Literary Activity Dec 2024
Hello, and welcome to the December 2024 literary activity. :sparkle:
We're focusing on short stories again.
Please carefully review the following, as there have been some changes:
1) Submissions will be open until the 15th of December. The stories will then be posted and can be commented on until the 31st of December.
[s]2) After that, one day will be allotted to "guess the author".[/s]
3) Entries must be PMed either to me or to @Noble Dust. NOT TO BOTH OF US.
4) Max one submission per member.
5) Min 500/Max 5000 words (no exceptions).
6) Must fall under the broad category of short story.
7) No pornography, trolling, or other obviously inappropriate content.
8) Submissions are to be anonymous. Don't advertise what you've written prior to voting.
9) Entries must not be previously available online (edit: or in print form).
10) Entries will be posted as discussion OPs and may be commented upon.
11) Comments should focus on stories, not authors, and may be moderated.
11b) Speculations on authorship are permitted during voting, but should remain in the sanctioned "Authorial Speculations" thread.
EDIT: 12) No AI (except for proofreading). You can check your story here: https://gptzero.me/. A score that suggests significant AI input will result in your story being rejected.
Formatting:
If you care about formatting, please send a pastebin link rather than text. If you send text, the formatting will be lost when the story is copy-pasted into its post.
Judging stories:
Instead of a poll, there will be a favourites thread this time where members can list the stories they liked the most. This should offer a bit more flexibility in how we express our preferences.
If there are any further questions or comments, please post them here. The above rules are not necessarily exhaustive. Clarification on the above may be posted in the discussion below and considered addenda. Read the discussion for a full understanding of how well run this.
... All sounds a bit formal because we want to avoid confusion/controversy. Really though, the emphasis is on creativity, letting our hair down, and having a bit of fun.
We're focusing on short stories again.
Please carefully review the following, as there have been some changes:
1) Submissions will be open until the 15th of December. The stories will then be posted and can be commented on until the 31st of December.
[s]2) After that, one day will be allotted to "guess the author".[/s]
3) Entries must be PMed either to me or to @Noble Dust. NOT TO BOTH OF US.
4) Max one submission per member.
5) Min 500/Max 5000 words (no exceptions).
6) Must fall under the broad category of short story.
7) No pornography, trolling, or other obviously inappropriate content.
8) Submissions are to be anonymous. Don't advertise what you've written prior to voting.
9) Entries must not be previously available online (edit: or in print form).
10) Entries will be posted as discussion OPs and may be commented upon.
11) Comments should focus on stories, not authors, and may be moderated.
11b) Speculations on authorship are permitted during voting, but should remain in the sanctioned "Authorial Speculations" thread.
EDIT: 12) No AI (except for proofreading). You can check your story here: https://gptzero.me/. A score that suggests significant AI input will result in your story being rejected.
Formatting:
If you care about formatting, please send a pastebin link rather than text. If you send text, the formatting will be lost when the story is copy-pasted into its post.
Judging stories:
Instead of a poll, there will be a favourites thread this time where members can list the stories they liked the most. This should offer a bit more flexibility in how we express our preferences.
If there are any further questions or comments, please post them here. The above rules are not necessarily exhaustive. Clarification on the above may be posted in the discussion below and considered addenda. Read the discussion for a full understanding of how well run this.
... All sounds a bit formal because we want to avoid confusion/controversy. Really though, the emphasis is on creativity, letting our hair down, and having a bit of fun.
Comments (620)
Righto, mate! :cool:
Let's have fun and let our creativity flow.
:grin: :up:
Thanks to you and @Noble Dust for hosting this :up: :flower:
Quoting Baden
I like this idea but not clear about the list. The stories most liked - how many? The top 3?
However many you want, I guess. Maybe you like them all equally. You can say that too.
:lol: And I suppose it would be helpful to give reasons for why we think one is better than the other? Subjectively and/or objectively...
That would be helpful, yes, but it's up to you. You can still comment in the discussion threads for each story too, so it's likely if you commented on the individual stories, we could figure that out.
We will see. Sounds like it will be fun and more laid back. Cheers :party:
:cool:
I think it would be a good idea to delay opening the Favourites thread until all stories are read by participants and any feedback given. Is that what is planned?
Keeping an air of suspense makes it more exciting. Might also prevent people from reaching hasty decisions.
Quoting Baden
So, at the same time as we enter the Favourites thread? At the end? As per:
Quoting Baden
Only one day for everyone to speculate and list favourites, is that enough time to have fun? :chin:
'Guess the author' is a fun yet formal step. It is not a big deal, and since one of the mates could
have already posted his guess, the rest will most likely follow his intuition. As has been the case in the pastif I am not mistaken
Feels a big vague as to what this entails? Does it mean that we all make a post in which we kind of rank them in order of which ones we liked the most? Just mention one or two? Or is it more of a conversation thread?
Both polling and this style might make people be influenced by what others have mentioned or said before "voting" and lose the honest and pure reaction we individually feel when reading.
Wouldn't it work better if we could send someone our votes and when the voting window is closed, the favorites thread is opened so people can start discuss the stories more openly? Maybe even have that as a "guess author" place as well, like a main "general" thread.
I'm not trying to overthrow the established process, but just wondering if that would be better? Regardless, as long as people focus on the fun of it all and accept negative feedback as a way to grow their writing it will be a good time :fire:
I know we inevitably speculate and guess all along as individuals.
However, that wasn't my understanding of the 'rules'.
I thought the one day for guessing was to lessen any ongoing influence by others. :chin: and so that the main focus was kept on the stories.
Precisely, the main point of this year's activity is to avoid voting...
It is the comments that are closed. And:
Quoting Baden
I was referring to the "Authorial Speculations" separated thread. I thought that we might guess and discuss about the authors there since the beginning, but I am not fully certain now. Let's wait for @Baden to come back here and see what he says.
I see :up: You are probably correct!
Re: The authorial speculation thread. When would it be best to start?
So as not to distract from the stories or influence others. And still to have fun.
Perhaps neither at the beginning or the end but somewhere in the middle? :chin:
Goldilocks wants to know :love:
OK. :up:
:up: 'just right', thanks!
Now, I must rummage in the bin of set-aside story ideas for one I can use. That should keep a few brain cells functioning a little bit longer.
We're definitely going to try running the activity without formal voting / polls this time, but you can e.g. pick one story and write "Story X has my vote" in the favourites thread, which will sort of amount to the same thing.
Can't that still be done within this flexible favourites thread?
It's not called 'voting' but... each story can be 'ranked' or rated favourites.
Ist, second, third...
Trouble is, it's not systematic for those wanting to see a clear 'winner'.
This time, it is not to be a competition, as such, but there is always gonna be that competitive element. Gold, Silver, Bronze. Whatever. Hey ho. Off we go...
Winners all, I say :heart:
Quoting Amity
I think the competitive element is fun. It won't please everyone and some can feel hurt by the process, but reactions can't be the responsibility of the organizers. I thought that last year was really good. There might have been som negative reactions, but overall I saw a really good experience for most people and very interesting discussions. It was the first time I was involved with it, but still a highlight good time on this forum in my opinion.
I think the competitive element drives engagement. It gives an incentive to read all stories and for people to put a bit more effort into the writing.
I'm a bit worried that the more "lose", unclear and abstract way of voting will mostly confuse people to the point of not knowing if there is a competitive nature to it or not, or how the vote counting actually works.
I think it should be a clear competition in some form. Maybe instead of a poll on each story, there's just one thread for voting and nothing else. And in this thread people can post one time a ranking of the 5 best stories in order of their liking?
I think that the only thing that was kind of bad last year was that the voting was done within each story's thread, and so it was easy getting lost in what one preferred. But putting together a ranking of what five stories you liked the best both demands you to read at least five stories and formalize a clear preference. It's also less easy for people to put together which story is "in the lead" without having to do the math.
Informal 'voting' or ranking could still happen in the Favourites thread. I suppose this could start halfway through, just like the Authorial Speculation one.
I think it would be better if there was an agreement as to number of ranks or 'faves'. Otherwise we are all over the place.
I had thought offering up 3 would be enough. But hey, it still seems open to suggestion. Great to see people engaging already :sparkle:
Didn't you say that last time?
This seems unfair to @Hanover
Every time, in every way, the Literary Event exudes the scent of déjà vu.
I think I've said enough already. I begin to bore myself :yawn:
Best wishes, ND, for another interesting time ahead :flower:
Later...
Authorial Speculation thread starting half-way through, i.e. December 22nd, sounds good to me.
While I largely agree with you, this is how it's being run this year. We ran a version of it this way two years ago and it was as enjoyable and enriching as the competitions; to my memory at least. Feel free to reiterate these thoughts and ideas before the next one. Running these is an ever-evolving process.
:flower:
Actually, I was inspired by a book I "read" at the bookstore yesterday. It was a book of pictures with hidden cats, each more camouflaged into the background than the last. You can imagine my delight as I'd finally detect those little felines one at a time.
I was going to "write" such a story for our contest but I fear it will fail as neither a "story" nor would my hidden items satisfy the Victorian prudishness standards set out above.
Should I write it anyway or should I suppress my creativity in the name of compliance?
I am confident you can figure out a way.
If it was done like that before and was a good experience, I'm all for it as well. I just hope that we're not suppressing the competitive nature of it too much as I, at least personally, feel it's a good way to drive motivation and cut past procrastination. :sweat:
Okey-dokey. Sounds good to me too.
Quoting Hanover
That's Hentai or sort of National Geographic scooby. :yikes:
Change the belief, change the reality. :chin:
Yes, that's what I meant. Like one of the better electoral systems. I like the idea very much.
Quoting Amity
People generally do like a competition, and do like to win. Even the little children were not content with getting medals just for participating. I like participating, even when I don't win, so that's all right.
That's just a hazard of public interaction. If you feel you might be influenced, don't read any other posts before you respond. I sometimes do that in regular discussions, at the risk of repeating what's already been said. I also never read any critiques until I've submitted my own.
1) This time it's not supposed to be a competition, but an activity. (I've removed all reference to voting from the OP).
2) Mention as many or as few stories as you want in the favourites thread.
"All is chaos under the heavens... The situation is excellent."
Yes, for those of you who like more competition, it may change next time, depending on who takes the reins.
Thanks for your support as ever. Looking forward to your contribution. :heart:
I know it's an activity and not a competition.
Unlike literary activity 2023 which was!
https://thephilosophyforum.com/categories/49/literary-activity-dec-2023
Quoting Baden
Good idea. However, I still think listing 'faves' maintains a competitive element. The Favourites thread can be seen as an informal indication of 'votes' compared to the previous, formal system.
Quoting Baden
Yeah, OK. I might give it a miss. What's the point?
Quoting Baden
:roll: "Was will das Weib?"
No matter. Have fun with the experiment :sparkle:
The voting system influences the readers whether they want it or not. If you see the poll of a story with a low rating, you would probably think that is below in terms of quality, and you would try to find out why while you are reading the story. It is not the same as posting the title of your favourite story in a different thread. You can choose your favourites for many reasons, but not for being the best, necessarily.
Dear God! :roll:
Dont worry, my story wont make anyone feel good.
:lol: You got me.
:party:
Do you know what Kumbaya rhymes with?
Zumbada :cool:
Dance!
:lol: Nothing quite like a twisted, blame-shifting story to increase our endorphins...
[Edit: Oh, I see what you mean - https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/872139
That was one helluva discussion.]
***
The magical science of storytelling | David JP Phillips | TEDxStockholm
You need to re-activate the link, as provided by @hypericin - :fire:
https://pastebin.com/
Where is he, anyway? Last year's co-host and...wasn't he the winner?
PS I still have no idea how pastebin works. The formatting worked fine for me when I submitted my one and probably only short story. I used Word.
Quoting unenlightened
To get philosophical for a minute, storytelling and stories have always been competitive. It's the national story that wins which shapes history, it's the best storyteller of the tribe who spellbounded the crowd and became the shaman or the wise mentor. The role of the storyteller has been treated in the same way as any other skill in society.
But in today's era when it comes to competitions like this I'm of the opinion that we miss the positive effects of it. I mean, there's no price to win other than recognition, and engagement gets a boost if there's some stakes involved in which there's something extra to just reading them all, an engagement in a collective ritual.
On top of that, it should be used for the writer as a tool to test their skills. We're not children in here, we should be able to take a loss in a contest that doesn't really mean anything. A contest like this is a great tool to test your story's overall quality. Especially for those who want to do more professional writing, it forms a micro cosmos of what the real writing industry is already going to do with your writing skills.
I just think people both take the competitive aspect too seriously and not seriously enough at the same time. Not really sure why it becomes such a big deal? :chin:
Quoting Amity
Maybe there should be a nailed tutorial description in the main info about which settings to choose? I used it last year but I agree it was a bit confusing.
Not always. In general, writing is not a competition. It is a way to express thoughts and feelings, to share or enlighten. To entertain.
I would describe it more as a need, passion or challenge.
In a way, we compete with ourselves. To write what we want, how we want - to use words that attract and hold attention. We can improve by reading stories closely and discovering what makes it good for us.
If serious, then there are Writing Forums and Competitions.
This TPF space is tiny. With only about 17 participants at any given time.
We are fortunate that admin and mods see the value and that there are those who give their time and energy.
Nobody here 'takes a loss'. We only gain.
The event is not meaningless but I agree the votes can be.
But again, if people enjoy this aspect - what is wrong with it. *shrugs*
I don't particularly care to list faves. But that's because I can never make up my mind. So many different factors...
I admit to a certain fascination in following the polls. :yikes:
So, call me ambivalent...
But...if we all listed 3 faves...then the competitive types could work it out for themselves and party :party:
Is it too complicated to understand?
Because since this thread was posted, you are seeing the opposite: Fierce competition; evaluating skills; increasing 'motivation'; not suppressing the competitive nature; testing the ability of others, etc. The paradox is that the last-year competition contained all of that, but I don't recall a notorious participation from you, but the ones who always take part in these yearly activities. So, why do you want to change something if we don't have the guarantee that you will be active afterwards?
Yes, but that only tells half the story of the storyteller. The receiver, the reader, the one experiencing what we write is an interplay of sorts between us as writers and them as readers. And the quality of that interplay can be felt stronger by a competitive dimension, testing the action-reaction.
Quoting Amity
Exactly. It's why I think anyone who takes the competitive aspect too seriously need to chill a bit and just relax and have more fun, even if there's a competition.
Quoting Amity
I will probably list my favorites anyway. I think that the ones who reach a certain quality in their writing should be recognized for it.
I do think that any voting that visibly shows a negative or low score is bad. What I felt last year was that the only negative aspect that showed up in discussions were the times when a story got a bad score.
But it's unnecessary to show the low scores for the competition to work properly, just focus on the ones that are favorites and there will be a winner without any negativity of pinpointing the lowest scoring ones.
I think that was the only real problem with last year's scoring system.
I'm not fighting the guidelines at all and I'm not really saying that things should change for this year. Only that I think the competitive aspect got a bit too much flack when I didn't think it was as bad as some people make it out to be. I felt that the discussions and atmosphere were rather great last year.
Quoting javi2541997
What do you mean by I didn't participate or that I won't be active afterwards?
Quality :fire:
Quite the ride :cool:
Well, I think 'great' is not the proper word to describe the last-year competition. But it is fine if you remember it in such a way.
Quoting Christoffer
Sorry for pointing directly at you, but since you brought the competitive feature, that's why I am addressing you specifically.
I mean that wethe participants or storytellerswill really never know why our story gets more or less points than the others. We can figure it out thanks to the feedback, but sadly, not all the people who vote provide the feedback as well. This is the problem we had last year. Around 5 or 6 people commented on my story, with good opinions and recommendations, but I also got poor results by the votes of unknown users, and I never knew the reason. Since folks are not forced to rate my story, they shouldn't be entitled to vote. But it happened otherwise.
Of course, there is an inter-relationship. There is no 'Us and Them' competition in TPF's Activity. There's a flow between all. Reading each other, from different perspectives. Listening and appreciating. Even if we disagree or don't 'see' the meaning of the story. As well as fun, the feedback is thought-provoking. We all learn. Therein lies the Quality.
There is no need to 'test' this. Simply, relax and enjoy the challenge.
Write, Read and Reflect with Care.
Know when to let things be. :sparkle:
Bye for now.
As I mentioned, the only negativity I saw was related to the visibility of low score prompting reactions. But a competition can still work without showing low scores and just focusing on the favorite top ones.
And I think the discussions were actually very constructive. I saw much more friendly constructive criticism than I saw any kind of hostility. Even much of the hostility seems to have been with a slight tongue in cheek.
Quoting javi2541997
Ok, got it. I for one never voted without giving a constructive comment and I think I did so on all stories except my own.
This is also why I think, if we ever do it as a competition again, just have a thread in which people list their 3-5 favorites as voting. That way there's no "low scoring" of anyone's stories, everyone who vote with favorites stand by their input and the discussions are focused on the positives.
But it could also lead to the least favored stories not getting any interactions at all.
I do think that there needs to be some incentive for people to write constructively at least. I hope that we can at least have some form of recommendation to readers that if you read a story, please comment constructively on it. So that it's not just the top stories that get feedback.
Basically, what I mean is that while it can feel bad to get negative feedback, getting any kind of feedback is preferable to nothing. And every step that helps all get feedback is important. Otherwise it will feel like a waste of time for those who put effort into writing and then there's little to no reactions.
But if anything I do hope that this year yields more feedback interactions with the stories. As this interaction is invaluable for those who like to write or want to write more outside of this.
And I give due notice that my feedback will depend on amount of stories and the time allowed to carefully read, reflect and comment.
I reckoned last year, for me, with the extension, it worked out at about a day per story. Gotta do other things in a day...like wash my hair :scream:
No longer have that in me, [s]sorry[/s]. It is what it is.
We will see...but please can we chill :sparkle:
Exactly. :up: That's what I tried to say, but I explained myself very cryptically, as usual.
Quoting Christoffer
I agree, and I feel very optimistic about this year's activity. I can't see reasons for not giving feedback to writers for the moment. Since it is free to post our favourite stories in a separate thread, I can't see why people would not comment their thoughts about each story. Maybe the effort of giving a critical analysis could be tiring for some, but it is more relaxed this time. I remember discussing with you and others the reasons why some stories had more replies or feedback than the rest. I think we agreed that the 'most voted' stories displaced the others accidentally. Well, since there are no polls this time, we would not have the same issue. I might seem very optimistic, but I think the feedback will be high this year.
Ah, yes, thanks. Done that.
Quoting Amity
Yes, but when we copy it into a discussion, some of your formatting might be lost (e.g. italics and bolding). You can keep your square bracket stuff if you use pastebin (I used it just now and all I had to do was press the "create new paste" button at the bottom to get a link. Just ignore the other settings.)
https://pastebin.com/Hbk4uhhG
Quoting unenlightened
Still one of my favourites. :flower:
Thanks for the link. I'll test it out.
Quoting Baden
I haven't read it in quite some time. However, Pirsig's 'Quality' made an impact on me. The hairy, scary trip and its message. Wow! :fire:
In all aspects of life, I appreciate people who have the skills, time and patience to take care. And do whatever it is they are doing well. To the best of their ability.
Not just that but it is important to let them know and thank them, with a :smile:
Here speaketh the :halo: not to be confused with the :rage:
On the point of being let loose. Watch out, folks :wink:
I think it would be good to have an extension in mind for this already. If the amount of stories turn out larger than expected I think it's needed even without any voting. Just so the focus can be on the stories before revealing the authors.
Quoting Amity
I'm always chill :sweat: :cool:
Quoting Baden
Except the "public" one, so as to not just give out the story for anyone to see on that site. I think it should be "unlisted", right?
Good point, yes.
The commenters can still be highly critical of the works they are reading. I, for one, feel it's my job to read the story and say something important.
Quoting Baden
I'm not sure how to differentiate because the writing style, choice of words, and even choice of subject matter are possessed by both the author and the story.
Of course, once the authors' names are released, then possibly comments about the author's beauty or ugliness might be raised. I don't know.
Quoting javi2541997
Maybe some readers want to be honest about their thoughts but might hurt the feelings of the author if they speak their minds.
+1
Quoting L'éléphant
Certainly one can take note of and apply the difference between relevant thoughts about the literary piece and wordage itself and subjective opinions about what the author is, is not, did, did not, tried, or did not try to do?
Example A: I felt a bit led in a circle when Character A kept mentioning his passions for musical instruments to Character B. I was not able to ascertain the relevance or intended device said mentioning was intended to convey or perform. Could the author provide some context or clarification as to the reasoning behind said occurrence?
Example B: It's too long and confusing. Whoever wrote this has attention or memory issues. Useless dialog and a poor attempt at character development.
---
See what I mean?
A little tact goes a long way. Especially in written communication where meaning, intent, and context have a surprisingly vast amount of room for ambiguity and such are often assumed or otherwise on the onus of the reader.
Who said something about tactless critique?
No, you're right. Just mentioning it as a general observation since some folk like to indulge in such (often casually as a second nature) when it would be best avoided (refined) in furtherance of advancement, improvement, enjoyment, and increased likelihood of repeat participation, is all. No fuss. I sincerely hope you'll participate this time around. :smile:
Yes, I see your point about refined. Sometimes, I could be brash.
Participate? As in submit an entry? No way. I've already graded my work -- I got 2 out of 5.
Or do you mean comment?
It will not be like that this time. It is about having fun and practicing our creativity. Do not hesitate to write something or even be ashamed of the result. Each of us is a kind of artist in ourselves. :smile:
Ah. I see what you did there. The meaningless of a positive, coming either top or bottom of a scale (unless there is a zero) or negatives), where the author is left wondering "Che?". Looks like you agree. But why? What do you think I meant? And why did you zoom into that particular option? What is it about 'need' that stirs you...?
In context. Part of my response to @Christoffer:
Quoting Amity
Quoting Outlander
I decided to look back at previous examples of feedback - and noted the variations and focus.
From August 2023 - a busy event including poetry, thanks to @Caldwell- I found your submission:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/14545/no-dave-you-cant-do-that-by-outlander
What did you think of the feedback? I don't see any response in the story thread but perhaps it was elsewhere. It can be a bit of a muddle with some posting in the 'general' discussion.[*]
For me, the story thread is where the writers have the chance to explain or respond to the comments or questions. Unfortunately, it isn't the 'done' thing for writers to comment or give feedback during the conversation. Before voting. Although, many do. As did I, in Red, White and Blue. Now, that was Fun :fire:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/14546/red-white-and-blue-by-amity/p1
[*] A 27 page discussion! We do like to talk, don't we :wink:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/14486/literary-activity-july-aug-2023-discussion/p1
Yes. I tend to stay on the side of positive. Especially, where a certain sensitivity is detected. There may also be a wish to please any 'friends' - if we think we have identified the author. Not always the case!
It is only when feedback becomes more...er...interesting...when people 'speak their minds' that I re-read, go deeper and add other - perhaps more critical thoughts. Not always appreciated. It can even be perceived as hostile. Even if the intention is good. C'est la vie *shrugs*.
I will be more specific. An unfortunate example from Dec 2023. @javi2541997
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/14884/rip-out-the-grass-by-javi2541997/p1
Probably best not to re-hash or revive the feelings. But it does show the level of passion engendered by this Literary Event. It's all good :up: even when it seems not.
@javi2541997 - I hope you don't mind my using this as an example. I'll remove it, if you object.
You know how much your contributions and support are valued. Every single time :100: :heart:
Oh, fam! - look I am blushing now! :snicker: :yikes:
Well that's mighty inconsiderate of those here who might wish to get to know another side of L'éléphant -- a side other than the strictly logical and superficial one. It's not all about you, y' know. :wink:
Who knows, you might really brighten up somebody else's day or make one think in ways they've neglected or never cared to before. We never really know just what or how far the smallest ripple we make on others will lead to or bring about.
Eh, it's your creativity, I suppose. Do with it what you will. :meh:
With authors being allowed more than one submission. I think they were micro stories?
I can't find the starter 'general discussion' for this @Baden
Where is it hiding? I seem to recall several changes in the rules as the activity progressed. Caldwell coped exceedingly well. Flexibly adjusting to suit the demands of the hyper-creatives! Who cried "More!". Really great but hell, I remember trying to catch up with all the new additions. Look see:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/categories/42/short-story-activity-dec-22
Please close this thread. Thank you. :party:
I can't find it either...
Looking forward to it. :cool:
Did you send it in yet?
Hmmph. OK. It's probably been stuffed in a plum pudding somewhere... :roll:
:grin: Well, ya' know that ain't gonna happen. Only another 100 pages to go...
But yeah, I agree. :zip: :up:
Wait up...@Vera Mont has been quiet for a while. Must have summat to say...
Or maybe not.
Well, Amity, you have shown time and again how skillfully you've handled even this below: This is from the thread you referenced. You had an exchange with Javi.
Quoting javi2541997
That's the thing. I'm not a natural artist. I still haven't found my style. At some point, I went back to nonfiction. And that too is soul crushing because it's supposed to be devoid of your natural instinct for creativity. They say, stay focused on facts and avoid embellishing your narrative!. Gah!
Quoting Amity
I cannot just be positive. There's got to be some harsh criticisms or it's not fun because I'd feel too restrictive. Or worse -- censored. That's why I tend to avoid judging friends -- or I'd lose friends quickly.
Quoting Outlander
You are correct about the superficial part. But it's hard not to think "it's not about me", my dude.
The fact that you haven't found your style yet doesn't mean you are not an artist.
Tell me, how do you feel when you behold the sunset? Don't you feel like you want to paint it or write a poem expressing your feelings?
How would you like to manifest your dreams or nightmares? There are many ways to do, and each of them makes us a bit of artists.
Thanks for kind words and expressing yourself, thoughts and feelings so well. There, you have your story! We all have them. It's just that not everyone feels the need to write them down. Or even self-reflect as some philosophers do.
Philosophy is not known for its creativity. Depending on what and how it is read. However, it does use imagination and promotes analytical skills - transferable to other spheres. Like here! There is an internal dialogue and exchange of ideas. The same kind of questions can be asked, as of any story. The 5 W's and H. The Who, What, When, Where, Why - and How.
How to Read Philosophy
https://www.blogs.ppls.ed.ac.uk/2017/02/28/read-philosophy-step-step-guide-confused-students/
***
Quoting L'éléphant
Now, there's the start of another story. What we think about ourselves and how true is it. Are we too self-critical or anxious to the point where we put up blocks. The negative voice overwhelming the positive.
You, like most, have creativity. Look at how you use words like 'soul crushing' and 'Gah!'.
Quoting L'éléphant
There's the thing. We all judge. Sometimes, it's an immediate reflex and response - useful at times of danger. Other times, we judge first ourselves - sometimes too harshly, not seeing the flowers for that one damned weed! Then others. If we perpetuate the negative, then how likely is it that this internal thinking pattern, attitude or mood is externalised.
Marcus Aurelius has something to say about that...roughly, our life is what our thoughts make it.
Life and stories are interesting because of our differences as well as our similarities. On a wild spectrum from positive to negative to balance - and back again. Constructive v Destructive.
OK. Enough of my morning blethers. Here is something I found helpful - how to read a short story:
https://paulettealden.com/how-to-read-short-stories-like-a-writer/
This absorbing and intelligent article illustrates her method by using 2 short stories.
Unfortunately, no link to them - so, I had to go hunt:
1. Proper Library - Carolyn Ferrell
https://xpressenglish.com/our-stories/proper-library/
2. Sarah Cole: A Type of Love Story - Russell Banks
https://missourireview.com/article/sarah-cole-a-type-of-love-story/
Finally,
Quoting Guardian - Books - Richard Flanagan
I think writing a short story starts with an idea or sentence that won't let your mind rest. The wonder of imagination. I wrote my first story here - as explained in the feedback. So many encouraging voices...
Quoting L'éléphant
What is 'superficial' about you? I don't see it. And you know what - I think that it is all about 'you' and 'me' and 'them' and 'us'. How can it not start with the self and our wishes. Fears, hopes - everyday and extraordinary courage. Human stuff... as and how we relate to and in the world :chin:
Style is overrated. Style is just the result of the combination of writing a story and you as an individual. Whenever you write you add "your style" to it. As you fine tune and improve your writing skills, your style will become more clear as the "copying others"-parts gets chopped away.
It's similar to things like story structure and arcs and acts. No professional writer I know of actually write things in those terms except the mediocre ones. Story structure, what all those books on storytelling teach, and classes and stuff, are tools that are helpful when you've already written your story and go into rewrites. It's a tool to evaluate the story strength in order to spot problems.
There's a whole industry that blew up in the 90s from failed writers who started to have writing classes and wrote books on the subject of storytelling "for writers". And today it's a multimillion dollar industry making money on broken dreams.
People didn't teach story structure before and they still wrote the classics used as examples in teaching storytelling. The irony of that seems to have gotten lost somewhere.
The fact is that people learn storytelling by reading, listening and watching other storytellers. It's how the craft of storytelling has been echoing throughout history. It's in our genes as human beings to construct stories.
Good storytelling is merely a reflection of normal cycles of human emotions, the "acts" of how we humans process events and emotional consequences. If you want to write a horror story; a good such story taps into the same structure of how we would navigate a horrific event. The thought and emotional process of going through it matches up with the tempo and atmosphere of what the text describes.
Like:
"He walked into the cave, fire blinding him as the penumbra of darkness obscured the details of wet rocks. Boots echoing the loneliness as the brightness of the world behind him receded away with each step. His eyes trying to pierce the darkness and make out what the townsfolk described. "Inhuman", stuck in his mind. Their chilling words occupied his heart as the wet rock in front of him slowly broke from reason and started to move; impossibly big: speaking as from within the traveler's mind: "come"."
Follows how we people think in such a moment; the thought process, emotions and dread. Bad horror writing fails to tap into that subjectivity of the character. The same scene can be written in a book with perfect story structure, yet it would still be bland and uninteresting:
"He walked into the cave where the monster awaited. The townsfolk had described it as large and scary, but he marched on, barely seeing into the darkness he felt fear and then the monster appeared, speaking the words: "come".
This segment doesn't follow any empathic perspective of the character, only describes it casually, and fails to be scary.
And the overall story, if following the psychology of real people, finds its structure on its own. Someone starting out in one set of values, ideas and perspectives, meet something that challenge them and is changed because of it; is how life is.
Writers don't have to look at a story chart, hero's journey circles and such stuff when they write, they just have to be honest with their characters and let their experience progress naturally. If you know the character and what their future challenge will be and where they're going to end up (or have a vague idea about it), that's all that's needed; then just be honest with their emotional journey, use other characters as people who oppose their ideas and you get a natural conflict out of it.
In philosophical fiction that's usually what's used to convey a philosophical argument. You have one character on one side, and then another with an opposing perspective, and then they get into conflict about which side is correct, often with the winner being the side that aligns with the author's philosophical argument.
Bottom line is that getting lost in story structure teachings, thinking too much about style etc. just gets in the way of the natural progress and growth of the writer. Just continue writing in an honest way towards the characters and your style will emerge naturally. The hard work lies in the amount of text to write and the back and forth feedback with the readers.
But, while writing this text, I am wondering about the difference in style and originality. It is not a big issue for most writers because most of us just want to finish the novellike a long-term projectand hope to be read by a group of people. I guess some things as 'Spanish flamenco style' (for example) are more a marketing idea than maybe the idea of the authors.
Nonetheless, on the other hand, there are writers who I used to label as unique. I mean, whenever I hardly can find another author -- for example, Milan Kundera. His iconic novels have a common core, the unbearable sense of... *whatever the plot is*, I think he was an amazing writer, and I never found an European writer like him. Look at this following quote wtitten by him.
The purpose of the poetry is not to dazzle with an astonishing thought, but to make one moment of existence unforgettable and worthy of unbearable nostalgia.
So, I don't know how to call it, but some authors have that'sprakle' that makes them unique. The latter is an adjective I only use; I like to overreact when I love a novel. :sweat:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/949164
Basically, it's about making the glorious happening of the Literary Activity December 2024 more visible and accessible.
Originality is also a bit overrated. There's no such thing as being absolutely original, everything in art is a form of remix; the inputs of all you've seen gets remixed into the artwork you create. The only thing that forms a sense of originality is when you truly add your own emotional experience in who you are to that remix. Then it forms not only a merge of previous works of art, but a lens of you as a person experiencing that remix down to a new perspective.
The only way to be original is to be honest in your own perspective, emotions and ideas. And the more you write, the less you copy directly from others. Most people when starting out learning art and some craft, copy others; it's the natural progress of how humans learn any type of task. Only through a large amount of writing will you start to form that unique bond between "you" and the remix of others art that exist in your brain.
It's basically why you often hear new artists speak of "I want to make something like that thing I like", "I'm a big fan of that artist", and as they mature into their own as an artist they talk more about ideas, emotions, relations to the world and philosophy.
Not that trying to jump straight to thinking like that is any short cut to writing better, it's the natural progression. If you don't start out working out of the favorite writers you know, you have no actual starting position and try to outrun Usain Bolt by sheer will alone.
In the end, there's only one thing that makes a good writer; honest hard work. To not write for anything other than to create and explore your own relation to stories, storytelling and philosophical ideas; while putting in the hard work of writing every day, using and expanding your language, finding your voice by writing a lot.
People who write less and read more about storytelling (as in writing theory books etc.), will never improve their writing.
Another reason why I think many writers fail is that they're not really ready for having that openness to experience. It's part of the big-5 psychology map and the more open you are from the get go, the easier it is to just jump into writing stories about other people. If you're lower on it, there's more hard work to be done in order to reach that level of quality. But it's also a set of values on how to approach the world; it's impossible to write well if you are unable to see things from other perspectives, to have empathy.
Then, there are those who will never be able to write well. Usually because they're so low on empathy and openness to experience that their writing cannot connect to any other person but themselves and their lack of introspection makes them unable to see why their text is worse than other's.
Quoting javi2541997
Yeah, it's why I like good intellectual science fiction writing. The best ones don't dazzle the astonishing thought, they construct a way to through those unforgettable moments to end up in astonishing thoughts. The best experiences I've had reading is when the story holds onto me and out of all that is happening I realize the depth of the philosophical idea in the core of that emotional experience.
It's like when you look at the great philosophical writers who wrote prose; they constructed a story that convey a philosophical argument and conclusion, but through an emotional journey, and so it sticks in our minds better than just writing an essay. There's a reason why Camus got the Nobel Prize in literature.
I don't see a need to make it visible to non-members, so I think it's visible enough. And yes, according to most publishers, magazines etc., stories count as published if they've been on the internet. That's why I hid the relevant categories from search engines (by making them inaccessible to those who are not logged in).
EDIT: If you're worried about missing things and you're the only one who uses your computer then there's no point in signing out.
Create an online TPF Magazine; two publications each year; the best philosophical discussions and stories from the story events. :clap:
OK. I thought that would be your response. As usual, we have a difference of opinion. And, as usual, "You're the Boss!".
Quoting Jamal
Thanks for giving the reason for 'hiding' the stories. I didn't realise that search engines would find them otherwise. I don't see why writers have to be so restricted...it's not 'real' publishing, is it? Don't writers ask for different appraisals of their stories/novels from publishers? :chin:
So, is that why you removed your winning Plum Pudding story - including all participants' thoughts and feedback? I think, back then - if memory serves, the stories were accessible.
Did you enter it into a Short Story Competition?
Quoting Jamal
It's not about me! I sign out because that is the way I work. Like others do. Sign in and then out.
And then Sign in again. So it goes.
It's about others who might miss out. Is there no other way to announce the news? What the hell?
How many TPF writers does this rule affect, anyway?
@Vera Mont @180 Proof and any others - grateful for thoughts. How concerned are you about not being able to 'publish' your TPF story elsewhere?
Do you @Baden @Noble Dust really check up on whether the stories have been 'published' elsewhere? What does it matter?
Yes, I think I did own up to it here somewhere. I shouldn't have done it but I'd submitted it to a magazine and panicked, so ended up removing it completely instead of just hiding it and getting Google to remove it. Your feedback and that of others was thereby lost. Not my best moment and it won't happen again.
I'd still like to have the chance to submit stories to magazines that have been published here first, and think others should have that chance too.
I doubt there is anyone else who's concerned about it, but for the benefit of whoever is interested, you can bookmark a discussion and set your preferences to send a notification email every time there are new comments in your bookmarked discussions.
If anyone requires more details, let me know.
Maybe a newsletter? Isn't it possible to have the function to send a TPF newsletter for larger events, changes or stuff like that? It doesn't have to be a regular thing, just whenever there's some overall news.
Would be good to have that option for those who wants it. That way people will get the news that there's an upcoming story event and things like that.
But nobody has complained about the situation before and I don't think it's worth worrying about. I'll leave it to @Baden and @Noble Dust to decide if they really must have this thread visible to those who are not logged in.
Yes. That is a well-known defensive strategy and prepared response. Common in the workplace.
"You're the only one who has complained". It's a put-down and I don't appreciate it.
Some people might share the same opinion but never voice it. Or aren't even aware of the options.
Quoting Jamal
I checked out 'Bookmark' and got this: Use the [star] icon to bookmark a discussion. Manage notifications via your profile.
I can't see the icon. And how can you bookmark a discussion if you don't know it exists?
Bottom left of the image below.
It's at the foot of the page (but above the reply box) on each page of a diuscussion.
Quoting Amity
Yeah it won't help in that instance, but for others who are worried about missing comments in a particular discussion, that's the solution.
Thank you for that. Shame that you didn't even keep a copy. It was amazing. I hope the magazine and readers showed due appreciation :sparkle:
Quoting Jamal
I think that would be good for all the reasons stated. Here:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/949164
Quoting Jamal
Again. Is that a case of 'poisoning the well'?
Thanks. Got it :up:
Suggestions intended to make things better for the activity are welcome whether we follow them or not. So, thanks for bringing it up. And thanks to @Jamal for answering in my absence. In this case, I don't think any change is necessary either.
Thanks.
Quoting Baden
That wasn't my point at all. It's not necessarily the 'regulars' but those who might take extended breaks. Also, potential newcomers or non-members. It's about making the announcement visible to all. But I'm zoning out now.
OK, I see.
Of course not. But it might make it more interesting for some who happen to pass by for a look-see.
Quoting Noble Dust
Based on what evidence? Do you look to see how many members are online at any given time?
In any case, it seems that I have become too involved and potentially disruptive.
So, I will leave it there. Keep having fun :sparkle:
I mean, you never know. Those with interest in higher thinking tend to be creative types, often unbeknownst to them. :smile:
That most people in 2024 have their own private computers or phones, which makes singing in and out pointless.
Quoting Outlander
In my experience, those interested in philosophy (I'm not sure what "higher thinking" is, but it certainly ain't academic Western philosophy) tend to be pedantic types, not necessarily creative types. :razz:
You are not disruptive, Amity. I appreciate how you take care of this activity each year. You know I also become too involved and even energic or anxious. You and I already had big experience in this. -- anyway, I think the mates are all right. Potential newcomers would not join to just post a short story. They join to start posting threads on philosophy. Just look at the news members. All of them are discussing in the threads, but none of them are concerned about this activity.
On the other hand, it is true that veteran memberslike @Caldwellmight be unaware of this activity. But, again, if they feel the urge to visit us here, they would sign in, not just checking the site with logging.
Don't worry, the people who need to be aware, will be. :smile:
Thank you. That means more to me than I can let you know.
However, I still intend to keep out of this main discussion - like many, wiser than me. They save their energy and words until the stories start flowing in. I look forward to reading them all.
Until later. Take care :sparkle:
Maybe
For those who would like to have it.
Mods, rotating between them. I mean, it's probably only four times a year at most. There's not that much newsworthy and it doesn't have to be a long thing, just notable notes on what's going on.
Both to inform and for fun, the devotion shouldn't be taken too seriously (and no one wants a constant spam of newsletters so it's better that it's only done sparingly).
Quoting Baden
Support appreciated, amigos. :pray:
I will, too. It's not just a question of writing quality, but of how one's mind works. There are some widely recognized masterpieces that I didn't enjoy at all, that bored or put me off, and some I just don't get. It was the same with stories here the last few times: I found some well written but confusing, or they dealt with subjects I usually avoid. Favourites are as much about the reader as the writer.
I will try to comment as constructively as possible on every story: there must be some aspect that I recognize and appreciate.
I'm curious about this though... why? As I tackle things in life, I'll pass on some subjects merely out of not being that interested in them, but avoidance sounds more like not wanting to be exposed to new perspectives and ideas? I rarely feel like I want to avoid reading anything that makes me feel uncomfortable as I think most texts, except the most blatantly stupid shallow stuff, has a value of perspective needed in order to become wiser as a human being.
At 78, I've been exposed to most of them, and trust me, they're not new. I'm still interested in different perspectives, but I have no need of any more cruelty, degradation, destruction and violence than I've already witnessed, in the real world or precariously.
:smile: Twas ever thus!
Quoting Baden
But isn't all those things part of the spectrum of storytelling? Even in stories that focus on the good, that good is held up against the backdrop of darkness in order to stand out.
I don't like anything that isn't honest to the complexity of the human condition, and a totally shallow description of violence and darkness without a point to it is just as meaningless as a carpe diem poster on the wall. I don't mind reading about darkness, as long as there's enough complexity to form a sense of meaning out of the totality of the text; a light in the dark, or shadow in the light, otherwise there are not contours left to form a visible shape.
Sure, all that. But I read for enjoyment, not education. I've seen enough of their precious 'condition' to go right off the human race. Individually, I only like decent, non-vicious humans. I am totally and forever uninterested in zombies, serial thrill killers and detailed battle scenes.
Let me amend that a little. The negative aspects of reality and human behaviour must be taken into account for good fiction. What I object to is dwelling on evil and savouring the richly textured darkness of it; some authors seem to wallow in the muddiest pools of their imagination.
:up:
Be sure to read the guidelines in the OP; your question is covered there:
Quoting Baden
You have to focus on the fact that it is not allowed to use previously available stories. Yes, it also says online, meaning that if we could find it on other online platforms or websites.
The point is that only original entries are allowed.
I think you've now answered my question, but let me explain why the guidelines do not. I have published a number of short stories in print magazines over the years. They are not available on "other online platforms or websites." They are only available in the print publications themselves. So my question was, Can such a story be offered to TPF? I believe the answer is no?
Looks like your question hasn't been answered, so wait till @Baden is around and he'll tell you. On the face of it, stories will be accepted if they haven't been online before, even if they've been published in a magazine, but I'm not sure if that's what Baden meant.
EDIT: My guess is any previously published stories, whether online or not, are not allowed.
For example -- your short story was published in a magazine some years ago. The magazine is called 'moody writers,' and the number of the magazine where your story was published was 26th (for example), and, in most cases, magazines tend to be monthly or semi-annual. So, in addition to the number, the magazine would also have a specific date like 'June 2006' or 'Winter 2010' etc.
In my honest opinion, that also counts as 'published,' although you didn't do it online. But the magazine has the rights to publishing, and they might consider sharing them online, like most magazines do.
So, it will not be hard to find it, anyway. That's my point.
@Baden If, hypothetically, I were to delete a post from a personal Blog on which a piece appeared, would that clear this up?
Generally, a personal blog wouldn't constitute publication (particularly if there are any restrictions on readership) but a fully public one would, so clearing a grey area here...
No. It should be something unpublished.
Thank you. I've updated the rules.
Quoting AmadeusD
If the piece was previously available online, it shouldn't be submitted.
Quoting AmadeusD
I see the grey area and I don't think we can fully legislate for that. The letter of the rules calls for members to write something that has not been available online (or in print) before. Honestly, I don't want to get into every permutation. I'll do a quick Google check and gptzero.me check on the stories and that's it.
I struggled for a long time to work out the meaning of "T-Give Eve" but I got it: happy Thanksgiving.
I have a bun (story) pretty much baked (written) and I'm trying to move on and do other things rather than continually tweak my bun (revise my story) till December 15.
EDIT: Baking is shown here to be an inadequate metaphor: you don't change your bun once it's in the oven and you can't fix it once it's baked.
Yes! I am fond of what I wrote until now, but what I spend my time the most on is proofreading my grammar. I don't want to use AI or that stuff, so I try using Cambridge's official web page and so on. By the way, it is my first time that -- 1) I wrote the story in English directly and 2) There are more than 1,200 words. My stories have always been pretty short...
I have the feeling that a random village in Valencia would appear in your story, like the last time -- yeah! Why not? :smile:
Skill issue.
Parking lot.
Get telt bawbag.
Aye very good.
:rofl:
I wish you the best!
Would you have a bit of time to read (or even write, who knows!) the short stories of this year?
See, @Amity? It is not necessary to make these threads visible to non-members. Caldwell wanted to say hello, and she signed in, like most of the users do.
Hey, Caldwell! Where have you been?
It seems like forever since you did that amazing job. Volunteering to give Baden a rest by organising the Competition. Also, the micro/mini stories and the poetry... All that involved - Wow! :fire:
I appreciate your work - and @Baden's - even more now that I'm trying to organise with @Moliere a similar challenge for June 2025. Related to Philosophy Essays!
You guys make it look easy. Thanks to all the organisers and behind-the-scenes helpers over the years. You all deserve a medal :100: or a pizza or something :party:
Wishing you all the very best. :flower:
Take care. Hope to see you around :smile:
I feel left out. Cold. :kiss:
Time to chug power-up drinks and some caffeine sh*t, like a talented writer you are, mate. Don't fall apart! :strong:
Ideas?
Something that would happen to you and only you, would be interesting. Perhaps your own spin on the backstory behind one of your more puzzling or unusual cases. A spin on a pivotal life choice you made or didn't make from your youth and what would have happened, maybe.
You seem to do really well with otherwise routine daily life of characters who are gradually revealed to be exceedingly unusual or offensive to a comical degree.
Personally I wouldn't mind seeing a sequel to your infamous tennis racket misadventure. Though that might give away authorship.
Or, off the top of my head. I'm playing a video game where the protagonist travels a medieval-esque world where every town or place is full of hostile creatures and enemies- except for one: "Dominula, Windmill Village" where all the citizenry (known as Celebrants, apparently) are mindlessly dancing and twirling in place laughing and vocalizing happy sounds with one another. It's very surreal, considering the otherwise hostile landscape. That seems interesting enough of a premise to incorporate while leaving plenty of room for just about any kind of dynamic or outcome.
I'd like to read a story not in the Hanoverian style so as to throw us off the sent. Maybe something in a Noble-Dustian style. We could swap. You write something overly serious and vaguely mystical and metaphysical, and I write something absurdly offensive.
I be you. You be me. In the end, we learn from each other and our mother daughter relationship strengthened. I like it!
Well, you're definitely not winning this year with mistakes like that! :razz:
Try this. The king has a dream in which his daughter urinates so much that the whole kingdom is flooded. He is disturbed by this. Next night he has a dream in which a vine grows out of his daughter's vagina and overshadows the whole kingdom. Dream interpreters say it means his grandson will usurp him, so he keeps his daughter near, intending to kill the child when born. But it doesn't go to plan.
No one is winning this year, buddy-boy.
:smirk:
True, @Jamal is back.
I thought about Gore Vidal when I read your reply to Hanover! :sweat:
The paradox is, Benkei, that you might be the winner when there are not any winners this year. How would you feel about that?
Sounds ChatGPT-ish.
Said no winner ever.
Looks like you're at the airport. That's a good choice of socks for the airport. Socks will get more attention in an airport than most other places, so the colour, pattern, fabric, and quality are crucial.
That's what my uncle Fred told me at T-Give.
If Fred is your uncle, then you're my great-nephew dog, making you 47th in line for the Hanoverian throne, just behind the guy who cleans my gutters.
13) Please do not turn this thread into The Shoutbox 2.0.
Quoting Benkei
Benk! Shut up!
Don't feel left out. I'm always with you in spirit.
Ahh, let's see what emoji to use. This --- :fire:
Fire is a symbol of passion and creativity and power. My dear Benk.
Quoting javi2541997
I will be reading the short stories this year. :smile:
Quoting Amity
Thank you. The Baden was also a bit quiet this year, so I wasn't sure anymore.
A shoutout to @Noble Dust.
Yes. He is still a bit quiet. I'm still concerned about him...but hopefully all is well.
Did I miss out ND? I didn't mean to.
He has stepped up to the challenge, time and time again :100:
My God, they even both write absorbing and thought-provoking stories. :fire:
The talent in TPF. Unbelievable!
Like Baden and ND, he has amazing talent and skill; working wonders.
As 180. The list just keeps growing...
All writers, readers and organisers working together. Win, win. :100:
Keep them stories coming! :cool:
Where's my rah-rah skirt...?
Let your hair down. Don't worry about it. :smile:
Quoting Caldwell
Quoting Amity
Sorry, moving house at the moment and trying to limit internet. I will try to do better for you guys. :strong:
Thank Goodness! I had you lying in a hot bed of fever :mask:
Moving house is major. You are doing FAB :up: :cool:
Dicho y hecho, amigo. :up:
Quoting Caldwell
What magnificent news to start December with! :smile:
I kid, I kid. I was reminiscing about the time we came up with fake nicknames for users. You're one of the few I remember. As well as @Tobias who was "To be an ass".
And there's a joke somewhere nowadays that Baden is the past tense of Biden so pretty much dead but I'm not funny enough to make it.
Is that right? I think I remember a thread created just for the nicknames. But I didn't know that was my nickname. lol. :grin:
Quoting Baden
Oh. How's the move? I hope it goes well and you finish soon.
Quoting Amity
I missed out ND. And he's doing a great job.
I'm excited about it. December 15th, I think is when they release the stories?
I'm looking forward to it. I always enjoy your stories, and make no apologies for that.
Still running about in hotels at the moment. Procrastinating about where to live. My life is chaos. The situation is excellent?
Well, was sick today because I drank too much last night. I appreciate your misguided faith in me though.
Very Bad Boy, Baden :naughty: You will never get to Heaven! Who would want to anyway *shrugs*
Be well :pray:
Is that your story :chin: or are you still working on it...?
Scout's honour, Ma'am. :victory:
Ach, yer a shoogly wee eejit, so you are! :razz: :grin:
Quoting Baden
I lived for a few years like that. It was nice, that life really suits me.
In the circs, I don't blame him one jot or tittle!
Whatch y'all think?
I've received two.
Make that ruining writing contests by getting rid of the contest part.
If I'm at 500 total words, but I use the same word more than once, will it not have enough words? Or, if I'm at 6000 words, but there are only 4376 different words, am I OK? My vocabulary is only like 100 words, so it's going to be hard to get enough words depending on what the rules are.
I use the word very a lot. It helps me emphasize very very very much and I don't want to be penalized for that.
As per the rule quoted, unfortunately this disqualifies you. This is a philosophy forum, verbose loquaciousness is a requirement.
I got four.
Quoting Hanover
Disqualified for not being fiction.
Quoting Hanover
We'll make a separate contest just for you. No need to submit. You already won. Congratulations!
Now it's a popularity contest. :rage: Try as you might, you can't remove the competition. :naughty:
Three + uno, tío. :naughty:
One of them is mine.
Only a few days remain to have the stories posted. Sit on the most comfortable sofa, bring a Guinness* with you, and enjoy this sweet yearly literary activity.
* figgy pudding is also allowed.
I've just submitted mine, so that's at least 7 in total so far, with likely more still to be submitted.
The suspense grows relentlessly.
"[s]likely[/s] definitely more still to be submitted."
*Slightly eerie knowing smile*
Quoting Noble Dust
I'm cheering for you on this one. :pray:
Quoting javi2541997
:cool:
Thank you, my fragile ego needs the support of as many people as possible.
I'm on your side! Even if it's a non-competitive contest.
:yum: Pervy.
I live in a lean-to on the purportedly uninhabited Howland Islands. So, it's only fair.
:up:
As it turns out one actually needs a pro pastebin account to use the markdown functionality (to retain the formatting of the text), and they are no longer selling pro accounts. Could someone help me out here, maybe?
I'm not sure what Markdown support provides, but in any case what you need is to convert your Markdown text (I assume you've written the story in Markdown like I have) to BBcode for formatting here on TPF. The way I do that is to use this converter:
https://ddormer.github.io/markdown-to-bbcode-site/
Then you can paste the result into pastebin to create a paste, and share the link with @Noble Dust or @Baden. (EDIT: so you don't need a pro account)
Make sense?
I don't know how to write it in Markdown. I'm not sure what that means. Is that a setting or a word processor or something?
Oh you just mean with emphasis or something.
Before I answer your question, let's address your problem first. What are you trying to do? If you haven't written it in markdown, you can forget about markdown for now. What you need is to format the story for the forum, using bbcode, like a normal TPF post.
I'll assume that you've used some word processor. I don't know an easy way to convert such things to bbcode, i.e., to convert a word doc to bbcode text. Maybe someone else here does.
Ok, thanks. Maybe someone else can help me.
If there isn't much formatting, just paste it unformatted into a bbcode editor (like a post editor on TPF) or a text file, and format it manually, either using the formatting buttons or by typing the formatting codes.
I strongly suspect that's what you'll have to do anyway, but maybe there's a way of pasting formatted word-processor text into something that produces bbcode, I don't know.
What exactly is the bbcode output of the text I put in? it just retains formatting when translated to another thing like the TPF post editor?
I'm not sure what you mean.
I looked it up and I think I understand what it is now. I just didn't know what bbcode was. If I write something and make it into bbcode it should retain formatting when posted on TPF?
I understand now what to do after some experimentation. Thanks.
Basically, yes. BBcode is what is used to format everything on TPF (and many other forums). If writers want their stories to retain the formatting they want, they have to specify that using bbcode. The code is added automatically to the text by the edit boxes in TPF.
To submit your story, you have to send the text, with bbcode formatting, to @Noble Dust or @Baden. To do that you can paste it into pastebin and send one of them the link.
:up:
Let us know if you get in trouble.
Last time, I typed out the story in Word, then copied and pasted it into a PM.
How does the formatting change from the PM to the short-story as seen in the Activity? :chin:
If that works for you, roll with it :cool:
If you have special formatting requirements, howeversuch as italics, bullet points or what have youthen I dont think the formatting will carry through from a word-processor document to a TPF post, since TPF posts are plain text, in which formatting is defined in a kind of plain text markup code called BBcode, which you are familiar with in use.
I never use word processors and always write in plain text, so I might be wrong in saying that formatting doesnt carry through from word processors; maybe theres some magic that does it.
Overall, I give it a C-.
Curious.
If I ever decide to submit a story to the Literary Activity, I will bear that in mind :joke:
Is this is a problem for submissions anywhere or just TPF?
I do the same, but I type out the story in Microsoft Notes because my dad no longer gives me access to his Word account since I stopped paying the annual fee. :sweat:
The fact that historically the masses got hooked on word processors, even though they didnt need them, while text is passed around on the internet mostly as plain text, rather than as word processor documents, is a problem affecting pretty much everyone. But there are easy ways around it.
If you say so. I'm all for cheap'n'easy. Erm. Kinda :monkey:
Word Processors: Stupid and Inefficient
I use a text editor instead. For formatting I use the markup language called Markdown. Its much more lightweight than the one you use here on TPF (bbcode) with all the horrible square brackets and slashes.
EDIT: It also means I dont have any problems when I want to publish what Ive written in various media or formats, e.g., online in a blog (publishing software can convert markdown to HTML (which is also written in plain text)) and messaging apps like WhatsApp understand Markdown too. And the TPF literary events.
Its not just for programmers though. But I dont think that message will be getting across any time soon. Its part of my Utopian dream.
How many were simple C&Ps from a word-processor or similar?
Any other alternatives to consider?
I agree, I tried pastebin and didnt like it, so I just used Google Drive instead. Its just a matter of sending text, so there are multiple ways of doing it.
Previously, people could send files directly in PMs, at least if they were subscribers.
EDIT: but if people sent Word documents, it would be up to Baden and Dusty to translate the formatting to bbcode, and thats too much to expect.
Pastebin is telling me that I have offensive or questionable material in my story and won't allow me to paste it - not even unlisted. How else can I submit my story? How would I use my google drive to do it?
Paste the text into a text editor (notepad on Windows, for example) and save it as a text file (a file with a .txt file extension). Upload that to your Google Drive, then go there and click on Share > Send link > manage access > Anyone with the link (or something like that). Copy that link and put it in a PM to Baden or Noble Dust.
Once I upload the .txt file to the drive, do I have to enable text editor or something? Because it isn't letting me edit the file without text editor.
I have to work out what youre trying to do. Are you trying to edit the text after you have uploaded it to Drive? Because the idea here is to do all your editing before you upload it to Drive. Make all your changes in the text file and then upload it, and then if you want to change it again, do the same thing, overwriting the file in Drive with the new version. EDIT: And only then send the link.
You can probably edit in Drive using Google Docs, but that would just confuse things, I would think.
EDIT: Google Drive here is just a way of sending the story to B & ND.
Maybe stop being so offensive or questionable.
What is your view of subscript and superscript? I enjoy it when I type 1st and the st goes up to the top. I consider that quite classy. But if I say something like H2O and the 2 goes down small, I feel it pretentious and snotty.
So the next step is to send it, and for that you need to use an external site. Pastebin allows you to just paste directly, but if you use Google Drive you upload a file and then send the sharing link via PM with Baden or ND. Theyll open the file, copy the contents and paste it into a new thread. If its not clear, stories are posted by Baden and ND, not by the authors.
I do already have it uploaded to my google drive. Sorry, should have said that. It doesn't appear that it can be interacted with, however. It displays the text when I click on it, but I can't copy and paste it, so I just assumed that Baden or ND couldn't either.
It cant be edited but the text can be copied, either directly from the Drive interface or by downloading it. B&ND might find it easier to download it, open it in a text editor, and copy the text from there.
Youre not helping :wink:
And we found it.
There's been no bickering so far. It's a conversation between ToothyMaw and me in the role of TPF support, being held publicly.
That said, there is definitely a potential for bickeringness here.
Ok, cool. I'll share it with Baden or ND then. Thanks for the help.
I'm happy to have smoothed your path to fame.
I believe we're hiring for next round...
How's the pay?
Paltry. You have to love the work.
Oh.
Here, Hanover makes a claim, while helpfully embodying it, as an example, in that very same claim. Masterful writing technique, really.
If?! C'mon, we're running out of time!
:sweat:
In so many ways...
One-upman strikes again! I was merely helping to solve one members difficulty and made no attempt to explain things generally. I leave such pithy summaries from on high to you, while I'm down here doing the dirty work.
Just one day to go. The most beautiful activity of TPF is already leaving out of the oven.
I didn't buy figgy pudding, but I bought 'Hacendado'Mercadona's food labelalmond milk and cinnamon cookies. This is the closest set of food to what I interpret as 'Christmas confection.'
I appreciate you. :pray:
And I you, my swell pal.
This to me sounds like a non-American notion of something an American would say.
:lol:
That was kind of the idea. I liked it cos it sounds so awkward, even to me. Baden is actually swell though.
As with the oedipal scat catharses, geriatric exit dreams, sentient solipsistic planets, psychopathic murder suicides and other nightmares, it ain't all peaches and cream.
It sort of reminds me of when a female friend of mine met one of my male friends. Afterwards she described him as a "cool guy", but her body language and tone of voice suggested this didn't mean she was attracted to him, but that, rather, as his friend, I must have thought him to be a "cool guy". In other words I interpreted her comment as a projection of her concept of how straight guy friends think of each other, and what we look for in a potential friend; at the same time she was perhaps trying to affirm my choice of friend as meeting this imagined criteria. Anyways, I should be reading your stories. :grimace:
Sounds like a swell dame.
Quoting Noble Dust
I thought you just had to scan them cursorily and then post them.
I read them to meet guideline 7. :chin:
Ah right. No inappropriate content :sad:
Let ai do it? It would be interesting to see which of us gets flagged.
And yet there is a definite artistry sometimes, in making things ambiguously (or) or multiply (and) interperable.
How do you use ambiguity? As a crutch? With intention? Or do you avoid it?
I am aware that Asian audiences are very fond of ambiguity, and for this reason they disliked Murakami, for example. Don't be afraid of using ambiguity. Not at all. But get ready to read some comments about people not understanding at all your writing. I think ambiguity is not about understanding but letting oneself go.
:chin: Quoting hypericin
Why thank you. For some reason that small moment and my interpretation of it come to my mind often, maybe in part because I have a bit of a crush on this lady myself. But it was nice to flesh the thought out by writing it.
Yeah, I was thinking about this the other day, exactly along those lines. With good ambiguity, there's a strength to it, a feeling that it's intended, that the author is holding back. Is this just a dream, is the narrator crazy, etc. These kind of questions come up in good ambiguity because the author has cast a spell and we want to know more. In bad ambiguity, we want to know more only because without that extra information we're annoyed, since the story doesn't make sense or have a coherent force.
Something like that.
Ah shit, time to get back to editing. :grimace:
I do agree with you and @hypericin for the most part, although analyzing ambiguity is necessarily an analytical endeavor when appraising a work, and takes the experience out of the immediate, intuitive and aesthetic primary experience of the piece. And because ambiguity is specifically an issue of how understandable a work is, it also necessarily requires an analytical analysis, which will only yield an analytical result, which limits the criticism in scope. I think ambiguity can work but it does so on an intuitive level. David Lynch comes to mind of course. There are a lot of moments in his work that fill me with complex emotions, but they are ambiguous emotions in response to ambiguous artistic expressions. I personally find this kind of work compelling.
I actually thought of David Lynch as an example of good ambiguity. For me it's not analytical, but emotional and intuitive. Lynch is an emotional director, not an intellectual one, and he conveys emotion brilliantly, which is the strength and intention I was talking about.
I agree, but what I was trying to say is that analyzing how ambiguous a work is takes one's perspective out of the intuitive, immediate state of the experience and into an analytical state of criticism, and that this change limits how useful the analysis is; good ambiguity should be intuitively "understood" or felt. I think we agree, just making the clarification.
I get you, on an intuitive level.
Sounds like the Crianza talking. :party:
Whether she thought him attractive or not, she was smart enough not to communicate it to you.
Like if you met her hot friend, you'd tell her you thought she seemed nice and a good friend for her, trying to pretend you didn't notice she was hot.
Thing is, she'd have known you were pretending. You didn't cuz dudes are stupid.
Ah shit.
Probably. Cheers and good night!
Aw, shucks. :smile:
Keep warm. I wish you well. :flower:
I got six. Thank you to all who participated. :pray: Stories will be posted soon.
Thank you. :smile:
I got seven.
13 stories were submitted in total! What a very nice number, and thanks to the writers for their contribution and to you for handling this activity. :up:
¡Vamos a leer esas historias! :sparkle:
I woke up very excited this morning. :smile:
Past tense? There's still time, bud.
Eh. It'd take a bit too much time to properly flesh out right now to the point of readable elegance and reasonable format of appreciation. Ah well. I'll post about it later in the Lounge or Shoutbox, sometime, perhaps. :smile:
Or let it bubble for a few months, developing flavour, then begin building the finished dish, to be served up here a year from now.
Seems like you combined binge and bender. In that vein, you could also have said coke fueled bend.
Nah. Already drinking a bit for the holidays. One should be content enough with at least one vice, you know?
The problem I have with this hypothetical story is whether or not for the (initial?) "moral character" to be killed, naturally to be revealed said killing was unjust by what was thought of a necessity at the time, only for the assailants to be later saved by someone either related or close to or who otherwise used or believed the same thing the initial victim did. Cheesy stuff like that. But this one is good. I feel it.
Or, the alternate being that he survives, obviously. Through his wisdom or morality. And maybe add in his oppressors or interlocutors died horribly, but mostly ironically. Yadda yadda. You know how it goes.
Me too, but it seems we have to wait for the Howland Islanders at UTC-12. Damn those Howland Islanders.
Not a great start to your week. I wish Peanut a speedy recovery. Stomach pain in goats can be serious.
Theyve got backup though.
I knew Peanut was a chihuahua by the way, but I recognize your need to set the record straight.
Sorry, thanks to all of you who know what time and date it is.
Thats just what they want us to think. :nerd:
I would imagine anyone living in this to turn in a story of hardship and the torture of existence.
I dont know. Someone living in a tiny disused lighthouse named in honour of Amelia Earhart, who was looking for the island when she disappeared in 1937, might have a more interesting tale to tell.
True
For example, that person---he's an old man called Gary---knows that Earhart actually did get to the island, but he's kept it secret all this time because his parents killed and ate her, while he was just a baby. They had been shipwrecked there themselves and had quickly run out of food, so when Earhart turned up, having swum ashore from the plane that had crashed in the ocean, their lust for meat overcame all misgivings. Since Gary also enjoyed the delicious aviatrix-meat, he can't help feeling guilt and shame, even though he was far too young to be held responsible. But now, at the end of his life, he decides to tell the story, writing it in squid ink on parchment made from the skin of a manta ray.
The cozy bed that lies within could be heard muffled through the walls mocking you, saying, "Stretch your weary legs upon me and refresh your mind and spirit," and yet you couldn't, stuck outside in the relentless heat with the sand burs and biting insects.
It wouldn't be the conditions outside than would make it so bad. It'd be the bed being a total dick and there'd be nothing you could do about it but get pissed off.
If there had been cows there, Gary's parents wouldn't have had to eat Amelia Earhart and history might have been significantly different.
Well, I doubt it. Some folksmyself includedsee cows as sacred animals. Their milk is like the tears of the angels and as sweet as the lakes of Heaven. I might sound a bit 'scavenger,' but I would eat Amelia Earhart instead of my precious cows.
And their meat is as succulent as the cheeks of God.
their grass-infused methane farts fueling the fires of high Empyrean.
:yum:
You were all worthy opponents, and I enjoyed the competition. I wish you all better luck next year. The grace I've just shown with these comments actually makes me more of a winner than I already was.
Authors, your stories are going up. Please give them a check to make sure they are formatted as you intended and send a PM if there are any issues.
https://thephilosophyforum.com/categories/54/short-stories-dec-2024
It turned out to be 15 stories in total at the end!
Two lagging writers sent their stories in the last moments -- Ah yes, the inhabitants of Howland Island! :rofl:
Well, fair enough, time to end up with these jokes and prepare for reading each story.
Cheers, amigos.
Personally, the only one I've read from beginning to end so far is the one initially commented on by Jamal. Wanted to see what he had to say. So there's likely some truth to this. Then again this is an unusually busy holiday season for me, so.
Not to be the "I'm busy so I want something worth my time" guy but. Meh. Hectic time for many else I'm certain. Again, likely plenty truth there in your armchair psychological analysis. :chin:
There's also no formal voting dynamic, meaning there is no deadline or incentive to read any particular one in any sort of time frame.
Edit: Minus the author reveal timeline, which I'm completely unaware of as to anything thereof. Kind of does incentivize, doesn't it? Knowing I'm reading something from a poster I enjoy beforehand versus one I'm indifferent to or otherwise might skew things in one direction or the other as to one's particular level of attention to detail and internal analysis. Might not. We're all adults here. :smile:
I think that's reasonable, but last time I did that, people kicked up a fuss and I think I ended up changing it back.
Everyone, please dont panic. If you hate it that much Ill change it back. Just let me know.
Great!
Neither order is perfect, but this way its fixed and untied to popularity. My current favourite story is unfortunately at the bottom, but I feel that will cease to matter as it becomes obvious that the list is fixed.
Would I?
No, I did say my current favourite; to be clearer I shouldve said my favourite so far.
I would!
Quoting Jamal
:up:
Btw, thanks for fixing the order of the stories!
Quoting Benkei
No.
Quoting Jamal
Quoting Benkei
Yes.
Not a huge deal, but this format is not my favorite. I don't really get the reasoning: if people are psychologically disposed to comment on the top posts, this way is strictly worse. The hope I guess is that people will figure out that the order doesn't matter? But they can do that anyway. It does seem like a pretty clear pattern is emerging.
With the old way I like to work from the bottom up, bumping up the bottom stories. I can't even do that this way.
Again, not a biggie, but my 2c.
I agree.
I sort of agree now too, so Ive changed it back. Apologies to everyone for my erratic and impulsive meddling.
1) There are two stories whose female characters are called Lily, and they are children (or young), respectively. I think it is a common nickname for girls before their teenage years in the English language.
2) There are an important number of stories where the psychology is involved and/or hallucinations/dreams too.
:grin:
Cool. As an erratic and impulsive meddler myself I can relate.
Is that the last word on the subject, for evermore? :wink:
And, you gotta know I only agreed because I couldn't remember my old, impassioned arguments. And grow weary with it all.
Glad that short-story worthies @hypericin and @Noble Dust came forward. Well done, guys :up:
All excellent! In different ways. But then I'm easy to please :wink:
Seriously, this is good stuff :up:
The best middle ground would have been the order randomizing each time the page loads. That way it's not based on comment numbers or a set order, but everyone equally having a change to end up higher for better visibility. But I guess that's not a card that can be played with the forum code. I agree that it's better that things at least move around as they did before.
Same! I was annoyed there were no polls this year, now I'm starting to think they were always an unnecessary distraction.
Even if there were polls I think something like that could happen later. Rather than voting while reading and engaging, it let's people relax with the stories and occasionally a first reaction isn't an honest one, so if and when there's some kind of voting, even if it's next time, I think it should be something done after some time reading everything.
Do you mean that not having a poll would reduce author input? And so less stories. That wouldn't say much about the creative impulse at the heart of writing, would it? Does it really need that kind of motivation? Perhaps it does, for some. Not all.
I'm glad that @Baden is trying something new with a 'Favourites' thread. To be started later. Possibly at the same time as 'Guess the Author' ? It will be interesting to see how that works out. This means that each story should have its share of reading and comments. Each reader has time to reflect, perhaps even change their minds during the discussion period.
The 'people who care enough' - about competition - will vote. The people who care enough about writing will write. :pray: :sparkle:
Your personal preference is irrelevant. :razz: I prefer a science-based approach.
And science confirmed both a recency bias and the "rich-get-richer" effect, for stories liked early or commented on earlier will create a feedback loop to the detriment of stories that tend to be further down the line.
@Jamal You're so wishy-washy. I had good reasons as evidenced by research in the area. But to make it really fair, we should simply not allow in thread comments.
Well, it's true that stories already commented on will attract readers who in turn will comment. It's easier to stand back and not be first to commit.
So, someone should be given the task to comment on each and every story before the Activity even starts! Clearly then, such grave responsibility lies at the feet of @Noble Dust and @Baden - or whomsoever are playing hosts.
There is still one story without comment...go for it!
Exactly. I knew this would happen sooner or after the stories would be posted. I was against using polls for that reason. When a few stories get important attention, the rest go to the bottom of the page and go unnoticed. I commented on 'Paper Houses' this morning, and the story had zero replies until I posted today. This is what I fear the mostwhen some stories don't get attention from readers, and I think their writers don't deserve to experience this kind of 'ghosting.'
Thank you for bringing this up, Javi. I am extra-sensitive to it myself. (I've been using Firefox reader view to read those stories, to ease the pain)
For historical reasons, paragraph indentation as used in books is not supported on the web, or is only supported inconsistently. This means that on most websites, including TPF, the first line of a paragraph is not indented---it is flush with the left margin like the rest of the text. Since paragraphs need to be separated somehow, for readability etc., the standard on the web is to use a blank line-space.
The likely reason that we see so many stories without this context-appropriate paragraph spacing is that people have copied and pasted from Word, which---since it combines composition and typesetting---does provide paragraph indentation, or at least provides standard tab functionality (not part of HTML). When folks paste from Word, the indentation/tabs are lost.
Here is some text without proper paragraph spacing, copied from a source with indentation:
Personally, I really struggle with this. Reading large amounts of text from a computer screen is bad enough without having to deal with bad formatting. Here is what it should look like:
The upshot is: if you are writing in Word, add a blank line space between paragraphs (NB: but not after every sentence!), or do so when you've pasted the content and are composing the post. Note that this doesn't require any special formatting characters, just an extra line space.
@Baden I suggest this goes in the literary activity guidelines next time.
True. But I did own up to that, so it's really not cricket of you to point it out. :wink:
EDIT: In my defence, I'm flip-floppy on the issue because I don't feel strongly about it either way. It doesn't actually matter that much.
I understand and share your concerns about giving each story due respect.
It is not only readers but the writers themselves who could give more attention to the stories.
It's not possible to legislate for this. Hanging is too good for those who selfishly await responses but will not give feedback to others. :rage:
If every writer could manage to offer even a few comments, that would make all the difference. No excuses!
Which methods of execution do you think are more appropriate?
I would tailor it to the individual fears and terrors of the writer :smile:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/954310
A suggested addition to the rules for next time. I don't think you'll get the mention for it so I'm posting a fresh mention.
I thought I would sound fussy, and the author might not like it, but I still think that there should be some guidelines on this point for the next time, as you pointed out.
My struggle was more related to understanding all the florid words of English vocabulary. I often use 'Reverso,' which helps me to understand a specific paragraph written in English but in context and using examples.
The problemat least to meis that the lines of that story are too close together making me very difficult to follow the plot.
I understand it is not a big issue, but I feel sensitiveas you dowhen I read a big paragraph with many embedded words.
:up:
Quoting javi2541997
Just to be clear (and probably pedantic), I think you mean paragraphs rather than lines. Anyway, you give good additional reasons for enforcing good paragraph spacing.
Do you mean that when reading the stories you reformatted them in the browser? I've done that myself, but not everyone is gonna know how. I think the onus is on the writers.
Nah. I meant I added return spacing in the posts here.
Do you mean when writing posts you add an extra line break? If so, then yes, that's what I'm saying ought to be done, since it's the standard for web publication.
No. I meant I just went through all the stories in the literary activity, on site, and gave them the line break formatting. Manually.
Ah! I misinterpreted your "just".
Hm, I hope you didn't edit mine, since everything in it is intentional.
EDIT: No, it's good.
Well you can always edit it back.
Well, your decisive radical action will likely turn out to have been a good one, but I find myself slightly aghast at your boldness.
EDIT: Alternatively: thanks!
If I get enough complaints I'll just undo it. It was not hard to do, it is not hard to undo.
Also yes: sometimes it was obvious that the formatting was intentional.
Cool, cool, I trust your judgement.
I think you should make it clear to the authors that their story has been changed. Right now. In each story discussion! Not every author will appreciate the meddling without permission.
The intention is good. But still. The editing should be made clear.
I find it intrusive and unacceptable. A bit rude and ridiculous. To the authors and the hosts @Baden and @Noble Dust. They might not think so. It is also distracting. Something we were hoping to avoid. Pissed off, well and truly :rage:
Yeah, I was referring to paragraphs. I didn't express myself accurately.
Fine. Thanks! Your swiftness in execution reminds me of Japanese excellence. :up:
Please don't be pissed off Amity. First, I changed the sort order on Benkei's urging, thinking it would be fairer and better, but later I changed it back. It was impulsive of me, but there were no consequences.
Then @fdrake noticed that some of us were having difficulty reading some of the stories and intervened to help. Since he has done everyone, including the authors, a favour, merely adding line spaces to stories whose formatting has not been carried over from Word, I think everything is still okay.
Even if it was cheeky to go ahead and do it, he did it for good reasons and there's no reason right now to get upset.
I hope you continue to give your detailed feedback on the stories; you haven't done them all yet!
I am avoiding getting in much discussion here. I do think that the change to fixed positions is unfair because when I looked at the list those which are at the top are getting more reads whereas those lowest down haven't been read for about a day. It is hard to know whether this will change during the period because in the main forum once threads get to the bottom of the page they often never get touched again. The ones at the lowest place have been read when it was not fixed, but we will see how much attention they get as the activity continues.
But, I refuse to get stressed by any of it because there are too many stresses in real life. I just plan to wait until the holiday period, read them and try to offer feedback. It is as you say a different approach to see it as 'competition' or a genuine space for people who value writing. The two don't have to be opposites but on a forum such as this, the competitive component can become too forceful.
I had hoped to do that too :roll:
Quoting Jack Cummins
Great idea! Might just follow your lead... Cheers! :up:
Would have been better with the opposite, in which the ones with lowest engagement went to the top. It would encourage the bottom end to get more attention and make things more equal.
Not to go off a too long tangent, but this is why I don't like algorithms in online coding for community spaces. They are fundamentally created around the concept of engagement, producing the foundation for the attention economy that the world suffers by. It usually squeeze people into tunnel vision and all outliers and potentially interesting content and creations becomes sidelined, effectively making society unable to infuse originality to give new life to stagnated expression.
With new AI systems, it should be very easy to produce an advanced algorithm which identifies outliers and potential disruptors in art and expression in order to constantly challenge a status quo. If only that was the interest of corporations and people rather than conformed fast food.
If I were a cereal, I would also want to be on the top shelf because more people buy the top shelf cereal, but, odds are, I won't ever be a cereal.
Wouldn't a top shelf technically be so high that people just ignore it? Especially today when everyone's looking down on their phones.
Have you noticed that everyone is using "garner" these days? I just did it myself and I have mixed feelings.
I agree that this is a factor, but I think that this place of all places surely would have more people able to deal with longer written text. Maybe it's just that people deal with the shorter ones first and comment as they can be read in a short burst and then during the holidays they will read the longer ones as a more dedicated read.
It does require a bit more dedication to sit down and read them as the experience is more akin to reading a longer book.
I do however think that if people are engaging with the short stories they should have the curtesy to do so with them all, regardless of length. I've not yet been able to read all of them, but I will not skip over anyone just because they're at the bottom of the page or long.
I respect being physically lazy, but I don't respect mental laziness :nerd:
Could just be that people read the short ones first. Theres plenty of time :cool:
Definitely. That is unfortunately what you sign up for, when writing a longer story. More work, for less payoff.
Laziness is obviously a factor. People want the more instant gratification of a shorter story, and shorter stories are just plain easier to comment on.
But lets not overlook the fact that plowing though a long story by an amateur writer can just be a slog. I think people are gun-shy on that, and might not even attempt a longer one. Mathematically there is more opportunity for a reader to give up part way, the longer a story is. But if it *is* rough going, and the reader scrolls down and sees an imposing landscape of seemingly endless text to go, they are *much* more likely to bail.
In my reading of the stories, I plan to start at the bottom and go upwards, as opposed to starting at the top.
No, not what I meant. IIRC, the idea of voting only on the last day was floated before. The concern was that this would mean people would vote less, maybe they would forget, maybe they would be busy that day. But I don't think this is a big deal. The people who care about voting would make time to vote, even if they only had a day.
Quoting Jamal
:up:
Quoting fdrake
Thanks. :up:
There are text to audio converters you can download. Maybe you can choose a sexy, sultry voice to listen to. I think I'll listen to an incomprehensible Scottish accent.
As long as the text isn't funneled into training data without the author's consent thought. Although that might just happen by the nature of existing online anyway.
:sweat: I will find yours and train a model of its own :joke:
"Honey, how long are you going to be in there? Is that Reagan you're listening to?"
Agreed. I still have two to read myself, but this might be the strongest event so far.
The Authorial Speculation thread will be very puzzled and uncertain this year. Every story is unique and spectacular in its own characteristics. It is true that I perceived some British, American, and Irish words while reading some, but I will experience some struggling on guessing who the author of each story is.
By the way, even this time I didn't read in the feedback that -- this story was written by a non-native, etc. So, I tricked you this year, mates. It will not be easy to predict which is mine! :rofl: :eyes:
It's up. :smile: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/15657/authorial-speculation
:smile:
Even if not mentioned in the feedback, it is fairly obvious to me. However, I won't be entering the Guessing game, just yet. Still reading and enjoying the stories. :sparkle:
What!? Well, that 'obvious' was a bit painful to my feelings; just joking, jaja. I know you always put a lot of effort into each story, and since it is not my first time taking part in this beautiful activity, I guess you already guessed me for some details that I often put on my stories.
This is very interesting now that I am reflecting on that... indeed!
Ain't that the truth!
Quoting javi2541997
I hope @javi2541997 is now reflecting on the positive and interesting feedback to his story. Even if it must have been painful to read a hard, harsh comment concerning language and grammar.
The Activity isn't always 'beautiful'. The imagination and creativity shown is. In the library of dreams.
Anyone who writes in a language not their own, has my utmost respect. Even, in English, it is difficult to convey ideas, images and emotions.
So, please, @javi2541997 don't be disheartened. Especially at this time of year when it is about love.
Most participants show that in their careful reading and appreciation.
Participating in the Activity as you have done over many years can sap energy. It is a mental and emotional challenge. Sometimes, I have to withdraw to regain balance, a sense of perspective and humour!
Wishing you, and everyone, peace and happiness at Christmas time, and have a Guid New Year!
:pray: :heart: :flower:
Thank you, Amity. Your kind words cheered me up.
I thought I did better writing regarding my grammar skills. Yet, I am aware that there are a lot of things to do and improve. I guess I should read more books or novellas in English. That would help me, indeed.
I feel I should not have submitted my story this year. But, on the other hand, I also feel I would have regretted it otherwise.
See you on the main thread of my story when the names are revealed. You wrote a lot, and you deserve feedback from my side and an explanation of why I wrote my story. Other readersVera and Nilsalso posted interesting reviews, and they deserve a reply from my side too.
Take care, amiga. :heart: :flower:
I look forward to that!
Cuídate, amigo. :sparkle: :flower:
I would be more sympathetic if you didnt send private messages calling me a stupid ass because I gave feedback trying to figure out the writing. I did find and mentioned the good qualities of the story, but that seemed to go over your head. I just dont understand why if you're not comfortable with English grammar you dont put the story into any existing software able to assist with grammar and spelling problems in order to proofread and check for problems? It doesnt matter how good any of us are with English, its a normal part of the process for everyone to proofread and use available tools that help with writing.
Deciding not to proofread and then lashing out against people who criticized the writing, by sending hateful messages because the feedback given wasnt positive, is just plain weird.
And then play some innocent victim in here while acting in an opposite way in private messages? Just stop.
I honestly prefer reading authentic attempts at English, once the meaning is comprehensible, than sanitized machine-edited versions. And they offer more opportunity to learn if feedback is given and taken constructively. Sometimes, the boundary on that is hard to recognize. But I hope you two bury the hatchet and move on. If javi initially took this personally, I expect he is or will get over that, right amigo?
Sí.
On an entirely unrelated topic, The New York Times food editors wrote a column about canned fish -- sardines, mackerel, etc. It was a 'scrumptious article', and many of the canned fish they tried were from either Spain or Portugal and most of them were delicious, according to the article. New York City is more cosmopolitan than Minneapolis, so I've never seen 90% of the brands they sampled and some of them were pretty expensive by the pound. $10 for a 4 oz. tin might be tolerable once in a while, but that's $40 a pound--a pretty pricy sardine. It would have to be damned good to justify the cost.
King Oscar is the most common brand here, nominally Norwegian. The name originated in Sweden and their main plant is in Poland. The brand is owned by the Thai Union Group.
The ground has been covered with snow for several days, an essential part of Christmas in these parts.
There is a bit of a tension, when we have to criticize and be kind at the same time. Ideally we could outsource official criticism to a panel of paid judges, and then we could rush the defend our authors against the criticism of such outsider judges as an act of encouragement and camaraderie.
We could burn the judges in effigy after they leave to feel better. Every participant gets a judge pinata which they can beat to pieces, revealing a cash prize.
Javi can beat the Christoffer pinata.
:naughty:
:pray:
One also has to be ready to receive criticism and feedback when presenting a creation to the world. The art of giving critique is just as complex as how one handles receiving critique.
But never getting any negative critique, never getting anything that points towards and reveals the flaws is way worse. Those who want their work to be surrounded by yes-men will get stuck and never improve. Its nice to receive good and positive feedback, but its fundamentally only feeding the ego with pleasure, rather than giving the knowledge that comes out of revealing flaws.
If people want to bash a Christoffer pinata, fine, but since I'm not really from the peanut gallery I'd hope to give some feedback based on work experience. And through that experience I also know when to ignore individuals who can't handle critique, to their loss.
I suggest putting the stories back on the main page. I know people will complain, but it's only a few weeks a year, and if we prepend entries with "Short Story: " they can deal.
1. Guidelines on how to give and receive feedback.
2. The writer being able to have a dialogue with the feedback, before the final evaluation/favourites thread. Not too early or to explain the story because that would spoil the fun of interpretation and puzzling things out.
3. How best to read and question to achieve fuller satisfaction.
And improve understanding. For mutual benefit.
4. How to write a short story.
5. Provide links to a few helpful, technical or inspirational resources.
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2021/aug/14/take-risks-and-tell-the-truth-how-to-write-a-great-short-story
I agree. More could be done to promote this Activity.
1. Start a philosophy discussion on the main page.
Stories: What are they good for? - Absolutely nothing!
Writing is good for the soul. Discuss.
2. Complement the 'Currently reading' thread with a 'What are you Writing?'
Are you writing anything other than posts?
If not, why not?
3. Awake at 3am? Can't stop thinking? Looking for the OFF switch?
Write it out, write it LOUD, write it proud!
Or make yourself a cuppa and have a biscuit.
Or both... :monkey:
I love that!
Yup! Moi aussi :cool:
Putting the kettle on. What's your poison? :smile:
I agree. But I'm an awful promoter of anything but my own absurdities. I even hate putting exclamation marks at the end of sentences unless there's irony involved!
You are full of great ideas!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And implementing them. Else we wouldn't be here, so there :razz:
Must go, my tea is getting cold...
I can hang up some fliers for the next competition at the Chipotle's near my house.
Take it to the Shoutbox. Tell them there's pie. :party:
Dartmunder beer. I used to guzzle wine and sip scotch, but parts of my deteriorating system can't take them anymore. Worse: I've lost my palate for cheeses. the cost of hanging around long enough to be a burden on society.
Hellish, innit?!
Well, I had something stronger than tea. So, things are gonna get wild! :fire: :party:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/15657/authorial-speculation/latest/comment
Then again...
Not as good as this though! >>>
Quoting Hanover
I don't think we specified when the favourites thread would go up. But my current thinking is the 31st. And a few days after to reveal the authors?
Yes, that sounds good. :up:
It depends on how long after that you want the Activity to continue.
I think it is vital that authors get time to answer questions and have a dialogue with the readers.
I am seriously tempted to reveal myself now...but I will be patient :halo:
Use untapped skills for surprise attention
What about formally ending it on 5th Jan?
But the story discussions can continue...
I would be glad if your deadline suggestions were agreed. I am really uncertain to choose 1 or more favourites yet. I know that we have a few more days but 15 stories is a fair amount to think about, as some are longish. Also, 31st December seems a problematic cut off as people are likely to be going out for the evening and doing other things.
It's an impossible task!
I've still to read a couple...the longer ones. Needed a break. Hope you enjoyed Christmas!
Alright by me. :up:
I'm still reading and commenting too. There are a lot but overall a very high standard, which helps.
Does it warrant some extension before the favorites thread perhaps? Just like last year
With non-fiction, you're bound by something, even if you wish to throw in commentary.
Maybe I'm going about it wrong.
Nah.
I agree with us being limited by our imagination. Where can it take us, beyond borders. How willing are we to let it flow to dangerous ideas?
I don't think it's true that it's all just bullshit. What pops into our heads can be fun, scary, hellish.
But it does make sense at some level. Reining in the more fantastic fantasies to share in a way that others can appreciate...well...there's the damned challenge! Are we brave enough? Yes, we are! :100:
Dinosaur.
Anyone fancy a go at the new 'Philosophy Writing Challenge - June 2025'?
Read about it here:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/15596/tpf-philosophy-competitionactivity-2025-/p1
There is never enough time allocated to this Activity. Given that it happens only once a year and writers put in so much effort. How many stories? 15? We are only given 15/16 days over a busy period.
I think it could be extended further. To fully enjoy and relax. Would it be too much to ask for a month, from beginning to end? Mid Dec to mid-Jan?
Since it wasn't a contest there is no deadline to vote/comment. Why is everyone still hurrying for no reason. Authors are already outing themselves from the get go anyway, if the problem is about officially knowing who wrote what.
True.
Quoting Nils Loc
We are still in that mindset. To find a 'winner'. And usually, @Baden likes to shut up shop.
Quoting Nils Loc
True. But I think that authors can't participate until the list is revealed. That's annoying.
Have they? I haven't seen it, but I think most of the authors are pretty well deduced by now.
@Baden and @Noble Dust - I think once authors have been identified, even before the designated time, we have a right to reply. Yes/No?
You can certainly choose to reveal which story you wrote at any time. But in general, if someone correctly pairs you with your story, youre also under no obligation to confirm it its pretty loose, especially without the contest part. Guessing authors is just something fun that came about organically the first time around.
:up:
Thanks and to clarify:
Once revealed, by others, the authors can take part in the story discussion?
Ill leave that to @Baden but I imagine so. I think maintaining anonymity was originally to keep voting impartial when it was a contest.
OK, thanks. Time for me to give it a rest. G'night! :yawn:
As the philosopher Jean-Francois Leotard once commented "But from the seeds of the finite do dreams of infinity bloom." I think that's right in general. However, it's a bit different this time, so we can be flexible.
As the philosopher Jean-Francois Leotard once commented: "Okeydoke".
:up:
As the philosopher Marilyn Monroe once commented: " If I'd observed all the rules, I'd never have got anywhere."
As the philosopher Marilyn Monroe once commented: "Ever notice how 'What the hell' is always the right answer?"
As Amity exclaimed: "Hell's Teeth!"
Leotard/Lyotard. Please don't tell me that you and Hanover swapped bodies and minds :scream:
:lol:
Quoting Baden
I am also starting to take part in the story discussion. Frankly, all of you guessed my authorship, so it is not worthy to keep silent and not provide replies. :up:
I assume this has been extended, yes? (Indefinitely Id suggest)
I'm wondering what this means, will they be closed after that? They shouldn't since there will be discussions after the author-reveals.
Dont worry, well keep them open.
Time to start the Favourites thread?
Sure, we'll keep things open.
OK, that's up. I'll start putting names on the stories I got too.
Final, fond words of appreciation to @Baden and @Noble Dust for hosting the Literary Activity.
The authors and stories have been incredible. The feedback and feedback to the feedback fabulous.
I could say more but I'll leave it there. I've said enough already! Yup, indeedy! :smile:
I'm looking forward to another exciting adventure. A new TPF 'Activity' - to be hosted by yours truly and @Moliere - that's the plan, anyway! Not fiction but a chance to be creative in a different way:
The Philosophy Writing Challenge - June 2025.
If you haven't already, you can follow its beginning and its becoming, here:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/15596/tpf-philosophy-competitionactivity-2025-/p1
It's Philosophy for All. Designed to be as interactive as the Literary Activity. Challenging people like my (lazy) self to work on something a bit more substantial. I already have ideas. How to present them?
There are so many ways:
Quoting Amity
Thanks, again, to everyone for a most satisfying time. Even with a few hiccups, it seems to get better every year. And that's all down to the TPF team and the participants. It is as great as we make it. :fire:
Hope y'all bring joy and creativity to the June event. Best Wishes. :hearts: :sparkle: :pray:
Yes, it's been great, thanks to @Baden and @Noble Dust. I am struggling and not sure if I am going to put in a favourites list. That is because I can see merits in so many, meaning that I am a little stuck. Of course, if the threads aren't closing it can be added to at any point...
Hey there! Don't sweat the stuckiness :smile:
I've been wondering about the Favourites and the Guessing Game threads.
I get the impression that only a few are willing to list favourites and give reasons.
The 'Guess the Author' thread received a bit more attention.
They work OK-ish for a fiction activity where most authors/readers already know each other.
[Not sure that would work for the June event.]
Perhaps, a single thread where authors and readers leave their overall impressions?
Time line from the Lit Activity suggests that after about 17dys reading and feedback, people are keen to know about the authors. Perhaps this is when the list of authors could be posted in a separate thread?
A day or so, for speculation, before the reveal.
Do you think that this separate thread could incorporate both, evolving into a relaxed conversation?
If so, what would we call it ? Brainstorming:
'Story Discussion'. 'The Author Encounter'. 'Writer/Reader Get Together'. 'Authors and Readers Unite'.
Finally, I got 'Meet the Authors'. Hmmm...
@Baden @Noble Dust @Jamal et al. Any thoughts on how the 2 threads have worked out?
I thought the favourites would have been a bit busier. But maybe, like Jack, some are unsure how to approach it. Will mull over your suggestions.
Anyway, thank you for being so involved and also to my co-organizer @Noble Dust for being so good to work with and to all contributors and commentators for making this a fantastic experience. The standard really surprised me. We've got real talent here. :cool:
Yes, I had difficulty with that. And, perhaps, it's too early to come to a clear conclusion.
A pleasure to be involved, although I admit to being weary at this point.
Quoting Baden
Absolutely. :fire: :100:
I think it's that people don't know how many to list and what to say, but I just treated it as listing the ones I liked the most and a short summery of why. It seems that most did the same and I really like that inclusion of a short summery.
The number of stories mentioned I don't think is important, but maybe pinpoint the most favored one or the ones that were really really good, and then some honorable mentions after it.
That's just how I approached it. Maybe there weren't many reading this year? Or maybe some haven't been able to complete a read of all yet?
And because it's a dog-eat-dog world that wants to see winners win and loser lose. :razz:
:up:
Anyhow, as an encouragement for those who haven't commented, here's the direct link: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/15677/favourites/p1
I'll leave this discussion up a day or two more and then unpin. The favourites thread can remain open.
Personally I root for the underdog. I want an underdog-eat-overdog world, or just a doggy-dog world.
Me too. But I do that in part because I often feel like an underdog in life, so there seems to be a strange ego component to it either way. :chin:
Whether you're a winner who wins or an underdog who wins, you win! :up:
That's the spirit :cool:
Yes. In past events, there was an average of 17 voters, roughly the same amount of authors.
This time, it seems that some of the authors aren't nearly as involved.
Of the 15, only about 6 have so far offered a list of some favourites. Plus 2 made a half-hearted attempt.
I know that some like to wait until after they have read all of the stories. So, there's still plenty of time.
Perhaps, people just don't care what others have to say about where they come in a subjective list.
Perhaps, they have better things to do or think about. Probably.
I doubt I will submit or fully participate next year. I become tired and weary. It is hard to keep motivated.
While I have enjoyed the stories, I also feel weary and tired. It is hard to know how we will feel almost a year from now, but what do you think would help make it less wearisome?
Good question. Right now, for me, it's because I became too involved in the story discussions.
I have limited energy as it is. It's always a challenge. This time, more so. I'm not up for it.
Thanks. Take care :sparkle:
Yes, overinvolvement can be problematic as none of us has infinite energy. That is why I am taking a few days away from looking at the stories.
As I have said before, all this looking at screens I find hard. A TFP forum anthology of stories (in paper) would be great but probably not practical and whose stories would or would not get in would make it like the 'Big Brother' competition. Of course, it might motivate people, because even when there was a contest there was no prize at all, which often drives contests.
Folks also move here at the speed of a falcons and rabbits.
If one is tortoise-like, or even worse, clam-like or tree-like, keeping up is a bit hopeless.
For the research, sometimes websites and academic papers were not enough. For example, I turned to ChatGPT when I wanted to know if "Shred it bro!" was in use in the skateboarding community in the UK in the nineties. ChatGPT told me it was, and that was enough for me. My thinking was, even if it was wrong, it didn't matter much, and I would have found it quite difficult to get an answer to the question in any other way (laziness plays a part here).
As for its thesauric function, sometimes when I'm writing I'm certain there's a word with the flavour I need, but I just can't bring it to mind, so I go to a thesaurus. But I've found ChatGPT to be useful for this too. I can't think of an example I actually used, but it's something like this: say I want a word like weird but with a special flavour, so I ask ChatGPT, "what's a word meaning weird that has suggestions of malevolence and perversity?" and it will probably suggest eldritch. (This is just an example; I likely wouldn't use such a horror-worn word.)
I'm curious if anyone thinks these two uses constitute any level of cheating. EDIT: Or if not cheating--a hard case to make I'd think--then whether it's bad in some other way.
I didn't use it for anything else: ideas, structure, grammar, proofreading, and all the writing were done by me (but I'm not saying that using it for some of these is necessarily bad). I tried it for proofreading but, for me, it was more hassle than it was worth.
My line of thinking is like this. I haven't used it for creative writing before writing this year's story, and even now it's not the first tool I turn to. But I'd expect that to change, and I'm wondering if there's any danger in that aside from the obvious one about relying on purported but hallucinatory information.
If you'd Googled, the result would have been the same I expect, only it would have taken slightly longer, so it's not bad in any way I can think of.
With the enshittification of Google, googling such things has become a lot harder.
EDIT: Actually, I forgot it has AI built-in now.
Yes, AI for research is vastly superior than any other form of research tool. When writing, the research required is usually so specific to what is currently written that it would take weeks to read through broad information just to find the answer to a specific thing. This is what AI is a good tool for. Sifting through lots of information and provide an answer to a specific question. It's what scientists use AI for so it's used in critical work and maybe one of the only really fleshed out uses of AI that we have at this time.
My story had a lot of specific things about crews and ships and the royal society. What were missions into the Pacifics, what were the information Greystone would have known in 1827, by his class, status and position etc.
These things are hard to get from just a pile of information about that era and those institutions. I could even take a paragraph that I wrote and ask it questions about whether or not the information presented in that paragraph was correct for an expedition in 1827 and it understood the context of it being a fictional story and what was supposed to be correct expository information.
I think the best way to use it for research is to first ask the specific question, then google the specifics in the answer to get a verification on that information. That way, if the information's accuracy is critical, is as accurate as a person can get in research. Since you can also ask it about counter-perspectives, like, "were there any different views and critics of this official information?" and from that get a more nuanced view than most regular sources usually provide.
But always important to verify.
Quoting Jamal
Yeah, this is also a good use. I took many of the very 19th century-esque lines and asked GPT about them, if this would have been accurately said in early 1800s. And then ask about texts that are similar in nature that can be found and take inspiration from, especially specific classes of people on ships, the crew talking in a different way to the royal society members and the captain. As well as how would Erasmus talk being a former missionary priest but now settled for the better part of his life on this island.
It helped getting rid of too modernized words as well as find words that were more common in that era. If it's supposed to feel like it was written by a royal society member in that era, there had to be a certain style to it and having GPT check that this style was somewhat authentic helped a lot.
Quoting Jamal
No. Using it for research and proofreading is using it as an effective tool for a purpose that the author is still in control over. I think the debate around AI has become a mindless plaque-political, screaming, polarized mess in which no one really steps back and think for a moment.
I think it's easy to distinguish between what is cheating or not. If the AI is actively writing the text, if it's used to invent plots and ideas, it's "cheating". That use makes the writer just not being an author as they aren't writing the text or invent the ideas. And if one isn't working as the author of the text, then one cannot claim to be the author of the story.
I don't think research and proofreading is any bad because it's not the creative output. And with the advent of AI being part of every system that's used in society, then the idea of "using AI" loses it's meaning. I think it's better then to have control over the AI research tool and know the difference between what the AI generates and what is raw information.
The debate have somewhat gotten out of hand; producing luddite behaviors in which people just reject AI for everything, even the positive and valid uses.
The problem, as I see it, is that society have just been exposed to the pop-media shallow surface of what AI is, focusing on the image, video and poetry generation. All cases that are easily deconstructed and easily criticized. But AI is a broad tool, with uses that have nothing to do with generating art imitations.
Quoting Jamal
I think it's kind of easy to know where to draw the line here. Anything that is directly copy/pasted from its generated text is bad. Anything that has to do with analysis of the text that is then used by you as a source to rewrite yourself, is good as long as the AI isn't inventing ideas and concepts.
For instance, I asked it for a list of common British names in the 18-19th century based on different societal classes. It generated that list, but that list was not an invention by it, it was information research and I chose the names from it, not it. I also verified these names and dug into further googled research about their meaning and existence during that era. It would have taken much longer to try and find that information and putting together a similar list that would have been identical but taken a half day from actual writing.
Basically, asking the AI to write something for your, is bad. Asking the AI to provide information, both in research and about the story, is good and does not break authorship anymore than if you asked a friend or professor for information you then used in your story.
Quoting Jamal
If it's critical information that needs to be correct, then just a second step of verifying that researched information yourself will suffice in protecting from hallucination. But asking very specific questions and getting specific information, even if doing a second step of manual verification is still much faster than spending weeks sifting through irrelevant text just to get to something relevant. In the case of "shred it bro", that's not critical information so an answer from GPT is enough. But in the case of something relating to a real thing that happened that involved real people, I think it's important to do the second verification step.
As long as the creative writing is done by you and the AI just assist in research and proofreading I don't see how that would be a problem.
Quoting Baden
Quoting Jamal
...but googling doesn't take "slightly longer" for some information. Sometimes the flow of writing finds itself at a halt where some important information blocks further plotting and you have to spend a day trying to find that specific answer.
Not using AI to assist with finding that information, out of some principle, I wonder, what principle? Research and proofreading isn't generative AI in the way of "generating art", it's using AI as the tool it's primarily meant for, sifting through lots of information.
If the author is the actual author, the one writing the story; ideas and text, and AI is used for research. It's no different from an author who has a group of people around them who proofreads their story to pinpoint stuff they find odd. Or having sources in the police who can give specific information related to how murder investigations are conducted. Both have the same level of requirement on verifying the information given and the only difference is speed to get the information needed.
On top of that, search engine AIs are shit and hallucinate to the point of parody.
I agree with you, but the thing I noticed is that sometimes the line feels too easy to cross. Before I had worked out precisely how to ask it what to do, it started suggesting changes even though I thought I'd been careful not to ask for themand they weren't always bad. I have to assume lots of writers are offloading more and more onto AI now, and it might not always be easy to draw the line. EDIT: duh
I just treat it as another person reading my story and having the integrity to ignore using their suggestions but listen when they point out I used a word wrong and it made a sentence confusing.
I think being an author is always crashing against things that threaten your integrity as a writer. Everyone has suggestions and ideas, everyone reading your output will have comments and opinions. Some writers have too much integrity and won't listen to any feedback, while others have no integrity and just do whatever others tell them. Finding the balance is part of being a good writer.
Using an AI demands the same integrity. Some might fall for the temptation of it doing all the work, but how would that be different from them doing the same with people around them? Just taking what they heard and then pose as being the mind behind it, without transforming it into their own thing.
To get into a more philosophical rant on it...
I think we attribute too many flaws to the AI itself and won't address the elephant in the room, which is that it all comes down to the moral integrity of the author and with enough integrity the author will know where the line is drawn. If the AI suggests something good, then how is that different from hearing another person commenting something similar after reading your first draft? The choice is how it inspires you. And inspiration is all around us. If we truly break down how inspiration works, it would become a ridiculous process of distinguishing odd moral lines being drawn everywhere.
Some artists take other people's photographs and directly copy parts of those photos into their paintings. That's kind of a moral grey area lifting the composition and art from photography into another format. And a writer gets their inspirational internal information from everywhere, stealing lines said, events happening, movie plots points, other book characters, news stories, whatever everywhere etc. all the time. If the AI suggests something based on reading your story, and you find this suggestion being a good one; it's still not coming from the AI, it's based off your idea and evolving from that, it's not really generating a new idea or something outside of your work.
I think the key here is that asking the AI to do the work of writing the story for you is the problem and what is morally wrong. But rewriting a story, and how it's always been done, is a messy process so filled with influences and letting other people proofread that anyone who propose that the writing process is some pure state of the author sitting in an empty room and just invent things out of nothing... isn't actually that knowledgeable about the process of writing fiction.
The concepts of writing fiction, the idea of it, the image of an author working; usually comes from people who've never written a single word of fiction or specifically never had people read their fiction. The prevailing idea about the profession of writing fiction is usually just a fantasy invented by non-writers, ridiculed by actual professional writers when they hear what people think they do in their writing process.
There are three groups in this. The absolute non-writers who just read books or even that. Then there are those who write fiction, but aren't being published or have been rejected over and over. And then there are those who are published and have been working a longer time as professional writers.
The difference in understanding the profession by people in each group are very different and their individual perspectives taken into a holistic view tells a lot about what the AI debate is really about.
The non-writers usually don't care, or when they care they don't know anything about the process of writing so they argue for or against AI through the lens of the AI generating the actual writing. This is the shallow, pop-media view on AI for creative writing. There's no understanding in what an author really means, what the purpose of subjectivity in art and writing is and it's filled with people who just dream of the attention and celebrity they can get out of letting an AI do the work. They simply don't understand how writing fiction works. This large group come into conflict with the unpublished writers:
They have been rejected so much that they're in the "unpublishing" depression most writers always face when trying to reach success. Some are just not discovered yet, but a lot of them are simply just bad writers who haven't yet understood the memo because they're not fully invested in writing, and similar to the first group, more interested in the fame you'd get as a known author than interested in the art of writing. So they end up in conflict with the first group and almost the entirety of the debate we see in society about AI, is between these groups; the first being totally oblivious about the writing process, and the second group who fear they will not get to the point of being a good published writer before AI takes over, or they can't see the difference between what the AI writes and what a really good writer produces.
The third group is detached from all of that. The major conflicts and debates there is about large corporations wanting to train their models on their published works and it's similar to any other copyright infringement cases. But there's one thing they know that makes them a bit calmer and not so much into the heat of the debates, and it's the integrity of themselves as authors. Some just write for the money, but many write because they want to write stories. And through that process, they know where the line can be drawn between directly copying something and being inspired by it, opening up to the messy true nature of the process.
Because it's really messy, like all art that's being created. It's not some purist fantasy of a brilliant mind just shaping stories out of thin air. Through inputs from readers they ask to read their unfinished works, to research and interviewing people as inspirations for characters. They take whatever they find useful, but always filter it through their own writing to make it their own. That's the key, the transformation.
And this messy writing process is totally unknown to most in the first and second group. While the second group idolize the third and invent these false concepts of purity in the writing process, they do it in order to distinguish themselves from the first group, trying to form an identity around them as writers who has some magical power of writing compared to the first group. The second group struggles with their identity as writers just as much as with the writing itself; which fuels their aggression towards anything that feels like an invasion on their sense of purity that the writing process is supposed to have.
The bottom line is that the writing process can look whatever, as long as the integrity of the author is intact to the point of that author being the authority of each written word. Their language, their story and final ideas. Regardless of how they got there. Because that's how accomplished published and professional writers do it. There's no magic, it's a grind of feedback that influence and help shape and reshape their work. If an AI gives suggestions, then a true author will have the integrity to understand if that suggestion has any place in their story and how to transform it into their own craft.
There are so many uses for a hammer, not all is murder.
Research: Mainly around fentanyl, I wanted to get terms and basic things right.
Proofreading: This was somewhat helpful, it did catch some spelling and punctuation mistakes.
Macro Feedback: Just to see what would happen, I fed the whole story to it and asked it for feedback. It was very impressive that a machine could read a novel story of that length and give anything meaningful back, but I didn't follow any of its advice. Not out of moral qualms, I just didn't like them, or respect the AI enough, or I wasn't willing enough to make significant changes at that point. But here is a moral gray area. What do you think of asking AI for feedback?
Micro Feedback: I was agonizing over a sentence. I had a version I felt was better than the previous one, but I wasn't sure. I asked AI which was better, and why. The AI confirmed my choice, gave compelling reasons why, and an interesting if long winded back and forth discussion followed. I then asked it for feedback on the surrounding paragraph. It gave it and made several suggestions. I didn't like most of them, but a few I felt were quite good, and I couldn't resist making these changes.
This last one seems like a deep moral gray area. I could have gone through this process paragraph by paragraph, or even sentence by sentence, and I have no doubt the result would be a better written story. What stopped me was both laziness (writing unaided is time consuming enough) and the feeling that this was cheating. Is it though? I'm not so sure. If a writer had gone through this process with a human, maybe an editor, I don't think anyone would bat an eye. So why not AI? The problem is that the AI is all too willing to supply alternative versions, which the writer might become increasingly tempted to use more and more of. The result would be not a fully AI-written story, but maybe a 3%, 5%, 10% AI-written story.
The only issue which I have is that when reviewing your story I was thinking it seemed so 'perfect', that I wondered if it incorporated AI. Of course, you only used it as a source, to aid the creative process.
Generally, I would rather see more 'raw' aspects, but it is likely that it is going to be used more and more as a tool for creative writing and art. It is hard to know how far to embrace it or reject it. I am inclined to reject, but the polished perfection it produces may be hard to compete with increasingly. Also, if it is used partially, it will go unnoticed in many instances and may even become the new 'normal'.
Interesting. To talk of 'polish'. That word has been done to death throughout this activity. Either as a noun, a verb or an adjective. At one point, I counted its use 3 times in the space of 2 consecutive sentences.
There is an obsession to the point of obnoxiousness when a lovely, sensitive story is reviewed, and revised again and again, apparently to improve or make it shine. It disrespects the author and their voice.
How perfectly arrogant.
The idea of a 'polished' story has indeed been talked about a lot in this activity and it is in contrast to your emphasis on Lyotard speaking about the 'unfinished draft'. It is an era of technological and aesthetic perfectionism, which extends to the arts.
There are so many different possibilities, ranging from popular fiction to literary fiction, with so many differing audiences. Of course, here on this forum the audience was small and of people with philosophical inclination. Perhaps, philosophy itself comes with a tendency towards finality or 'polishing', and overcoming the 'rough edges'...
Quoting hypericin
It is a grey area. However, my own feeling is one of slight disappointment. The skill, then, lies in having the technical knowledge and experience to facilitate and enhance a story. Fair enough.
I would be interested to know how much, if at all, @Noble Dust @Vera Mont or any other writers used it.
Nada.
Yes. It speaks to me of a mechanical enterprise. Cold, shiny robots replacing the warmth and authentic voice of a human. We will exterminate you! But hey, my imagination runs off a bit too far...or not far enough.
Quoting Jack Cummins
Perhaps. It depends on the person. There are those who seek or follow an absolute path. Certain in their superior stance. Inflexible. Black and white thinking. Dogmatic.
Others, like yourself, prefer to explore, ask questions, integrate other ways of thinking. Examining issues from different angles. Curious about the rough edges of life. The different textures and colours, interweaving. Respectful.
And the middlers. Who explore just to the point where they are happy...
Wouldn't know how, even if I were remotely tempted.
Yes. I would have laid bets on that! :smile:
I don't think so. A suggestion that you transform into your own is not AI controlled or authored.
It's as you say, doing the same with a human is similar but it can also be influenced by emotions. Some writers have people around them who emotionally hijack the reasons for a change, by pointing something out and let the author feel obligated to change something, because of the social pressure, something that doesn't exist with an AI as analytical help.
It's this that I look at as AI as a tool. For the writer who does not have access to an honest human editor or who's trapped in feedback that is infected by social emotions.
This is the hammer that does something else than murder.
Quoting Jack Cummins
Yet, his previous stories had the same level of writing, so looking at how he used AI, I don't think this is the case. Research and proofreading doesn't affect the writing as long as there's no copy/pasting.
People need to realize that the use cases for AI is not always that the AI generates the text. To ask an AI a question does not write the story.
There's too much false ideas about AI doing all the writing work when that's not all that AI does. It's this false notion that I feel accuses writers wrongly, because the critics miss how the AI functions and ignores more use cases than pure generation of prose.
Hypericin didn't let the AI write for him. So if he used AI as a research tool, that cannot be responsible for his perfection in writing.
It becomes a genetic fallacy in which even toughing an AI for anything means that they have no talent and everything is false. This is simply not true.
Quoting Jack Cummins
But I think this is an illusion of what a professional writer does. There's no "rawness" really, all accomplished writers use lots of strategies to get to a final stage, use lots of inspirations; steal quotes and take inspiration. True artists are not purists. As I described, there's no actual rawness as even the best writer in the world would, in a raw sense, produce lackluster outputs of writing in their first drafts.
I think that this idea about "raw" creativity makes some inexperienced writers fail to realize how the writing process really is. Focusing on some magical ideal about what "real writers do".
As I said, there's a purist ideal that's being pushed on creative output that blocks real talents from evolving. Research and editorial help can be extremely extensive among accomplished writers, and a lone writer using AI in the same manner of editorial help, never letting the AI write on its own, but merely assist in research and proofreading; helps give such writers, who don't have extensive resources for editorial help, a better term for accomplishing their work
Most authors who are well known does not have the rawness or pureness that people believe. Their writing process may have been very odd and extensive, but lots of people deify these writer's process as something that's not really true to the craft of writing.
Quoting Amity
But also an obsession around the idea of pureness or rawness. That the idea of rewrite or polish is something bad. I don't know any writer who view extensive rewrites and polish as bad, but I've met plenty of writers who are obsessed with an idealized idea of a writer being a genius who just sprouts his work from nothing, without external input, proofreading or help to polish their work to a publishing quality.
I wonder; does the core idea, emotion and soul of an author's work disappear with polished rewrites? Or does it sharpen the pen for their point of view? What is the "raw" anyway? Why is this better? Isn't this notion of the "pure" just an illusion about creativity that is really not seen in the real world of accomplished writers?
I understand the idea of rawness, but I don't think it lies in the craft of prose, I think it lies in the soul of the author, and their authorship will always infuse the text with that raw emotion, even after polish.
Written text is not really a good communicating mean; it's a technical obstacle of the rawness of the whole substance of what an author wants to tell. What I feel and want to tell and show people cannot be expressed merely through text, so writing becomes clumsy to express it fully. Only through sharpening that text can I hope to express my full range of expression in a way that works. My first draft is not "raw perfection", it's shit.
Therefore I don't believe in "rawness" of a written text. I believe in the ideas and emotions on display, and the descriptive text of that output requires polish to fully incorporate what the author want to tell.
Quoting Jack Cummins
But I would ask, what is the benefit of the unfinished or unpolished? We can get some sense of the thought process of the author, but it can also be negative to the true understanding of what the author wanted us to experience.
To what benefit do we experience the rough and unpolished? If the unpolished nature of a text distracts from some core idea the author wanted readers to notice, was that good or bad writing?
I don't know how to quantify or define what the idea of the "raw" and "unpolished" benefit a reader or the author?
Is it even doing so?
Quoting Amity
Does it though? Isn't writing about judging what ideas are best for the story? How does this differ from a professional writer having a group of people giving notes on their writing? It's always about judging what to listen to and what not to listen to and what fits the ideas and creativity the author has.
I think it's an illusion that this is about technical knowledge, because it's no difference from a writer who's got tons of people behind them giving notes on the writing. It's the same process and the process of the author is the ability of judgement of what is relevant for the story; the author effectively always deciding the actual path of the story.
What's the difference between authors having the means of people enhancing their story through human reader feedback and an AI helping a lone writer proofread or research their story? I'd say that robbing a lone author the ability to get a similar input and help from an AI effectively gatekeeps their ability to act on equal terms.
As long as the writing, creativity and text isn't directly and solely generated by the AI, I don't think an author getting general proofreading and research help from an AI should be looked down on anymore than a writer who's got human help doing exactly the same.
Quoting Amity
But it doesn't though? The AI isn't the author. Just like a human proofreading or inputting their feedback on a story doesn't grant them authorship of that story. There are no robots taking over this, the only ones letting AI write their stories are non-writers wanting the success of real writers.
So I'm saying the same as before... a hammer has more purposes than murder.
There's this illusion that professional writers live by some purist ideals, but this is not true.
And there's an idea that AI "writes for you", which it only does if you ask it to. To use it for research and proofreading is just the same as working with an editor or getting human input.
"Raw" publishing isn't really a common thing and I'm not sure there even is something that can be attributed as "raw creativity".
It's important to distinguish how the hammer was used. So as not to believe it was murder when it was merely used to build a house.
Hrmm, while I appreciate you felt it was "so perfect", that is still not the kind of feedback one wants to hear. I think/hope it would still be pretty damn hard/impossible to produce this story with AI, but it sucks that the perception and suspicion is now forever in the air.
Quoting Amity
Don't be too disappointed, as I said beyond proofreading my use was pretty minimal. To preserve my honor I have to reveal exactly what suggestions I used:
That's it.
It makes a pretty decent editor, if you are willing to separate the wheat from the chaff. But I chose not to do this for the whole story, because it is too time consuming, felt wrong, and most of all I don't want to start using it as a crutch.
But now, the cat is out of the bag, and that suspicion will always be there, for any writer at this point. It's really kind of a bummer. What is the point of trying to excel, when it just increases the perception that AI was used?
Your previous stories contradict this notion as they hold the same high quality.
If I'm to be a bit harsh, this is just an example of not understanding the use cases of AI, believing any use of AI constituting AI being the writer itself, which in your case it clearly didn't.
I really don't like this misunderstanding of the technology just because the media portrayal of the technology focus only on it generating prose and text.
Like, people really need to test it out and see instead of conjecture ideas about this technology. Because if authors have enough moral integrity they will know where to draw the line.
Questioning your integrity as an author when we have evidence for your writing ability in the past, just shows how the slightest mentioning of AI infects any rational discussion to the point that people don't know how to arrive at truths.
Here's the truth of the matter: AI's generating stories is not the same as proofreading or research when writing
To return to my metaphor: proposing someone's writing is worse because they used AI for research (which has nothing to do with the writing itself), is like saying I'm a murderer because I used a hammer to fix my porch, since a hammer can be used as a murder weapon. :shade:
:smile:
I said slightly disappointed. Thanks for showing the suggestions.
The 2 pennies. Genius. I can see why someone could start to rely on it. Even making it their first port of call. As you say:
Quoting hypericin
Your honour remains intact. :sparkle: :flower:
What is the point of writing?
Its clear that you deserve 100% of the credit for your story and that you used AI legitimately as a tool, like a combined thesaurus, grammar guide, search engine, library, editor, and reader giving feedback, all rolled into one.
You did highlight the grey area though, which put flesh on the bones of my own questions.
I think you're right about this fantasy of pure, or "raw" creativity.
I certainly get the pushback against AI. We've all generated or at least read the sort of anodyne fiction AI produces. Many of us know of the authors or "authors" who are attempting to make a career out of "writing" with AI, and there is a dread that this will eventually overwhelm and supplant "genuine" writing. And there is a fear that even if we aren't letting AI write for us, everyone will have to play along with AI, or get left behind.
I wonder if this privilege of "rawness" stems in part from this. If one can produce perfectly "flawless", "polished" prose with AI, then these features will be devalued to nothing. Will people start self-consciously creating, and purchasing, writing that is the antithesis of AI smoothness?
Rawness makes me think of music, where rawness is definitely prized. "Polish" is now severely devalued by computer generated music, Beyond the sterility of it, ease of creation seems to inhibit rather than amplify creativity. Even before computers dominated, there is a lot to be said for the energy and immediacy of a rough, unpolished take, with all its interesting little mistakes, versus something rehearsed to death, performed to a click track, and lavished with an expensive studio post-production.
Is there an analogy to be made with writing? Is there something like the energy of a live performance, but written?
Even the two pennies was more of a collaboration. The AI wanted me to get rid of "a nickel and two pennies" entirely, because it overwhelmed the reader with detail. I agreed, I think 3 is the magic number when listing details like this, 4 is usually one too many, and the coins were the most redundant of the group. But as you noticed the pennies played a role later, so I glommed them onto the dollar. The nickel was irrelevant, and I threw it away. I do think it reads better this way.
Do you see a place for this sort of human-AI collaboration?
Quoting Amity
I do ask myself this, and I'm sure we all have our own answers. What am I spending all this time for? Writing is not quite fun, at least for me. But there is a deep satisfaction to it, beyond fun. The joy of creating something out of nothing, a miniature giving-birth. The freedom to explore a terrain whose only limits are my own. And of course there is the egoic drive, to create something that others enjoy, and find worthy. If it wasn't for the latter, I wouldn't be nearly as much of a perfectionist.
Quoting Amity
Whew!
I think that you use of AI was one as a mere aid was part of the creative process and worked. When I said it was too -perfect', I meant more like the detailed precision which artists achieve through photography for research and aspects of it as part of art. Of course, photography is an art in itself because it is done by a human.
Your use of AI still made you the creative artist as opposed to mere AI generated stories. It is possible to be fearful of any use of AI at all, when you were clearly master in the process.
Yes, the thought of the reader reading it is motivating, for me and it seems for you too. Its difficult to imagine the mindset of the writers who profess to be writing entirely for themselves, unless this means writing for people like them. After I wrote the story for the competition in (I think) 2021 I told myself I had to write more stories, but without the motivation of the competitions on TPF I didnt manage it, as if I needed the mental image of the familiar audience ready and willing to read.
But, getting back to AI, one of the things I had in mind this time around was to distinguish my writing from the bland smoothness and cliché-ridden prose of ChatGPT. The opening parts of the story were thus far more abstract, awkward, and eccentric than they finally became. But I did end up retaining quite a lot of repetition and strange turns of phrase.
Quoting Noble Dust
Quoting Noble Dust
I dont know how successful this was, but I do know that ChatGPT didnt like it (this was before I gave up on its feedback abilities). So its obvious that we can be motivated to be extra-human, so to speak, even while at the same time using AI as a tool.
Nobody here is obsessive about such ambiguous concepts or notions.
Nobody is obsessed with the idea of a rewrite or improvement as something bad.
Quoting Christoffer
Yes, you repeated and returned to that idea a few times.
A continual hammering at the use of language and structure in a good story can be harmful rather than helpful.
It is when an author's voice, rhythm and style are changed to fit some kind of idealised perfection, then that is destructive. When it is done repeatedly, it is like taking a sledgehammer to a nut. It can crush the spirit. A loud, overbearing noise disturbs the peace.
And when it comes down to it, it is about aesthetics.
It is interesting to consider how 'strange turns of phrase' are viewed as perfectly acceptable in one story and not in others. How some are seen to be confusing and disruptive to the reading, and others are read with ease. It depends on the eye and ear of the beholder.
ChatGPT does not feel the way humans do. To read between the lines to perceive the underlying sensitivity of what is being expressed.
It is like the use of the letter 'r' to help us imagine a human figure. While clever, it is not 'funny' as some view it. When we think of what or who has bowed the person over. Disfigured, figuratively and literally.
The rawness is the roughness of life. Expressed with authenticity. Lines to be honoured and respected.
The point of writing and reading is to share human aspects of life. Each story a creation. As here:
Quoting hypericin
Being a perfectionist. Is a double-edged sword. There are positive and negative aspects to it. It is often tied with anxiety and issues of self-worth:
https://mind.help/topic/perfectionism/
It will most likely replace some forms of commercial text, but I'm not so worried about it because it can never replace authorship. By that I mean it can mimic an artist, but never create that artist's next artwork as it doesn't share the internal subjectivity of that artist. It can only mimic past style, past work.
For instance, Christopher Nolan generally makes concepts that are totally different from what he has done before. If you trained an AI on everything up until Dunkirk and asked it to make a war movie, it wouldn't have been Dunkirk, it would have been something else with parts from the previous movies, not new.
The way GPT generates can look novel, but it's a rather predictive style, which is why we can analyze the text and get a score on how likely AI was used.
I don't think that AI will ever be better at writing stories because I think people who believe this will happen don't actually fully grasp what goes into a story. I suspect that AI written stories, even on future advanced AI, will only ever be able to output a certain type of stories, just like a never changing author with a singular subjective perspective that doesn't evolve. It cannot overcome the simple fact that authorship is a subjective ever-changing perspective over time, and thus it can never replace the collective of different subjective perspectives in the future.
Quoting hypericin
I don't think so. I think the idea of "raw" "honest" writing is an illusion that stems from a mythologization of the author. Non-writers or unpublished authors, especially new ones who dive into courses and books about writing tend to view accomplished and professional writers as having some kind of divine skill of raw writing perfect prose in one go. And they look up to this as the holy grail of the artform and what to achieve.
In reality, professional writers usually get better at writing their first draft and getting it closer to how it looks after rewrites. It takes years of practice to reach that level of writing. But they still use whatever tool and whatever help they have to get feedback and then spend often more time on the rewriting phase than the first draft.
The idea of absolute "rawness" is a somewhat skewed ideal that confuses unpolished text and structure with the rawness of the core "idea". A belief that polishing the text somehow devalues the core ideas and poetry. When in fact it sharpens it to focus on the core ideas and poetry.
I don't think AI will devalue an author's work just because it's used as a tool in writing. Because the author's expertise is about choices, what to change and what to do with the text. Having integrity as a writer, the AI or any other person who reads and comments, can only ever give a second perspective and opinion.
A writer who lets the AI just perfect everything is not the same as a writer who use AI as a tool for perspectives. I'd say that an author who just let AI "fix" their writing automatically becomes lazy and that laziness will turn to bland outputs which will show when they put it out in the public.
Polished writing is polished subjective writing. My style, polished, not my style changed.
Quoting hypericin
But there are different types of "rawness". In music, rawness does not mean that the notes comes out of the instrument being played in an unstructured incomprehensible mess, the music is still played "by the book" so to speak. The rawness in music usually has to do with the music feeling honest. That there are cracks in the voice singing, there are "mistakes" while playing, hearing the mechanics of the piano etc.
But it's never about notes being weirdly off beat or disharmony that makes the music unbearable.
And I think it's this difference that goes for writing too. Staying on a good prose flow, good grammar and never letting the technical aspects of a text stand in the way of the experience of reading and comprehending the text is what should be polished, but that doesn't mean descriptions, poetry and lyrics of it needs to be standardized. Having a "good language" is not condemning the prose to being too perfect, it's playing the notes and on beat in a way that makes harmony for the one experiencing the art. You can absolutely deviate, but just as in jazz, you can't just deviate off beat and off note all the time or else it just sounds like an amateur not able to play the instrument. You can use snippets of oddities, but generally there has to be a polished flow in general.
And generally I'd say that experimentation with deviations is something for those who already mastered the art. It's the same mistake that people make in filmmaking, young filmmakers who've seen too many art films and experimental cinema starts out with this format and they never learn the basics of something like a normal dialogue scene between two people. And so they stop evolving as filmmakers.
The same goes for painting.
You can absolutely just start throwing paint on the canvas and try to call yourself an abstract painter. But the good ones started out learning the basics of forms, the anatomy of a person etc. before deviating and experimenting.
Impatience leads to glorifying ideas about "rawness" because the road to being good in any art is too cumbersome for those who want to reap the benefits and be praised as an artist right now.
Quoting Jack Cummins
This is the key to it. AI generating text is not the same as AI analyzing text. Using AI for analysis is no different from letting other people analyze your story. Or using developing tools for photography, automation tools in filmmaking. Even in painting, many use threads around spikes to draw perfect curves rather than by hand. The key is always; is the author in control, is the author making the decisions. This includes getting feedback and choosing to follow it or not to follow it. Just letting the AI choose for you is not the same as getting an analysis from it and deciding what to listen and not to listen to. If the author do so in the same manner as they do with people reading their story, I don't see a problem with AI as a tool.
Quoting Jamal
I would guess that if you showed that to a human reader they might have commented on it as well. And the polish I'm talking about isn't about getting rid of that unique style, but just getting the text to flow without odd hiccups and off-beats. Those lines you wrote might look odd for other readers and the AI, but they still flow and has poetry to its lyrics. I'd say that polish is about that, getting the text to work and flow, not remove the unique style and choice of words and descriptions.
And I think it's here the confusion shows. That polish isn't about, as Hypericin dived into with music, a removal of the rawness of a live concert, but the polish of having the notes be on note and beats be on beat. That deviations are only bridges that can be uniquely sprinkled sparingly, but having an entire text written in an unpolished state would be the same as a music track that's always jumping around off-beat and never really have any note harmony.
Kinda like this:
Quoting Amity
I'm speaking about a general notion surrounding art. A confusion between the rawness of an artwork and the basics of a craft. To confuse unfinished craft with a rawness of a final piece. Like a musical track that has notes and beats all scrambled up is not the same as a live rough concert of raw emotion. They are too different things, but gets confused by aspiring writers who believe there's some kind of magical raw nature of a first draft. I've met a lot of such aspiring artists and they mostly end up never able to evolve past that chaotic state.
Quoting Amity
Not sure you understood what I mean with the hammer analogy. The hammer is the AI tool and many who oppose the use of AI just sees AI as a hammer that is only used for murder. When someone says that a hammer can be used to build something, to fix something, they still just chant that it's a murder weapon, without ever engaging with the myriad of uses an AI has that isn't destroying anything about the writing.
Quoting Amity
Yes, you mention "idealised perfection" a lot when talking about polish, but it's not about that. It's about having music actually having notes and being on beat and not be an incomprehensible mess of noises. To follow the craft of playing music does not put it into an idealised perfection, that's not what polish is about. The voice, rhythm and style does not disappear because a text is polished in rewrites, its amplified. The idea that a first draft has some kind of "rawness" to it that embodies some kind of perfection of such a voice, rhythm and style is what I view as this "idealised rawness" that I call an obsession of the idealized author genius who's output is always good no matter how it looks. Even the most abstract and unique published and accomplished writers value the basics of the craft. It's not about some idealised perfection, it's about basically playing notes and beats to form actual music, not to play unbearable noise and idealize it as some raw unique voice.
Quoting Amity
I don't think anyone viewed it as funny. We who liked it laughed because of the brilliant use of text as a visual metaphor. It was a gasp of joy over the brilliance of such a use of language, we did not laugh at the tragedy of the figure.
Quoting Amity
None of this gets lost in polish and rewrites. To honor a first draft like this is not to honor the authenticity and roughness of life. It's to confuse rawness of the craft with rawness of the meaning and content of the text. To polish a text is to sharpen the impact of that authenticity.
Quoting Amity
While I agree that the perfectionist can end up in a negative spiral, I still think there's an idealization of the "raw artist" in society that is an illusion meant to mythologize the artist into some kind of "shaman of the true lived life".
I don't know any accomplished and professional artist, in any field of art, who believe that this kind of natural born genius artist really exist, and they don't necessarily end up in a negative spiral of perfection by trying to fine-tune their craft. There's a reason it takes long to master an artform and it's not to reach perfection, it's to reach control over the output, to be in control of all aspects of it or knowing what to let lose.
The mess of not having mastered an instrument to play music, not having mastered how to choose camera angles and edit a scene in filmmaking, not having mastered the basics of anatomy in painting, not having mastered composition in photography... not having mastered the basics of crafting prose, is not something that I think either the artist or audience desires.
And confusing the polish of mastering a craft with the rawness of the final art, leads to idealized ideas about the mythological artist who just channel some divine understanding of life and the universe in one swoop of the paint brush. Rather than simply being able to spot lackluster prose that could be polished to a point in which the ideas and uniqueness of the author shines, rather than letting the flaws of uncared craft wreaking havoc to obscure those qualities.
It is this idealization of a form of rawness in craft that isn't really the same as the rawness of the final art. The musician doesn't just jump on stage and play whatever comes to mind, they carefully write their songs and music and the live performance is still considered "raw" and "honest". An idea that ignoring rewrites and polish somehow retains an honesty that would for some reason disappear when polishing the prose because such polish is viewed as "idealized perfection" when such a conclusion is just a slippery slope misrepresentation of what polishing rewrites is about and does. And how tools like AI ruins something regardless of how it is used.
I would have been happier with two of the repetitions - empty and anomaly, for preference; I liked those. The others grated just a little.
I rewrite continuously, taking out paragraphs, adding dialogue - whatever I don't like about the pages I did yesterday, or what I've decided to change after consideration, and then again sometimes after a rigorous critique from my Chief Reader. I quite enjoy editing unaided - at least, the first couple of edits. I do let the OG run Grammarly over the ms, but often overrule its advice. That's all the mechanical help I'll accept beyond Word's internal spellcheck - though I have to overrule that a lot, too, it being American and I not. Guess it's a question of control: I'm a freak about that. Like my wood projects, I sand and polish until I'm sick of doing it, and that's as polished as the product gets.
For my own amusement, I have just now asked ChatGPT to rewrite it.
Mine:
Robot's:
The way it's trying so hard to appear human, it's almost embarrassing :grin:
Interesting that it went ahead and changed the tense. It even had the temerity to claim its version had "richer imagery".
Thank you for the clarification. And all your effort. This has been a learning experience. :cool:
Whoa, Nelly, that hurt me in my hurt place.
:lol: Piercing sans anaesthesia. Oucha!
I actually quite like the phrase "lofty gaps," even though it's less direct and immediate, and therefore less effective, than mine (as I must continue to believe).
I figure if one has "lofty", the use of "above" is gratuitous.
Yes, but I had "up" and also "high", so it was probably mimicking me.
Heh, for what it's worth: if someone had hired me as a slush reader, I'd have paused over your version at the very least. Not sure I'd have set it aside, but I'd definitely have read more. The AI version? I'd have quit reading after a sentence or two. It's just what I'd expect from a text over-edited by creative-writing committee. So:
Quoting Jamal
Yeah, I saw that sort of edit a lot back in the days. It's a pretty good impression of a fledgling writer having just read Elements of Style, or its ilk.
Quoting Jamal
I don't really know how LLMs work, but if it goes sentence by sentence, the AI would certainly have noticed the lack of a tensed verb in the first sentence. Sentence fragments are frequent edits, but if you want a full sentence you need a tensed verb, and past tense is certainly the most frequent choice. So if the AI decides on the first sentence, without taking the rest of the text into account for that decision...
For the first two sentences, I actually predicted pretty accurately what it would change. Sentence fragments, dummy subject ("it is") and so on. Fun thing is that I have only experience with message board humans, not AI. Turns out, the same rules apply.
Good to know!
Yeah, "the century teetering on its edge" is so gratuitous it's virtually a parody; and, considering it was trying to remove repetitions, I noticed it introduced its own, much worse, repetition: "exhaled no scent of coffee or warmth" / "undisturbed by broom or hose".
This is not how these "authors" work. They don't say, "make me a war movie". They plot out the movie themselves, and break it down into scenes (likely with gpt assistance). Then, scene by scene they ask gpt to write, in small enough chunks for gpt to manage. They will append the plot outline and character traits to the scene request, so gpt's context window is not overwhelmed. They will ask for revisions, or revise themselves. Then paste the thing together, and there is the finished product.
Quoting Christoffer
This doesn't work at all, it is trivially easy to defeat. Especially since the tests are available to the author. All you have to do is give it stylistic cues. I just tried this. First I gave "In the style of Jane Austin", and this was detected as 20% AI. Then, "In the style of Jane Austin, but with a rougher, more experimental edge". This result was identified as human.
It's mostly introduced lots of clichés. I'd expect that from a statistical model. The most griveous flaw of the edit is that: it took out what made the pieces voice and put clichéd word choices and sentence structures in its place. The result is competently forgettable. Polished dull.
Getting rid of the existential "it is" repetition in particular hurts the flow. There's purpose to the repetition, here (re text cohesion). Replacing this with [subjet=agent]+[verb] creates some sort of... list, where you reset your attention (well, at least I do).
I wouldn't say the edit is a bad text, but it's not a good one either - and thus a bad edit. A good edit brings out the voice that's there, not replaces it with something else (and certainly not with something this... common-sounding). You want to retain voice. Every style has people who like it, people who don't, and people who dislike it. An editor should be able to help improve a style they dislike.
I'm reading fewer books these days than I used to, but when I read new ones, they tend to often sound alike (or be by established authors). As if the editing strategy these days is to minimise dislike of an authors voice while betting on content. Problem is, if the style bores me, I'm not attentive enough to take in the content.
That be me ranting. Maybe I'm just getting old.
I much prefer the human one, especially the unswept and unhosed bit.
It had different imagery, not richer. The hollow buildings sound post-apocalyptic, rather than a tranquil Sunday morning. And that teetering was way out of line; closing in on closing is more in keeping with the tone. That's what's wrong with the machine: it's tone-deaf.
That got me thinking of the role of collocations, where words are customarily connected such as "strong coffee" or "heavy drinker".
From that point of view, "gaps up high" is not the equivalent of "lofty gaps above". A closer version to your expression would be "up above". There must be more than repetition, without qualification, involved.
I wonder what would happen if the algorithm was used on Emily Dickinson poems. But I am not going to find out myself.
Exactly the same thing happened to me. This time I'm really trying to get myself to write outside of TPF. I have another story worked out, but its really hard to get the motivation to write, without the prospect of those dopamine hits you mentioned. I think we are all spoiled by the feedback we get here. It is not the norm. Most writing in the real world just falls into the void, from the writer's perspective.
What dismays me is the association between "perfect" writing - whatever that means to the reader - and AI. I'm positive you are not the only one making it.
Interesting analysis, but surely the meaning of "up high" is exactly reproduced by "lofty...above"? Because up = above, and lofty = high. (Something can be up or above without being particularly high)
Yes, and attempts to appear as if it's not.
I'm pretty good with language but it's entirely intuitive, so these insights are revelatory to me. Thank you.
They key might be to write for the next round of short stories. Write one, then see if you can write a better one, and so on till December.
Quoting Dawnstorm
Yeah, it's what I mentioned with it having a specific style and subjectivity. Because of this, it doesn't matter if it becomes more advanced, it will always have a very specific style to it, always edit and construct paragraphs in a similar manner. Those choices of wordings I highlighted are words and structures I've seen as well. It's what I think comes out of the "identity" that the training data and weights have formed.
It's not bad, but it's the same as if it had been a specific writer, a specific perspective. Its training data and the weights forms the "author psychology" that drives its subjectivity and it will always be like giving your story to another writer "to fix" and that writer just write in their own style. Or in this case, write like a committee.
This is why I think it's important to not let it rewrite anything, only analyze, to pinpoint. If I take my story into it for analysis and ask it to list things based on certain questions, like, "Analyze and list odd uses of descriptions", it will instead list what it notice being odd descriptive language. That way I can get specific help and choose myself if I want to change things in my story or not, choose if I agree with it or whatever I want to get out of it. Just like asking for notes from someone reading my story.
I think the best way to use AI as a tool is to simply treat it as any person who reads and gives notes on the story. Would you give your story to someone else and ask them to rewrite it? Of course not, you want to hear thoughts, input on the language; does the plot meander in some parts? Is there any balancing issues? Are there inconsistencies in character behaviors and dialogue? And then get notes that help with the thinking process during rewrites.
Quoting hypericin
It's the end goal for studios in Hollywood. They aimed to train AIs in such ways on previous screenplays in order to get author-specific styles. Even if going by the more plotted route, the identity of the style has to be drawn from somewhere. They can't just let it write without style input, otherwise it will all just output the same or similar plots that are bland. So the idea is to give it an aesthetic sprinkle based on previous stories and movies. Plot out a war movie, but have it in the style of a previous Nolan movie, as an example.
My point is primarily that when a real screenwriter writes something, there's always a past experience that is constantly changing. The inspiration for dialogue in a war movie isn't just out of character traits, plotting and based on previous screenplays in history, but could have crucial inspiration from the research, meeting veterans who says something very specific which becomes and inspires key moments in such a story. It's these details that infuse "identity" into a new story.
Just check out "Adaptation" by Charlie Kaufman. The deconstruction of the process of writing comes into full force in humorous ways, and it's a good meditation on formulaic and moment to moment inspiration.
Regardless of how the AI writes, it can only work with past information as an aesthetic. Using hundreds of thousands or millions of screenplays as its training data will only ever be a generalization with an expiration date.
For instance, you could not have written Alex Garland's "Civil War" with an AI. It's too specific and unique as a story and subject that it would lose any notion of interconnected beats that make it a coherent story.
In the end, the "writer" using AI would have to plot out so much and generate such detailed character traits and even edit the dialogue further that the work just ends up being the same as if they had just written it themselves from the beginning.
It becomes this ironic twist in which an industrial machine comes to replace you on a construction line, but you have to fine-tune it so much that you're essentially back at the beginning being the one doing all the work and the machine is just taking up space and eating energy.
And this use of previous writer styles leads to this:
Quoting hypericin
Yes, and then instead we tie ourselves to past writer's styles. It can never evolve past the past in that way. It can't invent a line of dialogue that a writer, for example, discovers through a news report interviewing a subject who spills out a perfect line that inspires a character in a story, what he says or how he is.
The choice becomes either to let the AI be bland and generalize without style input, or use previous style inputs and weight it towards a certain past writer.
In the end, it will always be rather bland. A generalization in some form or another. And the overall plot and story will not have much surprises.
And surprises are the thing it can never do. If you're plotting everything and being involved with the entire story and characters, then why not write the entire thing instead? Because the AI will only ever surprise the read with things that have been plotted before. There are no past plot points and twists that are unique, since they've already been plotted and put out there for readers to experience; they will always have some root in past works. While we can argue that all art is a form of remix, it's the way we subjectively remix that forms surprising new original work.
Without the subjectivity of the individual, the remix will not be unique. And that was my point about the AI. It will only be able to remix based on either its own "psychology" or a simplistic aesthetical weight that isn't broadly complex and fluid. Just one-note weights as in such a prompt request.
Quoting Dawnstorm
A cliché machine! That's a good name to call it :sweat:
Quoting hypericin
Yeah, I've had a multi-novel idea for many years but never getting into it properly. If I could get paid to write then yes, but so far I need to already be economically independent in order to find the time.
How the hell did many writers find the mental strength to write while dealing with life?
One idea is to just write a few short stories and then maybe gather them into a collection of short stories and try to publish. That way it's easier to finish each and then at a certain time there's enough stories to fill up the usual length of 40 000 - 90 000 words.
What are you trying to do us also-rans? Let hypericin submit any old thing he threw together at the last minute, and maybe we'll have a chance.
Good point :grin:
Good to see you again! I don't know if you've read any of the stories. You might be interested to know that one of your sentences acted as inspiration for 'The Perfect Match'. Go figure! :cool:
***
Quoting Dawnstorm
It's so good to hear from someone other than those who submitted entries. I hope there are more readers/listeners who have enjoyed the experience. Even if remaining silent.
I love that phrase 'polished dull'. It would have come in handy when I was asked to compare an original paragraph of @Noble Dust (Paper Houses) with a so-called improvement. The more it was revised, the more my eyes glazed over. I understand that not everyone has the same eye, ear or taste.
This is the particular part of a long discussion:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/956740
I also mentioned the importance of retaining the author's voice. So, appreciate your points:
Quoting Dawnstorm
The same issue came up in other stories. Like e.g. 'Nude Descending a Staircase' by @Janus :
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/954294
Please note: I do not wish to rehash the debate. Simply using examples of different views.
It's been worthwhile reading other perspectives/insights into the stories. This extra discussion on the use of ChatGPT has been enlightening. And entertaining. Thanks @Jamal with his fun move, comparing his paragraph with its AI rewriting.
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/958363
I am now turning my attention to reading, reflecting and research for:
'Philosophy Writing Challenge - June 2025'.
It will take me some time because it requires a deep dive after a butterfly float.
Hope to see some of you there! Giving voice to your reflective, creative spirit. :pray: :sparkle:
How do you know he didn't? :wink:
Let's guess how long it took him. Hmm. About a month...or so? :chin:
How long did everyone take on their story? For me, it was about 10 days. I hadn't been at all inspired before the 5th December. Funny how it just hits, like a bout of the flu...
I am afraid that I only spent 2 half afternoons on mine. I am sure that I need to spend more time in future. The trouble is I go out finding places to write because I can't concentrate in my room and libraries seem overcrowded. I find editing a bit of a chore too.
The prospect of knowing that some use proofreading AI as well makes me feel a bit out of my depth. Of course, the writers make discerning changes but, hopefully, beyond this forum it will not become an expectation that writers make use of AI.
Writers have been using technology since the beginning. Many people use Grammarly, while believing they're not using AI. Word processors provide spellcheck. Then there are dictionaries and thesauruses and grammar guides and encyclopaedias.
Most writers probably already use AI, and almost all of them use other labour-saving tools. At a minimum, you need something like a pencil and some paper. Where do you draw the line? Surely only at the point where AI replaces creativity, which is not how anyone has used it here, as far as I can tell.
Probably far too long. There was a week of aimless sporadic writing, then one night lying in bed inventing a plot, then a couple of days doing research, a week writing the main skeleton of the story, another week developing and revising, and then infinite tweaking.
One or two. I seem to have lost my patience for reading fiction on screen. It's almost always paper these days.
Quoting Amity
Oh, wow. What an unexpected honour, giving that I just randomly stay stuff on the web. I quite like the environment on here about writing fiction, for what that's that worth.
Oh, sorry, that was intended for @Paine. And to clarify, the sentence was from:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/945718
However, you have provided inspiration elsewhere. Random or not, it relates to voice and inner spark. From my Critical Thinking and Creativity thread:
Quoting Dawnstorm
That's good to know. I hope others feel the same. :sparkle:
It's so interesting to read the stories, then get feedback from the authors on their experience, process and final product. Amazing creativity. Thanks, all! :up: :flower:
As is obvious, as you tagged him, which I completely missed. (I think it's what happens when I click a thread via notifications rather than via the thread feature? I'm getting more of a me-mindset that way? It's a theory.) This also makes more sense to me. Heh.
So ultimately the inspiration goes back to Paul McCartney? ("I'm Fixing a Hole" is a song on Seargent Peppers: "I'm fixing a hole where the rain gets in/to keep my mind from wondering" is the first line, if I'm not mistaken.)
More of the lyrics:
I'm fixing a hole where the rain gets in
And stops my mind from wondering
Where it will go
I'm filling the cracks that ran through the door
And kept my mind from wondering
Where it will go
And it really doesn't matter
If I'm wrong, I'm right
Where I belong, I'm right
Where I belong
Oh wow, I've always gotten the song wrong. I'd always thought the singer engages in activity to stop thinking, but it's quite the opposite. (I've never paid enough attention to the lyrics, it seems. I'd like to say I misremembered, as that'd be less embarrassing, but I got it wrong from the get go.)
More or less, about three weeks of intermittent, undisciplined writing and revising. Not including the time mulling over the story, which I did on and off for months!
Quoting Jack Cummins
I have the same problem, I can't concentrate well at home. Have you tried coffee shops? Despite the noise, this works for me for some reason. Some of them here are designed as hangout spaces basically, with big worn couches.
Quoting Christoffer
This is my idea too. Much more achievable, and enjoyable, than trying to slog through a novel. Novels astound me, it seems they require an inhuman level of discipline to write.
When people say they "don't have the time", what assume they really mean is they don't have the energy. If I cut my useless internet browsing and youtube watching down by half and spent that time writing a novel, I might have one, at least a big chunk of one, in a year. But it feels like I need that time to decompress. If I were financially independent, it would free up a lot of time. But maybe more important, it would also free up a lot of energy.
That feels about right. Back when I was still writing, I was writing mostly short stories. I had a couple of concepts for a novel, but then most of the concepts I had for short stories never got written either. At one point, I decided I wanted to see what it was like to write a novel. I made a thread about it on a message board I attended, mostly because I thought that would keep me motivated. I did finish a first draft. What I did was - on the whole - write a scene a day. Sometimes it was a very short scene, sometimes it was a very long scene. But I compartmentalise. I usually had a plan for the scene, and by the end of it didn't go where I thought it would. That's also typical for me.
Now, I was unemployed at the time, and that was crucial. See, with a short stoy, what you have in mind is far more manageable. But with a novel, I never quite switch off. Given that my scenes don't end up as planned, I had to constantly brood over what this change meant for the overall concept, and predict where this will go... now. That's the fun of it - but I need the ability to devert attention to that. I found a job near the tail end of writing the draft, and I finished around three months after starting the job.
Then the job took most of my mental resources. If I had any writing ambitions, I could have gone on writing - but I don't have any ambitions to motivate me. I could easily have made the time, though. Maybe I wouldn't write daily; maybe mostly on days off. Maybe I'd have to wait for the proper mindset (days of lesser work-related stress, for example). It'd definitely have possible. The only thing I've written since I started on that job, was a piece of fanfiction (a longer work), also because it was something I've never experienced (and I find, I don't like writing other people's characters). I didn't finish that, but I did make time for it, so I know it's possible.
The problem is that a longer piece of fiction (novels, novellas, novellettes) require a sustained state of mind from me that's... just hard to sustain when you're main attention is elsewhere. Not to mention that I tend to emote while thinking things through: my sister once asked me why I look so angry: I was thinking through a scene and channelling... a character? My attitude towards the scene? I wouldn't have called the emotion anger, but it was something similar, related. Writing a novel feels... akin to an obsession I can't afford if I am to have a social life, too.
And after all that effort, I would like to draw attention to the fact that all I have is very rough draft. I've pegged quite a few problems, with one being a huge, glaring, obvious inconsistency half-way through. I changed my mind halfway through about some basic element and just went on writing as if it'd always been that way. So the second draft would have to be something of a re-write rather than just an edit. I can use a lot of what I have, but I'd have to re-write a lot. So: after all that, I Do Not Have a Novel written. (As a minor aside, I also had a lot of useful feedback from that writing forum I'd love to incorporate one way or another - public places not populated enough, better dialogue/setting interaction ratio... and so on.)
So:Quoting hypericin
I'm not sure what your approach to writing is, but this might explode exponentially for a novel. Don't underestimate the downtime between the actual butt-in-chair sessions. You'll be better at writing a novel if you know how to switch off (that was the hardest part for me).
The "polished dull" reminds me of saying "forced nonchalance" a while back. Mine is not quite right yet.
I am reading stories but keeping mum for the time being.
I am not opposed to technology but it is becoming so dominant. It is as if everything is being done on computers. I find that it has such a bad effect on my eyes. Some people even use audio features but I don't feel able to spend all my life on digital devices or computers. I have a Kindle, on which I have downloaded so many books but I still prefer reading 'paper books'.
Yes, I have always liked coffee shops as a place for reading and writing. Finding ones where there is enough space to write can be difficult sometimes. I do drink too much coffee though, but it is better than alcohol and when I write in pubs I don't think people like it. I had remarks like, 'This is not a library'. I do go to libraries but find that they have children's singing groups everywhere, which are not always conducive to writing concentration.
I returned to the post and see that I didn't adequately separate you two.
Sorted now with the 3 star treatment!
***
Quoting Paine
:up: :sparkle:
But it seems I messed up. My reference, to one of your sentences, is clarified in a later post:
Quoting Amity
***
Quoting Paine
Good to know that some people are still reading the stories. Even better if they can leave a comment. At this point, I'd be happy with a quick :smile: :chin: :nerd: :sad: or :yawn: !
Something Short and Sweet. :wink: :cool:
The lyrics are explained elsewhere but I think they can be left open to interpretation. Whatever gets you through the night. :smile:
You will have to explain!
Libraries used to be so quiet but they are becoming more community spaces for adults and children. I am not opposed to this and am involved in some activities in community libraries. But what this does mean is that using them for quiet study is becoming harder as they are filled with people using the computers and groups; it can be hard to even find a spare seat in some libraries I go to.
How can you tell the degree to which authors rely on AI to improve or re-write?
Quoting hypericin
Quoting Baden
It seems to me that it doesn't take much to pass any detection. :chin:
I imagine a story written as a pastiche faces particular difficulties.
On submission, should the authors inform the hosts of their use of AI ?
Or is that not practical or realistic.
Yes, this is the problem I feel too. But on top of a lack of energy, there's lots of stuff that also drains the joy of writing. So when I do have the energy to write my mind is blank and don't feel my output becomes nearly as good as it could have.
I experienced this when I was in the early stages of writing a video game. Even though it was quite consuming, as a whole I thought that level of engagement was a positive thing. I enjoyed thinking about ideas, solving design problems, in the shower, falling asleep... I can see how it can interferes with other things, such as social life. I don't have much of one, so that was all good!
But yeah, a novel. I feel like it would take me a year even to conceive of one. And, my approach to writing is probably not very compatible with novels. I just write whatever tidbit happens to be in my mind as I'm sitting down. So I might start somewhere in the middle, write a few lines, then jump to the beginning, then the end... Eventually I start filling in the gaps, until everything is filled in. I guess this could actually work if I outline all the chapters, then work chapter by chapter, treating each chapter as essentially a short story.
Quoting Dawnstorm
This is scary. I would be so demoralized by this. In truth, I would find some way, any way, to make it make sense, rather than do a re-write. Is that at all possible here? Mind sharing a bit of what the inconsistency is?
Quoting Amity
Yeah, the reality is it is honor system at this point. Only the most flagrant usages are detectable.
Quoting Christoffer
Indeed, this captures it well.
Okay, I've written a fantasy novel about "the death of magic". Basically, for roughly a century now magic has been disappearing, which leaves a few of the major super-national factions with the prospect of losing their. The mages are basically becoming scholars, and the church basically retain their spiritual function; they used to legitimate this through their being able to heal people with their magic, but their successrate is dwindling. The main power here is the Order of the Writ. I originally envisioned them as your standard monotheistic religion with a scriptural component (but the Writ is a work in process). During the writing process I found the Order of the Writ would work much, much better with the central plot if they didn't have a God so much as an abstracted version of Ancestor Worship.
Now the thing is that this has ripple effects in the world-building. It doesn't just affect scenes with the Order in it. And to make matters worth, the story is told in a rapid-fire succession of points-of-view, sometimes from bystanders who aren't even characters proper in the story (no plot function). Some of the scenes may no longer work.
I don't find the idea of a re-write that demoralising actually. It'd be an opportunity to explore the setting in more depth. The move, for example, requires me to work out various pagan philosophies more, which in turn works pretty well with the central plot mover (a series of local magical desasters nicknamed "The Aimless One", after a figure from myth) and would give more context. But I'd need more free time, to do it. Not for the time, but - as you said - for the energy. More free-time would give me the headspace I need. But I'd need that indefinitely. I can write a short story in a weekend; not so a novel.
I'm also not a novel writer by nature; I tend to lose interest quickly, so it's a miracle I even finished this draft.
Wow, I've never even heard of that concept before, and I say that as a Fantasy nerd. The furthest I got (in terms of theory) was the debate between Hard Magic vs Soft Magic. But to think that the "Death of Magic" is possible in that sense, as a concept, sounds really cool. Can you tell me more?
You're talking about The Nameless One from the videogame Planescape: Torment.
Think of magic as a psychoreactive substance, and think of the physical world as dead magic. The oldest human magic-making would have been unintentional. People with strong affinity venture into a magically dense area and experience something with causes a huge emotional spike: poof magical effect. The next step would be becoming aware of it and willing effects. That's what at the time of the novel is called Chaos Sorcery. It's not safe, as it relies heavily on the mental state of the person working magic. From then on, there's a split. There's a social channelling of imagination, either through mental discipline (locally expressed as religious faith, but meditation, etc. would also fall under this), or curiosity about how magic works - a desire to learn the "laws of magic" (which is locally expressed as something like magical scholarshop, mages, wise men) - basically church vs. academy.
Now what both have in common is that they channel magic into a quasi-predictable path and streamline imagination. And because so much of the magic is bound up with prayer or spells, there isn't enough left to respond to "spontaneous magical events". What this means, practically, is that magic becomes less effective (locally seen as "the death of magic"), because the trigger becomes weaker through habit. Think of it as a vicious circle, where a lot of magical energy gets drawn in by ritual, but then lacks the ability to actually form, because habit leaves imagination out front.
Now, the two strains are affected in different ways: faith works as well as ever, but the success rate is drastically reduced. Meanwhile, magical scholarship is as reliable as ever, but the effect becomes weaker and weaker. With the lessening effectiveness of magic, people all around pay less attention to instituionalised magic, which in rare cases frees up "pools of magic" to express itself via the old ways.
Now, after having interacted with life for quite a long time, living things have imprinted on magic, and giving it some semi-sentience. Not really sentient, and certainly not as an individual - but the best a human mind can do is to say that magic doesn't want to die, and that magic yearns for high-strung emotions from living things, to form unexpected things. Anything from awe to joy to fear would work.
And since fear is really powerful, we get "the Aimless One". This is not actually an individual, but some form of localised repeatable effect. Magic on its own can do things, but what it can't do is be repeatable. So it needs hosts. There have been two attempts. The first was resurrecting a still-born child, but the effect was a person with magical voices in her head who just wants peace and quiet and thus, as an act of rebellion, doesn't do what the voices tell her. That's not the Aimless one. The Aimless One is localised around, no in a person - and protects that person from danger - and forms from: (a) her guilt, (b) her fears, and (c) from rumour-enhanced fears of people who wish to hurt her in some way and realise too late that this was a bad idea. People usually only see the aftermath, and hear what very few witnesses report, which is not always consistent. They call this "the Aimless One", after a mythical figure (some demi-god maybe) who wanders the Earth without a cause and blesses or curses you, depending on mood. Few, if any, believe this *is* the Aimless one. It's just that the name stuck.
The story starts when the "Aimless One" strikes in a politically neutral city (merchant owned), and all the major figures send investigator, instensibly to investigate the threat, but also to negotiate the future on the grounds of this unfathomable catastrophe. The three major factions are the Church and the Academy, and also the Physicians, who have taken over healing with, well, physical methods (the current rising power, who are more reliable but less powerful than the church, but also have to deal with prejudice due to doing icky stuff with bodies - which hasn't been necessary in centuries and thus has left the populace with an ick-factor [e.g. cutting open corpses to look inside]).
That's basically the set-up. Note that my world-building method is "empirical facts first", so what I've said above is, alternating in a chicken-egg fashion, both how I interpret what happens and what I use to make not-yet-written empirical facts. So some of the above isn't necessarily fixed or true. This approach keeps the world alive and fresh. I don't explain any of this clearly in the story; different people have different theories - and nobody's quite right or wrong about that (including me, the author, actually - I'm sort of like a character in the world, but with more knowledge anyone in there).
That's such a good game. Deionarra's sensory stone is among my favourite fiction memories.
:heart:
I think it's the best video game ever made. I understand that the "title" has to go to some historical game like Pong, or Pac Man, or Mario Bros, but I think that Plansecape: Torment deserves to be in an Art Museum, honestly.
Fascinating theory. It reminds me of my favorite writer, the great Macedonio Fernández.
EDIT: Here is a poem by him:
Quoting Macedonio Fernández
To my knowledge, it only exists as a file on an usb-stick of mine (and an external hard-drive). It's also not really ready to be a book; it's a very rough draft (as stated above). I don't mind sending it out, but I don't really intend to do anything with it anymore, so this rough thing is likely all there'll ever be.
No, in that case, that's ok, I'd rather wait until you publish it, either as a physical book or as a blog post, the format doesn't matter to me.
P.S.: Never heard of him, but reading that poem and checking out the wiki-page made me curious. Sounds very interesting. (Also, I last replayed Planescape during the pandemic. Lots of time during the lockdowns, you see.)
Arcane Sandwich, I have a question. Are you a magic sandwich or a sandwich made of magic? {in the voice of Nordom}.
Oh, so I also have to unlock Nordom for my next run, is that it :rofl: ?
Hmmm... How should I respond to your question? Well, the first person that I'd ask is, obviously, Fall-from-Grace. If she doesn't have the answer, one of her employees surely does, and by that I mean the fine ladies at the Brothel for Slaking Intellectual Lusts. The problem is that if I do that, Annah might leave the party. So perhaps I should ask Morte, but I don't think that he knows the answer. Perhaps Dak'kon might know the answer, he is indeed quite smart. Well, I suppose I'll just quote Vhailor at this point:
I would say that all of us are the eyes of justice. It just so happens that some people are blind, willingly or otherwise.
In regards to your question, the answer is the former: I am a magic sandwich, not a sandwich made of magic.
More a mysterious, secret or understood-by-very-few sandwich I'd say.