Well, this is, as far as I know, the 'original'... unless I've read an adaptation of course. Glad you like it! I wish you good night and great chills ^^
Not long ago, an original version of "Who Goes There" was found amongst's Campbell's papers. It is 45 pages longer and is entitled "Frozen Hell". If you love this story, you might want to read "Frozen Hell", which apparently was Campbell's original version of this story.
Great job! I almost listened to another channels recording of this, but I saw it was an ai voice. So I found yours instead. I appreciate the time and passion you put into reading this yourself. Thank you!
Your accent is perfect for this story. It's refreshing to hear voices other than American and English. I recently heard an Australian reading a British sci-fi story and it worked so well.
Excellent! I have looked for an audiobook of this before and only looked today by chance. My timing was pretty good. Glad you took this project on. Really good work!
@MiniatureMythos I've just recently got into audio books, this is a channel I will be revisiting for sure. The version of Salem's Lot I was listening to wasn't that good to be honest, I prefer it when there's only one person doing all the voices otherwise it's just like a movie or tv show without the pictures lol.
You're more than welcome to check out everything I have on the channel. Although I must warn you that the quality of the audiobooks might drop the further back you go. I've learned a lot over the last year that I've been doing this and I've only just started to really hit my stride with these :) Hope you can find stuff to enjoy!
I know exactly which channel you're talking about...tried to listen to the Lot as well and one other story but the ads were too much. I get everyone needs to get paid but it's hard to get into a story when you have to skip scammy stimulus and insurance adverts. 😅
I'm glad I got to hear this one. One thing they didn't bring up because they might've not known yet but polar fish and most notably the wood frog have a natural antifreeze in their cells, animal cells (even a fish's) can't fully freeze without damage.
True, there's more than enough ways that something that's semi-sentient like the Thing would be able to use to make it's way from the Antarctic Continent. One thing I always liked about The Thing (movie) and now this, is the speculation of how an alien life-form that doesn't behold itself to our known bio-chemistry could spread. Even in an isolated setting like a polar region, there's still so many variables that we don't readily think of.
@@MiniatureMythos in the novel it is the pilot of the ship and knowledgible in many pieces of equipment it builds from odds and ends. Hardly semi-sentient.
That's true, but I wouldn't call it completely 'sentient' according to our own definition of the word either. My main issue with referring to it as a sentient creature is that, depending on who the Thing imitates, it loses the knowledge that it is the Thing, because its mimicry is so perfect. Some of the 'infected' genuinely don't know that they're the Thing in the novel, it's not just a matter of lying. That would convince me that its mimicry is more of an instinctual survival tactic, and that it loses some of its identity/personality in the process. Also, it's said that each and every cell of the Thing is a creature in its own right. Does that mean that the original is a collection of sentience(s)? Is it more a Hive-mind? A neural network with one agent in control? Because, I agree that the part that had imitated Blair was undoubtedly 'aware' of its identity and the knowledge of its species. But the others, I would argue, not so much and were acting way more primitive, bestial and 'unaware'. That's why I said "semi-sentient".
In story I love a great opening sentence: short and foreboding. The mid century writers were great at that - captivating. I still read them again and again and imho the best of the contemporary authors imitate the art. All the post modern tricks can’t hide a failure to captivate the reader in the first paragraph, or on stage or film in the first scene. Special effects won’t help you! Thanks for posting.
Completely agree. A lot of the stories on the channel feature a great opening sentence/paragraph that immediately pull you into the story. And like you point out, despite the need for a strong premise to draw the ever weaker attention span of viewers/listeners/readers, these days they don't manage to do that anymore.
You'll never guess what happened to me! I spilled a bag of M&M's and now thery're all over the place! 😃 How fabulous that you're having so much fun! 👏 Thanks for the scary story. Your description omits the The Thing (2011), 3rd adaptation. There are also radio plays. Cheers!
Oh no, I had that happen to me in a full movie theater at some point... A quiet, tense scene in the movie, and then my dumbass spilling my M&M's over the floor. Never heard anything so loud in my entire life ^^'... Thanks for coming over and listening to the story! Love doing these stories. I always thought The Thing (2011) was more of a prequel to the 1982 movie than an actual adaptation of this book? Could be wrong though. I'll just add it in and mention the radio plays, just in case :p Thanks!
@@MiniatureMythosAre you the one doing the reading, just wanted to say it was done very well. I admire those that can do audiobooks. The pictures were a nice added touch.
@@journeythru-n-c Jup, that's me you're hearing! I sometimes collaborate with other narrators, but I'll put it in the video and description if that's the case :) Glad you liked it and took the effort to leave a comment ^^
Definitely! Also a big The Thing fan here, and I was excited when I learned that it was based on a short story! Always wanted to read it, but only now had the chance to. So glad I did it, too! :D
@@ferdockm I have been playing with the idea of doing Edgar Rice Burroughs´ "The Land That Time Forgot"... so maybe that´ll be one in the upcoming weeks
Well, now that I've wrapped up the latest video, I've looked into the Tarzan books. And to get a guestimate of how long a video will take, I use a sort of word-counter tool. When I put in the first Tarzan book, 'Tarzan of the Apes', it says it would take me approximately 14 hours to narrate the whole thing! So, while I'm definitely up for the challenge, I'll probably have to plan it out really carefully as not to overexert myself. I'll see if I can do another Burroughs book in the meantime!
@@MiniatureMythosI know I’m just one of your fans, but my son & I love longer narrations. We usually listen to books and not short stories because books can draw you in. They can capture your imagination. Better narrators hold your attention and draw you into the story. Thank you for considering this suggestion! Matt
AI. So that’s how it’s done. I have listened to hundreds of readings and this is up there with Jeff Harding (Reacher), Timothy West (Flashman) and Patrick Tull) (Jack Aubrey).
That is some very high praise! And while I appreciate the thought, I don't think I can (ever) rank among those great actors and narrators. I'm just a fan reading stories that he likes on TH-cam...
No one thinks it is intelligent and lost and needs to speak with them. The question is how it would do so without discovery. Why would it want to take over unless it is on a colonizing mission? Only in the 1951 version did Kerrington try but was rebuffed violently.
That's a good point, tbh... Imagine the Thing tried to take over some of the living organisms to try and communicate with them to communicate its plight (because its mimicry would not be a 'bad' thing where it came from), but then it was met with 1. horrible violence when it started to take over the dogs and cattle, only too late realizing that, despite also being inhabitants of this planet, the animals aren't capable of communicating with the seemingly dominating species directly and 2. copying a human and realizing the abilities and paranoia this species has towards anything alien and unknown, so opting to try and make a quick getaway instead. I think one of the more fascinating topics about the Thing is that we just can't realize how utterly alien it and its motives truly are. It could've been peaceful, it could've been violent, it could've been sentient or not, does it have similar morality, a conscience?... at the end of the day, we just don't know.
John Carpenter's 'The Thing' is much closer to this than the 1951 'The Thing from Another World', which is a great film in itself, but quite removed from this story and deals more with the growing anti-communist atmosphere of the time. Carpenter's version is just full on paranoia, where people are trapped in a frozen hell where literally no one can trust anybody anymore. Carpenter really brought the slimy, visual aspects of this story to life.
I haven't seen the 1951 movie, so my only experience is with Carpenter's film. And I must say, the tension, doubt and paranoia that the 'It could be anyone'-part of this story brings is perfectly brought to life in that movie.
I think it's kind of counter-productive to announce who you are if you were the Thing, though :p Kind of negates the whole 'perfect imitation'-thing ;)
@@boriscovidscamson2911 Just the idea of the Thing going too far into the perfect mimicry that it gets stuck in the daily rut of modern society, trying to make rent, suffering from social injustice... wishing it could just leave this damned planet again :p
Great reading! Only get rid of the AI plastic "graphics" even simple hand drawings are better and have more style then this all the same looking generated stuff.
Why are you crediting John Carpenter's film alone? Carpenter's Thing was preceded by 1951's The Thing From Another World. As good as Carpenter's remake was it was not the first and Carpenter's film borrowed much from the original. Give credit where it's due.
Thanks for voicing your opinion. I'm glad you can value the reading on its own :) And the AI art... I only use the AI art because I'm currently not within means to pay an artist for their time and effort to provide me with actual art. Already in talks with someone to get at least my thumbnails done by a real artist...
@@MiniatureMythosI think the concern is someone else can get your voice and make ai generated readings of ai generated stories, so we end up in this morbid wasteland devoid of any human imput. We all just sit there consuming the regurgitated stolen effort of human creativity.
That is unfortunately true... I've thought about that before. That someone could just use my readings to train an AI model somewhere down the line to sound like me. Incidentally, I've just listened to a podcast about 'The Death of the Internet'. You know, the theory where most of the interactions on the internet have devolved into bots reacting to bots reacting to content made by bots reacting to bots, without a human in sight. But I think that, as long as I use my real voice, and feature stories written by real people and music made by real people, and I get comments from real people, it's not all too morbid of a wasteland just yet, right? If we can continue to value the human effort put into projects on a higher level than the AI that's used, we will be fine.
Hey there, thanks for taking the time to voice your opinion. Like I've said in comments before, on my Conan audiobooks, if I were to use existing stuff like art or real photos, they'll still be owned by someone and subject to copyright laws. And I can't go out and make my own photos of a 1920's Antarctic base camp, since that's rather far-off and a hundred years in the past... I'm also a very small channel doing this for the love of the stories that I read. I don't get a lot of revenue from this. I'm essentially also an 'artist', but with my 'art' being my voice(-acting), and I'm just doing this trying to get the break in my 'art career' that I'm looking for. I have reached out to artists, both personal friends of mine and artists on DeviantArt, and noticed that 1. I can't pay them what their work is worth, and 2. They can't provide art at the speed that I currently need it. I'm currently waiting on an artist to free up some of their time to start handling the Thumbnail art at least, as that could be paid for and delivered on a weekly basis. I have done research and weighed my options for creating these videos. And, regrettably, I had to decide to use an AI image generator to prevent people from staring at a black screen or a single image for the entire duration. However, I'd like to point out that, while I do support your view on AI and that using real photos or paying an artist would be better... I also believe that my hours and hours of recording my voice, reading these stories, editing them down, going out to pay the rights to use the background music in these videos, shows that it's not for a lack of effort. Like any starting artist, I'm doing all of this besides my full-time job and responsibilities in my life. I'm trying to make up for the fact that I use AI by also supporting small authors that agree to have their books read by me. If I were a content farm, with scripts written by AI, narrated by AI, with images by AI, editing by AI, and music by AI, then you'd be 200% correct in your statement. But right now, because of your lack of empathy and knee-jerk reaction... I kinda feel unjustly attacked. And, seeing how you've linked your (admittedly rather old) DeviantArt account in your profile, and it states there that you would have liked to draw Conan the Barbarian art, you might also have lost a potential customer... If you were to have asked me "Hey, I noticed you use AI-art, are you open to having an artist make you real art? I myself like Conan the Barbarian and I've noticed you've done stories on him on your channel before.", I would have gladly talked to you about that and maybe even got you or someone like you to do those thumbnails at least. But now, it just comes across as attacking someone small who just tries to make do with the few things he has to do wrong that he can't change, while doing all the other things right.
@@MiniatureMythos Absolutely well said. I've been a ink artist for over 20 years now and there is most absolutely a place for AI art to be used to brilliant effect, for the exact reasons listed above. Except for the last thinking that you're wrong for using it to begin with. Everyone has their opinions on ai but in the scheme of things there are many ways to protect the process of your works through sheer literal (and can even be lazily done) documentation. It takes seconds and should absolutely become a part of the progress. If only even for posterity beyond your lifespan in the digital age, because it's all there yanno?Your process is nigh immortal which I personally think is pretty cool. ☺️ There is of course the lazy mass produced cheap garbage product websites, the like farmers, attention seekers, the ones using it for evil crap. It any genuine institute or critic or even a local silkscreen printer could take a moment to look at even phone pictures taken documenting the process of digital media along with the scanning of traditional art there would be the market for traditional artists in any line of work. It's a bit sad in terms of grifters but literally what thing in the world can say they alone have no cons, grifts or thefts? Look at this gorgeous picture this dude made. It didn't exist in this way ever. It drew upon billions of instances of the past to perfectly set the scene for a fantastically produced reading. This man has worked so hard for his craft and it's a complete shame that he can think it's wrong to use. The fact that he wants to commission art from people is a credit he deserves. But this artwork , because it IS a creation of art because it's paired WITH the art, deserved it now. The support this guy deserves generates the support he can give to others. He added extra flavour to the sauce. The use of complimentary generated art is not only a brilliant supplement to media but it's leading to different genres that creators can use. This is a new horizon and it's okay to be cautious but never okay to dismiss it completely. Minotaur man, I absolutely loved your reading. And it would be just as good without but that pictures frigging dope and compliments it so well. ❤️
Excellent reading! But execrable art (to be expected from AI-generation) that distracts from your reading with how stupid and hideous it looks. It would've honstly been better just to put a single image made by an actual person--or even just the title in plain text--rather than have this slideshow of shit.
Thanks for providing some feedback. I personally don’t mind the shittiness of the AI-images, as I don’t hold AI in high regard myself and I don’t suspect it will ever be good enough to replace humans anyway. What it creates is not ‘art’ and never will be, so I don’t tend to take it too seriously. Honestly, I am just amused by what a language model or image generator interprets from the texts that I put in there. I have noticed however, that most people don’t share that opinion, and believe that my videos are either ‘lazy’, ‘soulless’ or ‘theft’ because of my use/presentation of AI. My videos aren’t meant to present AI as anything but window dressing. AI is a tool I use, just as I use my mic to record or a hammer to nail something to a wall. However, I do admit that I started using AI because I was afraid my narration/voice wouldn’t be ‘adequate’ enough to carry my videos. And that I’d need some visual element to go along with them, just to provide a whole package. Turns out you are one of the few people who have lately told me that my narration does stand on its own, and I don’t need the AI pictures to support it. That a single still image would do. Now that I know that my narration is the thing most people focus on, and the AI is either something people like, don’t care about, or absolutely hate… it might be best to cut that part out. In addition, I’m getting pretty weary of people (not you) attacking me for something I don’t value that much in my videos, while ignoring/dismissing what I value the most, i.e. the narration, like I don’t have feelings or I’m not human at all.
@@MiniatureMythos For whatever my opinion is worth (some rando on the internet), I'd say that sounds like a prudent course of action. Sorta like a business deciding to change the package of a product after numerous reviews say the product is good but the package looks terrible. For better or worse, people do tend to judge the (audio)book by its cover (ba-dum cheee!). So it doesn't entirely surprise me that some have, upon seeing AI-generated images, assumed the voice might be AI-generated, too. Heck, the only reason I bothered to listen long enough to ascertain that yours isn't AI was because I've been meaning to listen to "Who Goes There?" for a while, and hadn't had much luck finding it. Normally, I click "Not Interested" on anything with an AI-image simply as a matter of form. Besides which, I imagine most people are like me with audiobooks: We put one on to listen to it while doing other things with our hands (driving, knitting, chores, games like Solitaire, etc.), so any visual element is, at best, extraneous. Makes it seem to me like you personally have nothing to lose by letting your voice (which is deep and resonant) stand on its own.
Sorry to only get back to you now. I do think your opinion is worth something, even as a rando on the internet. And I don't mind you having an opinion that differs from my own (how unbelievable that might sound in this day and age), as long as you can elaborate on it and be civil about it, which you did and are. Everyone who puts thought into their opinion and the way it's voiced, deserves to be heard and taken into consideration. I get that a thumbnail is really important for a lot of people, and it's only normal that you do judge a book by its cover. That's what covers are for, after all. The whole thing on TH-cam is that thumbnails can be brought to a science (think about the astonished faces or red arrows/circles), almost ensuring that someone will click it. Matter of fact, most of those thumbnails and titles don't even accurately represent the content that they're used for. And just like you are not interested in videos with AI in the thumbnails, I immediately draw conclusions about 'SEO optimized' thumbnails. And that's fine. I can't fault you for that. In fact, I can only applaud you for clicking on my video DESPITE the AI that I've used. I only hope that, by doing so, you also realised that the AI is a relatively small portion of what this video is made of, and can respect the original work I did put in myself. In the meantime, I've done a couple of things to decide on how to proceed with the AI images in my videos. First: I've set up a poll on the community tab of the channel to ask the opinions of my subscribers to gauge how most of them think about the subject. One of the options is, like you've said 'I don't really need images, as long as the narration is good'. Currently, the majority doesn't seem to mind the AI images. In addition, I've also gotten the feedback that the thumbnails and 'design' I'm currently using make my videos stand out or be recognisable. So while I do get the comparison of a company changing the presentation of a good product with horrible packaging, I also find myself in the spot of 'brand recognition' already, with people being able to pick out my videos with ease from their homepage. Second: I've looked into and started making Pixel Art by myself to replace the AI images. And while fun, unique, and certainly viable as a replacement for the current images, it is VERY labor/time intensive to make those images. So I'm not decided about it just yet. The narrations of the audiobook are already taking up a lot of time, depending on the length of the story of course, but if I have to make my own art as well, I will only be able to release a story once every couple of weeks instead of weekly... It's a lot of things to consider for sure.
That's fair! I know there's a lot out there that's completely made with AI. And it's only normal to have assumptions when you see an AI thumbnail to assume the rest will be AI as well :) Just glad I could clarify that the voice used is, in fact, a very real person putting in the effort :p
I'm sorry that's the first reaction my channel/video elicits. I hope you can look past the AI window-dressing that I did and see/hear the voice-acting/narrating that I've done as far more valuable and telling of this channel :)
The "Thing" in an audio book. Love it
This is longer than the original? Well done, finally something to sleep and fear to.
Well, this is, as far as I know, the 'original'... unless I've read an adaptation of course. Glad you like it! I wish you good night and great chills ^^
And you also narrated this too! Well done great voice for narration.
Thanks a lot! :D
Such a good bedtime story! Thank you!
You're welcome! And, might I add, you have a great username (big Nagash fan here)
Not long ago, an original version of "Who Goes There" was found amongst's Campbell's papers. It is 45 pages longer and is entitled "Frozen Hell". If you love this story, you might want to read "Frozen Hell", which apparently was Campbell's original version of this story.
@davidk6269 Oh cool! Thanks for letting me know! I´ll definitely check it out :D
@@MiniatureMythos You're welcome! I hope that you enjoy "Frozen Hell"!
@@davidk6269 Thanks for the heads up. Just ordered a copy! 👍
@CastellanSpandex You're very welcome! I hope that you enjoy it!
This just makes me happy. Thanks
Glad you enjoyed it! :D
Bravo!
Really enjoyed the reading, and the art work was amazing.
Well done!!
Thanks! Had fun doing this one! Glad you liked it! :D
Great job! I almost listened to another channels recording of this, but I saw it was an ai voice. So I found yours instead. I appreciate the time and passion you put into reading this yourself. Thank you!
Glad to be of service! Thank you for coming over and watching/listening!
Atmospheric to the max dude! Fantastic reading. ❤
Thank you so much for the kind words! I really appreciate it!
Anyone who hasn't read this should.
It's a great story.
Indeed, I was pleasantly surprised by it and how well it held up as a story!
I would but i cant read. That’s why i have to listen…
Glad to be of service then! :D
@@alexmartin3143 What, you got someone or something reading out loud and taking dictation for you?
Read it first and then watch John Carpenters The Thing. It definately does it justice! 💌
Thanks!
Thank you so much for the support! I can't express how much I appreciate this !
Your accent is perfect for this story. It's refreshing to hear voices other than American and English. I recently heard an Australian reading a British sci-fi story and it worked so well.
Thanks! I've heard it said before that my accent makes a good pairing with these Weird Fiction stories. Glad to hear that's still the case! :D
" Wonderfully read, and one of the best listening experiences of a book/story ever!" Thank you!" 👍
Thank you so much for the praise! So happy you enjoyed it!
For anyone who loved this one, check out 'In Amundsen's Tent" by John M. Leahy. Also an inspiration for The Thing. ❤
That was done some years back on TH-cam's HorrorBabble channel. It actually predates the stories of both Lovecraft and Campbell.
Great video. Keep up the amazing work. ❤❤❤
Thank you for your kind words! Glad you enjoyed it
Holy Socks! This was great! It's much better than " The Thing " movies.
Glad you had fun with it! Thank you!
Excellent! I have looked for an audiobook of this before and only looked today by chance. My timing was pretty good. Glad you took this project on. Really good work!
Glad it was helpful!
Holy sheet. this one of the best.
Glad you think so! 😄
Massive thanks.
You're welcome!
One of the greatest films ever.
Agreed!
I'm hear after giving up listening to Salems Lot on a different channel, far too many adverts. This is much much better 👍
Thanks for giving my channel a chance! Maybe one day I'll do Salem's Lot as well, and you can continue on with the story :D
@MiniatureMythos I've just recently got into audio books, this is a channel I will be revisiting for sure. The version of Salem's Lot I was listening to wasn't that good to be honest, I prefer it when there's only one person doing all the voices otherwise it's just like a movie or tv show without the pictures lol.
You're more than welcome to check out everything I have on the channel. Although I must warn you that the quality of the audiobooks might drop the further back you go. I've learned a lot over the last year that I've been doing this and I've only just started to really hit my stride with these :) Hope you can find stuff to enjoy!
Me too lol
I know exactly which channel you're talking about...tried to listen to the Lot as well and one other story but the ads were too much. I get everyone needs to get paid but it's hard to get into a story when you have to skip scammy stimulus and insurance adverts. 😅
I'm glad I got to hear this one. One thing they didn't bring up because they might've not known yet but polar fish and most notably the wood frog have a natural antifreeze in their cells, animal cells (even a fish's) can't fully freeze without damage.
True, there's more than enough ways that something that's semi-sentient like the Thing would be able to use to make it's way from the Antarctic Continent. One thing I always liked about The Thing (movie) and now this, is the speculation of how an alien life-form that doesn't behold itself to our known bio-chemistry could spread. Even in an isolated setting like a polar region, there's still so many variables that we don't readily think of.
@@MiniatureMythos in the novel it is the pilot of the ship and knowledgible in many pieces of equipment it builds from odds and ends. Hardly semi-sentient.
That's true, but I wouldn't call it completely 'sentient' according to our own definition of the word either. My main issue with referring to it as a sentient creature is that, depending on who the Thing imitates, it loses the knowledge that it is the Thing, because its mimicry is so perfect. Some of the 'infected' genuinely don't know that they're the Thing in the novel, it's not just a matter of lying. That would convince me that its mimicry is more of an instinctual survival tactic, and that it loses some of its identity/personality in the process. Also, it's said that each and every cell of the Thing is a creature in its own right. Does that mean that the original is a collection of sentience(s)? Is it more a Hive-mind? A neural network with one agent in control? Because, I agree that the part that had imitated Blair was undoubtedly 'aware' of its identity and the knowledge of its species. But the others, I would argue, not so much and were acting way more primitive, bestial and 'unaware'. That's why I said "semi-sentient".
The science used in this by Campbell is remarkable for 1938.
He was obvious a very well read man
Exactly the impression I got from reading this as well
In story I love a great opening sentence: short and foreboding. The mid century writers were great at that - captivating. I still read them again and again and imho the best of the contemporary authors imitate the art. All the post modern tricks can’t hide a failure to captivate the reader in the first paragraph, or on stage or film in the first scene. Special effects won’t help you! Thanks for posting.
Completely agree. A lot of the stories on the channel feature a great opening sentence/paragraph that immediately pull you into the story. And like you point out, despite the need for a strong premise to draw the ever weaker attention span of viewers/listeners/readers, these days they don't manage to do that anymore.
You'll never guess what happened to me!
I spilled a bag of M&M's and now thery're all over the place! 😃
How fabulous that you're having so much fun! 👏 Thanks for the scary story.
Your description omits the The Thing (2011), 3rd adaptation. There are also radio plays. Cheers!
Oh no, I had that happen to me in a full movie theater at some point... A quiet, tense scene in the movie, and then my dumbass spilling my M&M's over the floor. Never heard anything so loud in my entire life ^^'...
Thanks for coming over and listening to the story! Love doing these stories.
I always thought The Thing (2011) was more of a prequel to the 1982 movie than an actual adaptation of this book? Could be wrong though. I'll just add it in and mention the radio plays, just in case :p Thanks!
I've been wanting to read this book, I enjoyed the audio book while I cross stitched....thanks!!
@@journeythru-n-c Glad to have been of service!
@@MiniatureMythosAre you the one doing the reading, just wanted to say it was done very well. I admire those that can do audiobooks. The pictures were a nice added touch.
@@journeythru-n-c Jup, that's me you're hearing! I sometimes collaborate with other narrators, but I'll put it in the video and description if that's the case :) Glad you liked it and took the effort to leave a comment ^^
@@MiniatureMythos Oh wow, cool...nicely done! I subscribed😊
Great synopsis! You've got a new subscriber.
At 53:30..the little dog on a leash in the front😂😂
wow! Such a great story. Im a huge fan of The Thing, but was not aware of this story. Thank you!
Definitely! Also a big The Thing fan here, and I was excited when I learned that it was based on a short story! Always wanted to read it, but only now had the chance to. So glad I did it, too! :D
@@MiniatureMythos Thank you so much for this one.
Ai or not, I think the graphics look awesome.
The background faces all look like melted wax.
HG Wells or Jules Verne next? Maybe Edgar Rice Burroughs or Rudyard Kipling?
@@ferdockm I have been playing with the idea of doing Edgar Rice Burroughs´ "The Land That Time Forgot"... so maybe that´ll be one in the upcoming weeks
Cool. What about a Tarzan series? Those are great stories.
I'll definitely take a look!
Well, now that I've wrapped up the latest video, I've looked into the Tarzan books. And to get a guestimate of how long a video will take, I use a sort of word-counter tool. When I put in the first Tarzan book, 'Tarzan of the Apes', it says it would take me approximately 14 hours to narrate the whole thing! So, while I'm definitely up for the challenge, I'll probably have to plan it out really carefully as not to overexert myself.
I'll see if I can do another Burroughs book in the meantime!
@@MiniatureMythosI know I’m just one of your fans, but my son & I love longer narrations. We usually listen to books and not short stories because books can draw you in. They can capture your imagination. Better narrators hold your attention and draw you into the story. Thank you for considering this suggestion! Matt
AI. So that’s how it’s done. I have listened to hundreds of readings and this is up there with Jeff Harding (Reacher), Timothy West (Flashman) and Patrick Tull) (Jack Aubrey).
That is some very high praise! And while I appreciate the thought, I don't think I can (ever) rank among those great actors and narrators. I'm just a fan reading stories that he likes on TH-cam...
So this is where they got the idea for “ The Thing “.
Indeed! The original short story that started it all :D
Sounds like the thing
This is the 1938 short story that the 'The Thing' movie from 1982 would be based on.
@MiniatureMythos I knew it was similar great story
It is. You're correct
Published in 1938, this is exactly the inspiration for The Thing
I see what you did there xD
Wonderful reading!
Thank you! Glad you enjoyed it 😀
No one thinks it is intelligent and lost and needs to speak with them. The question is how it would do so without discovery. Why would it want to take over unless it is on a colonizing mission? Only in the 1951 version did Kerrington try but was rebuffed violently.
That's a good point, tbh... Imagine the Thing tried to take over some of the living organisms to try and communicate with them to communicate its plight (because its mimicry would not be a 'bad' thing where it came from), but then it was met with 1. horrible violence when it started to take over the dogs and cattle, only too late realizing that, despite also being inhabitants of this planet, the animals aren't capable of communicating with the seemingly dominating species directly and 2. copying a human and realizing the abilities and paranoia this species has towards anything alien and unknown, so opting to try and make a quick getaway instead.
I think one of the more fascinating topics about the Thing is that we just can't realize how utterly alien it and its motives truly are. It could've been peaceful, it could've been violent, it could've been sentient or not, does it have similar morality, a conscience?... at the end of the day, we just don't know.
John Carpenter's 'The Thing' is much closer to this than the 1951
'The Thing from Another World', which is a great film in itself, but quite removed from this story and deals more with the growing anti-communist atmosphere of the time. Carpenter's version is just full on paranoia, where people are trapped in a frozen hell where literally no one can trust anybody anymore. Carpenter really brought the slimy, visual aspects of this story to life.
I haven't seen the 1951 movie, so my only experience is with Carpenter's film. And I must say, the tension, doubt and paranoia that the 'It could be anyone'-part of this story brings is perfectly brought to life in that movie.
Kinda like they did with the adaptation of First Blood, the only real similarities are the general gists of the stories
Really good voice actor!
Thank you! Really appreciate you taking the time to tell me that ^^
32:06 bookmark
I am the Thing.
I think it's kind of counter-productive to announce who you are if you were the Thing, though :p Kind of negates the whole 'perfect imitation'-thing ;)
@MiniatureMythos how would you know though? I look and sound the same, still turn up at work etc, in fact it's the same old thing everyday 😭
@@boriscovidscamson2911 Just the idea of the Thing going too far into the perfect mimicry that it gets stuck in the daily rut of modern society, trying to make rent, suffering from social injustice... wishing it could just leave this damned planet again :p
37:00
Tuesday
Sounds like my ex-wife Victoria T. Milonas.
Gold😂😂
Great reading! Only get rid of the AI plastic "graphics" even simple hand drawings are better and have more style then this all the same looking generated stuff.
I remember Edward French had a drawing of one of the creatures standing in a snow storm with its face partially obscured by winter gear
Abominable Inteligence.
Why are you crediting John Carpenter's film alone? Carpenter's Thing was preceded by 1951's The Thing From Another World. As good as Carpenter's remake was it was not the first and Carpenter's film borrowed much from the original. Give credit where it's due.
You´re completely correct and I have corrected my description accordingly. Thank you for the feedback!
@@MiniatureMythosThank you for this audio book. It was awesome!
Love the reading, hate ai art
Thanks for voicing your opinion. I'm glad you can value the reading on its own :)
And the AI art... I only use the AI art because I'm currently not within means to pay an artist for their time and effort to provide me with actual art. Already in talks with someone to get at least my thumbnails done by a real artist...
@@MiniatureMythosI think the concern is someone else can get your voice and make ai generated readings of ai generated stories, so we end up in this morbid wasteland devoid of any human imput. We all just sit there consuming the regurgitated stolen effort of human creativity.
That is unfortunately true... I've thought about that before. That someone could just use my readings to train an AI model somewhere down the line to sound like me.
Incidentally, I've just listened to a podcast about 'The Death of the Internet'. You know, the theory where most of the interactions on the internet have devolved into bots reacting to bots reacting to content made by bots reacting to bots, without a human in sight.
But I think that, as long as I use my real voice, and feature stories written by real people and music made by real people, and I get comments from real people, it's not all too morbid of a wasteland just yet, right? If we can continue to value the human effort put into projects on a higher level than the AI that's used, we will be fine.
I think the problem is, when ai is used there is no human effort. You're no longer an artist, you're now the client.
Close your eyes.
Ai is theft and shows lack of effort. I would recommend using real photos or reaching out to an artist
Hey there, thanks for taking the time to voice your opinion.
Like I've said in comments before, on my Conan audiobooks, if I were to use existing stuff like art or real photos, they'll still be owned by someone and subject to copyright laws. And I can't go out and make my own photos of a 1920's Antarctic base camp, since that's rather far-off and a hundred years in the past...
I'm also a very small channel doing this for the love of the stories that I read. I don't get a lot of revenue from this. I'm essentially also an 'artist', but with my 'art' being my voice(-acting), and I'm just doing this trying to get the break in my 'art career' that I'm looking for. I have reached out to artists, both personal friends of mine and artists on DeviantArt, and noticed that 1. I can't pay them what their work is worth, and 2. They can't provide art at the speed that I currently need it. I'm currently waiting on an artist to free up some of their time to start handling the Thumbnail art at least, as that could be paid for and delivered on a weekly basis.
I have done research and weighed my options for creating these videos. And, regrettably, I had to decide to use an AI image generator to prevent people from staring at a black screen or a single image for the entire duration.
However, I'd like to point out that, while I do support your view on AI and that using real photos or paying an artist would be better... I also believe that my hours and hours of recording my voice, reading these stories, editing them down, going out to pay the rights to use the background music in these videos, shows that it's not for a lack of effort. Like any starting artist, I'm doing all of this besides my full-time job and responsibilities in my life. I'm trying to make up for the fact that I use AI by also supporting small authors that agree to have their books read by me.
If I were a content farm, with scripts written by AI, narrated by AI, with images by AI, editing by AI, and music by AI, then you'd be 200% correct in your statement.
But right now, because of your lack of empathy and knee-jerk reaction... I kinda feel unjustly attacked. And, seeing how you've linked your (admittedly rather old) DeviantArt account in your profile, and it states there that you would have liked to draw Conan the Barbarian art, you might also have lost a potential customer... If you were to have asked me "Hey, I noticed you use AI-art, are you open to having an artist make you real art? I myself like Conan the Barbarian and I've noticed you've done stories on him on your channel before.", I would have gladly talked to you about that and maybe even got you or someone like you to do those thumbnails at least. But now, it just comes across as attacking someone small who just tries to make do with the few things he has to do wrong that he can't change, while doing all the other things right.
@@MiniatureMythos Absolutely well said. I've been a ink artist for over 20 years now and there is most absolutely a place for AI art to be used to brilliant effect, for the exact reasons listed above. Except for the last thinking that you're wrong for using it to begin with. Everyone has their opinions on ai but in the scheme of things there are many ways to protect the process of your works through sheer literal (and can even be lazily done) documentation. It takes seconds and should absolutely become a part of the progress. If only even for posterity beyond your lifespan in the digital age, because it's all there yanno?Your process is nigh immortal which I personally think is pretty cool. ☺️
There is of course the lazy mass produced cheap garbage product websites, the like farmers, attention seekers, the ones using it for evil crap. It any genuine institute or critic or even a local silkscreen printer could take a moment to look at even phone pictures taken documenting the process of digital media along with the scanning of traditional art there would be the market for traditional artists in any line of work. It's a bit sad in terms of grifters but literally what thing in the world can say they alone have no cons, grifts or thefts?
Look at this gorgeous picture this dude made. It didn't exist in this way ever. It drew upon billions of instances of the past to perfectly set the scene for a fantastically produced reading. This man has worked so hard for his craft and it's a complete shame that he can think it's wrong to use. The fact that he wants to commission art from people is a credit he deserves. But this artwork , because it IS a creation of art because it's paired WITH the art, deserved it now. The support this guy deserves generates the support he can give to others. He added extra flavour to the sauce.
The use of complimentary generated art is not only a brilliant supplement to media but it's leading to different genres that creators can use. This is a new horizon and it's okay to be cautious but never okay to dismiss it completely.
Minotaur man, I absolutely loved your reading. And it would be just as good without but that pictures frigging dope and compliments it so well. ❤️
Did you pay for this video?
@@MiniatureMythosI, on the other hand, am deeply appreciative of your work. Ignore the trolls. You’re doing great.
Excellent reading! But execrable art (to be expected from AI-generation) that distracts from your reading with how stupid and hideous it looks.
It would've honstly been better just to put a single image made by an actual person--or even just the title in plain text--rather than have this slideshow of shit.
Thanks for providing some feedback.
I personally don’t mind the shittiness of the AI-images, as I don’t hold AI in high regard myself and I don’t suspect it will ever be good enough to replace humans anyway. What it creates is not ‘art’ and never will be, so I don’t tend to take it too seriously. Honestly, I am just amused by what a language model or image generator interprets from the texts that I put in there.
I have noticed however, that most people don’t share that opinion, and believe that my videos are either ‘lazy’, ‘soulless’ or ‘theft’ because of my use/presentation of AI. My videos aren’t meant to present AI as anything but window dressing. AI is a tool I use, just as I use my mic to record or a hammer to nail something to a wall.
However, I do admit that I started using AI because I was afraid my narration/voice wouldn’t be ‘adequate’ enough to carry my videos. And that I’d need some visual element to go along with them, just to provide a whole package.
Turns out you are one of the few people who have lately told me that my narration does stand on its own, and I don’t need the AI pictures to support it. That a single still image would do. Now that I know that my narration is the thing most people focus on, and the AI is either something people like, don’t care about, or absolutely hate… it might be best to cut that part out.
In addition, I’m getting pretty weary of people (not you) attacking me for something I don’t value that much in my videos, while ignoring/dismissing what I value the most, i.e. the narration, like I don’t have feelings or I’m not human at all.
@@MiniatureMythos For whatever my opinion is worth (some rando on the internet), I'd say that sounds like a prudent course of action. Sorta like a business deciding to change the package of a product after numerous reviews say the product is good but the package looks terrible.
For better or worse, people do tend to judge the (audio)book by its cover (ba-dum cheee!). So it doesn't entirely surprise me that some have, upon seeing AI-generated images, assumed the voice might be AI-generated, too. Heck, the only reason I bothered to listen long enough to ascertain that yours isn't AI was because I've been meaning to listen to "Who Goes There?" for a while, and hadn't had much luck finding it. Normally, I click "Not Interested" on anything with an AI-image simply as a matter of form.
Besides which, I imagine most people are like me with audiobooks: We put one on to listen to it while doing other things with our hands (driving, knitting, chores, games like Solitaire, etc.), so any visual element is, at best, extraneous. Makes it seem to me like you personally have nothing to lose by letting your voice (which is deep and resonant) stand on its own.
Sorry to only get back to you now.
I do think your opinion is worth something, even as a rando on the internet. And I don't mind you having an opinion that differs from my own (how unbelievable that might sound in this day and age), as long as you can elaborate on it and be civil about it, which you did and are. Everyone who puts thought into their opinion and the way it's voiced, deserves to be heard and taken into consideration.
I get that a thumbnail is really important for a lot of people, and it's only normal that you do judge a book by its cover. That's what covers are for, after all. The whole thing on TH-cam is that thumbnails can be brought to a science (think about the astonished faces or red arrows/circles), almost ensuring that someone will click it. Matter of fact, most of those thumbnails and titles don't even accurately represent the content that they're used for. And just like you are not interested in videos with AI in the thumbnails, I immediately draw conclusions about 'SEO optimized' thumbnails. And that's fine. I can't fault you for that. In fact, I can only applaud you for clicking on my video DESPITE the AI that I've used. I only hope that, by doing so, you also realised that the AI is a relatively small portion of what this video is made of, and can respect the original work I did put in myself.
In the meantime, I've done a couple of things to decide on how to proceed with the AI images in my videos.
First: I've set up a poll on the community tab of the channel to ask the opinions of my subscribers to gauge how most of them think about the subject. One of the options is, like you've said 'I don't really need images, as long as the narration is good'. Currently, the majority doesn't seem to mind the AI images.
In addition, I've also gotten the feedback that the thumbnails and 'design' I'm currently using make my videos stand out or be recognisable. So while I do get the comparison of a company changing the presentation of a good product with horrible packaging, I also find myself in the spot of 'brand recognition' already, with people being able to pick out my videos with ease from their homepage.
Second: I've looked into and started making Pixel Art by myself to replace the AI images. And while fun, unique, and certainly viable as a replacement for the current images, it is VERY labor/time intensive to make those images. So I'm not decided about it just yet. The narrations of the audiobook are already taking up a lot of time, depending on the length of the story of course, but if I have to make my own art as well, I will only be able to release a story once every couple of weeks instead of weekly...
It's a lot of things to consider for sure.
23:17 "thaued" out WTF? Is this AI reading? 👎
@@Welther47 No, it´s not AI. That´s just me not being a native English speaker and not having a lot of practice using the word ´thawed´.
@@MiniatureMythos OK. Fair enough. There are just so many AI narrated audiobooks now, you will excuse me for being suspicious.
That's fair! I know there's a lot out there that's completely made with AI. And it's only normal to have assumptions when you see an AI thumbnail to assume the rest will be AI as well :) Just glad I could clarify that the voice used is, in fact, a very real person putting in the effort :p
Eww ai
I'm sorry that's the first reaction my channel/video elicits.
I hope you can look past the AI window-dressing that I did and see/hear the voice-acting/narrating that I've done as far more valuable and telling of this channel :)
AI nonsense.
The only AI used in this video is for the images. The story is originally written in 1932, and the voice you're hearing is my own.
this is an original story. before you yap, kindly do your research.
HATE SCIENTIST