The Ides of Starch Discussion/Planning

[Raven]

Nearly ten years ago (evidence suggests the end of 2006) on the old Lost Pathway forums, a collaborative story was begun called the "Ides of Starch," written primarily by Duke and Trae, though with many other collaborators over the years. It was determined that it would eventually encompass seven installments. Even in the times when the forums were offline, the Starch continued. Currently, six have been written. One more is to be finished. Over the years, a lot has been written either in or about the Starch. This thread will be a place for the collection of things written *about* the Starch, as well as general information on the Starch, discussion of the Starch, sharing of memories, as well as planning for the self-published version of the Starch to be made available to those who would like to have their own physical copy (if we can do so without legal trouble).
As we prepare to begin the 7th Starch, I would like to honor those who have contributed to the Starch over the years. Please correct me if I'm forgetting anyone.


Part I:
Duke
Trae

Part II:
Duke
Trae
SisterGrimm
Nnaril

Part III:
Duke
Trae
Fran
Brendan
Ryan
Nathan

Part IV:
Duke
Trae
Steve
Ryan
Dan

Part V:
Duke
Trae
Dan

Part VI:
Duke
Trae
Sarah

[josiahduke]

I think that's the right lineup. I'm not missing anyone; we can do a sweep when we have the full set.

Conceptually, I'm unsure what the final frontier for this last installment should be. Are we gonna parody sci fi now? Or are we going to do like JJ Abrams did and Force-Awakens this, return it to the roots, back to basics, what everyone loved about it, etc. I will just sit down and write it, but since we're in the planning stage, and it's a fundamental thing, I'd like your input, Trae.

Basically: do we want to loop back to any earlier parts, make this a victory lap kinda thing, or do we surge forward into new areas of parody? I'm playing a lot of cyberpunk hacking games right now, so sci fi might just be the next/last/final thing.

We have Quem. We have this modwyvern. Will we bring back Berbil?

Hmmm. I think I might return to some of the stuff we had in Part V--which was, in my opinion, the strongest Starch to date. We took our best risks in that one, and I actually loved a lot of the characters. But the Starch is always characterized (ha) by a rotating cast of joke-party members who get remixed/reshuffled in later installments.

No matter where we go, we have to bring back Berbil, in my opinion.

Let it be known I very seriously considered writing this entire post in Donald Trump's stilted dialectic.

--Duke

[Raven]

Oh dear -- to lift a line from Batman, Donald Trump is not the president this country needs. But he is the president this country deserves. . .


At any rate, we have yet to spoof sci-fi. I ended the last hoping we could do at least a big part of the final installment as a sci-fi spoof. But yes, at some point Berbil should come back. At some point the Ides of Starch will return. But, we don't need to have all of the returns happen in the first post. I was up last night reading through some old Starch to refresh myself. We need to do a good job of tying things in -- for old ties' sake. . .
At any rate, despite our desire to do this thing in a magical, wonderful way, this is the Starch, and we shouldn't get so caught up in wanting to write an amazing ending that we aren't Starchy. I think I will include excerpts from an old e-mail exchange we had, discussing what is the Starch (and for my part, even though this is the 7th installment, I'm not sure the Starch can ever really die . . . )

Old Email Exchange from 2011:

Alright, here we be.


Trae:
[EDITED], word on the international e-mail street is that you want in on the Starch. If my memory serves me, you first got introduced to the Starch under the horrific auspices of part IV. There are a few things I'd like to open discussion one.

    In the beginning . . . . . of the Starch,

   Part of the precedent was that we would write a story in which we subverted each other, undoing, redoing, or twisting the work of the other. This openly antagonistic precedent morphed fairly early on and became something else, something represented in the mysterious word, "Starch." The point of the Starch is not to collaborate openly, nor is it to undo or hijack the work of the other, though the latter may at times be Starchy, depending on the winds of the Starch and where they blow. It may be impossible to truly define the quality that is Starchy. First, let us look at a few rules by precedent.

     1. Duke always begins the Starch with the opening post.

     2. Trae always ends the Starch with the finishing post (Slaggety's ending to part IV is not canonical, in other words). These two first rules have been in place since the beginning . . . . of the Starch.

     3. The Starch exists in a continuous universe with history, characters, and so on.

     4. Starchiness is not located in trying to write sexual or bass humor, or stupid slapstick types of comedy involving genitalia or body noises. That is not the spirit of Starchiness.

     5. Turns are taken in rigid order. No one writes two installations in a row. Duke and I can never write another post before the other person responds. Other people, Dan presumably, do not have to write a post for each exchange, although they can if they wish. Other people can drop in posts here and there, but I cannot, for instance, post a second time before Duke responds. Likewise, any other participant cannot post twice before Duke and I respond. So this is how it would possibly look --- Trae, Dan, Duke, Trae, Duke, Dan, Trae, Duke   --- etc.   

      But the Starch isn't about rules such as this. Nor is it about HIJACKING LIKE PART V, where people weren't working with the plot, but started lots of separate things so that the whole thing became chaotic.

    The Starch isn't simply spoof or satire, more a celebration of the ridiculousness of what we otherwise are. It is not supposed to be stupid, but rather, clever, witty, ridiculous.  The only way to accomplish this is by participation and emulation. There are some excellent examples of Starch in past episodes.

My suggestion for newcomers is that they try not to start out as a major operator, making humongous plot shifts. We don't need a bunch of suprise major events and plot twists, but we can also use lots of clever descriptions, characterizations, connections and nods to great works of fantasy/sci-fi/literature, cleverly done. It doesn't take a big plot shift to be hilarious and Starchy (though sometimes the time is right for such a shift).

There is a great weight on this episode because we, in the fifth installment, have brought the "Ideas of Starch" into it. I suggest being extremely careful in how you deal with the topic of the Ides of Starch, especially as a newcomer, I wouldn't touch it.

What say ye, Duke, about these things?
----------------------------------------

Duke
Well, first off, I'm making a new word document entitled "Starch Canon".

And second, I agree with everything said in the past email. If we're putting everything on the table, I'd like to have my say with a few. And clarify one or two bits that may still be undefined. We obviously don't want to talk about the Starch as we're writing it, but these are bits of unspoken understanding

(As a footnote to Trae's Third Precedent)

As has been seen in past endeavours, any attempt to introduce actual characters from our world is unwise, and, considering that we no longer post on a forum, has the potential to be wiped clean from our memories and computer hard drives. (All that said: we have quite often had characters complain about the plot). I'm referring less to the rather unfortunate end of Part IV and more to various punctuated moments throughout Part III--most notably the infamous introduction of Satan by [EDITED]. Trae did his best to simply wipe it from the memory, but I fought for it because I believe that almost anything can be properly justified. There is, however, a difference in standards, and it's more fun to work with things that don't simply trample on the precedent. I'm good cop, Trae's bad cop on these things. With one fell swoop, Trae bid a (much-needed) adieu to [EDITED] ridiculous Demvi in Part II. (Did she ever post after that?) All that to say: Satan and God just don't happen. We've got a pantheon that can mock anything anyway.

(A Footnote to the Fourth Precedent)

See also:


"Gwano moved past the wrought iron cupboard, revealing two voluptuous green legs. They looked like unshaven zucchini in the dim light of midday. Berbil gulped and forgot the past day's events." -Part I

"And the thought of a drink made Berbil wretch all over his plate of steamed alfalfa." -Part II

(A Footnote for Dan)

I think the last time Trae and I tried to clarify the Starch, etc. to someone, it was [EDITED], and we broke his spirit--like quite honestly squashed it--and he was afraid to ever post again. Seeing as you have actually read the starch (he read all of them, Trae), I think you won't make the same errors. Unless you go in like [EDITED] on Part III with a "screw the world" sort of attitude (which led to some amusing if offensive Dark Tower references that only I got), I think you'll do fine. Quite fine.

All this to say, again, The Starch is not about rules. It's all about the Starch. We don't know what it is, although we do. The prime rule of the Starch, at all costs, is that we don't know what the Starch truly is, but that we somehow understand its essence.

Though, as has been the precedent as well,

Anything

Goes

--------------------------------

Trae
Very good points, Duke. As a footnote to your footnotes to the fourth precedent, it is apparent that in these examples, it isn't so much slapstick or sexual humor as it is cleverness in description. That is Starchy.

----------------------------

[Raven]

As we approach the final moments of the Starch, I think it pertinent to consider what must come after.
I think we should have the Ides of Starch printed so we can have physical copies. That said, I have a couple of options of book binders / self publishers we could consider. There is Bohemio Bookbindery of Michigan who would print on demand some high quality books if we wanted to get something nicer as a momento and just have a few made. Check them out here:
http://www.bohemiobookbindery.com/

Or, if we'd rather go with a simple paper-back book that is dirt cheap, http://www.createspace.com is what I'd recommend.

Here's part of the issue. If we went with createspace, we could try to clean up the Ides a bit as far as typos, etc, and make it available as a kindle book, e-book, or for order on Amazon, etc. very easily for free or for a dollar, with physical books costing only a few bucks (less than five I think). However, we have had 11 authors over the years, some of whom may or may not be easy to get in touch with and we'd have to figure out the legal ramifications of what we'd have to do to include their posts. I actually don't know what laws would directly apply.
EDIT: After some looking, I have found out that everyone who contributed most likely has legal joint copyright (at least to the part they were involved in) and can reproduce the work in anyway they please without permission from our joint copyright holders. But, if there are any profits, they have to be split evenly unless they sign away that right. But, because we did this in parts, the entire whole may actually be a compiled work and might not work in the same way as far as joint copyright for the individual parts. I'll keep looking. What we know so far is that we can do whatever we want with it so long as we're not making money. Free e-book anyone?

At any rate, I don't think we'd have any negative ramifications in having a few copies printed for those who'd want. But we need to consider the design and if we'd want to make it a paperback with illustrations, the "critical edition" with scholarly articles, or make it look as much like an old tome as possible.

What say ye?

This book is probably going to be between 100,000 and 110,000 words. That is a sizeable book in the area of 400 pages long. I'd love to have a copy on my shelf, one way or the other.
Duke is a talented artist, so if we wanted to go the way of illustrations, maps, etc., we could have that option if Duke consented. Or we could go with old leather tomes. One or the other.

[josiahduke]

I would rather not make the Starch available as a kindle or e-book; I think it's just something I'd rather share with friends, and would rather not think about profiting from it (or letting any potential publishers know I wrote). However, I am very much in favor of a handsome printed copy. I think that Dan might be the only one of our friend group who might be interested in getting a copy.

I have the entire saga in a Scrivener document, which should make it easy to clean up, create internal consistency, and create a good proofing copy, if nothing else. (Trae, do you have Scrivener? And if not, why?? It is the best app for writers).

I also have an old map of the Starch I made around Part III.

[Raven]

Very well, I'm fine with that. That way, we also don't have to figure out any litigious matters and can just do what we want.
So if we want to go with the more handsome copies, it'll cost a tad more. But we need to also consider whether we want illustrations/maps, and whatever other features. Should we get creative and do funny world-expanding footnotes? Should we stick to straight starch? Should there be an introduction/afterward? What ideas do we want to pursue?

I'll check out Scrivener.
EDIT: I checked out Scrivener. It seems to cost money. That's why I don't have it, nor will I anytime soon. . . How about Open Office? Or google docs?