PDA

View Full Version : Want to read the worst short story ever


laxmatt
16th June 2007, 09:58 PM
So what's worse than an author with shallow ideas, shallow plots, and even shallower characters? An author that suffers from delusions of grandeur! Read this awful, yet pathetically amusing (laughing at him, not with him) short by a fundamentalist christian. It seems to present itself as some sort of philosophical story, but stops short of saying... anything at all (except that atheists suck). The story is not copyrighted.

Dinner Party for the Deceased

By Michael Gryboski

It was quite exciting to think of it. Amazing that they were coming here, to my place of all places! By nature I am good at suppressing my emotions, so my countenance did not expose to my seven famous and infamous guests my elation, which was to the point of having me look like a cover band leader meeting the group he models. It is almost time; I cannot wait for them to come. I had set the dinner to be at six on the dot, though I was more than certain that O’Hair would be fashionably late. The first automobile showed up, and to my surprise it was Karl Marx and his newfound friend Francois Marie Arouet, both of them noted thinkers of their time.

Marx drove the vehicle, as he opposed having a butler do it for him. Francois Marie Arouet was indifferent, and felt as though Marx reminded him of an old rival. Both men came to the door, with Marx ringing the bell and I answering it, fearing what Karl would do if a servant did instead. Marx did not shave for the occasion, so he had that lion mane of a hairstyle when I saw him. Arouet had his favorite wig on, as well as some of the finest garments worn before the revolution. I immediately introduced myself in formal manner as the two men stood in the pleasant placid weather.

“Greetings, welcome Marx and Arouet,” I said.

“Glad to be here,” said Marx.

“Please, sir, call me Voltaire,” said Arouet.

“Vol?—“

“Taire, Voltaire. That is my preferred name.”

“A revolution unto itself, I might add,” said Marx. I said my further hellos and then had them enter the house, going through the well-lit hallway and into the nicely decorated dining hall. Voltaire felt quite at home, and Marx, although showing some contempt for the embroidered table cloth, also approved. As I was about to shut the door, another automobile showed up, driven by an English butler. In it there was a fellow who looked like he had dissolved something big and by his side a man whom smoke went from his mouth like a dragon. Yet, as the nice guy came closer, I could see that it was a breath from a cigar smoked on the way to the party. I could hear the two Britons as they came to the open door.

“I really pray that you would not chain thyself to such a detestable sinful practice.”

“Smoking this cigar is one of three things: it is enjoyable, painful, or insane. It’s not painful to me and I’m not crazy, so it must be enjoyable,” quickly replied the man.

“Why do you have people call you that anyway, it’s not your real name?”

“Consider what my loving mother named me.”

They came to the door and said their greetings to me and formally addressed them.

“Hello, Oliver Cromwell, and welcome to the dinner party.”

“Content to be here, I say.”

“And hello Clive Staples—“

“Call me Jack, everyone else does.”

“Sure, why not?” I said.

“I have heard the meal is supposed to be jolly good.”

“That is what I have heard as well, Oliver,” said Jack as the two men made their way to the dining room, where I made sure that cigars were at the ready for Lewis, but also Cuban ones for Marx. As ten minutes went by, the rest of the males guests arrived: Thomas Aquinas and Aristotle, both of whom I invited although Aristotle had been rumored to have it in for Thomas given that it’s been said that he plagiarized his work. We all by the seats assigned, with three seats on each side, and one seat on either short end of the rectangular table. To my left and closest to me on that side was Karl Marx, next to him Voltaire, and next to Voltaire Lewis. On the other side to my right was Thomas Aquinas, and next to him Aristotle, and next to Aristotle was Oliver Cromwell.

“I guess our only female guest decided not to arrive,” I had to say after we waited for a half an hour.

“Close the door to the Ark already!” declared Cromwell in a booming voice. So I decided to get things rolling.

“Alright then, we are about to receive our first course, tomato soup with precious basil and saltine crackers. Before that, shall I say grace?” I asked, more of a plea given that Voltaire, Marx, and Aristotle might get offended. But all three decided and spoke to me that they did not mind, with Marx saying he could survive a small dosage of opium, whatever relevance to the topic, I had no idea. As the heads bowed and I was about to start, a door slammed and there entered in street clothes an old angry looking woman with short white hair and big glasses.

“I object to this prayer stuff, it’s unconstitutional!” she shouted, to the annoyance of all present including the servants about to give the soup. My last guest, and the only female, Madalyn Murray O’Hair had arrived. “Why don’t you lousy pigs wait for me? I thought you were all nice gentlemen folks, but I guess not. Pathetic!”

Because of her bellyaching, grace was never said. But the first course was served; baize plates filled with mildly simmering tomato soup were put before each guest. The soup would have been warmer had it not been for the lateness of O’Hair. Worse yet, she complained about the soup not tasting real enough, amongst other things. She is not acting like a lady, this I know. Regardless, our guests went about their talk as they happily dipped their spoons into the course, and tipped them at their lips, letting the pleasant substance flow into their hungry mouths.

“I am telling you, Gzrybowski, that you need to free your workers. They should be your equals.”

“True, Marx, but I think that the fact I pay them on the hour, and with efficient pay at that justifies it. After all, that’s why your ideology never got to expand in Western Europe and America. Some people like their lot in life.”

“That is only because they were brought up to believe that it was what was meant to be by Divine Providence,” he said as he slurped more of the soup, which he had an unknown fascination with the hue. As I spoke with Marx, I was taking note of the conversation between Aristotle and Aquinas, both of whom were ahead of the others in their soup consumption.

“The fact remains is that you stole from me, Tom. Very few of those ideas were actually yours, and that cuts me to the quick.”

“All I was doing was harmonizing your philosophy with the Church’s. I can’t help it if you had so many good ideas. It’s not like I didn’t cite you. My whole purpose was no secret.”

“And I remember hearing about it from a friend: make me talk like a Christian was what I heard,” he said with some disdain though not much as he finished off the bowl of soup, apparently rather hungry.

“You should be happy,” said Aquinas, slightly diverting the conversation.

“Why?” said Aristotle, as a servant took his finished white bowl with thin streaks of tomato red from his sight.

“If it had not been for my efforts, your ideas would have been lost to the whole world. I brought you back into the mainstream. You had an organization as powerful and influential as the Church in medieval times actually adhering to a worldview shaped by your writings.”

“You do have a point, Tom,” said a conceding Aristotle. He continued, “And I guess those ideas on the Crusades and sexual morality came from your mind, not mine. People do remember you for different things.”

“Yes, they do.”

“Also, the inaccurate assessment of our solar system did make you pay bad enough for copying me,” said Aristotle with a laugh.

“It was your fault in the end,” countered Aquinas.

“Yeah but everyone thinks of you when they hear the name Galileo,” said the Greek with another pleasant laugh. I was happy to see them getting along, for I feared a bit of tension might ensue. But, to my surprise, it was O’Hair who was causing the ruckus on her side of the table, arguing with Cromwell, a man brought up to not do such with a lady. Then again, this was under the assumption O’Hair falls under that category. Aquinas was quick to take the side of Cromwell, comparing the English Civil War to the Crusades and Marx took the side, though with remorse, of Madalyn, arguing that it was done in the name of an opiate, but indeed the English Civil War kept him silent due to the fact that it was in the name of this “conforming opiate” that Cromwell and his ironsides fought.

Course number two came along, which was Greek Salad with French bread. This course had minor talks about it, with O’Hair scolding Lewis for his smoking, the one thing I agreed with that woman about when it came to the evening. As she delved into the French bread, Madalyn called it uncooked and claimed I was trying to kill her for her beliefs in a strong separation of church and state. It took Voltaire to be a voice of reason, mentioning that he liked the bread just as it was and he also despised the Church. I felt very ambivalent when it came to his defense of me.

“I still say you’re trying to kill me,” muttered the grumpy old woman.

“No offense, madam, but if Gzrybowski here wanted to kill you for the reasons aforementioned he would have done away with us intellectual adversaries first,” dissented Karl Marx.

“Whatever, you lousy Jew. It’s your people’s fault that we even have a Christianity. Anyway, where’s the last meal Dumbski?”

“That’s Gzrybowski.”

“Whatever.”

I had some remorse about ever even thinking about inviting her as the servants gave the blessing of the last course. Marx was happy to learn that I cooked this one myself: spaghetti with three kinds of tomato sauce, as well as more bread that was warm and melted the butter placed on it, and lastly some champagne for the alcoholic drinkers of the party and cola for the rest. But before we could even take a bite, O’Hair was scolding one of the servants, and said to the one wearing a cross over his outfit in a loud obnoxious voice:

“You stupid little slave, when will you ever stand on your own two feet?”

With that, the “stupid little slave” grabbed the woman by the neck, led her out, and saw her to the ground with a thump, with her cursing extensively in the background as the door was slammed shut. There was silence, with Marx thinking he had seen a proletarian revolution, Aquinas and Cromwell seeing a religious revolt, and the rest just plain knowing better. Voltaire was the one who broke the silence as the servants tacitly left the dining room: “I did not want to hurt that woman, so I am very glad someone else did it for me instead.”

With that, every guest broke out into laughter as well as I. The noise was not loud, but it was long, lasting several moments, only dying down because of self-suppression. With a saying of grace, we went into our well-cooked meal and were pleasantly filled as the clock struck seven. We went on to talk about profound intellectual topics as the night wore on.


Wow. That was awful. My favorite part: "After all, that’s why your ideology never got to expand in Western Europe and America. Some people like their lot in life". I guess that means the poor love poverty. Anyway, here's the kid'ds website ht tp://w ww.cross-nation.co m/dficfaithutmost.ht ml (I'm not at 15 posts yet - cut and paste and get rid of the gaps.)

athon
17th June 2007, 03:25 AM
Not sure what you mean by the story not being copyrighted. If it's published somewhere, it's technically got a copyright.

Otherwise, yeah, a fairly crap piece. Read a million like it. Some even get published.

Athon

laxmatt
17th June 2007, 02:33 PM
Not sure what you mean by the story not being copyrighted. If it's published somewhere, it's technically got a copyright.

Otherwise, yeah, a fairly crap piece. Read a million like it. Some even get published.

Athon
It wasn't published. It's on a website.

http://www.cross-nation.com/dficdinnerpartydead.html

triadboy
17th June 2007, 03:15 PM
“Glad to be here,” said Marx.

Priceless.

calebprime
17th June 2007, 04:06 PM
This should be in humor, though.

I have an unknown fascination with this sentence:


“That is only because they were brought up to believe that it was what was meant to be by Divine Providence,” he said as he slurped more of the soup, which he had an unknown fascination with the hue.


...as he slurped more of the soup, for the hue of which he had an inexplicable fascination. (?)

...as he slurped more of the soup, staring in fascination at his bowl.

...as he slurped his soup, staring distractedly.

"The fools believe in Divine Providence," he said, greedily devouring his soup.

"Fools!" he said, drinking his soup.

That's better.

geni
17th June 2007, 04:23 PM
It wasn't published. It's on a website.

http://www.cross-nation.com/dficdinnerpartydead.html

Um putting something on a website is publishing it.

Cactus Wren
17th June 2007, 08:55 PM
1. This reminds me intensely of the now-defunct website "The Founding Fathers (http://www.clark.net/pub/thomjeff/)", run by someone who used the name "gwash" and posted to Usenet under the name "George Washington". (If anyone knows of a current link for this trainwreck of a page, please post it!) This individual had assembled a series of dreadful comic strips, in which clipart versions of various historic figures gave vent to various opinions and statements "gwash" wanted to attribute to them. These were all curiously coincident with Mr. gwash's own opinions. (Example: he had Benjamin Franklin saying "If you love the girl so much, get MARRIED before you have sex!", and Thomas Jefferson calling an unbeliever "YOU DUFUS BOZO!")

2.:But the first course was served; baize plates filled with mildly simmering tomato soup were put before each guest.The soup was served on plates made of a coarse fabric resembling felt? :confused:

MelBrooksfan
17th June 2007, 09:07 PM
The author seems relentlessly obsessed with his own cleverness. Or lack thereof.

Benjamin Franklin saying "If you love the girl so much, get MARRIED before you have sex!"

I can't imagine Frankling ever saying that. Unless in jest, of course.

Cactus Wren
17th June 2007, 09:47 PM
I doubt he ever would have -- not the Franklin who came up with a list of carefully-thought-out reasons why young men should take old women as mistresses. But this was one of those "He was a smart guy, therefore he agreed with me!" pages.

I'm thinking here of a discussion I had some years ago about Helen Keller: I posted the last two paragraphs of this essay (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/keller-helen/works/1910s/15_12_19.htm), and another user hastened to assure me that I must be mistaken, that those lines must have been written by someone else, not Keller. I gave my source, and pointed out that Keller had been an active Socialist for much of her adult life; my interlocutor argued that either I or my informants were wrong, and that the person referred to must necessarily be some other individual who just happened to share a name with Helen Keller, but certainly not THE Helen Keller. Because, this poster said, she'd always understood Keller to have been quite politically conservative.

I gave further information and sources, including some quotations from How I Became a Socialist (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/keller-helen/works/1910s/12_11_03.htm) in which the author refers specifically to being "blind and deaf", and asked the poster where in the world she'd got the idea that Helen Keller was conservative? She never answered, and in fact dropped out of that thread altogether.

But it's easy to apprehend, if not to understand: She'd always been taught that Helen Keller was someone worthy of respect and admiration. In her mind -- although she almost certainly never expressed it to herself in so many words, or even consciously thought it through -- people who agreed with her on political matters merited her respect and admiration. Therefore ...

hgc
17th June 2007, 10:27 PM
2.:The soup was served on plates made of a coarse fabric resembling felt? :confused:


Not only that, but how was the soup simmering when served on their plates? It's pretty much my experience that tomato soup quits simmering the second you take it off the heat. Were they electric baize plates? And if it's plates, and not bowls, you'd have a very high surface to volume ratio, facilitating even faster heat loss.

quixotecoyote
17th June 2007, 10:31 PM
I've never eaten soup on a plate, have you?

PixyMisa
18th June 2007, 12:36 AM
Bah. Not a patch on The Eye of Argon.

athon
18th June 2007, 12:58 AM
It wasn't published. It's on a website.

http://www.cross-nation.com/dficdinnerpartydead.html

Hence published.

Copyright is an automatic right you get when you produce something. All of my stories, for example, are copyrighted, even those which I've never even printed off.

My illustrations on my web page are also copyrighted by virtue of my having produced them, and are published as they are available for viewing.

In the future just linked with a small (less than 10%) section for preview.

Athon

slingblade
18th June 2007, 01:35 AM
Publishing one's writing isn't copyright, anyway.

Writing is.

Wolfman
18th June 2007, 07:07 AM
Not only that, but how was the soup simmering when served on their plates? It's pretty much my experience that tomato soup quits simmering the second you take it off the heat. Were they electric baize plates? And if it's plates, and not bowls, you'd have a very high surface to volume ratio, facilitating even faster heat loss.
You silly people...you mock that which you do not understand! Obviously he is talking about soup that is served on metallic plates that are heated somehow (electical, flame, whatever). However, serving the soup directly on such a plate, you'd run a risk of burning the soup, or even of having the diner burn themselves if their skin came in contact with the hot metal.

Therefore, he puts a coarse, felt-like fabric over top of the metal, and then serves the soup into that. In this way, it keeps the soup hot for as long as you want, but you don't have to worry about burning yourself. And any soup that does burn is isolated by the coarse, felt-like fabric, so that it does not affect the taste of the rest of the soup.

As to why it is served in plates instead of bowls, in combination with the unique style in which he serves it, it is obvious that he is seeking to challenge his guests by presenting common-place foods in a very unorthodox or uncommon manner; and more indirectly, to challenge his readers, and make them think about what he is writing. I mean, come on...even a writer of Shakespeare's skill would have difficulty transforming something so mundane as drinking soup, into a topic that inspired so much contemplation and inquiry. Yet this author pulls it off flawlessly!

Rather than making fun of this writer, you should all be bowing at his feet for the incredible depth that he incorporates into his work; obviously, it is your lack of ability to comprehend his brilliance, and not any lack on his part, that has led to your hasty condemnations and dismissals.

triadboy
18th June 2007, 08:06 AM
Whatever the explanation - soup is fascinating!

brodski
18th June 2007, 08:14 AM
I've never eaten soup on a plate, have you?


Have you ever heard of a soup plate?

strathmeyer
18th June 2007, 08:29 AM
Have you ever heard of a soup plate?

Actually, no, but I eat out of Tupperware. Let me guess, you're the type of person who has two different types of forks or spoons in their house?

brodski
18th June 2007, 08:35 AM
Actually, no, but I eat out of Tupperware. Let me guess, you're the type of person who has two different types of forks or spoons in their house?

Well, I have tea spoons and desert spoons, because you can’t stir your tea with a dessert spoon, nor eat sufficient quantities of dessert with a tea spoon ;)
I only have one type of fork.

I didn’t say I had any soup plates, but hearing the term “plate” in relation to soup didn’t strike me as odd. :)

Wolfman
18th June 2007, 09:13 AM
brodski,

I've heard the term soup plate before; in fact, we had them in our own home. However, these were small saucers that were placed under the soup bowl, presumably to catch any errant drips or spills. I have never actually had soup served to me on a soup plate.

Which, again, only highlights this writer's brilliance.

brodski
18th June 2007, 09:17 AM
brodski,

I've heard the term soup plate before; in fact, we had them in our own home. However, these were small saucers that were placed under the soup bowl, presumably to catch any errant drips or spills. I have never actually had soup served to me on a soup plate.

Which, again, only highlights this writer's brilliance.

Perhaps “soup plate” has more than one meaning then- to me it means a very wide, shallow dish with a wide rim, in which soup is served, not the plate which is placed below a soup bowl.

ETA- like these http://www.civilization.ca/hist/cadeau/cadso00e.html

Beerina
18th June 2007, 09:17 AM
the Franklin who came up with a list of carefully-thought-out reasons why young men should take old women as mistresses.

Yeah, that sounds a little better.

All I have to say about this is I wish someone had told it to me when I was younger, weighed 185, and could bench press 260. En route to see The Matrix as a mid-30-something with my buddy, we had a couple of drinks in a bar. Looking around, there was an inordinate number of women in their mid-40's and up.

"Holy crap!" I exclaimed. "This is a middle-aged meat market!"

"Noooo...," drooled my friend. "Well, maybe..."

Yeah, I'd have hauled my 19 year old body in there and swooned, "take me! Use me! I need some edumication on the ways of llife!"

Rodney Dangerfield: You know what's great about teachers? If you do it wrong, they make you do it over

blobru
18th June 2007, 10:52 AM
Then there's this narrative nugget:
By nature I am good at suppressing my emotions, so my countenance did not expose to my seven famous and infamous guests my elation, which was to the point of having me look like a cover band leader meeting the group he models.
He feels like Beatlemania's top moptop about to meet the Fab Four
(or Seven -- Best, Sutcliffe; Madalyn Murray O'Hair... Yoko?) yet
"Greetings, welcome Marx and Arouet,” I said.

“Glad to be here,” said Marx.

“Please, sir, call me Voltaire,” said Arouet.

“Vol?—“

“Taire, Voltaire. That is my preferred name.”
apparently has never heard of "Voltaire". :confused:

With that kind of attention to detail, a wonder Gzrybowski doesn't serve the soup in easter baskets and have them eat it with bicycle chains.

grayman
18th June 2007, 11:46 AM
I have a craving now for gazpacho. Anyone know where I can get some? (alas, few have heard of it where I dwell)

MelBrooksfan
18th June 2007, 11:51 AM
Then there's this narrative nugget:

He feels like Beatlemania's top moptop about to meet the Fab Four
(or Seven -- Best, Sutcliffe; Madalyn Murray O'Hair... Yoko?) yet

apparently has never heard of "Voltaire". :confused:

With that kind of attention to detail, a wonder Gzrybowski doesn't serve the soup in easter baskets and have them eat it with bicycle chains.

I'm sure you're being sarcastic, but in the event you're not: It seems to be a lame attempt to show off how clever he is by showing that he knows Voltaire's real name. I supposed we're supposed to be wowed by this.

That or a really short and impotent attempt at suspense.

brodski
18th June 2007, 11:54 AM
I have a craving now for gazpacho. Anyone know where I can get some? (alas, few have heard of it where I dwell)

I ordered some at a restaurant once, and the buggers tried to serve it me cold[. I never went back there again!






Do I really need a smiley?

Wolfman
18th June 2007, 12:11 PM
Well, if we're choosing favorite bits from this masterful piece of literature, mine would have to be the following:
With that, every guest broke out into laughter as well as I. The noise was not loud, but it was long, lasting several moments, only dying down because of self-suppression.In the previous example, of the sizzling soup in cloth-covered soup plates, we witnessed the author take a plain, ordinary event and transform it into something extraordinary. But here, we are witness to an even more masterful stroke -- the author takes a moment of humor and hilarity, and reduces it to painfully boring banality. The people laugh for a long time...that lasts a whopping "several moments". Despite the obvious hilarity of the moment, nobody laughs loudly; but this demonstration of self-restraint from crass guffaws and gales of laughter is matched by their equal self-restraint in suppressing their laughter...for no apparent reason whatsoever, other than we are only two sentences short of the end of the story, and he still has to cover the topics of finishing their dinner, and engaging in lengthy intellectual discourse. Which, by the way, is another topic in itself...his brilliant stroke of not actually including "profound intellectual topics" in his dialogue, but rather to simply refer to it in closing, and leave it up to the reader to provide the rest.

RebeccaBradley
18th June 2007, 12:31 PM
Note, as well, that profound intellectual topics can only be addressed when the sole woman present has been unceremoniously dumped outside.

RenaissanceBiker
18th June 2007, 12:39 PM
If Gzrybowski ever invites me to dinner, I'll quickly make up an excuse for why I cannot attend. Champagne with spaghetti?

triadboy
18th June 2007, 12:48 PM
That or a really short and impotent attempt at suspense.

Calebprime spotted the suspense thread through this story: it is the constant 'slurping' of soup.

....the horror.....

blobru
18th June 2007, 01:08 PM
With that, every guest broke out into laughter as well as I. The noise was not loud, but it was long, lasting several moments, only dying down because of self-suppression. With a saying of grace, we went into our well-cooked meal...
I'm impressed that after all that self-suppressed, not-loud, long-short, momentous laughter, they were able to keep it together right through grace. I know if I'm trying not to giggle, there's nothing quite like a straight-faced request to an ethereal superbeing to please bless the spaghetti. But I guess that's the difference between dimwits like me and history's great intellects: Aristotle, Marx, Gzrybowski...

It seems to be a lame attempt to show off how clever he is by showing that he knows Voltaire's real name.

He's not quite clever enough to not show how clever he is. ;)

slingblade
18th June 2007, 01:13 PM
Ah, gawd, the passive voice...it hurts! Gaaaaaaaaaaah!

c4ts
18th June 2007, 02:45 PM
I knew Aristotle. That guy was no Aristotle.

laxmatt
20th June 2007, 12:34 AM
Hey - good to know about publishing, copyright, ect. I honestly had no idea. Won't happen again.

Anyway, in keeping with keeping up with this guy's horrible writing, childish ideas, and religious fanaticism, here are two terribly violent pieces he wrote about the Crusades, Faith Utmost Tested and The Persian Cat.

http://www.cross-nation.com/dficfaithutmost.html
http://www.cross-nation.com/dficpersian.html

These are fun to read in the same way Mystery Science Theater 3000 movies are fun to watch. The jokes simply supply themselves.

Here's my favorite quote from "The Persian Cat"
“All who bow down to idols are not of this Crusade,” spoke the words of Leonard; bow in hand whilst still on horseback. The bow was from one of the Saracen warriors he had felled years before. “You are an apostate, Duke of Tours. May your memory as serving Mother Church outlast your sedition.” Duke Kerring of Tours died before making a response to his betrayal. With the village taken, Leonard ordered that all be destroyed, in order to purge the world of the heathen village and guarantee his victory.

And my favorite from "Faith Utmost Tested"

“I demand that you do likewise. If your God is True and mine is False, he will surely keep you alive long enough to fell me in battle...

Then suddenly, Mahound came to a slow gradual halt. His sword soon dropped from his grip and he then dropped to both knees, and in a few moments more dropped prone.

Knights soon arrived from the victorious battleground, and tended to the wounds of Hristosacoft on the very sands he lay in. “My God is the True God…infidel,” he said under his breath. After the battle, the rest of the resistance from Saracens in the Holy Land ceased and two weeks after the battle in the desert, Theodosius Hristosacoft was crowned King of Jerusalem. He would found a royal line that would last for over three hundred years. He would die at age 67 via heart complications. Going to the grave, he knew that his God was True.

Ok, normally I wouldn't care at all about terrible writing. But keep this in mind - this guy considers these stories legit literature. I seriously think we are reading the works of the next Jerry Falwell, Left Behind creator, ect.

Also - the hero in one of his stories directly contradicts what Jesus told Satan in the desert "Thou shall not put you lord god to the test". Slightly amusing - in a Ted Haggard kind of way.

grayman
20th June 2007, 07:42 AM
Then suddenly, Mahound came to a slow gradual halt. His sword soon dropped from his grip and he then dropped to both knees, and in a few moments more dropped prone.
Slightly amusing - in a Ted Haggard kind of way.

Heh. ;)

RebeccaBradley
21st June 2007, 09:02 AM
I did a quick google on the author, and found he only graduated from high school in 2005, which explains a lot. I've taught a number of creative writing courses and workshops, and done hundreds of critiques over the years, and I can slot him into a kind of triage system I worked out for beginning writers.

First, there are the natural-born writers, who already know what they're doing, by instinct. I can't really teach them much, but I can give them feedback, and few pointers and tricks of the trade.

Second, there are those who have little or no natural talent, but are skilled enough with language to be able to learn to write competently, sometimes even well. These are the ones whom I can actually teach something useful.

Third, there are the ones with hopeless tin ears for language. I can help them write more competently (in the sense of sorting out grammatical and technical difficulties), but it's doubtful they will ever write a graceful or interesting sentence.

I'd put this kid in the second category. His nonfiction articles (though the content is execrable) are competently written. His fiction shows no natural talent, but many of the worst flaws are the result of inexperience, the sort of thing that a good writers circle or workshop could help him with. It's clear that he doesn't know had bad they are, or he wouldn't have posted them - but let's not get too cutting about writing that is essentially juvenilia. :)

And he's obviously a bright kid. Maybe he's bright enough eventually to realize how dumb he's being. I get a sense of "the gentleman doth protest too much" from some of his articles....

hgc
21st June 2007, 01:15 PM
I have a craving now for gazpacho. Anyone know where I can get some? (alas, few have heard of it where I dwell)


I had a really nice one, wtih shrimp, the other night at Pearl Oyster Bar. If you go there, get the Lobster Roll. It's the best around.

http://menupages.com/restaurantdetails.asp?areaid=0&restaurantid=4413&neighborhoodid=0&cuisineid=0

http://www.pearloysterbar.com/

Bellatrix
22nd June 2007, 05:00 AM
At first I have to admit I felt sorry for the kid. I'm a writer myself and I know that when your first starting out you can get over excited with the prosect of having people read your work. Then I read the crusade peices. I think someone is playing WoW durring bible study.

RebeccaBradley
22nd June 2007, 10:39 AM
The internet has its perils. Boomers like me have all our most embarrassing juvenilia safely tucked away in a bottom drawer; back in the day, it was hard to get your first piece published, but there was a better chance it would be decently publishable, and an editor would have a crack at it as well before it saw print. Now you can put up stuff that will rightly make you cringe in a few years, but you're stuck with it. And once it's public, it's a legitimate target for criticism. So I'm not saying we shouldn't critique the story, just that we should consider the source.

Even so, I did have to chortle over "Rented his clothes and flags" in the ballad of the Indifferent Man. At least they didn't just steal them. :D

calebprime
22nd June 2007, 11:15 AM
Over the years, I've accumulated enough insight and enough nasty comments from others to suffer from composer's block.

To compose, you need to live in a bubble. It protects you from reality while you work--the reality of chores not done and hopes not achieved. Cannabis helped, for a while, but as Saint Joni Mitchell said, it knocks you on your *ss.

It's a truism that you should remember praise and forget criticism, but my memory works the opposite way. I can remember the place and exact occasion of every humiliation. Sitting with an angry executive producer who said "Well, I guess we bought your theme, it's too late now". Or the time someone gave my music to a man on his deathbed. (Maybe Mozart or Bach would be good enough for that occasion, but not mine.)

Teaching in a conservatory was also pretty fatal, as was having a kid. Those are both bubble-bursters.

If you know some 'music lovers', they will contrast you and your career with Mozart, John Williams, Henry Mancini, Jimi Hendrix, Pat Metheny--even Neil Sedaka. I remember that Henry Mancini comment really hurt, at the time. Now I would be proud to be Henry Mancini.

Your youthful narcissism will wear away. I remember telling my father quite confidently that I would compose as well as Brahms. That was 25 years ago. Now I'd settle for Nancarrow or Harry Partch--experimentalists of no definite stature. One-of-a-kinds.

But a cure for self awareness is at hand. The cure is bad art, or carefree, or eccentric, or just-don't-give-an-8 art. Outsider art. The Shaggs. An album called Music from Left Field. Certain hippie stuff. Mystery Science Theater. This is Spinal Tap. Iron Butterfly. The prose stylings of David Jay Jordan.

The latest thing along those lines was the movie Copying Beethoven. For some reason, it had just the right combination of complete goofiness and earnest reverence for B.'s music. The scenes of him composing with his muse were silly enough to remind me not to take the whole process too seriously.

That's why I love bad writing, in small doses--it frees me up to dare to be...whatever.

RebeccaBradley
22nd June 2007, 11:56 AM
Over the years, I've accumulated enough insight and enough nasty comments from others to suffer from composer's block.


Man, I feel your pain. One reviewer once compared my work to "Eddings on helium meets Pratchett on valium", or something like that. Ouch. As for your wider point: I'd agree that bad art has a charm and validity in its own right, especially as an expression of popular culture and an antidote to elitism; but I'd still like to strive towards "good art", however that is defined. [In writing, good grammar certainly helps. That's half the battle in my writing courses. :) ]

calebprime
23rd June 2007, 08:02 AM
Man, I feel your pain. One reviewer once compared my work to "Eddings on helium meets Pratchett on valium", or something like that. Ouch. As for your wider point: I'd agree that bad art has a charm and validity in its own right, especially as an expression of popular culture and an antidote to elitism; but I'd still like to strive towards "good art", however that is defined. [In writing, good grammar certainly helps. That's half the battle in my writing courses. :) ]

Eddings and Pratchett are both fantasy/sci-fi writers? We read our 9-year old son a lot of fantasy fiction--Harry Potter and such. Finding good writing of this type makes a huge difference to us. The Hobbit was a really good example of a book that worked for the grown-ups and the boy. Right now we're reading The Sea of Monsters by Rick Riordan. Can you recommend other books?

As for good art vs. bad art--I'm an elitist, but one who needs to shut down the inner critic so the inner idiot can play. The older I get, the more the inner critic dominates.

I'm reminded of the movie Adaptation.

RebeccaBradley
25th June 2007, 02:08 PM
Caleb, sorry not to post sooner - busy weekend. Yeah, Eddings and Pratchett are fantasy writers. I've never actually read Eddings (I write fantasy, but I don't read it much), however Terry Pratchett's books are hilarious and also fun to read out loud. My kids also loved The Hobbit, but LOTR proved impossible to read to them; Tolkien had this way of stopping the narrative to smell the flowers (or admire the scenery) a bit too frequently to keep the junior listeners interested. I can't really think of any authors to recommend (except me, of course - :D ) but I think there's a useful thread about this on the Literature forum.

Back to this topic: looking at the Grybowski kid's website, I see he has a whole section huffing about a previous time his work was discussed on the JREF forum. I wonder if this thread will make the cut?