FAWC 5: Line, Please!

[FAWCker]

Well, technically I'd disagree with you--because the first sentence of a story carries a heavy responsibility for the story as a whole. (Maybe it would have been good to require the sentence to pop up just somewhere in the story--I've seen one commenter note they became put off of reading the stories because it was always there at the beginning).

The first sentence of a story does carry a good amount of weight. But I was specific in stating that the only requirement for the stories was that they include that sentence as the first line, and from there, the author was free to do as they wish. That's the only technicality that matters as far as the challenge goes. Everything else is up to reader interpretation.

And beyond that, what "has to happen" for an individual reader's approval is up to the individual reader, isn't it? It's enough for me (since I didn't open this discussion) to see agreement that using this criterion to differentiate the stories by the individual reader is both the reader's privilege and is a logical choice of standard. (And I think a lot of commenters in earlier FAWC exercises used this standard.)

I have already agreed on this point.

 

[sr71plt]

My first wife was half-French (the "good half," she told me ). When we crossed the Channel to France, she would do most of the initial talking, until it became apparent we were English-speakers, and then quite a few French would switch to English. I always got the impression that they saw the language barrier as a quid pro quo; "you speak mine, and I'll speak yours." But that infamous French arrogance -- at least to my impression -- was always there. Condescension is an artform to them, I think.

Bringing up the French tennis open in relation to this, I've seen a shift in just the past couple of years toward some tolerance of non-French. (Have also seen the tennis players showing multiligualism to the extent of making me feel really dense--I've take a lot of languages; they just won't stick.) More and more of the public address language is being tolerated in English, more of the advertising around the boards is in English, and I was shocked that there was writing on the backs of the ball kids' T-shirts this year--that was in English.

 

[FAWCker]

Bringing up the French tennis open in relation to this, I've seen a shift in just the past couple of years toward some tolerance of non-French. (Have also seen the tennis players showing multiligualism to the extent of making me feel really dense--I've take a lot of languages; they just won't stick.) More and more of the public address language is being tolerated in English, more of the advertising around the boards is in English, and I was shocked that there was writing on the backs of the ball kids' T-shirts this year--that was in English.

It's the Internet, and the resulting use of English, for better or worse, as the dominant online language. Plus, the USA is known as the world's largest glutton for, well, just about anything, so for foreign countries to display ads in English is no surprise to me.

 

[sr71plt]

The first sentence of a story does carry a good amount of weight. But I was specific in stating that the only requirement for the stories was that they include that sentence as the first line, and from there, the author was free to do as they wish.

Yes, yes, yes. Why can't I get the point across, though, that this means nothing to the reader in his/her assessment of the story? What you gave as a minimum requirement of anything means nothing to the reader in scaling the stories from top to bottom--they go after the superlative, not the good enough. And it's their privilege to do so. And a writer who doesn't understand what they have to do above the minimum to get superlative ratings and comparatively favorable comments just isn't thinking on all cylinders.

The complaint that set this discussion off was on the legitimacy of the standard set by the reader--with the complainant countering with the requirements set by you--which is a case of just not "getting it" as a writer in a competition based on reader voting rather than you being the judge.

 

[sr71plt]

It's the Internet, and the resulting use of English, for better or worse, as the dominant online language. Plus, the USA is known as the world's largest glutton for, well, just about anything, so for foreign countries to display ads in English is no surprise to me.

True. I've always thought the French would never accede to this, though. (They still give the scores in French.)

 

[AMoveableBeast]

Yes, yes, yes. Why can't I get the point across, though, that this means nothing to the reader in his/her assessment of the story? What you gave as a minimum requirement of anything means nothing to the reader in scaling the stories from top to bottom--they go after the superlative, not the good enough. And it's their privilege to do so. And a writer who doesn't understand what they have to do above the minimum to get superlative ratings just isn't thinking on all cylinders.

To each his own. Some of the most superlative stories in this contest are the longer ones, which you will likely never read. We all draw our own lines.

For the record, I agree with you--I think creative use of the items is almost an imperative, regardless of FAWCers instructions. If the prompt is, "write a story featuring a pig", I expect the story to feature a pig. Now it could be a man named Pig, a bar called "The Pig", or the police, but in my mind it should FEATURE it, not just nod to it at some point.

That being said, I hold no literary authority, nor should I. I get one vote same as anyone else. I will argue my view, but of you are unconvinced and still see things another way, I respect that.

 

[TamLin01]

I gather French people are rather fond of speaking French, yes. Seems to come with the territory. Literally.

 

[FAWCker]

Yes, yes, yes. Why can't I get the point across, though, that this means nothing to the reader in his/her assessment of the story? What you gave as a minimum requirement of anything means nothing to the reader in scaling the stories from top to bottom--they go after the superlative, not the good enough. And it's their privilege to do so. And a writer who doesn't understand what they have to do above the minimum to get superlative ratings and comparatively favorable comments just isn't thinking on all cylinders.

The complaint that set this discussion off was on the legitimacy of the standard set by the reader--with the complainant countering with the requirements set by you--which is a case of just not "getting it" as a writer in a competition based on reader voting rather than you being the judge.

From a casual reader's point of view, if they clicked on a story beginning with the line "upon the table lay three items: a handkerchief, a book, and a knife," they would expect that the story would, at least in some way, revolve around those items. There's no faulting a reader for expecting that.

But.

FAWC isn't just for the readers. It's for the authors as well, and many write not necessarily for what they think the readers' expectations are, but also their fellow authors. Those of us involved in FAWC are "in the know" and therefore write according to what they think the challenge entails, keeping in mind that other writers on this site are going to be reading the stories with the parameters of the FAWC challenge in mind.

I see the conundrum. Here we have a group of writers writing to a basic standard, submitting stories to a readership that may or may not understand what that standard entails.

Some writers used the line in its basic form and went off from there without building on the first sentence. That was to be expected. Others took the line to heart and crafted a story around it. Those who did the former could be seen as skirting the issue, while those who did the latter could be seen as investing themselves in the challenge. Either way, a story was still written.

I look back at the "basket" FAWC. Not everyone used all the ingredients in their baskets, yet the readers liked the stories anyway. When it comes down to it, the important thing is whether or not something was created that the audience appreciated.

You've gotten your point across, sr. But not everyone looks at FAWC the same way. Some do it just for fun. Others do it for the opportunity to hone their skills. The reasons for writing are as varied as the criteria by which the stories are judged.

 

[sr71plt]

To each his own. Some of the most superlative stories in this contest are the longer ones, which you will likely never read. We all draw our own lines.

Yes, I completely agree that some of the longer ones are/would be gems. It's just that I don't read the stories; I write them. I edit some of them, of course, but where there are people here legitimately interested in reading stories, I'm not. It's a chore for me to read any of them. When I do read for something like FAWC, I'm doing it fully to provide support--not because I would prefer spending the next thirty minutes on Literotica reading stories rather than writing and submitting them.

Of course I have detractors who say I spend all my time posting to the forum, which is a fun thought considering I manage to run rings around my detractors in posting stories to Literotica. (which, no doubt, is one reason they are my detractors. )

 

[sr71plt]

I gather French people are rather fond of speaking French, yes. Seems to come with the territory. Literally.

Well, yes, but if you are a world traveler, you'll know that the French have always been in a special category in this regard. But, then, so are the Americans--ultra provincial. The Americans have more of an excuse, though. They are a whole continent bounded by seas (and other Americans, of course--the Mexicans and Canadians, who manage to be less provincial than those in the United States). The French have never been that isolated--other than by choice--from the countries around them, though.

The point is that they have been ultra provincial by choice.

 

[sr71plt]

You've gotten your point across, sr. But not everyone looks at FAWC the same way. Some do it just for fun. Others do it for the opportunity to hone their skills. The reasons for writing are as varied as the criteria by which the stories are judged.

The issue is an author slamming a story commenter for choosing his/her own (quite legitimately, I hold) standard for judging how well a FAWC story did. Choosing to do so on the reader's interpretation of the elements of the exercise.

I'll stop here, though, because this isn't my bitch. I don't have to live with the complaint (or, thank God, the complainant).

 

[yesterdays]

When are the authors officially revealed?

I have several that I really like, but overall my top story is still An Account for a Bullet.

 

[Swilly]

Okay, one last time....

I completely agree that a person reading a story can evaluate it any way they choose. Any way. That is their prerogative.

BUT...

I never said that was my issue. My issue was that they declared it a requirement. FAWCER himself has said it wasn't all throughout this thread. So, this is a point of fact, and the fact is the commenter was wrong in their assertion.

And yet, pilot continues to address a question that hasn't been asked, and continues to post endless entries to the thread, burying the original post by me and all other responses.

It is a classic straw man argument:

The straw man fallacy occurs in the following pattern of argument:

Person 1 asserts proposition X.
Person 2 argues against a false but superficially similar proposition Y, as if that were an argument against Person 1's position.

This reasoning is a fallacy of relevance: it fails to address the proposition in question by misrepresenting the opposing position.

pilot misrepresented my argument, and tried to argue against one I didn't make.

And he'll come back here later, and post a barrage of entries doing the same thing again. It's just plain weird behavior, and it speaks to his inability to accept that he could have made a mistake.

I'm just going to end this now. Go ahead pilot. Time to post another 64 items that don't actually address my point.

 

[xelliebabex]

There are just too many authors in this one that I have no idea about so here are my wild and woolly guesses without cheating from patientlee

Blind_Justice- Heirlooms of a wicked time
Sabb- cooking it up
patientlee- Inspiration and desperation
sr71plt – A craving for Brandy; Mesmerised
slyc_willie- The midnight ball; Escape
PennLady- An account for a bullet;
_Lynn_- Invasion of the orcs; Reunion
jomar – The sex manual
Jagfarlane- A Mile;
stlgoddessfreya- Mystery night
MSTarot – Of roses and thorns
drteetho- Knife, Book, and hankie
Sheablue- Arranged marriage; The games she plays
Tamlin – The true oracle
Aynmair- It’s Danielle’s Birthday
SecondCircle- Transitions
Seanathon – Empire of the stars
AMoveableBeast – Bluetooth;
Saxon_Hart- Lorelei’s call
Swilly – Kay submits to Bob
TxTallTales- Desperate times, Desperate measures

 

[BuckyDuckman]

An aspect of the FAWC stories in the Chain Story category has always been a head scratcher for me--that FAWCker rarely makes even the "today" top list for the category when there are a batch of FAWC stories dominating the hub "new" list. There are twenty-five there and have been for a week, and FAWCker made the top "today" list only for yesterday (I think). I've never seen the name on the list before. Folks are still reading old Chain Story stories more than they are twenty-five FAWCKer current stories combined?

I find it interesting how few FAWC participants use their signature lines to advertise FAWC.

 

[patientlee]

I wish!

There are just too many authors in this one that I have no idea about so here are my wild and woolly guesses without cheating from patientlee

Blind_Justice- Heirlooms of a wicked time
Sabb- cooking it up
patientlee- Inspiration and desperation
sr71plt – A craving for Brandy; Mesmerised
slyc_willie- The midnight ball; Escape
PennLady- An account for a bullet;
_Lynn_- Invasion of the orcs; Reunion
jomar – The sex manual
Jagfarlane- A Mile;
stlgoddessfreya- Mystery night
MSTarot – Of roses and thorns
drteetho- Knife, Book, and hankie
Sheablue- Arranged marriage; The games she plays
Tamlin – The true oracle
Aynmair- It’s Danielle’s Birthday
SecondCircle- Transitions
Seanathon – Empire of the stars
AMoveableBeast – Bluetooth;
Saxon_Hart- Lorelei’s call
Swilly – Kay submits to Bob
TxTallTales- Desperate times, Desperate measures

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Okay, one last time....

I completely agree that a person reading a story can evaluate it any way they choose. Any way. That is their prerogative.

BUT...

I never said that was my issue. My issue was that they declared it a requirement. FAWCER himself has said it wasn't all throughout this thread. So, this is a point of fact, and the fact is the commenter was wrong in their assertion.

And yet, pilot continues to address a question that hasn't been asked, and continues to post endless entries to the thread, burying the original post by me and all other responses.

It is a classic straw man argument:

The straw man fallacy occurs in the following pattern of argument:

Person 1 asserts proposition X.
Person 2 argues against a false but superficially similar proposition Y, as if that were an argument against Person 1's position.

This reasoning is a fallacy of relevance: it fails to address the proposition in question by misrepresenting the opposing position.

pilot misrepresented my argument, and tried to argue against one I didn't make.

And he'll come back here later, and post a barrage of entries doing the same thing again. It's just plain weird behavior, and it speaks to his inability to accept that he could have made a mistake.

I'm just going to end this now. Go ahead pilot. Time to post another 64 items that don't actually address my point.

Partial credit.

The strawman fallacy is opposition and resistance to a proposition that doesn't exist.

 

[Swilly]

Partial credit.

The strawman fallacy is opposition and resistance to a proposition that doesn't exist.

I knew it wasn't an exact fit, but close enough. The concept is a fave used by our self appointed arbiter of right and wrong here on the boards.

 

[PennLady]

Lorelei's Call: PennLady

Nope.

 

[jomar]

Nope.

 

[PennLady]

I find it interesting how few FAWC participants use their signature lines to advertise FAWC.

Honestly, I forget to alter my sig. I think I did it a long time ago when something i was linked with went under, but that was it. I did advertise it on my blog, which also goes on my (other) Facebook page, but I don't know if that drew readers.

Ellie -- good guesses, but wrong in my case.

 

[AMoveableBeast]

Ugh.

To paraphrase the great Mitch Hedberg, who was himself paraphrasing the pretty-okay Abraham Lincoln, "You can't please all the people all the time, and, apparently, last night, all those people read my story."

 

[Blind_Justice]

Ellie: Sorry, wrong story

 

[AMoveableBeast]

When are the authors officially revealed?

I have several that I really like, but overall my top story is still An Account for a Bullet.

Definitely one of the best. Judging by the skill of the writing, I may agree.

"The Midnight Ball" is fantastic, as well. And I just love "Bluetooth".

"Desperate Times and Measures" deserves consideration--and the scores agree--if for nothing other than its emotional complexity. (I still haven't commented on that one. I'm letting it stew.)

"The True Oracle" is ambitious and enough grand fun where I could see it getting the win.

"Empire of the Stars" and "Lorelei's Call" are both supremely clever, though, I think, ultimately handicapped by being shorter, lighter pieces, which isn't necessarily fair. Wouldn't mind if either came in first.

If I had to pin it, I'd say Bullet. But things are wide-open.

Edit: I'm also glad to see "Escape" rising in the scores. That one has been, to my mind, criminally underrated so far. Oh, I'm so punny.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I knew it wasn't an exact fit, but close enough. The concept is a fave used by our self appointed arbiter of right and wrong here on the boards.

On one occasion a job applicant erupted with, I DONT CARE WHAT PEOPLE SAY, I'M NO ALCOHOLIC! Classic strawman.