The Drall
Junior Author
Legal Property of AWR
Nothing is true. Everything is permitted.
Posts: 3,796
|
Post by The Drall on Jan 27, 2010 21:06:55 GMT -5
*Drall's spirit appears*
*He watches Reffy*
She will defeat him. She MUST defeat him.
*sees Mel giggling*
YOU SAW NOTHING.
*vanish*
|
|
|
|
Post by Bloodeye the Bai Ze on Jan 28, 2010 5:39:26 GMT -5
Hmmm... you know, Agro got me thinking with this topic.
Mostly, it's on the issue of whether utopian fiction is in fact really dystopian fiction. Not much utopian fiction is written where something doesn't go wrong or there isn't an underlying element of chaos.
I suppose both go hand in hand.
|
|
|
|
Post by Matteo ((Taed)) on Jan 28, 2010 11:13:55 GMT -5
I think the difference isn't that something goes wrong, it's that in a dystopia, that something is a fundamental part of the society and it's usually sort of buried sneakily under the utopian aspects. It's a discord in an otherwise desirable situation. You know? Like, everybody's very secure ..... but they're under surveillance 24/7. Or there's no overpopulation or food shortage .... Because they kill people when they're 30 and turn them into soylent green. The Federation in Star Trek would be a utopia, even though they're always getting attacked by the Romulans or the Borg or whatever, because the fundamental nature of their society is nice all the way through. They live in a meritocracy without money or poverty where there's no discrimination and everyone has a voice. No strings attached.
Anyway, I have a question about the "epilogue" corollary. Two questions, actually.
A)) When you say epilogue, do you really mean ..... "epilogue"? Or do you just mean the end of the book? Because the epilogue takes place after the climax, when all the important events are over and the author is just tying up loose ends. I'm not saying that I can't or won't write a stand-alone epilogue like that, but it just doesn't seem as much fun as writing it at the climactic end of the book.
B)) When we write this, is it supposed to be a stand-alone piece situated near the end of a story, or are we supposed to give the impression that the whole novel was written before it and we just snipped out the last few pages? Like, would all the important stuff have been explained already by this point so we shouldn't reiterate? It makes things kind of tricky if that's the case because, in a utopian or a dystopian story, a lot of effort is usually given over to worldbuilding. You have to explain names and customs and organizations, usually within the first hundred pages. I already have some ideas on how I can squeeze details in even if we're pretending that it's all been said already, but I'd just like to know first before I start writing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jenny (Reffy) on Jan 28, 2010 12:37:04 GMT -5
A)) When you say epilogue, do you really mean ..... "epilogue"? Or do you just mean the end of the book? Because the epilogue takes place after the climax, when all the important events are over and the author is just tying up loose ends. I'm not saying that I can't or won't write a stand-alone epilogue like that, but it just doesn't seem as much fun as writing it at the climactic end of the book. B)) When we write this, is it supposed to be a stand-alone piece situated near the end of a story, or are we supposed to give the impression that the whole novel was written before it and we just snipped out the last few pages? Like, would all the important stuff have been explained already by this point so we shouldn't reiterate? It makes things kind of tricky if that's the case because, in a utopian or a dystopian story, a lot of effort is usually given over to world building. You have to explain names and customs and organizations, usually within the first hundred pages. I already have some ideas on how I can squeeze details in even if we're pretending that it's all been said already, but I'd just like to know first before I start writing. Good questions. I'd like to know the answer to these as well! I've been having the same problem. I'm currently working on a 2nd rewrite ... and still not sure if I like it. Might be going for a 3rd rewrite today. Everything has happened already with an Epilogue, which sucks! It is just like a summary of what happened. I don't want to go into much detail because its only being "regurgitated" from the novel before it, yet I don't want to not give enough information and confuse the reader who hasn't read the novel. Not much can happen in the Epilogue either, because it is the tying off loose ends. You aren't supposed to be creating more loose ends! 1st rewrite I had to stop. The idea just was not working. 2nd rewrite is good, but not amazing. A friend has read the 2nd piece and said it does sound like a book ending and pretty good ... but self-doubt is a fiend! (He likened it to Morgan Freeman ... not sure if that is a good thing?) |
|
|
|
Post by Kaez on Jan 28, 2010 14:26:52 GMT -5
I think the difference isn't that something goes wrong, it's that in a dystopia, that something is a fundamental part of the society and it's usually sort of buried sneakily under the utopian aspects. It's a discord in an otherwise desirable situation. You know? Like, everybody's very secure ..... but they're under surveillance 24/7. Or there's no overpopulation or food shortage .... Because they kill people when they're 30 and turn them into soylent green. The Federation in Star Trek would be a utopia, even though they're always getting attacked by the Romulans or the Borg or whatever, because the fundamental nature of their society is nice all the way through. They live in a meritocracy without money or poverty where there's no discrimination and everyone has a voice. No strings attached. Anyway, I have a question about the "epilogue" corollary. Two questions, actually. A)) When you say epilogue, do you really mean ..... "epilogue"? Or do you just mean the end of the book? Because the epilogue takes place after the climax, when all the important events are over and the author is just tying up loose ends. I'm not saying that I can't or won't write a stand-alone epilogue like that, but it just doesn't seem as much fun as writing it at the climactic end of the book. B)) When we write this, is it supposed to be a stand-alone piece situated near the end of a story, or are we supposed to give the impression that the whole novel was written before it and we just snipped out the last few pages? Like, would all the important stuff have been explained already by this point so we shouldn't reiterate? It makes things kind of tricky if that's the case because, in a utopian or a dystopian story, a lot of effort is usually given over to worldbuilding. You have to explain names and customs and organizations, usually within the first hundred pages. I already have some ideas on how I can squeeze details in even if we're pretending that it's all been said already, but I'd just like to know first before I start writing. A)) Either, really. You can feel free to do either. You could really be doing the final details, or you could be concluding the climax. Both of them can, if done properly, feel like an epilogue. Feel like a conclusion piece. That's the big requirement for the topic -- it has to be concluding something. That's what an epilogue does, whether it be the conclusion of the climax or the conclusion of the entire story. B)) Again, either would be fine. If you can find a way to squeeze in the details and write it like the last chapter of a 40-chapter novel, good on you. If you would rather write it as the stand-alone piece that it actually is, as long as it meets the requirements of 'A))', that's just as good. |
|
|
|
Post by Jenny (Reffy) on Jan 28, 2010 14:45:09 GMT -5
... but
A)) Everybody is going to like the climax more than just rounding-off-details. Nobody wants to read a "what happened after the disaster" they want to "see the disaster happen." *worries more*
|
|
|
|
Post by Kaez on Jan 28, 2010 14:52:57 GMT -5
... but A)) Everybody is going to like the climax more than just rounding-off-details. Nobody wants to read a "what happened after the disaster" they want to "see the disaster happen." *worries more* ... that's not your topic, though! Your topic is epilogue -- what happens after. It's a challenge, as it's supposed to be. But if done properly, it has potential for tons of awesome. *hands you copies of Primal Fear and Unusual Suspects* These are movies that, if you only watch the last ten minutes of, as long as you can fill in the very skeletal details of the story to the viewer, they will still really enjoy. They're stories in which the epilogue, alone, can be awesome. |
|
|
|
Post by Matteo ((Taed)) on Jan 28, 2010 14:58:18 GMT -5
Oh man, now I want to rip off the Usual Suspects! Seriously, that's one of my favourite scenes in any movie, ever. I'm honestly not going to be able to take the epilogue thing seriously. Remember when we discussed it before and I wrote that ridiculous little blurb about "Colonel Badass"? It's going to be like that. Or it's going to be like that Venture Bros. episode "Escape to the House of Mummies Part 2". Lots of little details out of context that don't seem to make any sense.  |
|
|
|
Post by Kaez on Jan 28, 2010 15:06:46 GMT -5
Knowing you, and with those inspirations, I can't argue against that idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jenny (Reffy) on Jan 28, 2010 23:58:56 GMT -5
Wow. "Usual Suspects." That really is an Epic Epilogue. Don't think I could ever write something that awesome! Film was ... a long haul to get to the end with not much happening. The ending ... amazing. You really could just watch the last 10 minutes, which I'm not sure is a good thing but it is damned clever.
Still considering another rewrite. Think third time will be lucky. Would be awesome if I could get anything near to the "Usual Suspects" epilogue, lulz. I'll see what I can hammer out tomorrow, if anything. Both writes just don't have the right feeling I'm looking for.
Thanks for the suggestion. It did help with the "aaaaah trapped with shitty Epilogue coz nothing happens" feeling. :]
|
|
|
|
Post by ASGetty ((Zovo)) on Jan 30, 2010 5:32:39 GMT -5
I believe in you all!
And I will be available to judge come Sunday, without doubt.
Looking forward to some good reads.
|
|
|
|
Post by James on Jan 30, 2010 22:35:43 GMT -5
I hope everyone is getting along with their entries. The silence is beginning to scare me.
|
|
|
|
Post by MeletaIsoldaa on Jan 31, 2010 3:31:34 GMT -5
No worries - I'm sure everyone's just taking their time thinking a little harder about the writing and edits for the semi-final rounds.
I know I am. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Jenny (Reffy) on Jan 31, 2010 15:15:45 GMT -5
Gawd damnit! Why am I always the first to post?
I'm not 100% happy with it. This is the third rewrite (I'll be posting the other 2 in my "Imagination thread.") Everybody I've shown it to likes it - more so than the Visitors one I did. I think its alright :] Just doubt its going to beat anything Taed does. Maybe I don't like it simply because of the "Taed factor" and anything I do I won't see it as good enough - heh.
Oh well ... here goes!
|
|
|
|
Post by ASGetty ((Zovo)) on Jan 31, 2010 19:17:36 GMT -5
Must be getting pretty late on the mainland. . . Ref may take the whole competition without ever having to compete. . .
Talk about a hollow victory.
|
|
