(no subject)
Mar. 3rd, 2016 11:26 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
madbakerI just finished a collection of Anthony Boucher's short SF stories (thanks, NESFA!). In general they were good. Boucher was primarily an editor, although he also reviewed mysteries for the San Francisco Chronicle and taught at Cal. There's a long-running mystery convention named after him.
Many of the stories were somewhat dated - they were written during WWII, after all. One of the last ones went the opposite way I thought it would, and I think it would be far more interesting the way I envisioned. So, as a way of getting it out of my head:
The editor of a small-town newspaper is granted one wish. He wishes that the newspaper should always publish the truth (it's the masthead slogan). He gradually realizes that everything he publishes comes true - at least within the circulation area. When he headlines "War Ends!" the town acts as if there were no longer a draft, ration coupons, etc; but the federal government eventually sends an agent to investigate why they've stopped complying. Eventually he realizes that he's abusing the power and publishes a retraction of the ability.
How I thought the story would go: The other way 'round. Instead of everything he publishes coming true, he only has the ability to publish what is true. Hilarious problems with advertisers! Even more so with politicians! How do you make stories interesting when you are limited to exact descriptions? Or constant usage of "This reporter thinks that..." Basically, it's a more nuanced problem.
Many of the stories were somewhat dated - they were written during WWII, after all. One of the last ones went the opposite way I thought it would, and I think it would be far more interesting the way I envisioned. So, as a way of getting it out of my head:
The editor of a small-town newspaper is granted one wish. He wishes that the newspaper should always publish the truth (it's the masthead slogan). He gradually realizes that everything he publishes comes true - at least within the circulation area. When he headlines "War Ends!" the town acts as if there were no longer a draft, ration coupons, etc; but the federal government eventually sends an agent to investigate why they've stopped complying. Eventually he realizes that he's abusing the power and publishes a retraction of the ability.
How I thought the story would go: The other way 'round. Instead of everything he publishes coming true, he only has the ability to publish what is true. Hilarious problems with advertisers! Even more so with politicians! How do you make stories interesting when you are limited to exact descriptions? Or constant usage of "This reporter thinks that..." Basically, it's a more nuanced problem.
