feedmyleg posted:

Just my two cents: the more this project adds new elements and strays away from the intentions of the source material, the less it feels like a worthwhile pursuit. In my opinion the best possible version of this primarily fixes and deepens the original text. Transforming it into a whole new book by adding additional subplots, factions, characters, and story elements just makes it feel like it's roaming outside of "interesting experiment" territory and into "writing fan fiction about an awful novel" territory.

If it's so different from the original that all characters, motivations, dynamics, and plot mechanics are substantially different than Cline set out to write, then just... write an original work that takes some elements you like and do your own riff on the core concepts.

Burkion posted:

So I've started skimming this thread, excuse me if I suggest something that has already been discussed. Keeping things true to the novel is ideal, like feed said, but there are some things in the novel that barely get any lip service or get no attention at all. The main thing is that Halliday should be presented the way he actually is- a deluded, sad old man whose only happiness were in the few things that he could distract himself with from his lovely home life. A man who, with his last act on Earth, plunged humanity into a creative freefall. A fact that the main character doesn't even realize because now he's Halliday, trying to ignore the world around himself by plunging himself into his own distractions and second hand nostalgia.

Take the stuff like "Wargames was his favorite movie, and so it became mine." And just make it quietly bitter. A bitterness and resentment that Wade would only realize as he goes further and further into the quest, maybe rearing its head during the Wargames game. Watching a movie is one thing, having to live through it is miserable. Key into the fact that the game ultimately does more harm than good, explore how it's made all of culture bankrupt. Maybe add an extra element, take the Aunt character and have her actually care about Wade. Wade just doesn't know it, doesn't realize it, because he's always got his head shoved in the digital clouds. The Aunt can't show it too well because she's stressed out and poor but Wade is the last thing she has of her sister and possibly family.

Basically the villain of the story should be Halliday himself, highjacking the youth of the world and forcing them to live like he did even after he has died

feedmyleg posted:

Just my two cents: the more this project adds new elements and strays away from the intentions of the source material, the less it feels like a worthwhile pursuit. In my opinion the best possible version of this primarily fixes and deepens the original text. Transforming it into a whole new book by adding additional subplots, factions, characters, and story elements just makes it feel like it's roaming outside of "interesting experiment" territory and into "writing fan fiction about an awful novel" territory.

If it's so different from the original that all characters, motivations, dynamics, and plot mechanics are substantially different than Cline set out to write, then just... write an original work that takes some elements you like and do your own riff on the core concepts.

feedmyleg posted:

Fully agreed. Definitely what I was meaning with "deepen". Take what's already there—like Halliday's toxic plan, or Artemis's physical abnormality—and modify it and build connections to other things in the story just enough to make it all have meaning and purpose.

Don't ignore or strip out the fact that Artemis has a portwine stain on her face like I saw some folks doing (which can be much more severe than just a small birthmark), make Wade react poorly when he finally meets her in the real world. Have that be extremely hurtful to her, validating her fears, and have it be harmful to their relationship. Make Wade wrestle with the dichotomy of being attracted to who she is inside, but not initially attracted to what she looks like in the real world. And have him come to understand how that reflects poorly on him, how he needs to overcome his superficiality. Then you can have him extend that thinking and growth to how he thinks about the Oasis and the real world. Make it a metaphor for how people escape into this world to ignore reality rather than deal with it in a healthy and constructive way, creating a spiral of toxic fantasy pursuit where people can ignore the problems of the real world by pretending they don't exist. Have Artemis struggle with the fact that this is true, but that being able to create an avatar in the Oasis allows her to feel comfortable with presenting herself to people without their biases and unconscious judgements becoming a barrier, but also recognize that it's a toxic force too. Just like, you know, the internet. Or take it a different way and have the portwine stain be barely noticeable, but then play up Artemis's insecurities about it and make her lie to Wade about who she is in the real world. Show how she internalized her insecurities and turned them into self-hatred. How the Oasis enabled her in running away from her acceptance of self. Or a million other interesting things you could do with what's currently on the page.

In other words, draw from what's already in the book, rather than adding new external things. It's a fine line, but I think having the outcome of the project be a better version of what Ready Player One is would be a lot more interesting than just writing the best possible book based on a bunch of the elements that Cline put into play, alongside a bunch of other stuff y'all wish was in there or think would be cool to add.

Sham bam bamina! posted:

Feel free to substitute Blade Runner 2049

quote:

I don’t remember what color the sky was when Halliday died.

I didn’t see it much, even when looking out the laundry room window. The other stack across the way filled up most of my view. When I actually left my unit, I kept my head to the ground and on a swivel for anyone coming out of an alley (which was often, since alleys were the only thing separating stacks). And when I was inside, I had more pressing things to pay attention to.

The date’s easy to find, though, if you Google it. December 2nd, 2090. According to weather.com, Oklahoma City was cloudy that day with a high of 39 degrees Fahrenheit and a low of 27 degrees. At the moment his heart made its final beat, the wind was 6 miles per hour and blowing northwest. Brain cells begin to die after 4 to 6 minutes without blood flow, so I suppose the humidity was around 24% when James Halliday ceased to exist. Give or take.

What I remember is that I was 14 years old when the school day was interrupted by a window that appeared on everybody’s visor. I think it might have been my US History (Basic) class, but a lot of these OASIS teachers look interchangeable so my memory is a bit fuzzy then. I remember that even he stopped mid-sentence, which is how I know that “everybody” meant everybody.

The window was black at first, with the title bar along the top simply reading “Anorak’s Invitation”. It piqued my interest; just about every announcement from the CEO came from Anorak, but usually in the form of emails. Stopping everything to force people to listen? Now that was something.

The first sound we all heard in our headphones was a distorted guitar, just long enough to get us interested. And then it seemed like every instrument possible struck at once. “All dressed up and nowhere to go….”

Darth Walrus posted:

In case you’re wondering, this is what BOTL was getting at about prose as explained by someone actually trying to be helpful and informative. It’s actually quite interesting.

chitoryu12 posted:

My two points on that:

1. Mass market writing isn't inherently bad, merely a good vessel for bad books. Describing a book as cozy and entertaining is still admitting that it's entertaining, even if you're upset that it didn't do something deeply artistic and unusual. Demanding that all fiction be written in the most maximally artistic ways is not unlike denouncing that any artwork except surrealism or cubism is just mass market trash, and that's how you get hipsters.

Mel Mudkiper posted:

I feel like its fundamentally depressing for a writer to believe their book is of so little value to not be worth writing well. The idea of a writer setting out to create a product that doesn't provide anything other tha base and indistinct entertainment is painfully capitalist.

I would also argue that the idea of good writing and experimental writing are not the same. Not every good writer writes like Faulkner or Joyce. Hemingway is the greatest English prose stylist in history and one would be hard pressed to call his craft experimental or avant garde.

Darth Walrus posted:

I suppose one thing - which you’ve already touched on slightly - that might help the medium be the message is to incorporate this culture’s obsession with an Eighties wonderland into the prose. Similes and phrases from ancient TV shows, speeches in the cadence of Claremont X-Men comics (god help us) - art is the language of culture, and we could really delve deep into how such a stagnant culture expresses itself through that language.

That does rather depend on how all-enveloping we want the OASIS to be, though.

quote:

If, as seems likely, Mussolini and other prominent members of the Fascist hierarchy have been shot by the Italian partisans without trial or argument, no one in the Allied countries will complain. These men were as guilty as any. They were sufficiently notorious to make identification easy. They richly deserved their fate. The method cannot be taken as a precedent, but many will feel that there is a certain rough justice about these swift and passionate executions which may be lacking from the cold-blooded judicial trials of which we shall have all too many before we are finished. Of the dead men only one has earned a place in history. Mussolini, the inventor of Fascism and the first modern dictator, was a man of no ordinary ability. This rough, shrewd, ambitious peasant was the first to discover the modern road to power. Long before Hitler he found an army among the down-and-outs, the unemployed, the ex-Service men, the whole tribe of "armed Bohemians" left over from the first world war. And long before Hitler he realised the power of propaganda as an instrument to support his rule. For this last he was exceptionally suited. A journalist, he had himself a flamboyant, effective style both in writing and speaking, which, unfortunately, he has bequeathed to the Italy that has got rid of him. A true Italian, he perfectly understood the dramatic gesture which so appeals to a nation with an operatic tradition.

In one respect Mussolini was always easier understand than Hitler. He was no fanatic, but a cynic who in private would often talk in a reasonable and intelligent manner. His foreign policy, therefore, was more predictable. In the early days at least he had no love for Hitler or for Germany, which he rightly regarded as the supreme threat to Italian independence. But when his absurd dreams of empire had led him into the Abyssinian adventure he was forced into the arms of Germany. The half-hearted policy of "sanctions" did not save Abyssinia but only made the Axis certain. Like the leaders of the democracies Mussolini underrated Hitler, whom he naturally despised as an intellectual inferior who had copied his example. At the same time he overrated the power of Italy and the loyalty of Italians to the Fascist Government. It is now clear that, for all their criminal folly, the Italian people never wholly accepted the denial of liberty, the cruelty and corruption, which went with Fascism. Many, too many unfortunately, liked to be told that Italy was a great and martial nation, but when it came to the point they were at once too sensible and too civilised to follow their leader to the end. If Italian fascism was less horrible than German Nazism, one must thank the Italian people and not Mussolini. As it is, his crimes were sufficient. The Murder of Matteotti and the invasion of Spain, to name only two, are not easily forgotten. But Mussolini's greatest crime was to have been the inventor and creator of that evil disease which has so nearly brought Europe to ruin. He was the first Fascist, and as such will stand infamous in history.

chitoryu12 posted:

A book doesn't stop being an artistic effort simply because it's easy to read and understand, any more than a book starts being good art when the prose gets more purple or the author starts making a failed effort to imitate Hemingway or Steinbeck. The book remains written as a narrative in Wade Watts' head, and thus should be written in a way that a socially awkward teenage nerd would describe his situation. The difference is that we're actually making him a character with feelings, rather than a walking list of pop culture references.

Mel Mudkiper posted:

I feel like its fundamentally depressing for a writer to believe their book is of so little value to not be worth writing well. The idea of a writer setting out to create a product that doesn't provide anything other tha base and indistinct entertainment is painfully capitalist.

I would also argue that the idea of good writing and experimental writing are not the same. Not every good writer writes like Faulkner or Joyce. Hemingway is the greatest English prose stylist in history and one would be hard pressed to call his craft experimental or avant garde.

Mrenda posted:

There's often a pride expressed in reading. "I looked around the hospital waiting room and everyone was on their phone! Not ONE person, [apart from me is implied,] reading a book!" I'm fine with reading being escapist. I'm fine with trash fiction. There are plenty of people who work hard all day long, they're tired, stressed, and their night with a book is a relief. These people might work physically active jobs, thought intensive jobs, they might be standing in one spot giving a pre-written response to the same question from a series of hundreds of people. A book that helps them switch off is fine by me. The difference is people somehow put that reading above watching a procedural crime show. They see that as somehow more worthy than watching a crime lab technician solve a murder.

Language and prose might be one way to value a story (keeping in mind, as you pointed out, the difference between Hemmingway, and Joyce and Faulkner.) The ideas present might be another. The exploration of the human condition, loss, grief, joy, hate, anger. The exploration of human interaction. All of this can have value for making greater (humanity.) But there still needs to be a line drawn between books which set out to achieve this, and books that are written for other purposes. Not all reading has the same goal, and not all writing is a grand achievement of human creativity, thought or ambition. The idea that books are a good thing, that reading is a valuable thing, no matter what, is having a horrific effect its environment.

chitoryu12 posted:

Would it work better for you guys if I tweaked the remainder of the chapter for a day or two and then posted the rest so we can move on to Chapter 2, or would it be best for me to post the draft I've got right now to see how it's working?

Sham bam bamina! posted:

I don't think that this goon project will end very well.

Clipperton posted:

even if this project gets abandoned tomorrow it's already made the forums a better place (for a week anyway)

Mel Mudkiper posted:

I don't think the emphasis on style and prose is because of some deeper belief that books are sacred and magical. For me, its just the simple belief that things should be done well if you are going to do them. Its why Raymond Chandler is better celebrated than Michael Connelly. It's not just books. Take Steven Spielberg. The dude has worked exclusively in schlock for his entire career, but one of his defining features is that he does schlock WELL. He is a master of the craft of filmmaking, and its that mastery which elevates his films from the generic mass his stories arrive from.

Even popcorn style turn your mind off entertainment deserves to have a level of "craft" applied to it.

Clipperton posted:

Mrenda posted:

For me that ends up in a separation of what the aim of fiction, film, TV, etc. is. You may want the best as a reader. A writer may want the best from their stories. Yet there needs to be a recognition that not everything is "art" and not everyone wants that. Once you recognise it's easier to focus on your own enjoyment and dismiss other matters. Even if it's to bathe in your dismay at the world (and write about it on highly topical and relevant internet discussion pages.)

(A common refrain in a professional rugby team I follow is, "Have you no pride?" Calling on each other to work their hardest in recognition they can do more. For some people their pride, their achievement and goal, is writing a story people fully switch off with, for others it's changing the direction of modern literature.)

Mel Mudkiper posted:

If you want the project to be truly collaborative you should give the thread as much raw material to work with as possible. If you are fixing it up behind the scenes and then showing it off, you are essentially taking ownership of the project.

chitoryu12 posted:

It was established in the OP that I've still got the final say on the content to make sure that it doesn't bog down on one chapter for months or end up with people trying to shovel in weird or terrible stuff, but I was hoping that I'd get some contributions from people on feeling out the prose or including something they thought would be important to cover. It looks like I ended up being the only one to post anything, though.

Mel Mudkiper posted:

I get this mentality, but it is a wholly capitalist and consumerist mentality. It suggests books are products and readers are consumers and the book must act transactionally in its relationship with the reader.

Mrenda posted:

There's a lot of writing for an audience. Even publishers asking prospective authors, "What's your market? Who did have in mind when you wrote this?" I quite like having my fancies indulged, rarely as it happens, but that seems to be what many people expect from their "entertainment."

feedmyleg posted:

I mean, this thing isn't publishable anyway.

Why not just put together a definitive bible of what the goals and main changes should be, get volunteer goons to each rewrite a single chapter at a time, give them a 2 week timeframe to get it done (after which it reverts to unassigned), then compile the whole thing together and release it. That way people can choose the chapters they want, choose to write it in the way that they want, and feel like they have some ownership over the final thing. It becomes "How would I rewrite this part of this book were I the author?" rather than the current way of "How would chitoryu12 rewrite this part of the book were he the author?"

Your way just kind of makes it feel like "Why bother, if this guy is just going to tell me what to do then rewrite what I've done?" It also takes the burden off of you for having to edit everything. It democratizes it, but with a guiding hand. Then you can even reserve the right to rewrite it after the fact, but the "behind closed doors" aspect really seems like a barrier if anyone wants to put in any effort. That way it might actually get done. After all, this whole thing is supposed to be a fun experiment, right? Don't let this become like most goon projects that collapse under the weight of someone wanting too much control. Let the compiled version be wonky and uneven in its style and direction.

Also, that Strange Horizons article was very validating for me wanting to write my Edgar Rice Burroughs novella in his prose style regardless of that removing some potential accessibility. So at the very least, this thread has accomplished that.

chitoryu12 posted:

3. It also opens the door to creepy stuff. When I first proposed the idea, it took like 3 posts for someone to earnestly bring up virtual snuff, rape, and terrorist training in OASIS. Goons are gonna goon, and I wasn’t comfortable with letting contributions go without review.