\"Writing.Com
*Magnify*
SPONSORED LINKS
BY ONLINE AUTHORS
Printed from https://writing.com/main/profile/reviews/mykel52
Review Requests: OFF
23 Public Reviews Given
24 Total Reviews Given
Public Reviews
1
1
Review of Saved By A Bug  Open in new Window.
Review by mykel Author IconMail Icon
Rated: E | (5.0)
Dear ConnieAnn,

I was originally attracted to your story by the picture of the VW Bug. My first car was a 1970 VW camper bus, but many of my friends had a bug just like the one you describe. And I went through a period in my life when I was always locking the keys in the car. The worst time was when the locksmith who had just opened the car was driving away, and I managed to knock against my car door, relocking the keys in the car once again! Twice in one hour! Heavy sigh.....

So I felt immediate, deep sympathy for you. I read through your piece, and I could really find no mistakes in it. I then decided to look more closely at comma usage, a place where everyone makes boo-boos. I realized that - tell if I'm wrong - you had a great understanding of proper comma usage, and you had taken probably taken the Comma Sense class. In fact, I even suspect this is an exercise for comma usage.

Well, whatever it is, you did a great job twice over. Thank you for bringing memories of locked cars back to me. I think I feel a flush coming on....

My very best wishes for your writing,

Michael
2
2
Review of Joey And Me  Open in new Window.
Review by mykel Author IconMail Icon
Rated: E | (5.0)
Dear W.D,

It is both a pleasure and an honor to review your story, "Joey and Me." Usually, I write a review as an analysis of the piece, noting the strong points and picking out the things I sense need improvement. This is a good story, well-written, and the only quibbles I had were how you used your em dashes and whether a comma might work better in certain places than in others. Since I could find so little to comment on, I decided I'd break from my usual long-windedness and just say, "Well done!"

As a little brother, I can appreciate both the incident in this story and the dynamics of the two brothers's relationship. My older brother almost did me in on several occasions, and Joey's experience reminded me of the many times when my older brother launched me into a course of action which he later regretted, situations where his little brother ended up surprising him! Thanks for bringing that back for me.

Best Wishes,

Michael
3
3
Review of Elinor, Take 2  Open in new Window.
Review by mykel Author IconMail Icon
Rated: E | (3.5)
Dear Diane,

         It is an honor and pleasure to review your short story, Elinor, Take 2. Please understand that what I write here is only my opinion, and I request that you take it as such, testing every suggestion and observation to determine its value for your writing. My intention is to be supportive; please feel free to discard or ignore anything here that is not useful to you.

         My overall impression of the work is that it is effective for the reasons I shall shortly give. It is very convincing, and I had to remind myself that it is fiction; at least, I assume it is fiction. I got pulled into the story right away, and it was easy to stay with until the end. I also feel a resonance for Elinor because I had a partner for several years who gave birth at the age of thirteen. Here are the observations that come to me as I parse through the story.

         The tone of the work is reflectively sympathetic. It appears in the form of a fictional memoir as the speaker reflects on the events that lead up to the climactic meeting with her birth daughter and family. You use three or four part repetitions to intensify emotion and express emotional depth. Here, I just want to caution you. Sometimes these repetitions can work and be very successful, but sometimes they can make the writing seem strident. Be careful of overusing them. I’ll mention them later when I get into some of the more technical aspects of your work. It’s easy to use these repetitions; you hear them a lot in spoken dialogue, but they can become a cliché and rob your work of its depth. I’m not saying that you have consistently done this: I’m just saying, be careful. It does work well when you use it here:

TEXT: She doesn’t know that her father and I met in August, when he was wrapping up lifeguard duties at the lake after his senior year in college. She doesn’t know that a feverish make-out session on a blanket in the dark led to her. She doesn’t know that while Jeff was on the blanket inside me, his fiancee Debra was flipping through Bride magazine looking for the perfect dress for their March wedding. I didn’t know that either.

         The mood of your story works, too. You are using description, internal dialogue, and character reaction to set the story’s mood. You can add to your descriptive language without overdoing it by describing body language, facial characteristics, and bodily sensation. Mind you, there are parts of your story that are VERY descriptive. My favorite one is:

TEXT: Standing in the hallway, my mother was staring, her eyes wide, her right hand held to her mouth. “Elinor, what did you do?”

         In the first paragraph, you are moving back and forth with your verb tenses. Having the first paragraph in present tense, then moving to past tense, confused me a little. I wonder if it might help to remove the first paragraph altogether, start with the phone call, then move into the present until Elinor begins recounting the story of the pregnancy. Or, if that makes the beginning too weak (it might), do something like:

TEXT: After the phone call, I didn’t realize I was crying until I saw a drop of water fall on the curling, cracked photo in my hand. It was a photo of a baby girl with blue-green eyes. How old is she now? I had her when I was seventeen, and I’m seventy-three now. So, she’s fifty-six…

         I understand that you might have to revise when you start talking about what she doesn’t know. However, my point is that the quick shift from present to past threw me a little. That’s all. There is no awkwardness in tense during the confrontation at the end; if fact, tere is no awkwardness at all after the first paragraph.

         Point of View in your story is very clear. The speaker recounts everything and the POV doesn’t “wander” at all. We know Elinor is telling the story from beginning to end, and her first person POV cements the story together. You have a well-conceived plot. First, you provide the emotional reaction to the phone call, then the phone call itself. Next, you tell the back story and go even deeper into the story of the pregnancy. Finally, you finish it up with the interview, the reunion, and the procession of Elinor’s new family. It is smooth and it works. There is some good conflict in the story as you show the reader how Elinor’s relationships change once her family becomes aware of her pregnancy, and the conflict also generates within the turbulence of Elinor’s emotions as they flow from waypoint to waypoint in the story. If you were of a mind to do so, you could expand on and develop some more of the emotional aspects of your story into scenes; however, for this particular piece of writing, I like the way you explain Elinor’s feelings. We do get a sense of what she’s going through.

         The structure of the story is laid out well. The phone call in the beginning creates some dramatic tension that builds nicely to Elinor’s and Rebecca’s meeting, then falls and concludes with Elinor recognizing her new family members. I think I would have liked to know more about Robin, Kayla, and Jenna, as well as something a little more substantial than Elinor’s life beginning anew. By substantial, I mean, what happened? Elinor’s granddaughter and great-granddaughters walk in: what do they look like? Are they smiling? Do they hug her? Is everybody crying? Are they talking over each other? Or are they sitting on the couch, eating cucumber sandwiches, and staring at each other in wild surmise? I think my desire for more means you did a good job with the rest of the story. Now I want some sense of how it’s going to play out, even though I won’t know everything before the story ends. That last scene is a real opportunity….

         There are two places where the wording struck me as somewhat awkward. The first is when you say,

TEXT: "What a fool. In the early 1960's...." Of course, I assumed the fool was Elinor and not Debra, but the proximity of Debra's reading Bride magazine while her fiancee is having it off with Elinor. It made me wonder for a moment if Elinor was referring to herself or Debra. It's probably fine, but i did wonder for a moment.

The second place was

TEXT: "I see it was empty rage, full of fury signifying nothing." I'm not sure quoting Macbeth here really works. If you make it as a direct quote, it will stick out like a sore thumb. If you leave it there, it sounds almost like a cliche. I'll bet you can come up with something much better in your own words....

         Writing in descriptive language, using all the five senses, and not overdoing it is a fine art. Your story is very descriptive in places. Elinor’s tears falling on the curled photograph, the skilful contrast of Elinor’s passionate lovemaking while Debra turns the pages of Bride magazine, Elinor’s brother teasing her and her clothes not fitting, Elinor’s mother’s discovery of the pregnancy (great!!!): there’s a lot of good description. So much so, in fact, that when you don’t describe, the reader notices. You definitely did not overdo it; you might consider if there are places in the story where a little more description might make the scene or character more vivid.

         You do add a little description in your dialogue. The story is not dialogue rich, but both the phone call in the beginning and the reunion at the end are opportunities for a little more descriptive dialogue. For instance, what does Rebecca’s voice sound like when she calls? Elinor speaks cautiously; perhaps…she…speaks…haltingly? Does Rebecca sound eager? What is their body language like when they meet? These are just possibilities for you to consider when you are constructing these scenes. And, by the way, your dialogue seems quite natural, not forced, just asking for a little more description (in my humble opinion).
Since the story is told from Elinor’s point of view, we know a few details about her but not many. We know her age and the color of her eyes. When Rebecca appears, we learn that both have freckles, but we don’t learn much more. I suggest that when you read through your story again, consider whether more physical description might intensify and enhance your character descriptions in the same way that dialogue can.

         Please understand that I mean this respectfully: your punctuation can use some work. Many writers do not know how to use commas. I am one of them, and I have to review them frequently There are approximately 30 different rules for comma usage in English; if we are going to write and write well, we have to know and understand them. At WDC, there is even a Comma Class at New Horizons Academy. It is wonderful, by the way, and I encourage everyone and anyone to take it.

To give you some examples from your story:

1. So , she’s fifty-six now? “So” used here requires a comma because it is an interjection. You are using it to express emphasis, interest, and surprise about Rebecca’s age.

2. When the phone rang yesterday , I was taking a fitful nap. “When the phone rang yesterday” is an introductory adverbial clause. They are used to provide background information about the main part of the sentence – “I was taking a fitful nap” – and start with a subordinate conjunction (when). The clause can stand on its own without the subordinate conjunction, “the phone rang yesterday,” but it becomes a dependent clause and requires a comma.

3 & 4. And, no, I didn’t know your mother ; I know your father. “And” here is a non-essential element adding characterization and emphasis (emotion) to your story. It is non-essential to the meaning of the sentence and does require a comma. And, in this sentence, you cannot separate “I didn’t know your mother, I know your father," with a comma because they are two independent clauses that are not linked by a conjunction. To do so creates a comma splice, and comma splices are a no-no. There are several ways to solve the problem of a comma splice. My first choice is to add semicolon because the two independent clauses are very closely related in meaning. You can also do any of the following:

I didn’t know your mother -- I know your father. You can separate with an em dash if you use this sparingly and infrequently.

I didn’t know your mother. I know your father. You can turn this into two separate sentences.

I didn’t know your mother, but I do know your father. You can use a comma and a coordinating conjunction.

         Any of these solutions will work to fix a comma splice, but it needs to be fixed. I didn't want to pelt you with criticism of your punctuation, but have a look at your story and ask yourself why every time you use a punctuation mark. If you are not sure why it's there or find yourself asking if you need a punctuation mark in a particular place, go to a trusted source to find out. On the other hand, please do not allow these comments to diminish your confidence. Your work will benefit from punctuation study, so I suggest you follow whatever means seems best to achieve that.

         In the end, I really enjoyed your story. There are some very strong elements within it. Depending on what you want to do with it, there is a lot of opportunity for creative revision or taking what you have learned by writing it and carrying those lessons into your next piece of work. I hope you will keep writing and keep posting. Again, please take what is helpful in my comments and discard the rest. Thank you for writing this. I really appreciate the opportunity to review it.

Best Wishes,

Michael
4
4
Review by mykel Author IconMail Icon
Rated: 13+ | (4.5)
         I have the honor to review, Are You Listening To Me, a short piece penned by my teacher, colleague, and friend, Winnie. My doing a review for you feels a little like the Cherubim checking to see how well God is keeping the universe in tune after Creation. However, in the WDC spirit of review, I will do my best to offer something meaningful and of value. I would like to say that I went through about ten to fifteen works with a lot of sighing before I settled on yours. Perhaps it is the way I like to do reviews, or perhaps it is just that I have a bad attitude, but I want to like what I am reading and not have to spend lots of time looking for kind ways to help an author extensively revise their work. It's not that I think I know better; rather, I don't feel I have the expertise to offer concrete suggestions that will improve the author's work without confusing the author. There is also the possibility that I am incredibly lazy. With this in mind, your story is very readable and clear, so I thank you for saving me a lot of extra time and work.

         I confess that I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer. By the time I got to, "Ted plodded down the hall," I understood that this was a ghost/lingering karma/lingering spirit story. The tone offers everyday description of the family's home, but the mood of the piece is fashioned with words and expressions like dawn, shrouding, sunrise, drawn shutters, blocked view, oblivion of sleep, sentenced to another day. This kind of language is more than description, though the reader experiences it as such in the first reading. These words and phrases create a transitional world where the spirit of Becky is reaching out to Ted in an attempt to move him through grief. I liked the subtle way you did it - nothing flashy - and I liked the descriptions of the cigarette smoke and ash, the dirty kitchen, Ted's stubble, the pizza boxes, the dirty cup, all of which express the state of a man whose life is shipwrecked and is floating in the ocean of his own grief. All those little details help to convey that, as do the references to light offer a contrast to express the world of spirit. Those word and phrase choices embellish this story nicely.
The POV is Rebecca’s, of course, and everything flows well from her perspective. The active verbs cause the story to move, and I did not detect any awkward verb tense usage.
I’m going to mention plot more at the end of the review. The plot is clear, well defined, and effectively developed. There is conflict scatter-gunned all over the story: Rebecca and Ted, Jim and Ted, Ted and Ted, the presence of death, the transition to the next world, and the pall of grief. You created a clear and readable structure, and the elements of introduction, rising action, and climax are all in place. The falling action and conclusion are embedded in the climax, and that’s OK. However, it causes the story to end somewhat abruptly. “Somewhat abruptly” is this reader’s judgment; depending on what you do with this story, it may be appropriate to your purpose. My feeling is that the story ends as quickly as it sprang to life. Again, depending on what do with this, it might just be the perfect thing.

         The characters are alive. We don’t get much of a description of Rebecca, and that may be appropriate for this story. You could add more description of her or leave it out, depending on how you want to show her. Ted has the clearest characterization with his stubble and stogie. As for Jim, we don’t know much about him other than he’s tall. And Amanda isn’t even mentioned. Nevertheless, as it is, the story works from beginning to end, and the dialogue is crucial in moving the story since Rebecca is speaking to Ted from her transitional state. In fact, the climax of the story is achieved through dialogue, and the resolution comes about as a result of the dialogue. The presence of Jim is helpful because it emphasizes Rebecca’s attempt to communicate with Ted from her spirit world, a task just as difficult as Jim trying to communicate with Ted through the layers of his grief.

         I saw no issues with grammar, spelling, or punctuation….

         Light and dark, shadow and smoke, cold and dirt and clutter – these all intertwine to form the fabric of the imagery and setting. They are manifest and clear; you have done it in a simple, straightforward way; if you wanted to extend the piece, you could do it by using these elements with more detail, but the piece stands as it is.

         Is this it? Is it finished? Is this all you want to do with it? You have a short story, yes. It ends abruptly, and if you intend it to end abruptly with the resolution in the emotional punch of the climax and left up to the reader’s imagination, so be it. But you also have a number of other possibilities. This could be the preface to a novella or novel that can include more story about the couple’s life together, the death of the mother & daughter, the subsequent investigation, etc. This might also serve as the final chapter of a longer short story, novella, or novel. The daughter has hardly been mentioned, so she is a fertile area of potential exploration and development. You can see my dilemma. Does the author want it to end here, or do I want something more out of the story that the author never intended? So much for my ideas!

         I enjoyed reading this a lot. It stimulated my gray cells. The only criticism I have (criticism is too strong a word) is that it seems to end a little too abruptly but in a way that may suit the author’s purpose. I thank you for the very enjoyable hours I spent with your work.

With Gratitude and Best Wishes,

Michael.

P.S. If you ever have the chance to see the movie, Truly, Madly, Deeply with Alan Rickman & Juliet Stevenson, you might enjoy it….
5
5
Review by mykel Author IconMail Icon
Rated: 13+ | (3.5)
         Hello, Kotaro. My name is Mykel, and I have the privilege of reviewing your short story, Spirit of the Lake. The title of your story attracted me, and I chose to review it because I have had many opportunities in my life to interact with Japanese culture. I have travelled a little in Japan, studied Japanese language, and appreciate Japanese culture. I very much enjoy the style, spirit, and mood of the Japanese folktales, especially the ghostly, mysterious stories. I enjoyed this story very much. It expresses the same sentiment of many of the stories I have read, a blend of charm, adventure, magic, and ethics. I would like to explore with you some of the elements that you combined to create this entertaining tale. Please understand that my review is meant to be encouraging and supportive. Also, do feel free to discard anything I may comment upon if it is not helpful to your story.

         I enjoy your sense of tone in this story. It evokes the traditional spirit of storytelling that is so familiar to us when we hear the words, “Once upon a time,” “In a galaxy far, far away,” or, as you know, the traditional one that often appears in Japanese stories, “Mukashi.” I could feel this spirit in your tale. Its sincere, nostalgic tone communicates a convincing narrative mood, grabbing the reader, creating deep interest in, and sympathy for, the characters you have created.

         Annin, the blind storyteller, is a wonderful character. We watch as Annin’s curiosity, love for his craft, and adventuresome spirit lead him to the fishing village, where he sails out onto the lake to meet the demon who is terrorizing the local villagers. At first, we expect to meet a terrifying apparition; instead, as the dialogue between the spirit and Annin deepens and matures, we discover a pitiable old hag, a tortured spirit made ugly due to the pollution of the lake by the local villagers. The encounter between Annin and the spirit evokes pathos. Each has some repellent aspect of appearance and character, yet each possesses a pure heart and is capable of trust and compassion.

Your longer lyric passages are particularly effective in creating the tone and mood:

Annin loved to travel, though, neither views of streaking clouds above majestic mountains, nor of red sunsets over sensuous shores, could increase the murmur in his breast. Rather, he enjoyed the near silence of a breeze caressing the trees, the sigh of waves sinking into sand, the clop of horses prancing on a bridge, the laughter of joyful children. You may say he could sample all of these without traveling hardly at all and you would be right, as Japan was at peace. Annin was a storyteller, which was one of the few vocations a blind person could strive to master.

Here, too:

Annin bowed, put the package in the sleeve of his kimono, and thanked him. Then, he straightened his posture, and tapping the road, proceeded west with his bowlegged gait. He felt the rising sun on his back. As the day progressed, sweat started to bead on his brow until a cool wind from the north unhindered by trees relieved his discomfort. Aah, he thought, I’m on the border of the lake. Soon the rustle of gentle waves on sand confirmed his guess.

And here:

Annin calmed his breathing. He focused to catch any sound besides the gentle lapping of the lake, yet he couldn’t ignore the clammy clutch of the mist; it permeated the folds of his kimono, chilling his skin till he felt the bumps form. A gust rushed from behind, blowing up over his back and scalp. He heard a disturbance in the water. Ripples rocked his boat, then the sound of water dropping on the stern of the boat. He could tell the drops were large by the way they slapped the wooden bottom; approaching, they thumped in harmony to the pounding of his heart.

         Your use of the 3rd person narrative in this story is completely appropriate. It enables the reader to focus on each character, and is especially helpful in the encounter between Annin and the spirit. This would be a very different story if you wrote it from the Annin’s point of view (or the spirit’s, for that matter). Not only does this choice easily shift the action back and forth, but it also gives the reader an opening to look equally into the heart of teach of these two interesting characters. You use your verb tenses and point of view effectively to create seamless narrative. I do not feel confused about what is taking place as I read.

         You use your minor characters well, too. I laughed at the foolish Gonta as he shares his lunch with the storyteller and tries to get him to turn back from his dangerous task. You skillfully interweave Gonta's anxiety for Annin’s fate with respect and admiration for the storyteller’s courage as Annin goes out onto the lake to meet the spirit. Your treatment of the spirit creates a sense of fear, then horror, and, finally, sympathy for the spirit as her true predicament is revealed. We all breathe a sigh of relief with Annin when the spirit disappears as he tugs at the rope, happy and relieved that the encounter is over. Yes, he has added quite a tale to his collection.

         The overall effect is that everyone “lived happily ever after,” and each character extends their threshold of compassion and understanding, thus banishing the shadow of fear that all the villagers experience due to the spirit’s activity in their midst. It works.

         Plot and story move along together in this story. It is a simple plot, but the way you tell it makes it all the more enjoyable and endearing. The conflicts are clear. You provide us with a main character, Annin, who struggles with his blindness and with a supernatural force that is terrorizing a community. You introduce the situation well and effectively create dramatic tension as Annin gets closer to his meeting with the spirit. The suspense climaxes as Annin confronts the spirit, but the surprise here is that anxiety and fear become compassion and understanding. And as the action falls off, you tantalize the reader with the possibility that Annin and the spirit may have enkindled a deep, loving relationship that might mature in the future. It is charming.

         I confess that I find the first paragraph of the story a little murky. How does everything fit together? I don’t understand the phrase, “...neither views... could silence the murmur in his breast.” Does that refer to his storytelling capability? I think I would have started the piece with something concrete. For example, “The first time Annin heard the story about the monster, he was sitting comfortably at a local tea shop, enjoying fragrant tea and a sweet cake.” You know, something that just grabs a reader and pulls them in, then go on to his love of travel and his journey to the village. Easy for me to say, right? Mind you, if you want go from the general – Annin’s love of travel – to the specific – his journey to the inn - that is perfectly fine. Do please consider revising the first paragraph so that it flows more smoothly into the local tea shop scene. By the way, that detail about the aroma of the charcoal-broiled fish wrapping itself around Annin like a vine’s tendril and pulling him into the inn was great!

         Looking at the plot of your story causes me to reflect upon the characters and the style. Here is a subject for some extensive thought and consideration. The tone and the style are very reminiscent of Japanese folktales. In this, you succeed admirably. The whole story is Japanese, its ascetic mysticism transporting the reader into the spirituality of Japan and Japanese people. When I read it at first, I actually thought you were Japanese for a little while! However, herein lies a deeper question: do you want to keep Annin as a more superficial character, somewhat self-serving, who seeks to explore the mystery of the lake spirit in order to get a good tale for his livelihood? Or are there deeper currents? Where does compassion for the villagers fit in? Does Annin feel genuine love for the lake spirit? Do they actually have a sexual encounter in the boat? Is it your intention to just tell the tale as it is and make the ambiguity a place where the reader must make up her/his own mind?

         Answers to these questions might help you finish the story with a more satisfying ending. The story ends somewhat ambiguously. Even though the reader understands everything at the end, the story seems to end a little too abruptly; the ending is precisely one sentence after Annin and the spirit part company:

“Annin let out the air in his lungs in relief, then tugged the rope. He had his story, and was eager to spread it.”

         As I read it more and more, it can stand by itself as it is, but I wonder if the story might be better served if the ending were a little more complete. I feel a little disappointed by its seeming abrupt ending. And, to a Western audience, the last sentence could be read as Annin seeming somewhat cynical because everything he did was just to get a good story. What if there is some mention that the lake grew cleaner over time? That Annin visited the village from time to time? And that, during those visits, he could be seen out in a boat on the lake, talking with a beautiful woman? Or perhaps the people of his own village become shocked when Annin takes a beautiful wife that no one knows? It might be helpful to offer something more that will tie it all up. It’s a point worth considering.

         In any case, the story is structured well. You introduce the characters and situation; the action rises as Annin journeys and meets the villagers. The climax occurs when Annin and the spirit meet on the boat, and the falling action is the heart to heart resolution that Annin and the spirit arrive at. This all resolves very nicely.

         For me, it’s the character of Annin that makes the piece. He is vulnerable, imaginative, friendly, polite – perhaps a little self-serving – and a delight to read about. While I would appreciate more description, I can see him vividly in my mind’s eye: Annin, Gonta, and the water spirit are each portrayed effectively, too. Mind you, I have seen lots of Japanese movies, pictures, and art to be able to easily conjure up a picture. Do keep in mind that if your audience is primarily Western, you might want to describe each character's appearance a little more. You give a brief description of Annin when he stops at the Inn. “The proprietor’s daughter saw that their guest was blind. She recognized the small folded cloth balanced on his shaven head and an apron’s pockets filled with scrolls and brushes as the costume of a storyteller.”There are really only a few details sprinkled throughout the story about Annin. We know he’s bowlegged when he walks, and you only mention the cane when he’s ready to go out onto the water. Remember, not many Western people know what a blind storyteller looks like. All we know for sure is that it is “not modern.” We also don’t know much about Gonta, except that he wears his tea flask on his hip.

You describe some striking features about both Annin and the spirit through skillful dialogue:

Annin turned while rubbing his face to warm it. With an inner strength he stopped shivering. “I can face you, but I can’t look, and my eyes are ugly and disturbing.”
“Your face is like a baby’s compared to mine. It’s good that you cannot see it.”
“I’ve heard that your hair glistens darker than the deepest black. I can only imagine how it would light my soul if only I could glimpse it.”
She raised her hands to her face, but didn’t touch it. “My face is marked with bloody sores.”

         These details are wonderful. Are they enough to really “show” Annin’s character? He is so compelling. His motivation creates depth for his character; moreover, it’s what drives the story. His easygoing acceptance of blindness addresses the conflict of being at odds with himself by harmonisng the conflict. His lack of conflict is very interesting and creates something of a mystical aura around him. He seems to be very at home in nature, and his solution to the hauntings of the lake spirit communicate an almost sage-like wisdom. I think it would be unfortunate if you leave him solely as a self-seeking storyteller. That decision, however, is completely yours. But I find him fascinating, and I feel I’d like to spend much more time with him and get to know him better.

         I feel that Annin’s, Gonta’s, and the lake spirit’s characters are all individual. You did not develop them as much as you could have, but the tone and mood of the story tends more towards the folktale style, and those tales tend to have sparse details. You seem to have followed in that tradition. I find the characters to be realistic in relation to the mood you are creating. I can empathize with each one of the characters. You use dialogue well, and your avoidance of dialogue tags worked within the story’s current context and stage of development. The dialogue flowed naturally, and you used it skillfully in parts, especially in the Annin & spirit meeting, to show the reader some important characterization details. As I said earlier, I never felt confused about who was speaking:

A voice hissed, “Who are you and what are you doing here?”
Without turning, Annin answered, all the while his teeth chattering, “My name is Annin. I’m writing a story in my mind.”
“Look at me when you speak.”
Annin turned while rubbing his face to warm it. With an inner strength he stopped shivering. “I can face you, but I can’t look, and my eyes are ugly and disturbing.”
“Your face is like a baby’s compared to mine. It’s good that you cannot see it.”
“I’ve heard that your hair glistens darker than the deepest black. I can only imagine how it would light my soul if only I could glimpse it.”
She raised her hands to her face, but didn’t touch it. “My face is marked with bloody sores.”
“Your sores can heal if the lake is healthy.”
“The people living here polluted my home. I should have acted sooner. I was beautiful.”
“You can be beautiful again. I can help make it happen.”
“Make me believe you, and I will let you live.”

         You also have an engaging way of describing Annin’s blindness through dialogue. This deepens his character and enables the reader to be “inside” Annin. One gets a feel for what it was like to be Annin and experience his perceptual world. You do this well:

Annin held out his hand. It was evening and his hand was cold, so the warmth of the dauther’s hand made him feel welcome. He couldn’t help smiling, as this was one of the benefits of being blind. “Thank you.”
“I’ll bring you tea.”
Annin nodded and gave his order. While waiting, he listened to two men at another table.
An enthusiastic voice said. “Aah, this fish is delicious!” While chewing on his food, he went on. “I haven’t eaten fresh fish for awhile. Thank you for bringing me here."
A calmer voice answered, “Yes, isn’t it?” He paused to lay down his chopsticks, and considered his next remark. “Have you been to the market? The price of fresh fish is really high now.”

         At the same time, there is a lot of room for expansion. Your context and formatting does enable the reader to follow who is speaking, but for a really polished story (I confess that I usually visualize text in printed book form), I recommend using dialogue tags where appropriate. Perhaps I am hopelessly conventional, but they do bring a sense of stability to the dialogue, and their proper use will prevent the reader from being confused about who is speaking.

         Another point on dialogue concerns the subtext in the final dialogue between the spirit and Annin. That dialogue suggests the encounter between Annin and the spirit becomes romantic/sexual/spiritual in some way. The scene becomes sparse in detail when the spirit appears in the boat. When she kneels at the end, for instance, we don’t really know that she was standing to begin with. If so, wouldn’t her voice becoming from above and to the rear of Annin? If she "offers herself" and they boat "rocks," it is somewhat suggestive, wot? Perhaps this is too much detail to consider, and you’d prefer to leave it more to the reader’s imagination. However, I suggest you make some minor adjustments to clarify (if this is what is supposed to happen) that all Annin and the spirit do is embrace.

         All told, the dialogue flowed and the story move along. You use active verbs well; as a result, the story does not stall at all.

         While considering the matter of description, specifically, how much or how little to use, you might also consider a decision the final tone of the piece. Do you want to write a folktale or a short story? At the moment, you seem to be hovering between the two. If you want a folktale, you can cut back a little on dialogue and description, refine the tone, and finish with a great story. If it’s a short story you are crafting, there is plenty of room for your dialogue and characterization to expand to meet the demands of the piece. In addition to the dialogue tags, you can construct paragraphs for your dialogue scenes which might contain more of Annin’s thoughts. This would create more depth for his character and enable the reader to get to know him better. Mind you, that is assuming you want the reader to know him better. Again, it’s the author’s call.

         You open the first paragraph in the story with the way that Annin perceives the world:

"...he enjoyed the near silence of a breeze caressing the trees, the sigh of waves sinking into sand, the clop of horses prancing on a bridge, the laughter of joyful children."

         These are all sounds, of course. There is ample room to describe and explore the heightened sensual dimension of Annin’s sightless world. For example, what does the lake spirit smell like? Does her smell change as she and Annin change? Does she make Annin feel cold at first, then warm? Do her blistered lips become smooth and soft as they kiss?I know you do this is many places in the story, and I am not suggesting that you have neglected it. It’s just that there is so much opportunity here. Through the character of the blind storyteller, you have great opportunity for exploring the other four senses of hearing, smelling, touching, and tasting. There are many places where the use of imagery can support your descriptions. It’s something to consider.

         I am not a writing teacher, so I am loath to comment on grammar and punctuation. However, your piece really needs attention in punctuation, especially in comma usage. There are many areas where lack of a comma in the right place or its presence in the wrong place blemishes the work and renders some of your sentences ungrammatical. I do not mean to imply that it’s awful, but it does need some work. Your story will sparkle as a result of that revision. I highly recommend the New Horizons Academy on WDC as a source for some excellent classes on comma usage and punctuation. Another piece of good news is that I found only two spelling mistakes. They both take place at the inn near the fishing village, where Annin spends the night in a communal room.

         I love this story. It is a delightful tale. I can see a “Tales of Annin” book cover floating in my mind. You have created a character with real appeal, and this story can be developed into many more stories if you choose. I found your folktale style charming and authentic. The only difficulty I have with the story is the ending. It really leaves the reader hanging; however, I have seen this kind of ending in Japanese folk tales before, so it is a judgment call whether or not you leave it as it is. I do think it will improve your story if you revise the ending in favor of one that is more resolved.

Thank you for all the work you put into this story, Kotaro. It’s a charmer.

Best Wishes, Michael
6
6
Review by mykel Author IconMail Icon
Rated: E | (4.0)
Review for WDC Poem: #1909581

Dear Angels in My Ear,

My name is Mykel. It is my pleasure and honor to review your poem, The Words We Never Say. Please understand that I wish to approach your work with kindness and respect. What I offer here in this review are my own personal impressions, and you are free to disagree with anything I have said; take or discard my thoughts as you see fit. I support your work and appreciate the obvious care and thought you have put into writing this poem.

I experience the tone of your poem to be an intimate, heartfelt plea for openness, empathy, and understanding in a relationship. I have a picture of someone sitting in the corner of a darkened room, a small spotlight light illuminating the narrator as this poem is recited. On the blank walls flanking the narrator, images of the couple in states of disagreement, dispute, argument, or defensive silence appear and disappear. The poem is a supplication for understanding and a wish that the other partner may see the pure, loving intentions that are being extended across the great gulf of perception. It is a moving poem, full of pain, frustration, and the deep wish for a different outcome in a relationship where the two people love each other deeply.

The attitude of the narrator is straightforward and blunt; it is clear that the narrator feels unable to communicate their feelings to the other partner. The other partner continues to fail to notice or understand the narrator’s desperation to show his/her true feelings. The narrator laments that the other partner’s empathy is dead; the words of the narrator do not reach the heart of the other partner, simply floating away like so many fluttering butterflies. I feel the love and frustrated sadness of the narrator. Both the tone and the mood work well together to provide a clear feel of the poem, effectively complementing each other.

You have chosen to write this poem in a ballad stanza form with alternating lines in a 4/3 4/3 beat pattern. As I’m sure you know, this is classic ballad format with alternating lines of iambic tetrameter and iambic trimester. Each quatrain has an abcb rhyme pattern, and you have consistently and wisely held to this rhyme scheme throughout the ballad. Rhyme always appeals to the auditory senses, and you have paid close attention to the rhythm it creates as it unfolds throughout the poem. Because of the ballad form, the rhyme and rhythm keep the poem moving from beginning to end. While the rhyme and rhythm are generally consistent, there is a little irregularity in the stressed/unstressed syllables, requiring the reader to have to work a little with the rhythm in order to hear the beats. The ballad form creates a beat in the background, enabling the reader to hear the rhythm of the stressed/unstressed syllables. But in some places, this irregularity can create the impression that some of the lines are forced, as if the words were being “compressed” to fit the line rather than the words themselves expressing the rhythm. Sometimes, the word choice will smooth this out, sometimes the addition or removal of a word will smooth it out, and sometimes the reader just has to accept how the narrator is going to write the poem.

For instance:

“My words are slow in coming
They stay locked inside my head”

And here:

“Can’t you see my struggle
And help me find my way,”

Here again:

“Or will you always keep me locked behind this dam”

I’m not going to write the whole stanza in case you choose to publish this poem. These are lines where you can hear the irregularity in rhythm if you read the whole stanza through. I don’t say this to criticize your work or tell you that it is somehow incorrect; I had to work with various lines to hear the rhythm which you have created. Sometimes this occurs from line to line, and sometimes it occurs from stanza to stanza. It’s like hearing someone with a heavy footfall come up the stairs, and one footfall is louder than the other. Just in case the way I have expressed this is unclear, here is a great example of a ballad in which the words seamlessly fit the rhythm and the rhyme:

“To Dawson Town came Percy Brown from London on the Thames.
A pane of glass was in his eye, and stockings on his stems.
Upon the shoulder of his coat a leather pad he wore,
To rest his deadly rifle when it wasn't seeking gore;” - Robert Service

I am not saying that you should have written your poem this way, or that you have made a mistake, or that I don’t like what you’ve done. It’s just that when you close your eyes and listen to the beats in this poem, you hear steady footfalls as the words, rhythm, and rhyme all dance seamlessly together. There’s no hint of irregularity. Mind you, if you listen to Bob Dylan sing a ballad, you are going to hear some irregularity, but the music covers it up. In written poetry where the rhythm is created by the rhyme and the stressed/unstressed beat in the words, the writer has to be really careful that the words are not being forced to fit the line.

I had a problem understanding the meaning of this stanza:

"I want so much to show you…Not your soul, but just a man"

Does this mean that I can’t seem to find your soul; all I can find is a man? I can’t find the inside, the heart, and just perceive the outside, the shell? I assume this is what it means, and, if so, I then understand that the narrator of the poem is the female partner speaking to the male. Up to this point, it could have been either partner speaking, but now it seems clear that the female partner is speaking. Is that correct?

I also had a little trouble understanding the last line in this stanza:

"You look but do not see me
You touch but do not feel
You hear but do not listen
You take but never steal"

There is clear contrast here of sense activity without consciousness in the first three lines: looking without seeing, touching without feeling, and hearing without listening. But I’m a bit stumped on the “taking but never stealing,” wondering how that fits with the other contrasts. I don’t see the connection of relationship yet. The addition of the word never after the three do nots also adds a lot of emphasis, but I don’t understand what it’s emphasizing. I do understand the meaning of the words! This is still an effective stanza powerfully illustrating the clouds of miscommunication and misreading that the narrator is trying to dispel. But that last line hangs there as somewhat mysterious to me.

You have created some nice sound affects in this poem which help the flow of its rhythm: the alliteration of silent shout; the assonance of dare to share and so much to show; and the consonance of thoughts a silent shout, feelings retreat, impact can affect. All of these show that you are very conscious of the words you have chosen.

You have generously sprinkled metaphors throughout the poem:

[my thoughts] a silent shout
[my thoughts] rarely have a voice now
[words] flutter and go out
[words] stay locked inside my head
[will you always keep me] locked behind this dam
[words] are precious cargo
[words are] tearing us apart
[words are] snowflakes in the air And they float then melt away
[feelings] retreat again behind this silent wall

These all help to strengthen the feeling and theme of the poem. You have skillfully arranged your metaphors to refer to the narrator’s words and have rendered the abstractions of the narrator’s experience into images that the reader can easily understand. Well done, Angel.

Your garnish of one, lone simile does the same:

[words] break like ice against your heart.

All in all, you have placed an ample amount of figurative language in your poem to express feelings and judgments, clarify, give pleasure, and intensify our awareness.

Ironically, if this poem has a weakness, I would suggest that it is in word choice. At various places in the poem, my impression is that you may have sacrificed the words for the rhyme. Perhaps one way of taking this poem to a higher level would be to consider a more fluent word choice. Doing so would challenge your rhyme scheme once more, but it might also create more depth and expression.

The poem seems to almost lose it’s sense in a few places. In the 3rd stanza, you write:

"But I can't seem to find you
Not your soul, but just a man"

It follows the rhyme scheme, but I have a hard time understanding what it means. As I’ve said already, I may just be dense on this point. But if other readers have a similar problem, it means that the real problem lies in its expression; here, that means the words used. There’s a difference between not understanding something because we don’t understand, and not understanding because it’s not clear what is being said. Deciding what to do here is up to you; you may not want to do anything at all. The poet has the final word here. It may well be that you have said this as clearly as you can, and the reader just has to figure it out. So be it.

Some of your metaphors make me feel a little uncomfortable. Do I understand them? The first is as follows:

“[words] flutter and go out.”

As I look intently at this metaphor, questions start arising for me. When something flutters, it flies unsteadily or hovers by flapping its wings quickly and lightly. Is this what you mean? If so, then what is the meaning of “go out?” I don’t follow that. Similarly, if I follow the flutter metaphor, I think of flapping, moving or falling with a light, irregular or trembling motion. Is this what it means? Then, how does it “go out?” Or, does it mean fluttering like a feeble pulse or heartbeat? That’s a lot closer. But pulses or heartbeats stop or disappear. Well, OK, maybe that’s what it is. Here you can see my tortured thought processes as I puzzle this one out. Please don’t let this discomfit you; my tortured thought processes are due to the way I think, not your poem!

I’m still on “flutter and go out.” As I look at the whole stanza, the fluttering and going out are happening in a darkened room. So, do you mean that the words flicker and go out, like electric or fluorescent lights? Or do they gutter and go out, meaning that the words flicker and burn unsteadily and then go out, like a candle in the dark? That works too. Both flicker and gutter work in your poem and make sense with the darkened room. But I have trouble with flutter; I still don’t see how the fluttering “goes out,” - leaves the room? – and don’t understand its relationship with the darkened room. Unless it’s a fluttering, then, disappearing pulse. That, I get.

In the stanza where the words “break like ice against your heart,” I’m a little clearer on the tenor of “break” and the vehicle of “like ice against your heart.” Here, I get a picture of two people being out on a frozen lake, or on an ice flow in the Arctic, the words come out, the sound of breaking ice is heard, and suddenly the two people are farther away from each other due to the words that have been said, the words separating the two alienated lovers even further. They also suggest the chilly atmosphere that ensues when people argue, misunderstand, or do not speak with each other. How am I doing on this one? I have a problem understanding the “break like ice” because the first thing I think of is “break like waves” against a stony heart. However, you are the writer here, and this is your simile.
The words which are snowflakes in the air which “float then melt away” concern me a little, too. Snowflakes do not float; they fall. Then they melt when they hit the ground. They can swirl around with the wind, but they are frozen water; they’re coming down, right? I can see your snowflakes falling, then melting; I can see them swirling, then falling and melting. But I cannot see them floating, then melting; my mind tells me that they have to fall to the ground first, then melt. All I really ask here is: is float the best single beat word for this metaphor? Or am I missing something?

I mention these three examples of figurative language as places where I had problems, and I try to explain myself so that you can discern whether the problem resides is solely in my mind, in your poem, or both places.

You have made the decision not to punctuate and have remained loyal to that commitment, only including commas where you have to. Whether a reader likes that or not, your poem is cohesive and logical, and I never felt confused as I moved from line to line and stanza to stanza. You did this well.

In spite of what I’ve said about figurative language, your poem is very clear and straightforward. You haven’t included any kind of esoteric symbolism that the reader has to understand in order to get the meaning of the poem. It is a cry over the widening separation between partners and a last, desperate plea for change. It’s good.

At first reading, this poem appears very simple. However, as I read it over many times in the reviewing process, I saw how much work you put into it. You have put a lot into this, and I commend you for it. I think it can be improved in the areas I mentioned, but this is your work, and you will decide whether you want to develop it any more or leave it as it is. Good job, Angel. Please do keep writing.

Mykel
7
7
Review by mykel Author IconMail Icon
Rated: E | (4.0)
Dear Shadow,

It is my pleasure to review your work, “A Letter to My Father.” Your epistolary form carries great emotional impact. I can feel the bitter frustration and grief which interweaves your text. I commend you for wearing your heart on your sleeve and, especially, for exhibiting it in such a public venue.

The tone of the work is both informal and intimate. The mood is deeply personal, questioning, challenging, conflictual, and confrontative. The narrator speaks aggrievedly, and her grief and frustration are palpable. It’s raw. Written in the 1st person singular, the point of conflict concerns the relationship between the writer and her father. The letter effectively communicates the writer’s demand for answers generated by the huge communication gap between father & daughter.

I have made a number of suggestions at rewriting. Please think of these as “try something like this.” I do not intend to correct, edit, or rewrite your work.

The fact that we've never been close has been the fault of both of us. Try…It is both our fault that we have never been close.

I was afraid of you, and still am. Try... I was afraid of you, and I still am. OR I was, and still am, afraid of you.
Maybe if I had asked these questions and received answers, they would have explained many things. You can say this in fewer words and clarify it, too. Try... If I had received answers to these questions, many things would have been explained. OR Answers to these questions would have explained many things. OR Your answers would have explained these questions.

The biggest question I have for you is: Why did you discipline so harshly? Why was I beaten with a belt? Were you beaten also? Also, why did you call me "Grandpa McCoy"? Did doing this make you feel better? This isn’t one question; it is many questions, so you’ll either have to consolidate or rephrase. Try... My biggest upset comes from how you disciplined me. Why…

The biggest question I have for you is: Why did you discipline so harshly? The good news here is you have properly capitalized the W of Why. I was unsure about that point and checked it with grammar gurus. Thanks for doing that because it taught me another use of proper capitals. The bad news is you can’t use a colon here because the phrase “The biggest question I have for you is” is a phrase and not an independent clause. You can only use a comma when it is preceded by an independent clause. One of our grammar & punctuation mavens at WDC says, “As a rule, one should avoid using a colon after a verb in order to avoid this mistake.” One simple and elegant way to fix it is as follows: I have one main question for you: Why did you discipline me so harshly?” You have the same problem in the following sentence: You know the saying: Sticks and Stones will break my bones, but names will never hurt me?" You could rewrite this as follows: “Do you know the saying, “sticks and stones will break my bones, but names will never hurt me?" Experiment with what feels right to you.

A child's home is supposed to be its sanctuary, a safe haven. That didn't happen to me. It’s unclear what the ‘that’ of “that didn’t happen to me” modifies. Try... “….haven, but my home wasn’t safe.” By definition, a haven is already safe; you risk a cliché by using “safe haven.” Haven is a good word. Try... A child's home is supposed to be its sanctuary, its haven, but my home wasn’t safe at all.

When you offered to move me back home, after my first marriage broke up, I said no because I had already had roots here. Try... When you offered to move me back home after my first marriage broke up, I said no because I already had roots here.

When I moved out sixteen years ago, I know you thought I wouldn't make it. I did. Since moving out, I know I've made many mistakes. You were there to help. I thank you for that. When you offered to move me back home, after my first marriage broke up, I said no because I had already had roots here. When I remarried, you probably thought I was making another mistake. I haven’t. This particular paragraph provides the opportunity for some short parallel sentences that will help make your point by showing the writer’s inner strength. To me this is clearer and more direct. Also, by using these strong statements (I have, I haven’t; I did, I didn’t), it shows the real inner strength of the writer. However, this is your piece and your call.

That is what a mother-a parent is supposed to give her child. Try... That is what a mother, a parent, is supposed to give her child. OR That is what a mother - a parent - is supposed to give her child. This is probably a typo.
It also seems that when we talk lately, there is nothing to talk about. Try... Lately, when we talk, it seems like there is nothing to talk about. Or, for emphasis, “Lately, when we do talk, it seems like there is nothing to talk about.”

Some general comments: With such a personal letter, it’s hard to use any other pronoun than I. But I can be overused and thus lessen the impact of your piece. While one approach uses a formula of making every other sentence not begin with I, just have a look at your sentences and see if there are other ways to write some of them. Can you create some interesting variations that will draw your reader in even more. You’ve already done this somewhat by asking questions.

It’s a personal choice to use a Capital Font to add expression. IMHO, you can capitalize one or two words, but I think you overuse it here. Overusing the caps font actually mars your message with excessive emphasis. The words are very powerful, and they will do the job when they are direct and well-chosen. The capitals just get in the way. Again, your call.

It’s a good piece, very expressive and passionate. Is this a real letter, the kind that is expressed but not sent? Well, I’d suggest standing back from it a bit, tidying up the grammatical structure, and seeing how you feel about it.
Please do not take any of the above comments as criticism. Please take whatever you feel is useful and leave the rest. Thank you for writing it and giving me the opportunity to improve my skills by writing this review.

Respectfully, and with appreciation,

Mykel
8
8
Review of The Witness  Open in new Window.
Review by mykel Author IconMail Icon
Rated: 13+ | (3.5)
Dear Steve,

Thank you for the opportunity to review "The Witness". I’m not sure what “flash fiction” means her, so I’ll just look at your scene as it is written and concentrate on scene development and story line. Given its length, issues of character development and personality are irrelevant here.

You’ve done a good job laying out the scene. I am able to follow the course of action from beginning to end. I’m going to number your paragraphs 1-5 as I describe what I see here.

In para 1, Mikhalia drops Pietro’s body onto the lower walkway, and in para 4, she returns to that walkway to finish the job. Would it be more effective if you said something like, “M returned to where she left P’s body to finish the job?” Describing the action without explaining it heightens the action for the reader. The sentence, “In order to complete her mission she must dump Pietro’s body in the middle of the bay,” works, but a more descriptive sentence continues the action and pushes the scene forward.

Have a look at, “Unfortunately, when she rolled him off the pier to the tiny craft several feet below,” and compare it to, “Unfortunately, when she rolled his body off the pier to drop it into the tiny craft several feet below.” Is the second sentence closer to what you mean? Do you want to refer to Pietro as him (Pietro) or it (his body)? Also, "several feet" usually means three to four feet. Is that how you envision the placement of the dock below?

In para 2, Mikhalia’s attention is drawn to Andino’s position by the popping of a street lamp. Does that sort of thing really happen? The street lamp just pops out at that exact moment? It seems a little contrived, and I’ll bet you can find another way to draw M’s eyes to Andino that will better serve your purpose.

In para 3, Mikhalia appears to shoot and kill Andino. You describe his body as ‘lifeless.’ To me, that says she killed him, so when Andino reappears in para 5, it confuses me. How about the shot knocking his body 5 yards and leaving it unmoving, or something like that? Then Andino’s reappearance in para 5 is more of a shock than an impossibility.

In para 5, you wrote, “But then, the shock of a lifetime! The small boat and Pietro were both gone!” I respectfully recommend you remove “But then, the shock of a lifetime! ” You don’t need it, and it detracts from the suspense. Description, rather than free indirect discourse, is your friend here; furthermore, consider removing the exclamation point in the sentence, “The small boat and Pietro were both gone!” The simple sentence will have more punch without the exclamation.

In para 3, you describe the Mikhalia shooting Andino. Your analogy of the gas powered pellet gun is a good description, but will most readers understand what that sounds like? I didn’t. Is there a better, more easily distinguishable, way to describe the sound?

In para 5, Mikhalia “jerks her eyes upwards.” Do you mean “jerks her head upwards?” Does “jerking the eyes” work as an effective verbal phrase? Also, a Glock is a semi-automatic pistol. Can you actually hear a round being loaded into the chamber on a Glock? I don’t know anything about guns, but I presume you want the description to be as realistic as possible.

You might consider dropping out the introductory adverbial phrases “unfortunately” and “suddenly” in paras 1 & 2, respectively. Your descriptive ability will serve you better without them.

I don’t know anything about your characters, but two of them have Italian names. If your female protagonist is Italian too, you might consider using Micaela. If she’s Greek or Dutch, you’re fine, but there isn’t a “kha” construction in Italian.

In para 5, only the blast of the Glock is described. But two guns are firing, aren’t they? Is it your intention to describe one or two blasts that reverberate around the bay. And, if there are two blasts, it appears that M’s demise is imminent. How the heck is she going to escape this fate? The reader is very attentive here….


Your piece is interesting and engaging. The narrative tone is developing nicely. I enjoyed the way the action built, and the surprise at the end is clever. It made me want to read on and find out what happened. This story line has a lot of potential. Is it part of a larger work?

You as the writer are supreme here, so please take my comments as “respectful possibilities.” I’ve enjoyed reading your work and I’m interested in seeing what happens here in case you decide to develop it. I hope you will find something helpful in my comments.

Best wishes to you, Steve.

Mykel
9
9
Review of American Suffrage  Open in new Window.
Review by mykel Author IconMail Icon
Rated: E | (4.0)
Dear April,

It is an honor to review your work. Please understand that you, as the author, have the right and responsibility to ignore anything I say. I reviewed your story because I liked it and see great potential in it. I have asked you a number of questions as a way of focusing your attention on areas which may or may not be problematical. I offer these comments in a spirit of respect and kindness.

American Suffrage
Genre : Historical Fiction: takes place NYC, 1910
2 Sections/Chapters
Characters: Sec. 1
Nora, Joan, Desmond (mentioned),Mrs. Duvall.
Characters Sec. 2
Nora, Jackson, Eugene (mentioned).
Structure for Chapter 1 – Mostly scene with some summary.
Structure for Chapter 2 – Dialogue with more summary; author also uses free indirect discourse.

My overall impression: the engaging title pulls the reader right in. The scene of the march is an interesting stage for the dialogue. The story is dialogue-rich, with the characterization mainly coming out of the dialogue. In the first scene, we have the march, Joan & Nora’s intense interaction, and Nora’s chagrin over being seen by her future mother-in-law. In scene two, we see the crisis of Jackson & Nora’s relationship, and the traumatic event of Jackson’s abuse. At the end, we’re left with suspense and questions: will Nora go meet Jackson? What will her answer be? Will she be safe? Will there be a twist? Are the lovers finished? Will they reconcile? This selection consists of two scenes in a larger story that can be developed in many directions.

This story centers around Nora, her relationships with men and women, and her struggle to free herself. The story isn’t developed enough yet to tell us what’s going to happen to Nora, but she definitely is in the state of “I’m not gonna take it anymore.” The author is successful in creating enough dramatic tension that the reader feels frustrated when there isn’t any more to read!

The effect of scene and summary: there is definitely more scene (dialogue) than summary. The dialogue gives the story energy and moves it forward. The dialogue sections are well constructed and tagged. I do not lose track of who is speaking.

Notes on Section 1

I’m a little confused about how the scene unfolds. It starts with Nora walking next to Joan, so the march has started, yes? – then earlier morning events - women are waiting for march to begin – nervous policemen – then long dialogue – then “They walked down the street with the other marchers. Policemen adorned the sidewalks and onlookers stood watching, waiting for any sort of spectacle. Nothing too interesting happened.” How does the action unfold, and where are the cues to lead the reader to participate in the action with characters?

It sounds like the Joan/Nora dialogue has taken place either: 1) standing in place waiting for the march to begin, or 2) they have been walking towards a beginning point. In either case, the flow of the action isn’t completely clear to me. Later on in the scene, they are walking. Has the march begun in earnest? How do we know?

Throughout the dialogue in scene 1, there is little mention of the march itself. Is that deliberate? If so, does that lend credence to the idea that Joan is Nora’s inspiration? I don’t know what your intention is for the rest of the story. All I see is that Joan and Nora are having this intense conversation about Nora’s relationships. The march seems secondary. Is that your purpose?

“Suddenly the crowd began to stir. They looked over to the far end of the street and saw people slowly moving.”

So, Nora and Joan are walking, then the crowd begins to stir, then they walk down the street with the other marchers, then they turn the corner and see Mrs. Duvall. What is the crowd doing? Where are they slowly moving to?

2. At the end of scene 1, you wrote,

“As they turned a corner, Nora's chest tightened. Standing at the forefront of the crowd of onlookers was Jackson's mother, who frowned when she saw Nora.
"Oh, God," Nora groaned.
"What is it?"
"Mrs. Duvall." Nora quickly pointed her finger in the direction of her future mother-in-law, and Joan's eyes followed. She turned back to Nora with her eyes wide.”

Nora doesn’t want to be seen, yet she’s pointing at Mrs. Duvall for Joan. Is Nora going to be that obvious and revealing? Does it fit her character and the rest of the story? Does that fit your purpose?

3. There is one nervous policeman in the beginning. There are more policemen as the march gets underway. Is their presence doing something for the story? Would increasing numbers of policemen add dramatic tension? Are the policemen nervous, smiling, amused, grave, threatening? Do you want to describe the march in some kind of detail and include the policemen, while going back and forth to the dialogue? Depending on where you take the story, the police presence can be an effective descriptive (or dramatic) element.

4. Joan is portrayed as a minor character in scene 1. If she has as much influence over Nora as Nora says she has, could she be developed more? Her dialogue seems a little weak; do you want her to come across like that? When she grabs her throat in shock, it’s almost a stage cliché. Is she prudish? A stronger Joan with a more developed character might provide an interesting contrast for Nora. I found myself wanting to hear more from Joan. She is more of a “straight man” for Nora at the moment.

Some Thoughts on Diction

In Scene 1:

“Joan jogged in her white boots?” In 1910? “Jog” jarred me; I had a vision of Joan jogging with arms pumping. Jog also seems a very modern word to use for a story based in 1910.

Joan says “I get that.” A 21st century colloquialism, but does it work for 1910? How historical do you want this to be? If it’s going to be an historical novel, you might consider having Joan give a less modern response. The same is true of her later statement, “That sure is news.” Again, it all depends on what kind of a story you’re writing. If you’re aiming at historical fiction, then the more authentic the dialogue – let’s say plausible – the more rich the story will be for the reader. Especially since you are exploring themes of equality. Is this a story about suffrage, or is it a romance with suffrage as the backdrop?

“Nora stared her in the eyes.” “In the eyes” seems a little awkward. When you stare at someone, you do stare at their eyes, but something like “Nora stared hard at Joan” carries the same idea.

You wrote, "He didn't take advantage at all. At times, it was I who initiated it."
"Nora!"
"It's true," she laughed. "I don't know how to explain it."
Do you mean this as it is written? Or do you mean, “ "It's true," she laughed. "I don't know how [else] to explain it."

Notes on Section 2.

In Scene 2, do you want to give the reader more stage setting. What is the scene? How are they sitting together before Jackson makes his opening statement?

“The sun became shy and hid behind a few clouds.” How about “the shy sun hid behind the clouds.” Is the sentence just a simple description, or do you intend it to be a reflection of the paragraph that follows it? If so, there’s something about it that doesn’t quite fit.

“Nora rose to stand beside Jackson, gazing out at the city's denizen.” Denizen is singular, and denizens is plural. It looks like you want to use the plural, so this should read the “citys’ denizens”. It works like the boys’ friends.”

“Her childhood had been anything but, but the interval between losing Mother and marrying Eugene had been a prosperous era.” I would recommend using some word other than era. Era means “a long and distinct period of history with a particular feature or characteristic.” Something more like “span of her life, phase, period of time, period of her life;” try one of those words or phrases and see how it seems to you. I understand that you are using free indirect discourse here, but the “but, but” does sound awkward to me. Is it important enough to leave in? “Her childhood had been anything but normal; nevertheless, the interval between losing Mother and marrying Eugene had been a prosperous era.”

“A shudder came over her at the thought. Slaps across the face met with profanities and cursing the day she was born came crashing into her mind. She took in a quick breath as she remembered how pitiful Mother looked right before she passed. It took her a while to pay her respects, but it had to be done.” This section seems a little murky. I think I understand what you’re trying to say, but I’d suggest some rewriting so your meaning is crystal clear. Whose slaps, profanities, and cursing are being talked about? What about their connection with Mother’s death? Was she beaten? Did she die from the blows? Are these memories of her parents?

"Not two minutes ago you didn't even know what a suffragette was! Now magically you're one of them?" Does this refer back to a previous part of the discussion? I don’t see any reference to it, and this is the first time the word “suffragette” is used. Are you are assuming that the reader will assume that N & J have already used the “s” word without showing that in the dialogue? Or is something missing?

Another point: a suffragist is different from a suffragette. The suffragist believes in the principles of suffrage, but a suffragette is a militant activist. Sometimes the two terms were used interchangeably; perhaps Jackson is using the term suffragette as an alternative to suffragist. How do you want to present this?

"Et voila! We come full circle. You insist you're right, I insist I'm right. We can go at it like rams on a mountainside if we like, or we can discuss this openly and maturely. I opt for the latter." Comma splice! Either, “You insist you're right, and I insist I'm right.” Or, “You insist you're right; I insist I'm right.”

"Et voila!” Is this colloquial speech? Does Jackson’s background justify using this? Is this something a man would say? It doesn’t quite seem to fit.

“We can go at it like rams on a mountainside.” Oh, yeah? Rams, huh? I’ve never heard this expression before, but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t use it. It does stand out like a sore ram….

“I opt for the latter." Would they speak like that in 1910? Does it matter?

"I've thought about others my whole life. It's time I've [I] devoted a bit of time to myself for a change." Perhaps change “I’ve devoted” to “I devote” here? What about the repetition of the word “time?”

I had a problem visualizing the staging in front of window. Jackson stands at window, then Nora stands beside him. Then Jackson paces in front of the window while Nora continues to stand there with her hand on the window? How is that possible? If you can describe their spatial positions more clearly, the action will be clearer. Or is you purpose is to generate everything out of the dialogue a la Jane Austen? If that is so, I’m still unclear how the action is unfolding and it’s bothering me.

"My decision? Why does it have to be me?"
"Because you're the one offending your honor with your traitorous ways."
"Traitorous? Traitorous to whom? Do you mean men in general?"
"That's the idea."
"That's absurd."
I don’t fully understand the sentence, “"Because you're the one offending your honor with your traitorous ways." She’s being traitorous to herself? I think I know what you mean, but it seems a little awkward.

“Jackson was at a loss for words. He tugged at his hair as a light rain fell outside. Movement outside of the house became hurried as everyone rushed to get indoors, out of the cold and wet world. Inside, their nerves were shot, and the air was stuffy with rage.” Whose nerves are shot? They ought to have a comma. You can also rewrite to create the contrast between cold & wet, and hot and stuffy, with just commas if you want. And shot nerves does sound like a very modern expression.

"Nora never thought he was capable of it. She had seen him cross a time or two, but nothing like this. He almost seemed like he didn't have it in him. He proved her wrong." Would you not say, “He [had] proved her wrong.”

Some punctuation issues:

“I love just thinking about him, and the good times we had." If an independent clause and a non-independent clause (a phrase) are joined by a coordinating conjunction, no comma is needed before the conjunction. “and the good times we had” is a phrase and cannot stand alone as a separate sentence. Correction: I love just thinking about him and the good times we had."

“Policemen adorned the sidewalks and onlookers stood watching, waiting for any sort of spectacle. Nothing too interesting happened.” I assume you mean for the participial phrase, “waiting for any sort of spectacle,” to modify “onlookers” and not “policemen.” But you may have a dangling modifier here. Try something like, “Policemen adorned the sidewalks, and onlookers stood watching and waiting for any sort of spectacle."

The next sentence, “Nothing too interesting happened,” seems somewhat bland. How about something a little more descriptive?

Suggestions for improvement:

1. Is the plot about suffrage, Nora’s relationships, Nora freeing herself from male bondage? Is suffrage the backdrop, or the core of the story? In one sense, it doesn’t matter; however, the story will develop quite differently depending on how you explore these themes.

2. Have a look at the stage direction throughout the story. There are some points that are unclear, and it will make your dialogue much more crisp and energetic if you rearrange some and explain some.

3. You have worked very hard to create the dialogue, and your work shows. If this is an historical novel, I’d suggest you consider doing more research on the diction of the time. There are some places where the diction is too modern, and other places where it seems awkward. If you can resolve this, it will give a smooth consistency and authenticity to the dialogue. Also, once your dialogue issues are resolved, the syntax will improve because you’ll be using the “right” words and you’ll choose the appropriate syntax for conveying them.

4. I did not do a really “hard” punctuation scan because I think you’re going to probably going to rewrite. Egad, what I wrote here was long enough! You have done a lot of good work here. Please continue to build on it.

Please do not get the impression I did not like this, or that I thought it was poorly written. No, it was quite the contrary! I apologize if I said too much and overloaded you with comments. I like what you’re doing with this and, as I said, it can go in all sorts or directions. I hope this review has been helpful to you. Please take what is useful and discard the rest.

Best Wishes, Mykel

P.S. If you ever get a chance to see the BBC production of "Shoulder to Shoulder," do so. It's about the British suffrage movement and it's terrific. Also, the Ken Burns documentary "Not for Ourselves Alone: Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony. You can see it on Netflix.

9 Reviews · *Magnify*
Page of 1 · 25 per page   < >
Printed from https://writing.com/main/profile/reviews/mykel52