Print Story 116
By Scrymarch (Fri Dec 04, 2009 at 12:07:43 AM EST) FFC, WTFC, Bill, Versifying (all tags)
Well, I managed to be late for the eternal fun challenge. Consolation entry inline.

Entry 116

I had planned to write something. I had enough time alone, for a change, but didn't really have space in my head for writing, somehow. At any rate, I was asked to read this at a friend's wedding recently. Rather superior raw material provided by this bloke. I believe it's one of the greatest hits, never really read the sonnets much. I liked it, anyway; I like the sensation of being surprised at how good a genre classic actually is.

In my defence, this was originally a Summer Fun Challenge, and mine has only just started. I'm really two and a half months early ...

< Out of the blue I get an IM. | Daughter. >
116 | 6 comments (6 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
classic by Kellnerin (4.00 / 1) #1 Fri Dec 04, 2009 at 07:36:53 AM EST
116 was featured at my own wedding, true fact.

I think this latest *FC has demonstrated that the motivation to create provided by the fun challenge is only very slight. If you're going to do something, you'll do it anyway; if not, then not, but you'll feel a little bad about it.

Anyway, I'm expecting the entries for the Scrymarch Summer Fun Challenge in two and a half months ...

"Plans aren't check lists, they are loose frameworks for what's going to go wrong." -- technician

Good choice by Scrymarch (2.00 / 0) #2 Sat Dec 05, 2009 at 09:49:20 PM EST
My friend is a bit of a raving atheist so the traditional religious readings were not really in play in his case. It works well either way I think. On the way I discovered that most online analysis of sonnets is aimed at the "I have an assignment due tomorrow" set. Which would be a downside of the greatest hits I guess.

I guess the WTFC had a the old problem with tasks where you can write (sing etc) about anything .. doesn't give you much of a starting point. And so I never writ ... and not many others did either.

Entries to the SSFC not limited to pseudonyms starting with S and ending with arch.

Will sig for food

[ Parent ]
we're not really raving ... by Kellnerin (2.00 / 0) #3 Sun Dec 06, 2009 at 09:34:16 AM EST
but we did have a JP do our wedding. I think he (the JP) would have been fine with a religious reading but it wasn't our style.

I think "too broad" issue was only one of the problems with the WTFC. Recent, more traditional *FCs with one medium and a more focused theme have had declining participation as well. I also took this particular *FC not to be simply "submit anything" -- although clearly that was also a valid interpretation -- but rather something along this spectrum:

  • Submit an entry for a previous *FC, according to the rules of that challenge (there were a couple entries that did just this).
  • Submit an entry for a previous *FC, but disregarding some or all of the original rules (there were some of these too).
  • Submit an entry in a different medium for a previous *FC, such as a song about Ed Hulver, a comic about politics, "Sparrows's Wings" as a dramatic reading, a story about geometry, photographs of the end of the world ... (even cooler, a program about hard-boiled crime, an ode to an HTTP/1.1 compliant server ...) I was disappointed actually that we didn't see more (any) of these. Guess I should have done one myself.
  • Do some kind of mixed-media thing that spans different *FC genres. In the voting story ana mentioned having wanted to do something along these lines. Would have been cool.
  • Take an actual entry that was submitted to a previous *FC and do something with it (a broader form of MFC X).
  • Anything *FCish that would take longer to do than the usual submission window -- but this is actually impossible because it is a fact of *FCs that the submission period only specifies how long you have to procrastinate before you throw everything together on the last weekend. Thus, the net effect is "anything *FCish."
For the SSFC, I may have some ideas for themes, but I fear that makes it the KWFC.

"Plans aren't check lists, they are loose frameworks for what's going to go wrong." -- technician
[ Parent ]
I really liked the covers idea by Scrymarch (2.00 / 0) #4 Mon Dec 07, 2009 at 03:10:44 AM EST
I just couldn't quite get it to work. I thought about reading fleece's apocalypse story. But even though it's in a spare style, as usual for for fleece, it's mostly dialogue. Likewise for your or CRWM's stories, I didn't think I could add anything to those particular ones ...

One story that could work well read would be fleece's dog trials story ... but it's nowhere online, I stupidly didn't save a copy and don't really know his broader online presence. Plus it wasn't actually for a WFC.

Let me not to the compliant request
Admin impediments. It's not OK
To change what W3C defines
Or respond 304 when page is moved
Oh no!

Will sig for food

[ Parent ]
I always thought by Kellnerin (2.00 / 0) #5 Mon Dec 07, 2009 at 07:14:28 AM EST
the WFC Audio Book would be a cool idea. I've never tried to do a story out loud, though. I probably should, just because it'd be uncomfortable. I'm flattered that you considered any of my stories, even fleetingly. From memory, out of fleece's stories I think "One-Twenty" might be an interesting one to try. For CRwM, either "Resurrection Men" or "Snow Cake" (or "Country Manners" for the right person, not me).

Someone should really try writing key passages of technical documentation in sonnet form, and force administrators to memorize them. "I'm Iambic Web certified."

"Plans aren't check lists, they are loose frameworks for what's going to go wrong." -- technician

[ Parent ]
Iambic Web Certified by Scrymarch (4.00 / 1) #6 Mon Dec 07, 2009 at 09:54:37 PM EST
Awesome. I wonder if I can get that into people's objectives next year. Er, not that I have a team next year.

I had forgotten about One-Twenty. It could work pretty well. As would the other ones ... though I think you're right that you'd have to be in the accent ballpark for Country Manners.

Will sig for food

[ Parent ]
116 | 6 comments (6 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback