Science Fiction Microstory Contest discussion
JUNE 2017 MICROSTORY CONTEST - COMMENTS ONLY
Mod
https://www.stbaldricks.org/participa...
C,Your Davis Kelly Cole and Ruby couple are really starting to grow on me. A fun story, nicely done!
Thanks Justin!Ruby is a character first introduced in the third book of my Axe Series on Amazon: "Burying the Axe." These stories are fun little scenes that might or might not show up in future novels, and go beyond the timeline of what I've already published. It's like what Ray Bradbury did in the Martian Chronicles, only not as brilliantly executed.
Loved the ending in your story. Without spoiling it, a great little twist!
-C
Thanks C, much appreciated! Those were the first two things that popped into my mind when I read this month's theme.
Nice story, Maryanne!You a crazy b-word maniac--and I love it!
Well done. Door A, B, or... of course my always preferred door choice... door C!
-C
CLP: Cue Flashdance.Thanks for the comment :) Seemed a natural fit for the theme.
Mine's up. (Justin kind of beat me to the punch line, but what the heck?)
I have no corner on the market with that particular species! Good story Tom and thanks for the kind review.
Justin,Doesn't it bug you just a little bit? Lol
*tom tom drum* *cymbal*
-C
Bad. Just bad. But I still laughed. LOL! There's never a good tornado suit around when you need one.
Here's a suggestion for the group to discuss: I'm proposing we have Jot select, (either directly or via random means), a single story from the current or prior month for the group to review. (Prior month is better logistically, since Jot would have to wait until the very end of the month to get everyone's work considered.)This would offer the following advantages over the current ad-hoc approach:
1. Multiple reviews of the same story would produce a more comprehensive and diversified analysis.
2. Everyone choosing to participate would only produce a single review each month, so there's less work per person, and with so many different writing styles, there would probably be more reviews in total as people are likely to express contradictory opinions.
3. No political or competitive story trashing.
4. No person or persons dominate the critique discussions.
5. It'd be interesting, as stated previously, to see a bunch of different 'takes' on the same story. I think this would be a positive evolution of the process.
What does everyone think about this proposal?
-C
This might work as a single review of the past month's winner on a voluntary basis. In this way pluses and minuses will be reflective of voting preferences. Many times, my top pick does not make it to the winner's circle because of the dependable overall group preference for traditional SF. But factors also play into my choices. For example, I have a distinct prejudice against an almost all dialogue story format unless that type of storytelling is gripping. Or stories that waste precious words telling me everything about a culture, and little about the characters, or why I should care what happens to them.I do think having a separate critique forum allows people to comment who want to comment specifically, and that may be enough. You cannot force people to comment, who do not want to, so even a voluntary single review of one story for all may fall flat.
Everyone has her/his own reason for participating in this group. For me, I just like to knock a story out from time to time. The opinion of another is interesting, and it might prove useful, but I do not seek it out. Literary ambition is on my grave heap for the moment, not quite dead, but clearly on fading life-support.
It seems to me that, lately, participation in the contest has vacillated quite a bit between feast or famine. I think there are several reasons for this. My main bugaboo is that we used to do a theme with 2 elements. That made the contest more interesting, at least to me. A broad theme I find less appealing, and so my participation has also dropped off. Also, to be honest, I just keep seeing the same type of writing and stories every month, and quite frankly, I am bored by it. But that just may be a function of having participated for a long period of time. Everything is cyclic.
I do try to promote this group on #storydam # writestuff because I also think we desperately need some new blood. I'd encourage other group members to do the same.
My 2.5 cents critique.
I'm sorry I haven't been reviewing much. I've been doing a lot of freelance writing at Writeraccess.com, and it has taken up most of my extra time.I am curious though about Marianne's comment that she sees the same type of writing and stories every month.
What type of writing do you mean? And what kind of stories? I just want to understand your perspective - which I do appreciate you sharing.
Hi, Justin, I am very much guilty of immediately classifying stories I read as I read them, even my own, which tend to be heavy on death and angst and pushing at the borders of what the general consensus (at least for this group) of science fiction is (nice running sentence there). Since you asked, lately for this group, my folders for shallow, info dumping, dialogue-ridden, not original/not exciting, minimum characterization/mood/setting, repetitive and snark have gotten a bit thick. If I can guess the direction or end of a story in the first couple of lines, I struggle to get through the story. I often hear in my head: Not this again! And this observation is cyclic as many of us have been writing here for some time. And part of it is just personal taste. How to crack the nut? This group could use some new blood, and we should make an effort wherever and whenever we can to invite new people into the group. However, as this group is male heavy, it is a tough sell for the women. And gender sometimes does play a role in what people prefer to write and read, so it can be a handicap in recruitment.
I do think the trend away from a theme with two required elements is hurting our group, as I stated previously. The requirements help us to try new things, rather than sticking with things we are comfortable writing about such as religion, politics, death, media, etc.. Can you imagine this group writing on the theme of Silly Romance in Space with 2 required elements being bubble bath and the phrase "thighs like Babylonian pillars!"
As for C's suggestion, I know when I submit my 3 votes to Jot when I participate during a month, I include a note about what I liked about each story I chose, even if it is only a word or two. What I say indicates what worked for me. Jot used to publish these when putting out the vote tallies, so anything I commented on was out there. I do not believe this is happening anymore. The whole business of having a separate critique forum, which I could take or leave, I believe, was a rather forced issue giving space for those who like to do critiques.
Maybe, what should be required from all of us who participate in any given month is this: after the voting is done, each member must write one full sentence as to why they voted for her/his top pick (not necessarily the winner) and one sentence about an improvement the writer could make in the story. At least, then, everyone gets a little something out of this monthly venture on the plus and minus side, and the task is not too time intensive. :)
Hope this makes my notions clear :)
Yes, absolutely. That's great feedback! Thanks for taking the time to write out your thinking. I want to hear if my stories seem repetitive or too predictable. If they are, then clearly I'm not working smart enough! I might be thinking I'm so clever, but my readers are bored stiff or predicting my endings two sentences in.
Having a theme with at least two required elements as in in previous months certainly does provide more specific challenges than broad single topics, but I am fine writing for either.
I do think a minimum of two sentence reviews for each story would give everyone some feedback without being to labor intensive. One thing that you like, one thing that you didn't or should be improved.
I'll try it!!
I am clearly lazier than you ;) I'd do the sentence thing for my top 3 picks :)
So. . . anyone else wish to share an opinion about the idea of one story per month (for the prior month) being selected for critiques by all who wish to?Usually there is no lack of opinions in this group...
-C
My opinion, and I'm happy with whatever the group decides, is to continue reviewing the current month's stories as they come in, in the critique thread, as people feel led or wish to. If people review my stories, great. I get feedback and hopefully get some improvement takeaways. If no one reviews my story, that's fine too.
I guess some of us enjoy more to write on a theme WITHOUT added parameters, which can impose limits working very much against what's possible on a given theme. So, in this regard/extent, I'd disagree with Marianne's post here. On her point about the group's participants, though, I have to agree that the preponderance of male writers and of tech-heavy (or, usually, tech-seeming heavy) and/or man-in-the-spaceship-cockpit or zap-goes-the-deathray kind of stories finally disillusioned many of us with the group. As for critiquing, there seems little need for 150-word (and up) critiques of 750-word stories, generally, but I would let people decide which tales they wish to comment on and how much--more useful for authors and critiquers alike, probably. --But this is is just my 2 cents here.
Paula, I have always viewed the elements as the key part of the challenge pushing us out of our comfort zones, so it works better for me in a very short format, rather than a wide brush. They focus the concentration, at least for me :)
Marianne,Suggest you toss ten or fifteen random elements into a hat and pull 'em out as necessary.
So you might end up with something like:
Terminator robot warrior, the Seven Dwarfs, and the common cold. Oh wait... that one's been done. : )
-C
Marianne wrote: "Paula, I have always viewed the elements as the key part of the challenge pushing us out of our comfort zones, so it works better for me in a very short format, rather than a wide brush. They focus..."I agree here too. I need more structure for a prompt. It helps me focus. And it helps me work a little harder.
Like going to a restaurant and opening the menu to find 200 options. Too many choices makes the direction harder.
But that's just personal opinion. I know lots of writers who prefer the broad stroke so they can go where they want, not necessarily where the prompt giver wants you to go. :)
Marianne wrote: "How to crack the nut? This group could use some new blood, and we should make an effort wherever and whenever we can to invite new people into the group...."I invite people and as soon as they hear it's on a platform they don't even have an account on then they are turned off.
I like Goodreads but I'm just never here.
I honestly would have preferred the over to the facebook group. The nice thing about facebook is if I comment, and the group is public, there's a potential my 4800 fb friends will see the comment. There are lots of writers hiding amongst the outdoorsmen and musicians!
But they don't see my activity on here.
I think once every 6 months we should have a bonus contest.You can pick any month's theme in the last 6 months that you didn't participate in!
I go back and I'm like "oh darn that's a good prompt that I missed"!
:) :) :)
And I refuse to join Facebook because I do not like it or its founder.The key for any group is compromise & being open, so discourse is good. We are all adults. If the group no longer works for me because of my preferences, I do not expect the group to cede to my will. It is everyone's choice whether to participate or not. It cannot be all things to all people.
If we forego elements, it should be clearly made part of our monthly rules.
Or perhaps the question of whether to add extra elements should be decided by the person posting the month's theme--thus one gets sometimes extra elements, sometimes not. I think that's what we have now, no? No one may be perfectly happy with it, but, as Marianne notes, hey we compromise.
Just posted mine. No time to do a "real" one, but this was fun.
Paula, do not denigrate your effort by labeling it as not real. It was a perfect distillation.
Are cats with human-like sentience sci-fi? I think it's certainly fantasy but not sci-fi. Now the way I did it in my novel "way of the axe" was definitely sci-fi. I gave the cat an advanced "worldnet" collar that analyzed brain waves and gave each emotion a spoken expression for each of three intensity levels, set by the owner. So if the cat was hungry the collar would say "I'm hungry". And if the cat was famished the collar would say, "hey stupid, feed the cat!" You can imagine the possibilities.
C., I think you prefer a very narrow definition of SF in the babes and bots vein, and I do not, so we can agree to disagree here as to personal taste regarding SF.The talking cat equation has many solutions. Imagine a quantum glitch that has effected the planet. Some days the cat can talk, some days not. Fantasy? No, SF, because of quantum reality. I am sure Sheldon can whip up the equations. Paula's cats have sentience. When did they reach that tipping point in their evolution? I don't need to know as a reader. I do not need to have it spelled out. She is showing me it happened, not telling me it happened, so SF and superior writing in a mere paragraph. She does not have to waste precious words on an explanation. Paula's plotting cats every bit of SF as the triffids, with the tip of the hat to science via the reference to social Darwinism, and also implying by reference that biological evolution has taken place with the cats to make them sentient.
Voting for the stories here each month reflects how hard or soft people are on their thoughts about SF. And that is their choice. I think if our members wanted to restrict this group to only stories about other worlds and spaceships, computers and bots, we'd already be there. We are here to hone our skills and try new things and push that SF envelope to the breaking point or the merging point with other genres.
One of my stories in the anthology has sentient buildings. Fantasy? I never say specifically how they become sentient. Plausible, like sentient islands? Possibly, so SF. I never specifically define psychomanteum in my new story, although it has a clear definition in the dictionary, and it is a construct/device/space. Could the woman be an engineering genius who has opened a link to another reality or a wormhole to other worlds, or has her brain created reality through the augmentation of the device/space. The reader can make up her/his own mind. Makes for a more interesting read. Life rarely has clear cut answers. Plausible, possibly so given quantum reality, so SF.
If you look at the winners of Hugos and Nebulas, etc, American Gods stands out. In that book, one character states that extraterrestrials, like gods, are also a product of human thought. Again, quantum reality, so SF, alternate reality where gods and ETs walk the Earth because humans conjured them up by thought. Cue Schrödinger again.
We do not want, I think, in this group to become like those sick, sad, insecure puppies that staged a Hugo coup and displayed everything that is wrong with an inflexible, fanatical attitude toward genre. That attitude is something modern, evolving SF must do without.
What matters most here is that a story is well told. People can form their own opinion as to whether it is SF or not. It won't go on anyone's permanent writer's record if someone wags a finger and declares, "Not SF!" Genre splitting and score keeping is for booksellers and publishers, and is why so many excellent authors' works never gets wider distribution. Therein rests the tragedy: stories denied.
Hi Marianne,Methinks I struck a nerve!
If I somehow gave you the impression that I am attempting to restrict anyone's expression or art on this site, I apologize. That was not my intent at all. I was merely expressing my opinion as many others do here. I sincerely thought the story in question was a brilliant story--as I clearly indicated.
As to the prickly subject of what is science fiction and what is not, I'd suggest we stay with a strict interpretation of the name, "Science Fiction."
So I'd suggest a nice succinct definition is that there's a future or alternate science component to a fictional story. It is future or alternate science, since current science is nothing more than current events. An adventure novel about current automotive motor technology is not science fiction even though it might be about technology. It's an adventure novel. There would be future or alternate science involved in the progress and development of the characters from the beginning of the story to the end.
Anything that does not have a (future/alternate) science component to the story, in my opinion, could be a great work of art and fall into many other genres such as murder mystery, fantasy, or adventure story.
It's all about the "Future or Alternate Science" thing *imho*.
Now, you can argue that a shovel is a hammer since you can drive nails with it; it has a wooden part and a metal head; it can pry out nails; or the person wielding it a nice, likable person who is using it like a hammer and so it is very much like a hammer in all the ways that matter.
But it's still a shovel.
And that's my 2-1/2 cents worth!
-C
I'm a little perplexed by some of the comments on this and the critique thread. I think that maybe this monthly contest is being taken waaaay too seriously. I thought this was supposed to be a fun, creative way to showcase the science fiction genre and brush up on our writing skills.As for the monthly elements, you can't be all things to all people and part of the challenge of this contest is adhering to the guidelines, be they easy or difficult. Either way, we should be having fun.
Regarding the scope of science fiction, I feel it can be painted with a broad brush, from a high-tech thriller to a deep space adventure or even anthropomorphized cat (with ray-guns, of course - lol).
We should all just write what we feel is reasonable and appropriate given the monthly theme. It may be vague or very detail specific, but the writer's challenge is to work within the scope of a monthly contest that has worked well for several years.
As an aside, I do miss some of the past authors who haven't written in several months and wish they'd return.
Anyways, it's just my perspective, for what it's worth. :)
I think a lively discussion between intelligent people with differing opinions about what is/is not science fiction IS fun.And is this not a completely appropriate subject for our discussion board?
Did I miss a memo somewhere?
-C
I can't speak for anyone else, but I've mostly just been lurking. The "open" format of the group means that stories are considered "published" if posted here, and I've been focusing lately on submitting for publication, which makes things a bit tricky.There's always been a mix of "just writing for fun" and "serious" (both in quotes!) writers on here, as well as a miscellany of stylistic preferences. I think the key is that everyone is working to get better at what they do.
On the topic of improvement, there's a list from Strange Horizons that I spotted recently, that may be of use: http://strangehorizons.com/submit/fic...
Hmm. Looks like I've written a few stories on that list. Now I'm depressed. But since this is all a simulation anyway it doesn't matter.DELETE MEMORY FILE
END OF LINE
I've probably written half of the list too.
Justin: LOL :) The fur does fly!Chris: Yeah, fun! I stick around because maybe every now and again I remind myself of what I can do, and because I am grateful to Jot for the opportunity to do that. Part of why there has been a drop off in this group is rigid thinking on what SF is. I know I am quite tired of the exclusive not-too-thinly disguised mansplaining that goes on month after month regarding this. (I often have my own monthly pool to see who posts first.) This rigidity is especially why I galsplained the sick, sad puppies controversy over the Hugos as a citation to my argument about SF, along with all the rest. Yeah, not fun to be viewed as not writing SF every month because some folks are looking through only one facet of SFs prism and not critically thinking a story all the way through, but only superficially. Not fun when you have crafted a story in 750 words that could be fuller in 10,000 words and not generate a wagged finger. With our word count we have to show more than tell. For deeper storytelling, it can be a challenge, but the strategy is to give the reader more leeway into what she/he reads into the story.
C: Our rule 3 is much broader than your definition, it just says "science fiction", without caveat, so it is open to interpretation. Jot would have to change that if he prefers it to be different.
"3) The stories have to be science fiction, follow a specific theme and potentially include reference to items as requested by the prior month's contest winner."
I'd go with Lester del Ray out of all the differing definitions (and the fact that there are so many definitions gives credence to my point) on Wikipedia : "Lester del Rey wrote, "Even the devoted aficionado—or fan—has a hard time trying to explain what science fiction is", and that the reason for there not being a "full satisfactory definition" is that "there are no easily delineated limits to science fiction."[9]"
Limits, there is the key. I choose not to be limited, and if our rules changed to your narrow band of what SF is, I'd be gone because I would be bored to tears. I am interested in psychological/spiritual SF. I want infinity, not zeroes and ones.
Being "Field Independent" in intelligence as my natural state, why yes, a shovel is another form of a hammer; doesn't matter that it is still a shovel. Function trumps form. Quantum switch on/quantum switch off.
"Mansplaining?" Lol--good one.Gotta try that one out on the wife!
-C
C: You might be surprised to find out that she already knows about it and has heard the term before. I did not coin the term. here is the Wiki ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manspla...
Marianne, exactly! In the end, WE should love what we're writing and have fun doing it. Take the critiques constructively and not too seriously. I'm certain they're only provided with kindness to help us hone our craft. Sure, there will be some months where we struggle and just can't seem to wrap our brains around a great concept. Of course sometimes, the reader or reviewer may not get your story and that's okay. I also agree that the tight box of spaceships and aliens is only one small segment of science fiction. For me, I happen to enjoy that type of hard sci-fi and write according to my own personal leanings. But that doesn't mean everyone should or that it excludes the possibility that a light sci-fi laced romance or mystery doesn't qualify or may or may not win the month.
So, write what you love. Personally, I really don't care if it's only vaguely sci-fi as long as we've enjoyed writing it. A good story ultimately rises above any perceived confines of genre.
Marianne,Your reference makes the term "Mansplaining" seem kind of insulting. As does your "wagged finger" reference. You were careful to level it at "some people" rather than at me, but your meaning was clear.
As I've already indicated, I'm not trying to impose any rules on anyone. I am merely expressing my opinion. And by attacking me, you are in fact attempting to suppress my ideas, not the other way around.
-C
I am not attempting to suppress your words. You speak them loud and clear. I am not attacking you. I am arguing how critiques and explanations of the definition of SF sound when there is no wiggle room. The wagged finger refers to a "do not color outside the lines" attitude that has been resident in this group from the beginning.Words have power. Just about every woman I know has been on the receiving end of mansplaining. And it has happened more often than not in this group when regarding the definition of SF and who won in any given month. I recall many months back I got a win that someone thought I did not deserve because my story was not hard SF. That may be why so few women have remained here. It ain't worth our trouble. We have to sell a different type of storytelling, then we get told it ain't SF, and the reason why it isn't, true or not, usually not.
As for the rules, you gave a good definition of what you think our rules should be regarding what constitutes SF for judging here. Jot may change the rules. It is his decision.
Thank you for that galsplanation. : )Sorry it's been so hard for you Marianne. I had absolutely no idea I was stepping into a giant bucket of deep linguine here.
For what it's worth, I think you gals look really good in short skirted Star Trek uniforms, and I loved Seven of Nine and not just for her implants (the Borg ones, anyway. . .) So I guess I'm a bad bad mansplainer.
Just kiddin. Actually I think we're lucky to have some of our woman authors, who are quite amazingly talented. I'll never forget the image burned into my brain of Paula's "Dem Bones" flying skull hurtling through space trailing gory streamers. It was such an otherworldly image that I was mesmerized--both intellectually entertained and emotionally unsettled.
Another perspective is always a good thing. And as long as you don't toss it on the floor and stomp it to pieces, it could even be fun like Chris said!
-C
Being over sixty, I prefer the term hagsplain, for myself, as I embrace the Hag, the ancient hawk. She gains clear vision by flying high. She sees all perspectives. But the rendering talons can come out.If someone submits a story for this contest, we should all operate under the assumption of respect that the writer knows that she/he is submitting a SF story, at least from her/his perspective. The writer has her/his reasons for her/his belief in the story presented. You can disagree with the writer's belief, but not dismiss it.
I don't fault you for being a younger woman, thanks.Leaving now to go find a store that sells Bactine antiseptic spray.
-C
I'm also a bit tired of the use of terms like "you gals" here by one or more of "you boys." But most tiring are the attempts, every several months on average, of one or another person to impose his (nearly always a "he") limited version of "what science fiction must be" on the group. It's boring, it's repetitive, and it wastes our time.
On a more positive note, thank you, C., for remembering the image of a flying head/skull from my "Dem bones" story; guess I better go reread it as I'd totally forgot it, lol. (Seriously, thank you.)
On an even more positive note, very well said, Chris--yes, if we have fun with our writing and enjoying our own and others' creativity here, probably it will most encourage better and better writing.
Most positively--wonderful points very very well said, Marianne!
The rules for this contest are posted in the story feed.
**********
This month's theme:
Survival of the fittest