The Lark by Baden

Baden December 16, 2024 at 17:31 200 views 30 comments
He struts and sighs and stops and sighs and struts. Words dribble.

'’Alysha out… bitch. Dermot… treachorous fuck. Ventakesh… utter bastard. Judases all. But you’re not beaten, Lark. There’s always a way. You’ve always found a way. You can’t be beaten, can you?'’

The dribbles trail off. An odd cast over the eyes—cloudy, an incantation.

“It’s no law of the universe. We must be hard-nosed. The mind could go before the body and fortune before the mind. Is this the start of it, Lark? When it shows its chops? When the stride fails? You've seen it. You’ve caused it. Cause and effect. Time runs its course and then? The laws of the mind are not the laws. Truth persists. It obtains, they say. And what does it obtain? You! You, Lark. The game stops working because youinvented it. Because it was never there. Only truth was there. Truth obtains… But…”

*

“Where’s Larry?”

“Where is he ever? Marchin' up and down his dressin' room like a toy soldier, mumblin' to himself.”

“What's he sayin’”

“Fuck knows. He's not used to bein’ put in his place. He never knew he had one.”

“Is he goin' to do the fuckin’ show or what?”

“Of course he’ll do the show. What else would he be doin'? He is the show.”

“Maybe he's lost it?”

“If he hadn't lost it long ago... Listen, relax. He'll do the show.”

“He'll do it?”

“He'll do it.”

*

“I'll do the show. I’ll fuckin’ do the show. I'll do it.”

Larkin laughs and sits and looks in the mirror.

*

“I told ya he'd cave. O' Donnell is in. All the Lark wants is long format and some layout changes. The two of them behind a desk. Cameras to the front only.”

“What for?”

“He says it’d be more intimate. Who cares? Give the baby his bottle. The veto's gone. We got O' Donnell. lt’s a win.”

“It's a win.”

*

“…And now, your host, Larry, ‘The Lark’, Larkin.”

(A stride. Breathless. Inner thunder gathering.)

'’Wow, folks, have we got a show for you tonight! Have we got a show! It's gonna be different, it's gonna be better, it's gonna be dynamite! Ladies and gentlemen, let me just tell ya, because I can't handle the suspense either, it's gonna be CON O' DONNELL!'’

'’Get out here, CON!”

"Larry! It's an honour.”

"Listen to that, Con! They love you! Over here, my friend. Let's talk!'’

The Lark struts, skips, shimmies to the desk and slides into his chair. Con ambles after, sits and flirts with a lock of his hair.

"A horror movie, Con! And it gets you the gong. The whole country goin’ mad. Would you ever have thought? A young lad from County Meath, batterin’ sliotars one minute and the toast of Hollywood the next. What a ride! Is your head spinnin' Con? Is it spinnin’?'’

'’Jes' it is, Larry. It’s hard to take in, I can tell ya.'’

'’Now, Con, a horror movie of all things…the fear in you, the fear was palpable. It burned through the screen, Con. We couldn't look! But we had to. What a performance! A triumph! And we're wonderin', where did it come from? Where did you dig it up? How did you dig it up and…

" Well, Larry, uh…”

“... and could you dig it up again any time? Like now. For us!”

"Well…”

'’Listen to them, Con. They love you! You'll do it for them, won’t you, Con?!'’

'’The thing is Larry…'’

Con's sentence doesn't finish itself, not from any want of internal impetus but a sudden realization of the external, a pressure, a push. Con looks down and sees the gun.

“That’s it, Con! That's it! It’s coming… Will ya look, folks! Stunning! It’s what got you the gong! It's what has them wonderin' are you man or God!”

The Lark applauds and the audience joins the ovation.

Con’s face is death. The Lark pushes a card in front of him.

1. The Author of Misfortune: Mother Milked.

“Now folks, I told you the show was going to be dynamite and I meant it. We've got an announcement to make. A big one. Con, spring chicken though still he is, has written the first volume of his autobiography, and we are proud to be the first to read it and the first to bring it to you!”

“Con, let me just say, it’s dark isn’t it? I mean, let’s get that out there. You go places that would have others shakin’ in their boots. It’s testament to your courage, but risky, [I]risky[/i], I mean career-wise, to say the least, to reveal what you have here.”

A push of the muzzle.

“Eh, yes, Larry, yes, it’s eh… “

“Go on, Con, go on…”

“...I… I felt the openness of it, I mean to do that now at this stage in my career. I want people to know me…”

“Hell with the image right? Keep it real! I love it Con, I love it. And the audience. Don’t you love it? See, Con, they love it too.”

“Just so intense, Con. Like when you admit your sexual feelings for your mother, the uh, relief you got from—let’s not go too far into it—but ‘playing’ with her underwear, rubbing your…ah the… Stay with us, folks, stay with us. This is real. We’re getting real. None of us should be afraid of that.”

“I… I… “

“Go on, Con, you’re among friends here. Look, they love you. You love him, don’t you? See, Con?”

“It’s ah, ah… “

“And your mother there in the audience. There she is. You don’t need to, eh, worry. mum. He says you fought him off every time and now you can even hug again. Right, Con?”

Tears are seeping down O’Donnell’s face. There’s the gun and Larkin and nothing else but a feeling that the past and future have obliterated each other.

“We can hug again.”

“Beautiful, beautiful, Con. We are all deeply moved.”

The Lark slides another card across.

2. A Stunning Separation: In for a Penny.

“Now Con, there’s something else that, in the spirit of openness, you want to announce here and I know it’s difficult. Your wife Penny is there in the audience too and there’s something you want to tell her, isn’t there?”

“Uh, I, uh, tell… uh…”

“We thought we might need my help. Some things are just.. But can you do it, Con? Can you.. ? Is it too much?”

“I, I…”

“It’s OK, Con. It’s Ok. I said I’d help. Penny, Penny… He’s sorry but.. Well.. It’s over Penny. He’s divorcing you. It’s finished. Tell her, Con. Go on. You’ve come this far.”

The push, the squeeze of the muzzle.

“I.. It’s… “

“Over, Con, tell her it’s over…”

“Over! It’s over! Over!”

“Stay with us, audience, stay with us. He, they, need your support more than ever… Now Penny.. Oh, she’s going. Penny! It’s not you, it’s him. He wants to tell you that, Penny…”

“Peeehhhnnnnnny! Pehhhhnnnnnnnny!”

“It’s Ok, Con, it’s OK, we’re nearly there. A big round of applause for Penny. That’s it. That’s it! See, Penny, they love you too. They love you, Penny!”

Larkin pushes another card over.

3. Heart of Darkness: The Wager.

“We’re getting to the heart of it now-–why you need to do all this, why you need to change your life, why you need to, for once, tell the truth. Aren’t we, Con? Your inner pain. Your misery, Despite all the success. That monkey on your back you can’t shake off. That’s been following you since as long as you can remember. “

Con’s face like cardboard in a rainstorm.

“We’re… It’s always been hard.”

“Tell us more, Con. Tell us more.”

“It’s true… It’s true… you don’t know how true, not even you, Larry…”

“It’s OK, Con, go on.”

“...When I finished… finished that flick, the one you’ve all been raving about, I went home, put my head under the bedcovers and stayed there for days, in a mood as black as death. It was even worse after I got the gong. I nearly didn’t go. But I thought I had to. There’s no weight to it… It was all too easy. And it’s always been like that. The toys, the girls, the parts, the kudos. It’s been showered on my head my whole life. One fucking Disney movie after another and me behind a screen unable to touch any of it. It’s a curse I wasn’t born a failure, could never become one, so I could work my way out of it.

“But I go on. For all that, I’m driven. On I go and and still I go on and still it works… Somehow it works. I’m fucking sick of it. I want out of this mad trip. I want off the road. Give me a fucking bridge and a river as deep as it takes! Give it to me, Larry!”

The Lark puts the gun in Con’s hands and grabs him in a dramatic facsimile of supportive embrace, hissing into his ear “Here! Now’s your chance, Con. Now!”

And there’s a moment when it might have happened, when Con might have taken control, but only a moment and then a limpness, a limpness in which Larkin shouts “HE’S GOT A GUN!”, grabs Con’s wrists and pushes them up, shouting “CON! STOP! STOP! CON! NO!”, pushes the gun up right under his chin, his fingers tightening on the young man’s, with the audience screaming, the producers in paroxysms, and O’ Donnell trapped in an unknowing paralysis that ends in explosion.

*

He sighs and struts and stops and struts and sighs.

“The thing is—at the end—it was the truth, wasn’t it, Lark? No act at all. He was telling the truth! You never would have guessed. And it almost gave you pause was the thing. You almost didn’t follow through. Not seeing how much better it made it all! The novelty! The irony! You did him a favour after all, no? Despite yourself. You foresaw it all... But you might have… Ach, it doesn’t bear thinking about. It had to happen the way it did. Had to. It wasn’t you. It was it. It was there. It obtained. Only it obtained him. Not you. Beautifully. Completely. Finally. So you could go on. A work of life’s art laid at your feet because you had the courage to pursue it. A finer weave than you could have imagined. Cannot be denied. Ad infinitum and forever, amen. The Gods dodge truth’s bullets and mortals die for our sins.”

“Amen, ahhhmen. But… for all that, for all of it, it was still—was it not still… are you not still… is everything not still… just a lark?”

Comments (30)

hypericin December 17, 2024 at 04:34 #954036
Reminds me of Shawn and Quigley. Which is a good thing.


The first section was rough. Not having context i couldn't really follow at all. Reading back, it made somewhat more sense, but only somewhat. Greasy (the talk show hosts are always greasy) Larry Larkin is compelled by sinister figures to induce a guest to kill himself.

I guess they did oppo research on the hapless Con? The talk of the autobiography threw me off.

Then the first section is somewhat mirrored at the end, bookending the story. That last soliloquy really lost me.

I enjoyed the "pages" of the " book", but the story didn't come together as a whole for me. I'll have to come back after someone smarter has explained it.

Quoting Baden
There’s the gun and Larkin and nothing else but a feeling that the past and future have obliterated each other.


:smirk: :up:

What is "the gong"?
Baden December 17, 2024 at 05:59 #954040
Reply to hypericin

I looked it up for you: https://metro.co.uk/2018/01/24/award-called-gong-7255802/
hypericin December 17, 2024 at 09:47 #954078
Reply to Baden

And as the word ‘award’ is tirelessly banded about, the word ‘gong’ is used in place of it, to keep things interesting.


Something very British about all this...

Jamal December 17, 2024 at 16:15 #954126
I found this compelling and superbly tense, and intense. It was uncomfortable but I couldn't stop reading. I didn't find the beginning difficult to follow at all, but I was confused by the ending.

Yeah, a lot like Shaun and Quigley. These Irish talk shows are quite something.
ToothyMaw December 17, 2024 at 18:28 #954145
Reply to hypericin

As far as I can tell, Lark was thrown off by the fact that Con actually wanted to die and nearly didn't assist him in committing suicide. He didn't foresee this possibility, presumably (it surprised him), but he claims he foresaw it anyways, so Lark is probably mentally compromised. He thought that this development made the act of pushing Con to suicide ironic, as whoever was compelling Lark to do it probably thought that Con wouldn't be so willing. But this doesn't totally make sense to me, because Lark probably couldn't have executed it convincingly without breaking Con.

My guess is that Lark is taken advantage of by his rich entertainment industry friends. They acquired Con's autobiography in which he claims he wants to be totally honest. I think he was probably going to reveal some damning secrets about some rich/famous people:

Quoting Baden
We've got an announcement to make. A big one. Con, spring chicken though still he is, has written the first volume of his autobiography, and we are proud to be the first to read it and the first to bring it to you!”

“Con, let me just say, it’s dark isn’t it? I mean, let’s get that out there. You go places that would have others shakin’ in their boots. It’s testament to your courage, but risky, risky, I mean career-wise, to say the least, to reveal what you have here.”


This gives it away. Especially about how it would have some shaking in their boots.

Quoting Baden
The Gods dodge truth’s bullets and mortals die for our sins


further supports this reasoning.

edit: they were likely going to kill or expose Lark if Lark didn't succeed. Thus, he talks about how it didn't obtain him but rather Con - "it" being death or something.

edit 2: "it" is actually a placeholder for truth I think based on the opening monologue

edit 3: Con never says he wants to be totally honest. Oops.
Vera Mont December 17, 2024 at 19:06 #954151
it sounds to me like the extreme projection of dr. phil and the like. the producers - and presumably the audience - want drama, more intense drama, darker, more violent drama.
larkin has qualms about pushing the format that far; reluctant to be the instrument.
the guest is a designated victim - a troubled young man who needs psychological help, not public shaming, and larkin know it. larkin has to provide all the revelations, because the guest can't get the words out.
and finally, in spite of all the goading, he resists suicide and larkin has to do that, as well.
the show must go on.
if that's what the story was meant to be, it's very well done. if it's not, i'm in the whole wrong story.
Christoffer December 17, 2024 at 20:00 #954168
Feels like there's something today for stories that revolve around some form of post-modern take on talk shows. Like the movie "Late night with the Devil", "Joker" etc.

I think a talk show is an interesting setting; always riding on the edge between intimately going deeply personal and providing sensationalistic pushed drama.

So having this kind of absurd situation of pushing Con in this way becomes something akin to a Black Mirror episode. A horror story of the media format itself.

I liked it, but it was also a bit overly stylized and would perhaps have needed some grounding just to let the reader into each moment. It's closer to a stage play script where the focus is on the dialogue, but that requires a director to be complete so it's kind of hard to really get into the narrative when there's almost no description or guidance to the atmosphere and geography of the story.

I think it would have benefited from more actions that happen in a described place to balance against the sometimes relentless dialogue. For instance, the audience could basically be non-existing since the only reaction described is a scream because of the shot. What's the audience reaction otherwise earlier in the story? Like when he mentions his wife, would maybe benefit from a sudden swoop of a hot burning spotlight -- flashing over the unexpected audience as it encircles a woman meeting Con's glazy eyes? Just to ground what is happening. Otherwise the story risks speeding on without the reader having time to process each event as they're happening. It took a few reads of the beginning before I understood the setup and where it all took place.

Otherwise I think its good. Still hooking onto the tension and it felt like an oppressive nightmare version of a late night talk show.
Jack Cummins December 20, 2024 at 10:13 #954761
Reply to Vera Mont j
It is intense drama about the way in which hidden motives hide behind the apparent issues. It reminds me of the difficulties of risk assessment when I worked in mental health. We never know what is going on in human minds and how behaviour cannot always be predicted.

I like the introduction and the way it goes on to be complemented by the dialogue which follows. I will definitely wish to reread this one.
Amity December 20, 2024 at 17:29 #954835
The Lark

The first thing I thought of was the bird; a clear voice singing at dawn. A favourite with artists and poets. Lark Ascending. In fact, I'm going to post the YouTube video @tim wood introduced me to, a few years ago. Even if it has nothing to do with the story, I feel the need for some beauty:



The story is about entertainment of a different kind. The Lark is a talk show host: Quoting Baden
And now, your host, Larry, ‘The Lark’, Larkin.”


We see him first in his dressing room where:
Quoting Baden
He struts and sighs and stops and sighs and struts. Words dribble.
'’Alysha out… bitch. Dermot… treachorous fuck. Ventakesh… utter bastard. Judases all. But you’re not beaten, Lark. There’s always a way. You’ve always found a way. You can’t be beaten, can you?'’

The dribbles trail off. An odd cast over the eyes—cloudy, an incantation.


Love the picture of Larry, fretting. His friend takes control of an issue threatening him. How far is he prepared to push a vulnerable guest?
Is Lark praying for guidance? His friend starts talking about truth, the game, the mind, body and fortune as they pertain to Larkland. Truth obtains Lark. Whatever that means...

Cut to another scene. A snappy dialogue between two people. The director and producer? Wondering if the show will go on. It will. Larry stipulates conditions and gets ready to introduce Con O'Donnell to the thrilled audience.

The author has a great sense of the rhythm and persuasive tone of chat show dialogue. The host is in control, the unwitting guest not so much. The tension builds and O'Donnell is skewered, along with his Mum and his wife. He is not acting when asked to perform the part in his successful horror movie.
He is being prodded by Larry who is holding a gun.

I'll say no more. Others have summarised it:

Quoting Vera Mont
the guest is a designated victim - a troubled young man who needs psychological help, not public shaming, and larkin know it. larkin has to provide all the revelations, because the guest can't get the words out.
and finally, in spite of all the goading, he resists suicide and larkin has to do that, as well.
the show must go on.


The intriguing story hooked and compelled me to keep on reading. The audience has an appetite for increasing drama and violence, even if some turn their heads away. At what cost to the guests and family? It reminds me of Rome's Colosseum and the Gladiators.

The use of 3 cards reminded me of astrology, tarot cards and fortune telling. Here:
Quoting Baden
1. The Author of Misfortune: Mother Milked.


Quoting Baden
2. A Stunning Separation: In for a Penny.


Quoting Baden
3. Heart of Darkness: The Wager.


Quoting Baden
“We’re getting to the heart of it now-–why you need to do all this, why you need to change your life, why you need to, for once, tell the truth. Aren’t we, Con? Your inner pain. Your misery, Despite all the success. That monkey on your back you can’t shake off. That’s been following you since as long as you can remember. “

Con’s face like cardboard in a rainstorm.

“We’re… It’s always been hard.”

“Tell us more, Con. Tell us more.”


The climax of the show is reached. It is a shocking death.
The final scene of the story mirrors the start. Larry:
[quote="Baden;d15637] sighs and struts and stops and struts and sighs.[/quote]
His friend returns to the subject of truth. Telling Larry what he wants to hear. How he 'foresaw it all'. How it had to happen the way it did. Absolving him of all guilt:

Quoting Baden
Had to. It wasn’t you. It was it. It was there. It obtained. Only it obtained him. Not you. Beautifully. Completely. Finally. So you could go on. A work of life’s art laid at your feet because you had the courage to pursue it. A finer weave than you could have imagined. Cannot be denied. Ad infinitum and forever, amen. The Gods dodge truth’s bullets and mortals die for our sins.”

“Amen, ahhhmen. But… for all that, for all of it, it was still—was it not still… are you not still… is everything not still… just a lark?”


Bringing religion into the equation. Give me an 'Ahmen!'.
Answering the philosophical question of "What's it all about?"
Is everything just a lark? Do we sigh and stride too much? Dribbling words.

***
I enjoyed reading this take on life. Our so-called civilised world under the spotlight.
The predictable and the unpredictable. Where are we headed? More of the same?
The persuaders and powerful manipulators.
Thought-provoking in a strange way. Thank you for making it. Very well done! :pray: :flower: :sparkle:


























javi2541997 December 21, 2024 at 08:34 #954951
First of all, please let me write something that could be interesting to the author. When I read 'The Lark,' I thought, What the hell is a lark? But the paragraph I posted in Reverso wasn't translated literally but in context. Now, searching it on Google, I know now a lark is an alondra!!

User image


A great, superb, and very well-written story. It reminds me of Chekhov, but I feel some Dostoyevskyan psyche around the characters due to the familiar crises and all. I can't say more but just to congratulate the author. I enjoyed your story.

PD: Oh, I also noted a bit of satire on that kind of TV program where people go there to tell their personal problems to an audience. I feel I was in something like that in some parts of the paragraphs.
Amity December 21, 2024 at 08:59 #954953
I am still engaged by this story. Larry's dramatic strutting, sighing entrance and exit. The dialogue pinpoints his character:

Quoting Baden
“Where’s Larry?”

“Where is he ever? Marchin' up and down his dressin' room like a toy soldier, mumblin' to himself.”


The Lark plays his part. As a fighting showman. Aren't we all actors on the stage of life?:

Quoting All Poetry - All the World's a Stage by William Shakespeare
All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances,
And one man in his time plays many parts,


Quoting Identity and Reality Dramaturgy Summary
Sociologist Erving Goffman developed the concept of dramaturgy, the idea that life is like a never-ending play in which people are actors. Goffman believed that when we are born, we are thrust onto a stage called everyday life, and that our socialization consists of learning how to play our assigned roles from other people. We enact our roles in the company of others, who are in turn enacting their roles in interaction with us. He believed that whatever we do, we are playing out some role on the stage of life.


The author's use and style of dialogue is fitting and excellent. A masterclass. :fire:
Interspersed with descriptive gems:
Quoting Baden
Tears are seeping down O’Donnell’s face. There’s the gun and Larkin and nothing else but a feeling that the past and future have obliterated each other.


Amity December 21, 2024 at 09:27 #954954
The Lark's side-kick is the one relaying the essential message, Shakespearian style?

Quoting Baden
A finer weave than you could have imagined. Cannot be denied. Ad infinitum and forever, amen. The Gods dodge truth’s bullets and mortals die for our sins.”

“Amen, ahhhmen. But… for all that, for all of it, it was still—was it not still… are you not still… is everything not still… just a lark?”


‘There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.’
(Hamlet, Act 1, Scene 5)

‘We are such stuff as dreams are made on, and our little life is rounded with a sleep.’
(The Tempest, Act 4, Scene 1)

'Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player, that struts and frets his hour upon the stage, and then is heard no more; it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.’
(Macbeth, Act 5, Scene 5)

From: https://nosweatshakespeare.com/quotes/famous/
Vera Mont December 21, 2024 at 16:15 #954984
Quoting javi2541997
What the hell is a lark?

a practical joke or bout of boisterous play often engaged in by british schoolboys.
to behave in a silly way because you think it is funny: I was woken up by a couple of drunks larking around in the street. We were just larking about.

the protagonist is a professional entertainer named Larkin; larking about on television is what he does for a living; it's not a long stretch to the nickname.
Noble Dust December 22, 2024 at 19:31 #955127
It does indeed remind me of Shawn and Quigley, but I enjoyed that more, I think. This is still well done. I'm intrigued by the note cards The Lark gives to Con. It seems to be a script they're both supposed to be in on, but Con doesn't seem to be. I'm not sure what the significance of this is, though. Something to do with a narrative that's supposed to be pushed, but no one seems to actually be in control of it; no one is really pulling the strings. Everyone in the story, The Lark, Con, the audience, and the nameless people talking in the beginning (who I took to be the show runners) is looking elsewhere for an authority who is in control of the narrative. But there is none. It's all very disconcerting. I don't know if I'm on the right track or not here. A thought provoking read.
Caldwell December 22, 2024 at 21:46 #955148
While the writing had accomplished what the writer wanted to create, this story is not for me. There was no chance to like or support anyone of the characters. It's murder being committed in front of an audience and no one seemed to have the moral aptitude to stop it. Lark bullied Con to the bitter end, then squeezed the trigger to finish Con off. [at least this is what I understand what had happened]
In the name of "truth, Lark would destroy a person for a high rating.
Caldwell January 01, 2025 at 02:45 #957247
:scream:

The Baden wrote this?
Baden January 01, 2025 at 10:08 #957302
Reply to Caldwell

Most people got that straight away. I'm glad I managed to surprise at least one reader. :party:
Baden January 02, 2025 at 02:46 #957577
Quoting hypericin
I enjoyed the "pages" of the " book", but the story didn't come together as a whole for me. I'll have to come back after someone smarter has explained it.


Glad you got something from it. I knew it would be a bit hard to follow and I considered adding more to make it easier but nothing I considered adding made it better in my eyes, so I left it. As it turns out, it was harder to follow than I thought.

Quoting hypericin
Something very British about all this...


Actually, there's nothing British about it. It's 100% Irish, which is why I knew I'd be nabbed straight off the bat. I even threw a bit of Gaelic in there: "sliotar" (the ball used in the traditional Irish sport, hurling). I guess though the vernacular made it even harder to follow, but again I appreciate you making the effort and enjoying it in part. :up:

Baden January 02, 2025 at 03:16 #957582
Quoting Jamal
I found this compelling and superbly tense, and intense. It was uncomfortable but I couldn't stop reading.


That's what I was going for, so It's really gratifying to hear that. Thanks. :up:

Quoting Jamal
I didn't find the beginning difficult to follow at all, but I was confused by the ending.


Looks like everyone except @Amity was confused by that. I thought the danger was people would get confused by the beginning and never get back on track (which did happen to some). Anyhow, here's the entire plot:

Larry is an ageing talk show host and a narcissistic and control freak. He pushes his fellow staff into keeping rising star Con O''Donnell off the show---the implication being that this is due to jealousy. However, the staff (for the first time) get together and defy him.

Being a narcissist with a huge ego and massive and growing insecurities, he blows this out of all proportion imagining his personal empire to be falling apart (his character and speeches are inspired by those of Caligula in the play of the same name by Camus). Rather than resist though, he goes along with the idea of having Con on the show intending to make it into a sick victory for him rather than a loss by murdering the young man and making it look like a suicide.

This he does, the twist being that Con, unbeknown to everyone, had already been suicidal. The final soliloquy is Larry mulling on this irony. Then there's a bunch of philosophical stuff in there that Amity identified. The whole thing is very dark and cynical and somewhat obscure and I did want to develop it but found myself not motivated enough. I think it has promise as maybe a short film script or something. But the feedback strongly suggests it needs further development.
Baden January 02, 2025 at 03:26 #957586
Quoting ToothyMaw
As far as I can tell, Lark was thrown off by the fact that Con actually wanted to die and nearly didn't assist him in committing suicide. He didn't foresee this possibility, presumably (it surprised him), but he claims he foresaw it anyways, so Lark is probably mentally compromised. He thought that this development made the act of pushing Con to suicide ironic, as whoever was compelling Lark to do it probably thought that Con wouldn't be so willing. But this doesn't totally make sense to me, because Lark probably couldn't have executed it convincingly without breaking Con.


Insightful commentary, thanks. The bit about Larry saying he "foresaw" it all after saying he couldn't have expected it (re Con's being suicidal) is a prima facie contradiction. It was also an intentional addition which I knew would be confusing but I added anyway as an edit not long before submitting. The idea is that Larry sees himself driven by Godlike forces which are both a part of him---something he identifies with---but at the same time somewhat mysterious to him. Consciously, he didn't expect Con to really be suicidal (he wanted to force him to pretend to be), but retrospectively considering how much better it worked out that he was (in Larry's twisted worldview), the gods must have intended it, and so as Larry considers himself godlike, he must also have foreseen it in that sense. It's like he must consider himself guided by a divine hand that both is and is not his in some sense.

Quoting ToothyMaw
"it" is actually a placeholder for truth I think based on the opening monologue


Yes, that's correct.

Quoting ToothyMaw
The Gods dodge truth’s bullets and mortals die for our sins
— Baden

further supports this reasoning.


Here though, Larry is referring to himself. It's all about him. The whole universe, everything. He's the ultimate narcissist.

Baden January 02, 2025 at 03:29 #957587
Quoting Vera Mont
if that's what the story was meant to be, it's very well done. if it's not, i'm in the whole wrong story.


It's an interesting interpretation and I can't really say it's inconsistent with the text. But the intended plot is as above. Really glad you enjoyed it anyhow. Thanks for reading and giving your spin. :pray:
Baden January 02, 2025 at 03:35 #957588
Quoting Christoffer
It's closer to a stage play script where the focus is on the dialogue, but that requires a director to be complete so it's kind of hard to really get into the narrative when there's almost no description or guidance to the atmosphere and geography of the story.

I think it would have benefited from more actions that happen in a described place to balance against the sometimes relentless dialogue. For instance, the audience could basically be non-existing since the only reaction described is a scream because of the shot. What's the audience reaction otherwise earlier in the story? Like when he mentions his wife, would maybe benefit from a sudden swoop of a hot burning spotlight -- flashing over the unexpected audience as it encircles a woman meeting Con's glazy eyes? Just to ground what is happening. Otherwise the story risks speeding on without the reader having time to process each event as they're happening. It took a few reads of the beginning before I understood the setup and where it all took place.


This is a very fair critique and I was aware the reader is kind of tossed into this without much guidance. I appreciate you taking the time to read the beginning a few times to get the sense of what's going on. As I said above, I did consider more grounding but I wanted to keep it more in the realm of dialogue and suggestion even if that did mean that lacking a visual element, there was a major risk of losing the reader. My favourite art form is the play rather than the short story and this is somewhat of a hybrid, which turned out to be understandably problematic.
Baden January 02, 2025 at 03:36 #957589
Quoting Jack Cummins
I like the introduction and the way it goes on to be complemented by the dialogue which follows.


Many thanks, Jack. Glad you enjoyed it. :smile:
Baden January 02, 2025 at 03:39 #957590
Quoting javi2541997
A great, superb, and very well-written story. It reminds me of Chekhov, but I feel some Dostoyevskyan psyche around the characters due to the familiar crises and all. I can't say more but just to congratulate the author. I enjoyed your story.


Thank you, javi. :pray:
Baden January 02, 2025 at 03:51 #957592
Reply to Amity

It was really gratifying that you got into this and made connections that reflected some of my deepest interests and philosophical and artistic inclinations. The quotes you provided really resonate with me and the mood of the story. For most readers, I didn't really manage to get across the philosophical core and I didn't even have it fully clear myself, but was trying to communicate through the medium of the modern talk show (yet again) a commentary encompassed in much of what you mentioned. In other words, your feedback is invaluable and encouraging and has helped make the whole endeavour worthwhile. :sparkle:
Baden January 02, 2025 at 03:53 #957593
Reply to Noble Dust

Much appreciate your thoughts on this. It was hard to follow for sure but I'm glad some of the atmosphere of it got through at least.
Christoffer January 02, 2025 at 14:19 #957644
Quoting Baden
As I said above, I did consider more grounding but I wanted to keep it more in the realm of dialogue and suggestion even if that did mean that lacking a visual element, there was a major risk of losing the reader. My favourite art form is the play rather than the short story and this is somewhat of a hybrid, which turned out to be understandably problematic.


If that is so, I think you should embrace writing a play. I don't think the idea of "short story" demands the structure or format to be a hybrid. I've got some Pinter plays in book form on my book shelf and they work great as a read as much as on stage. The nature of written plays fixes the main issue with setting things up right at the beginning. As written plays make a fundamental setup aimed at the director to have a starting point, the set designer to make the set geography and who the characters are. The rest is mostly just dialogue. It's easy to see how this story works better in that format.

So, if we were to make a real play out of this story it works great, even the setting makes for a great style of play, including the audience of the play being the audience in the story, having the character of the wife be sitting among the actual audience for instance. The immersion for such a play is strong.

(guessing characters here):

[i]"The Lark"

(Characters with short descriptions)

A studio set, late night show. The audience is part of the play, the set is the stage of the show; table, seats, entrances and cameras and crew. Stage left is separate slice showing the backstage area. Larry, the host sits alone in his dressing room, crew, Alyscha and Dermot waiting outside. Show is about to start.

ALYSHA: “Where’s Larry?”

DERMOT: “Where is he ever? Marchin' up and down his dressin' room like a toy soldier, mumblin' to himself.”

ALYSHA: “What's he sayin’”

DERMOT: “Fuck knows. He's not used to bein’ put in his place. He never knew he had one.”

ALYSHA: “Is he goin' to do the fuckin’ show or what?”

DERMOT: “Of course he’ll do the show. What else would he be doin'? He is the show.”

ALYSHA: “Maybe he's lost it?”

DERMOT: “If he hadn't lost it long ago... Listen, relax. He'll do the show.”

ALYSHA: “He'll do it?”

DERMOT: “He'll do it.”[/i]


The easier thing with plays is that the stage directions are often few and there's not much pressure on making them poetic; they're basically just direct descriptions for the director and art department of the play to know the basics of what's going on, sometimes even that gets dismissed based on the specific vision that's being done for the stage adaption.

But if you want to write a pure play I think you should. Even if we would easily be able to guess the author on that one, you should commit fully to that idea for the next event if you like plays more.

I'd sure like to read a short story written fully as a stage play!
Baden January 03, 2025 at 09:18 #957834
Quoting Christoffer
If that is so, I think you should embrace writing a play. I don't think the idea of "short story" demands the structure or format to be a hybrid.


One the rules of the activity (although I'm not sure who originally introduced it) is that no poems or plays are allowed, so I had to get around that. But I've written plays before, and it does make sense to develop it that way I think.

Quoting Christoffer

I've got some Pinter plays in book form on my book shelf and they work great as a read as much as on stage.


Me too! Pinter is a great favourite and inspiration of mine.

Quoting Christoffer
I'd sure like to read a short story written fully as a stage play!


Much appreciate that thought and your encouragement. :smile:
Christoffer January 03, 2025 at 11:59 #957849
Quoting Baden
One the rules of the activity (although I'm not sure who originally introduced it) is that no poems or plays are allowed, so I had to get around that.


Ah, you're right. Poems I can get, that's a sharp turn from stories for the most part and should be their own thing, but I think plays should be allowed. There are stories in these events that aren't really short stories either, having little to no actual story and being more abstract, so it's already blurring the lines.

Maybe it should be the basics; anything that has a beginning, middle and end, regardless of format.

Quoting Baden
Much appreciate that thought and your encouragement. :smile:


:cheer:
Amity January 13, 2025 at 13:46 #960335
Quoting Baden
It was really gratifying that you got into this and made connections that reflected some of my deepest interests and philosophical and artistic inclinations. The quotes you provided really resonate with me and the mood of the story. For most readers, I didn't really manage to get across the philosophical core and I didn't even have it fully clear myself, but was trying to communicate through the medium of the modern talk show (yet again) a commentary encompassed in much of what you mentioned. In other words, your feedback is invaluable and encouraging and has helped make the whole endeavour worthwhile. :sparkle:


Thank you. This talk show held my attention and interest more than the first. Both original works of art.
Your stories always hold a deeper meaning. The writing is clever and the dialogue masterful.

The whole engagement between writers and readers interacting....trying to understand...is what makes the Literary Activity so worthwhile to me.

Again, you are the one who made it all happen. Please continue, if you can! :pray: :sparkle: