leezdz
Tuesday 10th February 2009 18:08 | Pratfall |
| Wonderfully skewed. I'm still laughing. More, please! |
SomeGuyFawkes
Wednesday 9th April 2008 22:50 | Pratfall |
Worthwhile parodies are hard to do. One rarer, but obviously not unseen, risk is becoming that which is parodied.
|
freshwater
Sunday 10th February 2008 03:08 | Pratfall |
"It was a quivering mound of love pudding that he longed to plumb."
ROTFLOL!!!!! You are so weird.....your picture should accompany the dictionary definition of "bizarre". This was a hoot to read from beginning to end. I particularly liked the quirky little field trips that Harry's mind took....somebody give the boy a laptop and the web address for wikipedia so he can research rubber chickens. **grin**
The bit with Barney was just evil....surely you have been sued multiple times for inducing hyperventilating or chronic hiccups caused by uncontrollable laughter.
The true identity of the pranksters did surprise me, although I was becoming suspicious of Fred and George's repeated protestations of innocence....usually they proudly proclaim their ownership of a prank.
Despite my earlier accusations of weirdness, I'll venture to say that your ability to write a story such as this marks you as one of the most mentally healthy guys I've met. Well done! |
ykprasad
Wednesday 30th January 2008 23:07 | Pratfall |
| one of the best stories i ever read |
ykprasad
Wednesday 30th January 2008 23:07 | Pratfall |
| one of the best stories i ever read |
jeanne
Sunday 30th December 2007 19:49 | Pratfall |
| Too bad for SIYE, they lose out. This was hilarious. Only dirty minds would find fault with this. Still laughing and enjoyed every word. Ultimate prank. |
| Monday 7th January 2008 23:17 | Pratfall (Author Response) |
| Only dirty minds? Well, I guess that rules out just about everyone that might ever read this. That's okay, I don't mind too much. I'm glad you enjoyed it, truly, though if you still find yourself laughing after all this time, I trust others find your sense of humour as warped as they find mine. Cheers. |
aharkins
Wednesday 19th December 2007 15:08 | Pratfall |
| Excellent! Thank you. |
| Monday 7th January 2008 23:15 | Pratfall (Author Response) |
| Glad you enjoyed it. It's always fun to find someone appreciating my strange sense of humour. |
majolie
Monday 10th December 2007 12:38 | Pratfall |
I think I hurt myself reading this. Thanks for a great laugh on a dreary Monday.
"Ride me forever, Dragon Lover!" |
| Monday 17th December 2007 00:30 | Pratfall (Author Response) |
| Glad you found it amusing. But hopefully not so amusing that the hurt was enduring. T'would be nicer if it just faded with the passage of time to be less raw, and simply fond on recollection. Cheers. |
janepotter
Monday 30th July 2007 19:27 | Pratfall |
Oh...My...God...
I can hardly type...Can't see the keyboard through my laughter-induced tears...
It was Barney that did it...Big purple member wanting others to join S.P.E.W, indeed! |
| Monday 30th July 2007 23:13 | Pratfall (Author Response) |
| There's a back-story there, of course. Once upon a time, in a life far, far away, I had a girlfriend that worked in a public library. She introduced me to the "smut test" for romance novels, something she worked out with some of her friends. They found it such a good rule, she had to share it with me once it was worked out. Needless to say, my fragile little mind (hush, no snickering in the background) was quite damaged as a result. The rule was something like this: If you can pick up a romance novel, and randomly turn to three spots, finding no mention of a Throbbing Purple Member on either page (or something close to such a description), then it's a proper romance, and not a novel form of smut. In the due course of writing this (which has a theme through it as well), that minor tidbit came back to me with a vengeance. That was coupled to one of my betas telling me that she would never compliantly read anything talking about a "quivering mound of love pudding" for a sexual euphemism in it, which I naturally took as a challenge. I believe she now regrets ever telling that to me, but I also believe she found it a worthwhile sacrifice when working on this one. Whew. Lengthy reply, but there it is. Glad you enjoyed this little ditty. Err, well, maybe that was a bad word choice. Watch out for more one-shots coming soon. One (MMM, COOKIES) is a parody, but it's still in the percolating stage. One (Buttonfly 501) is more like Ridiculous, in beta. The other (Confused Mind) is closer to Doors of Perception crossed with Echoes, and has the first chunk in beta. Cheers. |
Patches
Saturday 21st April 2007 14:48 | Pratfall |
| Quite the prank! I never would have guessed that Harry, Ginny, Molly and Arthur were the praksters! This was very well done Thank you for writing. I look forward to more stories. p |
| Monday 30th July 2007 23:05 | Pratfall (Author Response) |
| Wow, I think I overlooked the reviews on this story. Anyway, glad you found it amusing. The hard part was keeping it consistent to the character's thinking, without revealing too much. Did you catch the theme inside the parody? There are a couple of one-shot type things coming, sooner or later. Lots of people have real life issues cropping up, so delays are inevitable. |
ninkenate
Friday 2nd February 2007 15:33 | Pratfall |
| That was hilarious! I'm not normally the type to like parodies but this one came recommended to me. I am so glad it was. The ending came as a complete surprise and totally changed the whole story for me. I look forward to reading the rest of your stories here. |
| Friday 2nd February 2007 23:06 | Pratfall (Author Response) |
| I'm glad you enjoyed this. There's the blatant humour, and then there's all the rest of it. I'm never sure who is really finding even half of it, but comments like yours give me hope. I've got a couple of more "in the works" as it were that you may enjoy as well, one-shots to distract me from Echoes (22 chapters and counting on that monster). |
Sovran
Friday 19th January 2007 22:56 | Pratfall |
So what's the approximate ratio of jokes/references to words in this thing? 50%? More?
It's no surprise that I think the best bits are at the ends. Then again . . . most of us like the bits to be at the ends, right? Middlebits are messy, confusing, and perhaps even detrimental to doing good bitness. The trick, of course, is to separate the wheat from the chaff. Then discard the wheat, switch your glasses, and take another look at the chaff. Repeat ad nauseum. Eventually, you'll be left with only one bit, and then perhaps you'll have discovered and learned something of singular value. |
| Wednesday 24th January 2007 22:37 | Pratfall (Author Response) |
| Hmm, jokes/refs to words? I'd be hard pressed to classify that. Do I have to count unique jokes/refs? If so, well, it probably skews it down quite a bit. Maybe to just 5-10%. If I can repeat them, then I'd SWAG the number around 85% or more. It might be higher, but the dangling bits on the front and back are less targeted at a few words per theme, and more general targets to a few choice references. Of course, we all have to be careful with our dangly bits, right? I think the best part of it all is simply "ad naseum" for how true the whole thing is. But watch out for that one bit when you get done separating all the false bits. Mathematics in base one is never as simple as it appears, especially when you have to think about different aspects of it all. |
Astrid
Friday 19th January 2007 12:24 | Pratfall |
| Hehe, hilarious. |
| Wednesday 24th January 2007 22:33 | Pratfall (Author Response) |
| I'm glad you found it amusing. I do wonder whether people get all of it, especially the non obvious bits. Thanks for the feedback. |
zoltan42
Thursday 18th January 2007 09:58 | Pratfall |
| "After the third time it just became dull and repetitive." referred to the third fake proposal. If I had meant I read it three times I would have stated it that way. |
| Thursday 18th January 2007 10:16 | Pratfall (Author Response) |
Look, you're clearly not getting it, and I mean that in so many ways it's not funny.
Your first review was a long-winded and patronizing "I don't get it."
My response was a long-winded and patronizing "That's obvious" with some clues as to what you're missing.
Your second review was a long-winded, patronizing, condescending "No, really, I don't get it."
My second reply was a short, blunt, direct statement that "That's clear, and I was making fun of your own word choices and phrasings since you seem to want to pick on mine, there's absolutely no way for you to miss that this time, and by the way, if you don't clean up your tone, you're going to be very surprised."
Your third review is still harping on the same thing: "I don't get it." And it boggles the mind that you have failed to comprehend what I've been trying to tell you.
Are you really so frustrated in life that you can't just admit to something like this, and then ask what it is outright? You have to resort to such reviews as the ones you left?
Let me spell it out directly:
There is blunt and obvious humour.
There is subtle and interwoven humour.
There is as much said as unsaid, and it's all in the exact phrasing used.
Pratfall has all of this, and quite a bit more.
Your whole PoV complaint stems from the fact you think that there was no way to avoid telling the reader that Harry knew what he was doing. That's part of the bit you're not getting. Try reading Chreechree's review for the same story. |
Chreechree
Thursday 18th January 2007 03:24 | Pratfall |
Ooh, we're feeling the love already! That didn't take long.
Well, I loved your absurdity, especially as that's what it's supposed to be.
And, I too thought Zoltan42 was saying he/she had read it 3 times as the review said "after the third time". Maybe s/he meant after the third false proposal? I'm with you, though, that s/he didn't quite get that Harry's thoughts weren't altered and he never felt interest in his "targets". It's all about the language you used, and I should know since we pruned out those kinds of inconsistent thoughts (he knew she'd say yes, etc.). Every thing else is up for interpretation. After all, if you read “he gradually understood that she really cared so deeply for him. That she would always be there to take care of him, give him a hug, help him back on his feet, no matter what! She simply must love him back as much as he loved her!” as applying to Molly, not Ginny, his thoughts are consistent. Of course he loves Molly and vice versa. As a matter of fact, those comments about giving him a hug, etc. do sound a bit more motherly, now, don’t they? Of course, part of the trick is to figure out when Harry is thinking about Ginny and when he’s thinking about his target.
I think you behaved pretty nicely.
|
| Thursday 18th January 2007 10:17 | Pratfall (Author Response) |
No, I know he was referring to the third time the joke happened. After all, there's really only one direct joke running in the story.
Maybe my last review will get him to go back and reflect on it. I don't know how he's missed the comments thus far.
Thanks for all the eye-catching work. I know that got tedious! |
zoltan42
Wednesday 17th January 2007 23:40 | Pratfall |
No, I did not read it three times. What I stated was this was written in Third Person Limited Omniscient perspective. You know, as opposed to First Person point of view (POV), where the main character is the narrator and the narrative is in the form "I opened the door."
Third Person Limited Omniscient perspective is a version of Third Person POV where the narrator, an unseen person who is not part of the story, is privy to the thoughts and emotions of (usually) one of the characters. Except for a few opening chapters in PS/SS, GOF, and HBP, JKR has written the entire series using the narrative scheme from Harry's POV.
I am not confused about the potions. That comment was to blunt any argument that the potions would have altered the thoughts we read that would mask what was really going on. Yes, I know the last part was clear he was targeting the family and trying to blame the twins. The point is that the last part does not agree at all with what came before. We know in great detail what was going on in Harry's mind. There was not one moment that his thoughts and emotions were not genuine, as opposed to being fake as shown in the last part. If Harry was really faking it, because of the narrative scheme you used, there should have been some indication in the set up that this was all a fake. The only effective way to do this would have been to write it purely from a Third Person POV. |
| Thursday 18th January 2007 00:19 | Pratfall (Author Response) |
Maybe you should read it a fourth time. You missed all the hints the first three times.
"Jokes of the proper kind, properly told, can do more to enlighten questions of politics, philosophy, and literature than any number of dull arguments." Isaac Asimov.
And for the record, your PoV commentary is out of line. |
zoltan42
Wednesday 17th January 2007 18:22 | Pratfall |
| This started okay, but the sledgehammer approach quickly beat any humor out of it. After the third time it just became dull and repetitive. And the twist ending just doesn't work since it goes contrary to your narrative scheme. Written in Third Person Limited Omniscient perspective, we are too privy to what is really going on in Harry's mind. Trying to explain that the potions he was taking would mask his true thoughts is just a rationalization. |
| Wednesday 17th January 2007 21:27 | Pratfall (Author Response) |
First, let me be sure I understand you. You actually read this three times? Why? I've read it more times than I can count easily, and it's not funny at all to me anymore unless sufficient time lapses between readings. Even then, the humour is for what no one seems to be picking up on, rather than the obvious bits.
Second, if I assume for a moment that you did read it three times...
a) The blunt humour is there for a reason...
b) If you read it three times, there are far more subtle things in this story that should leap out at you. Almost all of the really "interesting" bits are in the first and last pieces. The filler in between has some vague hints and references, but this is actually a story within a parody, or perhaps a parody within a parody of a story.
c) There are several connections to other popular major fanfic works that are seemingly not parodied in the bulk of the material.
Third, the problem with writing a deliberate setup like this is partially what you point out -- it's hard to have a quasi-omniscient character that doesn't actively think about the game going on.
Fourth, I think you're confused about the role of the potions he was dosing himself with, or else I didn't explain it well enough. They didn't alter his thoughts so he was unaware of them (see third part above about thoughts), instead they nullified the mental controls and allowed him to pick his target. As the last section should have made clear, they were (a) deliberately targeting everyone in the family, and (b) knowingly turning the blame for it all on the twins.
Thanks for reading and leaving feedback. |
TreyFury97
Wednesday 17th January 2007 13:46 | Pratfall |
good story... and you had me fooled as to who was causing it the whole time.... WOW!!!!!!!!!!!
Trey |
| Wednesday 17th January 2007 21:18 | Pratfall (Author Response) |
| I'm glad you enjoyed the story. The hints were there along the way, but they should have properly been lost in the noise as it were. |
parakletos
Wednesday 17th January 2007 11:38 | Pratfall |
| And you got this posted too? |
| Wednesday 17th January 2007 21:17 | Pratfall (Author Response) |
| You know where to look for the guilty parties on that one. Rumor has it that there's a helping hand picking it over, since the usual didn't care for it. Hmmmm. You wouldn't happen the know the fellow, would you? At any rate, I'm surprised people are reading it all the way through. It's a bit much in one go. |
No Idea Why I Smile
Wednesday 17th January 2007 05:14 | Pratfall |
well...im glad i populate this site as well as SIYE, cause im sure i'll love this...going to print it off and read at school...heh...good way to fail high school, yeah?
and i just read your author's notes...you humor isnt tasteless...not all the time anyway...but it is quite twisted, i must admit...
im sure ill love this...
~*NIWIS*~
*KNOWN AS GINNYMARIE ON SIYE* |
| Wednesday 17th January 2007 09:44 | Pratfall (Author Response) |
| Since you hadn't read it at the time, let's just safely assume you now think otherwise, yes? I'll be candid. The humour in Pratfall is verrrryyy much so at times. But that's what makes it fun. Well, that and the hidden meaning that seems to evade readers. |
girlspell
Tuesday 16th January 2007 19:14 | Pratfall |
Well what can I say? Your homage to delightfully inane fan fiction writers (of whom there are too many) just hits the mark.
"Her warm touch! Her touching warmth! Her loving touch! Her touching love! Her loving warmth touching him! Him burying himself in her loving warmth!"
Actually this reads like a deranged Barbara Cartland (or a sane Barbara Cartland, if you're a fan). Cartland was deadly serious.
Best part? the ski masks, snow suits...the best thing that magic can come up with in thousands of years, let alone central heating.
|
| Tuesday 16th January 2007 21:15 | Pratfall (Author Response) |
While I doubt this fic, in and of itself, will help people avoid certain overly abused cliches, I can always dream, right?
I'm glad you enjoyed it. It's obvious you caught the blatant humour and puns... but I have to ask. Did you catch the not so obvious ones? There's more to this story than just a parody... |
