On self control

Subject: On self control
Author: Guvnor of Space
Posted on: 2011-04-19 02:31:00 UTC

Hm, I see what you're saying, but Thomas' love for the Stargate 'verse is modeled on mine, and my reaction to each new stupidity inducing turn the fic took. It was partially because, in the scene you mentioned in particular, the Stu came up with more and more ways to be stupid. I might have done the same in his place. Or not. I'm sort of a wimp.

There's that, and he has the restraint and ability to think ahead of a two year old. For example, the AK-47 served no useful purpose, he just wanted to bring it with him. Sure, it worked well for me (and gave me the title of the story) but his lack of restraint and ability to see the consequences of his actions is part of what makes him do the things he does. He is ruled by his emotions. If the Stu is making him angry, by god he is going to charge him. He would not think about the consequences until after his toes have been stomped.

That being said, it is more than a bit repetitive. In the future, I'll keep that in mind.

Does that make sense? It does to me. I think it's in character for someone like Thomas to try to do something like charging the room, even after he should know that Orken will just stomp his foot, but is probably mediocre writing, and not something I am likely to repeat to this extent.

Thanks for the crit. It made me think, and that is a good thing.

Reply Return to messages

Jump to this post's position in the thread ↴

First mission finally up! by Guvnor of Space on 2011-04-18 07:18:00 UTC Reply

Agents Orken 7861 and Thomas Greenwall disguise themselves as replicators disguised as Russians to take down a Genuis!Stu. (Stargate, rated-T)

https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1Bc8CNQKUJdlQmGZE8TNgpD5U5oNGOmP-Mo-9ACOULZg

So yeah. First mission is up, woo!

Nice mission. by doctorlit on 2011-04-19 01:35:00 UTC Reply

I can't—can't—stand it when a character is said to be something (like a genius) and is absolutely never shown to actually express that trait in any way. This one, rather than merely failing to be a genius, breaks the laws of physics to make it so. Cannot stand it.

One thing I want to bring up is Orken's stepping on Thomas' feet. Obviously, it makes sense for Orken to stop Thomas from charging into the meeting in some way. I found it to get a little too repetitive, though, especially within that single scene. I can see it happening two or three times, but the fact that Orken had to keep doing it, and with increasing strength each time to the point that it broke poor Thomas' toes, feels a little over the top to me. Maybe it's just that Thomas is still a relatively new character, and I don't understand the sheer depth of love he has for Stargate characters, but it seems unlikely to me that he keeps trying to charge the room, especially after the first toe is broken.

On self control by Guvnor of Space on 2011-04-19 02:31:00 UTC Reply

Hm, I see what you're saying, but Thomas' love for the Stargate 'verse is modeled on mine, and my reaction to each new stupidity inducing turn the fic took. It was partially because, in the scene you mentioned in particular, the Stu came up with more and more ways to be stupid. I might have done the same in his place. Or not. I'm sort of a wimp.

There's that, and he has the restraint and ability to think ahead of a two year old. For example, the AK-47 served no useful purpose, he just wanted to bring it with him. Sure, it worked well for me (and gave me the title of the story) but his lack of restraint and ability to see the consequences of his actions is part of what makes him do the things he does. He is ruled by his emotions. If the Stu is making him angry, by god he is going to charge him. He would not think about the consequences until after his toes have been stomped.

That being said, it is more than a bit repetitive. In the future, I'll keep that in mind.

Does that make sense? It does to me. I think it's in character for someone like Thomas to try to do something like charging the room, even after he should know that Orken will just stomp his foot, but is probably mediocre writing, and not something I am likely to repeat to this extent.

Thanks for the crit. It made me think, and that is a good thing.

Yay! by Neshomeh on 2011-04-18 18:36:00 UTC Reply

Congrats on the first mission. I like it. {= )

First, a few things I noticed:

1. When the mini-Unas wakes Orken up, you mention him having to get his heart rate under control. I'm not that familiar with the canon, so I could be wrong, but I thought the point of the disguises was that they wouldn't have a heart rate that the Stu could detect...?

2. A couple of missing apostrophes around the "Another Excellent Chapter" author's note; one before it (authors instead of author's), one after (Suethors instead of Suethor's).

3. "Rouge NID" is meant to be "Rogue NID," yes?

4. This is for everybody: it's "all right," two words; literally, everything is correct. "Alright" happens because we think it should work the same way as "although," but the "al" there takes the medieval sense of "even," so it doesn't really. It's so widespread that in most cases no one will notice, but since we're concerned with correctness here, it's something to keep in mind.

That out of the way, in general I thought this was a good mission for establishing the baseline for the characters. I think I'm echoing the previous posters when I say I'd like to see Orken get more ruffled by Thomas, but I think it's important to show what's normal for them before you start breaking them down, so it's cool for a first mission. {= )

The Stu... I just.... Look, people, if you're going to write a character who's supposed to be really smart, you have to do the dang research, or it all falls apart as soon as you run into a reader who actually knows anything about the subject you're talking about. Argh. Was his internet signal supposed to be squiggly, or adaptive to the multiple layers of shifting atoms in the rock...? I mean, I'm pretty sure a wireless signal has to be continuous to be any good, right? You can't just break it apart and expect it to work properly. Gah.

Things I particularly liked include the conversation with Mitchell when the agents stepped in as guards, the attention given to keeping the Stu from noticing the agents, and the description of being flung from wherever they were to Cheyenne Mountain. I have trouble with Mitchell because I'm a Farscape fan first and foremost, so I have a lot of trouble seeing him as anything but an alternate universe version of John Crichton, but even with that the exchange felt in character, even with his intelligence nerfed, and it was a nice break from the Stu being dumb. I think we rely a little too much on the SEP field at times (I know I'm guilty of that), so the reminder that we should actually worry about this is well taken. And, well, silly things happening to the agents is always good. {= )

~Neshomeh

On 'alright' by DigitalSocrates on 2011-04-20 08:08:00 UTC Reply

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/alright

I think it's kind of been grandfathered into the language at this point.

Yes, but. by Neshomeh on 2011-04-20 17:54:00 UTC Reply

I know it's in common use. That's fine. However, widely used does not equal appropriate in all contexts, which was my point. I'm looking at my Chicago Manual of Style (15th edition) right now, and on page 199 under the section Word Usage, it lists:

all right. Two words. Avoid alright.

Considering that the CMS is the standard for most if not all generally respected publishing houses, at least in this country, I'll take their advice and pass it on to others when it comes to contexts in which we want our writing skills to be taken seriously.

~Neshomeh

I don't know, it just seems stiff to me. by DigitalSocrates on 2011-04-20 18:10:00 UTC Reply

Typing "all right" instead of "alright" almost seems like typing "do not" instead of "don't." I realize that your argument hinges on the fact that "all right" and "alright" are pronounced the same spoken while "don't" and "do not" are not, but it still feels the same to me.

There's always phonetic spelling. by Neshomeh on 2011-04-20 20:25:00 UTC Reply

I mean, if you really listen, not many people even pronounce an l-sound anyway, regardless of spelling. They say "a'right" or "a'ight" similar. So, there's that if you really want to go over to the side of relaxed/casual usage.

~Neshomeh

Well that gets into slang, dialects, etc. by DigitalSocrates on 2011-04-21 00:43:00 UTC Reply

I don't think I really have anymore arguing points for this. The closest parallel is 'a lot' versus 'alot' which most decidedly has a correct answer, and supports your argument.

Disagreeing on 'alright'. by JulyFlame on 2011-04-19 19:06:00 UTC Reply

It's informal spelling, and an informal word in speech.

Considering that it's passed completely into general modern usage, and that it is at this point its own word, saying it shouldn't be used in writing is akin to saying you shouldn't use contractions when writing because they're not technically correct either.

If it was used in dialogue, you're being far too persnickety for saying he should change it.

This is relatively light fiction writing; if he was writing some sort of essay or non-fiction work that didn't involve quoting anyone at all I would agree, but it's out of place as a suggestion in this context.

Apology for the sarcasm below. by Neshomeh on 2011-04-19 23:27:00 UTC Reply

The level of sarcasm employed by me in the post below was unwarranted and not cool. I'm sorry.

My point is that if one informal spelling is okay, then all such informal spellings in the same category (especially "alot") must also be okay, and I cannot accept that, especially in the PPC where we claim to care about correct usage.

I should stop putting my foot in my mouth.

~Neshomeh

Is okay. by JulyFlame on 2011-04-20 05:18:00 UTC Reply

Though yes, I would agree that 'tho', 'thru', 'lite', and 'nite' and so forth are informal spellings and are acceptable- in the proper context.

('Alot' though, is not. That one is just plain wrong.)

But feet are so tasty.

Really? by Neshomeh on 2011-04-19 22:59:00 UTC Reply

"This is relatively light fiction writing," therefore using a more correct form of a word (in fact, two words) is unnecessary?

So, is "lite" okay, too? Can we call it "lite fiction writing" because "lite" has passed completely into general modern usage? How about "alot", "tho", and "thru"? Those are all okay, rite?

Sorry, but I'm not convinced.

~Neshomeh

I wasn't aware that those terms were 'common' by DigitalSocrates on 2011-04-20 08:12:00 UTC Reply

..at least in a literary sense. They are used in chat speak and occasionally in infantilized company logos but I can't say I've ever seen it used (with dignity) in any kind of written work.

'Alot' is relatively common, but never accepted as correct as far as I can see.

Example of "tho" in everyday use. by Neshomeh on 2011-04-20 20:57:00 UTC Reply

From a dA comment on page 138 of OFUM fanartist Pika's awesome crossover comic, "Girls Next Door":
Yay, another win for pika. Sarah would not be happy with me either because, honestly, I cannot come up with a clear reason why she does deny her obvious feelings for him altho I would never say contrariness even tho there may be some truth there.

I just happened to come across this today, so I figured I'd share.

~Neshomeh

A DA comment does not count as 'dignified writing' :P (nm) by DigitalSocrates on 2011-04-21 00:40:00 UTC Reply

Well, no. {= p Shows that it's out there, though. (nm) by Neshomeh on 2011-04-21 22:07:00 UTC Reply

My point exactly. (nm) by Neshomeh on 2011-04-20 17:56:00 UTC Reply

Fixe'd! by Guvnor of Space on 2011-04-18 23:44:00 UTC Reply

Thanks for the catching of errors. Before Caddy beta'd it, I also had a "nuclear missile lodge." Although now I really want to see Rouge NID. Perhaps it would be makeup they used for disguises?

And as for your favorite part, well, that was my favorite part, too. I do love the SG-1 canon, but poking fun at its treatment of Russia is fun.
I just used "Alright" in a dialogue. by Sergio Turbo on 2011-04-18 20:17:00 UTC Reply

Since it's said by a non-native English speaker, it's plausible to let it slip or should I correct it?

(The context is: Agent 1 was talking about hat they have to bring in the fic, Agent 2 doesn't listen and runs into the portal, Agent 1 frowns, says "Alright.", and follows. Maybe I even got wrong the use of "all right".)

In this case... by Neshomeh on 2011-04-18 22:50:00 UTC Reply

Since the pronunciation is the same whether you write it one way or the other, the standard way should be used in dialogue as well as elsewhere.

~Neshomeh

Thank you! (nm) by Sergio Turbo on 2011-04-19 11:51:00 UTC Reply

Like by Karen Elaine DuLay on 2011-04-18 16:21:00 UTC Reply

Muahaha! I love it! Orken and Thomas are entertaining. I'll admit I see what PoorCynic is getting at, but I do like this pair, and hope you'll write more soon!
Re: First mission finally up! by PoorCynic on 2011-04-18 10:39:00 UTC Reply

This is a good first mission. I can see that these agents have a lot of potential, especially in regards to their working relationship. There's an Odd-Couple-esque vibe to them that I always like to see in a partnership.

The bit with the radio wave fail!logic was delightfully hilarious. Nice catch with that one.

The one major stumbling point for me was the banter. I'm a big fan of good interagent banter and it seemed a little weak here. I can't put my finger on why, exactly. Apart from a few stand-out instances (like the insult exchange after Orken corrects his partner's grammar), it just felt very humdrum to me.

Regardless, the mission as a whole was quite enjoyable. I look forward to further missions in the future.

If you are not too busy... by Guvnor of Space on 2011-04-23 06:55:00 UTC Reply

...would you look over some banter for my new mission? I'd like to have your opinion on it. After all, banter is important, and if mine needs work, you're as good as anyone to ask to be a banter beta.

Or not. I'm fine either way.

Thanks for the crit. I didn't really know how to respond to it, or I would have sooner. Just saying "I'll work on it" seemed shallow.

Sure! by PoorCynic on 2011-04-23 18:50:00 UTC Reply

Always happy to help. My email is reillybf AT msn DOT com (replace caps with symbols).