\"Writing.Com
*Magnify*
SPONSORED LINKS
BY ONLINE AUTHORS
Printed from https://writing.com/main/profile/reviews/reg312
Review Requests: OFF
34 Public Reviews Given
34 Total Reviews Given
Review Style
I look for verisimilitude, clarity, and an "uninterrupted dream," as John Gardner put it, but then it also should have emotional impact and be going somewhere, not just writing for the sake of writing. Good writing is rare, so I won't tell you it's good unless I think it is.
Favorite Genres
literary fiction
Least Favorite Genres
fantasy, horror
Favorite Item Types
short stories
Public Reviews
1
1
Review by r32312 Author IconMail Icon
In affiliation with WdC SuperPower Reviewers Group  Open in new Window.
Rated: 18+ | (1.0)
The first measure of any fiction, in my opinion, is does it evoke an emotion? Does it stir something inside, does it make you cry or laugh or at least feel happy or sad for somebody? This is difficult to do, especially in very short fiction. Still, if it doesn't make the reader feel something, what's the point? Here, I get the picture of a young man who falls for a girl. Okay, boy meets girl. Well worn, but certainly has been effective for many writers. But where does this go? What emotion is evoked? So I'm sorry, but I just don't see the point here. There are some fairly basic problems also. He tells the story instead of showing it. In other words, he says the girl "could leave you in stunned silence just by smiling." Well, okay, pretty girls are fetching, sure, but "stunned silence?" What about her leaves you in "stunned silence?" Not there. Then, "Not in the kind of way that people moon over another person just because they are kind of pretty or buff or just smile at them." "the kind of way" is a filter term. In other words, it would be much better to say "Not the way people moon..," leaving out the "kind of way." Seems like a small thing, but these things add up. Then the writer says "...people moon over another person..." Wait a minute. This change-up throws you off, and it is especially disturbing because its in the first paragraph of the story, which makes you want to say forget it right at the start. How about, "Not the way a boy might moon over a girl just because..." I guess the writer meant "quiet" when he wrote "quite" in the first sentence of the second paragraph. Okay, maybe just a typo, but the reader says to himself, "This guy doesn't know how to spell and he wants me to read his work? Forget it." Then, really catching me off guard, he's cuddling up with the girl for the first time and sees of all things a syringe and tubing. What's this about? No hint, no way of figuring this out in a year. Stories should not leave so puzzled he has no way of figuring out what's going on. Is somebody using drugs here? Or is somebody very sick? Diabetic? Who knows? Not me. Sorry. This does not work for me.


*Gold* My review has been submitted for consideration in "Good Deeds Get CASH!" Open in new Window..
2
2
Review by r32312 Author IconMail Icon
In affiliation with WdC SuperPower Reviewers Group  Open in new Window.
Rated: 18+ | (2.0)
Hallucination, dream, some combination? Is there a reality in here somewhere?
After reading this piece three times, I'm still not sure what state of reality, what fiction or what fantasy the author is trying to describe, or what emotion he seeks to evoke, or if that is his aim in the first place.
There is some good description of what the dream/hallucination looks like to the narrator. But I was never sure exactly what the author was describing or what was the time and place. The writer says, "Every time he thought about what his life was like before whatever happened to him he only felt a strong stinging pain in his chest. Sorrow and melancholy. That is all he felt."
It seems to me that somewhere along the line, the reader ought to learn "whatever happened to him," unless there is a reason to not learn this. Then the narrator says, "And he knew for a fact that even in his previous life he probably never met a girl." If the writer wants to write about previous lives, the story ought to at least go in that direction, but it never does.
The main concern I have of this story, as I have previously stated, is reader orientation. Too many things have the reader turning in different directions to ever really understand what is happening.
It starts out as a dream, then the narrator settles down for some cold cereal and television, but is shocked by a scene of people "making out" because of an apparent aversion to females. Then the narrator is shocked by television news reports about people being killed. Well, is this another dream, hallucination, or are people really being killed in record numbers while unseen voices shout at our narrator something about being "the 15th." As if that weren't enough to wonder and worry about, now men with guns and uniforms apparently come into his house and carry away the narrator to some other scary place that looks a lot like the dream scene in the beginning. But no, by the end of the story our narrator is on a rooftop looking through binoculars with wind blowing his hair.
The writer stuck to the third person limited point of view throughout, that is true. But the plotting is so confusing and obscure, I really couldn't figure out what was happening.





3
3
Review of The Shadows  Open in new Window.
Review by r32312 Author IconMail Icon
Rated: 13+ | (3.0)
Of course this is only my opinion and others may differ. If you feel it is off base, too harsh, not harsh enough, misses the boat entirely, please disregard.

Lots of potential here because the writer has made the experience seem real, or at least made the reader feel it was real to the writer, if that makes any sense. It is no small accomplishment to write something like this clearly and concisely because it's something close to fantasy, and that means you've got to make something real which most people have never and will never experience. Very difficult. So I think the writer has a real skill. There are things I would point out and modify. First, the narrator speaks for his wife. He'll say, "we paid no attention to it," or "we realized..." This is point of view problem, and that kind of problem is difficult and sometimes hard to fix or even see. The implication is the writer and his wife discussed the thing and now he's going to speak for her experiences. Not good. The reason this is not good is it dilutes the emotion the writer is trying to build up. In other words, the reader is going to identify with the writer, which is what the writer wants to do. Giving the wife's point of view dilutes that effort. It is a subtle thing, which is why it's hard to identify and fix.

There is also some sloppiness I would work on. The writer says, "It was my fault for keeping her isolated...." But exactly what was his fault? Hard to say what he's getting at here.

There is no dialogue in this story. Now this may have been done intentionally and it does have an effect on the reader. I'm not sure that effect is what the writer is looking for. On the one hand, dialogue brings a story to life, on the other hand, you may want the effect you have produced, which is pretty dark and gloomy.

4
4
Review of Deception  Open in new Window.
Review by r32312 Author IconMail Icon
In affiliation with WdC SuperPower Reviewers Group  Open in new Window.
Rated: 13+ | (3.0)
First the disclaimer that I'm just one person so take it for what it's worth and if it's too harsh toss it and forget it.

Writing is clear and concise, easy to follow everything that happens, and that's no easy task. Read enough stuff on this site and others like it and you'll see 80-90 per cent of the writing is incomprehensible, simply unreadable because you can't follow what's going on. I hate reviewing those stories because I end up telling people to forget it, try painting or photography. So that's a plus.

But, the description and narration leaves a lot to be desired. You're inside a prison, make me see and feel what its like. The scant description doesn't do it. Then out in the park or wherever to meet the killer, again, I don't have a feel for what it's like. And I wouldn't expect it would be in such a short sketch. It needs to be written, not sketched. Of course this is the hard part. I refer to this as the "art part," the part that needs an artist not just an "idea person," who has what he thinks is a good idea for a story, but not the time or inclination or the skill to "write it." Ideas are relatively easy to come by, well stories are not.

Sometimes you have to sketch a story then go back and write it. I've heard people say this. Two problems. First problem is a sketch for purposes of telling yourself what you're writing is really another way of saying it's an outline. In my mind, Sketch equals Outline. I have never had success in outlining a story and then writing it. For me, it loses all its fire and spontaneity. Outlining, in my opinion, is always bad. That doesn't mean you can't rewrite. Rewriting is different than outlining, or sketching. Second problem, if you're going to do an outline no matter what I say, don't ask people what they think of it because there's nothing much to criticize, there's no "art." It would be the same for a painter to show a pencil sketch to a person and ask a critic how he thinks the finished painting is going to look. How can he know? It's not writing, it's an outline. Same with rewriting. Don't share your first draft.

Okay, on to the story. A woman wants to have her husband killed, good enough, that I can understand. Many of us have thoughts such as this. But the motivation is he's not around much and she thinks he going to dump her? That's sufficient motivation to have him murdered? Wow! This is some woman I don't want to mess with. There's also a hint she'll get his money, but that's never developed and it seems she wants him dead for the sake of having him dead. So lack of motivation, under motivated, is my feeling. When a story is under motivated, I have found the reader gets the feeling that it's not real. Ah, there's that word. Did the writer make it real? The word is: Verisimilitude.

Then we have the tricky ending. The killer her father had sent ends up being the intended victim, and now she's scared because, why? Because he knows she wants him killed? Wow. So now he's going to kill her before she can get him? Maybe. Seems like he had it figured out before he got there, so does that mean he knew she picked him for a hit? Okay. I won't mess with all the thoughts about what came first the chicken or the egg or how is it the father wouldn't have at least had an idea who the killer would be, I won't go there because anything's possible and this is just one person's idea of how it ought to come out.

But again, I have the feeling that the author did not have the time to think through what all this means and how it should fit together. But I do think there is potential in this "idea," and that's really what this is, an idea for a story. But a damn good one, delicious even, when you think about it. Here's the part that with proper development could be a really good story: Faced with the fact her husband knows she wants him dead, what are her options? And if he's a hit man, how can she protect herself? Is it even possible? Can her father help her, or is she a goner right then and there? This follows the old advice for writers everywhere: Write yourself into a corner, then find a way out. It also calls up the advice of Flannery O'Connor, who said, "Dig deeper," don't be satisfied with the surface emotions of your characters, get way inside their minds and hearts and slice them open for your readers, show what really makes them tick.

In telling a psychological thriller type of story such as this, you've really got to think through how it comes out and what meaning it has. Is your character just a cold blooded killer? Does she have a lover somewhere? Ah, that would be my first thought. And how does that guy (or girl) fit in to the story? Is the father involved? Mmmmm.... This could be pure Alfred Hitchcock. But it must be developed, not just hinted at. To me, these options are delicious.



*Gold* My review has been submitted for consideration in "Good Deeds Get CASH!" Open in new Window..
5
5
Review of Dr. Ruth  Open in new Window.
Review by r32312 Author IconMail Icon
Rated: 18+ | (1.0)
Maybe the best advice I can give this writer is that as a reader sitting here looking at what you have produced, I do not want to have to try to figure out what you're getting at. I am an old man with many college degrees who reads and writes for a living, so I am at least competent to figure out what most written communications are supposed to be telling me.

What do we have here in this work? First, there is a more or less typical conversation that might occur on the first-time visit of a patient to a psychiatrist. A little friendly banter, maybe a misunderstanding about intention, but nothing striking. It's a little weird with the hand holding, but what to make of that? Don't know. Of course you have wonder if the writer had some reason for naming this doctor "doctor Ruth," the famous sex advisor, but there is no hint of what that might be except we learn that this Dr. Ruth and not THE Dr. Ruth. But anyway, good enough. End of first part, the writer draws a dotted line, which can only be taken as break in the story, and a new conversation ensues.

In this second conversation, the same two actors appear as in the first, but this time the psychiatrist (I suppose), questions the patient about his culpability in some heinous crime and his belief about motives, revenge, and whether he believes he is insane. And it appears, thought I am not certain, that this conversation switches to the psychiatrist's point of view.

So how are these two parts connected? Is there a hidden meaning in this work? What is the writer trying to communicate? I can not tell much of anything to help me understand this from reading these two very short fragments (they are not scenes in a traditional sense).

Now look, don't get angry with me, okay? I'm only giving an honest opinion. If we are going to communicate in writing, there must be some rules. You don't have to agree with me, but I have rules about this and Rule Number One is this: I must be able to have some rudimentary understanding of what it is you're trying to communicate or there is no sense in writing anything at all. You might as well be writing in a foreign language if there is no meaningful communication going on. And in this work, I simply have no idea what you're trying to tell me.

Sorry if this is not what you were looking for, it is simply my intellectually honest appraisal of this work.
6
6
Review of The Beginning  Open in new Window.
Review by r32312 Author IconMail Icon
Rated: 13+ | (2.0)

The question, Ben, is not whether a fiction story "actually happened," but rather whether the writer made it seem like it happened, whether he or she "made it real," a "continuous dream," as John Gardner, a great writing teacher once put it. So your helpful comment to reviewers that the story really happened doesn't reach the question of whether the writer made it seem like it happened, get it?

Okay, here's another example. Superman. Nobody really thought this story actually happened. No person with his wits about him thinks that a baby from another planet landed in a space ship and ended up on this farm, etc.... But the writers who wrote the original comic book, and then later the movie and television scripts, they made that thing come to life, they made it real, and people, including me, we watch that thing like it really did happen. Pick your story when it comes to this principle. Men In Black. How about Metamorphosis, by Franz Kafka. Nobody thinks a person really turned into a beetle overnight, but Kafka made that story real, see? So it doesn't matter if your adventure with this lovely girl "really happened," what matters is did your writing make it come to life, did you as a writer make it real. That's my criteria, anyway.

So let me put in my qualifying statement here and now. I'm just one reader so take this review for what it's worth. If you think it's wrong, or too harsh, fine. That's for you to decide. My job is to give you an intellectually honest review of what I think about it. So here it is.

Start with this. One of the basic tenants in fiction writing is you're supposed to "show, not tell." That means the writer is supposed to "draw pictures in the reader's mind," and the reader is supposed to "see the story in his mind." So you don't tell what happened, you show it.

You say she had "overwhelming good looks." No matter how you turn that phrase, you're telling me what she looked like. You're not showing her, which is much harder, but what writers get paid for. What about something like this: "Her hair hung in foot long blonde braids that reached half way down her tanned back, and her ice blue smiling eyes and pouty red lips were something out of a movie poster."

I'm just making this up, of course, but I'm trying to point out you need to SHOW HER, not TELL about her. So that's my first criticism of the writing.

So the way you go about this, the language, simply needs work, that's the main point.

The story is actually very charming and sweet, and it's not unbelievable at all. As a little love story, it's fine. There's not much more to it that I can see. There's nothing much literate about it, no theme or human trait you're trying to get at, no overwhelming message. But stories don't have to have such things to be effective.

Ah, and there's the real question. Is it effective? Does it evoke an emotion? Or is the writer merely writing to satisfy some urge or motivation on his part, such as to impress his wife of 40 or 50 years?

The only effect this story had on me was to show that one person can be so impressed with his own actions and conquests, for lack of a better term, that he still reveling in his luck 40 or 50 years after the fact, and while I'm sure he's a lucky guy, does he have anything else for me? See, it's not about the truth or veracity of the story at all, it's all about the quality of the writing.
7
7
Review of Promise of Hope  Open in new Window.
Review by r32312 Author IconMail Icon
Rated: E | (1.0)

The writing in this piece is really very good, clear and concise, much better, more detailed and carefully crafted, than most of the other writing you will find on this site and others like it. Clear and concise writing is very hard to do well, and this writer is clearly gifted.

But when I read this work, or any work, really, I ask myself, what is the writer trying to communicate, and beyond that, what is her purpose? Is it a short story? A part of a novel? A memoir? A biography? In my opinion, it is necessary to classify writing because it's important to recognize what a writer is trying to accomplish.

The piece starts out as a list, or catalog of difficulties the author has found herself in. Health problems, drug problems, relationship problems, all the things that humans suffer through to one extent or another as they trudge through life. And she sets them down in detail and with excellent clarity.

But then the author shifts gears and becomes an unabashed, blatant spokesman/messenger from God. Not much different than a street preacher you can find on street corners around the world, New York, Los Angeles, Miami, she has a message and she's going to deliver it.

Now there's nothing wrong with delivering messages. But does the audience want to hear it? Or is the messenger merely delivering it because she thinks it's important to deliver whether the reader wants it or not? One of my writing professors told me a long time ago: "If you've got a message, go to Western Union and leave me alone."

So what we have here is a sermon, and as I said, there's nothing inherently wrong with a sermon, as long as the congregation wants to hear it. So the best place for it is in church, where the membership at least signed up to hear something like it.




8
8
Review by r32312 Author IconMail Icon
Rated: 13+ | (2.0)

First I should remind you that I am merely one reader with one opinion and others may have opinions far different from mine.

The suspense the writer builds up in this story is excellent, and because of that it has great potential.

The events leading up to the climax of this are crucial, and although they are not handled poorly, the timing and sequence of events is confusing. In a story where the plot is very important, the sequence of events is crucial and that's where this needs work.

First, how many nights exactly did this story take? It seems to me she was by herself for two nights, but that's one of the things I had to keep going back to check on.

Second, you say at one point she checked the locks, but then a door was ajar? And she never checked the barn?

But then the real killer is the bad guy is wearing her husband's shirts? Or did she kill her husband my mistake?

If the killer had her husband's shirt, how did he get it? And if she killed her husband, did she not see his face before she let him have it?

Then the police arrest the woman for killing the intruder? That seems odd, and even it's true, it's got to be explained.

9
9
Review of Captain Griffon  Open in new Window.
Review by r32312 Author IconMail Icon
Rated: 13+ | (1.5)
This action thriller gets going fast, and starts where it should, in medias res, in the middle of the thing. The author keeps the action going very nicely, running down a bad guy, confronting him and finally beating him in sword fight, but alas, he gets away. I will get to some word choice problems, but there are other things to talk about first.

Remember, please, this is only my opinion and others may react differently.

This scene attempts to reproduce a fight in a bar between some good guys and some bad guys in a fantasy land at least a couple hundred years ago. For the writing to work it must make the reader believe it's a real thing, like it really happened. It's called verisimilitude.

Now it's hard enough to make a piece of fiction seem real when you're writing about something most people have experienced, say a car accident or a sunset or a puppy playing around with a child. When the writer takes on the job of making a scene like this one real, he's really got his work cut out for him because how's he going to realistically describe a sword fight between 20 or 30 people, and the main fighter is this big, terrific woman? See, it's very, very hard to make it real just because I doubt very much if he's ever seen something like this, except maybe in the movies. More on this in a minute.

Second issue: Where's this going? The good guys have a brawl in a bar and the bad guy gets away. Was the entire purpose of this writing to show this fight? As a scene, I suppose if you could make it real it would be effective, but where does the scene fit in? Shouldn't it belong in a story?

Now some difficult descriptions: Inside the bar, "The seemingly endless rows of faces were either in shock or awe." Endless rows of faces? How would that actually look? I'm trying to picture "seemingly endless rows of faces" and it's not coming through. Then, "The place was packed with individuals of ill repute one would expect slither thru it's doors..." Something's obviously missing, but beyond that, "individuals of ill repute...?" Excuse me? "Slither thru it's doors...?" See, all this is adding up to word choices that simply do not make this thing seem real at all, but rather contrived and stilted. Then, "In between the roar of battle the two of them fought it out, dodging and parrying attacks, all the while Manual held his smile." I can't really blame the writer for resorting to telling the thing instead of showing it, because I don't know how I would have shown it either. Goes back to the problem of describing something he's never seen. I could go on, but you get the point.

Myself, I try to stay away from writing about things I've never seen or can hardly even imagine, but when the writer takes on that task he must figure out a way to make it at least seem real or risk losing the reader's attention, and credibility.


10
10
Review of The Last Guardian  Open in new Window.
Review by r32312 Author IconMail Icon
Rated: ASR | (1.5)

Remember this is just one opinion, and others may feel completely differently.
It's really not bad as horror shorts go, but if its a commentary, a commentary on what? How the humans finally, finally beat the bugs? It hasn't happened in millions of years, so I don't see anything that explains in the story how and why it could be happening now. If that's what it's getting at, who's going to complain about finally beating the bugs? So I don't see a commentary on anything.
If it's a satire, then its supposed to make fun of something, show the foolishness of something by using humor. So I'm not really seeing any humor in this.
The only real criticism I have of the writing is what I'm seeing as overly formal usage. It's kind of odd, to say the least, that a story is told from a bug's point of view, but hey, anything is possible, right? Think Superman, Batman, Avengers, The Hulk, so nothing is too weird just because it's weird.
But what bothers me more is I can't figure out why a bug would talk like he learned the language from Shakespeare. Our hero says something like the "power of the mist hones our fear with the mastery of bygone 'plague-bringers.'” Then, "Should we be swift enough and close enough to manage it, we survive. And today we flee again, we cower once more, seeking shelter." Pretty fancy talk for a bug. Or is that your point?
Either way, it bugs me. (Sorry).
Of course, it's also a little like a joke, something a junior high student would be proud of. Other than that, why not?
10 Reviews · *Magnify*
Page of 1 · 25 per page   < >
Printed from https://writing.com/main/profile/reviews/reg312