Wow, well you have some really nice imagery in here, but being fully honest: you bored me. I read sentence after sentence not only with the same structure - subject->verb-object; subject->verb->object; etc. -- but that added one more detail to a scene without action or emotional dynamics. Frankly, this is unforgivable in the opening of a book. Within those precious first few paragraphs, you have to 1) engage the reader in a character and viewpoint 2) give them a sense for what type of story this will be and hopefully excite them about it 3) get them to feel grounded in a situation that is tense and vivid.
You set the stage, but the actors are just sitting there while the narrator tells us what they are actually doing. You have to get the reader into the moment, feeling the action, understanding the desires, fears, challenges, conflicts of the character. Why else would they spend their precious time reading it? Readers want delicious escapes into vivid, tense, alluring worlds. Not to be told about a story.
Don't get me wrong -- lots of nice, creative language here. Shows promise, but it's a long way off from publishable. The story is just not there. Have you ever read any Dwight V Swain or Sol Stein on story theory? Great stuff. I think you'd find it really helpful to read a little novel crafting theory if you really have a goal of getting published.
Keep writing! That's all there is to it: effort + growth / time
What can anyone say but that the bravery you show in telling this so candidly and the talent you display in rendering it so beautiful is just stunning. It literally brought tears to my eyes. Thank-you so much for writing it.
This is beautiful, and for anyone who has a lake of misery like the one you mentioned, poised to swell and consume, the imagery is very, very powerful. I've often analogized my childhood trauma's to a basement full of nightmares that sometimes pop up and sometimes pull me down, but I like yours better. You write with such fluency and grace, it really brings the sentiment right up off the paper. Very well done.
I can see we have much in common -- a deep need to resolve histories that we didn't choose but can't deny having had. Funny, but from our initial exchange, I expected our discussion to be replete with paradigm mismatch. The aesthetic and the pragmatist. Perhaps we are just approaching the same problem from a different base of beliefs?
Just curious, but have you ever read any books by Alice Miller? The Drama of the Gifted Child? How about Tara Brach? Radical Acceptance? Two of my favorites, and I wonder what you would think of them. They've shaped my thinking quite a bit.
You write very well! You have a good sense for sentence structure (variation, style, transitions, etc.) and grammar (some spelling problems, but who cares about spelling!). I can also feel the story you are telling pulsing through your fingers into these words! The idea of having three plot-threads weaving together is a good one. Here is my constructive advice:
1) You jump from showing to telling after only one sentence. If there's one thing that I've had beaten into me by every reviewer that's ever reviewed my work, it is this: show, don't tell. Of course, that is not exclusively possible. But, I find that it is important to make sure the reader has been shown a lot -- especially interesting, exciting stuff -- before you tell them anything. And if possible, tell through your character (inner dialog as reactions to the world) rather than an uninvolved narrator. I especially feel that your book deserves a more "vivid" opening than what you have. Remember -- the first few paragraphs have the most important job: get the reader to buy it!
2) Three viewpoints woven together can create a lot of excellent tension, but you need to manage them well. There have been volumes written on this topic (try On Writing by Sol Stein), but the boiled down version is this:
- don't switch too often, and let the reader know you are doing it (extra spaces or "###" can be used as devices).
- Never switch viewpoint within a scene (which you don't, just thought I mention it).
- Be careful not to let them bleed together (make sure the character in one thread knows only what has happened within that thread).
Of course, there's lots of more. There are even authors on the subject who would advise against trying this unless you are a very experienced writer. I say go for it -- you seem to have a vision for the way it is going to work.
3) Watch out for relative references. In several places you switch from using the personal pronoun (Cindy, for instance) to "the young woman." I found this a bit confusing. Not a big deal, but you don't want your reader going back over something in order to understand it.
4) I found the "mushed together" formatting of this piece to be a hinderance to reading it. The standard I follow is that there should be a space between each paragraph, including dialog elements. Use extra spaces to indicate change viewpoint.
Most importantly: Keep writing! I look forward to reading your next installment.
Simply beautiful. I read it out loud as if it were my own work being read to an audience and found that it holds many secrets in cadence and rhyme. So many poems I read fail to glide so ellegantly off the tongue as this one does. Exceptionally well done.
Beutifully written, great depth, variation, rythm, and expressive of a worthy thought. Your word choice and avoidance of cliche sentiments is commendable. The analogy of love as flowing water is wonderful. The way you use it to convey both passion and trepidation is brilliant. Great work.
- I like the fact that you are going for an edgy, irritable, hectic character. Fun!
- Good punky images, not more of the the usual.
...now the bad:
- losts of dangling modifiers
- problems with subject verb disagreement
- tense jumping from today to Florida
If I'm guessing your character correctly, you are thinking: Oh, boy -- another grammar dweeb. And, that I am. But, I am also a reader, and I found your material hard to read, not just incorrect technically. As almost every author writing on the subject of grammar has ever said (someday I might do some research to prove that), break any and all rules when it works (or something like that). The problem is, much of your rule breaking works like spaghetti as shoelaces.
Here are a few examples:
You wrote:
Jarring buzzing sounds jerk me from a state of gray, and I wake to find myself in a strange room decorated with green floral fabrics and with sheer pink walls.
The room was decorated with sheer pink walls? You accidentally elliptically re-used decorated here.
As tempting as it is to put in a full day at the office, it's Sunday, and I have to make sure Dani stays home and got to bed at a decent time since her mom was away.
Think about this: As tempting as it is...I have to...was away?
I hate church traffic, especially with the inadequate parking some of them have.
The church traffic has parking? Church is not the subject here, traffic is. So, the modifier mislands.
More throughout the rest of the piece.
Personally, I think you have a great spirit that could write some cutting edge prose. But, I think you need to spend a little time making sure that what you write is readable.
It's good to see someone playing with the english language, but I think you've knocked all the sand out of the sandbox and are scraping bottom. I can tell you are trying to achieve a "Voltaire" like quality, only tongue in cheek, but I'm afraid that your verbosity exceeds your eloquence (sorry, couldn't resist that -- this style is rather catching isn't it?).
The main problem I had was that nearly every phrase had me re-reading to guess at what it meant. In the attempt to make your prose grandiloquent, you seem to have combined words that go together like bread and butane. Here's an example (the bolded phrases are ones I found unintelligible:
My undelayed customs, I conjecture, inhabited often hardly surpassable frequency at the estate of Chapwill. I visited when I felt a pressure for delight in the mind, when the intellect, suppressed in reasoning powers by lack of employment, would be detained for misuse. Many willingly doubtful occasions emerged {b{there—some cases suitable of record. So, as I approached one of the quick common journeys to that place, I consider such archiving.
Here's the heart of the problem: there's nothing funny about reading prose full of missused big-words. I think you need to find the kernal of humor you are looking for hear and tackle it more concisely. For example: is the main character a pompoous one who's eloquence often fails humorously?
Like I said initially -- so much writing out there is going after the same thing. I give you lots of credit for thinking out of the box here. I Don't mean to be harsh, but I think you'll agree with the statement that exposition is best conveyed without timidity.
I stopped by to check out your style, and I have to say I am very impressed: terse, vivid, and colorful. You engage all the senses and find just the right details. Of all the writing I have read on W.C, you have perhaps the most polished. I enjoy studying the styles of skilled authors and will be adding you to the list of those I spend time with.
Very well done. You have a very elegant style and a keen sense for word choices. I like the three scenes and how they interrelate. I also like the humor you've woven in very comfortably. It makes the characters likable and exciting to follow as they move through the story.
I'll be back soon to take a look at your prologue!
I like the characters and their energetic banter -- you keep the piece moving at a very solid, exciting pace. I found that I was interested to know more about what was going on -- who are these boys? What is this school they attend? But, I have to admit that I found myself lost a bit in the beginning. You jump right into action, which is a good thing, but I think that a little framesetting would strengthen the piece. A pattern I have seen work well is action -- brief summary to fill in the blanks -- back to action.
As for the names, I like them but am not sure about Wee Andy and Tall Andy. Perhaps I have trouble with them since they smack of the Raggedy Anne and Andy from books I used to read to my kids: Raggedy Andy this...Raggedy Anne that. At first, I thought that Wee Andy was just going to turn out to be a pet name, but then I realized it was his real name. Just my opinion, though.
This piece shows lots of talent: characters, writing (nice sentence styling by the way!), and story telling. I think you would have something really strong if you give the reader a little more context (not too much!) in the beginning. Excellent job!
One other thing: I think the formatting without breaks between the lines is a little hard on the eyes. Might want to fix that.
LateNightWriter
As short as it is, this piece is very powerful, hauntingly so. Your style is very lean and your choice of words excellent -- it works like an elongated poem. Reading it, you are never sure of exactly what is going on, but the feelings it invokes are rich and frightening. Then, you get to the last paragraph, and all the pieces fall into place to great effect. As a short story, it has good bones.
Very impressive stuff. I especially like the first paragraph -- you have a terse, poetic style that is a joy to read. I just stopped by to check out your work and wound up reading this all the way through, pulled along by its intensity and vividness.
I just have a few comments for you:
You wrote:
Being an alien from a techno-world,...
The term "techno-world" left me flat and felt like a punt. Perhaps this is because the rest of your language is so heavily textured. You might want to spend a sentence or two describing the world rather than just dropping a bit of lingo.
You wrote:
Protected from wind by a tumble of rocks he examined his comatose shipmate. Wiping sand from a calloused finger, he searched for a pulse and the warmth of living flesh. With a sigh of satisfaction, he relaxed.
Two things about this:
1) You do struggle with commas, don't you. The rule I learned is to use is that if a modifying phrase is not in its natural location, use a comma to seperate it. For instance, the first sentence could be considered to be:
He examined his comatose shipmate while protected from wind by a tumble of rocks.
What you have is better, but you made it so by moving "protected from the wind by a tumble of rocks" out of its natural location as a modifier for the verb "examined" How did he examine? While protected from wind ...
The real problem of ommitting the comma here is that on first read, it sounds like he was protected by a tumble of rocks he examined. Rewind -- oh... /
Same problem here:
In his vision strands of hair washed like seaweed across the disintegrating flesh of dead sailors.
I read this first as "in his vision strands" and had to go back to determine that you meant strands in his vision...
2) This paragraph, like a number of others, repeats the same sentence pattern in succession:
modifier, subject, predicate
As in:
Protected from wind by a tumble of rocks he examined his comatose shipmate. Wiping sand from a calloused finger, he searched for a pulse and the warmth of living flesh. With a sigh of satisfaction, he relaxed.
I know that this is a good way to avoid redundant inclusion of verbs and pronouns, but in certain perts of your chapter, repeated use of this construction becomes like a drone.
Having said all that, let me make sure I was clear about the positives: you have probably the best sense of word choice I have found on this sight. Your skill at making the right choices is first rate (interesting details, etc.). And, you have a great sense for how to construct interesting dialog.
Excellent work. I'll come back and read more when I have a chance.
I can tell that you have a strong back-story in mind, and the purpose of your prologue is to establish it. I think the idea is a good one, but I'm not crazy about how you do it, mostly because it is a long, long stretch of being "told" the backstory by the bard with almost no action. On the low end of the revision spectrum would be adding characterization of the bard by intermingling his actions with his story telling. Perhaps he is waving his hand or stomping his feet or even just raising his eyebrows. On the high end of the spectrum would be rewriting this to take the reader into the action of his story instead of having us listen to him tell it. One of the writing rules I live by (break rules whenever it works, remember) is to keep "narrative summary" to less than two paragraphs and mix in humor and color as much as possible to keep it from becoming boring. Old style authors used to go on for pages "telling" the reader the story, but I believe (and I'm not alone in this) that modern readers expect to be "shown"
Here are a few specific editorial comments for you:
- why is the dialog broken into different chunks? Unless something is happening inbetween, it seems odd to have it stop and re-start without reason.
You wrote:
He took a deep breath and stepped out onto the floor before the king and his guests.
Before is ambigous here -- time or location? I'd chose another word (in front of?)
You wrote:
"In the Days Before, men lived in fear of Darkness. Darkness reigned over the land. The minions of Darkness harassed men. In their fear, men gathered together in close villages to protect each other from the Demons, the most man-like and evil of the wraiths of Darkness.
To my taste, the repition of the word Darkness (even as a name) doesn't read well. Perhaps you should find a way to vary your references.
You wrote:
Knights of Men
I know that you are estbalishing that there are creatures about in opposition to men, but this name is weak. It reminded me of something that Monty Python would use in a sketch. Perhaps "Guardians of Mankind" or something?
You wrote:
Seeing Crystal with which he controlled his legions. (missing ending quotations)
Just a typoe -- missing the end quotation.
You wrote:
kill the fell beasts.
Not familiar with this use of the verb "fell." Did you mean to type "foul?" You use it this way in many places.
There are probably more technical nits that I could dig up, but the intent of this review is to encourage you to recast the piece to make it more immediate and exciting to read. Hope this helps.
Very well done. You have a smooth style that I found pulled me right in. Your prologue is a nice way of starting off the story. It establishes a backstory that made me want to find out what was coming.
I do have one nit though:
You wrote:
The softness of the soil was also quickly dispelled as I realized it was made of tiny coarse granules that lightly abraded my exposed skin. Granules that adhered to the moisture of my skin and had somehow seeped beneath my clothes to irritate that skin as well.
Perhaps it is just me, but I find that when the same word is repeated often in close proximity, it makes the writing seem awkward. In the above two sentences, you use the word "skin" three times. I think this is particularly an issue since this is your second paragraph, and therefore one of the most important. You can't afford to have the reader distrust your style that early on, or they might choose not to go any further.
A second, smaller nit: Why "...soil was also quickly..." instead of the more terse: "...soil was quickly..." I don't see the function of the word "also" here.
Keep writing -- you say you're new to this? If so, then you have an abundance of natural talent.
I think that this is a nice story about a cute, spunky little girl with a love for her bike and adventure. You do a nice job of describing through action in many places, such as when you wrote "Her blonde curls looked like spun gold as they danced in the light of day as she peddled along."
That said, I found the prose a bit awkward in many places, extra words, lack of agreement between subject and verb, etc. The biggest problem is simply a matter of dangling references. A few examples:
You wrote:
She liked how she felt riding it with the wind whipping in her face and making her cheeks the color of bright cherries.
In this case, you meant to have this read such that the wind was what was "making" her cheeks turn red, but 'it' refers to the bike, not the wind. If you take out the modifier "with the wind whipping in her face" you'll see what I mean:
She liked how she felt riding it and making her cheeks the color of bright cherries.
Another example:
You wrote:
The last words that she knew her mother said although she didn’t hear them was to stay away from the old castle.
This just doesn't read smoothly. The apposotive "although she didn't hear them" should be set off with commas, and it doesn't match in tense -- "hadn't heard them". There is also a tense problem with "that she knew her mother said" There are several places where you attempt to jump to a deeper pastness but don't manage your verb tenses well enough for them to read well. Jumping around in time is VERY tricky stuff. It is very easy to lose your reader if the transitions are not perfect.
I'm sure that you feel that all this grammatical nit picking is just that, but I think that grammatical issues will get in the way of your engaging your reader until you eliminate them.
Please don't be discouraged. You have all the real skills needed to write -- imagination, figurative sense, a desire to tell a story -- you might just want to spend some time tighening up your technical skills.
Overall, I found this intruiging, but a little akward at points. I think that you are on to something with the whole "who is she, where is she, why is she wandering around" beginning, but I don't think the prose draws the reader in enough, mostly due to weak transitions and lack of sentence varaition. Consider that the second paragraph is almost entirely composed of compound or complex sentences of the pattern: she...and, she...and, she...and, it...and, she...and.
Some of the sentences simply need to be more concise, such as:
"She awoke the next morning to stare at a pair of yellow eyes looking into hers."
She didn't awake the next morning purposefully to stare at a pair of yellow eyes, and why was she staring at eyes that were looking into hers? I think you meant to say something like:
"She awoke the next morning to find a pair of yellow eyes staring at her. "
Even better, would be to get away from starting most of your sentences with "She" and add an introductory phrase:
"The next morning when she awoke, a pair of yellow eye stared into hers"
You may think I am nitpicking here, but I found that the style issues detracted from what I otherwise thought was an interesting piece of prose.
By the way: the ending is a real grabber. But, I think you need to do more earlier on to motivate the reader to to get there.
Good luck, and keep on writing!
Printed from https://writing.com/main/profile/reviews/fgracely
All Writing.Com images are copyrighted and may not be copied / modified in any way. All other brand names & trademarks are owned by their respective companies.
Generated in 0.10 seconds at 10:18pm on Nov 24, 2024 via server WEBX1.
View Portfolio
Visit Notebook
Send Gift Points
Awards
Badges
Send Email
Community Newsfeed
General Discussion
Sponsored Items
Book of Trinkets
Static Items
Books
Groups
Interactive Stories
Audio
Campfire Creatives
Community Notes
Crossword Puzzles
Documents
Folders
Images
In & Outs
Madlibs
Photo Albums
Polls
Product Reviews
Quizzes
Survey Forms
Web Pages
Word Searches
