Comments on: PC018: Illuminated Dragon

By: Laleh

Laleh — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 19:10:44 +0000

Interesting to know.

By: Spork

Spork — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 00:48:56 +0000

By the way, nice try at burying my first and only warning 21 days after the story drops off the main page…

By: Spork

Spork — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 00:39:30 +0000

I give my honest opinions, I do not troll.

By: Rachel

Rachel — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 06:52:51 +0000

Spork, you have a history of trolling this site and others related to PodCastle. I am not inclined to tolerate you calling other posters “idiots.” Consider this a final warning.

By: Spork

Spork — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 23:30:11 +0000

Some of you are taking this WAY to literally.

The rationalists are called such because it’s the only opposition one can muster to something that is inherently irrational. That being magic.

You slap some paint, or blood, into an animal shape, wave your fingers, mutter a few weird words and whoosh! You’ve got a living critter made out of paint, paper, or blood.

There simply couldn’t be anything more irrational than magic. Well, except for the RNC, but you get my meaning.

Stop trying to apply fantasy stories to the real world in which we all live, you idiots! I read/listen to fantasy to escape reality, not to compare the two. Seriously. What’s wrong with you that you can’t enjoy a story with a giant dragon made out of blood and willpower?

By: Spork

Spork — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 15:58:57 +0000

I really, really enjoyed this one. I could see and feel everything described, and the blood dragon was a great solution.

By: aaron

aaron — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 00:46:58 +0000

I know it’s an old story by now but I felt I had to comment.

The description of the “rationalists” really bugged me.

I, and most other rationalists I know, would love to live in a world with magic, physics, gods, and whatever other paranormal things you want to throw in, that’s why we love fantasy. The problem is that every bit of evidence suggests that world doesn’t exist.

I can accept the caricature of a group to communicate a message about that group. The problem here is that the message is completely and utterly wrong. The rationalists of the story are polar opposites of what rationalism is but are instead based on the misunderstandings and lies of those making their living conning people as paranormal experts. On the contrary psychics, mediums, and religions have much more in common with the “rationalists” of this story than real rationalists ever could.

By: Rod Basler

Rod Basler — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 20:45:18 +0000

An amazing story, and one that just cries out to be expanded into novel format - with more elbow room, the countless unanswered questions could be addressed, and with more subtlety.
I must admit that for a good deal of this story, I had a hard time accepting it as fantasy at all - not because the fantastic elements are rare or incidental to the story, but because the world of this story so closely parallels some of the ugliest and most painful aspects of our own. It was less than a decade ago that ‘police’ went through the museums of a particular country with sledgehammers, destroying priceless artwork and artifacts because they were ‘idolatrous’; and as for denying the evidence of one’s eyes - the story goes that Galileo had the churchmen look through his telescope to see the moons of Jupiter, to see for themselves that there were bodies in the heavens that did not revolve around the earth…and they claimed to have seen nothing.
As Einstein said: “Only two things are infinite: the universe, and human stupidity. And I’m not sure about the former.”

Please, Ms. Prineas, I’d love to hear more.

By: The Fix | From the Podosphere: July 2008

The Fix | From the Podosphere: July 2008 — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 01:31:17 +0000

[...] final story for July is “Illuminated Dragon” by Sarah Prineas. In a world of rationalists, where magic is banned, a man hides his gift [...]

By: Martin R

Martin R — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 15:18:36 +0000

This story is a heavy-handed allegory of the kind that Tolkien loathed. It’s designed to alienate every fantasy lover who, while happy to read about Faerie, has no wish to try to live there. Worst Podcastle story so far.

Good reading, though. I always imagine Steve Anderson looking like Frank N. Furter in the Rocky Horror Picture Show.

By: Greg

Greg — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 01:33:28 +0000

Great story. As for the view of rationalism the story presents, I think it was trying to represent the complex historical issues of idolatry/iconoclasm in a simple form. My sense is that the “rationalist” position would’ve been in a religious context, interpreting commandments again graven images to be anti-image. I appreciated that the author didn’t make it a simple conflict of magic vs. “religion” or “the church” as things are often simplified in fantasy. On the other hand, describing the anti-image group merely as the ‘rationalists’ doesn’t do justice to the religious context in which that view grew up. It would be difficult to say much more in a short story though, but there could’ve been a little more description on this point.

By: DrunkenGamer

DrunkenGamer — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 00:43:16 +0000

I found myself truly admiring the lead character. He faced his seemingly inevitable doom without calling on vengefulness, victimhood or any other manifestation of anger. He had a humble heart throughout it all. It’s been awhile since a happy ending left me actually feeling happy and not pandered to.

By: SarahP

SarahP — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 12:46:42 +0000

Oh, and as far as the rest of it goes. It could very well be a straw man argument. If the story opens up discussion, I’m thrilled. But I’m not going to defend the argument either way. It’s not my story, it’s the reader’s.

By: SarahP

SarahP — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 12:45:15 +0000

Steve, thanks for continuing this discussion. I don’t necessarily feel that way about rationalism. I’m not trying to make an argument in the story at all. The story is a story and not a vehicle for any opinions I might have on that issue. The reader is welcome to derive whatever meaning he or she likes from the conflict presented in the story.

Interesting. You’re tapping into a larger issue about what stories, or fiction in general, should do. As an author, I don’t write in order to advance any agenda. At least, I hope not.

Rachel directed this to the boards! I didn’t know there was such a thing, but I’ll try to track it down.

By: Changwa Steve

Changwa Steve — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 09:12:24 +0000

Sara,

I am asking why you resort to a straw man argument, not why you made certain artistic choices. That’s clear, right?

By: Rachel

Rachel — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 07:54:24 +0000

“A rational skeptic would not discount the evidence of his own eyes that magic works, were such evidence presented.”

There’s a discussion about this on the forums.

By: SarahP

SarahP — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 03:38:48 +0000

Thanks all, for the comments on the story!

Changwa Steve asks,

“I would be interested to know why the author feels this way about rationalism, and what motivated her to write around the issue rather than confronting it more directly.”

Because it’s a story, not a treatise.

By: Changwa Steve

Changwa Steve — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 21:59:29 +0000

I call shenanigans on this story. The Rationalist faction is a straw man.

A rational skeptic would not discount the evidence of his own eyes that magic works, were such evidence presented. Nothing about rational skepticism leads inevitably to hating art and beauty, and there is no clear relationship between an evidence and logic-based worldview, and the violent suppression of dissent to that worldview.

I would be interested to know why the author feels this way about rationalism, and what motivated her to write around the issue rather than confronting it more directly.

By: George

George — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 15:00:44 +0000

… and worthy of being published as an Illuminated ms

By: George

George — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 14:58:51 +0000

Excellent story! Great reading too.

It brought back memories of Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 (the classic I fell in love with at age 12) and that made the end all the more meaningful and sweeter.

Brilliant!

By: scatterbrain

scatterbrain — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 22:51:19 +0000

Quite brilliant, quite unique in itself.

By: Nae

Nae — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 13:53:38 +0000

As an artist as well as a lover of books (illuminated and otherwise), I simply fell in love with this story. It was beautifully crafted, emotionally charged, well narrated & powerful, as well as intellectually stimulating. Great job! Just fantastic!!

By: Abbie

Abbie — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 18:50:02 +0000

I loved this story! But I really really wanted to hear more. Surely this is not the end of this character and his tale?

By: CaroCogitatus

CaroCogitatus — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 21:20:46 +0000

Oops. I confused the reader of this episode with Escape Pod 168.

By: CaroCogitatus

CaroCogitatus — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 21:09:15 +0000

Nice premise, but it was marred by a couple of problems in my opinion. First, if the depiction of animals were really illegal, bookstores would have been the first to feel the heat. I got the impression that the protagonist, despite his past activities and his current profession, has been flying under the radar. He wasn’t nearly as careful with his work as any reasonable person would be in his shoes.
Second, the ending was telegraphed in advance, which is unusual for me (count me slow-on-the-uptake in that regard, which makes the ending all the better for most of the stories I read). I wondered halfway through why he hadn’t already been doing what he did at the end.
Alastair was a good choice of reader, though. Love his work on pseudopod and the match was good here.

By: Chris

Chris — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 00:46:00 +0000

Easily my favorite so far, but I’ve enjoyed everyone of them so far. I really think I had gotten so lulled in by the lack of what I previously thought of “fantasy” that this one almost had a nostalgic fantasy feel to it. As much as I’ve enjoyed the many variations on fantasy, I’m very glad this one was more of what I think of as typical fantasy.

By: Rachel

Rachel — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 14:05:02 +0000

“A small request, though: when reading feedback at the end of the episode, could you guys give a brief mention of what the story was about? Often, I find I’ve forgotten the title by the time feedback comes around.”

I’ll make sure to pass that along to Ann.

By: Josh

Josh — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 05:42:05 +0000

This may be my favorite Podcastle so far. It used enough of the tropes of fantasy - dragons, conflict between magic and rationalism, etc. - to draw me in, but it still felt very unique. Sort of like 1984 meets meets sword-and-sorcery.

A small request, though: when reading feedback at the end of the episode, could you guys give a brief mention of what the story was about? Often, I find I’ve forgotten the title by the time feedback comes around.

By: I Like Podcasts » Blog Archive » Sarah Prineas Story Up at PodCastle

I Like Podcasts » Blog Archive » Sarah Prineas Story Up at PodCastle — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:22:52 +0000

[...] Sarah Prineas’s fantasy story, “Illuminated Dragon”, read by Steve Anderson, is up at fantasy podcast site PodCastle. The story originally appeared in Strange Horizons in 2002. [...]

By: Travis

Travis — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 20:17:53 +0000

Wow, this was a wonderful story!
The reading was appropriately subdued, as well, which just made it that much better.
I really hope the author considers adapting this story into a full novel, furthering the story and detailing the renewed fight against the rationalists.