The Gold Plated Bud award

Daft idea!

miserable bugger.

Seriously though.. Gold Plated Cherries.. I jus had to take the mic couldn't resist it.

heck yeah. It's a good idea for anybody who wants to do it. I do like bud but I haven't smoked it for about a year because of societal percussions, if you catch my drift. funky_seagull, I wanted to say some stuff. First of all, I've read a lot of your stories, too. But honestly, I don't remember any of them except "Elixir of Life", which I really liked. It took me a while to decide what I thought of it. At the time, I thought it was better not to post anything, considering that I really didn't understand it. But after I thought about it for a while, I decided it was a really awesome story. Top of the line. That's the kind of story that deserves to be published. You know, a lot of people here don't like me. But a lot of people in a lot of places don't like me. I'm the kind of person who can really piss off a crowd. But I don't offend people for the sake of offending people and I didn't do that here on ABCtales. I really just wanted to guide some writers in the right direction. There are a lot of writers who are very talented but they don't have anything to say. I was just trying to emphasize to them that they need to have something to say. I call it "intellectual ideas"; you can call it whatever you want. Peace out.

Yeah no worries M8 Anyone who can write stories like: 'Child of Nature' and 'A Stranger Every Morning' - is sound in my opinion. total_buds to you ~F.S2002~ "Are you the Buddha? I'm the Buddha." classic line man.

I tried to award hedgeapples once, but that didn't go over too well.

<> Sean, this is an awfully arrogant thing to say... how can you decide that people have nothing to say, simply because they dont write in a cliched *hidden moral* manner? I think it was Sirat that said that you seem to prefer a fable style... it's true i think. But then a lot of Americans seem to like that Moral/overstatement thing. Its why "Oriah Mountain Dreamer" (path to enlightenment) topped your book charts for so long. Its why every single show on your tv has a moral or a piece of heartfelt advice at the end... in this house, we sit with bated breath waiting for the line about how you should live your life is delivered.. even in a programme as innocuous and (apparently) funny as Friends. I have read your stuff... some of it is good. The coffee shop ones spring to mind. But Sean - they are not what I would call intellectual work at all. They dont make me think. They dont tell me anything in a way thats different to a hundred other cliched pieces of advice. Just a little encouragement you understand.

I'd like to be able to award mangoes. So I'm up for Funkey;s idea - sounds fabulous to me. As for morals in stories, I agree with Liana. If you want a story that 'has something to say' it doesn't mean you take the model of the author as god, commanding the reader with wisdom. That idea was thrown out years ago. But I have to say, it does seem a certain streak of the American character to uphold this idea, possibly because they're more ardently Christian as a whole (after all, Barthes pointed out the connection between usurping the godlike status of the author and rejectng God himself, and he had a point.) Take 1984. A bitter indictment against totalitatianism. It 'says' something. It provokes thought. Great book. Most of the Americans who I've heard speak about it, however, seem to take it as some celestial damnation of socialism. They ignore completely the fact that Orwell was a democratic socialist (and go mysteriously quiet when I bring it up,) and seize him as an example of a mighty literary figure on the side of the political right, against the left. Dentalplan mentioned this earlier. I've heard people refer to Orwell's quotes as if they were one of the ten commandments, whether or not they are logically defendable! So let's removed once and for all the idea that any author anywhere is some wisened, all knowing soul with something to teach his readers, especially in an age when any idiot tabloid journalist can write and promote a crap novel (*cough* Richard Littlejohn *cough*) The function of the author in society is to entertain, and promote consideration of his or her subject matter, not to lead.

But then, surely, you are saying that an author abdicates their right to opinions on the world and to convince people of those opinions, simply by the act of writing.

"All animals are equal (but some are more equal than others)"

foreplay good two fingers bad

seannelson should give the funky seagull award, because he craps on the heads of authors "less worthy".

Hey give the guy a break.. Yeah maybe he was a bit harsh in his criticisms. Went about it in the wrong way. But he's not a bad bloke man, and whatever you might feel about him, he's entitled to his opinions. Nobodies perfect.. and forgiveness goes a long way you know. People who can't forgive another for their mistakes, and continually hold it against them, are just as bad as the person who made the mistake in my opinion, if not worse. So let it go.. it's water under the bridge. Leave sean alone man.

An old American Indian proverb: "Don't judge another man/woman; till you've walked the trail of life in their moccasins."

old inuit proverb "never eat yellow snow"

another old American/Indian proverb: "don't walk the trail of life in another man's moccasins if you don't like the smell of his feet."

He who is without sin, cast the first stone.

right, Funky. just don't say Jehovah!

Well I'm not casting stones. I'm simply taking issue with his opinion. He can be a hero to millions or a totalitarian despot - wouldn't make a difference to my response to his message. And I wouldn't say I'm disallowing authors from having an opinion - I'm saying you should treat what they say as opinion, not as divine intervention in your life. If an author 'has something to say,' it doesn't necessarily mean you have to agree with it. Tale yesterday's poem of the day, for example (grumble, grumble.) The crux of Sean's argument seems to be that talented writers have a duty to put forward their opinions, since I presume he equates a talent with language with a fresh and worthy angle on important matters. I'd say the 'job' of a writer is primarily to entertain, and I use that in a broad sense. You might entertain people in such a way as to give them a pleasurable experience, or present a problem for them, or to occupy them with an issue. Distract them, in a way. That of course doesn't mean anyone who writes has to write for other people. I do get fed up with being told I have to write for a specific audience - I personally write to produce something which *I* like. If being a writer became my 'job', my service to society, I might take the duties more seriously.

It's true though.. humanity is all too eager to stone another.. they enjoy it, enjoy hurting things, whether it is with their words, their fists, their thoughts, their mockery. Yet nobody is perfect themselves. But it's not fashionable to show compassion these days, empathy for another, whether it be animal, vegetable, mineral. Yet empathy is our progress, we need to change ourselves within or we shall face our extinction. Humanity is like a cancer on the earth at the moment, and soon the earth will fight back, then man will know. This is the sadness of the human race and the tragedy that will ultimately become its downfall. You can laugh and joke about it, be apathetic about it - but til you've felt what it's like to be another, you are just as bad as they are. Why is it people never forgive, always remind another of the mistakes he/she has made? Make their lives a misery, haunt them. Is it a kind of sport, entertainment, or a way to feel better about yourself? I don't know why people act like this, animals are afraid of us, we hunted some of them to extinction, others we factory farm for our food, test new drugs on. To animals we are a like demons. The pain of rejection is a hard thing to go through. That's why forgiveness is so important. Is not good for man to be alone, I hate this popularity trendy vibe, I will kill it. And why do people mock those who stand for what is true? To be popular, you have to be mean-hearted it seems. What has happend to the human soul in this day and age? And I'am just as bad.. yeah.. laugh at those who speak the truth, tear them apart, till they go away, til they shut up and don't speak out anymore; but oneday their words will come back to haunt you.

Sorry for being so heavy.. I just find the way of the world difficult to cope with at the moment. I wish that we could all live in peace.. put down our weapons, stop hurting things, be at one with the elemnts, not rape the earth anymore.. I wish there was no more division, and people wouldn't be better off than others.. I wish that people would try to change themselves within, to grow more in spirit and mind.. so that we can evolve.. into something better.. For thousands of years humanity has been the same within.. for all our technological achievements.. we still fight wars, we still suffer from greed, selfishness, violence, fear.. jealosy and cruelty. Till we change these things within ourselves, we will never evolve into something better, but reap our own extinction. The real struggle is within. I can't help the way I feel man.. just had enough.. enough of the hard politics of the human soul.. I object to them.

sorry for the moral intensity.. I think I'am gonna stop reading the newspapers, they just depress me man. I always seem to read news stories that break my heart. Just somedays I can't cope with it anymore hearing about all the bad stuff that's happening in the world.. and something clicks in me.. and at times I don't feel like laughing. I need to try and lighten up a bit.. think I'll sit and watch my 'League of Gentlemen' videos tonight. Get out of this heavy vibe I'am feeling.

Funky, there's a common ailment among psychiatrist and psychotherapists. It's the dream that somehow, if they could just get out there and talk to enough people they could heal the world, by incorperating the world into themselves and using their skills to sort it out. Unfortunately it's impossible for them , and it's impossible for us. we can't say 'if only the world was more like I am, then everything would be okay'. The world isn't inside you, you are inside it. This sounds odd, but there is a point. To be in any way effective in changing things, you need to sort out what happens inside you from what happens out there. You are a closed figure, not just a conduit that things pass through. There's no conflict between getting your head straight and not being able to get the world straight.

Yeah cheers Mark. I think I can see where you're coming from. Am feeling pretty good now.. my head was a bit cabbaged earlier. Too much deep thinking man, and introverted foolishness. Am wearing a steel plated armour of skin now. So won't let things get to me anymore. have just spent the past hour or so watching the lives of the people who live in the town of: Royston Vasey Haven't laughed so much in ages.. doesn't matter how many times I watch the League of Gentlemen it still has me in stitches man. Am so glad I got it on video. Will treasure it for all eternity. Have just clinked open a can of beer and am having a chilled out time mooching through people's abcsets. Is very therapeutic reading man.. I should have done that earlier.. nevermind.. I live and learn, the hard way. can't be arsed to worry about life anymore.. I'm jus gonna smile and have a laugh.. your bro in da scribing tradition the right honourable funky_seagull

The idea of a morallising book that actually influences people's daily interactions was thrown out shortly after the bible, surely. Koran for any muslims reading. Sorry for any who know where I live. Oscar Wilde said "There is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book. Books are well written or badly written. That is all." I think a modification of Sean's point in that you should try to achieve something through your writing (even if it is only the object of bringing top quality light entertainment to people who read it) may be more universally accepted. Sean may have meant something akin to this and phrased it badly. A story that does nothing or goes nowhere can have surreal value only. Provided it makes no sense

Oh, God.

The Koran is not a book.It is a message from God.Hence you can not compare it to books written by man.If there is anyone who has a right to influence man it's God! That said i agree that one of a writer's main aims should be to entertain people.A good story should be like a painting....The writer's impression of a situation.It should be up to the readers to interpret it as they want and to draw their own conclusions/morals. Was it Louisa May Alcott who said that a story with an obvious moral is not a story or something to that effect?

I think you should aim to write what you would captivated by if it was written by someone else. At the end of the day you only have your own critique to go by.

If there is a god he has absolutely no right to influence anyone , unless that is what they wish. We have free will and he is supposed to have given it to us.

A very productive and interesting debate, but putting theology to one side for a moment I think that there definitely have been books that have opened people's eyes: that have made us aware of previously unrecognized social and political threats, several of them already mentioned in this thread (Animal Farm, 1984, Brave New World, Lord of the Flys, Mother Night, Darkness at Noon, One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich) and books that have informed public opinion about such issues as recreational drugs (The Doors of Perception, Heaven and Hell, On the Road) or have enlightened us about some deeper aspect of the human condition (any Shakespearean tragedy) and the list could go on and on. Sean is right, that is ONE of the things that literature does. However it isn't the only thing and it isn't a NECESSARY function of literature, or even of great literature. It isn't implied in the very definition, as he seems to think it is. The problem with Sean's definition is that it is so narrow and stipulative. If I read To Kill a Mocking-Bird and it gives me a warm glow from the portrait it paints of a truly good man, then it has achieved something perfectly valid and earned its right to the name literature and perhaps even great literature. There isn't some particular thing that a work of literature has to accomplish in order to be so called, any more than there is one particular thing a painting has to achieve in order to be called a work of art. A story or a book can do many many things and we need to have open minds and accept writing (like any other art form) on its own terms. It isn't illustrated philosophy or moral fable (although paradoxically, it MIGHT be).

Hi everybody. I was particularly interested in Sirat's thoughts on literature. Sirat's right in so far as my definition of literature really is limited to the intellectual. Now I don't want to be narrow in my definition of intellectual. I really would like to see some good, sophisticated fables written. I don't like entertainment fiction. I think it distracts us from the true meaning of literature. But that's just my opinion and, as you can see, there are many others.

Good. I think that's clear at last. You have every right to favour one type of literature over another. But I think it's important to realize that it is your opinion, not holy writ. People have become upset because you seem to devalue other kinds of work, perhaps the kind of writing that they produce, and say that it isn't "proper" literature but only some lesser kind of thing. Speaking for myself I have nothing against fable whatsoever. My story "Bottom Feeders" is pure parable. Unless the reader grasps the analogy it becomes meaningless. "Witchcraft" is one of mine that has a subtext, where what is really being said is quite different to what appears to be being said. Those kinds of technique are fun to play with. But you can say important things about human life by other more direct means too. My story "Cinderella's Slipper" is absolutely direct in describing an incident from someone's life, a moment when he achieves a piece of self-knowledge. And my "Angel and the Elk" series is intended as pure entertainment. All I'm trying to say is that I am interested in stories of many different kinds and I believe that the value or quality of a story has nothing to do with the category to which it belongs.