Yes, all very well and good, Zach. But if you want to get serious with Jo, you need to be good at more than just seduction. You can’t spend all your time together shtupping.
@Alice: There’s no indication at all that ZZ is interested in Jo for her mind or in getting “serious” with her. He thinks of her like a game to be solved and won, a metaphorical trophy for his metaphorical trophy cabinet. I think he does have some kind of plan for winning her over mentally… but only for the sake of proving what an ubermensch he is, not because he cares for her.
Arky says it better then I could. ZZ’s powers seem to have given him a very unhealthy outlook on how to handle other people, and it’s going to be spectactular when he can’t solve the inevitable implosion of their relationship.
For Christ’s sake, Campbell. Some time ago you said how you liked observing people to write your stories. Well, congratulations. I can see how this has influenced your work. Pretty much every story you have ever done has been about your characters being emotional, empathizing, analyzing each other and ultimately resolving their particular dramedies or attacking emotional weaknesses. Doing what you think you are good at. (Hint: Going by your writing, you are not good at it)
The background and actual plot of the story are mere frills for the Aspergian soap operas.
Your main characters and protagonists all care too much about what other characters are thinking. They are all highschool girls. And now you have evolved that into this character’s super power. Even if it leads to his own downfall you are still using emotional analysis over-drive as a default setting.
Do yourself a big favor and try to come up with a story in which you don’t rely on internal monologues or open and frank discussions of feelings to move drama along. Stop explicitly telling your readers what your characters what your characters are feeling. Show, don’t tell.
She might not want worshipping but that doesn’t mean she wants emotionally distant or nonchalant. Just because the serum deadened his self-deceptions doesn’t mean he’s right about everything around him. His perception is still colored by his own biases. He’s being objective about all the perceptions he is having. He’s not taking any subjective thought into any of his deductions or considering the other person’s perspective.
Why the hell do I want to punch my computer screen every time I see Zach’s smug expression?
“Do yourself a big favor and try to come up with a story in which you don’t rely on internal monologues *or open and frank discussions of feelings* to move drama along.” (emphasis mine)
…
Gravitatoid, how do things change in your world? Because in mine, it usually happens after people notice that just wishing for it isn’t enough- when someone is doing things that you don’t like, they have to understand why you don’t like that before they can attach enough value to those feelings to actually change their behavior.
@Alice actually I think he’s now handling the “otherwise” by writing something for her dissertation… Of course that may be the opposite of what she actually wants.
Actually, it kinda reminds me of Ender’s Game and Flowers for Algernon, the way he has this superior overanalytical mind, and becomes cold and manipulative. He’s using everyone around him like a tool, and although it seems like he cares, it’s difficult to tell whether he actually does or if he’s just calculating how to get what he wants.
That being said, for his sake, I hope that laptop he’s using is a fairly cool-running laptop. Otherwise, yeowch.
@Gravitatoid: You have made a huge sacrifice, reading pretty much every story T Campbell has ever done, so that you are able to point out his errors with exactitude. For this we salute you!
I wish that I was equally able to contribute to the future quality of T Campbell’s writing, but alas, I seem to have only read the few exceptions to the rule – the few stories that did not, to any large degree, display the flaws you’ve now exposed – and thus I did not realize how serious the situation was.
I shall make a sincere effort to find and read some of the offending stories in order to enlighten myself, but I fear that I don’t have the strength to read all of them. If nothing else, the knowledge that Tim Mitts is a highschool girl will surely provide some interesting new perspective on the stories I already did read.
Don’t read comics when you’re sleep-deprived, people. Simple words can have you hitting up YouTube and singing “Hai yai, Forces! Hai yai, Forces!” with embarrassing swiftness.
I’m not really interested in jumping through Gravitawesome’s hoops at this point. Anyone whose idea of criticism is to repeatedly diagnose both my characters and me with a mental disorder is not someone I can engage successfully. And anything I could say about the kernel of truth in these diatribes, I’ve already said.
Oh I’m not saying you have aspergers. I’m saying you give something very much like aspergers to your protagonists like you have a big box of it and you want to use it all before it expires.
This becomes glaring because you keep relying on stories in which conflict is resolved talking and thinking about feelings between characters with the emotional constructs of cardboard cutouts. James Bond henchmen had more believable emotional personalities.
And then there is this protagonist. Who is acting like The Aspergionaut. Which is merely exaggerating the empathic characteristics of your past characters.
Gravitatoid, please shut up. As someone who was professionally diagnosed with Aspergers Syndrome at an early age, I can tell you that Campbell’s characters don’t even vaguely resemble somebody with Aspergers, and you clearly don’t actually know what the syndrome entails. Somebody with Aspergers does not EVER openly discuss their feelings the way you describe; in fact, if people with Aspergers could express their feelings clearly, they wouldn’t really be diagnosed with Aspergers in the first place. Aspergers is a disorder defined by the inability to communicate and interact properly with the world and people around you; Campbell’s characters do not have this disability. Please actually know what you’re talking about before throwing out hot-button words like that, because you never know when somebody who is actually familiar with what you’re talking about is reading and getting extremely insulted.
Sasha: I leave the cultural impact of a Spider-Man obsession on sexual fantasies to your imagination. Well, mostly.
Gravitwhoever: If you want to see a story written entirely by me that has absolutely no direct talk about feelings, I refer you to “Entitlement” in the first volume of Guilded Age. That seems like a weird restriction to apply, though, considering that it would disqualify most of the classics of Western literature. Also, I happen to think that understanding feelings is really important, so surprise surprise, my writing reflects my beliefs.
Alice and Koolerkid pretty much said everything else I wanted to say here. I got real familiar with Asperger’s after our first talk: you clearly haven’t. Frankly, it’s reached the point where I can’t take anything else you say seriously. “More cardboard than James Bond villains” is insult comedy masquerading as criticism with no examples or arguments to back it up, and seems designed only to provoke a defensive reaction, not to provide any insight. Which is pretty much the definition of trolling, and so I’ll be deleting your messages from here on out.
I said henchmen, not villains. You know, characters who don’t actually do much, are never given much exposure, don’t make speeches, but are still vital to the background of a story. When I say you write characters who have emotional personalities worse than that I mean that as a sincerely derogatory criticism. Because your standard henchmen doesn’t detract from the plot or mood of a story. A henchmen are pure function.
A lot, way way too many, of your characters are about 40% function and 60% emotions. And that 80% of emotion isn’t even good stuff. Walking cliches, no sense of privacy or emotional boundaries, stilted spontaneous conversations about feelings, cheap motivations.
You attempt to write stories with drama. Stories in which conversations are vital to resolving the plot. But you suck at writing character interactions. Your casts are libraries of open books with nothing interesting on them. Just photocopies of characters you saw elsewhere.
Oh you were bothered by characters in works of fiction you saw that didn’t fix their problems talking when it was an option. Cute. So I guess that means you are going to let that influence every single thing you write forever.
Emotional irrationality, privacy and confronting valid ideologies are essential not only for drama but for believable fictional personalities.
Your characters have a lot feelings and yet are blatantly shallow and ill-conceived copies of characters not your own. Because those feelings are not arranged into a believable personality.
The worst kind of hack is the sincere one that is oblivious to how derivative he is.
But hey, you have readers and fans. That must mean you are doing something right. Popularity must equal quality. The guys up there with their open reveals of aspergers are all the endorsement you need that you are doing a good job.
Or it could be that you are showing your stories to a crowd incapable of telling how blatantly shallow the drama is and who honestly don’t know any better.
So no, I am not trolling despite how convenient it will be for you to dismiss it that way. I am most sincerely and in the best intentions of the act throwing a rotten tomato at you for the crappy plays. You hack.
Your occasional reader.
X0X0X0X0X
-Gravitatoid T. Awesonadon’tevenrememberwhatnicknameIlastusedhere Squire.
Aw, heck, Grav, I don’t have the heart to delete that last one.
You keep shifting your Asperger’s-related statements and pretending consistency, but even if I agree that your last statement about the topic is the only one that counts, you’ve clearly got absolutely no idea what Asperger’s really is (and yet you keep returning to some variation of the word, as if obsessed). You treat it as some synonym for “emotional behavior that doesn’t make sense to me” and act like you don’t understand why that’s offensive.
I stand corrected: you did say “henchmen,” not “villains,” but my point about insult comedy remains valid no matter which word you use.
Finally, now that it’s become clear you’ve got to do it or lose the argument, you’ve at least tried to come up with some specific justifications for your statements. Issues of privacy, “ideology,” emotional boundaries, motivations? Still a little vague, but at least an improvement. Maybe if you’d led with this instead of ASPIE ASPIE ASPIE ASPIE, I’d be more inclined to take you seriously now. But even at this point, it’s all “this aspect is bad,” not “this aspect is bad BECAUSE x.” The only thing you get into any detail about is the degree to which characters address their own emotional issues and I think we’ve covered that pretty thoroughly already.
Oh, yes, popularity doesn’t equal quality, not in a world where Twilight has done so well. But if you’re going to persuade me to listen to you over all the other well-spoken readers, editors and teachers I’ve had over the years, you need to bring some really solid arguments to the table. But you seem undecided whether you really want that or just want to hit me with your metaphorical tomato, which, incidentally, is the same thing as trolling.
“Compute Naked”?
[Actually, I’m surprised he doesn’t think about posture there…]
Yes, all very well and good, Zach. But if you want to get serious with Jo, you need to be good at more than just seduction. You can’t spend all your time together shtupping.
@Alice: There’s no indication at all that ZZ is interested in Jo for her mind or in getting “serious” with her. He thinks of her like a game to be solved and won, a metaphorical trophy for his metaphorical trophy cabinet. I think he does have some kind of plan for winning her over mentally… but only for the sake of proving what an ubermensch he is, not because he cares for her.
Arky says it better then I could. ZZ’s powers seem to have given him a very unhealthy outlook on how to handle other people, and it’s going to be spectactular when he can’t solve the inevitable implosion of their relationship.
If you could call what they have a relationship.
For Christ’s sake, Campbell. Some time ago you said how you liked observing people to write your stories. Well, congratulations. I can see how this has influenced your work. Pretty much every story you have ever done has been about your characters being emotional, empathizing, analyzing each other and ultimately resolving their particular dramedies or attacking emotional weaknesses. Doing what you think you are good at. (Hint: Going by your writing, you are not good at it)
The background and actual plot of the story are mere frills for the Aspergian soap operas.
Your main characters and protagonists all care too much about what other characters are thinking. They are all highschool girls. And now you have evolved that into this character’s super power. Even if it leads to his own downfall you are still using emotional analysis over-drive as a default setting.
Do yourself a big favor and try to come up with a story in which you don’t rely on internal monologues or open and frank discussions of feelings to move drama along. Stop explicitly telling your readers what your characters what your characters are feeling. Show, don’t tell.
Yeah, and go wash your car – it’s a mess!
And get off his lawn!
I love how he’s subtly becoming less and less human.
She might not want worshipping but that doesn’t mean she wants emotionally distant or nonchalant. Just because the serum deadened his self-deceptions doesn’t mean he’s right about everything around him. His perception is still colored by his own biases. He’s being objective about all the perceptions he is having. He’s not taking any subjective thought into any of his deductions or considering the other person’s perspective.
Why the hell do I want to punch my computer screen every time I see Zach’s smug expression?
Yeah, on rereading I must agree with Arky and Gaddez, above.
Also…back for more, Gravitatoid? Or should I say… Awesonapulus?
I can’t even begin to count the times I read Penny & Aggie and thought “they’re all acting like a bunch of high school girls!”
Makkabee wins the comments.
“Do yourself a big favor and try to come up with a story in which you don’t rely on internal monologues *or open and frank discussions of feelings* to move drama along.” (emphasis mine)
…
Gravitatoid, how do things change in your world? Because in mine, it usually happens after people notice that just wishing for it isn’t enough- when someone is doing things that you don’t like, they have to understand why you don’t like that before they can attach enough value to those feelings to actually change their behavior.
@Alice actually I think he’s now handling the “otherwise” by writing something for her dissertation… Of course that may be the opposite of what she actually wants.
Actually, it kinda reminds me of Ender’s Game and Flowers for Algernon, the way he has this superior overanalytical mind, and becomes cold and manipulative. He’s using everyone around him like a tool, and although it seems like he cares, it’s difficult to tell whether he actually does or if he’s just calculating how to get what he wants.
That being said, for his sake, I hope that laptop he’s using is a fairly cool-running laptop. Otherwise, yeowch.
@Gravitatoid: You have made a huge sacrifice, reading pretty much every story T Campbell has ever done, so that you are able to point out his errors with exactitude. For this we salute you!
I wish that I was equally able to contribute to the future quality of T Campbell’s writing, but alas, I seem to have only read the few exceptions to the rule – the few stories that did not, to any large degree, display the flaws you’ve now exposed – and thus I did not realize how serious the situation was.
I shall make a sincere effort to find and read some of the offending stories in order to enlighten myself, but I fear that I don’t have the strength to read all of them. If nothing else, the knowledge that Tim Mitts is a highschool girl will surely provide some interesting new perspective on the stories I already did read.
And thus, the true protagonist of the story was conceived.
(He’s writing a sentient computer virus you see.)
Don’t read comics when you’re sleep-deprived, people. Simple words can have you hitting up YouTube and singing “Hai yai, Forces! Hai yai, Forces!” with embarrassing swiftness.
I’m not really interested in jumping through Gravitawesome’s hoops at this point. Anyone whose idea of criticism is to repeatedly diagnose both my characters and me with a mental disorder is not someone I can engage successfully. And anything I could say about the kernel of truth in these diatribes, I’ve already said.
If the scarf is any indicator, one of the forces ZZ is applying is kinky bondage play.
Oh I’m not saying you have aspergers. I’m saying you give something very much like aspergers to your protagonists like you have a big box of it and you want to use it all before it expires.
This becomes glaring because you keep relying on stories in which conflict is resolved talking and thinking about feelings between characters with the emotional constructs of cardboard cutouts. James Bond henchmen had more believable emotional personalities.
And then there is this protagonist. Who is acting like The Aspergionaut. Which is merely exaggerating the empathic characteristics of your past characters.
Gravitatoid, I give you a copy of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR) so you can do your homework. Merry Christmas.
Gravitatoid, please shut up. As someone who was professionally diagnosed with Aspergers Syndrome at an early age, I can tell you that Campbell’s characters don’t even vaguely resemble somebody with Aspergers, and you clearly don’t actually know what the syndrome entails. Somebody with Aspergers does not EVER openly discuss their feelings the way you describe; in fact, if people with Aspergers could express their feelings clearly, they wouldn’t really be diagnosed with Aspergers in the first place. Aspergers is a disorder defined by the inability to communicate and interact properly with the world and people around you; Campbell’s characters do not have this disability. Please actually know what you’re talking about before throwing out hot-button words like that, because you never know when somebody who is actually familiar with what you’re talking about is reading and getting extremely insulted.
Sasha: I leave the cultural impact of a Spider-Man obsession on sexual fantasies to your imagination. Well, mostly.
Gravitwhoever: If you want to see a story written entirely by me that has absolutely no direct talk about feelings, I refer you to “Entitlement” in the first volume of Guilded Age. That seems like a weird restriction to apply, though, considering that it would disqualify most of the classics of Western literature. Also, I happen to think that understanding feelings is really important, so surprise surprise, my writing reflects my beliefs.
Alice and Koolerkid pretty much said everything else I wanted to say here. I got real familiar with Asperger’s after our first talk: you clearly haven’t. Frankly, it’s reached the point where I can’t take anything else you say seriously. “More cardboard than James Bond villains” is insult comedy masquerading as criticism with no examples or arguments to back it up, and seems designed only to provoke a defensive reaction, not to provide any insight. Which is pretty much the definition of trolling, and so I’ll be deleting your messages from here on out.
I said henchmen, not villains. You know, characters who don’t actually do much, are never given much exposure, don’t make speeches, but are still vital to the background of a story. When I say you write characters who have emotional personalities worse than that I mean that as a sincerely derogatory criticism. Because your standard henchmen doesn’t detract from the plot or mood of a story. A henchmen are pure function.
A lot, way way too many, of your characters are about 40% function and 60% emotions. And that 80% of emotion isn’t even good stuff. Walking cliches, no sense of privacy or emotional boundaries, stilted spontaneous conversations about feelings, cheap motivations.
You attempt to write stories with drama. Stories in which conversations are vital to resolving the plot. But you suck at writing character interactions. Your casts are libraries of open books with nothing interesting on them. Just photocopies of characters you saw elsewhere.
Oh you were bothered by characters in works of fiction you saw that didn’t fix their problems talking when it was an option. Cute. So I guess that means you are going to let that influence every single thing you write forever.
Emotional irrationality, privacy and confronting valid ideologies are essential not only for drama but for believable fictional personalities.
Your characters have a lot feelings and yet are blatantly shallow and ill-conceived copies of characters not your own. Because those feelings are not arranged into a believable personality.
The worst kind of hack is the sincere one that is oblivious to how derivative he is.
But hey, you have readers and fans. That must mean you are doing something right. Popularity must equal quality. The guys up there with their open reveals of aspergers are all the endorsement you need that you are doing a good job.
Or it could be that you are showing your stories to a crowd incapable of telling how blatantly shallow the drama is and who honestly don’t know any better.
So no, I am not trolling despite how convenient it will be for you to dismiss it that way. I am most sincerely and in the best intentions of the act throwing a rotten tomato at you for the crappy plays. You hack.
Your occasional reader.
X0X0X0X0X
-Gravitatoid T. Awesonadon’tevenrememberwhatnicknameIlastusedhere Squire.
From Yahoo! News: What if JFK had survived his assassination?
…Hmph. Not a word about Spider-Man permeating every aspect of American culture. I am disappoint.
Aw, heck, Grav, I don’t have the heart to delete that last one.
You keep shifting your Asperger’s-related statements and pretending consistency, but even if I agree that your last statement about the topic is the only one that counts, you’ve clearly got absolutely no idea what Asperger’s really is (and yet you keep returning to some variation of the word, as if obsessed). You treat it as some synonym for “emotional behavior that doesn’t make sense to me” and act like you don’t understand why that’s offensive.
I stand corrected: you did say “henchmen,” not “villains,” but my point about insult comedy remains valid no matter which word you use.
Finally, now that it’s become clear you’ve got to do it or lose the argument, you’ve at least tried to come up with some specific justifications for your statements. Issues of privacy, “ideology,” emotional boundaries, motivations? Still a little vague, but at least an improvement. Maybe if you’d led with this instead of ASPIE ASPIE ASPIE ASPIE, I’d be more inclined to take you seriously now. But even at this point, it’s all “this aspect is bad,” not “this aspect is bad BECAUSE x.” The only thing you get into any detail about is the degree to which characters address their own emotional issues and I think we’ve covered that pretty thoroughly already.
Oh, yes, popularity doesn’t equal quality, not in a world where Twilight has done so well. But if you’re going to persuade me to listen to you over all the other well-spoken readers, editors and teachers I’ve had over the years, you need to bring some really solid arguments to the table. But you seem undecided whether you really want that or just want to hit me with your metaphorical tomato, which, incidentally, is the same thing as trolling.
Isn’t one definition of ‘troll’ a ‘person who continues to post after being informed that all his further posts will be deleted’?
Ah, well.