 'bad guys' that are convincing. At some later point it turns out
> they're actually the bad guys, and the others the good guys. What
> you've seen was still true, but perhaps misinterpreted (preferably
> by you), or just not containing all information. (I'm not talking
> about an unreliable narrator; I'm not seeing any narrator at all,
> only the reader being a witness to actions and character thoughts.
> What you see is what truly happens, what the character thinks is
> their true thoughts.)
>
> How could that be done?
>
It could be done if the in "The Little Picture" the "hero" is in the
right, but in "The Big Picture" he/she is not.
Example (Spoilers for the movie No Way Out)
Our intrepid hero is accused of murder and all the evidence points to
him. (He is also in charge of the investigation. being appointed by
the actual killer, who does not know that the hero has had an affair
with the victim).
While the hero is innocent of the crime, he is also a spy, something
we don't find out about until the end, although the movie hints that
there is a spy about.
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> Perhaps this would be better placed in rasfc, but that's got a
> handful of writers versus a countless number of readers here. Plus,
> if you know of any existing books, I can see whether they are
> available as audiobook at the library.
>
> What I'm wondering is that:
>
> You start reading a book, and it gives you the impression that
> you're following the side of the 'good guys', with glimpses of the
> 'bad guys' that are convincing. At some later point it turns out
> they're actually the bad guys, and the others the good guys. What
> you've seen was still true, but perhaps misinterpreted (preferably
> by you), or just not containing all information. (I'm not talking
> about an unreliable narrator; I'm not seeing any narrator at all,
> only the reader being a witness to actions and character thoughts.
> What you see is what truly happens, what the character thinks is
> their true thoughts.)
>
> How could that be done?
The usual way to do it -- though far from easy if you want to really
pull it off convincingly -- is to select, very carefully, the times you
give us a peek into his thoughts, and the exact actions you describe. As
it's an old book, and known for this quirk, and as I can't even name the
title without spoilering anyway, I will point to Agatha Christie's
mystery The Murder of Roger Ackroyd, in which we actually are WITH the
murderer throughout the book; he's the viewpoint character. We're even
with him on the night of the murder. Yet it isn't until the end of the
novel that we realize he IS the murderer (if you're good at picking up
clues, you might deduce it very early on, but it's not obvious,
especially for those not expecting such a trick; when she did this, a
number of people were absolutely furious. They felt she'd cheated
somehow), all because Agatha Christie is very good at choosing the exact
words and thoughts to tell us... and the ones NOT to tell us, in such a
manner that you may not even notice anything's being left out until it's
pointed out to you.
In a sense, all the approaches use that basic method. However, you can
use other approaches to help confuse the issue. For instance, giving the
villain(s) some positive traits or, at least, people around whom they
exhibit positive traits, allows you to show these people as apparently
kindly and thoughtful, etc., which they may be -- to their select
friends. This method is often used in TV shows in which it will turn out
the apparently warm-hearted character is in fact a serial killer hiding
his secret with skillful acting.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://seawasp.livejournal.com
Shawn Wilson
> You start reading a book, and it gives you the impression that
> you're following the side of the 'good guys', with glimpses of the
> 'bad guys' that are convincing. At some later point it turns out
> they're actually the bad guys, and the others the good guys. What
> you've seen was still true, but perhaps misinterpreted (preferably
> by you), or just not containing all information. (I'm not talking
> about an unreliable narrator; I'm not seeing any narrator at all,
> only the reader being a witness to actions and character thoughts.
> What you see is what truly happens, what the character thinks is
> their true thoughts.)
>
> How could that be done?
The real world doesn't have good guys and bad guys, just different
guys with different agendas. Show the protagonist (who the reader is
guaranteed to *assume* is a good guy) in the light of his own beliefs
and motivations. He thinks he's a good guy.
Ken from Chicago
"Tina Hall" <Tina...@ftn.kruemel.org> wrote in message
news:MSGID_2=3A240=2F2199.13=40fidonet...@fidonet.org...
Simplest way is a Stalking Horse.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalking_horse
You're following Our Heroes who have been duped by The Real Villains behind
the scenes into thinking they are doing good when in fact they aren't. The
pilot episode of LEVERAGE had that. A lot of detective stories have the
detective being duped into helping a client who's really the villain of the
story. Of course a lot of revenge stories seem like justice to those
plotting said revenge.
The key, as Ryk points out upthread is selectivity--carefully selecting the
scenes and moments of characters' thoughts and actions. From a certain
perspective, Gollum is the ultimate hero of LORD OF THE RINGS, tracking down
his stolen ring in defiance of Sauron and the thieving hobbits, while having
to endure humiliation on top of humiliation--while carefully, slowly,
patiently biding his time to strike.
-- Ken from Chicago
Christopher Henrich
Tina...@ftn.kruemel.org (Tina Hall) wrote:
> Perhaps this would be better placed in rasfc, but that's got a
> handful of writers versus a countless number of readers here. Plus,
> if you know of any existing books, I can see whether they are
> available as audiobook at the library.
>
> What I'm wondering is that:
>
> You start reading a book, and it gives you the impression that
> you're following the side of the 'good guys', with glimpses of the
> 'bad guys' that are convincing. At some later point it turns out
> they're actually the bad guys, and the others the good guys. What
> you've seen was still true, but perhaps misinterpreted (preferably
> by you), or just not containing all information. (I'm not talking
> about an unreliable narrator; I'm not seeing any narrator at all,
> only the reader being a witness to actions and character thoughts.
> What you see is what truly happens, what the character thinks is
> their true thoughts.)
>
> How could that be done?
>
> (No, it doesn't matter whether you personally like it.)
Consider /If This Goes On-/ by Robert A. Heinlein. At the start of the
novel, John Lyle, the viewpoint character, is on the side of what he
believes are the good guys.
--
Christopher J. Henrich
chen...@monmouth.com
http://www.mathinteract.com
"A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver." -- Boon
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Tina Hall <Tina...@ftn.kruemel.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>Perhaps this would be better placed in rasfc, but that's got a
>handful of writers versus a countless number of readers here. Plus,
>if you know of any existing books, I can see whether they are
>available as audiobook at the library.
>
>What I'm wondering is that:
>
>You start reading a book, and it gives you the impression that
>you're following the side of the 'good guys', with glimpses of the
>'bad guys' that are convincing. At some later point it turns out
>they're actually the bad guys, and the others the good guys. What
>you've seen was still true, but perhaps misinterpreted (preferably
>by you), or just not containing all information. (I'm not talking
>about an unreliable narrator; I'm not seeing any narrator at all,
>only the reader being a witness to actions and character thoughts.
>What you see is what truly happens, what the character thinks is
>their true thoughts.)
>
>How could that be done?
>
>(No, it doesn't matter whether you personally like it.)
>
>--
There's also a slightly different case where the author genuinely thinks
he's writing about the good guys, but the reader (or some readers) don't
buy it. Case in point: The Foundation Trilogy.
Ted
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Tina Hall
>> You start reading a book, and it gives you the impression that
>> you're following the side of the 'good guys', with glimpses of
>> the 'bad guys' that are convincing. At some later point it turns
>> out they're actually the bad guys, and the others the good guys.
>> What you've seen was still true, but perhaps misinterpreted
>> (preferably by you), or just not containing all information.
>> (I'm not talking about an unreliable narrator; I'm not seeing
>> any narrator at all, only the reader being a witness to actions
>> and character thoughts. What you see is what truly happens, what
>> the character thinks is their true thoughts.)
>>
>> How could that be done?
> The real world doesn't have good guys and bad guys, just
> different guys with different agendas.
We're talking about speculative fiction here. I would assume anybody
reading the paragraph above would get the implied 'there are good
guys and bad guys in what I'm talking about'. I mean, that's what it
_is_ talking about. No good quoting that and then talking about
something else entirely.
> Show the protagonist (who the reader is guaranteed to *assume* is
> a good guy)
Unless the reader is I (or anyone like me), which turns your
'guaranteed' into a lie.
> in the light of his own beliefs and motivations. He thinks he's a
> good guy.
That's not automatic. In the stories I've written so far, I've
already got at least two characters (viewpoints, too) who revel in
being the bad guys. They like what they do, and like repelling
people with it, or as one of the good guys observes:
<<"There's no fun in being a sick bastard if you don't get to shock
a few people with it.">>
(I've just amused myself by reading bits of it, so I had that fresh
in my mind.)
--
(Gorash) "I was going to talk with Norlan about that, as well. Maybe he'll
come up with something." - (Thay) "After he has exploded your head about
this, or before?" - "Preferably before. Talking is a bit awkward when you're
busy gathering up the bits of your head, or so I've heard." -- S&E II: CtM
Tina Hall
> Tina Hall wrote:
>> Perhaps this would be better placed in rasfc, but that's got a
>> handful of writers versus a countless number of readers here.
>> Plus, if you know of any existing books, I can see whether they
>> are available as audiobook at the library.
>>
>> What I'm wondering is that:
>>
>> You start reading a book, and it gives you the impression that
>> you're following the side of the 'good guys', with glimpses of
>> the 'bad guys' that are convincing. At some later point it turns
>> out they're actually the bad guys, and the others the good guys.
>> What you've seen was still true, but perhaps misinterpreted
>> (preferably by you), or just not containing all information.
>> (I'm not talking about an unreliable narrator; I'm not seeing
>> any narrator at all, only the reader being a witness to actions
>> and character thoughts. What you see is what truly happens, what
>> the character thinks is their true thoughts.)
>>
>> How could that be done?
> The usual way to do it -- though far from easy if you want to
> really pull it off convincingly -- is to select, very carefully,
> the times you give us a peek into his thoughts, and the exact
> actions you describe.
Hm. Should be even easier with this character (I forgot to mention
that[*]), who does not know that they're on the wrong side.
> As it's an old book, and known for this quirk, and as I can't even
> name the title without spoilering anyway, I will point to Agatha
> Christie's mystery The Murder of Roger Ackroyd, in which we
> actually are WITH the murderer throughout the book; he's the
> viewpoint character.
Cool.
(And noted.)
> We're even with him on the night of the murder. Yet it isn't until
> the end of the novel that we realize he IS the murderer (if you're
> good at picking up clues, you might deduce it very early on, but
> it's not obvious, especially for those not expecting such a trick;
> when she did this, a number of people were absolutely furious.
Heh.
Of course I won't be able to see whether I can pick up on clues,
being spoiled, but I like being spoiled. :)
> They felt she'd cheated somehow), all because Agatha Christie is
> very good at choosing the exact words and thoughts to tell us...
> and the ones NOT to tell us, in such a manner that you may not
> even notice anything's being left out until it's pointed out to
> you.
Seems worth some study.
> In a sense, all the approaches use that basic method. However,
> you can use other approaches to help confuse the issue. For
> instance, giving the villain(s) some positive traits or, at
> least, people around whom they exhibit positive traits, allows
> you to show these people as apparently kindly and thoughtful,
> etc., which they may be -- to their select friends. This method
> is often used in TV shows in which it will turn out the
> apparently warm-hearted character is in fact a serial killer
> hiding his secret with skillful acting.
Often?
In the TV shows I watch, the killers tend to be all whacko
psychopaths. Except in Dexter, where the acting is kind of the point
of the show (or at least part).
Have you got better examples (I'm sure I'm just not remembering any
right now).
[*] What I'm seeing is someone - so far female but I don't want
that, so I'm wondering what to do to the image to make it something
else - who's convinced of the goodness of their side, and the
nastiness of the other side. Not some fanatic, only someone low in
the hierarchy and with too little information that they don't know
better. Somehow the character ends up having to work with someone
from the 'bad' side (a personal favorite - I really liked the
Stargate:Atlantis episode where Shepard had to work with the
wraith). The other character either doesn't bother trying to convice
this one, or whatever he says is taken as propaganda.
But at some point it turns out that he's on the good side.
There are some acts (which will be mentioned) of the apparent bad
side that may look bad, unless one knows what's behind it.
(Details are vague, still. I'm trying to come up with some
parameters for the world and stuff first. Plus I want more than one
viewpoint, and don't yet know where to get any others. Perhaps I
should just wait and see...)
Hm. I am reminded how some of the tribes I made up in one story
first gave a different impression. But there I later (while writing)
found some explanation of what's behind it after I've shown them to
be somewhat objectionable - the first image I had of them (until I
remembered that they all had to be good guys per definition of the
world).
<sigh>
I'm really good at doing things backwards. And am quite clueless
about doing it the other way round.
--
"Don't get upset at Chareyna telling more lies than there are sand-grains in
the steppes. The other tribes have to relearn that that's what they do. Right
now they're expecting the sneaky shifters to be as honest as a violet-haired
wizard." -- Thay to Ghira, Seasons & Elements III
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> On Jun 24, 3:31 pm, Tina_H...@ftn.kruemel.org (Tina Hall) wrote:
>
>> You start reading a book, and it gives you the impression that
>> you're following the side of the 'good guys', with glimpses of the
>> 'bad guys' that are convincing. At some later point it turns out
>> they're actually the bad guys, and the others the good guys. What
>> you've seen was still true, but perhaps misinterpreted (preferably
>> by you), or just not containing all information. (I'm not talking
>> about an unreliable narrator; I'm not seeing any narrator at all,
>> only the reader being a witness to actions and character thoughts.
>> What you see is what truly happens, what the character thinks is
>> their true thoughts.)
>>
>> How could that be done?
>
>
> The real world doesn't have good guys and bad guys,
Assertion without evidence.
Mike Ash
Tina...@ftn.kruemel.org (Tina Hall) wrote:
> Perhaps this would be better placed in rasfc, but that's got a
> handful of writers versus a countless number of readers here. Plus,
> if you know of any existing books, I can see whether they are
> available as audiobook at the library.
>
> What I'm wondering is that:
>
> You start reading a book, and it gives you the impression that
> you're following the side of the 'good guys', with glimpses of the
> 'bad guys' that are convincing. At some later point it turns out
> they're actually the bad guys, and the others the good guys. What
> you've seen was still true, but perhaps misinterpreted (preferably
> by you), or just not containing all information. (I'm not talking
> about an unreliable narrator; I'm not seeing any narrator at all,
> only the reader being a witness to actions and character thoughts.
> What you see is what truly happens, what the character thinks is
> their true thoughts.)
>
> How could that be done?
Ought to be easy. Real-live evil people don't think they're evil.
Virtually everyone thinks that they're on the side of right, and that
their heart is in a good place. Hitler almost certainly thought he was
doing the best thing for Germany, ditto Mao and China, and so forth with
most other homocidal crazy dictators and anyone else you like to name
that's evil.
An exception can be made for sociopaths and the like, but they're in the
tiny minority compared to the large number of evil people who think
they're actually doing the right thing.
Why do these people who think they're doing the right thing commit evil?
As I see it, two reasons. First, they think that the people they're
harming deserve it, either because they're traitors or because they're
inherently inferior, as with all the people the Nazis killed directly.
Second, they think that they're doing good for these people even when
they're doing grave harm, as with all the Germans the Nazis killed
indirectly by making the allies bomb their country flat.
So, you need to get the reader to believe these actions are right.
Either convince them that the people they're intentionally harming
deserve it by presenting them in a convincingly bad light, or convince
them that the harm is the other side's fault even when it's not.
--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon
Dimensional Traveler
--
Things I learned from MythBusters #57: Never leave a loaded gun in an
exploding room.
Nigel
> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <seaw...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Tina Hall wrote:
> >> Perhaps this would be better placed in rasfc, but that's got a
> >> handful of writers versus a countless number of readers here.
> >> Plus, if you know of any existing books, I can see whether they
> >> are available as audiobook at the library.
>
> >> What I'm wondering is that:
>
> >> You start reading a book, and it gives you the impression that
> >> you're following the side of the 'good guys', with glimpses of
> >> the 'bad guys' that are convincing. At some later point it turns
> >> out they're actually the bad guys, and the others the good guys.
> >> What you've seen was still true, but perhaps misinterpreted
> >> (preferably by you), or just not containing all information.
> >> (I'm not talking about an unreliable narrator; I'm not seeing
> >> any narrator at all, only the reader being a witness to actions
> >> and character thoughts. What you see is what truly happens, what
> >> the character thinks is their true thoughts.)
>
> >> How could that be done?
> > The usual way to do it -- though far from easy if you want to
> > really pull it off convincingly -- is to select, very carefully,
> > the times you give us a peek into his thoughts, and the exact
> > actions you describe.
>
> Hm. Should be even easier with this character (I forgot to mention
> that[*]), who does not know that they're on the wrong side.
>
Another way to do it is if your "good guy" is an idealist while your
"bad guy" is more of a protagonist (even if he's trying to achieve the
same ends). A good example of that is Asimov's "In a Good Cause -",
in which the protagonist wants the various human governments to unite
against the real alien enemy, while the human politicians are more
interested in fighting each other. In the end, it is revealed that
the military was continuing with the intra-human conflicts in order to
improve their military techniques while at the same time engaging in
diplomatic maneuvers to ensure that none of the human governments
would ally themselves with the aliens when the real war began.
It's something of an atypical story for Asimov, who generally favoured
the lone hero winning in the end and didn't often paint the military
as the good guys.
Cheers,
Nigel.
Ken from Chicago
"Ted Nolan <tednolan>" <t...@loft.tnolan.com> wrote in message
news:ZBB0m.2980$Uf1...@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
That could be also about cultural shifts. The Captain Kirk that goes about
"fixing" other cultures he doesn't like in the '60s comes can generate a
different reaction in the audiences today.
-- Ken from Chicago
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
No. I'll accept "most people think they're the good guy". Not that
THINKING you're the good guy MAKES you one.
Michael Grosberg
> Perhaps this would be better placed in rasfc, but that's got a
> handful of writers versus a countless number of readers here. Plus,
> if you know of any existing books, I can see whether they are
> available as audiobook at the library.
>
> What I'm wondering is that:
>
> You start reading a book, and it gives you the impression that
> you're following the side of the 'good guys', with glimpses of the
> 'bad guys' that are convincing. At some later point it turns out
> they're actually the bad guys, and the others the good guys. What
> you've seen was still true, but perhaps misinterpreted (preferably
> by you), or just not containing all information. (I'm not talking
> about an unreliable narrator; I'm not seeing any narrator at all,
> only the reader being a witness to actions and character thoughts.
> What you see is what truly happens, what the character thinks is
> their true thoughts.)
>
> How could that be done?
It *has* been done.
Iain M. Banks, _Consider Phlebas_.
OWKtree
The viewpoint character is definitely part of the leaders of one side
that for all intents and purposes is the "good guys". What becomes
clear as the novel moves on is that the goals being acheived are not
necessarily that clear. And the structure of the narrative(s) make
certain other things clear.
Overall I thought it was a good read, but there are issues that will
definitely turn off some readers.
- Kurt
Jon Schild
Tina Hall wrote:
> Perhaps this would be better placed in rasfc, but that's got a
> handful of writers versus a countless number of readers here. Plus,
> if you know of any existing books, I can see whether they are
> available as audiobook at the library.
>
> What I'm wondering is that:
>
> You start reading a book, and it gives you the impression that
> you're following the side of the 'good guys', with glimpses of the
> 'bad guys' that are convincing. At some later point it turns out
> they're actually the bad guys, and the others the good guys. What
> you've seen was still true, but perhaps misinterpreted (preferably
> by you), or just not containing all information. (I'm not talking
> about an unreliable narrator; I'm not seeing any narrator at all,
> only the reader being a witness to actions and character thoughts.
> What you see is what truly happens, what the character thinks is
> their true thoughts.)
>
> How could that be done?
>
> (No, it doesn't matter whether you personally like it.)
>
For a non-literary example, you might want to consider renting the movie
The Hole (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0242527).
--
Wanted dead and/or alive: Shroedinger's cat.
Mike Ash
<349f0515-d0a0-4d49...@e20g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
Michael Grosberg <grosberg...@gmail.com> wrote:
That one came to my mind immediately upon reading the original post,
however I don't believe it qualifies. CP made it readily apparent, at
least to me, that Horza was fighting for the wrong side. I guess it
could technically qualify, as Horza probably looked to be in the right
at the very start, and "later" (but still very early in the book) it was
revealed to be the contrary, but I assumed the intent was for the reader
to spend the bulk of the book seeing the protagonist as being the good
guy.
I guess this might depend on the reader, but it always seemed to me that
Banks was making no attempt to hide the fact that Horza was working for
the wrong side, and that indeed the obviousness of his stubborn
wrongheadedness was part of the essential tragedy of the book.
Nicholas Waller
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SO5WoLnOOlU for Mitchell and Webb as
some SS soldiers thinking about the skulls on their caps and wondering
what that says about them.
--
Nick
Tina Hall
Definitely different ends.
(Good and bad guys opposing each other. Or more specific, one bad
'higher class' ruling ignorant subjects, and those they paint as bad
guys who are the real good guys, living differently - I'm working on
the details still. <digressing> Right now working on the species;
not humans, but mostly looking similar to us. Are there any words
for a different gender system (replacing he/she/it), of non-mammals,
and with something similar on Earth only found in some obscure
species only specialists heard of, if at all? :) </digressing>)
I'm not quite sure how you define 'protagonist' to not have one
possible option be an idealist, though.
(For me, 'protagonist' is interchangeable with 'character'. At best
that could be cut down to 'main character' or 'viewpoint character',
but I'd rather not use the word at all. The dictionary (I checked
just to see whether I'm off somewhere) suggested lead character, and
that in turn implies a single character around whom the story
centers, even if that's were to be the ultimate menace in the story.
That assumption is too incompatible with how I see stories;
preferably with various different viewpoints and a group of main
characters. There may be a leader, but no lead character.)
> A good example of that is Asimov's "In a Good Cause -", in which
> the protagonist wants the various human governments to unite
> against the real alien enemy, while the human politicians are more
> interested in fighting each other.
That places the politicians on the bad guy side from the start, and
protagonist who-knows-where. :)
Noted, though.
> In the end, it is revealed that the military was continuing with
> the intra-human conflicts in order to improve their military
> techniques while at the same time engaging in diplomatic
> maneuvers to ensure that none of the human governments would ally
> themselves with the aliens when the real war began.
Ok.
I don't think that can be mapped onto what I have in mind. Perhaps I
should just go and get some sleep, though. :)
> It's something of an atypical story for Asimov, who generally
> favoured the lone hero winning in the end and didn't often paint
> the military as the good guys.
Interesting.
--
(Chaeron) "I'll see whether I can't get Chastan to bargain a little with me."
(Ghareg) "Be sure she leaves you your clothes, the people here seem to think
not wearing any mighty odd." -- Seasons & Elements II: Controlling the Magic
Excerpts at: <http://home.htp-tel.de/fkoerper/ath/athintro.htm>
Tina Hall
Except it's not done in that book.
If there are any good guys at all, the Culture is definitely not it.
--
"I don't think he's going to eat us. I'd be more worried about the Spring
Lord. I heard they bite. But Cavora hasn't eaten anyone so far. Not even
Senim." - "I'm too small. He'd have to find someone bigger for that. But
I'd defend them." -- Lanar, little Senim, S&E II: Controlling the Magic
Dorothy J Heydt
Ken from Chicago <kwicker1...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>That could be also about cultural shifts. The Captain Kirk that goes about
>"fixing" other cultures he doesn't like in the '60s
In violation of the Prime Directive.
"...More like a guideline."
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at hotmail dot com
Should you wish to email me, you'd better use the hotmail edress.
Kithrup is getting too damn much spam, even with the sysop's filters.
Andrew Woode
> Perhaps this would be better placed in rasfc, but that's got a
> handful of writers versus a countless number of readers here. Plus,
> if you know of any existing books, I can see whether they are
> available as audiobook at the library.
>
> What I'm wondering is that:
>
> You start reading a book, and it gives you the impression that
> you're following the side of the 'good guys', with glimpses of the
> 'bad guys' that are convincing. At some later point it turns out
> they're actually the bad guys, and the others the good guys. What
> you've seen was still true, but perhaps misinterpreted (preferably
> by you), or just not containing all information. (I'm not talking
> about an unreliable narrator; I'm not seeing any narrator at all,
> only the reader being a witness to actions and character thoughts.
> What you see is what truly happens, what the character thinks is
> their true thoughts.)
>
> How could that be done?
>
> (No, it doesn't matter whether you personally like it.)
>
Spoiler of course, but....
s
e
e
b
e
l
o
w
Poul Anderson's "The Corridors of Time" ought to count; my memory is a
little hazy, but it
involves conflict between two groups with time travel over a range of
times; the protagonist
(20th century) is recruited by one but then discovers that all is not
as it seems.
Piwne Oczy Ma
> I'm not quite sure how you define 'protagonist' to not have one
> possible option be an idealist, though.
>
> (For me, 'protagonist' is interchangeable with 'character'. At best
> that could be cut down to 'main character' or 'viewpoint character',
> but I'd rather not use the word at all.
The protagonist is the central positive force in the story. It may be
represented by a single character, a group of characters, a city, a nation,
or even abstract forces like ideologies or forces of nature.
The viewpoint character is the character whose life the story follows. When
he is also the protagonist he may be called the main character.
When the roles of protagonist and viewpoint character are split the latter
will usually (but not necessarily) serve as the narrator.
For example Sherlock Holmes is the protagonist, while Watson fills the roles
of viewpoint character and narrator.
> The dictionary (I checked
> just to see whether I'm off somewhere) suggested lead character, and
> that in turn implies a single character around whom the story
> centers, even if that's were to be the ultimate menace in the story.
Not exactly. The story always centers on the struggle between the
protagonist (good) and the antagonist (his opponent). Like the protagonist
the antagonist can be anything from a single character to an impersonal
force like nature or society.
Dorothy J Heydt
Oh yes, I remember that one. Your memory is essentially
correct. The fun thing about that book (the only fun thing
IIRC, it's *very* early Anderson) is that the main character,
a villainess named Storm Darroway, and possibly the title are
lifted from a story mentioned in Boucher's _Rocket to the
Morgue_ as being by Joe Henderson (Edmond Hamilton with the
serial number filed off). Talk about your subtle hommage.
Piwne Oczy Ma
> In violation of the Prime Directive.
>
> "...More like a guideline."
Well, these were all cases of Special Circumstances.
trag
> You start reading a book, and it gives you the impression that
> you're following the side of the 'good guys', with glimpses of the
> 'bad guys' that are convincing. At some later point it turns out
> they're actually the bad guys, and the others the good guys.
>
> How could that be done?
The bad guy is charming.
Also, no overtly unjustifiable evil actions are committed by the first
protagonist while the reader has his eye on him.
In high school I had this friend. Her father had a goat ranch out in
the Texas hill country, to which he would invite a number of us to
visit. There, he would feed us a mix of home cooked Texas and
Mexican food and regale us with tales of his adventures in his youth
on both sides of the border. He was a good friend and I enjoyed his
company and I regret his passing.
Later, while he was still living, his daughter learned more about
various aspects of his past and became estranged from him. Turns out
he probably murdered (or at least killed) a woman at one point. So
I'm on the phone with his daughter and she's asking me to shun her
father and I'm refusing and she says, "But Jeff, he's a murderer."
And I reply, "I know, but I still *like* him."
trag
> So, you need to get the reader to believe these actions are right.
> Either convince them that the people they're intentionally harming
> deserve it by presenting them in a convincingly bad light, or convince
> them that the harm is the other side's fault even when it's not.
Well, remember that most readers are in a receptive frame of mind, at
least at the beginning of the story. If your protagonist is an
assassin, e.g., the reader will assume that the victim was justifiably
killed, unless the reader has morals such that such killing is never
justified. He'll just be waiting and expecting to read some
explanation of why the assassination was needed and in fact that will
help to hook the reader into the story, as any bit of anticipation
does.
I use assassin as an extreme example. The point is that show the
reader a protagonist doing seemingly bad things, and he'll create his
own provisional justifications and develop a bit of interest and
anticipation in the story waiting/expecting some explanation down
stream.
Anthony Nance
> On Jun 25, 12:08 am, Mike Ash <m...@mikeash.com> wrote:
>
>> So, you need to get the reader to believe these actions are right.
>> Either convince them that the people they're intentionally harming
>> deserve it by presenting them in a convincingly bad light, or convince
>> them that the harm is the other side's fault even when it's not.
>
> Well, remember that most readers are in a receptive frame of mind, at
> least at the beginning of the story. If your protagonist is an
> assassin, e.g., the reader will assume that the victim was justifiably
> killed, unless the reader has morals such that such killing is never
> justified. He'll just be waiting and expecting to read some
> explanation of why the assassination was needed and in fact that will
> help to hook the reader into the story, as any bit of anticipation
> does.
>
> I use assassin as an extreme example.
Everyone generalizes from one example. At least, Vlad Taltos does.
- Tony
Tina Hall
> Well, remember that most readers are in a receptive frame of
> mind, at least at the beginning of the story. If your
> protagonist is an assassin, e.g., the reader will assume that the
> victim was justifiably killed, unless the reader has morals such
> that such killing is never justified. He'll just be waiting and
> expecting to read some explanation of why the assassination was
> needed and in fact that will help to hook the reader into the
> story, as any bit of anticipation does.
> I use assassin as an extreme example. The point is that show the
> reader a protagonist doing seemingly bad things, and he'll create
> his own provisional justifications and develop a bit of interest
> and anticipation in the story waiting/expecting some explanation
> down stream.
I won't have to show the viewpoint doing anything bad. :) (They're
ignorant of their side being the bad guys.)
Though that make might things more difficult, because I have to
cloak the bad things their side does with the character themselves
thinking them good.
So, rather than the character doing bad things (with an explanation
expected to come), bad things are done and seen as normal. So I
figure I have to hide them somehow. I think that's what the question
aims at.
--
Food (served) swimming in water just wasn't right.
-- Senar, Magic Earth V
Excerpts at: <http://home.htp-tel.de/fkoerper/ath/athintro.htm>
Sean O'Hara
declared:
> In article <Tr2dnW9ycfKWqd7X...@giganews.com>,
> Ken from Chicago <kwicker1...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> That could be also about cultural shifts. The Captain Kirk that goes about
>> "fixing" other cultures he doesn't like in the '60s
>
> In violation of the Prime Directive.
>
> "...More like a guideline."
>
Why do you think the Enterprise has a political offic -- I mean
"councilor" in The Next Generation?
--
Sean O'Hara <http://www.diogenes-sinope.blogspot.com>
New audio book: As Long as You Wish by John O'Keefe
<http://librivox.org/short-science-fiction-collection-010/>
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> In the Year of the Earth Ox, the Great and Powerful Dorothy J Heydt
> declared:
>> In article <Tr2dnW9ycfKWqd7X...@giganews.com>,
>> Ken from Chicago <kwicker1...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> That could be also about cultural shifts. The Captain Kirk that goes
>>> about "fixing" other cultures he doesn't like in the '60s
>>
>> In violation of the Prime Directive.
>>
>> "...More like a guideline."
"This is Captain Jack Sparrow, commanding the Federation Privateer
Enterprise..."
>>
>
> Why do you think the Enterprise has a political offic -- I mean
> "councilor" in The Next Generation?
>
For the low-cut dress?
Default User
An example would be The Stainless Steel Rat. In the beginning, Jim is
an out-and-out criminal. He has his ethical code, of course, not
stealing from individuals or bringing physical harm to anyone. And
fairly soon he gets forced into working for the "good guys".
Brian
--
Day 144 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project
Tina Hall
> Sean O'Hara wrote:
> "This is Captain Jack Sparrow, commanding the Federation
> Privateer Enterprise..."
Ooh, I want that.
>> Why do you think the Enterprise has a political offic -- I mean
>> "councilor" in The Next Generation?
> For the low-cut dress?
I seem to recall that only being worn after she lost the shape that
looked good in the pyjama.
Though the Borg Barbie made a still better appearance in them. At
least with a paper bag over her head.
--
(Ipoq) "You'll have to visit the Water tribe one day. There are plants
that wander, and animals with something like roots."
(Thay) "I think I'm confused enough."
(Ghareg) "I didn't even say anything yet." -- Seasons & Elements III
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>> Sean O'Hara wrote:
>
>> "This is Captain Jack Sparrow, commanding the Federation
>> Privateer Enterprise..."
>
> Ooh, I want that.
>
I think it'd sell! I'd pay full admission price to that movie.
>>> Why do you think the Enterprise has a political offic -- I mean
>>> "councilor" in The Next Generation?
>
>> For the low-cut dress?
>
> I seem to recall that only being worn after she lost the shape that
> looked good in the pyjama.
Hm, I thought her outfit was always more, um, open than the others. I
watched TNG early on, but it's been a long time since I watched any.
>
> Though the Borg Barbie made a still better appearance in them. At
> least with a paper bag over her head.
>
I think she was quite pretty, but the Borg Face Appliances weren't
appealing.
Tina Hall
> Tina Hall wrote:
>> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>>> "This is Captain Jack Sparrow, commanding the Federation
>>> Privateer Enterprise..."
>>
>> Ooh, I want that.
> I think it'd sell! I'd pay full admission price to that movie.
I'd pay for the DVD when it comes out (watching at the cinema lowers
the value far too much for me to be willing to pay for it, or even
go if someone else pays).
>> Though the Borg Barbie made a still better appearance in them.
>> At least with a paper bag over her head.
> I think she was quite pretty, but the Borg Face Appliances
> weren't appealing.
This is one of the things where our opionions are exactly reversed.
:)
--
"After your little show, the whole lot of them is convinced that your
brother is not only completely crazy, but also combines all the worst
traits Thalos and I can scrape together." - "Shovel, you mean." -
"Yeah." -- Arentus and Ranes, Magic Earth IV: Seeing Far
Mark Stephen
Generally true, but consider Lawrence Block's _Hit Man_. The protagonist
is a professional murderer, and although he makes vague attempts to find
out why he is so dissatisfied with his life, these efforts lead him into
absurd situations, punctuated by professional killings. I found this
series of short stories very funny, and the hit man vaguely endearing,
in the way you might quite like a pet pit bull of proven poor character.
Mark
Kurt Busiek
> Generally true, but consider Lawrence Block's _Hit Man_. The
> protagonist is a professional murderer, and although he makes vague
> attempts to find out why he is so dissatisfied with his life, these
> efforts lead him into absurd situations, punctuated by professional
> killings. I found this series of short stories very funny, and the hit
> man vaguely endearing, in the way you might quite like a pet pit bull
> of proven poor character.
And he goes to some pains to make sure we understand that he considers
what he does unjustifiable, on a moral basis, and the people he kills
do not necessarily deserve it; he usually doesn't know why they were
chosen to die.
But if he doesn't do it, someone else will. And then he won't be able
to buy more stamps.
The way Block makes it work is by making the killing just a job, and
focusing on Keller's private life and his wish to find satisfaction in
life; you can relate to him emotionally even if the details of his job
aren't familiar.
I've liked the whole series, the short stories and the novels.
kdb
Carl Dershem
When it comes to assassins we can like and interesting character arcs, I
think Steve Brust's "Vlad Taltos" books are excellent. Vla starts off
as a bit (or more) of a jerk, and gets it thrown in his face more than
once. It takes him a while to let it sink in the killing people is not
necessarily a good thing, and it changes him.
I wonder how old Vlad is at the beginning of the series. I get the
feeling he's pretty young.
cd
--
The difference between immorality and immortality is "T". I like Earl
Grey.
William December Starr
Sean O'Hara <sean...@gmail.com> said:
> Dorothy J Heydt declared:
>> Ken from Chicago <kwicker1...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> That could be also about cultural shifts. The Captain Kirk that
>>> goes about "fixing" other cultures he doesn't like in the '60s
>>
>> In violation of the Prime Directive.
>> "...More like a guideline."
>
> Why do you think the Enterprise has a political offic -- I mean
> "councilor" in The Next Generation?
Like it mattered, given how gelded the captain was?
("No problem, sir: we replaced his balls with a stick up his ass.")
-- wds
James A. Donald
Hall) wrote:
> So, rather than the character doing bad things (with an explanation
> expected to come), bad things are done and seen as normal. So I
> figure I have to hide them somehow. I think that's what the question
> aims at.
Consider real life events. The liquidation of the kulaks was not
particularly hidden, but a very large number of western intellectuals
rationalized it away, asserting the kulaks were not being liquidated,
but that they should have been.
Ken from Chicago
"Sean O'Hara" <sean...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7akd56F...@mid.individual.net...
> In the Year of the Earth Ox, the Great and Powerful Dorothy J Heydt
> declared:
>> In article <Tr2dnW9ycfKWqd7X...@giganews.com>,
>> Ken from Chicago <kwicker1...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> That could be also about cultural shifts. The Captain Kirk that goes
>>> about "fixing" other cultures he doesn't like in the '60s
>>
>> In violation of the Prime Directive.
>>
>> "...More like a guideline."
>>
>
> Why do you think the Enterprise has a political offic -- I mean
> "councilor" in The Next Generation?
"Your Cruise Director", like Julie.
> --
> Sean O'Hara <http://www.diogenes-sinope.blogspot.com>
> New audio book: As Long as You Wish by John O'Keefe
> <http://librivox.org/short-science-fiction-collection-010/>
-- Ken from Chicago
Ken from Chicago
"Tina Hall" <Tina...@ftn.kruemel.org> wrote in message
news:MSGID_2=3A240=2F2199.13=40fidonet...@fidonet.org...
> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>> Sean O'Hara wrote:
>
>> "This is Captain Jack Sparrow, commanding the Federation
>> Privateer Enterprise..."
>
> Ooh, I want that.
The Outrageous Okona.
>>> Why do you think the Enterprise has a political offic -- I mean
>>> "councilor" in The Next Generation?
>
>> For the low-cut dress?
>
> I seem to recall that only being worn after she lost the shape that
> looked good in the pyjama.
Either the low necklined or high thigh slit dress.
> Though the Borg Barbie made a still better appearance in them. At
> least with a paper bag over her head.
She didn't wear low cut outfits, merely ridiculous tight ones. Jeri Ryan
complained of having difficulty breathing which is why her character finally
had a different outfit after her first season on the show.
> --
> (Ipoq) "You'll have to visit the Water tribe one day. There are plants
> that wander, and animals with something like roots."
> (Thay) "I think I'm confused enough."
> (Ghareg) "I didn't even say anything yet." -- Seasons & Elements III
-- Ken from Chicago
Ken from Chicago
"Tina Hall" <Tina...@ftn.kruemel.org> wrote in message
news:MSGID_2=3A240=2F2199.13=40fidonet...@fidonet.org...
>> Tina Hall wrote:
>>> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>
>>>> "This is Captain Jack Sparrow, commanding the Federation
>>>> Privateer Enterprise..."
>>>
>>> Ooh, I want that.
>
>> I think it'd sell! I'd pay full admission price to that movie.
>
> I'd pay for the DVD when it comes out (watching at the cinema lowers
> the value far too much for me to be willing to pay for it, or even
> go if someone else pays).
>
>>> Though the Borg Barbie made a still better appearance in them.
>>> At least with a paper bag over her head.
>
>> I think she was quite pretty, but the Borg Face Appliances
>> weren't appealing.
>
> This is one of the things where our opionions are exactly reversed.
> :)
Some people like facial jewelry and tattoos, some don't. Then again, some
kinds of facial jewelry and tattoos look good and some don't.
Then again, Jeri Ryan looks much better on her own without the facial
appliances.
> --
> "After your little show, the whole lot of them is convinced that your
> brother is not only completely crazy, but also combines all the worst
> traits Thalos and I can scrape together." - "Shovel, you mean." -
> "Yeah." -- Arentus and Ranes, Magic Earth IV: Seeing Far
-- Ken from Chicago
Sean O'Hara
Starr declared:
If only the Cardassians had killed Picard and Ronnie Cox had stayed
on as the new captain.
William December Starr
"Ken from Chicago" <kwicker1...@comcast.net> said:
> "Tina Hall" <Tina...@ftn.kruemel.org> wrote
>> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "This is Captain Jack Sparrow, commanding the Federation
>>> Privateer Enterprise..."
>>
>> Ooh, I want that.
>
> The Outrageous Okona.
A title and episode which in combination comprise one of the great
examples of Telling And Not Showing.
[...]
>> Though the Borg Barbie made a still better appearance in them. At
>> least with a paper bag over her head.
>
> She didn't wear low cut outfits, merely ridiculous tight ones.
You are incredibly mistaken -- there was nothing ridiculous about
their tightness.
Absolute supreme wonderfulness, yes. Ridiculousness, no.
-- wds
Piwne Oczy Ma
> Absolute supreme wonderfulness, yes. Ridiculousness, no.
That depends on whether you are attracted to women dressed like women or
women dressed like bimbos.
Tina Hall
> Generally true, but consider Lawrence Block's _Hit Man_. The
> protagonist is a professional murderer, and although he makes
> vague attempts to find out why he is so dissatisfied with his
> life, these efforts lead him into absurd situations, punctuated
> by professional killings. I found this series of short stories
> very funny, and the hit man vaguely endearing, in the way you
> might quite like a pet pit bull of proven poor character.
Parker (in the Parker novels by Richard Stark, IIRC) is a criminal,
and not really a good guy either. I rather like him. (Nothing
absurd, or poor, just very no-nonsense. More supposed good guys
should have that attitude.)
Then there's the guy in The Axe (same author under a different name
that I can't recall), which I stopped reading, bored with the
whining idiot. (It starts with an ordinary guy wanting a job and
setting out to remove the competition. After the first one killed,
he starts whining about it.)
Not that that still has anything to do with the original subject.
That was about presenting the bad guys as good guys without
revealing the bad things they do, or if something bad has to be
shown, not giving enough information, so it still looks harmless.
A killing, or other obvious stuff, really doesn't qualify. That
might work to present the real good guys as bad guys, without giving
a reason.
I'm still wondering how that could be done.
--
"Could we pretend for a moment that I'm not a sick bastard?"
-- Thalos, Magic Earth II: Without Heart
Excerpts at: <http://home.htp-tel.de/fkoerper/ath/athintro.htm>
William December Starr
You speak illogically -- the latter is a subset of the former.
A very aesthetically pleasing subset, quite often.
-- wds
Piwne Oczy Ma
> You speak illogically -- the latter is a subset of the former.
>
> A very aesthetically pleasing subset, quite often.
That depends on whether you are attracted to women dressed like women not
dressed like bimbos or women dressed like bimbos.
William December Starr
"Piwne Oczy Ma" <pz...@neostrada.pl> said:
> That depends on whether you are attracted to women dressed like
> women not dressed like bimbos or women dressed like bimbos.
Yes, and yes.
-- wds
Jack Tingle
news:h28gmq$b47$1...@panix2.panix.com...
Zew, mein boi, for how long haf you had the zuspishun you might be
heterozexual?
Freudulently,
Jack Tingle
David DeLaney
>When it comes to assassins we can like and interesting character arcs, I
>think Steve Brust's "Vlad Taltos" books are excellent. Vla starts off
>as a bit (or more) of a jerk, and gets it thrown in his face more than
>once. It takes him a while to let it sink in the killing people is not
>necessarily a good thing, and it changes him.
>
>I wonder how old Vlad is at the beginning of the series. I get the
>feeling he's pretty young.
I'd be surprised if he were more than about fifteen. But I haven't seen an
actual timeline with dates.
Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from d...@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Ken from Chicago
> In article <pIadnQY8Bv9h1drX...@giganews.com>,
> "Ken from Chicago" <kwicker1...@comcast.net> said:
>
>> "Tina Hall" <Tina...@ftn.kruemel.org> wrote
>>> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "This is Captain Jack Sparrow, commanding the Federation
>>>> Privateer Enterprise..."
>>>
>>> Ooh, I want that.
>>
>> The Outrageous Okona.
>
> A title and episode which in combination comprise one of the great
> examples of Telling And Not Showing.
Trudat.
But it demonstrated his charisma and prepared him to travel back in time as
one of The 4400.
>>> Though the Borg Barbie made a still better appearance in them. At
>>> least with a paper bag over her head.
>>
>> She didn't wear low cut outfits, merely ridiculous tight ones.
>
> You are incredibly mistaken -- there was nothing ridiculous about
> their tightness.
>
> Absolute supreme wonderfulness, yes. Ridiculousness, no.
>
> -- wds
William! She suffered breathing problems for a whole season. Shirley you
would not wish that upon her? Shirley you would not want actors to suffer
physical harm merely for your entertainment.
-- Ken from Chicago (who suddenly imagines William as some latterday caesar
sitting on his leather-clad reclining throne before a widescreen HD arena,
declaring, "Yes, ... that one, ... she amuses me. Tighten her toga!")
Ken from Chicago
Talk about having a stick up his sphincter--tho he FINALLY made Troi
actually wear an actual official uniform.
-- Ken from Chicago
P.S. And she looked good in blue--without seeming like she's trying too
hard.
Ken from Chicago
"William December Starr" <wds...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:h28gmq$b47$1...@panix2.panix.com...
Um, sorry, the latter is trying way too hard for attention. There's your
warning sign of impending danger.
-- Ken from Chicago
William December Starr
"Ken from Chicago" <kwicker1...@comcast.net> said:
>>> That depends on whether you are attracted to women dressed
>>> like women not dressed like bimbos or women dressed like
>>> bimbos.
>>
>> Yes, and yes.
>
> Um, sorry, the latter is trying way too hard for
> attention. There's your warning sign of impending danger.
That takes nothing away from their value as scenery.
-- wds
Robert A. Woodward
d...@gatekeeper.vic.com (David DeLaney) wrote:
> Carl Dershem <der...@cox.net> wrote:
> >When it comes to assassins we can like and interesting character arcs, I
> >think Steve Brust's "Vlad Taltos" books are excellent. Vla starts off
> >as a bit (or more) of a jerk, and gets it thrown in his face more than
> >once. It takes him a while to let it sink in the killing people is not
> >necessarily a good thing, and it changes him.
> >
> >I wonder how old Vlad is at the beginning of the series. I get the
> >feeling he's pretty young.
>
> I'd be surprised if he were more than about fifteen. But I haven't seen an
> actual timeline with dates.
>
I remembered some dates in _Jhereg_ - Vlad was 16 when he got
Loiosh and Loiosh mentioned that he had been working for Vlad for 5
years. That makes Vlad 21 then. He was younger than that in
_Taltos_, _Yendi_, and _Dragon_.
--
Robert Woodward <robe...@drizzle.com>
<http://www.drizzle.com/~robertaw>
Brad Sims
> Sean O'Hara wrote:
>> In the Year of the Earth Ox, the Great and Powerful Dorothy J Heydt
>> declared:
>>> In article <Tr2dnW9ycfKWqd7X...@giganews.com>,
>>> Ken from Chicago <kwicker1...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> That could be also about cultural shifts. The Captain Kirk that goes
>>>> about "fixing" other cultures he doesn't like in the '60s
>>>
>>> In violation of the Prime Directive.
>>>
>>> "...More like a guideline."
>
> Enterprise..."
>
Damn you, get busy and write that story so I can read it <g>.
I /want/.
--
This is the tomorrow you worried about yesterday. And now you know why.
James Nicoll
Brad Sims <bms...@comcast.net> wrote:
>In Dread Ink, the Grave hand of Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) Did Inscribe:
>> Sean O'Hara wrote:
>>> In the Year of the Earth Ox, the Great and Powerful Dorothy J Heydt
>>> declared:
>>>> In article <Tr2dnW9ycfKWqd7X...@giganews.com>,
>>>> Ken from Chicago <kwicker1...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> That could be also about cultural shifts. The Captain Kirk that goes
>>>>> about "fixing" other cultures he doesn't like in the '60s
>>>>
>>>> In violation of the Prime Directive.
>>>>
>>>> "...More like a guideline."
>>
>> "This is Captain Jack Sparrow, commanding the Federation Privateer
>> Enterprise..."
>>
>
>Damn you, get busy and write that story so I can read it <g>.
>I /want/.
You may want to track down Irresponsible Captain Taylor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irresponsible_Captain_Tylor
--
http://www.livejournal.com/users/james_nicoll
http://www.cafepress.com/jdnicoll (For all your "The problem with
defending the English language [...]" T-shirt, cup and tote-bag needs)
James Nicoll
James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>In article <slrnh4hhvj....@c933657-a.insightbb.com>,
>Brad Sims <bms...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>In Dread Ink, the Grave hand of Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) Did Inscribe:
>>> Sean O'Hara wrote:
>>>> In the Year of the Earth Ox, the Great and Powerful Dorothy J Heydt
>>>> declared:
>>>>> In article <Tr2dnW9ycfKWqd7X...@giganews.com>,
>>>>> Ken from Chicago <kwicker1...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That could be also about cultural shifts. The Captain Kirk that goes
>>>>>> about "fixing" other cultures he doesn't like in the '60s
>>>>>
>>>>> In violation of the Prime Directive.
>>>>>
>>>>> "...More like a guideline."
>>>
>>> "This is Captain Jack Sparrow, commanding the Federation Privateer
>>> Enterprise..."
>>>
>>
>>Damn you, get busy and write that story so I can read it <g>.
>>I /want/.
>
> You may want to track down Irresponsible Captain Taylor.
Sorry, "Tylor".
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> In Dread Ink, the Grave hand of Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) Did Inscribe:
>> Sean O'Hara wrote:
>>> In the Year of the Earth Ox, the Great and Powerful Dorothy J Heydt
>>> declared:
>>>> In article <Tr2dnW9ycfKWqd7X...@giganews.com>,
>>>> Ken from Chicago <kwicker1...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>> That could be also about cultural shifts. The Captain Kirk that goes
>>>>> about "fixing" other cultures he doesn't like in the '60s
>>>> In violation of the Prime Directive.
>>>>
>>>> "...More like a guideline."
>> "This is Captain Jack Sparrow, commanding the Federation Privateer
>> Enterprise..."
>>
>
> Damn you, get busy and write that story so I can read it <g>.
> I /want/.
>
Pirates of the Federation. Has a nice ring to it.
The problem would be convincing the dual juggernauts of Disney and
Paramount to not crush me over it.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://seawasp.livejournal.com
Dimensional Traveler
prohibited by copyright law?
--
Things I learned from MythBusters #57: Never leave a loaded gun in an
exploding room.
trag
> and the hit man vaguely endearing,
> in the way you might quite like a pet pit bull of proven poor character.
Sorry, the only way I'd ever find a dog endearing is if you sew up its
mouth, put a cork in its butt and amputate all its legs.
trag
> In article <-sWdneVvWf4rZ9rXnZ2dnUVZ_judn...@giganews.com>,
> "Ken from Chicago" <kwicker1b_nos...@comcast.net> said:
>
> >>> That depends on whether you are attracted to women dressed
> >>> like women not dressed like bimbos or women dressed like
> >>> bimbos.
>
> >> Yes, and yes.
>
> > Um, sorry, the latter is trying way too hard for
> > attention. There's your warning sign of impending danger.
>
> That takes nothing away from their value as scenery.
Unless the association of said scenery with the above warning causes a
feeling of anxiety even if one is not interacting with them.
trag
<seaw...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
> Brad Sims wrote:
> > In Dread Ink, the Grave hand of Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) Did Inscribe:
> >> Sean O'Hara wrote:
> >>> In the Year of the Earth Ox, the Great and Powerful Dorothy J Heydt
> >>> declared:
> >>>> "...More like a guideline."
> >> "This is Captain Jack Sparrow, commanding the Federation Privateer
> >> Enterprise..."
>
> > Damn you, get busy and write that story so I can read it <g>.
> > I /want/.
>
> Pirates of the Federation. Has a nice ring to it.
>
> The problem would be convincing the dual juggernauts of Disney and
> Paramount to not crush me over it.
Well, if you could get them fighting each other first...
Louann Miller
news:ba86708a-ea78-48ed...@l34g2000vbi.googlegroups.com:
>> Pirates of the Federation. Has a nice ring to it.
>>
>> The problem would be convincing the dual juggernauts of
>> Disney and
>> Paramount to not crush me over it.
>
> Well, if you could get them fighting each other first...
>
Then ITYM 'duel' juggernauts.
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
What makes you think it would be a parody?
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
oo. And then I could sell tickets.
Taki Kogoma
allegedly proclaimed to rec.arts.sf.written:
> trag wrote:
>> On Jun 29, 11:15 am, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
>> <seaw...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>>> Brad Sims wrote:
>>>> In Dread Ink, the Grave hand of Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) Did Inscribe:
>>>
>>> The problem would be convincing the dual juggernauts of Disney and
>>> Paramount to not crush me over it.
>>
>> Well, if you could get them fighting each other first...
>
> oo. And then I could sell tickets.
Tholian Diplomacy: "Let's you and him fight."
--
Capt. Gym Z. Quirk (Known to some as Taki Kogoma) quirk @ swcp.com
Just an article detector on the Information Supercollider.
Jesper Lauridsen
>
> "William December Starr" <wds...@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:h28au2$k59$1...@panix2.panix.com...
>> In article <pIadnQY8Bv9h1drX...@giganews.com>,
>> "Ken from Chicago" <kwicker1...@comcast.net> said:
>>>
>>> She didn't wear low cut outfits, merely ridiculous tight ones.
>>
>> You are incredibly mistaken -- there was nothing ridiculous about
>> their tightness.
>>
>> Absolute supreme wonderfulness, yes. Ridiculousness, no.
>
> would not wish that upon her? Shirley you would not want actors to suffer
> physical harm merely for your entertainment.
I'm sure William would be ok with her wearing something more ... comfortable.
Dimensional Traveler
anything about it besides the title, that should win the case for you! :D
For that matter, how did 'Galaxy Quest' survive to even be made?
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Not if put on the stand, unless I actually did write it to be a parody.
>
> For that matter, how did 'Galaxy Quest' survive to even be made?
>
That would be like my making "Corsairs of the Republic" rather than
"Pirates of the Federation", with characters like "Captain John Wren" on
the "Freebooter Industrious". To me, that would defeat the purpose.
Galaxy Quest did not use any of the original characters, none of the
ship designs, etc., and that, COMBINED with the parody, gave it complete
protection.
Dimensional Traveler
:D
Walter Bushell
Nigel
> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
>
>
>
> > Dimensional Traveler wrote:
> >> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
> >>> Dimensional Traveler wrote:
> >>>> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
> >>>>> Brad Sims wrote:
> >>>>>> In Dread Ink, the Grave hand of Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) Did Inscribe:
> >>>>>>> Sean O'Hara wrote:
> >>>>>>>> In the Year of the Earth Ox, the Great and Powerful Dorothy J
> >>>>>>>> Heydt declared:
In some ways the German film (T)Raumschiff Surprise [1] came closer to
using the original characters, with Captain Kork, Mr Spuck and
engineer Schrotty.
Cheers,
Nigel.
[1] See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traumschiff_Surprise_-_Periode_1
Ken from Chicago
"trag" <tr...@io.com> wrote in message
news:af774cc9-71b3-4172...@k26g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
Thank you.
Plus the lack of a subtlety ... it's like reading a WAY TOO OBVIOUS STORY
where EVERYTHING IS TELEGRAPHED LIGHT-YEARS IN ADVANCE.
The word is "subtlety". Leave something to the imagination.
-- Ken from Chicago
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Yeah, but I don't generally write satire; I would write something like
this straight.
I can do satire or parody or Deliberately Wrong for a short time but
not a full work.
David DeLaney
>>> "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seaw...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>>>> The problem would be convincing the dual juggernauts of Disney and
>>>> Paramount to not crush me over it.
>>>
>>> Well, if you could get them fighting each other first...
>>
>> oo. And then I could sell tickets.
>
>Tholian Diplomacy: "Let's you and him fight."
And perhaps while they were distracted we could re-take copyright law!
Dave "multi-purpose" DeLaney
--
\/David DeLaney posting from d...@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
William December Starr
"Ken from Chicago" <kwicker1...@comcast.net> said:
> Plus the lack of a subtlety ... it's like reading a WAY TOO
> OBVIOUS STORY where EVERYTHING IS TELEGRAPHED LIGHT-YEARS IN
> ADVANCE.
>
> The word is "subtlety". Leave something to the imagination.
The far better word, I say, is "variety," which in this case
would mean a wide spectrum of womanly attire from the subtle to
the most... unsubtle.
-- wds
trag
trag
wrote:
> Thank you.
>
> Plus the lack of a subtlety ... it's like reading a WAY TOO OBVIOUS STORY
> where EVERYTHING IS TELEGRAPHED LIGHT-YEARS IN ADVANCE.
>
> The word is "subtlety". Leave something to the imagination.
Suggestion, not revealing. A loose fitting blouse in a wrap style is
much more interesting for the suggestion that it might fall open, than
a tight low cut top which leaves nothing to the imagination nor to be
anticipated. But tastes vary. I'm definitely in the elegant
suggestions camp.
Whenever a TV show does a strip-club scene, I'm left wondering why
anybody would want to look at women dressed like that. Ick.
William December Starr
trag <tr...@io.com> said:
> Whenever a TV show does a strip-club scene, I'm left wondering why
> anybody would want to look at women dressed like that. Ick.
Note that whenever a (U.S.) tv show does a strip-club scene, the one
thing it almost certainly doesn't show is the women in the state of
clothing that the patrons came to see them in.
-- wds
Robert Bannister
I'm left wondering what sort of TV programme wants to have a strip-club
scene. I can only think of police/detective programmes, and then it
would be sufficient to give the impression of a strip club, rather than
every sordid detail.
--
Rob Bannister
Moriarty
> > trag <t...@io.com> said:
>
> >> Whenever a TV show does a strip-club scene, I'm left wondering why
> >> anybody would want to look at women dressed like that. Ick.
>
> > Note that whenever a (U.S.) tv show does a strip-club scene, the one
> > thing it almost certainly doesn't show is the women in the state of
> > clothing that the patrons came to see them in.
>
> I'm left wondering what sort of TV programme wants to have a strip-club
> scene. I can only think of police/detective programmes, and then it
> would be sufficient to give the impression of a strip club, rather than
> every sordid detail.
It's mandatory in sit-coms where a marriage is planned.
-Moriarty
Robert Bannister
The same day I sent the above, I saw in the evening an episode of "Trial
& Retribution" that showed a strip club with a woman naked to just above
the crotch, and as far as I could see, this had nothing to do with the
story line at all.
--
Rob Bannister
Chuk Goodin
Lots of scenes in "The Sopranos" were in a strip club, kind of the
opposite of a police/detective program. It was for verisimilitude, I'm
sure.
--
chuk
Christopher Henrich
wrote:
Kind of the opposite - like a photographic negative. (OMG those are
nearly obsolete. )
--
Christopher J. Henrich
chen...@monmouth.com
http://www.mathinteract.com
"A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver." -- Boon