Random Questions Thread

How many "loved ones" does she have? Does this include extended family members, besties from high school, or just lovers?

And what's the point? Is it a form of magic? A cultural practice? A way to show her mental health slipping away? Or just an in-universe quirk with no explanation?

Well, depending on the size of the chunks used and the length of the character's base name, that doesn't sound like much at all to me.

Let's say that her name starts out as "Kaitlyn". Let's further say that her loved ones "Charlotte" and "Matthew" die before the start of the story, and her loved one "Michelle" dies during the story.

She might then use "char-", "matt", and "mich" from the three names, giving her a final name of "Kaitlyn-char-matt-mich". It's quite a mouthful, but not too bad for use as a formal name.

It could perhaps even be trimmed down further: have her drop "lyn" from her base-name, and use only the first few letters of each of loved-one name, giving her something like "Kait-chamami".

As to casual use, she might go by just "Kait", leaving off the rest for the sake of ease.

Just a few selected people who's very important to her.

It's her inability to accept the fact that they are not longer with her despite knowing fully that they have died, she also keeps memento of them, something that remind her of them the most.

Edited by Andermann on Jul 25th 2020 at 4:37:06 PM

Could WW 1-WW 2 era painkillers cause auditory and/or visual hallucinations? If they can, could a normal person move (at least to sit up) with that dose? I'm trying to invent the reason for a character to have a Man In The Mirror Talks Back moment.

Edited by Nukeli on Jul 25th 2020 at 11:56:51 AM

I am terrified of getting my work out there. My writing teacher told me to trust those who care about me and want to help me improve. I can't help but think I'll become the next George Lucas and Mr. Plinkett is right around the corner. How do I prevent this?

Edited by ChicoTheParakeet on Jul 25th 2020 at 5:21:49 AM

If you put your work out there and people disparage it terribly, then ask for critique, work on your writing as called for, and hopefully thus put out new work that's better than its predecessors.

Conversely, if you keep your work to yourself then you may not discover any lurking issues within it, and so not improve as you might if given that external feedback.

That said... Putting your work out there can be terrifying. But terrible though the fear may be, let me note that it may nevertheless be unsurely-founded.

Edited by ArsThaumaturgis on Jul 25th 2020 at 12:08:11 PM

"Could WW 1-WW 2 era painkillers cause auditory and/or visual hallucinations? If they can, could a normal person move (at least to sit up) with that dose?"

Since some of the most common painkillers in those days included alcohol, cocaine and opium, I'd say you can plausibly include that as a side effect.

I write because I like it. I want to share my stories with others so they can enjoy themselves.

There is so much online critique that solely exists to highlight and dethrone incompetence. If I want to share my work, I'm going to have to prepare myself mentally for what is to come and this low self esteem of mine is such a hindrance.

Maybe this isn't the place to talk about this.

I would argue that there's also critique that highlights issues in a given work, and that can thus be a means of learning and improving.

I suppose that I might rephrase my original reply like so:

By being willing to take on critique and use it to improve. Indeed, by not avoiding critique or insulating yourself from it, but by examining the critique and—as called for; critique isn't necessarily valid or actionable—taking it on and looking for ways to better the critiqued elements in future works.

Of course, if a critic starts disparaging you as a person, then that's another matter.

But as long as they're analysing the work itself, then in a sense they're offering the opportunity to grow as an artist.

This is another matter; I'm not sure that I have advice there myself, I'm afraid. :/

I'll say only that I hope that you do take the plunge and release your work, and that it's well-received when you do.

If my responses have been untoward, then I apologise. :/

You could, perhaps, share your work with us, over at the constructive criticism thread.

Also a good suggestion, I do think! ^_^

Haven't written anything yet, right now I'm writing up summaries of my characters. Still, these thoughts haunt me.

Edited by ChicoTheParakeet on Jul 26th 2020 at 4:51:35 AM

Is naming a character Bonaparte Proulx a good or a bad idea?^note  The character is french-speaking Swiss. Last names as first names is an American thing, but i came up with this while trying to be memorable. The story is set 20 Minutes into the Future. The character's real name is implied to be something else, but he's only known by that name to the other characters.

Edited by Nukeli on Jul 26th 2020 at 12:18:06 PM

Is it realistic for a depressed person to make passing comment like “Haha, I’m dead inside, anyway, moving on.”

Sure, unless literally everyone I've ever met online who claimed to be depressed was lying.

With close friends, fellow depressives and mental health care providers who are aware of their condition, sure. Else it's just an unnecessarily alienating thing to say... which your character might be too depressed to care about, but at that point they'd probably be too mentally burnt out to engage in human interaction, anyway.

(Source: am clinically depressed and an r/TrollCoping user)

@Nukeli: We cant answer your question without knowing more about what kind of story you are writing.

@Andermann: Anybody can say almost anything, if it is consistent with their character and previous behavior. People differ in how they react to things—a lot. One person might insist that everyone treat their mental illness with absolute seriousness, another might make lame jokes about it as a way of not having to deal with the emotional trauma. The same person might switch back and forth between these extremes depending upon the context.

One thing you want to be wary of though, is making light of mental illness. It's ok if a character does so provided it's a logical manifestation of their characterization, but if the readers get the idea that the author does so, that will alienate many people. Just make it clear that depression has serious consequences, regardless of what the character says, and you'll be ok.

I'm trying to devise a model for the complex web of influence that a MegaCorp in some not-necessarily-closely-related story ideas of mine controls (the megacorp in question is given the placeholder name of "MegaCorp" for convenience). The model, dubbed the "MegaCorp Macrocosm", has a mythological motif of being themed after the Nine Worlds of Norse cosmology, as the Macrocosm in question comprises nine "Spheres". I've nailed down the characteristics of all but one of these Spheres, and I'm stumped on how to fill the gap.

Below is a numbered list of the Spheres (including the missing one, marked in bold; its placement is merely provisional), with the numbers indicating their hierarchial ranking in the Macrocosm; the intention is that generally, the lower the Sphere to which an entity belongs, the less valuable / more expendable it is considered.

1. Entity is a division or wholly owned subsidiary of MegaCorp. Only entities of this sphere are allowed to bear "MegaCorp" in their name.
2. Entity is controlled by one or more members of the Wealthington family, but is technically not part of MegaCorp.
3. Entity is legally independent of MegaCorp and not controlled by a Wealthington family member, but has essentially allied itself to MegaCorp's interests of its own volition.
4. Entity is legally independent of MegaCorp and not controlled by a Wealthington family member, but receives significant financial support from one or more higher Sphere members, whether directly or through an intermediary. The senior management typically includes one or more loyalists to MegaCorp (often former members of a higher Sphere entity) embedded into high-level executive positions.
5. Entity is wholly owned by a network of shell companies and/or Third and Fourth Sphere members, with no single entity owning a majority of the shares, thus giving the illusion of independence.
6. Entity is partially owned by a network of shell companies and/or Third and Fourth Sphere members, with no single entity owning a majority of the shares.
7. Entity is neither directly nor indirectly controlled by MegaCorp, but is highly dependent on at least one one entity of a higher Sphere, and thus liable to follow MegaCorp's lead and submit to its will of their own volition.
8. ???.
9. Criminal organizations and individuals that entities from higher Spheres utilize as informants in the criminal underworld, as well as deniable assets for conducting tasks that are both too risky and not important enough to assign higher Sphere assets to undertake.

PS: There's another inspiration for this model. Can you guess what it is?

Edited by MarqFJA on Jul 27th 2020 at 8:15:17 PM

8. Small independent businesses and start ups which receive significant investment capital from megacorp controlled financial institutions secretly, via third parties. The start ups themselves are often unaware.

Cant guess, what is it?

Edited by DeMarquis on Jul 28th 2020 at 8:57:00 AM

What's an equivalent phrase to "avoid changing the course of history" when it's not a time travel story? Or would it still work to call it the same thing?

I think that the same phrase could likely work.

I'm imagining someone contemplating acting against some emergent technology, but not wanting to get in the way of a thing that they feel will, if not for them, drastically change society or human well-being.

I had almost exactly the opposite scenario in mind — this is about why the Alien Non-Interference Clause exists and prevents people from just going around doing Technology Uplifts willy-nilly.

@De Marquis

The setting is ambiguously anchored somewhere in the early 2020's^note  (mostly because one really old character needs to be alive, meaning i can't turn time much further because she'd be nearly 100 old already), but it's a little more futuristic^note  More advanced artificial limbs, more efficient and clean energy, deep space explorations, stuff like that. The stories lampoon and deconstruct the superhero genre's tropes (ex. Femme Fatale), but it's not a pure comedy and the reader is still supposed to be able to take the events and characters seriously when darker and more dramatic things happen.

I think that it still works there, indeed.

If you wanted to change it, you might use something along the lines of "wanting to avoid interfering with a species' natural development". But "changing the course of history" works too, I do think.

Come to think of it, I suspect that which line is used might depend on the character and their outlook: speaking of a species' "natural development" has a more scientific slant to it, while "the course of history" has a more narrativistic slant to it, I suppose.

Either way, the concern on the part of the characters in question carries an interesting underlying perspective: that there's a course of development that should be followed, but that could be derailed.