The old man is panting as he reaches the summit. The small of his back twists with ache, bending him forward as if into a wind. He stumbles, legs barely able to support him.
Hell of a place to choose for a meeting, he mutters.
An eagle soars effortless on thermals, and a breeze carries the scent of lemons. A bush bursts into flame. The prophet selects a chisel from his satchel and prepares to take dictation.
I know what you’re thinking, but you are mistaken. Just because something didn’t happen doesn’t make it untrue.
Friday fictioneers is a weekly challenge set by Rochelle Wisoff Fieldsto write a 100-word story in response to a photo prompt. You can find other stories here
I’m having major connectivty problems, so please forgive me if I’m not able to comment on your post
“Heinous. So proud of our great military. Slam dunk. Goodbye slime ball.”
He clicked some missiles.
Friday fictioneers is a weekly challenge set by Rochelle Wisoff Fields to write a 100-word story in response to a photo prompt. You can find other stories here.
I found Christophe’s little repair shop tucked away under the railway arches. There was nothing he couldn’t fix. Springs and gears cluttered his bench, bits of old toasters and gizmos whose purpose I couldn’t imagine.
“I need these words repurposed,” I said, dropping the Gladstone bag on his counter. Some tarnished verbs slipped out.
He picked one. “Flense,” he said, turning it over and examining it with a jeweller’s loupe. “Tricky”
While I waited, I leafed through an antique volume, became lost in the tale.
“Where was I?”
“Working a story,” he said. “I’m afraid I involved your body in slaying some dragons.”
Friday fictioneers is a weekly challenge set by Rochelle Wisoff Fields to write a 100-word story in response to a photo prompt. You can find other stories here
An anthology of 32 stories about climate change. One of them is mine. Profits go to the Earth Day network.
A schoolboy inspired by a conservation hero to do his bit.
A mother trying to save her family and her farm from drought.
A world that doesn’t get dark anymore.
And a city that lives in a tower slowly being taken over by the sea.
These stories and many more make up a poignant collection that is sometimes bleak, sometimes lighthearted, but always hopeful that we can make a change.
Published on 22 April, 2018 you can order from Amazon
Yeah, I wasn’t surprised when they came. The truth is out there, you know. No, no. Don’t stand directly underneath – they can beam you up that way.
What do you mean they’re lamps? Don’t you get it? That’s what they want us to think. Well, if you’re so smart tell me what the message means.
The message for crissakes, the one they’re projecting on the window. Look, one bar, then two, then three. Arithmetic, right? But look at the first one. That, my friend, is their encyclopaedia, their gift, if you know how to read it.
Friday fictioneers is a weekly challenge set by Rochelle Wisoff Fields to write a 100-word story in response to a photo prompt. You can find other stories here
The guest post is still scheduled. I can now report on the other two.
Building an e-mail list
I used MailChimp to mail a newsletter to a list of 158 people who follow my blog and/or who have commented regularly and thoughtfully on my writing. The draft newsletter was pilot tested with nine people.
The mailing didn’t go hugely well. Yes, on the one hand the response was well above industry benchmarks. On average, 22% of e-mails in the media and publishing industry are opened. My open-rate was 42.7%. Again, the industry benchmark for “click rate” (clicking on “subscribe”) is 4.66%, while in my case it was 14.6%.
But something went horribly wrong. I should have received 23 subscription notifications. But I only got three. Some people told me independently that they had signed up, bringing my e-mail list to eight. So, I’m missing 15 subscriptions. I guess I made some mistake with MailChimp.
The Scribophile writing community
Scribophile is a large members-only community of writers, and claims 858,776 critiques for 145,608 works, an average of just under six responses per work. Being a closed group, it has the advantage that it shouldn’t prevent you submitting your work elsewhere. I joined it last month, and I’m pretty impressed.
It runs, like any successful community, on the basis of reciprocity. You can’t post your own writing without first contributing, most particularly by critiquing others’ work. There are groups for people with particular interests, bulletin boards, competitions. And, of course, posting your writing for critique. I’ve used it to test out whether readers will tolerate breaking some pretty fundamental rules about first chapters.
I’m a newbie on the site – you start with the rank of “Scribbler” and can rise to “Scribomaster”; I have reached the dizzying heights of Typesetter. Despite that, I can track 16 visits to my blog originating from Scribophile. I also have 13 followers on the site.
The meeting broke up early. You’d think it would take days to reach such a decision, but only fifty-three minutes had passed, I walked with the President in the gardens. On the lawn a peacock called, the sound rasping and full of anguish.
“All of them?” I said. “Must they all die?”
The President brushed hair from her eyes. It was a weary gesture. “You know the answer. If even one survives, this will get out.”
Beyond the walls, I heard the rumble as the tanks moved off.
Friday fictioneers is a weekly challenge set by Rochelle Wisoff Fields to write a 100-word story in response to a photo prompt. You can find other stories here
Do we need to be scared of big data and its claimed spooky ability to know more about us than our partners, to mould our behaviour like puppeteers?
An e-mail dropped into my inbox today from Amazon. I won’t name the book or the author the tech giant’s algorithm was trying to market to me. Usually I delete Amazon’s recommendations unread, but this time I looked at the book. Not because I expected I’d want to read it, but because I wanted to understand the marketing. The book was described as “An emotional psychological thriller with a twist.” That already annoyed me: why both psychological and emotional? And, yeah, of course it has a twist. The only thing it didn’t tell me is what reading level I need in order to follow the prose.
I began to read the taster. It began with an odd question. That was designed to intrigue and to hook my attention. The meaning of the question is explained by the bottom of the first page, in case my patience flags. There’s a hammer-beat of short staccato sentences, designed to lunge for my heart. There’s a bit of backstory. Hmm. Backstory on the first page? That’s a mistake when we’re supposed to be in the relentless attention-grabbing now.
The machine algorithm is marketing something to me I wouldn’t read in a million years. Primarily because it feels like it was assembled by a machine according to a formula. Facebook’s algorithms keep showing me pictures of cute dogs. Actually, it’s my wife who’s keen on cute dogs, not me.
My point is despite all that machine learning and big data, these two tech giants still have little clue who I am and what I like.
So, exactly how afraid should we be of Cambridge Analytica? The data breach that allowed the company to harvest the details of 50 million Facebook users is undoubtedly serious. But did it get Donald Trump elected President of the US? Did similar dirty tricks swing the Brexit referendum in the UK? Let’s examine what they’re able to do with the data.
The core of the data analysis seems to be a personality quiz app, developed by a Cambridge University academic and downloaded by 27,000 people. The quiz broke people down into groups, dominated by traits like agreeableness, openness, neuroticism etc. We’ve all done such tests in magazines. There are 72 different online personality tests available on the website of Cambridge University’s (not to be confused with Cambridge Analytica) Psychometrics Centre. Clearly this is not an exact science.
What was different in this case was the ability to look for correlations between the personality quiz results and Facebook records, such as what people liked. Here it does start to get a bit more sinister. For example,a 2013 research paper by three academics from the Psychometrics Centre showed that it was possible to predict intimate information about a person from their Facebook likes, information such as sexuality and political leanings.
In some cases, the correlations were pretty obvious – liking the “No H8” campaign and being gay. In others they were less clear. For example, users who liked the “Hello Kitty” brand tended to be high on “Openness” and low on “Conscientiousness”, “Agreeableness”, and “Emotional Stability”. They were also more likely to have Democratic political views (75%) and to be of African-American origin (82%), predominantly Christian (69%), and slightly below average age.
While it’s not precise, what this does is allow micro-targeting. Instead of standing at a hustings and bellowing the same message to everyone, a political candidate can whisper different messages to different groups – threat messages to the fearful, for example, and optimistic messages to the bold. The Cambridge Analytica whistle-blower, Christopher Wylie, said this is exactly what the company did.
Was that enough to lose Hilary Clinton the US presidential election? We don’t yet know. A scientific test would require demonstration that micro-targeted ads outperform random ads in changing consumer actions. But my guess is that Cambridge Analytica was better at marketing itself to sleazy clients than it was at targeting and changing voters’ behaviour. Predicting personality attributes is not the same thing as changing behaviour. And, despite the hype, it’s not at all clear that the algorithm is any better at prediction than a human would be. If Amazon can’t even get my reading preferences right, what chance big data can make me vote for someone whose politics I don’t like?
I don’t just write – I write myself at the same time as the stories. Or at least, I explore myself in the act of writing, and discover things I didn’t know.
There are now enough novels under my belt (five) to constitute an oevre (yay). As an avid analyser, I can now explore what this tells me.
Each novel is a in a different genre. The first is an amalgam of detective, sci-fi, and psychological thriller. The second, is literary travel– a journey of the mind coupled with a journey to an exotic location. The third, historical fantasy. The fourth, an amalgam of historical and detective. The fifth is again literary, and a romantic political thriller. So, if I don’t follow a genre (almost certainly a marketing mistake) what do my books have in common that marks them as mine?
The main male character is almost always flawed and, at least in part, hard to like. They are often unreliable narrators. The only exception to this is the historical fantasy novel.
Edvard Munch The Scream
The stories are almost always told in close third or first person by a single narrator. Again, the historical fantasy novel is the exception. In this one I experimented with multiple point-of-view characters.
The stories are multi-threaded. There is usually a surface narrative which conforms roughly to a genre format, and then there are other threads. The fifth book, The Tears of Boabdil, does this is spades. There is a fairly simple story of an undercover policeman attempting to penetrate what he believe is a terrorist cell, and falling for the sister of the cell’s leader. Yet there is little of the tension you would expect from a thriller because the narrator gives away in the first chapter most of what subsequently happens. This follows the advice of Boris Fishman
If your story has a secret reveal it from the top.
The drama of the story is in how the protagonist deals with his secret. But there are also magic realist elements of a parallel story of a wandering minstrel in Moorish Spain. What connects both of these strands, which begin to interweave, is a commentary on truth in which identity becomes the story we tell ourselves and other people.
There is a common human preoccupation behind all of these stories. The main character is usually confused or conflicted about what is really important to him. Though there are antagonists in all but the literary travel story, the real barrier to be overcome is internal. Many of the lead characters are of dubious sanity. There is often a helper character who is female and who is usually strong and whole. In some of the stories, the confusion gets the better of the protagonist. In others, he overcomes his barrier.
There is a political (with a small “p”) preoccupation behind many of these stories. Part of what the protagonist confronts is social injustice, and the way in which different cultures or sub-cultures get labelled as “other”. The politics is most explicit in the historical fantasy novel, which tracks the attempt of two very different Kings to maintain the integrity of their realms and the allegiance of their peoples.
Now that is all pretty interesting to me (though whether it is to you, only you can say). I hadn’t set out with the intention of writing flawed protagonists. Noble heroes are much easier to like (though arguably much less interesting). Readers identify with heroes, but their sympathy is engaged by flaws. So I guess, a first principle of my writing is
Your protagonist doesn’t have to be likeable, but s/he does have to be interesting
Malcolm McDowell as Alex in A Clockwork Orange
Am I using my characters’ flaws to explore something in myself? Possibly, but if so, I don’t know what it might be. The characters all have different flaws. I don’t think they’re me, though each of them has some aspect of me. I didn’t consciously decide to write conflicted protagonists. It just happened. So, I reassure myself that I just enjoy the depth that a flawed character allows.
The preoccupation with what things mean is definitely me, and the idea that we are all stories is certainly a recurring theme. The first book is even called Identity.
Facts are everything that exists. Stories are the connections between them. Stories tell us what goes with what, what is important and what is unimportant, who to praise and who to blame.
The multi-threading is also a signature. I like stories with layers, especially where the layers “rhyme”. Just as a piece of music is dull if it only has a simple beat and melody, so with a story.
Complexity rewards the reader’s attention when s/he recognises recurring motifs. Complexity also adds ambiguity, blurring certainty. It makes the reader part of the story’s construction, because there is no single reading, there are as many stories as there are readers. A story only belongs to the author up to the moment of publication. From then on, it belongs to the readers.
Images and metaphors from myth and religion recur frequently in my work, even more so in the short stories. Which is odd really, since I’m not religious. Or maybe I am, and I just don’t know it. I wrote a story, Cara’s Saga, which is a deliberate bricolage (a delicious French world, meaning a construction from a variety of a diverse range of things). And that, of course, is the attraction of bricolage. The story invents a world which is part Inca, part Australian aboriginal, part Canadian northwest seaboard, wrapped up in a homage to Norse sagas. I loved writing it. The Sumerian goddess Ishtar is a character in The Tears of Boabdil.
And there’s a clue there to the pre-occupation underlying it. I’ve been planning to write for most of my working life, but decided not to (at least not write fiction) until I could write whatever I damned well pleased without having to worry about whether it was commercial. I always imagined I’d write science fiction. And yet, I’ve written very little of that genre. I like to explore different worlds, both for the curiosities I encounter there and for the underlying music of the universal human spirit at work. It turns out that the most interesting worlds to me are not those with elves and dragons (I actively dislike elves and dragons), or empires in other galaxies. The most interesting worlds are those inside people’s heads. I’m interested in the ways that people understand things, and how that makes them act.
Stories should take us to places we’ve never been before, and introduce us to characters we’ve never met before. The writer constructs a new world for us. But you don’t have to cross galaxies to do this. Inside every head there is a world which, to the rest of us, is unimaginably different and strange. Since we can never enter these worlds in reality, it’s the job of fiction to take us there and show us our friends, our partners, and our children as they really are.
If we were all aliens beneath the skin, that would be as scary as the pod people in the classic (McCarthy era and anti-communist) sci-fi movie Invasion of the Body Snatchers. So the work of fiction is not to render people as “other” but as (at least in part) delightfully like us. We have to be able to understand and empathise with the alien universes inside their heads.
I think getting a handle on how those mystifying creatures around me think and feel and construct meaning is my main motivation for writing.
And that’s probably why I’m so drawn to religion and myth. I wasn’t even really aware of this until I was doing a reading at a “Lit Live” event in Frensham and the poet, Jo Young asked me why I used so much religious reference. The impulse is literary, not a religious. These are simply great stories, the best our species has created. And why are they so great? Because they have been the glue which binds communities and peoples together. They express universal longings and fears, and explain, in their distinct and unique ways, cultures to themselves.
Religion and myth are a wonderful toolkit of story pieces.
Like an electronic hobbyist, the writer can take characters and themes and events from them, and plug these into the circuit board of a story. And when narrative current is passed through them, they resonate with deep energy that draws in the freight of hundreds or thousands of years of storytelling.
We called them the witch’s tits. On account of their shape, you know – sharp cones. Before we named the peaks, this was just an ordinary mountain track. Afterwards, well you could feel it, the cold I mean, a kind of chill in your heart as you rounded the corner.
I think it was Harry who named the force – Ishtar, an ancient Queen of Heaven, who destroyed her lovers. Anyhow it was Henry She took for her own that day. We heard a wail and he vanished. That’s why we made the warning sign. Nobody takes this road now.
Friday fictioneers is a weekly challenge set by Rochelle Wisoff Fieldsto write a 100-word story in response to a photo prompt. You can find other stories here