Forum / One more thing re: Dom Conlon's story

• 
  Matthew Robinson

  Apr 09, 05:08pm

  It just occurred to me that this ("Dear God, know me, from Adam") is the first instance I'm aware of of a Fictionaut story truly going viral. I mean, 6,600 page views is nothing compared to a YouTube video getting 15 million views (millions seems the standard for viral stuff now), but in relative terms (2nd most viewed story here ever), it's really quite a big deal. Usually it's journalism or a video or something like that spreading like wildfire; it's not often fiction, making the occasion even more unique. Sadly, we chose not to celebrate (initially, anyway) what is actually a tremendous moment for the website. It's not too late, though! I hope!

• 
  Lynn Beighley

  Apr 09, 05:09pm

  Yes, times 6,600. Makes me want to promote this story further. In fact, I will.

• Frankie Saxx

  Apr 09, 05:10pm

  I am celebrating. :)

  Did you read it? I can see why it would -- it's cheeky, but smart too.

• 
  Matthew Robinson

  Apr 09, 05:13pm

  I did read it. It's a fun piece, not normally to my taste (as I privately shared with the author), but I agree, I can see why it caught fire.

  P.S. those not familiar with what "going viral" means (Gloria...), it's when an online piece gains instantaneous popularity through the "art" of online sharing. Think of the music video for "Gangnam Style," or, to a smaller extent, that recent column about Literary Fiction being boring or whatever that was.

• 
  Matthew Robinson

  Apr 09, 05:16pm

  Also, cat videos.

• 
  Charlotte Hamrick

  Apr 09, 05:22pm

  Congrats, Dom! Going viral IS very exciting.

• 
  Gloria Garfunkel

  Apr 09, 07:02pm

  Congrats, Dom. And I do know what going viral means. I have a computer literate family, including a programmer. It's just me that's, uh, illiterate.

• Variola major

  Apr 09, 07:27pm

  I remember when going viral actually meant going viral. Ah, the good ol' days!

• 
  Marcus Speh

  Apr 09, 08:41pm

  I've never been this close to anything going viral, it's exciting to see this happen NOT to a 250 word flash or to a video but to a 3000+ word story. As Matt says, momentous and worth celebrating...in whatever we do celebrate (write more stories?)...wait, how DO we celebrate around here?

• Frankie Saxx

  Apr 09, 08:50pm

  Smexy poems?

• 
  Jim V

  Apr 09, 10:45pm

  It would be nice if stories with some heft got some play around here. Not every story need to fit on one page. When 3000 words is viewed as a herculean reading effort, you know the internet has addled the reading public.

• 
  Gary Hardaway

  Apr 10, 02:31am

  We are what we tweet.

• 
  Marcus Speh

  Apr 10, 05:16am

  @James I don't think we can talk about "the reading public" here, or about the Internet as a whole. You'd be surprised what amount of text and information is read and digested by folks on the net around the world. Fictionaut is not a good sample.

  In my teaching practice which parallels the development of the web/net as a social medium, I have not noticed anything like reduced attention spans on behalf of students, or digital dementia or such thing. If there are developments like these, they could have any number of reasons. People do stare at screens all day but they still sleep at night (dream), fornicate away from screens (most of us), look each other in the eye etc. We're animals on an interesting path, that's one way of looking at it.

  The argument is as flawed as the argument (scientifically badly supported) that playing ego shooter games makes people aggressive. The opposite can be the case. Religion can make someone aggressive and into a killer, too.

• 
  Marcus Speh

  Apr 10, 05:40am

  @Gary Hell yeah. We also are what we eat. One can't defend tweeting just as one can can't defend e-mail. Or fax machines. Or TV. Or the telephone. And so on. Undoubtedly all these inventions lead to change of habits and loss of culture but I've always liked siding with the optimists if only because it's sunnier over there.

• 
  Marcus Speh

  Apr 10, 05:42am

  To go viral, this forum thread should have been called "If you want to be published, read this". That's also the way we celebrate, I suppose, at least judging from what people celebrate here mostly: getting published!

• Frankie Saxx

  Apr 10, 07:02am

  Yes @marcus & @james - people still read long. I just prefer mine in takeaway (download). Already stare at the communication machine until my eyes go buggy. I enjoy reading away from it.

• 
  Jim V

  Apr 10, 11:41am

  The argument that is flawed is the anecdotal fallacy, which says because my students show no signs of diminished attention (observed by a person who himself may have diminished attention) therefore the rest of society is not experiencing such a decline in attention.

  It would be utterly impossible to tell if a student (or anyone else, including us) has diminished attention unless one could see these same people in an environment outside one with the internet. Also, often such students are often at the far end of the intelligence bell curve.

  What we do know, at least from personal experience, is that readers here are put off by longer stories. It isn't necessarily a time or energy or dislike of online reading, since they have little problem scooting from work to work to work, if all of them are short enough. I've seen my own shorter works, which in some cases are vastly inferior to my longer works, get far more attention and praise than stories I believe (and have been told) are some of my best work. This too is anecdotal evidence, but it is anecdotal evidence across all areas of social media and real space.

  I do agree that scapegoating video games or guns or religion or anything else for violence, other than the killer's own choice to embrace evil, is a nonstarter. But to say that nothing causes anything is the very definition of anti-science, since all of science is founded on the idea that where there is an effect there is a cause. (By the way, religion, like video games, cannot "make" someone do anything. People choose their own actions.)

  It may be that the cause here has less to do with addled attention spans and more that Fictionaut writers do not value one writer enough to spend that much time on him, prefering to be more democratic or, being less generous, more desirous of dropping as many tit-for-tat comments as possible. But there is certainly some cause for the fact that longer works are comparatively ignored here and I think the site is weaker for it.

  For one thing, many here, in their lust for faves, have stopped writing ambitious stories and poems and have made a non-career out of daily drive-by paragraphs or three-line poems.

  In some ways, the internet is a disaster for such writers, those who crave instant and constant approval. Defend the internet all you please, Marcus, and I'll still be glad I started writing before it came along.

• 
  John Riley

  Apr 10, 12:17pm

  So if someone adapts to a new medium they are "craving instant and constant approval?" It's not zero sum. The same same person who writes shorter pieces to be distributed through one medium may also write longer pieces to be distributed through another. Shorter works are more suitable to computer screens, longer works can be read with ease on tablets. The printing press helped give rise to the novel and the newspaper. What one should be focused on is how to come closest to his/her best work while incorporating the medium it will be delivered on. We have more choices than in the past. It's hard for me to see how that is a bad thing.

• Frankie Saxx

  Apr 10, 01:10pm

  James:

  "What we do know, at least from personal experience, is that readers here are put off by longer stories. It isn't necessarily a time or energy or dislike of online reading, since they have little problem scooting from work to work to work, if all of them are short enough."

  I suspect this has less to do with "internet" and more to do with a) a poor conception of how much time a read/comment will take. eg. I spent, from time stamps, 2:28pm to 2:44pm telling Dom all the reasons people don't read longer stories, at which point I realized *I can go read his story instead of having a conversation about why it won't get reads. Duh.* And my next post, after I finished reading it, was 2:59pm.

  There's a lesson in there.

  Short stuff may be what's popular here, but on other sites, it's long work. (see: Wattpad.) Declaring attention spans damaged by the internet because the user base of Fictionaut prefers short work in the course of how they use the site is as prone to fallacy as any of Marcus's assertions to the contrary.

  I suspect the main reason longer work doesn't get read here is because longer reads are happening on tablets and ereaders and smartphones these days. If Fictionaut had Android and iPhone apps for reading & commenting, I bet there'd be more love on the long stories too. (Might as well, while you're on the bus/train/waiting in line/waiting for lunch/etc.)

  Of course, my opinions are just as anecdotal as yours. :)

• 
  Sam Rasnake

  Apr 10, 01:15pm

  I can only approach this topic from my own point of view - For me, the Internet is an immense help in the background that surrounds all my writing, but it's a huge obstacle I have to maneuver around in the writing process. The only thing worse than no information is too much information. It hinders my own growth as a writer - again this is a personal view - because it tends to pressure me into settling for what James calls the "drive by" - and here I'm applying the point to writing and not reading ... though I’m certain that is widespread approach fro readers here – read quickly, comment and move on. After all, this a huge community – even with the small periodic waves exodus that have taken place since I joined in 2009. There will be more. We’re so large - no can read all the works here.

  The same notion of a hindrance to writing applies, for me, in forcing a work in the direction of a particular audience. That's not my purpose in writing. I loathe the concept of writing for or to a particular audience - though I can and do respect that approach in others. It's just not for me. My best writing - if there is such a beast - is surely written with no one in mind. That's not to say that I can't write a piece that connects with a specific cause. I can, but that writing is rarely infused with fire or truth. The Internet doesn't help me in that regard. I'm certain it's vital to others - to many - but not to me. I need to keep it chained while I write. With this in mind, Fictionaut can also get in the way – in particular if I vainly attempt to write something with FN in mind. I’m not naïve enough, however, to level this at the Internet only – This also applies to MFA programs, writing groups – large and small – love, hate … and so on.

  I also think that as readers we gravitate toward writers and not works. This is especially true given the fact that there are so many writers and here – and I expect that growth to continue. The fave system – and not the comment system – also strengthens our approach to reading writers and not works. The comment system – for the most part - is a valid approach to reader response and help for a writer.

  We connect with certain writers, and read their posts – simple as that. We avoid certain writers, and don’t have the time to read other writers. This will not change.

  Let me add a dose of salt – there’s more of Han-shan in me than Michael McClure.

• 
  Gone

  Apr 10, 01:37pm

  Some people go to France and complain that the French only want to speak their own language. There is a name for this phenomenon, but it escapes me.

• Frankie Saxx

  Apr 10, 01:43pm

  Jean: Americans?

• Frankie Saxx

  Apr 10, 01:43pm

  (Sorry, sorry, I couldn't help it.)

• 
  Gone

  Apr 10, 02:07pm

  Frankie, that was too obvious. I was more like... going for subtlety.

• Frankie Saxx

  Apr 10, 02:09pm

  Hey, you just set it up and left it there.

  Subtlety has never been my strong suit.

• 
  Jim V

  Apr 10, 02:20pm

  Sam, I agree with everything you said, and, as is usual for you, it is elegantly stated.

  There is no denying that many here must crave the approval that Fictionaut supplies in the same way someone craves a drug. I'm not immune to such things myself, maybe nobody is, and so I limit the time I spend here and work I place here. Those who are familiar with my writing know I'm prolific enough to post every single day. I could post work five times a day for the next year and never touch a thing I wrote today onward. I don't do this-- I usually post once a week, if that, because I consider it rude to other writers to hog the stage and also because I recognize it's a trap, a way of sating my literary ambitions without accomplishing anything of note. In other words, if you're writing for faves, you're not writing that novel you always wanted to write. Or the book of poems that are challenging to the ordinary reader. Or reaching new readers. Or busily submitting your work to magazines and publishers. And therein lies a great challenge and danger of a site like this.

  Some people write shorter works, and if that is what comes most naturally to them and what they most enjoy doing, who am I to argue with it? But for those who are "adapting" to Fictionaut, I have to ask why? What good is being at the top of the Fictionaut mole hill-- when there are so many mounatins you could yet climb?

• 
  John Riley

  Apr 10, 02:23pm

  The internet is creating some new forms and experiments that like all art operates within the confines of the medium. That is a great thing imo and I feel lucky to be alive while it's happening. But I don't see evidence that it is draining writers and readers from established forms. I write a fair amount of short stuff but read more novels and novellas. Because the tools and access to fiction and poetry and other genres have expanded doesn't mean they've contracted elsewhere. Photography wasn't the death knell of painting.

• 
  Jim V

  Apr 10, 02:41pm

  The internet is good. The internet is good. The internet is good. The internet is good.

  If we just keep telling ourselves that, it just might make it true. But I don't know if the internet is good for individual writers, bad, or something in between. But I suspect, like most things, for the vast majority of people and for writers as a group it's the third one: a combination of boom and doom.

  For some writers, it will be the best thing to ever happen. For others, it will destroy them. We often talk about the first kind of person. We rarely mention the second kind, especially not here.

  One of the great lies of our age is that we think we can get things for nothing, that great benefits can come without any hidden costs, that all someone has to do is wave a wand and health care will be free, wars will disappear, and everybody will own a pony. But there is always a flipside, always the dark side of the moon, always unintended and unforseen disastrous consequences and results. The internet has them too, for writers, readers, and everyone else, and anyone who doesn't think so is kidding himself.

• 
  Gone

  Apr 10, 02:42pm

  Frankie, there are Americans and then thur's Amurrakins.

• 
  Sam Rasnake

  Apr 10, 02:50pm

  I also realize, Jean & Frankie, that I shouldn't say one thing and do another - If FN isn't good for me, I shouldn't prowl around here. And that's a valid point. But I also gain from and am benefitted by the presence of other writers here - not so much by their works ... That’s doesn't mean those works aren't good ones. Awakenings and epiphanies are private matters - not easily played out in a public settings. I also, by the way, don't believe my posted works have impacted anyone. I do hope my presence has helped and not hurt.

  Agree with John on this point - We still begin with blankness, and then letters and words begin to appear. The how is fluff.

• Frankie Saxx

  Apr 10, 03:15pm

  Jean: I think it's #merica these days. At least that's what they call themselves on Twitter.

  Sam: Sorry, I got completely off the topic. (I blame Jean.) Not commentary on how you use Fictionaut, etc.

• 
  Jane Flett

  Apr 10, 03:47pm

  “I was writing a screenplay in the little house. I wrote it at the kitchen table, or in my old bed with its thrift-store sheets. Or, as anyone who has tried to write anything recently knows, these are the places where I set the stage for writing but instead looked things up online. Some of this could be justified because one of the characters in my screenplay was also trying to make something, a dance, but instead of dancing she looked up dances on YouTube. So, in a way, this procrastination was research. As if I didn’t already know how it felt: like watching myself drift out to sea, too captivated by the waves to call for help. I was jealous of older writers who had gotten more of a toehold on their discipline before the web came. I had gotten to write only one script and one book before this happened.”

  - Miranda July, on the internet.

• Frankie Saxx

  Apr 10, 04:10pm

  On topic:

  I am finding the "validation" of late kind of a turn off. I have been tired for some time of the need, not just here, to quantify everything and assign value based on metrics. Technology makes it easy to measure clicks and provides a shortcut to deciding what's "good." Cuz the more views something gets, the better it must be, right? Just read the stuff (watch the stuff, listen to the stuff) everyone else says is good.

  Somehow, we've all decided that clicks and counters mean something qualitative. Like my facebook page! Look how many retweets I have! See how many people voted for my story! I have five stars on Amazon!

  These things are only marginally useful as tool when you're a consumer. (Seriously, there should be an "IMDByourecrazy" tumblr just to catalog the whack shit that has respectable star ratings.) As a creator, they're worse than meaningless, they're a trap, and judging the merit of your work by how many people click a link or a button can only end in tears. (And if I have to listen to one more lamentation along the lines of "I have 10K twitter followers and only sold 5 books on Amazon ;_;" I might cause the tears.)

  (You know what metrics are good for? Selling space to advertisers.)

• Frankie Saxx

  Apr 10, 04:12pm

  (How do you know everyone says it's good? It's got the most clicks/views/likes, duh! I should click it/view it/like it too!)

• Frankie Saxx

  Apr 10, 04:15pm

  Btw, none of my bitchery about metrics should diminish Dom's happy event; even if only 1% of those clicks through stayed to read the whole thing, that's still 68 people. Which doesn't sound like much, but what's the last thing online, song or video or story, that you devoted a solid fifteen minutes to?

• 
  Gone

  Apr 10, 05:11pm

  Did Dom leave?

• Frankie Saxx

  Apr 10, 05:22pm

  Not sure if he's coming back or not. Kind of hope he does.

• Frankie Saxx

  Apr 10, 05:39pm

  Gary: "We are what we tweet."

  Jesus I hope not. I just spent several minutes scrolling through the #merica tag & now I think I might be sick.

• 
  Charlotte Hamrick

  Apr 10, 06:37pm

  "I loathe the concept of writing for or to a particular audience - though I can and do respect that approach in others. It's just not for me. My best writing - if there is such a beast - is surely written with no one in mind." ~ Sam

  Ditto.

  "I am finding the "validation" of late kind of a turn off. I have been tired for some time of the need, not just here, to quantify everything and assign value based on metrics." ~ Frankie

  Ditto

  I'm too lazy to write my own pov. I'm going off to read. ~ Charlotte

• 
  Marcus Speh

  Apr 10, 07:08pm

  In case anybody was doubting this: we ARE celebrating. This is Fictionaut celebrating—by argument and counterargument. Unsheathed foils and all that. I'm proud of you, guys.

  Btw, is anyone is in doubt where my true affinities and loyalties lie regarding technology (including the internet), please read my new essay/ramble:

  http://yareah.com/kurt-vonnegut-challenge-0965/

  ...and leave a comment. Cheers!

• 
  Sam Rasnake

  Apr 10, 07:17pm

  Never doubted you for a second, Marcus.

• 
  Marcus Speh

  Apr 10, 07:31pm

  On Twitter, I'm getting a LOT of heat from erotic writers though for this essay. Might have to seek refuge with Pope Francis. Or join Pope Benedict in the monastery. I should never have lumped sexuality and technology together. I knew it but I couldn't help myself...Cheers, Sam.

• 
  Matthew Robinson

  Apr 10, 08:02pm

  I commented on the essay, Marcus. As usual, you've made me think a way I didn't expect--and you quote me in the piece!

  (P.S. Speaking of attention spans, this thread has gotten WAY off track.)

• 
  Gone

  Apr 11, 12:25am

  Yes, we should celebrate. This requires only that when Dom returns, we welcome him.

• 
  Matthew Robinson

  Apr 11, 01:49am

  Excellent thought, Jean.

• You must log in to reply to this thread.