Half-penny Thoughts — 17aug26

I was thinking about narrative and the phrase “there are no new tales left to tell” and its myriad variations.

Looking into it, someone was suggesting writing in “the quiet, eerie margins” was a writing space left largely untapped. Described as: “It is the difference between a sudden, violent storm (the loud center) and the heavy, electric stillness in the air just before the barometer drops (the quiet margin).”

Of course, I’m curious about your thoughts.

Are there truly no new tales left to tell? Is everything derivative? Can you think of a story that doesn’t have an easy analogue?

Or, how would you interpret writing “in the quiet, eerie margin”? Do you have a different description or opinion? Where would you start if you were writing in/of the margin?

michael raven

Filed under:

|

Tagged:

23 responses to “Half-penny Thoughts — 17aug26”

  1. Chico’s Mom Avatar
    Chico’s Mom

    I enjoy listening to Alux.com on YouTube. They suggested, and I agree, there are tons of stories left to be told. Billions in-fact. If you write a love story and I write a love story, there will be similarities but they are different. You are writing from a different perspective. Almost every thing will be different. You live in a city. I live in the country. Our genders are different. Our lives are different. Married. Single. Divorced. Widowed. Rich. Poor. Children. No children.

    Everybody and their blue-green grandma has written a book. So what! Write on to.

    Everybody wants to be a poet! So what! Write a poem.

    Write a song.

    Write music.

    Write.

    Reply
    1. michael raven Avatar
      michael raven

      I agree that there are billions of combinations, but the narratives seem to play out into a handful of “acceptable” patterns or pathways. It seems we trend towards the same narratives and fill in the details differently.

      Thanks for the thoughts.

      Any time I start to think (or suspect) I know something, I like to throw out a line and see what comes back. It’s usually very good for smashing my “knowing” to smithereens and is good for me. Always an education and always humbling.

      Reply
      1. Chico’s Mom Avatar
        Chico’s Mom

        Amen.

        The things that are not acceptable. Oh, the list is ever evolving; therefore, it is endless.

        Reply
  2. Chico’s Mom Avatar
    Chico’s Mom

    Kinda went on a little tirade.

    Reply
  3. steveforthedeaf Avatar
    steveforthedeaf

    The quiet eerie margins and the bit part side quests are what fascinate me the most.

    Rozencrantz and Guildernstern are dead. Waiting for Godot. Just off to the left. That’s a sweet spot

    I often to try to write from there. Change, Everything Change, 28/05, Directions, The Long Man even The Master.

    They’re me trying to write from the margins. It’s hard to do. And I’m not sure I’ve got it right yet.

    I’m sure brevity has something to do with that too but I’m struggling with it.

    Reply
    1. michael raven Avatar
      michael raven

      I like reading and writing the vignettes.

      What happens is self-contained and things just happen.

      But people like their resolution and concrete endings. I prefer the peeking in on things.

      I’m a bit obsessive about brevity in my own writing. If I can cut something out, I will. That doesn’t mean I am good at cutting things out. But I still try.

      Keep writing, fun stuff 99.9% of the time. [That 0.1% is when I get interrupted by a hungry kitten and lose track of where I was, so it is mostly my own issue.]

      Reply
      1. steveforthedeaf Avatar
        steveforthedeaf

        Distracted by hungry Kittens is a story in and of itself

        Reply
        1. michael raven Avatar
          michael raven

          Let me tell you. Old story 🤣

          Reply
  4. Bob Avatar
    Bob

    There are always new tales to tell. Maybe not always apparent, or maybe happening in cycles. One thing for sure pop culture isn’t rushing out there to be original.

    Reply
    1. michael raven Avatar
      michael raven

      I think the hard part is in the finding of them.

      Reply
  5. chrisnelson61 Avatar
    chrisnelson61

    I would lean towards the notion that everything is derivative, but that doesn’t mean that tone and approach cannot be unique, and, certainly, I have read some truly derivative stories which have been written in an engaging way. And some more ‘original’ ones which haven’t!
    I think that the issue might be the form of the novel itself – heavy back story for example is often deemed a must-have, yet can drag the story itself down a blind alley of ‘sameness’. Plus, if one is writing professionally, publishers perhaps go for what they know will sell – the tales with which the majority of readers feel comfortable.
    Short stories is, imo, another matter – vignettes maybe don’t suffer from the same prescribed conventions and expectations; sometimes an insight or observation can be fresh in terms of piqueing the readers interest.

    Reply
    1. michael raven Avatar
      michael raven

      Good point about short stories being allowed some latitude with respect to narrative. They are not expected to have a plot, whereas novels are often expected to follow certain patterns or they are not novels. And it might be those very patterns that cause the feeling of derivation.

      Interesting…

      Reply
      1. chrisnelson61 Avatar
        chrisnelson61

        🙂

        Reply
  6. Stacey C. Johnson Avatar
    Stacey C. Johnson

    This is so close to my heart, Michael. I think my favorite stories are often the non-story-like margin notes, often in invisible ink. I don’t know if you’ve ever come across Ursula K. Le Guin’s “The Carrier Bag Theory of Fiction” but I find that I cite it a lot for reasons similar to what you are alluding to here. I think you might appreciate it : ). A deep dive online will uncover a .pdf copy : )

    Reply
    1. michael raven Avatar
      michael raven

      Thank you for the recommendation. I haven’t read it, but will do so now. Thank you 🙏

      Reply
    2. michael raven Avatar
      michael raven

      That was a fantastic read. Short and felt spot on. THANKS. I loved it.❤️

      Reply
      1. Stacey C. Johnson Avatar
        Stacey C. Johnson

        SO happy to know this landed, Michael. What a kindred soul. : )

        Reply
  7. Ari Avatar
    Ari

    my belief in all this is although very few ideas are truly unique, the personality and interpretation one conveys is different

    Reply
    1. michael raven Avatar
      michael raven

      Thank you for the perspective, Ari. I think you are getting at some of the same things Jolene was poking at.

      What feature is it, do you suppose, that separates the “unique” from the “remix”?

      Reply
      1. Ari Avatar
        Ari

        Hmm.. maybe I can take the perspective of a physicist here, we see it happen again and again in science, there are rarely new ideas popping out of nowhere, it’s mostly always something built on something pre-existing, but looked at from a different perspective that allows you to better understand the same entity. I would say, that makes it unique: your interpretation of it. Remixing is the same thing given a different flavor and color, but somehow there is no bending. Whereas interpreting something differently is bending the meaning to it’s extreme until a new shape unravels..? I don’t know if it makes much sense the way I explained 🙂

        Reply
        1. michael raven Avatar
          michael raven

          A physicist? Thanks for sharing that. Any particular branch? Or general physics?

          I’m spitballing here a little and trying to unravel what drives these kinds of innovations.

          Makes sense what you’re saying and I think we’re suggesting some of the same things, just from different POVs.

          Your thoughts got me to wondering about the philosophical argument of the subject/object theories of something potentially not existing until an observer begins to look for it. I’m not sure exactly how that might fit in, but it seems to potentially have a role.

          Just a different avenue if thinking if I need to change lanes.

          🤔

          Reply
          1. Ari Avatar
            Ari

            Hey, sorry for the super late response! I study optical telecommunications, my current work is focused on experimental based analysis on the efficacy of different models of propagation of light in optical fibers 🙂 I’m at the trail end of my PhD right now 🙂

            On the idea of something not existing until observed: I don’t really know how much I like that. I’ve heard of it before, and my thought is it’s quite narcissistic to believe that the existence of something is solely dependent on the observation of the thing by a conscious entity. Which can then always spiral into a discussion on the hard definition of consciousness. But I digress. The fact that you can observe something, means that whatever sensors you use has interacted with something that existed. It’s highly unlikely that things will spawn into being just because you point your sensors (could be biological or a mechanical instrument) at it. Your observation of the thing only placed that object in your world model, but not necessarily the thing in the world itself. But maybe to go on from our previous discussion, what would change with your observation is your perspective of a world that can contain such a thing.. so observation is always good–the more you observe the deeper your interpretation of your environment gets. So it doesn’t change the world, just the meaning and mechanics you think the world abides by 🙂

          2. michael raven Avatar
            michael raven

            No worries about timing of responses. You’re a busy woman, it sounds like.

            Congrats, [soon to be] Dr. Ari!🎉 That’s something to be celebrated. Loudly. Be sure to let us know when you have successfully defended your dissertation.

            Be sure to call me out if I ever make a written statement in your field that is complete hogwash — always a risk for a dabbler like me. I only dipped my toe into the water with my chemistry degree by taking a few semesters of general physics (and another semester of physics-focused chemistry where I got in trouble debating some physics-based models of a hydrogen atoms with the professor). And reading about the more exotic physics out there (without making any claim to actually understanding what I read).

            Thanks for your thought-provoking comments. I’ll have to ponder them more. And consciousness is one of those things that most people just accept without going down the rabbit hole. I bet we could have some good discussion about that.

            I think it all comes down to the age-old question about the tree falling in the woods and whether it makes a sound if no one is there to hear it.

            To borrow from Zhaozhou/Jōshū, the answer to such questions is (more often than not): “Mu.”

            To experimentally prove that the object and the subject are entangled, we’d need a third observer to watch that entanglement, and then it just gets to be a crowded mess where couldn’t cleanly separate what is influencing what. And who’s to say that the subject is not created solely for the object to exist?

            🤣 Mu.

            Thank you, Ari. Your input is much appreciated.

Leave a comment. Markdown permitted.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.