Cole Parker
-
Posts
9,058 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
15
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Cole Parker
-
-
You ARE special, dearie. We all know that.
Now come and have your tea.
C
-
I thought the article superb. It gives one hope.
C
-
Okay, I read the link, but it sure didn't make clear why there is no jail time being considered.
C
-
Thanks for the invite, but my bubbling paranoia gets in the way. Im just sure, absoltuely and totally sure, that if I write sometihng, someone else will post that chapter just ahead of me, and I'll be left with egg all over my face. And so I desist.
C
-
What POV an author uses should depend on how he wants the story to develop, what the focus of it will be, and plot concerns that are involved in this decision.
In everything I write, I ask myself what the POV should be to best allow the story to be told the way I want it to be told. It is not a matter of what's easier for me, but rather what carries the story to the reader the way I want it to be carried.
Writing allows you to do most anything you want, if you're creative enough, and so I disagree a little with my colleagues when they say 1st person only allows you into the thoughts of your protagonist. I find it easy to show the thoughts of anyone in a story at all. I merely have them speak them. It's not exactly the same, there are other considerations involved, but it's close enough for jazz.
I usually write in 1st person because my stories tend to be much more character driven than plot driven. 1st person allows me to delve deeply into my charcter's thoughts and musings, and so allows the reader to get to know who he is better, and, hopefully, identify with him more closely.
I don't really think 1st person is easier to write in than 3rd person. I do think 3rd person gives you greater freedom, greater ease, to introduce things to the story that you have to work a little harder to introduce from the main character's perspective. If I were to write a story that involved things that were happening away from and not involving the main character, I'd probably choose 3rd person to write it in. Again, the story itself commands the decision.
The question, as stated, of whether one POV was superior to another, or whether amateurs would choose one over another, isn't really relevant. You could as easily answer if chocolate is superior to butterscotch, or if Charles Dickens was a better writer than Jane Austen.
Cole
-
But James, if we don't tell them that, they'll realize it sooner than we want them to, and then they'll be telling us what to do.
Then the only ones left for us to boss around will be the women.
C
-
Probably no coincidence. The mask sort of gives him away.
C
-
I realized I do have something else to say about this story.
I hope you weren't being paid by the word.
C
-
Very clear time frame, but the time frame wasn't really the issue here, was it?
No, I think not.
Cryptic. I said it and I stand behind it.
C<g>
-
Cryptic as usual. He gets a kick out of this.
C
-
So you're suggesting someone took the Internet down for repairs?
Or, for you conspiracy nuts, took it down to implant tracking devices?
Uh oh.
C
-
Sounds more like The Beginning to me.
C
-
Okay, okay, obviously we have to dispense with xenophobia,
although it's somewhat ironic that a foreigner would object to a foreign word
and that word would be xenophobia. Go figure.<g>
Is this better?
All babies create drool excessively, frequently gurgling hilariously. It's justifiable kitsch,
like many natural occurrences. People quirkily repeat silly taradiddles:
uselessly voicing witticisms, xeroxing yesterday's zingers.
C
-
As usual, Des, your logic is impeccable, your writing is captivating, and you've convinced me. She's certainly as ass.
Too bad we can't arrange a debate between the two of you.
Of course, debating with someone to whom logic is merely another word for sinful (and she's got a lot of such words) could be very vexing.
I'd ask if you were up to it, but you keep convincing me that you're up for most anytihng.
C
-
Trab, I was talking about having to twiddle my thumbs for 20-second intervals.
I do write fairly quickly, but that's absurd.
You're taking flash fiction to a whole new level.<g>
And where, may I ask, is your alphabetically induced 26-word challenge piece? I expected you to have fun with that.
C
-
Damn and blast!
I hate waiting for anything.
A personality quirk. Some people, rude people, call it a personality fault.
But I hate waiting.
Anyway, it's a little better now than it was earlier today.
C
-
Thanks.
C
-
As has been readily apparent, I know less about computers than most anything else.
So I have a question for most anyone else here.
Normally, at AD, when I go to read a forum entry, or post a reply, the time between my clicking to open something and it being open is a matter of maybe a second.
Today, it's taking about 20 seonds. When you're used to one second and it extends to twenty times that, it seems like forever.
Is anyone else experiencing this delay, or is it only me?
C
-
I think someone mentioned the word 'barbarians'.
I rest my case again.<g>
C
-
Trab, I have absolutely no idea how much time you've spent looking soulfully into the eyes of cows ( or is it bulls, in your case? ) and I accept that some people do that<g>, but I don't think you can compare it to befriending a dog. Dogs come when called. Cows just chew. Dogs fetch with delight when tossed something. Cows get tossed over by drunked teens; there isn't much in common there. Dogs pass gas and everyone winces. Cows do it and scientists, low level and over matched ones, are thinking about how to heat a village with the output. Is that the village that's going to raise our children? Hope they have abundant clothespins for their little noses. Dogs are man's best freind. Cows are man's best meal.
Where chickens come into the mix, I'll leave to you. Breaded or not.
C<g>
-
James, there's a cynicism there that I'd like to address.
Yes, men are capable of hate, and that hatred can be blind, and unalterable. Agreed.
But isn't it better if society lets the haters know that their view isn't the majority view any longer? That blind, corrosive hatred isn't the word of the day any longer? That their opinon, their hate, isn't universal, and certainly isn't a universal truth?
I think we've progressed as a nation, as a society, because we've addressed the underpinnings of some of the hatred that's been with us since our beginnings. Three of the biggies have been racial intolerance, sexual orientation intolerance and religious intolerance. It's only been relatively recently that these intolerances have been rejected in our schools, legally enjoined, and then discussed openly in classrooms. By doing this, we've opened the ears of kids to messages other than what their parents have said. We've taught that blind hatred is wrong. Prejudices are not so easily being passed from generation to generation because now a different message is being taught, and kids are hearing it. Not too many years ago, most kids ended up thinking like their parents did about race, orientation and religion. Today, many kids have rejected their parents' intolerance and seen their hatred for what it is. Seeing it, and undestanding they have a choice to make, many have turned away from it.
Yes, some people are going to hate, and it's better to know their views. But I think by addressing their hatred, talking about it, disecting it, and teaching kids that there are better ways, we've moved forward as a society.
Cole
-
Exactly! I rest my case.
C
-
Hey, I like froglegs. They're yummy!
But do frogs walk up to you and lay their heads in your lap and look soulfully into your eyes with large and caring ones of their own?
I've never known any frogs like that.
C
-
Telling the parents their son was gay just has such a slimy feel to it. It feels like the girl can't wait to reveal a huge, dramatic secret. It feels like she's trying to get off the hook of being accused of being a party to his death. It feels like she's slapping them in the face after they've slapped her. There's an ugliness in it that speaks of the worst parts of human nature.
She should not tell the parents their son had told her he was gay. That statement was made to her as private information. The fact he's now dead does not mitigate her responsiblity to keep it private. If they learn that fact from another source, at that time she might feel free to discuss it with them, but otherwise, it was confidential information and nothing has changed that fact. I've never seen such poor advice from DA.
From the article we have no idea how close the parents and the girl are. If they have very little contact, then my answer to her would have been, simply tell the parents you're sorry for the loss of their son, you're grieving too, you've lost a good friend and that hurts, and that unfortunately no one, not you, not them, knows exactly why he took his life, but as the two of you were still great friends and you both talked a lot after the breakup, you know the ending of your romantic relationship with him had nothing to do with his death. Then walk away from them if they want to argue or castigate.
Cole
Scan to donate
NZ teen convicted of cyber crime
in The Web Wiz
Posted
I didn't see any reference to that in the article I read.
C