Hey! It looks like you're new here. You might want to check out the introduction.
I can't decide which side to join here :3
On the issue of there being other ways he could earn money, I'm not sure that's the point. The impression I got is he's not trying to earn money; he's trying to spite Fluttershy in any way he can, and he takes all her money to score points against her in his head. This is a story about a twisted, petty, greasy, spitting ball of hate lashing out at everyone around him at some percieved injustice, much like some petty asshat who ends up serial-killing women because one or two said 'no' to him and therefore they're all lying sluts. In that respect, it does a fine job of raising emotional hackles.
I agree it was rather too easy to see coming, though, and I was particularly puzzled by this line:
Surely this means Fluttershy, more than anyone else, should have seen the spiderweb she was walking into, but she spends the entire thing oblivious. It's an especially weird line because it comes in the middle of a segment where Fluttershy blithely insists he's trustworthy, but doesn't go anywhere with the assertion. It makes more sense if it's an actual thought Fluttershy's having - like "Fluttershy knew the game of predator and prey, and she could tell this pony wasn't a predator" - but as it's phrased, it sounds like an objective fact from the narration, that she is better at spotting these things, and so it's weird that she manifestly doesn't.
On the issue of there being other ways he could earn money, I'm not sure that's the point. The impression I got is he's not trying to earn money; he's trying to spite Fluttershy in any way he can, and he takes all her money to score points against her in his head. This is a story about a twisted, petty, greasy, spitting ball of hate lashing out at everyone around him at some percieved injustice, much like some petty asshat who ends up serial-killing women because one or two said 'no' to him and therefore they're all lying sluts. In that respect, it does a fine job of raising emotional hackles.
I agree it was rather too easy to see coming, though, and I was particularly puzzled by this line:
Fluttershy may not have been as smart as Twilight, but if a life spent caring for animals had taught her anything, it was the game of predator and prey.
Surely this means Fluttershy, more than anyone else, should have seen the spiderweb she was walking into, but she spends the entire thing oblivious. It's an especially weird line because it comes in the middle of a segment where Fluttershy blithely insists he's trustworthy, but doesn't go anywhere with the assertion. It makes more sense if it's an actual thought Fluttershy's having - like "Fluttershy knew the game of predator and prey, and she could tell this pony wasn't a predator" - but as it's phrased, it sounds like an objective fact from the narration, that she is better at spotting these things, and so it's weird that she manifestly doesn't.
>>horizon
I eat sandwiches like that.
Well, I've now got two stories in [...] and I'm contemplating a third with my remaining couple of hours.
I eat sandwiches like that.
Snrk. Now we've got prompts that aren't even words. Whoever did that one, I salute you.
... well, I would if I knew the unicode :|
... well, I would if I knew the unicode :|
>>Fahrenheit
PTHTHTBHBTHTHBTBBBB.
six academic articles to read/annotate
four psychology essays to write
book report to submit
finishing touches to put on an academic article
(Plus my roommate had her 21st birthday party that Saturday)
Medal-winning story
Epic poem in addition
I have an entire story about the time I learned my special talent was procrastination
PTHTHTBHBTHTHBTBBBB.
God, sir or ma'am. Those puns.
Your funny bits are funny, and your pathos bits are pathos-y, but much like steak and custard, I'm not sure they mix well even if they're each done capably.
(I did once have an excellent bacon milkshake. This should not detract in the least from my metaphor.)
Spelling, grammar, flow, and language are all good, though (I particularly liked the bit where Jackie re-folds her arms just to not mirror her husband; that's some good subliminal spite there), and with that, this feels like a quick experiment by a capable author to a tight deadline; much, in fact, like a chef mixing steak and custard in his off-time just to see if it works.
Your funny bits are funny, and your pathos bits are pathos-y, but much like steak and custard, I'm not sure they mix well even if they're each done capably.
(I did once have an excellent bacon milkshake. This should not detract in the least from my metaphor.)
Spelling, grammar, flow, and language are all good, though (I particularly liked the bit where Jackie re-folds her arms just to not mirror her husband; that's some good subliminal spite there), and with that, this feels like a quick experiment by a capable author to a tight deadline; much, in fact, like a chef mixing steak and custard in his off-time just to see if it works.
Seconding >>horizon 's edit so freaking hard.
I work in one of those hotels that strives for posh restaurant service, where they present the food all artistic-y, and you end up with a lot of ugly-duckling food being put aside for the staff to pick at. So sometimes I'll come in and there's just, like, an entire plate of cheesecake there for me to steal. And it'll be made up of the bits where the cream collapsed, or the biscuit crumbled, or the strawberries fell off, or they're wrong-shaped edge-pieces or what-have-you, and I will not care a single whit because it's an entire plate of cheesecake.
Reading this was like finding one of those. There's bits where the rhythm stumbles into off-beats, and bits where the rhyme scheme does what it feels like, and bits where the sentences sound like Yoda with Tourette's, and I just do not flipping care, because none of its lumpiness detracts from the creamy delicious fable that is its essential core. Bits like
- were just lovely; however much your rhythm or rhymes stumble, when you get it right you get it right. The concept and the world are just adorable, the tale was sweet and gripping, and even if the ending was anticlimactic, it was the right kind of anticlimax; not bad-writing, but intentional, carefully-built, and leaving a hollow sorrow in its passing. Top contender, sir or ma'am.
================================
(Hmm.)
(>Fairy wants make poetry cool among her friends.)
(>Fairy makes poem.)
(>Fairy presents poem to her friends.)
(>Fairies go 'eh'. )
(> Fairy is a Writeoff-er.)
:V
I work in one of those hotels that strives for posh restaurant service, where they present the food all artistic-y, and you end up with a lot of ugly-duckling food being put aside for the staff to pick at. So sometimes I'll come in and there's just, like, an entire plate of cheesecake there for me to steal. And it'll be made up of the bits where the cream collapsed, or the biscuit crumbled, or the strawberries fell off, or they're wrong-shaped edge-pieces or what-have-you, and I will not care a single whit because it's an entire plate of cheesecake.
Reading this was like finding one of those. There's bits where the rhythm stumbles into off-beats, and bits where the rhyme scheme does what it feels like, and bits where the sentences sound like Yoda with Tourette's, and I just do not flipping care, because none of its lumpiness detracts from the creamy delicious fable that is its essential core. Bits like
No songs of war,
Nor angry shore,
Disturbed her well-earned rest.
No swelling crests
That tried their best
To pull her to sea-floor
But from the depths did manifest
A softer song’s encore.
- were just lovely; however much your rhythm or rhymes stumble, when you get it right you get it right. The concept and the world are just adorable, the tale was sweet and gripping, and even if the ending was anticlimactic, it was the right kind of anticlimax; not bad-writing, but intentional, carefully-built, and leaving a hollow sorrow in its passing. Top contender, sir or ma'am.
================================
(Hmm.)
(>Fairy wants make poetry cool among her friends.)
(>Fairy makes poem.)
(>Fairy presents poem to her friends.)
(>Fairies go 'eh'. )
(> Fairy is a Writeoff-er.)
:V
Hmm. I may try to enter. Though My entire writing period takes place during a DnD session here everyone gets pissed at me if I so much as look at my laptop.
3am writing, ho!
3am writing, ho!
Hmm. Apologies, author, but I can't see the story here. I get the feeling it references a legend or tale that I'm not aware of, and it would all be clear if I knew; but I don't, alas.
I get the feeling, also, that there's a puzzle in here. I tried collating the footnote references, and they do make a kind of sense (footnote [2], for example, is called for Nordic runes and for a section on demonic summoning, so presumably that footnote talks about runes of all stripes, mundane and arcane), but again, I can't tease out the bigger pattern behind it.
Spelling is good, grammar is solid. A few turns of phrase here and there that could be tweaked - I've listed the ones I caught below for the sake of thoroughness - but they're pretty minor, all told.
TLDR: Fairly solid wordsmithry, but I can't tell what's going on story-wise. If it is referncing something else, try to lean on that a little less next time around (that, of course, depends a lot on what crowd you're rolling with, so if this does reference something well-known to a different circle, then the problem is just with me and not the writing; although you should still try to pick your targets. If it's not referencing anything at all, of course, then ignore me :P).
==
Nitpicks:
"in keeping with similar tomes" is a tautology. It's basically saying 'it's similar to things it's similar to'.
The opening sentence of the second paragraph reads like it's missing a part: " [...] the fact that the writing on the parchment is in no known language means that...".
"this volume makes no illusion to supplying a definitive resource on the matter." - I probably am just being finicky here. You could have "makes no illusion about supplying..." or you could have, which I suspect is the one you were going for, "makes no allusion to supplying..." An advanced mistake, though, and to be honest I might be wrong myself on this. Other grammar nerds! To me!
"The text itself is no more likely the product of demons than it is of a fractured mind..." - this is stating "The text probably wasn't written by demons, and it probably wasn't written by a mad person either." It should be "The text is less likely the product of demons than..."
"disappeared in his death." Minor one: should be 'with', not 'in'.
I get the feeling, also, that there's a puzzle in here. I tried collating the footnote references, and they do make a kind of sense (footnote [2], for example, is called for Nordic runes and for a section on demonic summoning, so presumably that footnote talks about runes of all stripes, mundane and arcane), but again, I can't tease out the bigger pattern behind it.
Spelling is good, grammar is solid. A few turns of phrase here and there that could be tweaked - I've listed the ones I caught below for the sake of thoroughness - but they're pretty minor, all told.
TLDR: Fairly solid wordsmithry, but I can't tell what's going on story-wise. If it is referncing something else, try to lean on that a little less next time around (that, of course, depends a lot on what crowd you're rolling with, so if this does reference something well-known to a different circle, then the problem is just with me and not the writing; although you should still try to pick your targets. If it's not referencing anything at all, of course, then ignore me :P).
==
Nitpicks:
"in keeping with similar tomes" is a tautology. It's basically saying 'it's similar to things it's similar to'.
The opening sentence of the second paragraph reads like it's missing a part: " [...] the fact that the writing on the parchment is in no known language means that...".
"this volume makes no illusion to supplying a definitive resource on the matter." - I probably am just being finicky here. You could have "makes no illusion about supplying..." or you could have, which I suspect is the one you were going for, "makes no allusion to supplying..." An advanced mistake, though, and to be honest I might be wrong myself on this. Other grammar nerds! To me!
"The text itself is no more likely the product of demons than it is of a fractured mind..." - this is stating "The text probably wasn't written by demons, and it probably wasn't written by a mad person either." It should be "The text is less likely the product of demons than..."
"disappeared in his death." Minor one: should be 'with', not 'in'.
This is well-crafted; there's a good voice to it, and it builds up nicely towards the revelation of what Matias could be. I did feel the ending spoiled things, though. When Matias apparently hits his tormentor, and the narrator isn't sure what just happened, there's a sort of haunting, creeping uncertainty about whether Matias is normal or whether there really is something weird going on... and then you hit him with a truck and throw it all out the window. I think it might be much improved by slicing out that final bit, and leaving the uncertainty there. (Though, you know, my opinion, probably bollocks, etc. etc.)
I'm also not sure how this is relevant to the prompt; is it that time hasn't been able to remove this memory from our narrator's mind?
Still, not a bad read.
I'm also not sure how this is relevant to the prompt; is it that time hasn't been able to remove this memory from our narrator's mind?
Still, not a bad read.
You've got an intruiging world here, author, but I'm not sure 750 words is really enough room to do it justice. These minific rounds are incredibly constrained; the wordcount and time limit is barely enough to sketch the briefest of stories, and so what scene-building you can do is really limited to familiar ideas that don't need a lot of words to explain. For this - with its Hours, and demon-hunters, and time magic and alternate dimensions and this guy Midnight who apparently commands an army of chronological minions desperate to be freed from their bonds - you really need the freedom of the 8,000-word short story rounds to let it thrive.
The scene itself was pretty cool. I felt it could have ended better at the point where he died - your last paragraph is a surge of exposition which, as I said, hasn't the room it needs to really get its concepts across, but the main scene, even if there's a lot we don't know about, was still a good piece of drama. Slicing that last bit would strengthen the previous scene and give you the extra wordcount space to reinforce it even more.
Spelling's good, grammar's solid bar a couple minor bits ('lied' should be 'lay'; 'ended-up' doesn't need a hyphen, 'Twenty four' does). Watch out for changing tenses; mostly you're in past tense, but you sometimes shift to present.
TLDR: I read a book by a Hollywood director once where he talked about his job rejecting or accepting scripts sent in by wannabe movie-writers. He recalls how he rejected thousands of scripts that were perfectly constructed but just boring, because there's nothing you can do about a boring idea. He never once threw out something with construction problems that was interesting, though, because they can always be made to shine.
Your problem here is a construction problem: the wordcount is too small for your idea. This is intruiging, and given free reign with a bigger wordcount, this could really blossom.
(Also: I was totes expecting a gears-and-clockwork creature too, narrator)
The scene itself was pretty cool. I felt it could have ended better at the point where he died - your last paragraph is a surge of exposition which, as I said, hasn't the room it needs to really get its concepts across, but the main scene, even if there's a lot we don't know about, was still a good piece of drama. Slicing that last bit would strengthen the previous scene and give you the extra wordcount space to reinforce it even more.
Spelling's good, grammar's solid bar a couple minor bits ('lied' should be 'lay'; 'ended-up' doesn't need a hyphen, 'Twenty four' does). Watch out for changing tenses; mostly you're in past tense, but you sometimes shift to present.
TLDR: I read a book by a Hollywood director once where he talked about his job rejecting or accepting scripts sent in by wannabe movie-writers. He recalls how he rejected thousands of scripts that were perfectly constructed but just boring, because there's nothing you can do about a boring idea. He never once threw out something with construction problems that was interesting, though, because they can always be made to shine.
Your problem here is a construction problem: the wordcount is too small for your idea. This is intruiging, and given free reign with a bigger wordcount, this could really blossom.
(Also: I was totes expecting a gears-and-clockwork creature too, narrator)