Search the Site
Subscribe
Mail Me
Powered by Squarespace
Login
Books
  • Jude: Level 1
    Jude: Level 1
    by Julian Gough

    Shortlisted for the 2008 Wodehouse Prize for comic fiction.

    The novel's prologue won the biggest prize in the world for a single short story - the BBC National Short Story Prize.

    "Sheer comic brilliance" - The Times

    "The best comic novel I've ever read" - Tommy Tiernan

    "Could be the finest comic novel since Flann O'Brien's The Third Policeman" - The Sunday Tribune

  • Juno and Juliet
    Juno and Juliet
    by Julian Gough

    My first novel, of which I am very fond. The adventures of teenage twin sisters Juno & Juliet, in their first year away from home. Life, love and literature, in Galway and Tipperary.

     

    "Like Roddy Doyle in an extremely good mood" - The Washington Post

    "A modern, at times brilliantly ironic reworking of the classical fairytale, with nods to Shakespeare, Austen and Beckett." - Literary Review

    "Hugely entertaining" - Vogue

Monday
Aug302010

Electric Picnic, Free Sex Chocolate, Jude in London, etc.

OK, a slightly messy blog post, catching up on a few things. I'm reading (or mud-wrestling John Banville, it hasn't been decided yet), at the Electric Picnic at 5pm, Sunday 5th, with Greg Baxter. Feel free to come up and give me a big kiss. I'll be around for most of the weekend, and so may well pop up at other events too.

My Electric Picnic reading will probably be from Jude in London, which was due out, oooh, roughly today. It isn't. Why? Because, rewriting it this year, I disappeared up my own hole in search of perfection. Perfection turned out not to be found up there, but in the meantime (warning: we are now changing metaphors, mind the gap), I went through my deadline like a freight train through a sheet of crepe paper. So, my lovely publisher Ben and I have decided to postpone publication till next year. But, on the upside, we’re using this delay to add drawings, in the manner of Alice in Wonderland. (These pictures will not only be lovely in themselves, but will also help make it clear to new readers that Jude in London is, er, not a standard literary novel.)

Thus, I've asked Gareth "Napoleon" Allen to throw a bucket down the well of his subconscious, and haul up some demons. Gareth may be known to some of the more elderly hipsters out there as the artist who designed the sleeve for Toasted Heretic's first album, Songs for Swinging Celibates, back in 1988. (A sleeve which was, more recently, at the centre of a highly entertaining legal battle with Tayto Crisps.)

 

Oh, and my darling poetry publisher Jessie, who lives on the Cliffs of Moher, would like me to tell you that Free Sex Chocolate: Poems & Songs (published by the great Salmon Poetry!) is now out. It contains all my poems (most of them from the past few years in Berlin), and all the Toasted Heretic lyrics. Putting the book together, I was startled at how many of my favourite lyrics hadn’t made it onto the albums, so I’ve included B-sides such as Food for Breakfast (always popular live), unreleased tracks like Satellite Dishes and (perhaps my favourite lyric) Pregnant (which I once set, rather illegally, to Leftfield’s Melt, under the name The Piggy Back Gang – never legally released, but Dave Fanning would have played a bootleg of it a few times, back in the day.)

 

Anyway, you can buy Free Sex Chocolate from Jessie directly, or from Amazon in the UK, or Amazon in the US. (Makes a lovely Christmas present for Toasted Heretic fans, hint hint.) If you're the sort of wild and crazy person who likes to live on the the edge, you could even get your local bookshop to order it. Should you be into signed copies, I signed a few in Easons on O'Connell Street last time I was over, and if Des Kenny has his way (and he usually does), I'll probably sign a pile of them in Kenny's in Galway next week... I'd say the copies in Charlie Byrne's might get a good seeing-to as well...

 

And I'll wrap up with a quick Q & A:

 

Q: Where was I for the last six months?

 

A: Thailand, Vietnam, Ireland, Berlin, Edinburgh.

 

Q: And what was I doing?

 

A: Writing a film. Writing a book.

 

Q: And why didn't I blog?

 

A: Because the reaction to my last blog post got a little out of hand, so I decided to keep my mouth shut for a while, and get on with my writing. Also, I have been expending my precious blogging fluids over on Twitter, which leaves me sated and drowsy.

 

OK! If you’ve any more questions, or comments, stick them in below. If it’s too private, personal, or perverted, feel free to mail me at the button down there on the right, or just send it to JulianGoughsSecretEmailAddress at good old gmail dot com.

Wednesday
Feb102010

The State of Irish Literature 2010

 

To my slight surprise (and immense delight), my story “The Orphan and the Mob” was chosen to represent Ireland in the ambitious new anthology, Best European Fiction 2010 (edited by Aleksandar Hemon, and introduced by Zadie Smith). The book’s publishers, Dalkey Archive Press, recently asked me five polite questions about the state of Irish literature. I replied with an intemperate rant. A slightly updated version follows below…

 

1. Are there any exciting trends, movement, or schools in contemporary Irish fiction? Who do you feel are the overlooked contemporary authors in Ireland who should be more widely read and translated?

 

I haven’t the faintest idea. As is traditional with my people, on achieving the status of Writer, I was strapped to an ass and driven from the City. I’ve lived in Berlin for the past few years. When I was in Ireland, I lived in Galway city, which is on the opposite side of the country to Dublin, where the novelists fester. Galway doesn’t really do literature. And I grew up in Tipperary, in the midlands, where writers were, until recently, killed and eaten. And quite rightly.

 

If there are exciting trends in literary Ireland, the excitement hasn’t made its way to Berlin yet. Anyway, I don’t believe in trends, movements, schools, and the whole German classification mania. That’s all made up after the fact, to help university libraries with their filing.  Each pen is held by a single hand. But for what it’s worth, none of my Irish friends read Irish books any more.

 

Indeed, I hardly read Irish writers any more, I’ve been disappointed so often. I mean, what the FECK are writers in their 20s and 30s doing, copying the very great John McGahern, his style, his subject matter, in the 21st century? To revive a useful old Celtic literary-critical expression: I puke my ring. And the older, more sophisticated Irish writers that want to be Nabokov give me the yellow squirts and a scaldy hole. If there is a movement in Ireland, it is backwards. Novel after novel set in the nineteen seventies, sixties, fifties. Reading award-winning Irish literary  fiction, you wouldn’t know television had been invented. Indeed, they seem apologetic about acknowledging electricity (or “the new Mechanikal Galvinism” as they like to call it.)

 

I do read the odd new, young writer, and it’s usually intensely disappointing. Mostly it’s grittily realistic, slightly depressing descriptions of events that aren’t very interesting. Though, to be fair, sometimes it’s sub-Joycean, slightly depressing descriptions of events that aren’t very interesting. I don’t get the impression many Irish writers have played Grand Theft Auto, or bought an X-Box, or watched Youporn. (And if there is good stuff coming up, for God’s sake someone, contact me, pass it on.) Really, Irish literary writers have become a priestly caste, scribbling by candlelight, cut off from the electric current of the culture. We’ve abolished the Catholic clergy, and replaced them with novelists. They wear black, they preach, they are concerned for our souls. Feck off.

 

But let us accentuate the positive, for the love of the Lord:

 

I do like Kevin Barry. His collection There Are Little Kingdoms had something special about it. Hints of glory ahead. (I gather there will be a novel. I’ll be buying it with cash money.) And from a few years back I loved Mike McCormack’s first book, the story collection Getting it in the Head. I always felt Mike McCormack had the great, demented, Irish small town heavy metal novel in him, he just needed to get it out. Then this week I discovered, from a very reliable source, that he’s finished his next novel, Pilgrim X, and it’s a post-apocalyptic Western set in the west of Ireland. Hurray! Exactly what Irish literature needs right now. I hear there’s a strong Scandinavian death metal vibe off it. This has all the signs of being his major breakthrough, and breakout.

 

For me, the only writer to grab the Celtic Tiger by the tail and pull hard while the tiger roared was Ross O’Carroll Kelly, the pseudonym of Paul Howard. And that was a newspaper column. (Collected every year into a new book – read them all if you want to understand Ireland’s rise and fall. No other writer caught it while it happened. The best, funniest, and most historically important run of Irish satirical journalism since Myles na gCopaleen.)

 

The Irish writer that most excited me recently was Diarmuid O’Brien, and he writes unproduced television scripts. Very funny, very Irish, on the edge of the surreal, a nice mixture of  WB Yeats and UK sitcoms. Padraig Kenny is another very funny, passionate, interesting guy trying to do interesting things with TV and radio scripts. (He has already managed to turn his Twitter rants into an artform.) Tommy Tiernan is Ireland’s most philosophical voice, but he has chosen stand-up comedy as his way of delivering his philosophical prose. Tiernan has read everything by Beckett, and everything by Lenny Bruce, and combined them. On the right night you will end up on the floor weeping tears of laughter and recognition as he takes Ireland apart. I remember reading Graham Linehan when he was only 17 and writing for Hot Press, and thinking, this guy is the funniest writer in Ireland. Of course, he got no recognition or encouragement in Ireland, so he went to London and co-wrote Father Ted, and Black Books, and now writes The I.T. Crowd. (Two days ago, as I write this, he won the British Comedy Award for writers.) The guy’s a genius, but he’s been working out of London, with UK broadcasters, since his early 20s, so he has no reason to address Ireland. (We had other geniuses, a decade or two back, but we didn't want them either. Cathal Coughlan tried to tell us who we were, spewing poetic vinegar with Microdisney, then sulphuric poetry with Fatima Mansions, but we didn't want to listen. Don't get me started on Cathal Coughlan, I'll cry.)

 

But then, why would our funniest, most original voices want to join a pompous, priestly, provincial literary community?  I’m pretty sure the best of the new, young Irish writers are writing for film, TV or computer games. Of course, anyone decent then has to go to England to get anything made. Another problem with Ireland is that its national broadcaster makes civil service television. Raidió Teilifís Éireann have never made a good comedy, they hardly ever make decent drama, and they treat writers like shit. Any work that has to go through an official Irish institution is slowly castrated by committee. All of those things are set up wrong. Our national theatre, The Abbey, is a weird, dysfunctional machine for setting fire to money. There is an almost total disconnect between the plays the Abbey puts on and the nation they are supposed to represent. (It does put on work by good playwrights: but with a thirty year delay.) Its most recent director, Fiach Mac Conghail, is doing his darndest, but turning round around The Abbey is like trying to do a wheelie in an Airbus full of American tourists. As an Irish playwright, you’ve a far better chance of getting your first play put on by the Royal Court in London than by any theatre in Dublin. Culturally, Ireland is a failed state. The fact is disguised because the UK and the USA have taken up the slack, and given our artists an outlet. But Ireland herself has, for example, never made a television program that anyone outside Ireland would want to watch. Given the quality of our writers, and the size of the global English-language TV audience, this is an immense national disgrace. (Just to repeat, everyone involved in Father Ted was Irish - but it was made by the British broadcaster Channel 4.) I know and like many of the individuals who work in RTÉ, but it is institutionally incapable of using the talents of its people, and it is institutionally incapable of change. Its news and sports coverage are excellent, the rest of it should be shut down. At the moment it’s a machine for wrecking talent, and the talented people inside it would be much happier under almost any other system.

 

The only area where Irish writing is thriving in Ireland itself is on the internet, because it’s a direct connection, writer-to-reader. Blogs captured, and capture, Ireland in a way literature  no longer does. Sweary Lady was brilliant (on her Arse End of Ireland blog), right through the Celtic Tiger years. Kav wrote the great Kav’s Blog. (Sweary and Kav both moved on to the Coddle Pot group blog…) And the quality, and quantity, of the swearing was and is very high on the Irish blogs, with guys like Twenty Major. The Irish swear better than almost anyone else on earth, bar maybe the Spanish and a couple of countries in Africa. That’s another area where I think recent Irish literary writers  – with the honourable exception of Roddy Doyle - have failed us badly. Ireland’s great lost playwright, Kevin McGee, was a master of the kind of swearing that had you desperately poking your inner ear with a biro to try and remove the images from your head. However, he was let down by professional theatre, moved into writing television soap operas (and translating the classics), and seems to have abandoned the stage. Who will swear for us now? Who will let rip the savage, guttural, primal utterance – half Yeats poem, half Guinness fart – required, DEMANDED, by the current state of Ireland? {EDIT: Probably Kevin Barry. Since this was first written, his apocalyptic story Fjord of Killary has appeared in the New Yorker, gracing its fragrant pages with North Galway lines as pinpoint accurate as these: 

“Fuckers are washin’ diesel up there again,” John Murphy said. “The Hourigans? Of course, they’d a father a diesel-washer before ’em, didn’t they? Cunts to a man.”

“Cunts,” Bill Knott confirmed.}


But I am biased, unstable, bitter, twisted, and living abroad, so don’t rely on my judgement. I’m sure there’s millions of brilliant writers in Ireland, I’m just mysteriously missing them every time I go there and look. In fact, aware of this, I outsourced the search to Twitter and asked who were the overlooked or neglected Irish writers that I’d missed. Here were the suggestions I got back, to balance my bile:

 

John MacKenna, Tomas O'Crohan, Mark O' Rowe (playwright and screenwriter), Antonia Logue, Sean O'Reilly, Vincent Woods (for “At the Black Pig's Dyke, the most underappreciated Irish play in the past 20 years.”), Gavin Duff, John Moriarty, Mike McCormack.

 

In an enjoyable and robust Twitter debate, Rosita Boland of the Irish Times took issue with the idea that O’Rowe, McCormack or O’Reilly were overlooked. This is a fair point, as all three do get excellent coverage in the Irish Times and on RTÉ, and O’Rowe has a powerful, thoughtful patron in Michael Colgan of the Gate Theatre.

 

Others on Twitter (some of them from lands far from Ireland) suggested Philip O Ceallaigh, Ken Bruen, and Dermot Healy, but it’s hard to think of these excellent, award-winning and acclaimed writers as being “overlooked” in any meaningful way.

 

As for Irish language writers – I’m not qualified to judge. They could all be geniuses for all I know.

 

 

2. Who are the contemporary European writers from other countries that are writing compelling fiction?

 

I’d only be bullshitting you if I tried to answer that question. My pitiful French, street-German, bar-Spanish and school-Irish are not remotely good enough to make literary judgements. I can barely mangle my way through comics in any of them. So, for me, all of European mainland literature is at the mercy of the quality of its translators, which makes me reluctant to judge. For all I know, I should be praising the translator, not the original writer. If you read my first book in Swedish, you would think I was a genius. If you read my first book in German, you would think I was a fool. So it goes. In fact, I strongly suspect that the Swedish translator of my first novel is a better writer than me, and wrote a better book. Molle Kanmert’s emails asking me questions were far funnier than mine, and the Swedish version outsold every other version. Someone sign her up for a novel…

 

3. Do you want your work to be translated? Why or why not?


Of course I do. I want readers. I want to be understood, I want to be misunderstood, I want to get into fights, I want to swim in the Dead Sea, I want to die in my swimsuit, I want to visit Siberia (but leave again), I want to butt in on your national conversation, drink your national drink, shoot and stuff your national bird, eat your national icecream, kiss your poets and pat your dogs and weep at the airport as we hug each other and exchange email addresses and our respective national varieties of flu.

 

4. Are there enough publishing outlets in Ireland for contemporary fiction? Is there a market for literary fiction in Ireland?

 

Well, we have the usual situation that arises when you share a language with a larger neighbour. A perverse, S&M relationship. You fight your oppressor & occupier for 800 years, get your freedom, then immediately ask  them for a publishing deal. Just as Bosnian writers seek Croatian publishers, Irish writers seek English publishers. Of course, English publishers seek Irish writers, so it’s a healthy, wholesome S&M relationship. 80% of Irish novels come out of London publishing houses. There’s always a slight tension in that relationship, of course, because some of your jokes and references won’t be understood by your publisher. But London publishers are very good at making sure that doesn’t become a problem, and that the integrity of the work is protected. They have to navigate the same issues with Welsh and Scottish and Indian and Australian novelists, so it’s not a big deal. There are a lot of small, very noble but very undercapitalised Irish publishers, but they have great difficulty hanging on to their writers if a UK publisher offers a decent advance. Or any advance at all.

 

We don’t really have a problem with lack of recognition, lack of outlets. The best Irish writers get recognised, usually in London first, after which the Irish literary establishment falls into line.  Ireland very, very seldom discovers its own writers first. Roddy Doyle had to take out a bank loan to publish the Commitments in Ireland. After which, he was picked up by an English publisher.

 

That has an interesting effect, though. Knowing that you are addressing sixteen UK readers for every one Irish reader, in a very mild way your book goes into translation in your head, as you write it. Most Irish writers will deny this, but I think it’s true. Of course I was born in London to emigrant Irish parents, so I feel equally at home, or not at home, in both places.

 

 

5. Given a choice, would you prefer a faithful, literal translation of your work or an interpretive re-imagining of it? Why?

 

An interpretive re-imaging, definitely. I don’t think a “faithful, literal” translation of my work – of any work - is even possible. If a translation were to be literal, it wouldn’t be faithful, and vice versa. Any decent writer is playing with nuances, rhythms, echoes, soundstuff that will evaporate in any literal translation. I like a lot of layers. Puns, resonances, double-meanings, Tipperaryisms, things my mum says at Christmas. Often the point of the sentence hasn’t anything to do with its literal meaning at all.

 

I use deliberately “wrong”, literal translations of phrases from the Irish language sometimes myself, because they sound fecking great in English. Friends of my dad would still say “I walked several strong miles”, and that is straight out of the Irish.

 

The Jude books are deliberately written in a stilted, old-fashioned, formal English, of the type spoken in Ireland a century ago. It’s the first-generation English of speakers who learnt English in school, from books, because their parents spoke Irish at home. For me this is a very rich form of English, because you can let the underlying Irish thoughts, structured in Irish grammar, burst through now and again. There is always a nice tension in the speech, as though Jude is walking on linguistic stilts, and has to be careful. He is trying to be terribly precise with a language he doesn’t really control or own.

 

Sometimes the games I play with the various versions of English are fairly explicit, as in the case of this head injury in Jude in London:

 

           “Their noble Tipperary speech reminded me of my mental catastrophe. I looked up from my book, and took the opportunity to experiment with my deformity: I spoke a Catholic thought, and it came out Church of England: I praised a fine All-Ireland semi-final performance by the Tipperary Under-21 hurlers against Kilkenny; and from my mouth came alien speech of an F.A. Cup semi-final replay at Villa Park.

           Sweet Mother of Jesus, I thought, astonished, and

           “Queen of Heaven!” I said.

           Christ on a bicycle, I thought.

           “Good Lord!”

           Holy fuck.

           “Blessed Union!”


           I gave up the attempt to accurately express myself, and returned to my book.”

 

 

I must be a real bastard for translators, because increasingly I like to back-engineer scenes so that a crucial line of narrative, thrown up by the action, is also a line of poetry by Yeats, or a line of dialogue is also a line of Joyce, or Kafka, or is made out of Radiohead song titles. They can be tricky to spot - most of my native-English readers miss most of them. And I also use the misunderstandings and gaps between American English and English English and Irish English to generate jokes and misunderstandings, and moments of unease.

 

 

A single English word sings in many voices, and I like to set off a couple of them, and make my words sing harmonies with themselves, or beat each other up. I doubt if anyone but me gets the half of it, but I think readers find pleasure in it anyway. I remember a woman on a blog quoting her favourite piece of my writing. She said she couldn’t put her finger on why she liked it so much. Well, I could. It was the end of a chapter, and I’d written it in iambic pentameter. Because it was laid out like prose, she hadn’t consciously registered the formal rhythm, the internal rhymes. But subconsciously, she got it...

 

That makes me sound too much of a word wizard – I should also say that most of my sentences are extremely straightforward attempts to get a character through a door in such a way that the reader understands it without having to read it twice, and I don’t always even succeed at that.

 

 

{EDIT: OK, I'm getting Repetitive Strain Injury from putting in links to all these bastards, enough for tonight. Hope you enjoyed it, if you got this far. I'll link a few more lads tomorrow. Your comments are very welcome.}



Tuesday
Dec012009

Best albums of the noughties?

CDs and lots of them. Not sure who took the photo (contact me!) From http://www.jazzchicago.net/

I've been asking friends and strangers all week on Twitter about the best albums of the past decade. (A mixture of the joy of conversation and research: I'm discussing the decade's albums tonight - Tuesday, December 1st 2009 - on RTÉ's Arena program at 19.30 GMT, with Luke Clancy and others.)

In a spirit of internetty openness, here's a copy of the email I sent last night to the producers of the show, with some thoughts on the subject of music, albums, decades, technology, Twitter, and the Long Tail...

 

Please do add your thoughts and comments...

 

"Hi Penny, hi Luke,

That sounds fine. Here's a rough overview of my thoughts: I'd quite like to step back and talk about the whole idea of an album, and how it changed over the past decade. I suspect this might be a bit more original, and interesting to the listener, than my own personal taste in a top three (though I will give that too!)

That would mean talking a little about the technology. It's technology which secretly shapes musical eras. Pop music as we know it became possible with the 45rpm single, and the pop single.  Then the 33rpm, 12" vinyl disc made albums possible, so people bunched some songs together. Then multi-track recording allowed the Beatles to happen (and thus allowed rich, complicated, overdubbed albums to happen). Transistorised electronics allowed Kraftwerk to happen. Digital technology allowed techno to happen. And so on.

But you could argue that the invention of the CD meant albums were suddenly a bit too long for listeners to comfortably pay attention to all the way through. (The human brain can only stay focused for about 45 minutes before it needs a break.) And that, in the noughties, with the rise of  iTunes, iPods, and the iStore, the album as a collection of songs in a particular order is beginning to disappear, as people download individual songs off an album, or listen to their music at random, on shuffle. (As the great music site Pitchfork pointed out, the decade is a few months younger than Napster and only a year older than the iPod.)

So lists like the NME's favour quite a retro thing, the old-fashioned, short sharp rock album. The Strokes, at number 1 in the NME poll, are incredibly old-fashioned. They're rich kids who met at a Swiss finishing school, and pretended to be a gritty, streetwise New York 1970s band. It's absurd to say they sum up the noughties. In fact the NME's list is full of young bands knocking off old bands. Interpol, Strokes, Yeah Yeah Yeahs, Bloc Party. They knock off specific 70s and 80s bands! Interpol are a Joy Division tribute band.

I've read a lot of these lists, thinking about this, and the big problem is, where can anyone stand - on what sacred gold mountain - to take their view?

The noughties was the decade of the obscure album that you stumbled on and loved. A Top 10 made sense in the 60s when only a few hundred albums came out each year, and you could, with a bit of effort, hear most of the music released. But for the past decade, a top ten would be misleading and wrong. It was the decade of the top ten thousand. I put up a hashtag on Twitter, and got a fairly random bunch of lovely people to name their favourite album of the decade. The range of albums suggested on Twitter was astounding. The vast majority were not on any of these best of lists. What has happened is the same as what has happened to books with the rise of Amazon, and the rise of the long tail. The majority of Amazon's sales and profits don't come from selling loads of the top ten books. They come from selling a tiny number of copies of each of the bottom two million books. It's very democratic. Likewise, many more people are recording albums, and finding small, loyal bands of followers.


The forties had Sinatra. The fifties had Elvis. The sixties had the Beatles. We don’t have a Beatles, and it's possible nobody will be able to dominate a whole decade like that ever again. Which is fine.


And that ties into a final point: We probably haven’t heard the greatest albums of the decade yet. The people that do the thing that is new are not instantly recognised. If you look back at the lists from previous decades, they are full of forgotten bands. But truly influencial bands like, say, The Velvet Underground - the band the Strokes want to be - don't appear on any of these lists. It took twenty years for the first Velvet Underground album to go gold.

Meanwhile, guys that were already out of time, out of step with fashion, have aged really, really well. Maybe Tom Waits made the album of the decade. Maybe it was Johnny Cash, with The Man Comes Around.

As for legacy... it was a transitional decade. I suspect the noughties will be remembered more for its computer games than its music. But there were many, many wonderful gems, in all genres. So, a golden age of democracy, with no real king of pop.

I'll send you a top three tomorrow! Still thinking about it.

-Julian"

A nice picture of vinyl albums (ask your mum) from the wonderful Wikipedia Commons

Wednesday
Oct282009

Twitter & Tweets: Who Can Read What (And How And Why To Use The Dot).

I started to use the mighty "." on Twitter today, and immediately got into about 50 confused conversations about it, most of which started "What's with the . thing?" Trying to tweet 50 different bitesized answers did not lessen the confusion, so I thought I'd explain here what I'm doing (or what I think I am doing).

May this post give you the strength to make the dot a good thing, the self-restraint to avoid making it a bad thing, and the wisdom to tell the difference.

See? Many of humanity's problems, incredible as it seems, predate Twitter. (Explosm sell this as a T-shirt! Site seems down, so I've linked to info on the Cyanide & Happiness guys.) 

SOME BACKGROUND ON HOW USERS DRIVE TWITTER'S EVOLUTION

A lot of people, especially new users, are not entirely sure how Twitter works, or who can read what, when and how. This is unsurprising: Because Twitter has evolved so fast, features that didn't even exist a year ago are at the heart of the Twitter conversation now. Users are constantly finding new implications of those new features, and creatively using (& misusing) them, in turn. And those new, user-invented features and workarounds that are popular and useful get turned into new, official features: When I started using Twitter only a few months ago, for example, retweets had to be done by hand, and there was no agreed syntax ("Retweet", "(RT)", "RT:", "Via" and others were all in use.) ...Twitter only installed an official button for retweeting in September this year. (We will get to the meat of the matter after you jump the shark. With its black dot for an eye.)

A lovely blue shark 

SO WHO CAN READ WHAT?

Before we talk about the mighty dot, we need to be clear on how tweets work. As things stand today (and this wasn't true last year, and may not be true next year), this is who can read what. Let's say I send a nice ordinary tweet, like "I am eating the most amazing pickled shark testicles." That tweet
will appear in the stream of everyone who follows me. It also appears in my own stream (where I can read all the incoming tweets from those I follow), and on my own page (where all my tweets are stacked up one after the other.)

But if I reply directly to someone else's tweet, like this: "@sharklover Sorry, I forgot you were a vegetarian. And married to a shark. Whoops." ...then that reply will only appear in the streams of the people who follow BOTH me (@juliangough) and her (@sharklover). Twitter don't make this very clear, and it isn't intuitively obvious, so a huge number of Twitter users assume that everyone who follows them can read all their replies. Not so. However, that last tweet is defined by Twitter as a reply simply because it STARTS with a name, @sharklover. If I hand-crafted a reply like this: "Well listen, @sharklover, obviously I wouldn't have eaten his testicles if I'd known he was your husband" ... then, because it doesn't start with a name, Twitter will treat it as a regular ordinary tweet, and all my followers can see it in their stream, whether they follow @sharklover or not.

 

WHICH IS WHERE THE DOT COMES IN...

Which is, at last, where the dot comes in. Hitting reply is handy: there's the person's name, the cursor is blinking after it, all you have to do is type the message and send. Building your tweet either side of the other person's name, however, just so your reply will be visible to all your followers, is not handy, and can sound really awkward, like a tweeted, 140-character version of stilted Victorian dialogue: "So, @moriarty, we meet again, in the shadow of the Reichenbach Falls..."

 

Of course, most replies are not of general interest and the system, by hiding them from most of your followers, works fine. ("@mum I left @dad drunk in the coal shed.") But sometimes a reply would be of interest to many, or all, of your followers (not just those who follow you and the person you are replying to). For example, I sometimes get asked interesting questions about my novels, or about my old band: I know that a good chunk of my followers are fans who would appreciate seeing my reply. And sometimes you just want to open up the conversation with a reply, and give others a chance to join in. And sometimes you want to start a big fight.

But how do you quickly and easily convert the reply into an open message? You can't just type a letter, or letters, directly in front of the name with no space, like this: a@sharklover. That stops it from being treated as a reply by Twitter, sure, but any letters touching the front of the "@" mess up the name, stop it from being searchable, prevent it from appearing in the @replies box of the person you sent it to, and mean it is no longer hyperlinked (that is, you can't click on it and go to their page). So, what, add a letter and a space? A quick abbreviated explanation? It starts to get messy, and distracting. And eat up scarce characters.

But you CAN type non-letters, such as punctuation marks, directly in front of a name, without messing it up and breaking it as a link and all that bad stuff. And the simplest, smallest, least annoying punctuation mark is the full stop. This guy, inside the quotes: "."

So if I send this: ".@sharklover I've always loved you, I've had fins surgically attached also intromittant organs, feels weird having a double penis, marry me", now everybody who follows me can read it. Which may or may not be a good thing, but it's a nice option to have.

 

A WORD OF CAUTION

The dot allows a personal conversation to be overheard by many others, so use it sparingly. Think - is this private remark really going to interest many of my other friends? If not, don't dot. Otherwise you run the risk of being the person at the bar shouting loudly at their friend, in the vain hope of impressing the whole pub. Don't beat yourself up if you overuse it at the start and annoy a few friends. It is natural to get a bit carried away at first (he said, after an entire day's experience). I certainly did. But I had calmed down by teatime, and so should you. A cup of camomile should do it.

 

WHO INVENTED IT?

I've no idea, but I'd love if you could tell me. I first noticed guys like @glinner using the dot recently, I had no idea what it was, and (too shy to ask) worked out what it meant by context. I have noticed that comedians and scriptwriters are prone to use it. (The dot is particularly useful if you are replying to a friend with a cracker of a joke and don't want it wasted.) It just seems to have spontaneously evolved, because it was needed, and may have many mothers and fathers.

 

A FINAL THOUGHT ON DMs (DIRECT MESSAGES)

Oh yeah, while we are at it: there is one other type of tweet. DMs (direct messages) can only be sent to people who are following you, and can only be read by you-the-sender, and the individual you sent it to. But bear in mind, if YOU aren't following THEM, they can't DM you back, which can lead to an embarrassingly public tweet like this: "Sure thing @juliangough I'll DM you an answer to your DM requesting the name of my drug dealer as soon as you follow me." So it's probably best to follow people BEFORE you DM (direct message) them.

 

Also bear in mind that nothing in human cultural history has grown as fast as Twitter, and that this is just a snapshot of the evolving situation in late 2009. It will all change, change utterly, and within a few months this post will seem as quaint as advice on the kind of red flag your servant should be carrying as he walks sixty yards ahead of your self-propelled mechanical vehicle.

 

THE PREHISTORY OF TWITTER

For those interested in the prehistory of Twitter, and how such arcane events as the great #fixreplies revolt of May 2009 shaped the current Twitter universe, here's a couple of links:

The Evolution of Retweeting. This article from August 2009 (only two months ago as I write!) gives a flavour of how users drive the development of Twitter, and of how tentative and confused the developers can feel in the face of such pressure from below. The retweet option they initially planned to build is nothing like the one that they eventually delivered.

The Great #fixreplies Revolt of May 2009. This battle reshaped the modern @replies. A bit like the slaves' rebellion in Spartacus, the revolt failed but left an enduring legacy, and scared the pants off the Emperor (ie this is when the chaps who set up Twitter first realized they were not in fact in total control of it).

The Invention of @replies and @mentions. Back in November 2008, when the world was young, @replies were formally adopted by Twitter. This Twitter blog post now feels like the Magna Carta.

 

Throw in comments, advice, argument below, or attack me frenziedly on Twitter itself (@juliangough). Feel free to link to, copy, or pass this onto friends if you think it's helpful. And be nice to each other out there. Oh, it's all fun and games in the Twitter playground till somebody loses an eye.

 

Meanwhile, to reward you for reading so much stuff about such a small thing, here's a real dot to play with. Focus on it. Now lean forwards, and backwards. Feel the power of the mighty dot! (This probably won't work for you, Momus, or any other visitors with one eye.)

Feel its power

Friday
Oct092009

See the smallest film in the world, on the biggest TV in the world.

This has been popping up on the internet anyway, so I thought I might as well share it with my three devoted readers here on the website... News of my tiny new film below the photo... Cheers!

The Playhouse Project lights up Liberty Hall in Dublin


"The Playhouse Project in Dublin has been showing short animations for the past two weeks, using two sides of Liberty Hall – the tallest building in Dublin - as an immense 16-story television screen.

Now Tod & Viv, a two and a half minute animated movie by Irish novelist Julian Gough, will premiere on Dublin’s Liberty Hall late Friday night.

Says Julian Gough, “It’s a very low resolution TV screen – each window is a pixel, so it’s only 10 pixels by 16 on each side. So very strong, simple images show up well. People have done some great stuff, mostly a single idea, often a single image, moving or repeating, and a bit of music as a soundtrack. Someone did Space Invaders, someone did static… But I thought it would be interesting to be madly ambitious, and make an entire feature film, with love and death and murder and forgiveness… I wanted to see if you could make a film with a bit of a narrative. A story that was strong & simple enough to work on this amazing screen, that was so primitive and high-tech at the same time. And a film that was written for Liberty Hall, that used the fact that the screen was also a building in Dublin. And could you pack it all into in a couple of minutes?”

The result is Tod & Viv, a-two-and-a-half minute murder mystery/ghost story/drama that starts with the words “Tod & Viv live in a big house…” as two windows light up on Liberty Hall. It wouldn’t be giving anything away to say that Tod & Viv are trapped in a hellish relationship. And, as Flann O’Brien said, (in the original title for The Third Policeman), “Hell goes round and round…”

“You could loop the film, and they’d be killing each other forever,” says Julian Gough. “I wrote it as a loop, because I couldn’t be sure people would catch the start of it, walking along the Quays, or over O’Connell Bridge. This way, they’d get the whole story even if they only started watching halfway through. But you wouldn’t want to watch it more than twice, it would wreck your head pretty quickly. It’s all death, nightmares, and slamming doors.”

The project is high-tech: 100,000 low energy LED lights light up 330 windows. Inspired by the amazing, seminal Blinkenlights installation in Berlin, Playhouse has gone one, or even two, better, and added colour, and sound.  But the animation in Tod & Viv is minimal in the extreme. “Yeah, Tod is a single pixel. And Viv is also a single pixel. Two pixels in love. It doesn’t get more minimal than that. My favourite bit is where Tod takes off his clothes to have a bath. A single window turns from white to pink… Most of the effort went into the soundtrack, which will go out simultaneously on the radio in the area around the building, 94.3FM. I had kids pounding up and down five flights of stairs in our apartment in Berlin to get the footsteps, and slamming doors. Luckily, our upstairs neighbour is a professional actress, Elisa Gelewski, who’s done a lot of TV and theatre in Germany. So she popped downstairs, we put on a pot of coffee, and she recorded the only line of female dialogue. So the total cost of the film – apart from everyone’s time – was a pot of good coffee. Berlin is a bit like Sesame Street, if you need someone to help you with a film or anything else, you just lean out the window and shout.”

Tod & Viv has its world premiere late on Friday night, half an hour after midnight, and is best seen while listening to the soundtrack, broadcast on 94.3FM in the vicinity of the building. It can be watched live on the internet at here at justin.tv. A film of the performance, taken from across the river, will be available later on the internet. You can check out more details here."