Grassroots Disc; 10-12-04 neonlyte, Ob Seen

Pure

Fiel a Verdad
Joined
Dec 20, 2001
Posts
15,135
Neonlyte is one of lit's best.

This quite a captivating piece, a first chapter.

I placed a mark ##### at 2/3 of the chapter, 6600 words, in case people's time is limited.

NOTE: This is entirely a dialogue; picture a radio play; there two voices (only), which will be recognized as to gender. Previously, at the time of the first critiques, one voice was put in italics, by agreement with the author. Italics are now removed in accordance with his wish.

# (one mark) is a section divider.

Author's Questions:
1. Can you start a novel with thirty pages of dialogue?
2. Are the characters identifiable?
3. Is it clear there are two sexes?
4. Does it read 'true' within the context of a novel.

Synopsis

Ob is a blind paraplegic.
A. Patel is Ob's personal therapist employed by the Therapy Institute, a charitable organisation pioneering neuro-genetic technology.
The Institute is headed by a Professor Fingleton.

Ob, despite a severe handicap, has a brilliant conceptual mind and photographic memory. Ob is aware that the current research has strategic military implications, and is not willing to allow military use to ‘lock away’ the technology and deny it to the blind and others in similar situation.

The first chapter is written from Ob’s world; deliberately, no external information is given; I’m trying to reinforce the notion of utter dependency on others to live as near a normal life as possible. I deliberately do not specify gender. There is a note as to gender, at the end.

The remaining chapters are ‘traditional’, except when these two characters are alone ‘on stage’.

The story deals with the power struggle to prevent the technology being reserved for military application. Ob has designed a gene trigger that activates neural centres; the effect would be to allow an aircraft to be flown pilot-less, with the pilot ‘at home’ effectively flying the plane neurologically. Once you remove a pilot from a plane, it can fly many times faster (and is cheaper) – the premise is ‘whoever controls the skies, controls the world's dwindling oil supplies’.

The sub-plot is the emotional struggle between Ob and A., just how do they come to terms with their relationship. Can you reconcile yourself to living with a paraplegic, where is the boundary between love and compassion? It should be obvious from the first chapter that Ob has delayed telling the news to force A to choose.

Oh, and when Ob was a teenager, a staff nurse at the Institute indulged in extra-curricular sex with Ob. Fingleton has photographs and will use them to blackmail Ob to continue working on the project, which Fingleton is negotiating to sell to a CIA backed company.
--------

OB SEEN

Oblivion

n 1: the state of being disregarded or forgotten 2: total forgetfulness; “he sought the great oblivion of sleep.”

Preamble / Introduction

“Let me read you this from the Guardian Editorial:

“ ‘ This extraordinary announcement demonstrates man’s potential to overcome adversity; against all the odds, this gifted and extremely talented individual has achieved a remarkable breakthrough in neuro-technology.

“ ‘There is a lesson hear…

“They spelt ‘hear‘ wrong, typical Guardian:

“ ‘There is a lesson hear for all mankind, the will to succeed will surpass all obstacles, overcome every hurdle placed in its path providing the infrastructure is there to support initiative. Government cutbacks in education, research and development and medicine will only serve to damage Britain’s ability to pioneer projects like PulsePen and deprive brilliant individuals from realizing their potential or force them to relocate to a country prepared to invest in the future.

“ ‘The wider debate in the country over the issue of euthanasia should acknowledge the impossibility of predicting the future of any individual blah blah blah...

“That’s good Ob, don’t you agree.”

“Yeh, though I wouldn’t mind going to the US, I’m sure we would have better funding there. The Therapy Institute has some good people and does good work but is not really a research base. I know the Prof. is trying to build on that side of things, but I can’t help but think that I could make more progress in a fully funded R&D environment.”

“Don’t forget the support the Institute has given you, PulsePen wouldn’t even be possible without the pioneering neurology work undertaken here. Ok, in the end you needed Format but the Institute has played a big role. Anyway, you are absolutely forbidden to go anywhere without me so don’t even think of it until I’ve finished my PhD.

“I’m just going read you this bit from the Times, then, we need to get ready for the reception.

“ ‘The Prime Minister praised the unveiling of the PulsePen neuro-scripter…’ ”

“Neuro-scripter? Where the fuck did they get that from.”

“Ob, I thought we had agreed you would not use that type of language anymore. Come on, we have gone past that, act your age. Don’t you dare swear in front of the Prime Minister; otherwise you will have me to deal with. Are you listening to me?

“Let me continue with this.

“ ‘The Prime Minister praised the unveiling of the PulsePen neuro-scripter and the team that developed the technology, the Prime Minister said, ‘This announcement opens a new phase in neuro-technology, one that Britain can justifiably be proud to be leading. It is testimony to the dedication and hard work and of countless people working to overcome insurmountable obstacles. It demonstrates the value of focused research funding, the skill and resources of our finest medical institutions and technology companies and emphasizes the importance of my governments decision our to make education the number one priority in Britain so that more young people can be given the opportunity to excel in their chosen field of endeavor.

“ ‘But more than that, I would like to pay tribute to a remarkable individual that I will have the privilege of meeting tomorrow. To overcome punishing disability and develop a technology that will enhance the lives of thousands of people across the world is an astonishing feat and one that we, as a nation, can look upon with pride.


“Praise indeed, and right from the very top. Are you happy now?”

“Well, apart from him turning it into a Party Political broadcast, and making it sound as if the government funded PulsePen, and that I’m the product of the British education system, and the whole idea that I was doing this on behalf of Britain. Yeh, I suppose I’m pretty happy.”

“What do you expect, it’s an election year. The government will claim credit for anything that makes them look good to the electorate, I expect that is the whole reason he is coming down here. I don’t suppose he really wants to meet with you at all.”

“Oh great, thanks for the confidence boost, I’m just a photo op am I?”

“Well yes, what did you expect? Don’t be daft, he personally insisted on meeting with you, he is very impressed, so we need to make a good impression. Come on, I have to get you ready.”

“I don’t want to go. I’m really nervous about meeting people. They stare at me, I won’t know what to say.”

“Ob, we’ve been through all this time and again. People want to meet you. Say thank you for what you have achieved. It’s an honor; you have earned it. Anyway how could you possibly know people stare at you?”

“I can feel their eyes, I’ve told you this before, I can sort of sense people staring. I’m intuitive; you know that. Anyway, they talk too loud, they think they are whispering, but I can hear them, they seem to think I’m deaf as well as blind.”

“Ob, people will say things. You are an amazing talent; people are shocked when they see you. That don’t mean to be rude, it is just that what you have achieved is so far beyond their comprehension, they blurt out the most appalling platitudes. You know how it works; we have spent weeks going through this. You have to push what ever you hear out of your mind, it is said without thought and is of no consequence. I can tell you, with most of those people if you played back to them what they had said, they would be mortified, so don’t pay any attention.”

“No word on my Mother.”

“No Ob. I’m truly sorry. We have tried everything we can think of to trace her. The police have made enquiries, we tried to trace her through her social security number, she doesn’t want to be found. You know, in the end you have to respect that. She made her decision twenty years ago. Walked out of the hospital and never looked back. You understand how it must have been for her. She would never have been able to take you home and she must blame herself for your condition…”

“Yeh, I know. She didn’t know what the tablets would do. But if she could see me now she wouldn’t have to blame herself anymore. When my house is finished she could come and live with me.”

“Ob, it’s not going to happen. You have to face up to that. It’s not going to happen. Hopefully she is happily married raising a family somewhere. She made a mistake with tragic consequences. We have to allow people to move on from that. We are allowed to make mistakes; sometimes the result is too appalling to contemplate; painful. We learn and we move forward. I’m sure she thinks about you. With all the attention you are receiving she may just put one and one together. Even so, it would take remarkable courage on her part to show up after all this time; almost as much courage as it took to leave you in the first place.”

“How do you mean?”

“No one willingly abandons a baby. There is an emotional bond that is almost beyond comparison. Your mother must have been out of her mind with guilt and remorse; unmarried, and facing an impossible future, trying to raise a severely handicapped child. She probably didn’t even think that you would spend most of your early years in hospital. She fled, it broke her heart to do so, but she fled. For her, it was the only choice, she didn’t see any other way. You cannot blame her for that. She did what she thought was best for you. Yes, for you. She knew you would have a much better chance than if she had to raise you single-handed. As it turned out, she was right, you have had the best of care and attention.”

“Yes, but I’m lucky. I have this gift. What about all the others like me?”

“Well that is why you developed PulsePen, for others like you, look at as a down payment on your bill.”

“What if he tries to shake my hand? What’s he going to do, stick his arm up my gown?”

“Ha ha, very funny. At the most he will give you a patronizing squeeze on the shoulder, at least, that is what he has been told to do. Don’t under any circumstances call him a patronizing bastard when he does it.”

“Oh this’ll be fun; I’ve got to sit in my wheelchair and be mauled by the leader of my country. Once, ok. He can do it once. More than once and he gets called names.”

“Don’t you dare embarrass me; there will lots of media taking pictures, you will sit still, smile and behave yourself. You’re not fifteen any more.”

“It’s alright for you, you’re not the one that is being groped.”

“Can you lean forward, I need to get you dressed.”

“What am I wearing?”

“Midnight Blue cotton tunic; looks great with your blond hair, there, lean on me, let me… let me get this under you. You are getting heavy, you need to go on a diet.”

“I want to wear my shades, I don’t feel comfortable with people looking at my eyes.”

“Ok.”

“Blimey. Oh great day. The therapist agreed with me without a protracted argument. Finally she is learning. I have to make a note of this:

Oblivion. Note. Bold. 24pt. Write. Historic day. Therapist agrees with Ob. End. Oblivion.

“Did the computer get that?”

“Yes! You’ve got it well trained.”

“So I can wear my shades?”

“I said yes didn’t I? You look good, Spunky, ready to take on the world.”

“Yeh, but do I look sexy? Am I in the running for paraplegics’ pin-up of the month? That’s what’s important; I can hear them now, thousands of wheel chairs descending upon the Institute searching for the blue shirted sexy one.”

“Yes, you look sexy, satisfied? Let’s get you to the lift.”

#


“I’m not expected to demonstrate PulsePen am I, ‘cos it doesn’t always behave when I’m nervous.”

“We’ve been through this. There’s a video in the press packs. All you have to do is be on your best behavior and smile.”

“You will stay with me won’t you. Don’t leave me alone.”

“Of course I’ll stay with you. I promise I won’t leave your side. It will be all right, maybe forty minutes tops. Then I’ll get you out of there. Don’t be nervous, I’m nervous enough for both of us. Not every day I meet the Prime Minister.”
Fifty minutes later.

“That wasn’t so bad. He’s a nice chap, our Prime Minister.”

“Yeh. I especially liked the bit where he asked me if I could hear him.”

“Oh give him he a break, he’s a busy man. He forgot which bits of your body actually work. Good heavens, even I forget sometimes. You should have seen Professor Fingleton’s face when he asked you to explain how you came to have the name Ob, what did you tell him, I wasn’t close enough to hear?”

“I told him the truth, how I was left in a toilet for three hours and no one noticed and decided there and then that I was Oblivion. Still, he even managed to turn that to his advantage, going on about how his government was putting more money into hospitals ‘to ensure British hospitals provide the finest quality of service’, a consummate politician. Nice guy though, told me to call him Tony, said if I ever needed anything, to call his office. I could do with a new stereo, I’ll give him a call.”

“You know that is not what he meant. I could see you enjoyed it. That’s his special skill, charming people. I’m sure there is much more to him, you don’t get to be leader of the country just by being charming.

“Ob, I have to go back down, talk to journalists from specialist publications. Will you be ok by yourself?”

“Yes, I’m going to write up the diary. I ought to record this for prosperity. Never know if I’ll meet a Prime Minister again. Don’t I get a kiss for behaving myself?”

“Yes you do, and a hug.

“How’s that.”

“Blimey, that felt like you meant it.”

“I always mean it when I kiss you, don’t be ungrateful. Though Lord knows what would happen if someone saw me, still, I suppose you are a special case.”

“In that case… ”

“No Ob. Don’t go there. I am not, as you once so gallantly put it, sleeping with you in the interest of scientific research. Now behave, I’ll come and see you before I go home.”

Chapter One
Four Years Later.


“That’s enough! Look you; I can’t take any more of this. If you are not going to make the effort, I am not prepared to put in the work. I’ve really just about had it! What’s got into you? This last few weeks you have become impossible!”

“Rather a misappropriate use of words don’t you think. Look: just one things I can’t do is look.”

“Yes… well, I’m not going to apologise. I don’t know why I am bothering with you? There was a time when this project meant everything to you, now you simply don’t seem to care whether we can resolve the problems or not. I can’t work with you when you are in this mood, you are an ungrateful self-centred bastard. Yes, bastard. Don’t look so shocked.”

“How do you suppose that works exactly, looking shocked. I’ve never seen a shocked expression; how do imagine I know how to ‘look’?”

“I don’t know and frankly I’m beyond caring. I just don’t know why I am wasting my time. If you don’t want to do this, say so; then I can spend my time with people who are grateful and gracious for the help I can give them.”

“It’s because I’m sexy. I’m vulnerable.”

“Oh grow up! What is it with you? You have a great mind; why don’t you use it to achieve something instead sitting there feeling sorry for yourself.”

“Thank you for those few words of encouragement. I feel a whole lot better.”

#



“I’m sorry Ob, I shouldn’t have said that. You make me so angry when you are in this kind of mood. This is important work; you should treat it seriously. If we can get this prototype to work, it opens a complete new playing field. We need to succeed with this.”

“So, just what do you imagine is going to happen? We get a breakthrough and you wheel me out onto a stage in front of the media so they can photograph these piss arsed dinky things hanging from my shoulders and say ‘how clever… such a pity… ”

“If that’s all that’s stopping you, I’ll get you a jacket!”

“Yeh, that’s just what you want, then you and the Institute can take the credit for my work, get up in front of the media so you can show ‘your project’ and everyone can say how brilliant you are; then you can finish that fucking PhD and call yourself Dr. Fucking Brilliant!”

“How dare you! You think I do this for my benefit. That’s it Ob, I’m out of here.”

“Come on, admit it. I’ve been ‘your project’ for what, eight, nine years. I remember when you first came to see me at the hospital, you were a student, you came with a group of others…”

“How can you remember that? I never spoke to you.”

“The spices give you away. Announce you every time you enter a room. So used to them now I hardly smell them, but that first encounter with the sub-continent is firmly imprinted.

“Any way, you didn’t have an opportunity to talk; Professor Finger up his Arse likes the sound of his own voice too much; ‘Who can tell me something about this subject.’ What happened to the prick who said, ‘Severely incapacitated.’ He must be the Head of teaching college somewhere? Running a research unit? Bright boy.”

“Professor Fingleton gives you great support, the Institute has invested years of work and research with you.”

“Oh come on; every time we get one bit of technology to work, even half decently, Fingleton try’s to take all the credit, announces a world-class innovation that will change the lives of thousands. He’s a parasite. He feeds his ego on the hard work done by me, and tens of unrecognised programmers and technicians, and makes it sound like it is his invention. Who gets the royalties on PulsePen? Format and me. Whose names are on the patent? Format and me. Where is Fingleton’s name? Nowhere. Yet, that prick took it upon him to announce PulsePen to the world trying to get the spotlight. Did you know that nearly cost us the patent? I could have lost half my income.”

“What?”

“If you announce an invention before a patent is processed, you effectively place the knowledge into the public domain, so you don’t get a patent. Fingers managed to get the whole thing arse upwards as usual and thankfully no damage was done.”

“I didn’t know that Ob, I’m sorry. Professor Fingleton can be a bit impulsive. He means well, he’s only trying to keep the Institute on the front pages, it helps with the funding.”

“Calling me a fucking ‘subject’, I could have killed him. He is a user; uses anything to his own end. The only difference between you and Fingers is that he uses both of us; you only use me.”

“That’s not true, I don’t use you to advance myself.”

“No? Let me see, now what is the title of your doctorate thesis? Yeh, I looked it up on the Internet, hacked into the University files. Took me all fucking day even using PulsePen, but it was worth it just to hear the extent of your duplicity. Do you want to hear the computer crank it out for you? Nah, I’ll remind you - ‘Overcoming Oblivion’ – catchy title, aiming for the best sellers list are you? Sub-heading - ‘The developing relationship between neural technology and therapy’. You even put my fucking handle in the title! But that’s ok ‘cos you are not ‘using me’. How many other ‘subjects’ do you have who go by Oblivion? Jesus, why didn’t you talk to me about this? I’ll tell you why. After eight years of working with me, you regard me, as your property. Maybe not consciously, but never the less that is how your subconscious acknowledges me. You’ve become a mirror image of Fingleton, I’m a ‘subject’, something to be studied, evaluated, and written up.

“Yeh, I’m a freak, even if I were physically normal I would still be a freak. You can’t imagine what goes on inside my head. I visualise, ironic that – visualise, patterns of code to solve complex data handling problems, but I can’t project it, write it. Sure, PulsePen helped, but it’s still too slow. I’ve so much work to do yet I spend my time checking up on the stunts you and the Institute are pulling.”

“Ob, is this what is bothering you, my thesis, your work. You have been off the wall today.”

“No, they are both just symptoms of the same thing. I’m being used and get fuck all in return. You should try my life. Put a silk ribbon across your eyes; tie your hands and feet together behind your back. Spend a day like me. Then you might begin to work out how to write that doctorate thesis to advance understanding.”

“We’ve done that, you and me, when I first started to work with you.”

“Yeh, but it was just a fucking game to show you were on my side, win me over. Pretend that now you know what it is like to be incapacitated, how long did you last, less than an hour. Then you had to go take a piss. You have no comprehension of my life, how I live. Nothing in my life is spontaneous. Everything has to be organised down to the tiniest detail. I can’t even shit without humiliating myself. Try visualising that, every time you want to use the toilet, some stranger comes and cleans you up. Christ, it would be bad if it were a member of your own family. I used to just sit there waiting until a member of staff remembers they left me on the toilet or someone bothers to notice the warning light. Once, when I was seven, I was left there for hours, the nurse that took me forgot and went off duty, they had no warning light back then. I’m sat there crying my fucking eyes out and no ones listening.”

“I know, you told me, you tell everyone. That is when the precocious child decided to christen itself Oblivion.”

“Do you know why I tell that story over and over, a seventeen year old story? How many ‘stories’ have happened in my life? How many memorable days? I live a life of isolation, always have, and probably, always will. That’s fine, it allows me to work, to advance my knowledge and my skills. But that is all there is, nothing else. No trips to a restaurant or a pub, no holidays in Spain, no family to regale me with tales. Half a dozen things of significance have happened in my life; that is all I have to tell people. I could bore you for hours with the finer details of programming, I can recite for you the hex code for all the computer safe non-dithering colours, but I can’t tell you about life or experiences, or the day it rained and the bottom fell out of the shopping bag; the best I can do, is me stuck in a toilet, scared, frightened and lost. I tell the story to remind me not to take anything for granted.”

“Ob I don’t know what to say, I can see your feeling low, something is bothering you. At least you have Helen and Molly around to look after you.”

“They are not here all the time. Last week, Molly was ill; the agency sent a replacement, a guy, said his name was Jimbo. His breath stunk, whisky I think, probably his breakfast. Patronising bastard. He scared the shit out of me. Made me realise just how vulnerable I am. Ok, there are safety devices throughout the house, the computer will pick up my voice from any room and call for help, but can you imagine a complete stranger cleaning you. Looking at you. I tell you, I’ve had as much as I can bear. This is not living.”

“Ob, I’ll talk to the agency…”

“I’ve done that. They are going to train up a relief person to come in from time to time with Helen and Molly so ‘we can get to know one another’. That will be great, another round of piteous drivel to endure.”

#



“About the thesis Ob. You knew I would be writing up the work I have done with you. I should have told you about the title, discussed it with you. I spend half my time working with you, somehow I just assumed you knew…”

“No you don’t, you come here two or three mornings a week. Oh… of course, you write me up when you get back to the Institute. I keep forgetting the Institute still regards me as a patient. What is it, case notes, observations, lecturers; ‘Ob is blind, has tiny stunted arms and legs that don’t work properly, however an exceptional brain makes Ob kind of freakish and worth talking about.’ Do you have pictures of me? Do you show them slides? You do don’t you. I heard that sharp intake of breath.”

“Christ Ob. What’s got into you. You know how it works. The Institute looked after you when you were young, there were pictures taken. Sometimes photos are used to inform. Your face is never shown.”

“Oh it gets better. Just show them the bits that don’t work, black out the fucking brilliant brain! Are their cameras in here, in my home? I wouldn’t know would I. All the fucking techy’s that have trampled through here installing stuff all over. Are there cameras, ‘cos sometimes I swear I can hear a little servo whirring away focussing in on me.”

“There are no cameras.”

“You expect me to believe you? Jesus, Jesus Christ. This is a fucking disaster. I thought I could trust you. I thought you liked me. You are the closest thing I have to a family; I was fifteen, you were the first one to treat me like a person, to talk with me about my emotions and feelings. They were kind enough at the hospital but I was just another chore to them, someone to be carried or pushed from place to place, washed, cleaned, fed.

“I was going mad in that place before you came along. You cannot imagine what it was like, a brain that retained virtually every piece of information fed to it and no way to formalise the ideas welling inside. In another generation, I would have been locked away, maybe not even allowed to survive birth. In those days, under Pickford, the Institute was on the look out for people like me, the early days of making computers ‘accessible’ to the handicapped, they needed bright handicapped people to work with. Remember that little joystick that I used to work with my mouth. Christ it was slow work but at least I could begin to access stuff I wanted to listen to; to learn. Then Fingleton appeared, upped the ante, concentrated learning ‘cos he recognised there was a programmer inside my head. Forgot the rest, how to live, how to relate to people. I guess that’s why in the end they forced you on me. My outrageous behaviour was becoming an embarrassment. Teach me manners. Now you turn out to be just like them, using me for your ends. Well fuck you, fuck the Institute. You can all clear out of my life.

“The Institute's new device will never fucking work, and you get cross with me because I’m not putting in the effort. I told everyone at the outset that it will not do what you want it to. They insisted that we try their approach first, fine, I’m happy to help, but Jesus it wont do what Fingleton wants it to do; ever. It’s not because it’s Fingers baby, though God knows how he ever managed to come up with the idea, you can’t order colour in the way that he expects if you have never seen colour. The principle is sound, it’s an extension of PulsePen technology, but where PulsePen ‘learns’ through picking up the neural signals, this is trying to do the thing in reverse. Sure I can think a colour, say blue, but I can’t then synthesis the neural signal I receive as ‘blue’ because I have no idea what ‘blue’ is. With letters, numbers, I know what they do, I don’t need to ‘see’ them; they form together in a logical order that make words or numerical strings. A goes with P goes with P, L and E and makes apple. I don’t need to visualise an apple to know what the letters represent. You send me a round green shape and tell me its an apple and what I’ll see is A, P, P L and E. Colours have no logical order so sending me signals to try to synthesis an image can’t work, I have no idea how to form an image that I cannot visualise. It may have some benefit to formally sighted people but even that will be marginal. Fingers thinks its the processing power that needs boosting which just shows he knows shit all about anything, we have to find a way to write the signals onto the optic nerve so that it can ‘paint’ the image, and we are not even close. Sure, one day I will ‘see’ an image and you will tell me it’s blue and I will believe it’s blue, I might even remember that signal means blue. What then?”

“But it works with sighted people, surely there is a way to make it work for blind or partially sighted people. It’s just the first step Ob. Then we can improve the technology.”

“Yes, for the reason I’ve explained, sighted people ‘know’ how to synthesise the signal, we don’t. Getting an image in, is a long way from their objectives, they have barely succeeded with the easiest part and that will have no benefit for the people the Institute is supposed to by working for, the disabled and blind. We have been working with this for two years. I’ve never ‘seen’ anything that makes sense or even appears the same twice. Its arse about face. If you want people like me to ‘see’ colour or images, find out how to ‘write’ to the optic nerve, then work the technology. I told him that at the outset, but he knows best. Well I’ve had enough. I’m not wasting my time with this, I need to work on stuff that is going to produce results.

#



“I never gave you or the Institute permission to use photographs of me. I want a legal undertaking that photographs of me will never be used without my formal consent. I’ll talk to my solicitor this afternoon. Don’t take that tone…”

“What tone?”

“I can hear you, after all this time, you still don’t really get it, I can hear your body. For me, the way you draw breath is the same as facial expressions for you. I know your tone from the way you breathe, suck in air; you expanded your chest, ready to tear into me.

“Just say you were me; I’m going to show naked pictures of you, to a lecture room full of strangers. I assume I’m naked otherwise they wouldn’t be able to see the dinky little arms and the twisted legs. So how do you feel, there you are projected, twenty feet across, naked as the day you were born for everyone to stare at, everything on view. You are a shit! And to think I once imagined myself in love with you.”

“Ob…”

“No, don’t say anything. I would like you to leave now.”

#



“Ok Ob, that’s probably for the best, before one of us say’s something they will really regret; I don’t think anything will be served by trying to progress this now, best we leave things for the moment, give us both time to reflect. I’ll see you on Thursday as usual.”

#



“I may not be here on Thursday, I’m thinking of going away.”

“What are you talking about? You can’t go away. Who would look after you?”

“Hey, I can do just what ever I want to do. I don’t need your fucking permission to do anything.”

“Ob it’s not that simple, you need a great deal of specialist care and assistance, you can’t just take off for a few days.”

“Watch me.

#


“It’s all been taken care of, I’ll have twenty-four hour carers and all my special needs have been taken into account. They are professional people, they know what they are doing.”

“Who are? What’s going on?”

“Don’t worry, I’ll arrange access so you can finish your doctorate, that’s all you are concerned about.”

“Ob, don’t think that. I care about you and your welfare. I want to see you make something of your life, God knows you have drawn enough short straws, but you are brilliant in the work that you do, I want to see you have more and bigger success.”

“Fine words. Now everything is better is it? You care. You don’t care enough to spend time with me outside of working hours. When was the last time you called round to cook me a meal? I’ll tell you, June 14th 2001, and that was only because it was my twenty-first birthday. You gave me hope that there was life outside being institutionalised. Instead, I sit here night after night alone with my thoughts while you’re off screwing with someone.

“You care. You care about you and that fucking doctorate and climbing the slippery pole at the Institute. You climb on me to reach the first rung.

“There are others who care, who are prepared to go the extra mile to make sure I live as near to full life as possible and in return they will help me realise the potential locked inside my head. I’m not prepared to waste more time on prissy little projects that have no future, and that includes you.

“When will you admit that I am no more than a means to an end to you, I’m just a job, work that you do. Sure there was a time when you were pleased to be seen with me, you, on your mission, rescuing Ob from oblivion. Proud to have your photo taken with me, you told me I looked good. Photograph well do I, if you crop round the shoulders? Spunky, remember you used to call me that when I had my short blond hair and wore dark glasses, looked like I could take on the world. Where has all that gone, that passion to make something of me. I’ll tell you where it’s gone, it’s in the drive to make the Institute financially secure. Monies drying up, the government and corporations are drawing in the purse strings. They fucked up over PulsePen and missed out because Fingers didn’t believe I could work the algorithms so Format stepped in and picked up the gravy. Now he’s scrambling, pinning everything on Neuroptic and it isn’t going to cut it. He’s squeezing you, to squeeze me, no matter how much pressure he applies it is not going to do what he expects it to. Someone has to realise that and take the right decision. Well count me out. I can see what’s coming. I cost the Institute tens of thousands each year, when the shit hits the fan it’s not dropping on me, I’ll be long gone. There’s nothing and no one to keep me here.”

“You are getting things out of context. Ob, things happen outside of your home, life goes on. I know you don’t like me to talk about it, I respect your wishes but you have to understand, I started a serious relationship four years ago, I know how much that hurt you and that’s why you don’t want me talk about it. Maybe we should, might help you get a perspective on things. Relationships happen, you can’t time these things or say ‘not just now, try again in three years’. It was important to me. Is that still what’s bothering you? Do you want to talk about it?”

“Are you still screwing each other?”

“No, it didn’t work out, we finished months ago.”

#


“So why don’t you come round. Like you used to do.”

“It’s not that easy. You can’t just turn the page and start over. You and me, we had something really special. I know I hurt you, hurt you deeply. I didn’t want that to happen again the next time I got into a relationship.”

“So you’re saving me from myself, how noble.

#


“You have no idea what goes on here at night. Helen and Molly, my night time angels; sometimes I’m sure there is more than just the two of them here. It’s difficult ‘cos they talk all the fucking time, I’m sure it’s just to cover any extra noise. I think they bring people in to look at me like I’m some kind of circus freak. People look at me, and others like me, and make sweeping assumptions. No matter how clever I am or become, the first impression when people see me will always be disgust or pity, closely followed by compassion. Few people want to get to know me, to find out what goes on inside my head, but many are content to stare. That is what I feel at night sometimes, people staring. I can’t explain why; it is as if I have somehow compensated for blindness by sensing the actions of others. It’s an uncomfortable feeling. They forget, this house is where I spend my life, I know every millimetre of this house, it’s sounds, smells, the way air moves through when certain doors or windows are opened. I’m sure there have been others here beside Helen and Molly.”

“Ob, your imagining things. Helen and Molly are sweet kind ladies, they wouldn’t bring anyone to the house without your permission. Look, would you like me to come round? I’ll read to you, like we used to do.”

“No, tonight’s bath night, there’s no telling what time they will be finished with me.”

“Tell me what’s really bothering you, what’s going on. All this today is just is just a camouflage for what’s really nagging at you. Why are you talking about moving?”

“I can’t tell you, I’ve signed a confidentiality agreement.”

“You’re joking. Ob, tell me you’re joking.”

“No, I’m serious. This move is part of what’s bothering me. It’s also you, the realisation that this is coming to an end and the slow dawning that actually it finished an eon ago, I was just to dumb to notice. Still, as you said ‘life goes on’. I should have moved after PulsePen. I stayed out of love for you. Big mistake. Big, big mistake.

#


“No, don’t touch me. Your piety only serves to enhance my resolve to move on. It’s like a millstone your presence; it’s suffocating me. I’ve been slowly drowning these past four years.

#


“It took me an age to work out why we hit it off so well. Why you were able to give me the confidence to develop this curious brain of mine. Your intonation, the touching and games we played helped draw us close. You were kind, but not pitying, strong when I needed strength more than anything to pull me up from the downward spiral that had become my life. You gave me hope; taught me to imagine what could be, not dwell on what was. But more than that, I came to realise it was you who stopped the silence that screamed inside my heart.

#


“I never stop wondering what you look like. I can’t touch you, or stroke your skin. I long to hold you, embraced you to me, but have no imagination of how that might feel, how you might feel. The person I imagine as you, cannot be anything like you. What I ‘see’, when I think of you is an amalgam of shared experiences, memories, not really an image of a person. Even when you describe yourself to me, what you are wearing, colours, I can only reference you to other descriptions, books, stories that I’ve heard; things I hear on the radio. The words are irrelevant; they carry a meaning but as far as I am concerned, their illuminative power is hidden in the dark depths of the ocean; and yet words are all I have. My world is constructed out of words whose value is worthless.

“You have given to me more love than I have any right to expect, yet at the same time, I expect more, I need more than that. I know that is utterly selfish. I cannot participate in love; the very notion terrifies me. I could never share the experiences of being in a complete relationship; I need more than I can ever give in return and cannot place that burden upon you or anyone.

“What upsets me most is that I cannot spontaneously give of myself; I cannot even buy you the simplest gift. Ok , I send you flowers on your birthday, I have no idea what I’m buying, I ask the florist to describe them to me, she says ‘they’re red roses, what you asked for’, not understanding my need.

“Each day the guilt of dependency grows heavier, it’s dragging me down to the point that I no longer see the path ahead. I have to go. Start afresh; lose the weight of the years with you, the Institute. You must see that, I have been given so much by you and them, I cannot repay the debt, won’t repay it in the way that Fingleton wants, he’s wrong, doesn’t see the end game. Once we had a tremendous argument, really spitting mad, Fingleton told me that it was unfair that I had this brain. We both knew what he meant. Of course, he tried to cover his tracks, joked that his mouth was running ahead of his head. But we both knew, he would rather I were a supercomputer that he could program at whim, the fact that I can inhabit this pathetic body and think almost insults him.”

###### [possible stopping point]

“Ob we can wor…”

“No we can’t. We can’t work this out. The Institute, Fingleton, their difficulties are coming to a crisis. I’m not hanging around hoping for a solution. Fingers has taken the Institute out on a limb, it’s doing work outside it’s remit, the next Board Meeting will be crucial to the survival of Fingleton’s projects, big changes are imminent.”

“Why? What do you know? If you have heard something, you have to tell me.”

#

“Listen, I’ll tell you this out of loyalty to you and so that you can be prepared. Please understand that my decision to move on is entirely personal, there is a linkage between moving and the Institutes difficulties but it is not the link you might imagine, even if I could agree with Fingleton over the direction of the project, I would still move on. There is something going on, with Fingleton and the Institute. I am not sure what exactly, but Format and I are pretty sure it is not good news.

“We, that is, Format, have been negotiating to licence the Institutes gene patent, we have a product in development, the gene patent is vital. In all of these types of negotiation, there are backward and forward steps, they try to learn what we are working on, we try to avoid telling them. Recently, negotiations ceased, the Institute is not willing to grant a licence. We don’t know why.

“As you know, the Institute is running into serious financial difficulties, they have initiated a major evaluation of their cost base; they are looking for ways to cut expenditure. The biggest saving would be to cancel the Neuroptic programme. That would effectively finish Fingleton’s career.

“Two of the board members came to see me last week. There are concerned that Fingers is running out of control, the level of funding required, to advance his neural technology ambitions, far exceed the sums that the Institute can raise. The next step would be to bring in a commercial partner; that would cause legal nightmares. The charitable foundation that underpins the Institute expressly forbids entering into commercial activity. There are ways around that, for example, granting licences, as Format wants with the gene patent. Some board members are extremely worried that Neuroptic technology will not work, it already consumes a significant part of the budget, and no end is in sight. I understand that the Charity Commissioners are asking difficult questions about the expenditures, taking the line that this work is commercial research and development activity and outside the scope of charitable status. Any change in charitable status could subject the Institute to a substantial local tax bill, possibly backdated, compounding the problem. On top of that, of the Board and Trustees are worried that the therapeutic work of the Institute is being sidelined.

“One of the people that came to see me even suggested Fingers would take Neuroptic to the point where he would ‘jump ship’ with the technology. Ludicrous idea on the face of it, the work belongs to the Institute, but not so stupid if the Institute resolves not to continue with the research. You can see the scenario, Fingers approaches a corporation, the corporation buys the rights for peanuts since the Institute can have nothing more to do with it because of the pressure the Charity Commissioners are putting on them.

“We think that is exactly what is going on, it is the only logical explanation for his action. He has found someone willing to buy the Institutes neuro-technology division and with that purchase, is the gene patent. That is why they have stopped negotiating. You see, the thing is, Neuroptic does not do what Fingleton wants it to do, it actually does something else, we think who ever has approached him knows the true value of Neuroptic and is looking to control its future potential. Fingleton doesn’t yet realise he is being led, he needs quick results on Neuroptic to persuade his buyers, who, at the same time, are not letting on that they have other applications in mind.

“That is why he is putting so much pressure on you, and me. He has to get some quick success, before the Board asks him to resign.”

“Ob, that’s not going to happen, Fingleton may be many things, but he is not stupid.”

“No, your wrong, don’t you see. As far as Neuroptic is concerned, Fingers is as blind as I am. Away back, when we were developing PulsePen, he wanted optical feedback built into the device. You know how PulsePen works, converts neural impulses to letters and numbers. It’s a huge leap forward, once you have gone through the tedium of teaching it what your thinking. It improves my speed of work with computer by a factor of at least 10. Fingers wanted to utilise a feedback to stimulate the optic nerve into recognising the character being ‘projected’, it’s a brilliant idea, but it couldn’t be done. At the time, we were struggling trying to get PulsePen to do the basics. There was a row; Format effectively cut the Institute out of the project, difficult for me ‘cos I still lived there. We struggled for two years; he set up a parallel unit to work on Neuroptic.

“Neuroptic is a great idea, but that is all it is ‘an idea’ and that is where it will remain until someone serious gets there hands on the work. Fingletons approach is just wrong. And that is where he is being blind. What he is trying to do is to get me to see what you can see. I can’t do that, I may never be able to do that, we simply don’t know how to write the information onto the optic nerve. However, what I might be able to do is learn my own image vocabulary, combinations of shapes, light and shade that represent meaningful data to me but may be nonsense to the next blind person. He looks at the problem too empirically, dogs don’t see colour, only black white and shades in between, it is believed cats only clearly see moving objects. No two sighted people see the same. Every persons perspective is different, their height and the space between their eyes is different, the way light is refracted through the eye is different, the colour rendering is different. Who says I have to see what you see, you don’t see what Fingleton sees, and your Mum sees something completely different again, yet you all look at a ginger cat and say, it’s a ginger cat. There is no reason for me not to receive an image that I come to know represents a ginger cat, it doesn’t actually have to be your ginger cat.

“And this is his problem. What he has can’t work, not now, not for many years. The Institute won’t wait that long. Fingers has realised that I’m right. So what does he do next? He can’t go to the board and say ‘sorry, we’ve wasted all that money, it’s not going to work’.”

“That’s why you haven’t told us about this move, you were afraid what Fingleton might do to keep you here. Without you on hand, the board will throw him out. What did you tell the people who came to see you? Did you rubbish the project?”

“No, I told them that the project had great potential. I also told them it would take years and tens of millions of research investment.”

“Christ. What did they say?”

“They didn’t say anything for a few moments, I guess they were mouthing words to one another, I can sort of hear when people do that. Then they thanked me for my time and wished me all the best.”

#


“How far have you progressed with this moving plan?”

“Don’t worry about that now.”

“I am worried. How could you not tell me? Ob. You tell me everything, why haven’t you talked to me about this?”

“Because… you would have talked me out of it. You would have been nice to me for a few days, I would have felt safe, and the whole bloody cycle would have started over. It can’t go on, I can’t go on living like this, in a vacuum, I need more than this. Moving, starting over, scares the hell out of me but not as much as continuing to live like this. No, I’ve made my decision.”

“When is this happening?”

“Soon.”

“Soon, like when? What about your medical treatment, will they have facilities for you, staff and carers?”

“Everything is ready. I’m going to a medical research unit attached to a University. Purpose built accommodation, twenty-four hour carers and all the research resources I need to do my work. Let’s not talk about this, the decision’s made. There’s stuff I need to talk through with you.”

“Ob this is madness. You can’t just take off. Your life, your home is here. Everything you have, everything you have been working with is here.”

“That’s an illusion. What you think of as my life, it’s just an illusion. I carry my life in my head; the rest is seventy kilograms of worthless tissue. Your perception of life holds no parallel to mine. I measure in words and imagine what you see and experience; you cannot begin to comprehend the void that is my life.

“I remember one time when you took to the countryside. It was wonderful day, spring air heavy with the smell of life. You remember the songbird, a Lark, high above our heads shrilling its joy; you told me it was diverting our attention from its nest on the ground, to me, it cried freedom, happiness, singing its heart out just for you and me. I asked you to describe it; you did your best trying hard to relate it to things that I knew, but there is no way you can describe a bird for me. I have no understanding of its size, for me, size is analogous to weight. I can’t hold anything, except the smallest object gripped between the one finger I can control, and my thumb. I can’t measure the size of anything, but if you place it on my stomach or my thighs, I feel its weight and sometimes I can perceive its size.

“When you talked about the bird having feathers, I understood the concept; I know the dynamics that enable a bird to fly. But I will never be able to visualise a feather, not if you spoke till the end of your days could I ever visualise a feather. Like colour, it is just a description measured against other descriptions, a Lark is brown, a Blackbird is black, and the Robin has a red breast. When I think of a Lark, I think of a sound, music, the smell of the grass, wind in my hair and the noise of the trees; and a memory of a special day. It should be enough but it isn’t. It is something I have to deal with, I cannot be the person I want to be or have the things I want to have.

#


“You have given me so much and yet I still sometimes think it would have been better if we had never met. In showing me how to be a person, you showed me how to love. That whole spine tingling, heart stopping whirlwind that rips through me when I hear your car approach and wait for your footsteps in the hall, your cheery greeting, a kiss on the cheek, the spices on your breath and smell of your body. I can hear what clothes you are wearing as you move round the room and immediately know what the weather is like. When you sit close to me, I can feel your warmth, hear the way you breathe through your nose and that funny ‘phut’ sound you make with your tongue when you are concentrating.

“I crave your touch; the way you rub my thigh when things work out. From the moment you arrive, part of me is waiting for you to leave knowing you will caress my cheek and kiss me tenderly. And then four years ago, I sat here waiting. It was a Sunday, you used to come most Sundays and cook for me, would always tell me if you couldn’t come; we would listen to music, talk about anything but work; you read to me. I checked the talking clock on the computer every two minutes, panicked, started hyperventilating, imagining you in an accident. When I called your number, someone else answered, I disconnected the call.

“For the next twelve months or so, I waited for you to return; it took me that long to realised you had moved on. So you see the problem, I don’t need to paint it any clearer. I need to love you for everything you have given me, not hate you for not returning my love. It’s time for me to move on.

“Don’t cry, this is for the best. I didn’t mean all those things I said earlier. My anger is with Fingleton, not you, you are just a convenient conduit. You need to think about your future at the Institute, I certain there will be changes and you are so much Fingleton’s protégée you could pick up some of the flak. I don’t want you to use photographs of me ever. My solicitor will be in touch with the Institute today, all photographs, negatives and video must be handed over.”

“Fingleton… he won’t agree to that.”

“Well, he will just put another nail in his coffin. You realise that if I take legal action I won’t be able to keep you out of it.”

“Ob, stop, stop. I can’t take all this in. Why are you talking like this. Ok, ok… I understand your hurt. I know I hurt you. Believe me when I say that the last thing I would ever want to do is hurt you. You know in your heart that I love you; you are a very, very special person in my life. Why didn’t you tell me? We need to be talking this through, not you disappearing off somewhere.”

“That’s part of my life is closed, I’m not re-opening it. I’ve dealt with it, I’m moving on.”

“No Ob, you haven’t dealt with it, you’re running away from it. It won’t disappear just because you turn away. We need to talk. I’m going to re-schedule appointments so we can spend some time together. Look, I have to get back to the Institute, I’m going to be late for a meeting as it is. Promise me you will call me tonight. Promise.”

“I’ll call. If you want to see me, be prepared to travel.”

“When are you going?”

“Friday.”

“Christ Ob. This is crazy. Where are you going? You’ve got to tell me where you are going.”

“I can’t do that, there’s too much at stake, if you mention this conversation to Fingleton, you will never see me again.”

“Why are you so afraid of Fingleton?”

“I can’t explain, not now. It’s… it’s probably nothing, just me being hypersensitive. There are things that have happened that I’m not proud of… I don’t know how much Fingleton knows or what he might do with the information if he does know. You have to go now. I’ll call you, I promise.”

“That doesn’t sound like nothing. Has this something to do with your behaviour before I came to the Institute? You were frightened and scared witless then. You were wild, made peoples lives hell. Ob, that was ten years ago, people admire and respect you for what you have achieved despite your circumstances. Nothing in your past can hurt you. Fingleton wouldn’t dream of dragging that up again, if not least, it would reflect bad on him. Listen to me , ok. Don’t you go anywhere before we talk. I know you have made your mind; I’m not going to try to talk you out of anything. Christ, I above anyone know how difficult it is to get you to change your mind once it is set. But Ob, we have to talk. About you, and me, and what ever this nonsense is with Fingleton. You can’t take off with this weighing on you, trust me, we will talk this through and get things straight in you mind. I have to go. Call me ok.”

[[chapter end]]

=====
For those who have not guessed, Ob is a male; A. is a female.
 
Last edited:
Neon/Wills,

A very interesting read which must have been a real challenge to write. I had some problems, and found some possible errors, in the first 10-15 paragraphs. Then either you hit your stride or I got the hang of your style because the only other possible hitches I noticed in the opening section were a missing quotation mark and a confusing sentence.

I do have one writing-related question: Why start a novel with an all-narrative chapter?

I don’t have the time to read the entire chapter now. But since a novel's opening is so vital, I decided to go ahead and post this much, then come back later when I can finish the rest. PM me or leave a message here if you have any questions.

Rumple Foreskin :cool:

--

Author's Questions:

1. Can you start a novel with thirty pages of dialogue?
RF: Of course, you just proved that. Whether such a novel can be profitably published is another question.

2. Are the characters identifiable?
RF: Yes. Even in the pre-PM section. Good job.

3. Is it clear there are two sexes?
RF: Yes.

4. Does it read 'true' within the context of a novel.
RF: I'm not sure what you mean. However, I was able to stretch my suspension-of-disbelief far enough to cover the premise.

--

OB SEEN

Oblivion
n 1: the state of being disregarded or forgotten 2: total forgetfulness; "he sought the great oblivion of sleep."


Preamble / Introduction

“Let me read you this from the Guardian Editorial:

‘This extraordinary announcement demonstrates man’s potential to overcome adversity; against all the odds, this gifted and extremely talented individual has achieved a remarkable breakthrough in neuro-technology.

There is a lesson hear…’

“They spelt ‘hear‘ wrong, typical Guardian:

(HATE TO BE THIS WAY, BUT I’M ALREADY CONFUSED. HAVING BEEN MADE AWARE THAT ONE CHARACTER’S SPEECH WOULD BE IN ITALICS AND THE OTHER IN REGULAR TYPE, THE SWITCHES IN THE LAST TWO LINES CONFUSED ME. PERHAPS, IF THEY WERE COMBINED, THE SITUATION MIGHT BE CLEARER. ON THE OTHER HAND, MAYBE I’M THE ONLY ONE WITH THIS PROBLEM.)

‘There is a lesson hear for all mankind,(SEMI-COLON) the will to succeed will surpass all obstacles, overcome every hurdle placed in its path providing the infrastructure is there to support initiative. Government cutbacks in education, research and development and medicine will only serve to damage Britain’s ability to pioneer projects like PulsePen and deprive brilliant individuals from realizing their potential or force them to relocate to a country prepared to invest in the future.

The wider debate in the country over the issue of euthanasia should acknowledge the impossibility of predicting the future of any individual blah blah blah...’ (VERY LONG SENTENCES FOR A NEWSPAPER ARTICLE)

“That’s good Ob, don’t you agree.”

“Yeh, though I wouldn’t mind going to the US, I’m sure we would have better funding there. The Therapy Institute has some good people and does good work but is not really a research base. I know the Prof. is trying to build on that side of things, but I can’t help but think that(OMIT “BUT THINK THAT” ADD “THINKING”) I could make more progress in a fully funded R&D environment.”

“Don’t forget the support the Institute has given you, PulsePen wouldn’t even be possible without the pioneering neurology work undertaken here. Ok, in the end you needed Format but the Institute has played a big role. Anyway, you are absolutely forbidden to go anywhere without me so don’t even think of it until I’ve finished my PhD. (BOTH CHARACTERS SOUND FORMAL, PERHAPS BY INTENT, AND THE PARAGRAPHS COMES PERILOUSLY CLOSE TO BEING AN INFO DUMP)

“I’m just going read you this bit from the Times, then, we need to get ready for the reception.
‘The Prime Minister praised the unveiling of the PulsePen neuro-scripter…”

“Neuro-scripter? Where the fuck did they get that from.”

“Ob, I thought we had agreed you would not use that type of language anymore. Come on, we have gone past that, act your age. Don’t you dare swear in front of the Prime Minister; otherwise you will have me to deal with. Are you listening to me?

(MIGHT ADD “OKAY. NOW LET…”)“Let me continue with this.

‘The Prime Minister praised the unveiling of the PulsePen neuro-scripter and the team that developed the technology, the Prime Minister said,(PERIOD AFTER TECHNOLOGY. OMIT “THE PM SAID” OTHERWISE IT APPEARS TWICE IN ONE SENTENCE) ‘This announcement opens a new phase in neuro-technology, one that Britain can justifiably be proud to be leading. It is testimony to the dedication and hard work and(OMIT “AND”) of countless people working to overcome insurmountable obstacles. It demonstrates the value of focused research funding, the skill and resources of our finest medical institutions and technology companies and emphasizes the importance of my government(‘)s decision our(OMIT “OUR”) to make education the number one priority in Britain so that(OMIT “THAT’) more young people can be given the opportunity to excel in their chosen field of endeavor.

(‘)But more than that, I would like to pay tribute to a remarkable individual that I will have the privilege of meeting tomorrow. To overcome punishing disability and develop a technology that will enhance the lives of thousands of people across the world is an astonishing feat and one that we, as a nation, can look upon with pride.’

--

“No one willingly abandons a baby. There is an emotional bond that is almost beyond comparison. Your mother must have been out of her mind with guilt and remorse; unmarried, and facing an impossible future, trying to raise a severely handicapped child. She probably didn’t even think that you would spend most of your early years in hospital. (THAT LAST SENTENCE CONFUSED ME) She fled, it broke her heart to do so, but she fled. For her, it was the only choice, she didn’t see any other way. You cannot blame her for that. She did what she thought was best for you. Yes, for you. She knew you would have a much better chance than if she had to raise you single-handed. As it turned out, she was right, you have had the best of care and attention.”

--
 
Last edited:
Rumple Foreskin said:
Neon/Wills,

A very interesting read which must have been a real challenge to write. I had some problems, and found some possible errors, in the first 10-15 paragraphs. Then either you hit your stride or I got the hang of your style because the only other possible hitches I noticed in the opening section were a missing quotation mark and a confusing sentence.

I do have one writing-related question: Why start a novel with an all-narrative chapter?

I don’t have the time to read the entire chapter now. But since a novel's opening is so vital, I decided to go ahead and post this much, then come back later when I can finish the rest. PM me or leave a message here if you have any questions.

Rumple Foreskin :cool:
--

Rumpole
Thank you for your specific text comments, all noted and to be reviewed in detail.

Pure and I considered the best way to present this and elected for one character in Italic. Her reading of newspaper quotes probably should have been in indented Italic to assist readers.

The Prologue / Intro section is a lately added section intended to inform background and relationships, give the reader sufficent to relate to the following passage. It probably requires more, or less, in its current form it both illuminates and confuses by contraction. I have started a prologue in a traditional novel format, it allows a greater breadth of the orientation of the novel and includes markers for the 'dirty deeds' occuring later. The new prologue may yet prove to be the best option.

This all leads to the main problem, 'Can you start a novel with 30 pages of dialogue', no matter how well crafted.

My reason for taking this approach is to confront the reader with the world from Ob's perspective, to take the reader out of their 'comfort zone' and consider fundamentals about the way we relate to others and assume the norms of life as 'a given'. This may not be for the best if I want people to read the novel, my purpose for posting this here is to drag myself from my relatively fixed orientation and consider a traditional opening chapter to set the scene and players.

Your answer to question 4. is on the target, 'suspension of disbelief' is all I can ask for.

Thank you for your comments, I'd be delighted if you can find time to read further and offer you enlightenment. And yes, it was a tough write.

Neon
 
I had real trouble with this.

The beginning works well, although I had some trouble with the tone of your newspaper article, which didn’t quite sound like a newspaper to me (but then I have no idea what the Guardian sounds like), and I think the bit with talking about his mother wasn’t realistic. Surely he would have known all these things about the difficulty of finding his mother without Amanda’s having to tell him about them. (It’s obvious that she’s talking for the reader’s benefit, and I think a little terseness here would be more telling than her spelling out all these things about his mother's motives and the dead-ends the police had run into that he would have already known.) But I think the dialogue bit goes on for too long and gets gimmicky and, even worse, awkward and obstructive to the telling of the story.

There are a few wrong notes: “Your piety only serves to enhance my resolve to move on.” That jumped out at me, but on the whole, if this were a play or a script, I would say that it’s very good. The problem is, it’s a story, and I read stories to see people doing things, and here they’re just talking about doing things. It puts us at a remove from what action there is, and I’m afraid that after awhile it gets tedious. I would think that one scene of Ob struggling to go to the bathroom or eat a meal would be much more eloquent and revelatory than having him just talk about eating or going to the bathroom.

On the other hand, I know that’s not what you want. I think you’re using this dialogue technique to give us an impression of his world, which is pretty much reduced to just spoken communication: no action, no visuals. I question whether the cost to the story’s readibility is worth it though.

As to your questions: yes, the characters and their sexes are indentifiable. As to it reading ‘true’, I’m not sure what you mean. And your first question is the biggie is whether opening with 30 pages of dialogue do-able. In this case I’m not at all sure. It’s a masterful job of writing, but for me, at least, it doesn’t work. I long for the visuals, for the movie-like aspects of the story. It wore me out.

---dr.M.
 
Neon,

That was a good crit by Doc. It helped me focus on one aspect of your decision to use all dialogue that had been bothering me. IMHO, to accomplish what you want with this chapter, a more tradition approach, with some narrative in either third or first person using Ob's POV, might be more effective.

Here's my background and reasoning. I've never been a para or quadraplegic, but I've known some, even ridden in vans driven by quads. As for eyesight; after a small misunderstanding with the Viet Cong concerning exploding boody traps, I was totally blind (light perception in one eye) for nearly a year.

Although Ob is a blind quad, he gets many sensory inputs: hearing, tasting, smell, even, to a limited extent, touch, and he's a mega-genius. The current dialogue has little about those senses and tends to distance the reader from his most vital body part, his brain.

Whatever you decide to do with the all-dialogue approach, I'd suggest trying to work in at least some of his other senses. Is the girl wearing a new perfume? Are there any ambient noises (phones, birds, radio, jackhammers, other people)? Does a particular type of fabric irritate his skin? If he needs to lose weight, is there some favorite food she wants him to give up?

While doing that might be easier with narrative, all of it could probably be brought up during the course of their conversation.

These are strictly subjective, "thinking out loud" type comments. Feel free to use or abuse them.

Rumple
 
dr.M & Rumpole

I'll address to you both as you raise similar concerns.

Thank you both for taking the trouble to wade through this and offer your advice.

I think the the nub of the problem is it's length. You can take so much of the one-to-one talk but after a while you're waiting for something else to happen. Dr. made this point succinctly.

I'm reluctant to abandon the 'on stage' style between Ob and Amanda, but it might be worth exploring laying this discussion over a three week period during her regular sessions with him.

That will also allow other characters into the plot Amanda and Fingelton, Fingleton and his Board Members, Fingleton and his buyers.

The reservation I've had to taking this approach stems from Ob, he knows where he's leading Amanda, taking a period of time to force her to choose may dilute his ability to do so.

In a sense taking the first three chapters, they deal with Ob, then Amanda, then the conspiracy to sell the technology, and rolling them forward in parallel may solve both your problems with the approach as it stands.

That's not to say that I'm abandoning this, but if the story is worth telling it's worth telling it in a way that people will enjoy reading.
#
Dr.M - see my comments above to Rumpole regarding the first section, it answers pretty much the points you raise in that section.

The question about whether it 'rings true' is relates both to the work Ob is pursuing and the relationship between the two characters, I think you answered it by omission.
#
This chapter was written six months ago, seven other chapters and the final chapter are written. I keep coming back to this chapter undecided whether to retain its format. That was the main reason for posting it here. You've both been very helpful.

Thank you both for your comments on the standard of writing - much appreciated.

Neon/Wills
 
Note to Neon, and previous commenters, mab and Rumple, and for subsequent ones.

I have reformated the opening passage of _Ob Seen_. I hope it's clearer. Anyway I take responsibility for it, and will change it if the author has a fit.

best,
J.
 
Pure said:
Note to Neon, and previous commenters, mab and Rumple, and for subsequent ones.

I have reformated the opening passage of _Ob Seen_. I hope it's clearer. Anyway I take responsibility for it, and will change it if the author has a fit.

best,
J.

J
That's fine, but if you do it for the one, consider doing it for the passage she reads from the Times further down the first page.

Thanks.
 
1. Can you start a novel with thirty pages of dialogue?

There is no reason why you can’t start a story with thirty pages of dialogue, The question to me is whether or not the passage of ‘all dialogue’ is necessary to the story. At the point of prelude, the all dialogue enhances the story in reflecting the characters blindness, placing me as reader, into his world, oblivion so to speak. I feel better able to identify with Ob from this P.O.V. and think it’s a powerful reflection of character and possibly overall theme. As reader, I am interested in finding out, at this point, how you develop and keep with form as reflection of story and character. If you intend to do nothing with the structure throughout the story, then it is my opinion the all dialogue sequence beyond the preamble, for example in Chapter One, is useless.

I found this technique worked very well in your introduction, and quite frankly, your choice to do it this way is an intellectual turn-on, however, I began to grow tired of it as I read through Chapter One, not because I didn’t like the technique, but rather because of the huge chunks of dialogue, almost monologue. If you are trying to give the impression that Ob is narcissistic(?) or at least self-consumed/ loving to hear the sound of himself, then use it, otherwise, it didn’t work well to me.

All dialogue is an exchange between two people, and I felt there needed to be a more realistic flow between Ob and the other character. People argue, interrupt, finish each others thoughts, pause and break in conversation, especially in relation to things they are passionate about. To me, the dialogue in Chapter one verged on textbook reading at times, no offence.

2. Are the characters identifiable?

I had absolutely no trouble distinguishing between two characters (with an exception I’ll get to later). First, I will just say that I am turned off by the italics. I don’t find them necessary. Each character in the introduction has a different way of speaking, and that the one character addresses the other character by name blatantly distinguishes between the two. To read italics, quite frankly, emphasizes differentiation by sight, and therefore detracts from the concept of what I think you are trying to do, which is put the reader in Ob’s sightless world.
What impresses me about starting out in all dialogue is that it reflects on Ob’s character, since his world would be entirely distinguished by senses other than sight, and so to draw attention to sight through italics defeats the purpose to me.
Emphasis on the misspelled ‘hear’, is brilliant. I loved that small detail. I did find, however, that the news article passage was not credible as a news article. It was too personal, and even editorials remain a bit on the distant side.

The dialogue defines the characters. Ob talks with more contractions than the woman, who seems more proper with her language. As the story goes along, I find it increasingly easy to distinguish between them, even if I know relatively nothing about the second speaker. However, in Chapter One, I noticed a number of times when Ob lapsed from his usual tone, to a tone similar to that of the other character.

“Listen, I’ll tell you this out of loyalty to you and so that you can be prepared. Please understand that my decision to move on is entirely personal, there is a linkage between moving and the Institutes difficulties but it is not the link you might imagine, even if I could agree with Fingleton over the direction of the project, I would still move on. There is something going on, with Fingleton and the Institute. I am not sure what exactly, but Format and I are pretty sure it is not good news."

As I mentioned previously, just finding Obs tone has changed from the prelude. He talked in more contractions, and so some of this seems a bit out of character – perhaps purposeful, perhaps not, but thought I’d bring it to your attention just in case.

3. Is it clear there are two sexes?

I expect Ob, being blind, to concentrate on the words, and so further description, particularly if he is, as he seems to be, familiar with the other speaker, is not necessary. Ob has no personal need to distinguish between listening to a male or female that he knows well, and as a reader, I don’t expect this is necessary right away either.

As I read more and more, I find that you lead me very well into the discovery of the second speaker as female, and I do like having to discover this. Specifically:

“No one willingly abandons a baby. There is an emotional bond that is almost beyond comparison. Your mother must have been out of her mind with guilt and remorse; unmarried, and facing an impossible future, trying to raise a severely handicapped child. She probably didn’t even think that you would spend most of your early years in hospital. She fled, it broke her heart to do so, but she fled. For her, it was the only choice, she didn’t see any other way. You cannot blame her for that. She did what she thought was best for you. Yes, for you. She knew you would have a much better chance than if she had to raise you single-handed. As it turned out, she was right, you have had the best of care and attention.”

This is the passage where I first begin to consciously think about the gender of the speaker. What ran through my mind at this moment was: She says all of this with no personal attachment, and almost with professional distance. If indeed there is ‘an emotional bond almost beyond comparison’, then how does this character know? Is this a Mother speaking? The subtle compassion in prose is indicative of this, and yet the compassion is too subtle as to seem non-existent.

Gender, a male and a female speaker is solidified with this passage:
“Yes, I’m going to write up the diary. I ought to record this for prosperity. Never know if I’ll meet a Prime Minister again. Don’t I get a kiss for behaving myself?”

“Yes you do, and a hug.

4. Specific paragraphs

Before I get to your last question, I just wanted to bring some minor details to your attention. I did notice a lot of grammatical mistakes, but I am not a grammatical wizard, and so will leave that for someone else. Otherwise:

Introduction:

‘The Prime Minister praised the unveiling of the PulsePen neuro-scripter and the team that developed the technology, the Prime Minister said, ‘This announcement opens a new phase in neuro-technology, one that Britain can justifiably be proud to be leading. It is testimony to the dedication and hard work and of countless people working to overcome insurmountable obstacles. It demonstrates the value of focused research funding, the skill and resources of our finest medical institutions and technology companies and emphasizes the importance of my (Missing a word or two here) governments decision our to make education the number one priority in Britain so that more young people can be given the opportunity to excel in their chosen field of endeavor.

As a passage from the British Guardian, be careful to use British spellings rather than American, ie. Above: endeavour.

“What if he tries to shake my hand? What’s he going to do, stick his arm up my gown?

Since Ob is a guy, I might revise the word gown, because it suddenly makes me think he will be wearing a dress, and then makes me question who the speaker is, and what gender. I suspect he will be wearing clothes and not a hospital gown at the event he is attending?

“Yes, you look sexy, satisfied? Let’s get you to the lift.”
#
“I’m not expected to demonstrate PulsePen am I, ‘cos it doesn’t always behave when I’m nervous.”

Are the # signs to distinguish scene? I found myself disoriented as to whether the characters are at the lift, or still talking in the apartment. Perhaps something that indicated they were at the lift, ‘Can you press the button,’ would make this less confusing. I just didn’t find the transition significant enough, as it stands it’s a continuation of the previous sentence, broken up by an unusal # sign for whatever reason. Of course, if this is an addition from Pure's first post, happily ignore this note. :D

Chapter One

Again, be careful of British and American spellings. I notice you switch back and forth at times, often forgetting ‘...our’ in words like favour, but using ‘s’ instead of ‘z’ in apologise. A simple spell check in one or the other.

“That’s enough! Look you; I can’t take any more of this. If you are not going to make the effort, I am not prepared to put in the work. I’ve really just about had it! What’s got into you? (These) last few weeks you have become impossible!”

“The spices give you away. Announce you every time you enter a room. So used to them now I hardly smell them, but that first encounter with the sub-continent is firmly imprinted."

If scent is important to his memory, and since you indicate he has photographic memory, more detail is necessary here, for example what kind of spices give her away?

“Ob, is this what is bothering you, my thesis, your work. You have been off the wall today.”
To me, "You ARE off the wall today" seems like an active phrase someone would actually speak, and matches the first part of the sentance where you use is.

“When will you admit that I am no more than a means to an end to you, I’m just a job, work that you do. Sure there was a time when you were pleased to be seen with me, you, on your mission, rescuing Ob from oblivion. Proud to have your photo taken with me, you told me I looked good. Photograph well do I, if you crop round the shoulders? This seems to need clarity.

“You are getting (or taking?) things out of context. Ob, things happen outside of your home, life goes on. I know you don’t like me to talk about it, I respect your wishes but you have to understand, I started a serious relationship four years ago, I know how much that hurt you and that’s why you don’t want me talk about it. Maybe we should, might help you get a perspective on things.

“No, your wrong, don’t you see. As far as Neuroptic is concerned, Fingers is as blind as I am.
An aside, I really loved this! Very ironic.

Away back, when we were developing PulsePen, he wanted optical feedback built into the device. You know how PulsePen works, converts neural impulses to letters and numbers. It’s a huge leap forward, once you have gone through the tedium of teaching it what your (you are, you’re) thinking.

“The Institutes new device will never fucking work, and you get cross with me because I’m not putting in the effort. I told everyone at the outset that it will not do what you want it to. They insisted that we try their approach first, fine, I’m happy to help, but Jesus it wont do what Fingleton wants it to do; ever. It’s not because it’s Fingers baby, though God knows how he ever managed to come up with the idea, you can’t order colour in the way that he expects if you have never seen colour. The principle is sound, it’s an extension of PulsePen technology, but where PulsePen ‘learns’ through picking up the neural signals, this is trying to do the thing in reverse. Sure I can think a colour, say blue, but I can’t then synthesis the neural signal I receive as ‘blue’ because I have no idea what ‘blue’ is. With letters, numbers, I know what they do, I don’t need to ‘see’ them; they form together in a logical order that make words or numerical strings. A goes with P goes with P, L and E and makes apple. I don’t need to visualise an apple to know what the letters represent. You send me a round green shape and tell me its an apple and what I’ll see is A, P, P L and E. Colours have no logical order so sending me signals to try to synthesis an image can’t work, I have no idea how to form an image that I cannot visualise. It may have some benefit to formally sighted people but even that will be marginal. Fingers thinks its the processing power that needs boosting which just shows he knows shit all about anything, we have to find a way to write the signals onto the optic nerve so that it can ‘paint’ the image, and we are not even close. Sure, one day I will ‘see’ an image and you will tell me it’s blue and I will believe it’s blue, I might even remember that signal means blue. What then?”

“But it works with sighted people, surely there is a way to make it work for blind or partially sighted people. It’s just the first step Ob. Then we can improve the technology.”

This is an exceptionally long piece of dialogue, and one which I doubt would ever happen between two people talking. People naturally interrupt each other when in conversation, and in my opinion it needs to be broken up by the other speaker.

5. Does it read 'true' within the context of a novel.

Other than exceptionally long dialogue passages in Chapter One, which could run more naturally, I have no problem with the intro being all dialogue, or even the beginning of Chapter One.

However, I would think with Chapter One, being more argumentative and therefore passionate, Ob would think, like anyone else, more (rather than speak) about her tone of voice, or how he might intuitively feel her movements around him, perhaps her scent, as you raised the issue earlier. Ob knows the woman well, and therefore would have some 'thought' while in a heated discussion, and not just go on dialogue.

Because he is blind, I would expect his character to pay attention to other descriptive details, and not really those associated with sight, but since he emphasizes his blindness and how he can't see, perhaps his desire to know what her face, in conjunction with her tone, might look like in this discussion they are having?

Just a thought. Otherwise, quite well done. :rose:
 
Hi Neon, and all.

I've adjusted the _Times_ stuff as best I can. Sorry if the quote marks don't bend quite right, but I think it's clearer. I have no more time this afternoon.
 
This will be very brief because most of what I wanted to say has been said above, particularly by Charley. I'm sorry, Neon, but all that dialogue grew uninteresting very quickly (though I did read through it all). It seemed unreal and forced, as if you were merely handing us the story in this odd way. Talk about 'telling' vs. 'showing', it's literally true here.

Neither character was likable to me, I did not feel like investing any thinking or emotions in them, none. I also felt as if everything that related to or referenced being disabled was more an intellectual exercise than based on reality (whether yours or anyone's). It's all too clinical and prescribed a conversation. I could not even buy it as a drama script.

I am sorry I have nothing more to offer. Your story is imaginative and should be interesting, fascinating, but I don't know how to advise you in making it so.

best, Perdita
 
Greetings Neonlyte. Thanks for posting, and first of all, let me congratulate you on having the courage to post a thought-provoking and experimental piece. Yes, the all-dialogue format is challenging, but I think it's good to push those boundaries once in an while and ask what happens when we try new ways of communicating. Sometimes a work can be exhausting, frustating and ingenious at the same time; I for one like it when authors don't offer me the easiest path through the work. I like the detours and the occasional desperate scramble over a verbal stone wall. It makes it all the more fun to see what's on the other side.

I wrote my own comments as I went through the story. This is, admittedly, partly laziness ;) However, I will defend the position that it's worth while, as an author, to learn not just what the audience thinks at the end, but what it was thinking as it went along. Here, then, is my stream-of-consciousness critique.

First, a very tiny point: the here/hear with the Guardian. Wouldn't one spell it "here" the first time, as Ob is hearing it, knows the right spelling in context, and doesn't know until told that it is spelled wrong? Yes, such are the petty things I concern myself with. I promise more useful insight, but for some reason that one struck me as an interesting little visual/auditory puzzle.

On the plus side, I disagreed with Dr. M. on this sounding like a Guardian editiorial. At first I balked, but then I realized I was thinking of a feature story, where terseness is the rule. On the editorial page, however, those sweet little hacks just love to flow purple. I think you've caught the tone pretty well.

Now, onto more serious issues :)

I enjoyed the sparseness and barren feel of the all-dialogue opening. I liked the physical, visual, and sensation isolation it brought to me as I felt all avenues of sensory experience shut off, and the stark feel was, to me, very appealing. Of course, you may wish to take this with a grain of salt; I write screenplays (bad ones), and am perhaps more accustomed than some readers to interacting with a bare text largely communicated through dialogue. I did not find the dialogue-only format painful or excessively difficult, although admittedly I have always enjoyed fiction that is more experimental in form.

That said, I do feel that Rumple has a very valid point about the sensation to which Ob is privy. He should be receiving a great deal more sensory input, including the little background noises that no doubt form an essential part of his perceptions of the world around him. He also would in theory have a very active internal mental life, and that too is notably absent. In strict veracity to physical reality, those details ought to be there.

May I suggest that you seem to be attempting more with this all-dialogue approach than simple physical reality? That is, I get the impression that the sense of barrenes and isolation is important to you in your depiction of Ob, important enough that you're overriding things that might ordinarily break that sense of isolation, like additional sensory input or internal monologue. I think that that is a very interesting goal, and I do think that the dialogue-only approach performs that function well and in an intriguing fashion. However, it will present more problems as length increases. First, as several readers note, it does make it difficult to sustain reader buy-in - although personally, I don't have a problem, from time to time, with choosing a form that inherently distances itself from some readers. So long as you're aware that that is the price you pay, and you're willing to pay it, it's all good.

The other issue, however, is that you seem to plan to switch to a more traditional narrative at some point. At least, that is how I read your comments on the story. I think that the problem you'll be faced with there is a rough, jarring thump as you switch gears quite a long distance into the story. I think you will need the traditional narrative if this is going to go the length you project and if you're trying to involve these characters in an extended emotional relaitonship, but the longer you stay with the harsh, spare, minimalist all-dialogue approach, the heavier and harder that "landing" will be. I'm curious how you plan to handle the transition.

One thing that would help in the dialogue is some trimming on adjectives and superlatives. A line like "PulsePen wouldn’t even be possible without the pioneering neurology work undertaken here" sounds more like the Guardian editorial than a person speaking in conversation. I know, I know ... when I talk about trimming diction, the words "pot," "kettle," and "black" spring inevitably to mind. But the fact that I can't *do* it doesn't mean that I can't *see* it :)

I'm laughing with the warning about swearing in front of the Prime Minister ... somehow I'm thinking of Christy Brown hitting up his wife to be. I like that earthy edge.

“I don’t want to go. I’m really nervous about meeting people. They stare at me, I won’t know what to say.”

This looks to me like a place where some trimming of the show/tell matrix would be profitable. I absolutely agree that this is what Ob is likely to be thinking, but people tend to voice their decisions a great deal more than their motivations. Typically, I might expect to hear "Oh sod it. Do I have to go?" as opposed to an explanation of internal discomfiture, something that most people like to hide.

I would say similar things with the details on Ob's mother and their attempts to find her - a line or two of implication would be better, on the whole, than a complete blow-by-blow, especially as the story gets into speculation about her motives and emotional state that imply either that the speaker would have to *be* his mother or that she is making some amazing guesses at the mental state of a complete stranger 20 years ago.

Trimming here would also, incidentally, help to compress that dialogue and keep it moving, increasing your chances of the reader continuing with you by keeping it lean and making the reader guess a little. Some readers, of course, will simply tune out due to the dialogue, but my gut instinct is that the type of reader who sticks with an all-dialogue experimental opening is also the type of reader who, like me, is more drawn in by a desire to figure out what is happening than by someone spelling out precisely what's going on.

Oblivion. Note. Bold. 24pt. Write. Historic day. Therapist agrees with Ob. End. Oblivion.

I enjoyed this banter, and the use of the computer to record it. It gave the dialogue livelier feel. I think that one thing I am struggling with as I progress is that I'm getting something of a Mummy-ish feel from Amanda. I understand why she might come across a bit maternal and humoring to Ob, but my gut instinct is that that is going to get in the way of me taking a romantic connection seriously when/if it comes to that. I might be wrong; you might throw me a curve ball and make it through. But at the moment, Amanda strikes me as one of those imminently sensible women with a huge purse full of tissues and wet-wipes and spare juice boxes, with five or six urchins clinging all over her. I don't think that this is the impression I'm meant to be getting.

“You will stay with me won’t you. Don’t leave me alone.”

This I think a much better line. It's simple, poignant, and has a great deal more force than a complete explanation ("because I get nervous in crowds and am not sure I can find you and it's hard to make myself understood etc. etc.").

I like Amanda better when she has a row with him, but she's quite uneven in her characterization. Of course, we are moving from mood to mood and jumping four years at a time, so perhaps that is to be expected. But that was one thing that did make me wonder - why the four-year gap, anyway? It seems odd ... is there some reason why we need to be four years further on when we take up again?

OK, some pages further on ...

What's bothering me is the immense amount of "tell" detail. Ob describes everything in his physical and emotional life at length. On the one hand, some of it is very interesting. The story about him being left in the toilet, for example, and his compelling and desperately sad explanation for why he tells that story, are great stuff. But because he has to tell them out loud, they are more verbose and less powerful and compact in imagery than they would be if told in standard narrative. One or two episodes like this aren't a big deal, but twenty pages of it is a lot.

Personally, I would like less. Less detail, that is, and less explanation. If you're going to stick with the dialogue-only opening, I would think about hacking this right back and getting really terse, at the risk, yes, of losing some readers. Maybe some short internal monologue - a word or two - to flesh out the spoken word. But I'd surrender the goal of absolute clarity in filling in the backstory, and instead accept that as a stylistic device, a dialogue-only format is best for evoking character and mood. It's not a good device for developing a narrative sequence, so I wouldn't use it for that.

Your other way to go, of course, is to do the standard narrative. I think that that can work too, and that it can even create that sense of limitation, isolation, and barreness that the dialogue can also do. The chief thing, to me, is an awareness of the constraints and strengths of each format or style. Traditional narrative is really one of the best choices for giving a series of events in a coherent and semi-detailed fashion; hence its popularity. Dialogue is not as good at that, but is excellent for developing character and establishing mood. What I think this needs is a recogntion that you can go either way, but that the tool should match the goal. Right now, you are using dialogue but attempting a detailed narrative sequence, and that, for me, is hampering your work.

That's showing up, for example, in the length of Ob's speeches. Some of his individual speeches are over a page long in fairly close type; that's a lot of talking. It also raises some balance problems with the characters; Amanda does a lot of sitting there while Ob talks, which makes it hard to get a grip on her character and also, honestly, makes you wonder a bit what she sees in him, or whether she's really very interested in him, as he doesn't often seem to give her much room to speak. I have to say that CharlyH is right - it makes him come aross as rather narcissistic. I do recognize that he's meant to be a complex and at times difficult person, and that's a fine thing for a character to be. However, because we don't get any internal thoughts of either of the two main leads, it's hard to see how sympathy might be being established.

Again, I think this comes back to a question of what tools work well for what purpose. Third person omniscient point of view has this in its favor: everyone gets a chance to show how s/he ticks, to reveal depth of emotion and motivation. By cutting back to just dialogue, you remove that. Traditionally, the only way to make that work effectively is to concentrate on pushing a lot of personality and individuality into the speaker. You might, for example, see some of Robert Browning's poems; he's very fond of the monologue as an artistic form. But even he drew line fairly close on length. I think he realized that despite its name, the dramatic monologue is really a compressed form, and not suited to epic (lengthy, narrative) action.

Well, that's my two pence - or possibly rather more. Personally, I would love to see this as an all-dialogue opening, because I love experiments - but I think that it needs to concentrate more on working with the form and its inherent limitations. I like the premise of the story and hope to see more!

Now, those individual questions ...


Author's Questions:
1. Can you start a novel with thirty pages of dialogue?

Yes, I firmly believe so. However - and I am very sorry to say it - these are not the thirty pages I would choose.

2. Are the characters identifiable?

If by this you mean, "Can you tell who is talking?" - yes, I can. On the other hand, I found that on the whole Amanda's personality did not come through to me in a coherent and consistant fashion.

3. Is it clear there are two sexes?

Yes. However, I was a bit uncertain about how much I liked Amanda's "feminine" characteristics. They seemed mostly to consist of tendencies to primness and mothering, which didn't on the whole draw me to her.

4. Does it read 'true' within the context of a novel.

I would have to say no. However, I think that your question reveals interesting depths. I would argue that we should be aiming for "does it read true within the context of a play for voices" or similar dialogue convention. Trying to make dialogue read like a novel is, in my opinion, the central problem here. Embrace the dialogue :) Forget the novel. Or go the other way around.

Shanglan
 
Last edited:
CharleyH

I deal with the issues as you raise them.

1. Ob is a complex character. Abandoned by his mother. Institutionalised through childhood, abused by a male nurse in his teens. Rebellious, verbally offensive in his mid-teens. He is isolated within society and within himself. Amanda is the emotional core holding his world together. She has helped him adjust to his condition, develop his unique skill and learn social behaviour. The prologue section intends to establish their relationship and the dependency between the two.

I added the prologue to provide readers with background information before launching upon the main section of the text. As I mentioned in another reply, it possibly illuminates and confuses by contraction. I’ll return to this in a general observations posting.

You, like other readers, are having trouble digesting the text in its current form, each looking for external – conventional – descriptors to establish the relationship. I’m unclear whether this is solely due to length, or a response to the text that causes discomfort in being confronted with Ob’s world. I hope it is a combination of both.

You mention the narcissistic tendency Ob displays, it should come across as arrogance when speaking of his field of expertise; if it’s reading wrong I need to address the problem.

2. The formatting of this is a problem. J and I agreed to present it this way to ‘simplify’ the reading. On reflection, it should be without Italics. The two voices are distinct and no one appears to have trouble distinguishing between who is speaking.

Ob intentionally speaks with two voices, he shifts between a brutal dialogue style and a more cultured style, the latter reserved for ‘business’. The purpose for doing this is to reinforce the linkage between Ob and Amanda, in part, he is comfortable speaking emotionally with the therapist, he is also deliberately provoking her, forcing her to choose and using the only tool he has available to him.

In the second chapter, currently pretty much devoted to Amanda and providing a huge amount of information about the relationship, Ob’s history and development, it is clear that Ob has lapsed into the brutal style of confrontation in recent weeks signalling an imminent event. I will cover this in more detail in a general observations posting.

You mention the Guardian comment, I’m pleased you enjoyed it. It is a kind of English joke. The newspaper, slightly left of centre and ‘preachy’ editorially, used to make horrendous simple spelling mistakes.

3.Thank you for picking up on this. Amanda is barely a couple of years older than Ob. She first encountered him as an undergraduate and almost immediately felt a compassionate attachment. She engineered her employment with the Therapy Institute to enable her to work with Ob, even then intending to write her PhD around working to help Ob deal with his condition. She has almost unrecognised maternal compassion for Ob who in many ways was a ‘baby’ when she first encountered him. At the time of the prologue she has worked with him for four years bringing him from a gifted yet offensive child to someone feted for his achievements. She ‘feels’ she gave birth to him.

4. Thank you for your specific text observations, all noted and to be reviewed in detail.

5.This returns to the nub of the problem. My interest was two fold with this question, is the fictional work Ob is pursuing convincing within the context of a novel, and, is the relationship between the characters, and the style in which it presented, similarly convincing.

The first part you answer by omission, as a ‘story’ it appears an acceptable premise.

The second part is a problem.

Just to deal with your final paragraph initially. There is a section in the posted text where Ob talks passionately about his feelings for Amanda and his desire to touch her, to know her appearance. It is somewhat low down and you may have skipped the latter section. It was asking a lot to expect you to wade through the entire text.

I’m not keen to abandon the style of exchanges between Ob and Amanda. I don’t think that is the problem and I feel it would detract from one of my objectives in writing this which is to force readers to Ob’s P.O.V. The problem seems to be with length, both the text as a whole and specific ‘speeches’ within the text. The latter point is a relatively straightforward fix.

All of O/A’s exchanges in latter chapters retain this format, but they are much shorter, interspersed between other scenes and events as the story unravels. I will have to give some thought in overcoming the obstacle in presenting the story with this long opening section, I’m anxious not to lose the impact of Ob’s P.O.V., I’m also anxious not to lose readers. If I’m not misreading you, I understand you think the format is worth retaining and achieves its purpose and would be more effective in smaller doses.

Many thanks for taking the trouble to critique this work; it is very much appreciated.

Neon.
 
BlackShanglan

Greetings yourself. May I first of all thank you for taking the trouble to read the chapter and for replying. I’ll deal with your points as you raise them.

I should say straight up the reason for posting this is to clear my blockages in resolving the story, the blockage stems from the presentation of this first chapter. The effect striven for is to place the reader in Ob, in isolation. You ask further down in your crit. if I was seeking this perspective. Yes – but it brings penalty. The feedback generally has identified the problem.

1. Dealing with the point you raise over the Guardian. It is a sort of English joke, the Guardian is a serious left of centre newspaper with a preachy editorial style, it makes, or used to, horrendous spelling mistakes. Introducing Amanda’s comment so early on is to establish that the relationship is much more personal/intimate than the carer/therapist role that she is clearly identified with further into the story.

2. I’m pleased you saw what I was trying to achieve through the all-dialogue approach. The overriding goal is to recreate in the mind of the reader the extent of his deprivation. I take on board all comments relating to other sensory input. Certain passages of the text confirm he receives other sensory data, in the second chapter his acute sense of smell is crucial in establishing his breakdown in his relationship with Amanda – she arrives at his room smelling of sex, which of course begs the question ‘how does he know what sex smells like?’

The separation between the dialogue form in the prologue and the main text is a reflection of this. In the prologue they are chummy, mildly flirtatious; in the main text he is tense, angry, betrayed, cheated, and that’s just his personal life. He is also uncovering a plot that threatens to disrupt his work. I will return to this in a general comments posting after the weekend.

3. My intention is to keep the ‘all-dialogue’ style only when these two characters are ‘on stage’, if they share a room with other characters, the writing is ‘traditional’. I want to keep reinforcing Ob’s isolation. The problem is the length of these passages. As you say the choice is to maintain this approach throughout and treat it purely as an experimental piece of writing or to find a way of making the story acceptable to a wider audience, again I will return to this in a general comments posting.

4. I take on board all of your comments relating to ‘trimming’ etc, your comments along with others will be reviewed in detail.

5. Ob’s Mother. Reviewers seem to think her superfluous OR see the role that her appearance plays in story. CharleyH raised a similar question, please refer above to save me typing it again. One point I forgot to mention in that reply is that Ob’s mother has been found and Amanda is lying to Ob through her teeth, the mother wants nothing to do with Ob. Amanda is protecting him from disappointment at crucial moment. The discussion between Amanda and the mother is laying foundations for Amanda’s feelings about Ob. It is likely, that she may be removed entirely in a subsequent edit, she remains for the moment because she is the device I use to allow Amanda to explore her feelings.

6. Length.
The crux of the issue is the length of the all dialogue approach AND the length of some specific passages within the dialogue section. I’m going to mull this over and respond in detail in a general comments posting. Right now I would like to draw some positives and negatives from what you (and others) say simple to help me focus on direction, and post my thoughts early next week.

Thank you for answering the questions, I think your first and last answers tell me all I need to know, now I have to decide.

Finally, didn’t have an opportunity to look at your SDC submission, had a difficult summer that kept me away from the computer for a considerable period, I will take the opportunity in the coming weeks and let you have my thoughts.

Thanks again.

Neon
 
It will be interesting to see how your story develops. Like said, I have no problem with the form of the story. It is intriguing, and I am all for form reflecting content and reverse. I am a huge fan of drama, particularly the dramatists who write in a way where form and content are inseparable, and I am fascinated to follow how you make your transition into more descriptive prose.

It is difficult to offer thorough critique on a once over reading of any text, certain things take precedence and others don't cement into my mind. Forgive me if it seemed I skipped chunks, I didn't, but as mentioned, perhaps the length of the dialogue/monologue in Chapter One led me to be 'unconcerned'. The length of the dialogue sequences definitely made the read increasingly banal – and this opposed to your language, which is definately not.

Admittedly, I wanted more. The question is, more of what? More realism. But then I have to ask myself well, what is the realism of his existence and experience? It is what it is. Perhaps he is completely unconcerned with anything but his own voice. Self-consumed, and self possessed. He is whiney, which makes him weak. He is barely likeable, and I don't mind not liking him, if that's the way you want me to feel toward him. If you want me to be distant from him – you have achieved this. Narcissicm was an inappropriate word, but I couldn't think of an aural equivalent. (Echoism?)

Am I looking for conventional descriptors? Not really. I am looking for his reality, and I am open to his reality, and the way that you present it. Reality stipulates that people interact with their world. Unless he is living in a desensitization tank, he will react to his world with more than simply dialogue, but perhaps this is your point. On the otherhand, is it so conventional to have him think while Amanda is talking? Is it so conventional to have Ob and Amanda in a conversation rather than her merely making comments about his monologue?

Reiterating, it is not the form that bothers me, and so if it is not the form, if I am not really looking for conventional narration, why bother mentioning what I just said; because somewhere in Chapter One you lost me, and I am trying to ask myself why.

Putting this together: Since Ob is not exactly likeable, and I have no problem with the form, the question becomes is it the length, or is it that I just don’t care what Ob says after a while because of his character?

I guess I cannot answer my own question unless I read more thoroughly.

Anyhow, since this is story discussion, I am simply thinking out loud for discussion sake. :)
 
Hi Neon, and all. All italics are removed, and the gender clues in the synopsis. There is a small note about gender at the very end.

I hope this is satisfactory.
 
Some impressions:

I find this long section or group of them, quite affecting, and hope it does not change; it is your best:

“How far have you progressed with this moving plan?”

“Don’t worry about that now.”

“I am worried. How could you not tell me? Ob. You tell me everything, why haven’t you talked to me about this?”

[...]

“No Ob, you haven’t dealt with it, you’re running away from it. It won’t disappear just because you turn away. We need to talk. I’m going to re-schedule appointments so we can spend some time together. Look, I have to get back to the Institute, I’m going to be late for a meeting as it is. Promise me you will call me tonight. Promise.”

“I’ll call. If you want to see me, be prepared to travel.”

“When are you going?”

“Friday.”


There is a passage about being touched, which is quite poignant.
Also I particuarly like the 'are you still screwing him' {{Correction: {Are you still screwing each other"}passage, which shows real hurt and anger.


*Just* prior to this is several paras with a lot of details of the corporate maneuvering.

Starting from the beginning:

The prologue is good, basically, but the newpaper quotes are too long, and I don't see why so much detail about the mother is mentioned. I suppose it gives us some psychoanalytic background, but I'm not sure why it's done in the prologue.
Let Ob's nature come out in Chapter 1. He could refer to mother's abandonment as related to the plan to leave.

I find the Chapter 1 beginning good, though it's ultimately bogged down in details, roughly after this para:

“I was going mad in that place before you came along. You cannot imagine what it was like, a brain that retained virtually every piece of information fed to it and no way to formalise the ideas welling inside. [...]Well fuck you, fuck the Institute. You can all clear out of my life.

There are obvously some relationship issues that come out, after here, and before the beginning of the best part I mentioned, but they are embedded in too much 'back story.' imo. That there is maneurvering to screw our hero, that Fingleton is an evil plotter can be done more concisely. Explaining why the current version cant work, can be abbreviated: "It won't work, and I don't want to go into detail. Let's stick with how you've used me."

----
In all, I think the story CAN begin with dialogue, provided it's not too diffuse and burdened--besides the interpersonal issues, with too much corporate and scientific detail, essentially back story.

Good work!!!!!

PS. Reading Rumple, I think he made some excellent points about sensory detail, and I notice that the 'touch thigh' passage I liked, is about touch. Likewise Ob remembers her smell from the first. I think there should be more of this sensual stuff, and it will make the exchanges less of a debate "You should not have done this" "Welll, I had to, and besides you..."

What come out in the best exchanges is real feeling is woundedness and rage on his part, and once things get hot and heavy, her new wounds over being so harshly judged. I.e., it's where you succeed in imparting emotional valence to the disagreement, as opposed to simply who did what.
 
Last edited:
Pure and CharleyH,
I'll respond to your comments tommorrow or Sunday, flying back to UK first thing in the morning.

One point I cannot leave in Pure's comments:

"Are you still screwing him"

Check it, I have many times, it is not what it says but because you imprint the characters so firmly that is what you read.

Catch you later.

Neon
 
OK, it's “Are you still screwing each other?”

More egalitarian, but what's your point.
 
Last edited:
I read up to the stopping point that Pure marked. A few of my thoughts regarding your work.

Interesting experiment having something written as total dialogue and while the story did pull me in at times I would prefer not to read a story written in this manner even though it fit the character. I agree with Rumple's point about putting the other character's other senses in the story. Without placing them always in dialogue. Whether it be the smell, a hightened sense of hearing, taste or touch alot can be placed in the story without forcing it into dialogue. A story without any visual discriptions but with all the other senses magnified can work for me but one of pure dialogue unless it is short and to the point is going to be hard for me to stay with.

The early section with the newspaper and the point where he is talking about the colour blue I found myself skiming through. You might want to be a little more brief in those parts.

About that the project relates to the military using it for an aircraft to be flown pilot-less, with the pilot 'at home' and the premise of 'whoever controls the skies, controls the world's dwindling oil supplies'. You don't have to be so specific, the military sees it's value whether be it in a plane, tank or a remote controled robot. And it is "all about oil" supplies is a bit cliche and whether you have control over the skies does not mean you can control oil supplies it just means you have air superiority.
 
Wills,

I finally found the time to read this. My first impression: very interesting read, I am intrigued to find out more, but I got tired with reading so much dialogue.
I'm not sure I would have continued if not for the sake of this Forum. I'll get to the why.

I browsed through the thread and understand there have been some changes. I was not bothered with italics, thank god. I hate those in large quantities.
But then you know, from my comments on your Halloween story. LOL

I'll give you my answers, regardless of rehashing. Sorry, but I don't have much time.

Author's Questions:
1. Can you start a novel with thirty pages of dialogue?
Yes, you can but you have to make sure it's very interesting. It took me some time to get into it, but not so much that it was putting me off. In other words, acceptable.
You do need to work something in to make it more of a dialogue though. As it is now, it's mostly Ob and A. waits politely for him to finish his sentences. If they are really talking to one another they will interrupt, leave sentences half finished, use fragments and things like that. It's not close enough to everyday speech for me.
2. Are the characters identifiable?
Yes, with a little effort it was clear when one was speaking or the other.
3. Is it clear there are two sexes?
Yes, almost right from the start. The part about his mother was the first clue and somewhere you refer to A. as she. That was more the confirmation as I already thought of her and Ob as him.

4. Does it read 'true' within the context of a novel.
This is the territory of my main complaint. LOL
Apart from making it more interesting to read, I think it's also an issue in credibility. If you are confined inside your mind because of the limitations of your body, I expect to find a lot of attention to those limitations. Or better, to the compensating factors.
Ob will have a lot of other sensory clues: hearing, smell, touch with his skin, taste. Also, I think, he will notice things inside his own body. It's after all his entire universe.

I hope this is adding to all that has been said.
Apart from the comments above, I found a lot of typo's, missing words, stuff like that. :rolleyes:

Don't forget my first impression: a very interesting read.



:D
 
Hi, Neon-

I read the posted chapter yesterday, but only now am having a chance to comment properly. I wish you had only posted the synopsis at the end, but I was overall impressed with the storyline and writing style, and especially with your approach to it. I have a few bones of contention, but I can see the potential is there to turn it into a good novel.

I'll start by responding to your questions, and then I'll add any uncovered considerations at the end.

1. Can you start a novel with thirty pages of dialogue?

Absolutely. Nicholson Baker did more than that, writing an entire novel making use exclusively of dialogue in all 176 pages of "Vox". The question should be, Can this novel start with thirty pages of dialogue. And I'm not so sure about that.

I certainly understand the reasons for you to attempt this structure, and I agree that it can work to your benefit, shaking the readers off their comfort zone. There are, however, clear problems with it. In "Vox", the core of the story was a telephone conversation between two strangers, and everything that mattered to the exchange truly could be conveyed by dialogue. Here, that is not the case.

"Oblivion" is not a real quadriplegic. From what I could understand, and it would probably be a good idea to go a little further in explaining it sometime, he was a thalidomide baby with malformation of the eyes and extreme neurological complications at the level of motor control, but he still retains control of his main bodily functions and, above all, feeling. As others said, his world wouldn't be limited to words. His condition is in no way the same as being in a sensory deprivation tank. There are sounds, silences, hesitations and nuances that can't be translated into words, there are smells, there are air displacements, shifts of weight on the bed and the contact of clothes against his skin, differences in temperature. There are feelings and streams of thought that aren't, that can't be vocalised. I honestly wanted to like the exclusive use of dialogue, but in these conditions, it denies most of what makes his perspective unique.

In small doses, in very controlled situations, it's a device that you can and should use, but never to the extent you present here, at the cost of making Ob's environment seem completely sterile and alienating your readership.

Another, [to me] very important thing: What annoyed me the most in the entire posting were the expressions "Fifty minutes later" and "Four Years Later". When you are attempting to write using nothing but dialogue, conceptually refusing to use any speech tags, you can't break that rule just because of these disconnected, disjointed expressions. It's sloppy work.

I didn't like the # marks either, because most times they don't represent a real shift (and then they're useless), and the other times that shift is evident (and then they're superfluous).

2. Are the characters identifiable?

If you're asking if I could always say which character was talking when, yes. Their styles are different and it's always perceptible who is talking. But even so...!

I didn't like to be forced to be extra careful with the closing quotation marks after each paragraph, to make sure if it was a new or the same character talking. The extremely long pieces of dialogue from either character, divided into several paragraphs, were a bad choice for a number of reasons. First, it imposed on the reader that more attention to what should be automatically apprehended notation. Second and more important, it meant that the exchange between the two characters was seriously hampered. There was no real conversation, for long sections of the text, but instead simply long, uninterrupted monologues.

I see no reason for the newspaper editorial to be set apart from A.'s speech. It's just one more graphic, visual element that adds to the confusion. From the perspective that matters, from Ob's perspective, it's her voice, it's her speech. He doesn't have a copy of the editorial to real along with her. There is no real reason for the internal paragraph breaks, either. If there is a hesitation, a silence, a pause in A,'s speech, that doesn't come across in just an internal paragraph break. You need more than that. I understand that you needed those breaks, because otherwise you'd have several chunks of 500+ words in a row, but that is exactly the problem: real people have conversations, they interrupt each other, they talk on top of each other. Real people having real conversations hardly ever need more than a paragraph before they're interrupted, before they need to breathe, before a different thought crosses their minds. These large chunks of text artificially broken into paragraphs are a manifestation of the lack of fluidity and dynamism of the dialogue.

If you were asking about the characters themselves, if you wanted to know if I can infer from the text much in terms of their personal characteristics, I can't say that I they are identifiable.

The problem is the same. There's no realistic exchange, no conversation dynamics, so you can't really get much of whom they are, especially in A.'s case. There's no depth of character either, because we're restricted to a transcript of their words, with little clues about tone, concerns, texture, and all the range of description elements that could come from Ob's real complete-perspective.

3. Is it clear there are two sexes?

Yes, that is perfectly clear right from the start. As I said, the characters have different styles, and the basic terms of their relationship is apparent from early on. By the end of the prologue, it's all but explicitly said.

4. Does it read 'true' within the context of a novel.

Not really, for all the reasons I mentioned already, fundamentally the sensory deprivation tank effect, which isn't real, and the lack of a convincing dialogue dynamic.

About the plot plausibility, I have nothing to say (from what is present here, not the synopsis) except to note its potential to make a gripping novel. I'm not sure how photographs of a sexual abuse of which Ob was the victim could possible be used as a blackmail tool against him, but that will depend on how the case is presented in subsequent chapters.

As a matter of detail, I noticed a little nothing: "The rest is seventy kilograms of worthless tissue". Seventy kilograms is just short of the average weight of a normal adult man. Ob has been institutionalised his entire life, neglected and abused, his diet controlled by default. He has malformations of arms (it's common for thalidomide babies not to have arms, their hands sprouting from the torsos where the arms should be) and (possibly) legs, severe muscle atrophy. I think seventy kilograms is an exceedingly generous estimate for someone in his position.

There were other minor inconsistencies, but nothing important at this stage.

Apart from the necessary grammar and phrasal construction edits that others mentioned, what I would like to see, what I think would make the story work better is:

- A more focused, more dynamic, dialogue-only prologue. I think that it's a good device and you can take a lot of benefit from it in small doses. The prologue would be the ideal time to make use of it more extensively, as long as you're careful to maintain a more realistic exchange, and get rid of the distinction between newspaper editorial and A's speech and the excessive internal paragraph breaks. Also, make it just one scene; no "fifty minutes later", no # coming in and out of lifts.

- A more comprehensive narrative structure across the first chapter proper. You can keep the reader trapped in Ob's perspective AND break out of the constraints of the dialogue-only structure. The ideal approach would be, in my opinion, a 3rd person sympathetic narrator, which would be able to tell us the story from Ob's side without being limited only the words he says and hears: all the things he feels, physically and emotionally, all his thoughts, hesitations and perceptions. This should be the basic POV of the novel, whenever possible, constituting a flexible medium that allows you to both sink into short dialogue-only moments, whenever the sensory deprivation tank experience can be useful, and to broaden to full-blown 3rd person omniscient when it's necessary to step away from Ob.

There. Hope some of it is understandable, and some of that is useful.

;)
 
Lauren, I am resposible for formating the newspaper material, though I believe with neon's consent. The idea was that, as you said, the beginnings and endings of quotations are a bit tricky, and that's a quotation with a quotation. (There had in fact already been discussion over revisions in the first set of quotation marks.)

IOW, the typography keeps one from having to rely totally on two levels of quotation marks. I believe it's defensible, but of course, up to the author, in the end.
 
J

You are taking all the responsibility!

This is a difficult piece of work to present and we agreed jointly on a format, subsequently amended following comments.

I take full responsibility for the presentation of the work and thank you sincerely for your advice and making corrections and amendments to render the work readable.

Neon
 
My thanks to every one of you for taking the time and trouble to read this opening chapter. It was not an easy read and I can only applaud those of you who have taken the trouble to raise your concerns with the current structure of the work.

Many of your comments fall within the same general parameters, I will address this reply to the overall tenor of your critiques. I will be taking note of specific points each of you raise relating to the text and consider these when I commence re-writing the story.

Positive Points.
1.
I’m encouraged that no one has seen fit to criticise the overall story line, there are reservations with certain aspects that need to be considered in more detail and addressed in the re-write. (Ob’s Mother and the role she plays, Amanda’s perceived character, the ultimate military application of Ob’s work.)

2. The depth of characterisation clearly works, though some confusion exists over Amanda’s ‘nature’ – she should not be read as a ‘mummsy’ character, but protective of someone she has nurtured from a wild adolescent to a brilliant individual. She has a combined fear of losing Ob professionally – essential to her PhD – and is unsure of her emotional relationship when confronted with him moving. This dual aspect needs clarification.

3.
Readers are forced to confront Ob’s world. It is jarring and possibly distasteful, the search by readers for other sensory input indicates a degree of discomfort with the text (ignore for a moment the length). I sense you are looking for something to mitigate the harshness of Ob’s world.

I take comfort from this; please tell me if I am misreading your response.

4. The ‘split’ personalities of Ob work but are less clear within the text in the format presented. He does have split personalities; one tending toward narcissism, but not self pity, his anger at his situation is that he cannot give himself to Amanda. This engenders a feeling of dependency with which he is uncomfortable and underpins his desire to ‘give back to society’ the value of his research rather than to see it applied solely for military application.

His other personality is entirely professional, you see some of that in this text, his relationship with Format, the technology company he works with, is very different from his relationship with Amanda, but does not currently appear until later a later chapter.

5. It is clear from comments by virtually all reviewers that very real emotional feelings are invoked in certain dialogue sections. In fact, I have the impression that the emotional content, the touching, smells, Ob’s toilet christening, carry more weight that the ‘technical’ dialogue.

I have no intention of diluting any of the personal content, it does raise the question, is the technical content unconvincing, or did readers just want more personal interaction?


Problems.


Length, length, length just about sum’s it up.

I have made note of each reviewers specific text related problems, these will be addressed.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I wrote the prologue to provide some background to the ensuing dialogue. This should have served as a warning that readers need more information before confrontation with the dialogue section.

It is clear that the dialogue section is too long; it alienates readers and possibly is too harsh to be ‘taken on board’ in its current length. Apart from specific text amendments and clarification with regard to the development of characters, I intend to maintain most of the dialogue section.

What I propose is to intersperse the dialogue over three or four chapters developing a rounder scenario of the plot, introduce other characters and build to the moment where Ob makes his break from Amanda and the Institute.

In a sense, this will render the prologue obsolete, but it is crucial to the ensuing story. Amanda’s romance is with the Prime Ministers head of security, they meet during the preparation for the PM’s visit, a romance ensues and he is the person Ob and Amanda turn to when the going gets tough. I will have to handle it differently; I have preliminary ideas on how to approach that.



It’s clear to me that each of you wants to see this story written, but written in a way that is ‘rounder’ without losing the essence or quality of the dialogue section. Looks like I have some work to do.

Lauren’s, and others, thoughts on story presentation, POV, narrative driven, interspersed dialogue are probably the way to go – if I want this story to be read and enjoyed.

Thanks again for your contributions, very valuable.

Neon/Wills
 
Back
Top