"Old Cliches" (800 words)
Fedallah
me misreading something on afo as "buying old cliches." The other is about
an old woman who foolishly sells her cliches to a telemarketer and finds
that she can no longer talk, as cliches made up a huge of her speech. Kinda
like the idea, so I'll work on it tonight if I get the time. Meanwhile,
just a goofy writing excersice. Hope some enjoy.
Rick
---
"Is that a quotation?" I asked.
"Of course. There is nothing but quotations left for us. Our language is a
system of quotations."
-Borges, "A Weary Man's Utopia"
---
Michael was a language trader. He worked for Systamatik-one of the "Big
Three" brokerage houses that dealt in English phrases. His specialty was the
acquisition of cliches. "Stellar"-though a perfectly legal description, as
it only used one word and thus didn't fall under any of the applicable
laws-didn't even begin to describe his performance in such a capacity,
though that was the word most often used in his last performance review.
Dressed in the obligatory Armani suit and Italian leather shoes, Michael's
appearance and general bearing gave no reason for anyone to suspect that he
was a revolutionary. His superior, before whom Michael was standing,
certainly never suspected such a thing.
"I don't know how you do it, Mike." The man laughed. "I'm just glad that you
do."
"Only doing my best to help the firm. It's all just a matter of
understanding the fundamentals of cold selling." Michael's apparent humility
wasn't a facade. He took no pleasure in his job, or his success. In fact, he
detested the hours spent on the phone.
"Well, I just wanted to congratulate you again. We'll find a buyer for these
quick. I won't ask how you convinced them to sell so low." The man winked.
Michael smiled politely before asking to be excused so that he could "make
sure the paperwork got handled properly." The buy and sell orders had come
through the official channels less than an hour ago.
In them, Warner Brothers Entertainment agreed to sell the rights to the
phrases "A stitch in time saves nine" and "An ounce of prevention is worth a
pound of cure," along with their various separable phrases and all
combinations thereof. A company seeking to publish a book titled-or even
using, in any conspicuous way--"A Stitch in Time," for example, would no
longer be able get such rights from WBE. If Michael had his way, no one
would ever again be able to use the phrase publically.
Back in his office, surrounded by display screens showing the changing
states of various language markets, he made the phone call. He used his own
adiovid unit, of course.
An attractive woman answered. "Is this Angelo?"
"Yes, this is Michael."
"Happy to hear from you again so soon. What have you got for us today?"
"'A stitch in time saves nine,' and 'an ounce of prevention is worth a pound
of cure.' Got them to sell both, total rights for all markets."
She beamed at him.
He continued, "Still working with Harper Collins on the Shakespearean set.
They've budged a bit on 'A rose by any other name,' but are still obstinate
about 'to be or not to be.' Seem to think its future use is too profitable."
"No worries. You're still our best. We'll put in our bid on the other two
immediately." She smiled and disappeared.
Hers was the only face The Congress had ever shown him. In their few
personal conversations, Michael had learned that she worked for The Congress
out of artistic passion. He suspected that many did.
It's purposes were less than clear to Michael, but he knew they suited his
own, for the time being. Quietly, surely, The Congress was buying up the
rights to all phrases, sentences, stories, advertising slogans, screenplays,
etc. that they could obtain. The Congress never sold or released those
rights again; in effect, the combinations of words they bought became
taboo-or sacred, in the same way that YHWY's name wasn't to be spoken aloud.
In short, They were constricting language, possibly in some attempt to
eventually eliminate it. People like the woman he had just talked to,
however, felt that such constrictions would again force creativity and
originality into public discourse, as writers and ad men were forced to seek
new ways of expressing themselves.
Michael, though, had an image of a few immensely powerful and obscenely rich
people behind it all, guided by their own nihilistic purposes. In his
happier moments, he even imagined that their purposes matched his own.
He considered himself an ontological revolutionary, a metaphysical
anarchist: a tool used by a divine but impersonal Purpose. He wished the
universe to exhaust itself, to play out all of its possible states of
affairs and thus-he hoped, imagined, had faith-cease. Forcing language to
play out and exhaust its own possibilities was his small contribution
towards that end. Once this universe had completed its course, Michael had
faith that another could shine forth, one less bungled and dense with
suffering. Sure, the time it would take that to happen wasn't even really
imaginable, but for the fervent, eternity itself wasn't too long to wait for
the fulfillment of a dream.
Thinking thus, and so bracing himself for more hours of sacrificial
drudgery, he looked at the schedule on his desk. He dialed the number, and
waited as a secretary put him through. If all went well, the phrase "It's in
God's hands now"-currently owned by Gideons--would soon be the property of
The Congress.
Fedallah
me misreading something on afo as "buying old cliches." The other is about
an old woman who foolishly sells her cliches to a telemarketer and finds
Kinda
like the idea, so I'll work on it tonight if I get the time. Meanwhile,
just a goofy writing excersice. Hope some enjoy.
Rick
---
Michael was a language trader. He worked for Systamatik-one of the "Big
Michael Breslau
Nicely done.
MIke
In article <b%FX9.6855$bL4.6...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
"Fedallah" <pro_g...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> *chuckle* this is nothing serious. It's one of two stories that came from
> me misreading something on afo as "buying old cliches." The other is about
> an old woman who foolishly sells her cliches to a telemarketer and finds
> that she can no longer talk, as cliches made up a huge part of her speech.
> Kinda
> like the idea, so I'll work on it tonight if I get the time. Meanwhile,
> just a goofy writing excersice. Hope some enjoy.
>
> Rick
>
> ---
>
> Michael was a language trader. He worked for Systamatik-one of the "Big
> Three" brokerage houses that dealt in English phrases. His specialty was the
> acquisition of cliches. "Stellar"-though a perfectly legal description, as
> it only used one word and thus didn't fall under any of the applicable
> laws-didn't even begin to describe his performance in such a capacity,
> though that was the word most often used in his last performance review.
> the fulfillment of a dream.
...
Huw Lyan Thomas
> "Is that a quotation?" I asked.
Fun story. Reminded me of domain name brokers, back in the dotcom boom. I
don't see how you could have ended it with more punch, but that Gideon
thing kind of fizzled for me.
--
nativelaw
I knew it would be a good one <g>.
this is 'nothing serious' you say, but it's actually written very well, with
a lot of creativity to it and a neat premise and a great narrative voice.
The only thing not really credible to me was his motivation, about the
waiting for the old world to end, unless he was an immortal and had the
time to see it through, but I could see you taking this, giving him a
slightly different motivation and running with this for a longer story if
you wanted to. I think because it does resonate with the dot com craze
recently, the domain purchase stuff that goes on now but went on in the late
90s even crazier (I admit I was fascinated and neck deep in that for a
while) you could probably even get it snapped up for publication, with the
right twist.
Thanks for posting,
Andrea
"Fedallah" <pro_g...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:5%FX9.6854$bL4.6...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
michael
"Fedallah" <pro_g...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:5%FX9.6854$bL4.6...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
from
> me misreading something on afo as "buying old cliches." The other is
about
> an old woman who foolishly sells her cliches to a telemarketer and finds
> that she can no longer talk, as cliches made up a huge of her speech.
Kinda
> like the idea, so I'll work on it tonight if I get the time. Meanwhile,
> just a goofy writing excersice. Hope some enjoy.
Rick, this is great stuff - don't do yourself down so! I'll crit it later
from my world of deskjob hell, but for now I wanted to suggest something -
and apologies if I've got ideas above my station here - Michael seems at
odds with the ruthless capitalist company he's working for. Supposing he
tried to 'break the machine' by buying Karl Marx quotes and disseminating
them?
Just an idea that popped in to my brain, for whatever reason, on reading
your start.
Michael
> me misreading something on afo as "buying old cliches." The other is about
> an old woman who foolishly sells her cliches to a telemarketer and finds
> that she can no longer talk, as cliches made up a huge of her speech. Kinda
> like the idea, so I'll work on it tonight if I get the time. Meanwhile,
> just a goofy writing excersice. Hope some enjoy.
>
> Rick
Hi Rick, this time I'll crit the piece. Sorry if plot suggestions etc
(my previous post on the subject) is toe-treading on my part; just
that the idea inspired my twisted mind to find something in it. This
time, I'll stick to the facts.
>
> ---
>
> "Is that a quotation?" I asked.
>
> "Of course. There is nothing but quotations left for us. Our language is a
> system of quotations."
>
> -Borges, "A Weary Man's Utopia"
>
> ---
>
> Michael was a language trader.
Great character name <g>
>He worked for Systamatik-one of the "Big
> Three" brokerage houses that dealt in English phrases. His specialty was the
> acquisition of cliches. "Stellar"-though a perfectly legal description, as
> it only used one word and thus didn't fall under any of the applicable
> laws-didn't even begin to describe his performance in such a capacity,
> though that was the word most often used in his last performance review.
Great.
> Dressed in the obligatory Armani suit and Italian leather shoes, Michael's
> appearance and general bearing gave no reason for anyone to suspect that he
> was a revolutionary. His superior, before whom Michael was standing,
> certainly never suspected such a thing.
Obligatory, or a tangible sign of his "stellar" success? If everyone
wears them, then I guess they're all doing OK out of this word trading
mularkey...
>
> "I don't know how you do it, Mike." The man laughed. "I'm just glad that you
> do."
>
> "Only doing my best to help the firm. It's all just a matter of
> understanding the fundamentals of cold selling." Michael's apparent humility
> wasn't a facade. He took no pleasure in his job, or his success. In fact, he
> detested the hours spent on the phone.
>
> "Well, I just wanted to congratulate you again. We'll find a buyer for these
> quick. I won't ask how you convinced them to sell so low." The man winked.
>
> Michael smiled politely before asking to be excused so that he could "make
> sure the paperwork got handled properly." The buy and sell orders had come
> through the official channels less than an hour ago.
>
> In them, Warner Brothers Entertainment agreed to sell the rights to the
> phrases "A stitch in time saves nine" and "An ounce of prevention is worth a
> pound of cure," along with their various separable phrases and all
> combinations thereof.
hah. Here in the UK, 'prevention is better than cure,' but that's just
for interest (if indeed it is interesting?)
A company seeking to publish a book titled-or even
> using, in any conspicuous way--"A Stitch in Time," for example, would no
> longer be able get such rights from WBE. If Michael had his way, no one
> would ever again be able to use the phrase publically.
Publicly? Might be a USA/UK thing. Great para though. (There's a
website about MacDonalds trademarking common phrases such as "Happy
Meal" but also some phrases that are barely fast-food related - take a
look, it might give you more material if you want to continue this?)
> Back in his office, surrounded by display screens showing the changing
> states of various language markets, he made the phone call. He used his own
> adiovid unit, of course.
>
> An attractive woman answered. "Is this Angelo?"
>
> "Yes, this is Michael."
>
> "Happy to hear from you again so soon. What have you got for us today?"
>
> "'A stitch in time saves nine,' and 'an ounce of prevention is worth a pound
> of cure.' Got them to sell both, total rights for all markets."
>
> She beamed at him.
>
> He continued, "Still working with Harper Collins on the Shakespearean set.
> They've budged a bit on 'A rose by any other name,' but are still obstinate
> about 'to be or not to be.' Seem to think its future use is too profitable."
>
> "No worries. You're still our best. We'll put in our bid on the other two
> immediately." She smiled and disappeared.
>
> Hers was the only face The Congress had ever shown him. In their few
> personal conversations, Michael had learned that she worked for The Congress
> out of artistic passion. He suspected that many did.
Hints of 1984 here. That is *never* a bad thing.
> It's purposes were less than clear to Michael, but he knew they suited his
> own, for the time being. Quietly, surely, The Congress was buying up the
> rights to all phrases, sentences, stories, advertising slogans, screenplays,
> etc. that they could obtain. The Congress never sold or released those
> rights again; in effect, the combinations of words they bought became
> taboo-or sacred, in the same way that YHWY's name wasn't to be spoken aloud.
> In short, They were constricting language, possibly in some attempt to
> eventually eliminate it. People like the woman he had just talked to,
> however, felt that such constrictions would again force creativity and
> originality into public discourse, as writers and ad men were forced to seek
> new ways of expressing themselves.
>
> Michael, though, had an image of a few immensely powerful and obscenely rich
> people behind it all, guided by their own nihilistic purposes. In his
> happier moments, he even imagined that their purposes matched his own.
Nihilists? Not convinced that nihilists are that focused or driven on
anything.
> He considered himself an ontological revolutionary, a metaphysical
> anarchist: a tool used by a divine but impersonal Purpose. He wished the
> universe to exhaust itself, to play out all of its possible states of
> affairs and thus-he hoped, imagined, had faith-cease.
Heavy. Not sure it really scans that well, though - hoped, imagined,
had faith... it's the had faith - now, you can't really say 'prayed'
as I get the feeling that this guy's agnostic, but I think it needs
another '-ed' word to keep the flow.
Forcing language to
> play out and exhaust its own possibilities was his small contribution
> towards that end. Once this universe had completed its course, Michael had
> faith that another could shine forth, one less bungled and dense with
> suffering. Sure, the time it would take that to happen wasn't even really
> imaginable, but for the fervent, eternity itself wasn't too long to wait for
> the fulfillment of a dream.
>
> Thinking thus, and so bracing himself for more hours of sacrificial
> drudgery, he looked at the schedule on his desk. He dialed the number, and
> waited as a secretary put him through. If all went well, the phrase "It's in
> God's hands now"-currently owned by Gideons--would soon be the property of
> The Congress.
Superb stuff - great idea, well executed so far. You should work on
this and post more as and when. Believe it or not, this is the best
thing I've seen from you in terms of ambition and range. Come on! Keep
it going!
Fedallah
"Michael" <michae...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:65db83ab.03012...@posting.google.com...
> "Fedallah" <pro_g...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:<5%FX9.6854$bL4.6...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
> > *chuckle* this is nothing serious. It's one of two stories that
came from
> > me misreading something on afo as "buying old cliches." The other
is about
> > an old woman who foolishly sells her cliches to a telemarketer and
finds
> > that she can no longer talk, as cliches made up a huge of her
speech. Kinda
> > like the idea, so I'll work on it tonight if I get the time.
Meanwhile,
> > just a goofy writing excersice. Hope some enjoy.
> >
> > Rick
>
> Hi Rick, this time I'll crit the piece. Sorry if plot suggestions etc
> (my previous post on the subject) is toe-treading on my part; just
> that the idea inspired my twisted mind to find something in it. This
> time, I'll stick to the facts.
Hey Michael. No worries at all about the suggestion, I always enjoy
hearing other perspectives on where a story might be taken. I liked
your idea, made me wish Adorno lent himself to punchy phrases ;) That
could be an interesting piece about mass culture commodifying language
(hmmm......) It also gave me the idea of having him be opposed to both
The Congress and the culture, using the former for temporary ends, maybe
part of some radical sect within the congress. In other words, it
sparked some fertile thought, thanks.
<snippage of much appreciated kind comment>
> > Dressed in the obligatory Armani suit and Italian leather shoes,
Michael's
> > appearance and general bearing gave no reason for anyone to suspect
that he
> > was a revolutionary. His superior, before whom Michael was standing,
> > certainly never suspected such a thing.
>
> Obligatory, or a tangible sign of his "stellar" success? If everyone
> wears them, then I guess they're all doing OK out of this word trading
> mularkey...
Great eye. You pinpointed what I was trying to get across: it would be
obligatory in his field for someone as succesful as Michael, not for
everyone.
<snippage>
>
> A company seeking to publish a book titled-or even
> > using, in any conspicuous way--"A Stitch in Time," for example,
would no
> > longer be able get such rights from WBE. If Michael had his way, no
one
> > would ever again be able to use the phrase publically.
>
> Publicly? Might be a USA/UK thing. Great para though. (There's a
> website about MacDonalds trademarking common phrases such as "Happy
> Meal" but also some phrases that are barely fast-food related - take a
> look, it might give you more material if you want to continue this?)
I think I just spelled "publicly" wrong. That web ste is the kinda
thing that would interest me all on its own, and it'd be great fodder
for this story. Happen to remember it? I'm sure I can find it with a
bit of effort on my own, if not.
> > Hers was the only face The Congress had ever shown him. In their few
> > personal conversations, Michael had learned that she worked for The
Congress
> > out of artistic passion. He suspected that many did.
>
> Hints of 1984 here. That is *never* a bad thing.
*G* Cool. But dangerous, 1984 is forceful enough that even hints of it
can make something read as derivative.
> > Michael, though, had an image of a few immensely powerful and
obscenely rich
> > people behind it all, guided by their own nihilistic purposes. In
his
> > happier moments, he even imagined that their purposes matched his
own.
>
> Nihilists? Not convinced that nihilists are that focused or driven on
> anything.
You might be right, a better choice could be made. I was thinking along
the lines of Nietzsche's "active" nihilism, which seeks to actively
destroy, rather than retreat from meaning. Forgot that it would read
differently to others.
> > He considered himself an ontological revolutionary, a metaphysical
> > anarchist: a tool used by a divine but impersonal Purpose. He wished
the
> > universe to exhaust itself, to play out all of its possible states
of
> > affairs and thus-he hoped, imagined, had faith-cease.
>
> Heavy. Not sure it really scans that well, though - hoped, imagined,
> had faith... it's the had faith - now, you can't really say 'prayed'
> as I get the feeling that this guy's agnostic, but I think it needs
> another '-ed' word to keep the flow.
Thanks for pointing this out, as it was a concern when I wrote it. It
does need a "-ed" word, and I counldn't come up with one. Rather than
interrupt the writing I settled on "faith" ('faithed' didn't work *g*)
I'll see what fits.
> > If all went well, the phrase "It's in
> > God's hands now"-currently owned by Gideons--would soon be the
property of
> > The Congress.
>
> Superb stuff - great idea, well executed so far. You should work on
> this and post more as and when. Believe it or not, this is the best
> thing I've seen from you in terms of ambition and range. Come on! Keep
> it going!
Wow. Thanks for the kind comments, Michael. I'm pleasantly surprised
that this seems to resonate with some readers. It was fun enough to
write that it felt like mere self-indulgence. I'll see what I can do
with it in taking it a bit more seriously as something worthy of being
fleshed out and fully explored. Thanks for the encouragement and the
helpful comments!
Rick
Fedallah
"nativelaw" <l...@nativelaw.net> wrote in message
news:v2uhdo4...@corp.supernews.com...
> Hi Rick,
> I knew it would be a good one <g>.
> this is 'nothing serious' you say, but it's actually written very
well, with
> a lot of creativity to it and a neat premise and a great narrative
voice.
> The only thing not really credible to me was his motivation, about the
> waiting for the old world to end, unless he was an immortal and had
the
> time to see it through, but I could see you taking this, giving him a
> slightly different motivation and running with this for a longer story
if
> you wanted to. I think because it does resonate with the dot com
craze
> recently, the domain purchase stuff that goes on now but went on in
the late
> 90s even crazier (I admit I was fascinated and neck deep in that for a
> while) you could probably even get it snapped up for publication, with
the
> right twist.
>
> Thanks for posting,
> Andrea
*G* Hey Andrea. Thanks for the encouragement to write it ;) I'm glad
you liked the result. I agree with your point on his motivation,
there's no way it can work as it stands: it either needs to be changed,
or Michael as a person needs to be developed to the point that it
becomes believable. The former is easier to do, I think... requires
fewer words anyway. This motivation was some self-indulgence on my
part, I'm fascinated by proponents of hopeless causes, and I don't think
you get more hopless than his, hehe. Surprised but pleased that this
oddity worked well. I'll think on what can be done with it for a bit
and see what unfolds.
Many thanks for the time taken to read it, and the encouragement.
Rick
Fedallah
"Huw Lyan Thomas" <h...@NOhexlibrisSPAM.com> wrote in message
news:Xns930CAB0B228...@192.168.1.4...
Thanks for taking the time to comment, Huw. The end fizzled for me,
too, to be honest. I was looking for a way to close the story off
before it became troublesome, when I come back to this, more thought
will be put into a real ending. Happy you were entertained by it,
thanks again.
Rick
Fedallah
"Michael Breslau" <mbre...@speakeasy.org> wrote in message
news:mbreslau-6CA717...@news-central.giganews.com...
> An interesting exercise in imagination.
> Nicely done.
>
> MIke
Hey, Mike. Thanks for reading it and letting me know that it worked for
you. It was a fun indulgence to write it, and it's satifying to know
that it was interesting to others.
Rick
michael
>
> > Hi Rick, this time I'll crit the piece. Sorry if plot suggestions etc
> > (my previous post on the subject) is toe-treading on my part; just
> > that the idea inspired my twisted mind to find something in it. This
> > time, I'll stick to the facts.
>
> Hey Michael. No worries at all about the suggestion, I always enjoy
> hearing other perspectives on where a story might be taken. I liked
> your idea, made me wish Adorno lent himself to punchy phrases ;)
Ah, the culture factory... <cue university flashbacks...>
> > Publicly? Might be a USA/UK thing. Great para though. (There's a
> > website about MacDonalds trademarking common phrases such as "Happy
> > Meal" but also some phrases that are barely fast-food related - take a
> > look, it might give you more material if you want to continue this?)
>
> I think I just spelled "publicly" wrong. That web ste is the kinda
> thing that would interest me all on its own, and it'd be great fodder
> for this story. Happen to remember it? I'm sure I can find it with a
> bit of effort on my own, if not.
>
Did have a quick browse, couldn't find it though. It was things like "share
the moment", phrases like that as well as happy meal, big mac, etc etc.
Sorry. Worth a trawl if you can be bothered!
Patrick Null
>"Fedallah" <pro_g...@earthlink.net> wrote in >message
news:5%FX9.6854>$bL4.6...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> *chuckle* this is nothing serious. It's one of two >stories that came
from
> me misreading something on afo as "buying old >cliches." The other is
about
> an old woman who foolishly sells her cliches to a >telemarketer and finds
> that she can no longer talk, as cliches made up a huge >of her speech.
Kinda
> like the idea, so I'll work on it tonight if I get the time. >Meanwhile,
> just a goofy writing excersice. Hope some enjoy.
>
> Rick
Hi, Rick! I am glad that you are posting more often now. It's good to see
your name in threads again, m'man. It's equally good to read your stories
for they're always good. I don't know about anybody else, but I would love
to read your other story. It sounds intriguing.
This one is interesting as well and fascinating in the fact that I wouldn't
be surprised if something like this happens in the future. Can you imagine
the consequences that would happen to the human language as well as NEW
cliches that would be invented for the sole purpose of expressing creativity
since they would no longer have access to the comfortable words and phrases
that they are used to? I think you touched on this, and, believe me, it was
handled very well.
One of the most creative stories I've read. And I don't say that lightly.
>
> ---
>
> "Is that a quotation?" I asked.
>
> "Of course. There is nothing but quotations left for us. >Our language is
a
> system of quotations."
>
> -Borges, "A Weary Man's Utopia"
At first, I thought this was part of the story, until I saw the quote. It
threw me for a loop. It might be better without the quote or tacked onto
the end of your story instead of the beginning.
>
> ---
>
> Michael was a language trader. He worked for >Systamatik-one of the "Big
> Three" brokerage houses that dealt in English phrases. >His specialty was
the
> acquisition of cliches.
Good start.
>"Stellar"-though a perfectly legal description, as
> it only used one word and thus didn't fall under any of >the applicable
> laws-didn't even begin to describe his performance in >such a capacity,
> though that was the word most often used in his last >performance review.
Take out the explanatory stuff between the hyphens.
>
>Michael's apparent humility
> wasn't a facade. He took no pleasure in his job, or his >success. In fact,
he
> detested the hours spent on the phone.
This doesn't work for me. Sorry. It seemed odd to be obsessed with his job
and the acquiring of cliches, but, at the same time, hate it. See what I
mean?
>
> "Well, I just wanted to congratulate you again. We'll >find a buyer for
these
> quick. I won't ask how you convinced them to sell so >low." The man
winked.
I don't know why you keep referring to his superior as "the man" Too lazy
to look in a phone book to get a name, Rick? <wink>
> In them, Warner Brothers Entertainment agreed to sell >the rights to the
> phrases "A stitch in time saves nine" and "An ounce of >prevention is
worth a
> pound of cure," along with their various separable >phrases and all
> combinations thereof.
Never heard of the second phrase.
>A company seeking to publish a book titled-or even
> using, in any conspicuous way--"A Stitch in Time," for >example, would no
> longer be able get such rights from WBE. If Michael >had his way, no one
> would ever again be able to use the phrase publically.
LOL-I really, really like this concept.
>
> Back in his office, surrounded by display screens >showing the changing
> states of various language markets, he made the phone >call. He used his
own
> adiovid unit, of course.
You might want to explain what an adiovid unit is and the fact that he can
see her. Cause I was getting all set to pounce on you about how he would
know she was attractive and how he would know she beamed at him. I thought
they were on a telephone until I gave it a little thought.
>
> An attractive woman answered. "Is this Angelo?"
>
> "Yes, this is Michael."
Michael Angelo? Groan. :-)
>
> He continued, "Still working with Harper Collins on the >Shakespearean
set.
> They've budged a bit on 'A rose by any other name,' >but are still
obstinate
> about 'to be or not to be.' Seem to think its future use is >too
profitable."
Man, I love this.
> Hers was the only face The Congress had ever shown
Any reason why The is capitalized? Wouldn't it be enough if just Congress
was?
> It's purposes were less than clear to Michael, but he >knew they suited
his
> own, for the time being. Quietly, surely,
Quietly and surely-one or the other. Or find another way to word it. Like:
The Congress was discreetly buying up all the rights..."
>The Congress was buying up the
> rights to all phrases, sentences, stories, advertising >slogans,
screenplays,
> etc. that they could obtain. The Congress never sold or >released those
> rights again; in effect, the combinations of words they >bought became
> taboo-or sacred, in the same way that YHWY's name >wasn't to be spoken
aloud.
Don't get the acronym here. Everything else is top notch.
> In short, They
I always used to capitalize important words like that, too, thinking, in my
wisdom, it's going to stand out and seem important. I've discovered it just
looks corny. Eh...might be a personal preference.
> He considered himself an ontological revolutionary, a >metaphysical
> anarchist: a tool used by a divine but impersonal >Purpose. He wished the
> universe to exhaust itself, to play out all of its possible >states of
> affairs and thus-he hoped, imagined, had faith-cease. >Forcing language to
> play out and exhaust its own possibilities was his small >contribution
> towards that end. Once this universe had completed its >course, Michael
had
> faith that another could shine forth, one less bungled >and dense with
> suffering. Sure, the time it would take that to happen >wasn't even really
> imaginable, but for the fervent, eternity itself wasn't too >long to wait
for
> the fulfillment of a dream.
Ya just had to bring philosophy into the picture, didn't ya? <G>
>
> Thinking thus, and so bracing himself for more hours of >sacrificial
> drudgery, he looked at the schedule on his desk. He >dialed the number,
and
> waited as a secretary put him through. If all went well, >the phrase "It's
in
> God's hands now"-currently owned by Gideons-->would soon be the property
of
> The Congress.
Heh. Nice ending. Cool story. Thanks for sharing, Rick. Take care.
Phil L
post-dotcom era. Instead of words being eliminated from the language
by gov't dictat, they're bought up - great idea. I wonder if you could
lenghten it to develop what the "underground" would look like in this
world. Like totalitarian gov'ts inspire subversive creativity, how is
this hyper-commercialism thwarted?
"Fedallah" <pro_g...@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<16QX9.7784$bL4.7...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
Joel Crum
news:5%FX9.6854$bL4.6...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net:
Wonderful little story. I can easily see it getting published. What I
really liked about it is how believable you made your central premise
seem through your treatment of it. I'll try to put some feedback in
below.
> His
> specialty was the acquisition of cliches. "Stellar"-though a perfectly
> legal description, as it only used one word and thus didn't fall under
> any of the applicable laws-didn't even begin to describe his
> performance in such a capacity, though that was the word most often
> used in his last performance review.
You could break that up into a couple of different sentences.
> It's all just a matter of
> understanding the fundamentals of cold selling.
Technically speaking he didn't sell the phrases. He purchased them. You
could say "cold calling".
The
> man winked.
>
> Michael smiled politely before asking to be excused so that he could
> "make sure the paperwork got handled properly."
Very nice note of discomfort.
> The buy and sell
> orders had come through the official channels less than an hour ago.
>
> In them, Warner Brothers Entertainment agreed to sell the rights to
> the phrases "A stitch in time saves nine" and "An ounce of prevention
> is worth a pound of cure,"
I think you don't need the comma and you may not need the caps on "A" and
"An".
> Back in his office, surrounded by display screens showing the changing
> states of various language markets, he made the phone call. He used
> his own adiovid unit, of course.
You might droop "surrounded by display screens" etc. and "of course" to
make this paragraph read a little more smoothly.
> He wished
> the universe to exhaust itself, to play out all of its possible states
> of affairs and thus-he hoped, imagined, had faith-cease.
Might I suggest "and thus-he hoped, imagined, and had faith-cease.
> Once this universe had completed its
> course, Michael had faith that another could shine forth, one less
> bungled and dense with suffering.
You used "had faith" in the previous sentence. You could present this
one as fact by cutting "Micheal had faith that".
> Sure, the time it would take that to
> happen wasn't even really imaginable, but for the fervent, eternity
> itself wasn't too long to wait for the fulfillment of a dream.
OK I really am getting picky, but it's only because I like the story. I
would reword the above sentence to a positive statement: "the fervent
could wait...".
Over all I really liked this story. If I were you I would rework it to
read more smoothly by the deleting qualifiers, commas, and extra
descriptions imbedded in the sentences.
--
- Joel C.
Dr. Robert Anthony
When you blame others, you give up your power to change.
R. Westermeyer
<pro_g...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>*chuckle* this is nothing serious. It's one of two stories that came from
>me misreading something on afo as "buying old cliches." The other is about
>an old woman who foolishly sells her cliches to a telemarketer and finds
>that she can no longer talk, as cliches made up a huge of her speech. Kinda
>like the idea, so I'll work on it tonight if I get the time. Meanwhile,
>just a goofy writing excersice. Hope some enjoy.
>
>Rick
>
You write well even when you're just fucking around.
Quite funny. the ending was a hoot.
LIke Huw, it didn't feel to farfetched with people bidding thousands
for domain names.
--Bob
*****
King Ink strolls into town
He sniffs around...
King Ink kicks off his stink boot
Sand and soot and dust and dirt and...
He's much bigger than you THINK!
--Nick Cave
Fedallah
"Patrick Null" <whitew...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:b0p0lk$rpkbf$1...@ID-173005.news.dfncis.de...
> Rick wrote:
> > Rick
>
> Hi, Rick! I am glad that you are posting more often now. It's good
to see
> your name in threads again, m'man. It's equally good to read your
stories
> for they're always good. I don't know about anybody else, but I would
love
> to read your other story. It sounds intriguing.
Hey Patrick! It's good to have time on here again. Actually staying in
a real house for at least a couple of weeks until I decide to get off my
rear and start making my way back to real life.
>
> This one is interesting as well and fascinating in the fact that I
wouldn't
> be surprised if something like this happens in the future. Can you
imagine
> the consequences that would happen to the human language as well as
NEW
> cliches that would be invented for the sole purpose of expressing
creativity
> since they would no longer have access to the comfortable words and
phrases
> that they are used to? I think you touched on this, and, believe me,
it was
> handled very well.
>
> One of the most creative stories I've read. And I don't say that
lightly.
Excellent, thanks for the compliment. I'm glad you enjoyed this, and I
always look forward to your suggestions, they are consistently helpful.
> > -Borges, "A Weary Man's Utopia"
>
> At first, I thought this was part of the story, until I saw the quote.
It
> threw me for a loop. It might be better without the quote or tacked
onto
> the end of your story instead of the beginning.
Heh, you're right. I tried to cut this, realizing the same thing, but
OE sent it out before I could.
> >"Stellar"-though a perfectly legal description, as
> > it only used one word and thus didn't fall under any of >the
applicable
> > laws-didn't even begin to describe his performance in >such a
capacity,
> > though that was the word most often used in his last >performance
review.
>
> Take out the explanatory stuff between the hyphens.
Was wondering if anyone stumbled on that. I meant it to set up the
situation and how extreme intellectual property/copyright laws had
gotten. I'll see if it can be presented another way.
> >Michael's apparent humility
> > wasn't a facade. He took no pleasure in his job, or his >success. In
fact,
> he
> > detested the hours spent on the phone.
>
> This doesn't work for me. Sorry. It seemed odd to be obsessed with
his job
> and the acquiring of cliches, but, at the same time, hate it. See
what I
> mean?
Yes, I do. Not sure I'll lose this bit, though. It's meant to seem odd
and to be contradictory, to require some further explanation. That
explanation being he sees dealing with his job as his sacrifice for a
greater good. I'll look and see if that can be made more explicit.
> >
> > "Well, I just wanted to congratulate you again. We'll >find a buyer
for
> these
> > quick. I won't ask how you convinced them to sell so >low." The man
> winked.
>
> I don't know why you keep referring to his superior as "the man" Too
lazy
> to look in a phone book to get a name, Rick? <wink>
*G* I think I just have something against naming my characters. The
poor bastards rarely get such a thing.
> > pound of cure," along with their various separable >phrases and all
> > combinations thereof.
>
> Never heard of the second phrase.
I may come up with another one... it may be less common than I thought.
> >A company seeking to publish a book titled-or even
> > using, in any conspicuous way--"A Stitch in Time," for >example,
would no
> > longer be able get such rights from WBE. If Michael >had his way, no
one
> > would ever again be able to use the phrase publically.
>
> LOL-I really, really like this concept.
Heh. Thanks, so do I ;)
> > adiovid unit, of course.
>
> You might want to explain what an adiovid unit is and the fact that he
can
> see her. Cause I was getting all set to pounce on you about how he
would
> know she was attractive and how he would know she beamed at him. I
thought
> they were on a telephone until I gave it a little thought.
Good suggestion. A couple well placed words should work.
> > An attractive woman answered. "Is this Angelo?"
> >
> > "Yes, this is Michael."
>
> Michael Angelo? Groan. :-)
LOL... cheesy, ain't it?
> > taboo-or sacred, in the same way that YHWY's name >wasn't to be
spoken
> aloud.
>
> Don't get the acronym here. Everything else is top notch.
Thanks for the kind comment. "YHWH"=the sacred name of Yahweh/Jehovah,
the name not to be spoken. Might be more clear if I reference "the
Hebrew God" or some such.
> > In short, They
>
> I always used to capitalize important words like that, too, thinking,
in my
> wisdom, it's going to stand out and seem important. I've discovered
it just
> looks corny. Eh...might be a personal preference.
You may be right. I _think_ I had used "they" to reference something
else in the paragraph, and didn't want to use "the congress" again, so
capitalized it to avoid confusion.
> > the fulfillment of a dream.
>
> Ya just had to bring philosophy into the picture, didn't ya? <G>
It's like some kinda involuntary muscle twitch *G*
> Heh. Nice ending. Cool story. Thanks for sharing, Rick. Take care.
Thanks for taking the time to read it, Glad you enjoyed :) Be well!
Rick
Fedallah
"Joel Crum" <cru...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns930C60FA7E6C8...@129.250.170.100...
> "Fedallah" <pro_g...@earthlink.net> wrote in
> news:5%FX9.6854$bL4.6...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net:
>
> Wonderful little story. I can easily see it getting published. What
I
> really liked about it is how believable you made your central premise
> seem through your treatment of it. I'll try to put some feedback in
> below.
Thanks for the compliment. I'm surprised but definitely pleased that
this one seems to have worked. Looks like I may put some work into it.
Really glad this approach made it believable, I decided to just assume
the worl this guy lives in rather than explain it, if that makes sense.
> > His
> > specialty was the acquisition of cliches. "Stellar"-though a
perfectly
> > legal description, as it only used one word and thus didn't fall
under
> > any of the applicable laws-didn't even begin to describe his
> > performance in such a capacity, though that was the word most often
> > used in his last performance review.
>
> You could break that up into a couple of different sentences.
Agreed. Would keep the reader from stumbling while getting across some
info I want to keep.
>
> > It's all just a matter of
> > understanding the fundamentals of cold selling.
>
> Technically speaking he didn't sell the phrases. He purchased them.
You
> could say "cold calling".
Nice catch.
> > the phrases "A stitch in time saves nine" and "An ounce of
prevention
> > is worth a pound of cure,"
>
> I think you don't need the comma and you may not need the caps on "A"
and
> "An".
Noted, thankyou.
> > Back in his office, surrounded by display screens showing the
changing
> > states of various language markets, he made the phone call. He used
> > his own adiovid unit, of course.
>
> You might droop "surrounded by display screens" etc. and "of course"
to
> make this paragraph read a little more smoothly.
Agreed, I think. Was trying to get across that he'd never consider
using the company'sphone for such a call with that "of course." I'll
see what else can be done, or if it even needs to be said.
> > He wished
> > the universe to exhaust itself, to play out all of its possible
states
> > of affairs and thus-he hoped, imagined, had faith-cease.
>
> Might I suggest "and thus-he hoped, imagined, and had faith-cease.
*G* chuckling at myself for not seeing the simple solution. I wrestled
with that line, many thanks!
> > Once this universe had completed its
> > course, Michael had faith that another could shine forth, one less
> > bungled and dense with suffering.
>
> You used "had faith" in the previous sentence. You could present this
> one as fact by cutting "Micheal had faith that".
Great suggestion... adds power to the statement, too.
> > Sure, the time it would take that to
> > happen wasn't even really imaginable, but for the fervent, eternity
> > itself wasn't too long to wait for the fulfillment of a dream.
>
>
> OK I really am getting picky, but it's only because I like the story.
I
> would reword the above sentence to a positive statement: "the fervent
> could wait...".
Another good suggestion. Thanks for taking the time to give it such a
careful reading, it's much appreciated.
>
> Over all I really liked this story. If I were you I would rework it
to
> read more smoothly by the deleting qualifiers, commas, and extra
> descriptions imbedded in the sentences.
Many thanks for the suggestions and the kind comments. I'm glad the
story interested you enough to merit a close reading, the effort is
appreciated. A re-write will be following soon.
Rick
Fedallah
"R. Westermeyer" <wst...@cts.com> wrote in message
news:c3g03v8l8uh2pnseb...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 23:41:53 GMT, "Fedallah"
> <pro_g...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >Rick
> >
>
> You write well even when you're just fucking around.
>
> Quite funny. the ending was a hoot.
>
> LIke Huw, it didn't feel to farfetched with people bidding thousands
> for domain names.
>
> --Bob
Thanks for the compliment... It's gratifying when you find my work
enjoyable, thanks for letting me know. *G* I was hoping the humor would
come through for some. Thanks for reading and commenting.
Rick
Fedallah
"Phil L" <pli...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:dc67335f.03012...@posting.google.com...
> This piece reminds me of Winston's job in "1984", updated for the
> post-dotcom era. Instead of words being eliminated from the language
> by gov't dictat, they're bought up - great idea. I wonder if you could
> lenghten it to develop what the "underground" would look like in this
> world. Like totalitarian gov'ts inspire subversive creativity, how is
> this hyper-commercialism thwarted?
Glad you posted this, as my thoughts are moving along the same lines:
exploring the underground in this world, and this character who is set
against both the world and the subversives by his radical stance. Nice
to know others would find the same kinda thing interesting, thanks.
Rick
jpg.writer
should: it entertained, the language flowed well and it got to the
point without leaving the reader feeling something is missing.
Personally, I liked your ending and found it ironic that religion was
about to have it's speech curtailed. I think it would make a good
jumping off point for a bigger story if you wanted. What if cliches
took on the status of vilgilante contraband and he ticked someone off
because of something he snapped up?
The only thing that jumped out at me is below and probably nit-picky
on my part. The word exhaust is used twice, which made me stop to
double check where I was. That kinda interupted the flow of the
narrative for me. Perhaps the second sentence could be simplified and
thus making it a stronger statement. <<Forcing language to play out
its possibilities was his small contribution.>>
He wished the universe to exhaust itself, to play out all of its
possible states of affairs and thus-he hoped, imagined, had
faith-cease.
Forcing language to play out and exhaust its own possibilities was his
small contribution towards that end.
Good luck, I think this will do well when you send it out.
jpg-writer
Andrew Callahan
I've been away from the group for a while, and this is the first piece I've
read since being back. I like it!
Tempted to say it was "cute" but it was something more than that. It has
just a bit of an edge and strangely doesn't seem all that far-fetched to me.
(The continuing extension of copyrights and never letting things go into the
public domain isn't too far from this).
Phil L. said this reminded him of "1984," it reminded me of that as well.
Others commented about the Gideons ending, (which I thought was pretty good)
but if you wanted to punch it up you might change it to the Southern Baptist
Convention and the phrase they are selling as "In the name of Jesus Christ,
Amen."
In any event, I really enjoyed it. I, also, would like to see the story
about the woman who can no longer talk because she has sold her cliches.
Thanks for posting.
Andrew
"Fedallah" <pro_g...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:5%FX9.6854$bL4.6...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Egad
them justice. Develop this guys revolution and you have a novel.
Nice stuff
Thanks for posting
Egad
"Fedallah" <pro_g...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:5%FX9.6854$bL4.6...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Fedallah
"jpg.writer" <jpe...@nc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:b5ae4ba3.03012...@posting.google.com...
> I liked your story a lot and I think it does what a short story
> should: it entertained, the language flowed well and it got to the
> point without leaving the reader feeling something is missing.
Thanks for taking the time to read and respond, I'm glad you enjoyed
this.
> Personally, I liked your ending and found it ironic that religion was
> about to have it's speech curtailed. I think it would make a good
> jumping off point for a bigger story if you wanted. What if cliches
> took on the status of vilgilante contraband and he ticked someone off
> because of something he snapped up?
*g* Happy you caught the irony of the ending. I think I'll keep that
same basic theme, but look at something a bit more satisfying. I'm
getting more intrigued by the idea of using this as an intro t something
more... fo now I'll work on it as a short story and see what develops
afterwards, thanks for the suggestions. It's gratifying to know when
something sparks the imagination.
>
> The only thing that jumped out at me is below and probably nit-picky
> on my part. The word exhaust is used twice, which made me stop to
> double check where I was. That kinda interupted the flow of the
> narrative for me. Perhaps the second sentence could be simplified and
> thus making it a stronger statement. <<Forcing language to play out
> its possibilities was his small contribution.>>
>
>
> He wished the universe to exhaust itself, to play out all of its
> possible states of affairs and thus-he hoped, imagined, had
> faith-cease.
>
> Forcing language to play out and exhaust its own possibilities was his
> small contribution towards that end.
>
> Good luck, I think this will do well when you send it out.
Many thanks for the suggestions and the kind comments. I agree with
your crit, and didn't find it nit-picky at all, that whole chunk reads a
bit clunky. Again, welcome to afo! Someone willing to offer solid
reviews and suggestions is awlways welcome here, I think you'll enjoy it
:)
Rick
Fedallah
"Andrew Callahan" <and...@anytype.com> wrote in message
news:TVhY9.3542$u12.1...@news.alltel.net...
> Rick,
> I've been away from the group for a while, and this is the first piece
I've
> read since being back. I like it!
Cool, thanks for letting me know.
> Tempted to say it was "cute" but it was something more than that. It
has
> just a bit of an edge and strangely doesn't seem all that far-fetched
to me.
> (The continuing extension of copyrights and never letting things go
into the
> public domain isn't too far from this).
Ack! *breathes a sigh of relief as he continues reading* Not sure I've
ever written anything cute, if I do, please let me know by
email--wouldn't want that knowldge getting out into the open. *G*
Seriously though, glad the light take on something had a spike to it.
> Phil L. said this reminded him of "1984," it reminded me of that as
well.
>
> Others commented about the Gideons ending, (which I thought was pretty
good)
> but if you wanted to punch it up you might change it to the Southern
Baptist
> Convention and the phrase they are selling as "In the name of Jesus
Christ,
> Amen."
LOL... hope ya don't mind if I borrow this. Patenting "In the name of
Jesus Christ, Amen" strikes me as perfect for this, and twistedly
hilarious. I think that's the punch I was looking for.
> In any event, I really enjoyed it. I, also, would like to see the
story
> about the woman who can no longer talk because she has sold her
cliches.
>
> Thanks for posting.
Thanks for taking the time to read and comment. Happy you enjoyed it,
and your suggestion was great.
Rick
Fedallah
"Egad" <eg...@sbcglobal.invalid> wrote in message
news:RsjY9.2$_T2.2...@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...
> Seems to me like you have plenty of very original ideas and the talent
to do
> them justice. Develop this guys revolution and you have a novel.
>
> Nice stuff
>
> Thanks for posting
>
> Egad
Thanks for the compliment, and thanks for taking the time to read this
and let me know that it worked for you. Not sure I have the skill to do
much justice to any idea yet, but I can finally say I'm taking my
writing seriously enough to try and develop that skill. Thisi dea seems
to have done better than I was expecting, and the revolutionary aspect
of this guy is intriguing me more. Hopefully something will develop
after I've honed this piece a bit. Thanks again for reading and
commenting.
Rick
Andrew Callahan
>
> LOL... hope ya don't mind if I borrow this. Patenting "In the name of
> Jesus Christ, Amen" strikes me as perfect for this, and twistedly
> hilarious. I think that's the punch I was looking for.
>
OF COURSE I DON'T MIND if you borrow the idea. I wouldn't have offered it
to you if I minded. And, in your case I'll waive my usual 40 percent share
(with a minimum upfront cash payment of $US40,000). All I will expect from
you is that when you are on your book tour and you come to Hastings,
Nebraska (which may not be right at the beginning of the tour) you take me
out to dinner at the OK Cafe (where they reportedly have very good
chicken-fried steak).
Best wishes.
Andrew
Alaric
know it wouldn't work (the mechanism for protection and infringement would
be impossible to frame and if framed to enforce) it's a cute notion, and
when you throw in the added benefit that it would put Barbara Cartland and
John out of business, I'm all for it in abstract principle.
Not sure you achieve all that could be achieved with this. You don't try to
build a story on the back of it, and I think it'd be interesting if you did.
What we have here seems more of a still life portrait than a movie. But
excellently written and conceived as always.
> Michael was a language trader. He worked for Systamatik-one of the "Big
Three" brokerage houses that dealt in English phrases. His specialty was the
acquisition of cliches.
A cliché acquirer's work is never done.
> "Well, I just wanted to congratulate you again. We'll find a buyer for
these quick. I won't ask how you convinced them to sell so low." The man
winked.
A good man is hard to find.
> Warner Brothers Entertainment agreed to sell the rights to the phrases "A
stitch in time saves nine" and "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of
cure," along with their various separable phrases and all combinations
thereof.
A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
> If Michael had his way, no one would ever again be able to use the phrase
publically.
Prevention is better than cure.
> He continued, "Still working with Harper Collins on the Shakespearean
set. They've budged a bit on 'A rose by any other name,' but are still
obstinate about 'to be or not to be.' Seem to think its future use is too
profitable."
What are the roots that clutch?
> In short, They were constricting language, possibly in some attempt to
eventually eliminate it.
A picture's worth a thousand words.
> He wished the universe to exhaust itself, to play out all of its possible
states of affairs and thus-he hoped, imagined, had faith-cease.
The other man's grass is always greener.
If all went well, the phrase "It's in God's hands now"-currently owned by
Gideons--would soon be the property of The Congress.
Ah. God's will.
Weird and oddly unsatisfying (for the reasons I said) but very, very clever.
You can't win 'em all, eh? There's many a slip 'twixt cup and lip.
See ya later, alligator.
Quadpus
>
> Michael was a language trader. He worked for Systamatik-one of the "Big
> Three" brokerage houses that dealt in English phrases. His specialty was the
> acquisition of cliches.
This is a wonderful, wonderful opener.
> Back in his office, surrounded by display screens showing the changing
> states of various language markets, he made the phone call. He used his own
> adiovid unit, of course.
audiovid?
> It's purposes were less than clear to Michael, but he knew they suited his
> own, for the time being. Quietly, surely, The Congress was buying up the
> rights to all phrases, sentences, stories, advertising slogans, screenplays,
> etc. that they could obtain. The Congress never sold or released those
> rights again; in effect, the combinations of words they bought became
> taboo-or sacred, in the same way that YHWY's name wasn't to be spoken aloud.
YHWH
> Thinking thus, and so bracing himself for more hours of sacrificial
> drudgery, he looked at the schedule on his desk. He dialed the number, and
> waited as a secretary put him through. If all went well, the phrase "It's in
> God's hands now"-currently owned by Gideons--would soon be the property of
> The Congress.
The three opening sentences, and the very concept, are much, much too good
for the sketchy, exposition-heavy, unfinished piece you've got here.
I wouldn't write this off as an "excercise" if I were you. This could easily
be developed into a publishable story.
Fedallah
"Alaric" <alar...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:b14134$lps$1...@helle.btinternet.com...
> Hi, Rick. Love the idea. Ignoring the fact that as a trade mark
attorney I
> know it wouldn't work (the mechanism for protection and infringement
would
> be impossible to frame and if framed to enforce) it's a cute notion,
and
> when you throw in the added benefit that it would put Barbara Cartland
and
> John out of business, I'm all for it in abstract principle.
>
> Not sure you achieve all that could be achieved with this. You don't
try to
> build a story on the back of it, and I think it'd be interesting if
you did.
> What we have here seems more of a still life portrait than a movie.
But
> excellently written and conceived as always.
>
*G* But thanks for the head-start on my list.
I'm afraid I agree with you Alaric, more should be done with this. This
is definitely a scetch and, in Robert's words, was mostly me just
fucking around. I'm pleased the idea seems to have caught the fancy of
some, though and I have this in my "current" folder as something to
develop. I'l see what takes shape and post it here sometime in the next
week or so. Thanks for taking the time to read and comment. Helpful as
always.
Rick
Fedallah
"Quadpus" <qua...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7dd67e3a.03012...@posting.google.com...
> "Fedallah" <pro_g...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:<5%FX9.6854$bL4.6...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
> >
spoken aloud.
>
> YHWH
Oi! *hangs his head in shame*
> > The Congress.
>
> The three opening sentences, and the very concept, are much, much too
good
> for the sketchy, exposition-heavy, unfinished piece you've got here.
>
> I wouldn't write this off as an "excercise" if I were you. This could
easily
> be developed into a publishable story.
Thanks for reading and taking the time to comment. Thanks for the kind
words... this really was just me playing around, but it seems there is
something here asking to be taken more seriously. I totally agree that
the exposition is way too heavy, and of course this can't qualify as a
full story as it stands. I'll be developing this more, and will post my
efforts. Thanks again for the encouragement to do something more
ambitious with this piece.
Rick
Wind River
Fedallah wrote:
>
> Michael was a language trader. He worked for Systamatik-one of the "Big
> Three" brokerage houses that dealt in English phrases. His specialty was the
> acquisition of cliches. "Stellar"-though a perfectly legal description, as
> it only used one word and thus didn't fall under any of the applicable
> laws-didn't even begin to describe his performance in such a capacity,
> though that was the word most often used in his last performance review.
I like this first paragraph, showing us that certain phrases can't even
be used legally by writers.
<snipped>
> It's purposes were less than clear to Michael, but he knew they suited his
Its
> own, for the time being. Quietly, surely, The Congress was buying up the
> rights to all phrases, sentences, stories, advertising slogans, screenplays,
> etc. that they could obtain. The Congress never sold or released those
> rights again; in effect, the combinations of words they bought became
> taboo-or sacred, in the same way that YHWY's name wasn't to be spoken aloud.
Good analogy here and not spelling out Yahweh (oops).
I enjoyed this one. (How come I always sound like a "broken record" when
reviewing your stuff?) There's a lot of power and creativity in the idea
behind this. I think it would work even better in a longer version where
the world does become more silent. I think a stronger ending could be
explored that way. Something like a young child stringing together a few
words and everyone going crazy over its supposed brilliance; although,
that might be too clichéd. Sorry if I seem intrusive; I don't throw out
these ideas to take control of your story. It's just your words always
get me thinking, which is good. That's one of the things I like about
the themes you choose.
Sue
Fedallah
"Wind River" <wind...@voyager.net> wrote in message
news:3E381EFE...@voyager.net...
> Hi Rick!
Hey Sue : -) (Glad you spoke loudly... my left ear still can't hear
worth a damn.)
> Fedallah wrote:
> >
> > Michael was a language trader. He worked for Systamatik-one of the
"Big
> > Three" brokerage houses that dealt in English phrases. His specialty
was the
> > acquisition of cliches. "Stellar"-though a perfectly legal
description, as
> > it only used one word and thus didn't fall under any of the
applicable
> > laws-didn't even begin to describe his performance in such a
capacity,
> > though that was the word most often used in his last performance
review.
>
> I like this first paragraph, showing us that certain phrases can't
even
> be used legally by writers.
Thanks for pointing to this. I'd thougt about scrapping it, but also
thought it was important. I think I'll keep the idea, and integrate it
a couple paragraphs later.
> I enjoyed this one. (How come I always sound like a "broken record"
when
> reviewing your stuff?) There's a lot of power and creativity in the
idea
> behind this. I think it would work even better in a longer version
where
> the world does become more silent. I think a stronger ending could be
> explored that way. Something like a young child stringing together a
few
> words and everyone going crazy over its supposed brilliance; although,
> that might be too clichéd. Sorry if I seem intrusive; I don't throw
out
> these ideas to take control of your story. It's just your words always
> get me thinking, which is good. That's one of the things I like about
> the themes you choose.
Thanks for the kind comments, Sue. And never feel like you're being
intrusive... any idea about where to take a piece is always welcome! I
agree that something longer need to be made of this, I'm letting it
kinda gel with the suggestions in the back of my mind, hoping something
comes out when I sit with it again. Thanks fr taking the time to read
this and comment :)
Rick