Looking for constructive cricticism, be nice! :)
- Thread starter Mr. Gloom
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Mr. Gloom
Banned
No, I'm not. I'm sorry if I sound overly sensitive, but my work is important to me. I don't mind negative cricticism, but not like this. I'll defer you to the title of the thread "Looking for constructive cricticism, be nice".
If you can't do both of these, then quite frankly, just get out, because I don't want nor need your opinions. And I'd appreciate if the moderators would erase the last six posts, if that's alright.
If you can't do both of these, then quite frankly, just get out, because I don't want nor need your opinions. And I'd appreciate if the moderators would erase the last six posts, if that's alright.
C'est L'internet, mon ami. If you ask for criticism from strangers, and they don't like certain elements of it, they'll sure as hell let you know. Taking stuff personally online is not a good idea.
I'm a writer myself and I'm cautious to post stuff because I know i could quite easily improve it myself. If you're looking for one-sided praise, this isnt the right place.
I'm a writer myself and I'm cautious to post stuff because I know i could quite easily improve it myself. If you're looking for one-sided praise, this isnt the right place.
Mr. Gloom
Banned
I know, and you're right. Still you'd think most people would have the decency to respect the thread author's wishes. Anyway, I do agree that the language I used is a bit too "cold" and dry, which is a problem. My intention was for the story to feel "visceral".
As for the erotica aspect, yes, there is that, but that's not the main goal. The relationship between the two main characters is meant to make the reader feel more uncomfortable and awkward than anything else, as they're not exactly normal people.
Since I still haven't gotten over my writer's block on Chapter 1, I decided to go back and trim a few edges, change a few words, etc. to make the story feel more alive. And though I'm not done yet, I've updated the OP again with what I have so far. Please do tell me if the new language does anything to make the story better and if I should continue writing in this style.
As for the erotica aspect, yes, there is that, but that's not the main goal. The relationship between the two main characters is meant to make the reader feel more uncomfortable and awkward than anything else, as they're not exactly normal people.
Since I still haven't gotten over my writer's block on Chapter 1, I decided to go back and trim a few edges, change a few words, etc. to make the story feel more alive. And though I'm not done yet, I've updated the OP again with what I have so far. Please do tell me if the new language does anything to make the story better and if I should continue writing in this style.
I recommend you procure a copy of "The Elements of Style" by William Strunk, edited by EB White and read it through a couple of times.
There are DOZENS of times you use a comma where a period should be. Literally dozens.
Mr. Gloom
Banned
Ever heard the old saying about how you should never go shopping when you're hungry? I got a new one, never write while you're horny. 
It's been a while, I know. But I've had some RL problems to deal with it and ended up forgetting about this story entirely, until I found the save file on my PC. I've updated the OP with a revised and improved version of the prologue. As always, any cricticism is appreciated so long as it is constructive and presented in a halfway civilized manner. Also, please don't obsess over minor grammatical details like me using a comma where I should have used a period. Those are little things that can easily be fixed later. I came here looking the type of input I can't get from a machine, like do you think the language and words I used are appropriate for this type of story, how does the story make you feel while Reading it, etc.
Hope you enjoy.
It's been a while, I know. But I've had some RL problems to deal with it and ended up forgetting about this story entirely, until I found the save file on my PC. I've updated the OP with a revised and improved version of the prologue. As always, any cricticism is appreciated so long as it is constructive and presented in a halfway civilized manner. Also, please don't obsess over minor grammatical details like me using a comma where I should have used a period. Those are little things that can easily be fixed later. I came here looking the type of input I can't get from a machine, like do you think the language and words I used are appropriate for this type of story, how does the story make you feel while Reading it, etc.
Hope you enjoy.
I felt quite bored, I feel like your biggest issue is that there is absolutely no flow to your writing and that for a short story that is supposed to delve into the psyche of your character we (the readers) are given almost nothing to "work with".
Let's take a look at just the first paragraph
What's interesting about this? Loud music? You couldn't offer anything more interesting than that it was loud?
Similarly, you don't really tell us anything about how Frieda reacts to the music...apart form her snarling which again isn't particularly inspired.
For example, you could have compared it to something, mentioned how maddeningly infuriating the music was for your character to hear, tied it to some memory, anything really that let's the reader imagine something about the scene.
What I am trying to say here, is that if you want to write well, it often isn't enough to say "The music was annoying, the music was pleasing, the music was cheery, etc."
I find this sentence to be very jarring to read and illustrative of the the problem you seem to have transitioning between distinct moments in time.
You seem to be at an impasse of sorts, in that you don't quite seem to be able to create enough detail for your short story to be a very detailed work and yet at the same time you are adding far too many unnecessary words to pull off a very minimalistic form of writing.
Let's take a look at just the first paragraph
What's interesting about this? Loud music? You couldn't offer anything more interesting than that it was loud?
Similarly, you don't really tell us anything about how Frieda reacts to the music...apart form her snarling which again isn't particularly inspired.
For example, you could have compared it to something, mentioned how maddeningly infuriating the music was for your character to hear, tied it to some memory, anything really that let's the reader imagine something about the scene.
What I am trying to say here, is that if you want to write well, it often isn't enough to say "The music was annoying, the music was pleasing, the music was cheery, etc."
I find this sentence to be very jarring to read and illustrative of the the problem you seem to have transitioning between distinct moments in time.
You seem to be at an impasse of sorts, in that you don't quite seem to be able to create enough detail for your short story to be a very detailed work and yet at the same time you are adding far too many unnecessary words to pull off a very minimalistic form of writing.
The comma stuff can't be gauged by a computer. In english there's an abnormal amount of leeway between punctuation marks and you can imply a lot by lengthening or splitting sentences. It's also one of the few ways to make a paragraph flow in a satisfying way without changing the words, because of the way people read stuff in their heads. I often find myself obsessing over commas and semicolons because of how important they are to the meaning/rhythm/structure of a text.
Picked a nugget of text semi-randomly:
"Of course she had never been to berlin" and "Of course, she had never been to Berlin." Have slightly different meanings because of how you'd say them. With the first sentence I'm inclined to put stress on 'course', and I'm accusing the reader, or a third party in the book, for not knowing that. In print, I'd put that in italics.
The second sentence is probably what you were going for here. It sounds a bit more impartial in its 'of course' because of how the reader is forced into a certain speaking pattern.
A computer would've ignored this.
You've also got:
...Berlin, or any other major city, during the those days * but from time to time, she still caught their parades and celebrations on the old black and white TV they had back home, before it broke.
The space marked by the first asterisk is crying out for a full stop. Parts of the sentence afterwards actually flow pretty well and are nice to read, even in my head (parAdes and celebrAtions), but to read the entire thing as a single sentence kills that.
The slightly strange clause order is also to blame. The 'before it broke' at the end is abrupt and ends the sentence in an unsatisfying whimper. Replacing "from time to time" with "before it [finally died]" seems better to me. but it's your story. You should be able to recite your writing in your head the way you want it to be read, and adjust accordingly.
Sorry for being so anal but it's bothering when popular writers don't bother making their work satisfying to read. Making a paragraph of exposition sound like water trickling along a fresh alpine brook will give readers a reason to trudge through five hours of inaction in a book.
The ninjas are in full force today.
Picked a nugget of text semi-randomly:
"Of course she had never been to berlin" and "Of course, she had never been to Berlin." Have slightly different meanings because of how you'd say them. With the first sentence I'm inclined to put stress on 'course', and I'm accusing the reader, or a third party in the book, for not knowing that. In print, I'd put that in italics.
The second sentence is probably what you were going for here. It sounds a bit more impartial in its 'of course' because of how the reader is forced into a certain speaking pattern.
A computer would've ignored this.
You've also got:
...Berlin, or any other major city, during the those days * but from time to time, she still caught their parades and celebrations on the old black and white TV they had back home, before it broke.
The space marked by the first asterisk is crying out for a full stop. Parts of the sentence afterwards actually flow pretty well and are nice to read, even in my head (parAdes and celebrAtions), but to read the entire thing as a single sentence kills that.
The slightly strange clause order is also to blame. The 'before it broke' at the end is abrupt and ends the sentence in an unsatisfying whimper. Replacing "from time to time" with "before it [finally died]" seems better to me. but it's your story. You should be able to recite your writing in your head the way you want it to be read, and adjust accordingly.
Sorry for being so anal but it's bothering when popular writers don't bother making their work satisfying to read. Making a paragraph of exposition sound like water trickling along a fresh alpine brook will give readers a reason to trudge through five hours of inaction in a book.
The ninjas are in full force today.
Mr. Gloom
Banned
Úlfheðinn said:
I find this sentence to be very jarring to read and illustrative of the the problem you seem to have transitioning between distinct moments in time.
[/quote]
Ok, I'm in a bit of a less than friendly debate over Skype right now. I'll certainly take a look at all your cricticisms when it's done. I just want clarification on this. Are you saying I should tell the reader how much time between her hoping the music would eventually stop and her getting up to see what was going on? Sorta like this:
"Still, she figured it would stop after a while and she’d be able to return to her slumber. After 10 minutes, when that still hadn't happened though, she decided to get up and see what all the ruckus was about"
Also I agree with your comment about there being too many unecessary words, and am currently trying to "trim the fat" so to speak. To try and make the text a little less bloated.
Check what Jacob said concerning your abrupt sentence end, it's pretty much the same issue and he explained it very well.
It's not that you necessarily have to quantify time but that you have to provide some sort of logical transitions between actions.
For example:
"Joe waited for his pizza, it didn't arrive, he was enraged and charged the waiter."
It's nicer to read:
"Sitting in Han's Italian Pizzeria Joe waited desperately for his pizza. Saliva slowly dripped from the corners of his mouth and pooled into an impressive lake of spit on the shabby round table in front of him. Sobbing quietly, he clutched the ancient metal fork he had been given in front of himself like a weapon and glared angrily at the waiter, who pranced just out of his reach with delicious discs of a most cheesy nature.
As the minutes passed, Joe could feel the anger growing inside of his empty belly, the searing hatred that began to take hold of his senses. It was at then that Joe finally remembered the dark kernel of truth that he had tried for years to bury deep within his soul. The waiter had to die for his sins, for his ineptitude and blatant disregard of the basic principles of customer service.
Rising to his feet, Joe let out a low guttural roar of pure hatred and charged at his arch-nemesis, scattering neatly folded napkins in his wake. Barreling forward he sent a small child that stood in his way sailing across the room without a moment of hesitation. Dwarfs had no place in battle, he idly mused before he threw himself at the waiter. Knocking him to the ground, Joe raised the fork high above his head and let loose a terrifying string of inhuman curses before plunging the shiny metallic object repeatedly into the other man's forehead.
An eternity later, drenched, in cooling blood and serenaded by the terrifying screams of women and children, Joe stopped only when the fork snapped in half. Standing up, he looked around at the horrified customers that now surrounded him.
"Danskjävel," he muttered, gesturing at what remained of the waiter with a serious nod. "It had to be done."
Also, I'm drunk, so A+.
It's not that you necessarily have to quantify time but that you have to provide some sort of logical transitions between actions.
For example:
"Joe waited for his pizza, it didn't arrive, he was enraged and charged the waiter."
It's nicer to read:
"Sitting in Han's Italian Pizzeria Joe waited desperately for his pizza. Saliva slowly dripped from the corners of his mouth and pooled into an impressive lake of spit on the shabby round table in front of him. Sobbing quietly, he clutched the ancient metal fork he had been given in front of himself like a weapon and glared angrily at the waiter, who pranced just out of his reach with delicious discs of a most cheesy nature.
As the minutes passed, Joe could feel the anger growing inside of his empty belly, the searing hatred that began to take hold of his senses. It was at then that Joe finally remembered the dark kernel of truth that he had tried for years to bury deep within his soul. The waiter had to die for his sins, for his ineptitude and blatant disregard of the basic principles of customer service.
Rising to his feet, Joe let out a low guttural roar of pure hatred and charged at his arch-nemesis, scattering neatly folded napkins in his wake. Barreling forward he sent a small child that stood in his way sailing across the room without a moment of hesitation. Dwarfs had no place in battle, he idly mused before he threw himself at the waiter. Knocking him to the ground, Joe raised the fork high above his head and let loose a terrifying string of inhuman curses before plunging the shiny metallic object repeatedly into the other man's forehead.
An eternity later, drenched, in cooling blood and serenaded by the terrifying screams of women and children, Joe stopped only when the fork snapped in half. Standing up, he looked around at the horrified customers that now surrounded him.
"Danskjävel," he muttered, gesturing at what remained of the waiter with a serious nod. "It had to be done."
Also, I'm drunk, so A+.
Mr. Gloom said:
You can trim the fat, but that doesn't always mean culling the wordcount. Actions generally need more words to explain things and the reader will generally skim over them faster. See ulfhedinn's (ulfhethinn's?) Drunken ramble. That drawn out, flowery style of action writing is probably more suited to comedy writing, but the principle is the same. Spread action out, keeping time jumps to a minimum (it is often necessary to bend your story in order to keep all the action within a small time frame. Nothing's worse than the climax of a movie being soread out over a few days).
Because english is a good language for static explanation (exactly what I'm doing here), it's very good practice to keep exposition or descriptions of places as compact as you can. Imply stuff. Use a framing device to show the information in a more interesting way. Set stuff up in advance through repeated but unspoken-of action. Anything other than infodumps. Because no matter how small, infodumps take up a lot of space and almost never flow well.
They had it coming. I regret nothing.Úlfheðinn said:
