Hey! It looks like you're new here. You might want to check out the introduction.
Hi. It's that time again. I'm going to put out some things here that I know a lot of this community doesn't agree with. I have mostly "retired" from actively posting commentary after being harassed to the point where engaging here was not good for my mental health, but eh, I'm feeling okay right now, and we have a lot of new faces who might benefit from hearing this perspective. (And a few commentors getting harassed, as I was, for posting honest but negative reactions to this piece. Stop doing that, people. Seriously. Cut it out.)
This is, by my reckoning, the truest statement in this thread.
Concepting is part of the skill of writing. A very important part, actually, and one that tends to be neglected and glossed over. Not hard to see why. People don't want to appear biased, they're taught that bias is bad and we should respect all forms of writing, and so we start to preach and believe that all concepts are equal and should be treated with equal "respect" by never criticizing them and placing "the author's intent/vision" as a thing of paramount importance.
However, consider: no.
That's wrong. Not what that means.
All story ideas are not created equal. Far from it. Writing exists not in a vacuum, but in contexts, and when looking at a certain context with certain goals of expression, there are going to be concepts that are better or worse at achieving those goals than others. Coming up with effective concepts and making good choices in your subject matter and story elements is part of the difficulty, and the skill, of effective fiction writing. "The direction the narrative takes" is not a thing separate from a piece's merits and style. It is part of those merits and style, inseperable.
It is also not the duty of readers here to respect the author's viewpoint and choices of subject matter, no matter what those may be. Nor to refrain from criticism on that basis. Nor to "consider the author's intent" and try to take a positive view based on it. The author's intent is unknown, unknowable, and often largely irrelevant. The text stands on its own. Once a story is delivered to readers, they are the ones whose interpretations matter. Particularly in a competition like this, where the readers are also the judges, it is not the judges' responsibility to be charitable or to twist their responses and try to look at all submissions in the most favorable lights. It is the authors' responsibility to write stories that the reader-judges will think highly of, not the other way around.
Perhaps if the prompt for the round had been "Pedophilia" then I might agree that readers have some obligation to respect this piece's concept. But it isn't. The prompt is "Here at the End of all Things." This piece being about pedophilia is a conscious decision that the author made, like any other decision in their process of composition.
Not only is it legitimate to consider the subject in judgment of the piece, I believe it is irresponsible judging not to do so. If this piece were to be published "in the wild," in a magazine or FIMfiction or etc, we can be sure it would draw a great deal of visceral negative response. Should that not be represented in the feedback it receives here? Are those reactions somehow less "fair" or less valid than more generous ones? If we accept that as somehow true, and apply it as a rule to critiques and/or votes, what happens to this site looking forward?
Responsible, fair critique is not "critique that seeks to eliminate all trace of personal bias and treat everything exactly the same." That is impossible, and pretending that it is possible is disingenuous. Rather, responsible, fair critique is critique that seeks to recognize one's own bias, to be aware of it, disclose it when appropriate and work with it in forming your framework for analysis, as part of a larger framework of personal development.
I don't know why the author thought it was a good idea to write and submit this piece to a T for Teen rated Friendship is Magic fanfiction competition/workshop/hootenanny. I bear them no particular ill will for having done so, and I hope they will return. But I also hope they will think carefully in the future about what the likely responses to controversial subjects are going to be, and how they often far overshadow "technical merits" in the minds of readers. Don't do edgy stuff in Writeoff. Thanks for writing, though!
-------------------------------------------
That all having been said, I do have one other point of curiosity. What in the heck is up with this place and pony pedophilia? This piece, The Best Days Lie Ahead, Blueblood's Greatest Love, A Gem Beneath (arguably)... those are just the ones I remember from the last six months. I liked some of these, and none of them individually raise an eyebrow for me beyond ill-considered edgyness. But what's weird here is that it keeps happening.
Lest you believe me some shocked prude throwing a fit, let me open up a little. I'm no stranger tolove, baby the subject of "lolicon" and underage relationships. Geek and anime culture and sexuality is one of my wheelhouses. I've (poorly) translated, written academic papers and taught a college course on erotic visual novels, including some with very controversial content. My personal beliefs align closely with Neil Gaiman and the CBLDF's excellent manifesto on the topic. By general societal standards I would think this puts me pretty dang far on the liberal side of the issue.
But I'm getting a little sketched out here, because never in my life, in all the venues I've been in and all the people I've known, never, ever, have I seen this subject come up this seriously, this often, with this sort of serious handwringing defensiveness. Not even with openly professed "lolicon fanatics," not even with Piers Anthony fans for god's sake. This doesn't happen anywhere else. Even Piers Anthony himself usually keeps a tighter lid on it than this. It really seems to be just this site, this community, especially the pony rounds, where I can count on some "let's take a serious sympathetic look at the subject of pedophilia - OH NO PEOPLE ARE SUPER HARSH ABOUT IT, what persecution, who could possibly have forseen this" popping up every couple of months.
So, open, honest question. Why is this? What is it with Pony Writeoff that makes this keep coming up as a subject, from multiple people over multiple rounds? Is there something going on here that I'm not aware of? And can we maybe consider making it stop?
Don't do edgy stuff in Writeoff.
There are some things you just can't write about and have your words well-received by a target audience.
This is, by my reckoning, the truest statement in this thread.
Concepting is part of the skill of writing. A very important part, actually, and one that tends to be neglected and glossed over. Not hard to see why. People don't want to appear biased, they're taught that bias is bad and we should respect all forms of writing, and so we start to preach and believe that all concepts are equal and should be treated with equal "respect" by never criticizing them and placing "the author's intent/vision" as a thing of paramount importance.
However, consider: no.
That's wrong. Not what that means.
All story ideas are not created equal. Far from it. Writing exists not in a vacuum, but in contexts, and when looking at a certain context with certain goals of expression, there are going to be concepts that are better or worse at achieving those goals than others. Coming up with effective concepts and making good choices in your subject matter and story elements is part of the difficulty, and the skill, of effective fiction writing. "The direction the narrative takes" is not a thing separate from a piece's merits and style. It is part of those merits and style, inseperable.
It is also not the duty of readers here to respect the author's viewpoint and choices of subject matter, no matter what those may be. Nor to refrain from criticism on that basis. Nor to "consider the author's intent" and try to take a positive view based on it. The author's intent is unknown, unknowable, and often largely irrelevant. The text stands on its own. Once a story is delivered to readers, they are the ones whose interpretations matter. Particularly in a competition like this, where the readers are also the judges, it is not the judges' responsibility to be charitable or to twist their responses and try to look at all submissions in the most favorable lights. It is the authors' responsibility to write stories that the reader-judges will think highly of, not the other way around.
Perhaps if the prompt for the round had been "Pedophilia" then I might agree that readers have some obligation to respect this piece's concept. But it isn't. The prompt is "Here at the End of all Things." This piece being about pedophilia is a conscious decision that the author made, like any other decision in their process of composition.
Not only is it legitimate to consider the subject in judgment of the piece, I believe it is irresponsible judging not to do so. If this piece were to be published "in the wild," in a magazine or FIMfiction or etc, we can be sure it would draw a great deal of visceral negative response. Should that not be represented in the feedback it receives here? Are those reactions somehow less "fair" or less valid than more generous ones? If we accept that as somehow true, and apply it as a rule to critiques and/or votes, what happens to this site looking forward?
Responsible, fair critique is not "critique that seeks to eliminate all trace of personal bias and treat everything exactly the same." That is impossible, and pretending that it is possible is disingenuous. Rather, responsible, fair critique is critique that seeks to recognize one's own bias, to be aware of it, disclose it when appropriate and work with it in forming your framework for analysis, as part of a larger framework of personal development.
I don't know why the author thought it was a good idea to write and submit this piece to a T for Teen rated Friendship is Magic fanfiction competition/workshop/hootenanny. I bear them no particular ill will for having done so, and I hope they will return. But I also hope they will think carefully in the future about what the likely responses to controversial subjects are going to be, and how they often far overshadow "technical merits" in the minds of readers. Don't do edgy stuff in Writeoff. Thanks for writing, though!
-------------------------------------------
That all having been said, I do have one other point of curiosity. What in the heck is up with this place and pony pedophilia? This piece, The Best Days Lie Ahead, Blueblood's Greatest Love, A Gem Beneath (arguably)... those are just the ones I remember from the last six months. I liked some of these, and none of them individually raise an eyebrow for me beyond ill-considered edgyness. But what's weird here is that it keeps happening.
Lest you believe me some shocked prude throwing a fit, let me open up a little. I'm no stranger to
But I'm getting a little sketched out here, because never in my life, in all the venues I've been in and all the people I've known, never, ever, have I seen this subject come up this seriously, this often, with this sort of serious handwringing defensiveness. Not even with openly professed "lolicon fanatics," not even with Piers Anthony fans for god's sake. This doesn't happen anywhere else. Even Piers Anthony himself usually keeps a tighter lid on it than this. It really seems to be just this site, this community, especially the pony rounds, where I can count on some "let's take a serious sympathetic look at the subject of pedophilia - OH NO PEOPLE ARE SUPER HARSH ABOUT IT, what persecution, who could possibly have forseen this" popping up every couple of months.
So, open, honest question. Why is this? What is it with Pony Writeoff that makes this keep coming up as a subject, from multiple people over multiple rounds? Is there something going on here that I'm not aware of? And can we maybe consider making it stop?
Don't do edgy stuff in Writeoff.
>>Kitcat36
Panic attacks definitely aren't fun. Take care of your mental health and do what you need to do for yourself.
That said, please do consider leaving your story up, even if you think it's bad and/or it scores poorly. Thank you for putting it out there. You can learn a lot from examining your work, even the old and/or "bad" stuff, and others can learn from you as well. As >>Pascoite said, nobody out here is judging you as a person for your writing, or judging your writing harshly. We like writing, we like your writing and we want to help you. Relax, enjoy, come back and keep at it. I'll look forward to seeing you in the Original rounds too!
Sincerely,
A fellow panic attack sufferer and perceived "harsh critic"
Panic attacks definitely aren't fun. Take care of your mental health and do what you need to do for yourself.
That said, please do consider leaving your story up, even if you think it's bad and/or it scores poorly. Thank you for putting it out there. You can learn a lot from examining your work, even the old and/or "bad" stuff, and others can learn from you as well. As >>Pascoite said, nobody out here is judging you as a person for your writing, or judging your writing harshly. We like writing, we like your writing and we want to help you. Relax, enjoy, come back and keep at it. I'll look forward to seeing you in the Original rounds too!
Sincerely,
A fellow panic attack sufferer and perceived "harsh critic"
>>Cassius
Briefly re-emerging from the shadows to comment on this one.
My initial read, following instructions to not look at comments before reading, was largely aligned with the Cassius/parasite interp, right on down to the advice to the author to claim it. (Which is very genuine and helpful advice!) The Gardez interp could also be right, and the parasite involved is changelingism...
... But on further thought, I wasn't very satisfied with either of those reads. There's a smoking gun.
That's not a random turn of phrase. It's a line from the opening theme of The Jeffersons, a famous mid-70s to 80s American sitcom featuring an African-American cast and a prominent interracial couple. And that's our cue for what's going on here.
A second shoutout to African-American skin tones. I think this is about race. Blinky is a half-changeling. That aligns his strange biology, the father leaving, and the focus on the family's poverty. Body horror as an allegory for racial miscegenation is a well played trope - see many of H.P. Lovecraft's works, which played with similar themes. This has the potential to go into unfortunate implications very quickly, so I'll stop the speculation there, and just say to keep this read in mind.
Briefly re-emerging from the shadows to comment on this one.
My initial read, following instructions to not look at comments before reading, was largely aligned with the Cassius/parasite interp, right on down to the advice to the author to claim it. (Which is very genuine and helpful advice!) The Gardez interp could also be right, and the parasite involved is changelingism...
... But on further thought, I wasn't very satisfied with either of those reads. There's a smoking gun.
When he had his wings, he'd be able to fly around wherever he wanted, and wouldn't need special help to get to school, and his family could move on up to a deluxe apartment in the sky.
That's not a random turn of phrase. It's a line from the opening theme of The Jeffersons, a famous mid-70s to 80s American sitcom featuring an African-American cast and a prominent interracial couple. And that's our cue for what's going on here.
They were brownish-blackish-clearish-green, not light blue like his coat.
A second shoutout to African-American skin tones. I think this is about race. Blinky is a half-changeling. That aligns his strange biology, the father leaving, and the focus on the family's poverty. Body horror as an allegory for racial miscegenation is a well played trope - see many of H.P. Lovecraft's works, which played with similar themes. This has the potential to go into unfortunate implications very quickly, so I'll stop the speculation there, and just say to keep this read in mind.
>>horizon
Uh, wow. So borderline personal attacks, casting yourself as Socrates and a "Writeoff heavy hitter" and likening my position to malicious voting that "the community would report." That's not very classy, I'm sad to see it, and you're still wrong. You're drawing a false analogy between comparing different genres of fiction (comedy vs tragedy, fantasy vs realistic drama) and different forms of writing (poetry, prose). I do think that comedy and tragedy can be fairly compared; Bad Horse's position is quite fascinating and I'd love to have seen it and debated it at the time. But no, the ability to fairly compare pieces that differ in some respects does not imply an ability to fairly compare between any sort of difference.
The fact that some gimmicks do get voted down does not change the issues involved. The problem lies in the process, the results are merely an illustration. (Also I think you confused my comments on Start Recursion with comments on poetry.)
I have done, and continue to do, exactly these things. If you read my posts on previous poems, and the discord logs of #fic and #meta (admittedly somewhat tedious since it's been a while now) you will find me attempting to advocate for poetry-specific rounds, or for people to vote for prompts that could feasibly lead to at least informal poetry-encouraged rounds. I was unsuccessful.
Err, ahahaha, what? No, no they certainly wouldn't. They didn't. I am quite certain that this exact thing has absolutely happened in at least one round since I've been here, and nobody cared. I attempted to raise the subject, but was immediately discouraged and shamed both for suggesting that it might have occurred and for suggesting that it might be a problem in need of address. I was told that the community prefers that everyone vote according to their own standards, and no one has grounds to question anyone's ballot for any reason. That's the atmosphere I'm operating under here.
The community consensus at the moment seems to be to not even enforce the few rules that are explicit. So I've given that up as lost. I don't put any stock in the results. They are not currently useful. So I, too, act autonomously. If it would be largely preferred that I do not do so, then I will happily cease and depart... but the comments I have received in private about these subjects have not indicated that this is the case. Rather, I keep hearing people tell me "I agree with you but I don't want to get into a slapfight with Horizon and Dubs." Or with less polite invective and more leaving the site and "Jesus, [name of controversial piece omitted] medaled? What a joke. Ran, don't tell me this is your main writing group." Truthfully, I myself have little energy left on the subject, and barely mustered up through stress to post this; I will likely leave it here
Uh, wow. So borderline personal attacks, casting yourself as Socrates and a "Writeoff heavy hitter" and likening my position to malicious voting that "the community would report." That's not very classy, I'm sad to see it, and you're still wrong. You're drawing a false analogy between comparing different genres of fiction (comedy vs tragedy, fantasy vs realistic drama) and different forms of writing (poetry, prose). I do think that comedy and tragedy can be fairly compared; Bad Horse's position is quite fascinating and I'd love to have seen it and debated it at the time. But no, the ability to fairly compare pieces that differ in some respects does not imply an ability to fairly compare between any sort of difference.
The fact that some gimmicks do get voted down does not change the issues involved. The problem lies in the process, the results are merely an illustration. (Also I think you confused my comments on Start Recursion with comments on poetry.)
SOCRATES: It encourages you to alter community standards in other, more robust venues. Debate. Appeal to Roger. Call a vote for a rules change. Request a trial round with different rules from the usual.
I have done, and continue to do, exactly these things. If you read my posts on previous poems, and the discord logs of #fic and #meta (admittedly somewhat tedious since it's been a while now) you will find me attempting to advocate for poetry-specific rounds, or for people to vote for prompts that could feasibly lead to at least informal poetry-encouraged rounds. I was unsuccessful.
SOCRATES: How, then, do you think the community would react if a rogue author tactically placed high-quality stories at the bottom of their slate, in order to maximize their own chances of winning a medal?.
PLATO: They'd report him.
Err, ahahaha, what? No, no they certainly wouldn't. They didn't. I am quite certain that this exact thing has absolutely happened in at least one round since I've been here, and nobody cared. I attempted to raise the subject, but was immediately discouraged and shamed both for suggesting that it might have occurred and for suggesting that it might be a problem in need of address. I was told that the community prefers that everyone vote according to their own standards, and no one has grounds to question anyone's ballot for any reason. That's the atmosphere I'm operating under here.
The community consensus at the moment seems to be to not even enforce the few rules that are explicit. So I've given that up as lost. I don't put any stock in the results. They are not currently useful. So I, too, act autonomously. If it would be largely preferred that I do not do so, then I will happily cease and depart... but the comments I have received in private about these subjects have not indicated that this is the case. Rather, I keep hearing people tell me "I agree with you but I don't want to get into a slapfight with Horizon and Dubs." Or with less polite invective and more leaving the site and "Jesus, [name of controversial piece omitted] medaled? What a joke. Ran, don't tell me this is your main writing group." Truthfully, I myself have little energy left on the subject, and barely mustered up through stress to post this; I will likely leave it here
>>Cassius
Seconding most of this.
I think using the word "Gorae" at all might not be ideal here. Some people are going to know what it means, others aren't and will suffer momentary confusion until the end of the piece brings it together. Why not just say "nuclear subs" and make it clear to everyone? I spent a few seconds confused and looking to find out if it was some science fiction explanation, maybe Gorae are aliens bombarding the planet with comets! Took away from the atmosphere a little bit.
As Cassius points out, the organization and mix between present action and exposition is clunky at times.
I'm also not completely sold on the premise, truth be told. Japan and South Korea already live in fear that today will be the day the Glorious Leader decides enough is enough and pride demands a Pyrrhic statement be made. It's just something that part of the world has to live with, and they've done so for decades. Is the aftermath of a short war and the fear of (one?) sub at large really so different as to bring Tokyo to this state in three months? Either evacuate the city or don't, yeah? Maybe this is nitpicking, but I do think that the core tensions could be slightly different to align better with the results we see.
The protagonist has no character, and so the piece comes off as very telly. A rework to put everything in Maki's perspective might help.
These are mostly all minor, high level tweaks. Obviously the piece is overall functional and the author's one of the better ones in the community and etc etc. Hella Japanese. Tighten it up and ease up on the maudlin, that's about all I got. Thanks for writing!
Seconding most of this.
I think using the word "Gorae" at all might not be ideal here. Some people are going to know what it means, others aren't and will suffer momentary confusion until the end of the piece brings it together. Why not just say "nuclear subs" and make it clear to everyone? I spent a few seconds confused and looking to find out if it was some science fiction explanation, maybe Gorae are aliens bombarding the planet with comets! Took away from the atmosphere a little bit.
As Cassius points out, the organization and mix between present action and exposition is clunky at times.
I'm also not completely sold on the premise, truth be told. Japan and South Korea already live in fear that today will be the day the Glorious Leader decides enough is enough and pride demands a Pyrrhic statement be made. It's just something that part of the world has to live with, and they've done so for decades. Is the aftermath of a short war and the fear of (one?) sub at large really so different as to bring Tokyo to this state in three months? Either evacuate the city or don't, yeah? Maybe this is nitpicking, but I do think that the core tensions could be slightly different to align better with the results we see.
The protagonist has no character, and so the piece comes off as very telly. A rework to put everything in Maki's perspective might help.
These are mostly all minor, high level tweaks. Obviously the piece is overall functional and the author's one of the better ones in the community and etc etc. Hella Japanese. Tighten it up and ease up on the maudlin, that's about all I got. Thanks for writing!
>>Not_A_Hat
Spot on. I was thinking Douglas Adams immediately, glad to see I'm not the only one. The goldfish realizing the world will end is a glaring point that doesn't make sense to me, glad to see I'm not the only one.
Doesn't quite gel as a story, but it's a nice stylistic tribute/experiment. Feels like this is close to as good as it could be for what it aims for; I think that aim is kind of low, but it would require major reworks to kick up and become a proper story, so eh, it is as it is. Thanks for writing!
Spot on. I was thinking Douglas Adams immediately, glad to see I'm not the only one. The goldfish realizing the world will end is a glaring point that doesn't make sense to me, glad to see I'm not the only one.
Doesn't quite gel as a story, but it's a nice stylistic tribute/experiment. Feels like this is close to as good as it could be for what it aims for; I think that aim is kind of low, but it would require major reworks to kick up and become a proper story, so eh, it is as it is. Thanks for writing!
But the Sharks had Tim.
GAY LOVE STORY INCOMING. Now let's read the rest and see if I'm right.
Nope, wrong. ... probably. Oh well.
As far as I can tell, the sin in the first scene is the grumbling. It's a bit hard to spot.
Like everyone else is saying, I was with this for the first two scenes, but felt like I was waiting for a payoff that never came in the third, and the lack of payoff retroactively makes the piece feel incomplete and directionless. I feel like some essential elements were cut for time or length here, such that I really can't even guess what the idea behind the third scene is. The connection to the prompt, if there was ever going to be one, would probably have come in the ending as well.
Not much else to say. What got done is a very nice read, but it's clearly incomplete. I'll look forward to the author's notes on this one. Thanks for writing!
“Come here at once, I need to talk to you.” his text said.
Nice.
As to the story, >>GroaningGreyAgony covers my thoughts more or less exactly. I've seen this idea, I've seen similar ideas (Machine of Death as >>Xepher says), and since this is just a "present a neat SFF concept, explain it and have a punchline" piece, there's not a lot of wiggle room or new ground to cover.
Honestly, this sort of thing comes up very often in minis (Last Minutes --20$ and Sparking Skies on my slate already, and they probably won't be the last) and while I understand the temptation and difficulty in writing to the format, well... that's the challenge. You have to push beyond just "here's a cool concept," and tell a story using that concept as your starting point to get the bigtime scores and make readers really get invested in the ideas you're putting forth.
This is still looking fine relative to the field this round. Technicals are very sound, there's a lot of little details I love here, like the line I called out and the "wickedness of human nature" bit. Enjoy the praise, learn from the feedback here, and think about ways to push for more! Thanks for writing!
Hmm, well. Vivid descriptions here, but as >>Not_A_Hat says, it's more of a snapshot than a story, and as he and >>AndrewRogue say, the lack of development of the narrator feels like the big missing piece. In its current state, the piece feels very "fanservicey." Like, I can tell that it's being written to me, the reader, to serve me up some fantastic setting porn and sense of wonder, rather than operating on internal logic or trying to "tell a story" or make some sort of point. The fourth wall feels thin, and the opening run-on not-really-a-sentence illustrates what I mean here.
So -- good effort. You can do better, though. Take some of this description and some of these ideas, and twist them around to go a step further: who is the narrator? What do they want? Why is this particular moment in time important, and what happens to bring it to a conclusion? Kick it up to the next level, get some plot and characterization, and make it a story instead of just a vignette or scene. You clearly have a handle on prose and descriptions, so I'm sure you can do it. Thanks for writing!
So -- good effort. You can do better, though. Take some of this description and some of these ideas, and twist them around to go a step further: who is the narrator? What do they want? Why is this particular moment in time important, and what happens to bring it to a conclusion? Kick it up to the next level, get some plot and characterization, and make it a story instead of just a vignette or scene. You clearly have a handle on prose and descriptions, so I'm sure you can do it. Thanks for writing!
>>Dubs_Rewatcher
Well, we've been over this a few times in the past. The short answer is "you apply your standards, and I'll apply mine; my standards represent only my own views with a specific and narrow set of uses." Apologies to the author for this thread derail.
With regards to the rules:
My reading of this implies prose fiction, and excludes poetry, as poetry is not fiction as the term is commonly understood in literary pursuits. The Dewey Decimal System classifications provide a supporting example:
I would not consider script-format drama or essays appropriate entries, either (and said so when the latter came up, not too long ago.)
The BISAC/BISG classification system also separates fiction and poetry at its topmost level of categorization. In every literary magazine or similar publication venue that I've checked the submission guidelines for, poetry uses a completely different set of guidelines and standards than prose pieces, if poetry is accepted at all. (And so do scripts and essays, where appropriate.) In every literary competition I'm familiar with, poetry and prose fiction are treated separately. I googled some just to make sure I'm not crazy here:
Phi Theta Kappa, separates into different formats
William Faulkner Competition, separates by format
Futurescapes, specifies prose only
Dorset Fiction Award, the only one I found on page 1 that doesn't explicitly disallow it, but read the second paragraph with regards to what they look for.
That last link is closest to my interpretations for this competition. I would say that there is clear consensus in the literary world that prose and poetry cannot be judged together in the same category of competition. Personally, all of my writing circles would simply hold it to be self-evident; this site is the only venue I've ever encountered where people consider it debatable.
But the letter of the rules, here, does not seem to be all that important. The rules also say that entries "must be based on the prompt to a reasonable and discernible degree," but when that's come up in the past, a number of people (including yourself, Dubs) have indicated that they completely disregard that rule and see no problem with doing so.
There are no hard or enforceable criteria on votes. "Enforcement at the fringes is done by voters," the rules say. So my vote is no more or less valid than anyone else's in that regard, no? In particular, I find the call to "abstain if you don't like it" unproductive and possibly disingenuous, since that is call to prevent my voice from being heard at all. But I do not have "no opinion." I have an opinion: that submissions that are not prose fiction are not appropriate for Writeoff. I want to actively discourage the submission of such pieces when they are not appropriate, and, recognizing that I have only one voice in that matter, I would still prefer them not to place anywhere over pieces that do follow the rules in the voting results. The abstain function is not an "opt out if you don't like it" button, and I frown on the suggestion it should be used that way.
With regards to fairness: therein lies exactly the reason why I believe and act as I do. I'm not doing this out of pedantry, you know, it's not like I enjoy bottom slating things. It is not fair to judge prose entries alongside poetry, or any other non-prose format! To do so, in my opinion, conveys disrespect to both/all relevant forms and authors. It is not fair to enter poetry in a prose competition. Different forms have extremely different writing processes and requirements.
To use the current round as an example, I think it's widely agreed that minific is a difficult format to practice in, and many if not most authors here struggle with telling a full story that fits into only 400-750 words. A glance at the gallery is telling: 19 out of 37 entries are 740+ words, a 20th is 739. Meanwhile, two entries are 400 words exactly, and three more are under 450, including this piece; all five of these are nonstandard entries that do not tell a "normal" prose story.
So how is it fair to the people struggling to get under 750, cutting sentences and paragraphs, having a hard time of that task but learning from it -- how is it fair to those people that someone submits poetry or a gimmick entry that completely sidesteps the requirements and does something not even in the same ballpark, and then people go "WHOA, MIND BLOWN, HOW CREATIVE"? How can you give feedback to the person whose prose places below this poem, how can you tell them "this is what you did wrong, this is how you can improve, here's how this piece that I ranked above yours did X and Y better"? It's not fair, and it's not fruitful. You can't learn how to write a better minific that way. The same goes in reverse: you can't learn how to write better poetry by comparing a poem to prose minifics. (And for other formats as well; I wasn't around for Start Recursion but going and reading it, I'd put it around an unimpressive midtier, that high only on strength of prose and general writing level.)
And, here may be the rub, learning how to write better is what I come to this site and use it for. I certainly have not praised the Writeoff as a place for experimentation, or used it for such, nor do I want to, nor do I think that's a good idea. I come here for the competition and workshop aspects, to compare pieces and by comparing them learn how to improve. I don't write and critique here to show off, or just for enjoyment (my own or anyone else's!) I'm here to learn what I can learn, and give back by teaching what I can teach as a peer. Please keep that in mind when reading any of my feedback: I am not giving any feedback on simple enjoyment, I am writing from the perspective of competitive and workshop style critique. I wonder if I should make a standard disclaimer at the start of every round, something like that?
Of course, not everyone does this, nor am I saying they should. Most people don't, and that's completely fine! Like I said, you and I have the same vote, and you're free to apply whatever standards you like. You may find it rude to say poetry is inappropriate; I find it somewhat rude when people say poetry and other gimmicks are appropriate, and keep encouraging their submissions. I find it somewhat insulting and definitely detrimental to the contest when people say "anything goes, nothing is inappropriate" and gimmicky or nonstandard entries get voted up and uncritically praised over pieces that did strain to follow the rules. That exact thing is the biggest reason why I can't take any "X placed well" talk remotely seriously; placement in Writeoff is ultimately for entertainment purposes only, as long as these attitudes continue. People could have voted the infamous Froggy to a medal position for the lulz, but that wouldn't make it any better as a piece of writing or say anything about the relative quality of other pieces in its round.
And so we shall continue, with all respect and much <3 to Dubs, the author of this piece, and everyone else in the Writeoff.
P.S. "bottom slate" isn't even strictly correct here, it's looking like there are at least four or five pieces that will eventually be going under this one for me. Original Mini unfortunately seems to attract the most gimmicks of any round by far, perhaps because it has the lowest barrier of entry.
Well, we've been over this a few times in the past. The short answer is "you apply your standards, and I'll apply mine; my standards represent only my own views with a specific and narrow set of uses." Apologies to the author for this thread derail.
With regards to the rules:
This event's genre is Original. Submitted works to this event should fall under the following description:
Fiction not dependent on work under U.S. copyright.
My reading of this implies prose fiction, and excludes poetry, as poetry is not fiction as the term is commonly understood in literary pursuits. The Dewey Decimal System classifications provide a supporting example:
810 American literature in English
811 American poetry in English
812 American drama in English
813 American fiction in English
814 American essays in English
815 American speeches in English
I would not consider script-format drama or essays appropriate entries, either (and said so when the latter came up, not too long ago.)
The BISAC/BISG classification system also separates fiction and poetry at its topmost level of categorization. In every literary magazine or similar publication venue that I've checked the submission guidelines for, poetry uses a completely different set of guidelines and standards than prose pieces, if poetry is accepted at all. (And so do scripts and essays, where appropriate.) In every literary competition I'm familiar with, poetry and prose fiction are treated separately. I googled some just to make sure I'm not crazy here:
Phi Theta Kappa, separates into different formats
William Faulkner Competition, separates by format
Futurescapes, specifies prose only
Dorset Fiction Award, the only one I found on page 1 that doesn't explicitly disallow it, but read the second paragraph with regards to what they look for.
That last link is closest to my interpretations for this competition. I would say that there is clear consensus in the literary world that prose and poetry cannot be judged together in the same category of competition. Personally, all of my writing circles would simply hold it to be self-evident; this site is the only venue I've ever encountered where people consider it debatable.
But the letter of the rules, here, does not seem to be all that important. The rules also say that entries "must be based on the prompt to a reasonable and discernible degree," but when that's come up in the past, a number of people (including yourself, Dubs) have indicated that they completely disregard that rule and see no problem with doing so.
There are no hard or enforceable criteria on votes. "Enforcement at the fringes is done by voters," the rules say. So my vote is no more or less valid than anyone else's in that regard, no? In particular, I find the call to "abstain if you don't like it" unproductive and possibly disingenuous, since that is call to prevent my voice from being heard at all. But I do not have "no opinion." I have an opinion: that submissions that are not prose fiction are not appropriate for Writeoff. I want to actively discourage the submission of such pieces when they are not appropriate, and, recognizing that I have only one voice in that matter, I would still prefer them not to place anywhere over pieces that do follow the rules in the voting results. The abstain function is not an "opt out if you don't like it" button, and I frown on the suggestion it should be used that way.
With regards to fairness: therein lies exactly the reason why I believe and act as I do. I'm not doing this out of pedantry, you know, it's not like I enjoy bottom slating things. It is not fair to judge prose entries alongside poetry, or any other non-prose format! To do so, in my opinion, conveys disrespect to both/all relevant forms and authors. It is not fair to enter poetry in a prose competition. Different forms have extremely different writing processes and requirements.
To use the current round as an example, I think it's widely agreed that minific is a difficult format to practice in, and many if not most authors here struggle with telling a full story that fits into only 400-750 words. A glance at the gallery is telling: 19 out of 37 entries are 740+ words, a 20th is 739. Meanwhile, two entries are 400 words exactly, and three more are under 450, including this piece; all five of these are nonstandard entries that do not tell a "normal" prose story.
So how is it fair to the people struggling to get under 750, cutting sentences and paragraphs, having a hard time of that task but learning from it -- how is it fair to those people that someone submits poetry or a gimmick entry that completely sidesteps the requirements and does something not even in the same ballpark, and then people go "WHOA, MIND BLOWN, HOW CREATIVE"? How can you give feedback to the person whose prose places below this poem, how can you tell them "this is what you did wrong, this is how you can improve, here's how this piece that I ranked above yours did X and Y better"? It's not fair, and it's not fruitful. You can't learn how to write a better minific that way. The same goes in reverse: you can't learn how to write better poetry by comparing a poem to prose minifics. (And for other formats as well; I wasn't around for Start Recursion but going and reading it, I'd put it around an unimpressive midtier, that high only on strength of prose and general writing level.)
And, here may be the rub, learning how to write better is what I come to this site and use it for. I certainly have not praised the Writeoff as a place for experimentation, or used it for such, nor do I want to, nor do I think that's a good idea. I come here for the competition and workshop aspects, to compare pieces and by comparing them learn how to improve. I don't write and critique here to show off, or just for enjoyment (my own or anyone else's!) I'm here to learn what I can learn, and give back by teaching what I can teach as a peer. Please keep that in mind when reading any of my feedback: I am not giving any feedback on simple enjoyment, I am writing from the perspective of competitive and workshop style critique. I wonder if I should make a standard disclaimer at the start of every round, something like that?
Of course, not everyone does this, nor am I saying they should. Most people don't, and that's completely fine! Like I said, you and I have the same vote, and you're free to apply whatever standards you like. You may find it rude to say poetry is inappropriate; I find it somewhat rude when people say poetry and other gimmicks are appropriate, and keep encouraging their submissions. I find it somewhat insulting and definitely detrimental to the contest when people say "anything goes, nothing is inappropriate" and gimmicky or nonstandard entries get voted up and uncritically praised over pieces that did strain to follow the rules. That exact thing is the biggest reason why I can't take any "X placed well" talk remotely seriously; placement in Writeoff is ultimately for entertainment purposes only, as long as these attitudes continue. People could have voted the infamous Froggy to a medal position for the lulz, but that wouldn't make it any better as a piece of writing or say anything about the relative quality of other pieces in its round.
And so we shall continue, with all respect and much <3 to Dubs, the author of this piece, and everyone else in the Writeoff.
P.S. "bottom slate" isn't even strictly correct here, it's looking like there are at least four or five pieces that will eventually be going under this one for me. Original Mini unfortunately seems to attract the most gimmicks of any round by far, perhaps because it has the lowest barrier of entry.
"Sepulchral" is a fantastic word.
As to the story, pretty much what everyone said. It's a cute idea, a little flimsy, but most mini entries are. The main letdown here is the execution. "Dark and cold" might be an okay hook, but repeating it twice, not so much. Dialogue, tone, and general prose all need work.
Getting into too many specifics is beyond the time I'm able to spend on a mini, but look up someone after the round and do a close read, and keep leveling up your prose skills. This piece heavily relies on intangibles of tone, word choice, dialogue shading, and precise manipulation of the reader's emotions to bring them along the line required for the idea to function. Composition is good, the idea fits in the mini format, there's a ton of potential here - it's just a polish-based piece that happens to be a little above the author's current level.
That's a very good thing, though. It's fantastic that you're challenging yourself and on the path to improvement. Much better to aim a little too high than too low. This is... *checks* Yep, this is actually first place on my slate so far, despite its shortcomings, because so many of the fundamentals are in place. Thanks for writing, keep it up!
As to the story, pretty much what everyone said. It's a cute idea, a little flimsy, but most mini entries are. The main letdown here is the execution. "Dark and cold" might be an okay hook, but repeating it twice, not so much. Dialogue, tone, and general prose all need work.
Getting into too many specifics is beyond the time I'm able to spend on a mini, but look up someone after the round and do a close read, and keep leveling up your prose skills. This piece heavily relies on intangibles of tone, word choice, dialogue shading, and precise manipulation of the reader's emotions to bring them along the line required for the idea to function. Composition is good, the idea fits in the mini format, there's a ton of potential here - it's just a polish-based piece that happens to be a little above the author's current level.
That's a very good thing, though. It's fantastic that you're challenging yourself and on the path to improvement. Much better to aim a little too high than too low. This is... *checks* Yep, this is actually first place on my slate so far, despite its shortcomings, because so many of the fundamentals are in place. Thanks for writing, keep it up!
Ssssooooo... what did he do with the minutes, and why? The other comments make me feel like I missed the point of whatever happened here. Is it really just rewinding to avoid the saleswoman? The ol' "don't change your past or you'll lose all the good things!" trope?
If that's all that's going on, I have to fall on the side that finds that trope a little on the trite and overplayed side. All these Time Travel 101 issues have been beaten to death for me, as a lifelong reader of science fiction. It's a very difficult subject. If you want to write a time travel minific, the bar to meaningfully engage with is very high, and you really need more original flavor than this.
That's a bit beside the point, though. The execution here is on the fuzzy side, to where I can't even be sure that the above read is correct, it's just the most obvious conclusion. When I say you need more original flavor, I don't just mean you need some original idea, you need presentation and followthrough. This piece's presentation is all tell and no show. I kept highlighting bits as I read, intending to post something like "The opening is weak, you should skip the boring explanations and start here instead:" but "here" kept on moving as I read more. All the way down to:
Chop off everything above that point and you've lost nothing vital, the story still works! ... Which, unfortunately, says more about how little story-meat there is to begin with, and how the balance of essential elements to fluff is working here.
Then look at everything that got cut, and realize that in all of that, we still don't learn any names, motivations, details about the characters. We could have had a lot of development in that space, learned more about the shopkeeper, who she is, how she is, why she's selling minutes for a paltry $20in the mall (we aren't even in the mall, I had just assumed that before checking, where are we? There's no setting either!) We could learn about the man and the daughter. Is she listening? Does she want some last minutes? Who are they, what's important to them, what do they want? There could be so much more, instead of repeating and overexplaining the premise.
This might all sound very negative and discouraging. Please don't take it that way, though. I'm putting this one as having been written by a non-native speaker, in which case the English is quite serviceable and needs only minor cleanups. (In particular, I don't mind "20$" because it's part of the handwritten sign, giving some character to the shopkeeper.) Even though this is more of an idea seed than a story, and needs a lot of rework to go anywhere, it's still readable and not too bad given the time and length constraints of Writeoff. Learn from this and take it up to the next level next time! Thanks for writing!
If that's all that's going on, I have to fall on the side that finds that trope a little on the trite and overplayed side. All these Time Travel 101 issues have been beaten to death for me, as a lifelong reader of science fiction. It's a very difficult subject. If you want to write a time travel minific, the bar to meaningfully engage with is very high, and you really need more original flavor than this.
That's a bit beside the point, though. The execution here is on the fuzzy side, to where I can't even be sure that the above read is correct, it's just the most obvious conclusion. When I say you need more original flavor, I don't just mean you need some original idea, you need presentation and followthrough. This piece's presentation is all tell and no show. I kept highlighting bits as I read, intending to post something like "The opening is weak, you should skip the boring explanations and start here instead:" but "here" kept on moving as I read more. All the way down to:
“Hon, even you won’t remember.” The woman smiled.
Chop off everything above that point and you've lost nothing vital, the story still works! ... Which, unfortunately, says more about how little story-meat there is to begin with, and how the balance of essential elements to fluff is working here.
Then look at everything that got cut, and realize that in all of that, we still don't learn any names, motivations, details about the characters. We could have had a lot of development in that space, learned more about the shopkeeper, who she is, how she is, why she's selling minutes for a paltry $20
This might all sound very negative and discouraging. Please don't take it that way, though. I'm putting this one as having been written by a non-native speaker, in which case the English is quite serviceable and needs only minor cleanups. (In particular, I don't mind "20$" because it's part of the handwritten sign, giving some character to the shopkeeper.) Even though this is more of an idea seed than a story, and needs a lot of rework to go anywhere, it's still readable and not too bad given the time and length constraints of Writeoff. Learn from this and take it up to the next level next time! Thanks for writing!
Unfortunately, poetry didn't win the prompt vote, so by my standards, this is not an appropriate entry for the competition. It cannot be fairly compared against prose minifics. I applaud the sentiment, and hope we'll have room for some dedicated poetry rounds in the future. But for now, this isn't the right venue.
I do think this is a fairly good effort at a poem, though. While it is free verse, it puts effort into being verse. It's very accessible, we can easily see what the poem is about (yoooooo dawg check this 10/10 I'mmaboutta bang), we can see a lot of devices at work in the presentation, and most importantly we can see the thought behind them.
Maybe a little too easily? The worst I can say about it is that it could use a bit more in the way of metaphor or theme. "Sex is great" is cool, but also very obvious. You can, shall we say, do better. Go deeper. Stronger, faster, harder, more fun, even if it looks messy.
So... thanks for writing! Keep at it, hopefully you have or can find a place to show off your poems and discuss them with others. Still bottom slating on principle, but this is far better developed than the efforts at poetry I've seen in previous Writeoff rounds, without a doubt.
I do think this is a fairly good effort at a poem, though. While it is free verse, it puts effort into being verse. It's very accessible, we can easily see what the poem is about (yoooooo dawg check this 10/10 I'mmaboutta bang), we can see a lot of devices at work in the presentation, and most importantly we can see the thought behind them.
Maybe a little too easily? The worst I can say about it is that it could use a bit more in the way of metaphor or theme. "Sex is great" is cool, but also very obvious. You can, shall we say, do better. Go deeper. Stronger, faster, harder, more fun, even if it looks messy.
So... thanks for writing! Keep at it, hopefully you have or can find a place to show off your poems and discuss them with others. Still bottom slating on principle, but this is far better developed than the efforts at poetry I've seen in previous Writeoff rounds, without a doubt.
Yeah, this is a nice three-part snapshot of a successful writer's life. Benny sticks with it, keeps putting himself out there, even after long hours, even when it costs him some friends who get turned off, and eventually makes it big (while still keeping his door open for everyone!) It's not super dramatic, writing about writing is the path of least resistance, a lot of the development is observed at odd angles from a distance, and the conflict is very understated, but this is pretty all right. Got me cheering for him!
... Oh hang on, the director's whispering in my ear. What? People are saying Benny's not the hero? We're supposed to sympathize with Dean, the self-absorbed, passive-aggressive POV character? Oh... oh. Mm. I, uh, I dunno about that one. Dean's kind of a jerk.
You can see the difference between them right here. Dean tries to forge a connection by breaking Benny down, while Benny's busy telling stories that get people to build each other up with mutual enthusiasm. And, mind you, there's no way Benny doesn't know what Dean thinks of him. I've done those nineteen hour car rides, you can tell when someone's not into it. But Benny lets it go, does his best anyway, and keeps trying to encourage Dean when they meet later in life.
Minifics don't have a lot of room for subtlety, and when you lead with the POV character expressing strong opinions, most of the audience is going to go along with them uncritically, either via natural flow or trying to guess the author's intent. I don't know what the author's intent was here, I can't honestly guess whether we're "meant" to sympathize with Dean or Benny - but I also don't much care what the author intended. The words on the page stand by themselves. What I do care about here is clarity and execution, so unfortunately I have to count the ambiguous potential reads as a major drawback for this piece.
While that is a big deal, the rest of the piece is fairly solid. Good details, good characterizations (but maybe unintentionally so!), good format. Second biggest downside (arguably first, really, but I had to do the whole spiel above to bring focus to the reads) is that the hook is very weak. The piece could stand to trim around 150-200 words, drop some of the repetition and extraneous descriptions. Make things punchier, especially up front, and that will go towards fixing the hook at the same time. I don't understand the title. There's also no clear connection to the prompt... but eh, the prompt this round is so disappointingly weak that I can't bring myself to care; this is at least better than another "touching moment before the apocalypse" or "last thoughts of a dying person."
Overall a decent effort, probably going to wind up mid-high for me. Thanks for writing!
(And if the author or other readers do sympathize with Dean... don't. Be more Benny. You can be quiet and still make yourself heard in the right moments, if you're looking the right way and trying to build people up and increase enthusiasm. That's a different story, though.)
... Oh hang on, the director's whispering in my ear. What? People are saying Benny's not the hero? We're supposed to sympathize with Dean, the self-absorbed, passive-aggressive POV character? Oh... oh. Mm. I, uh, I dunno about that one. Dean's kind of a jerk.
"That's... um..." Her smile fades and she looks to the center of the table. "...kind of rude," she almost whispers.
...
Benny gets to the big finish and everyone at the table glances at everyone else, feeding off each others' reactions.
You can see the difference between them right here. Dean tries to forge a connection by breaking Benny down, while Benny's busy telling stories that get people to build each other up with mutual enthusiasm. And, mind you, there's no way Benny doesn't know what Dean thinks of him. I've done those nineteen hour car rides, you can tell when someone's not into it. But Benny lets it go, does his best anyway, and keeps trying to encourage Dean when they meet later in life.
Minifics don't have a lot of room for subtlety, and when you lead with the POV character expressing strong opinions, most of the audience is going to go along with them uncritically, either via natural flow or trying to guess the author's intent. I don't know what the author's intent was here, I can't honestly guess whether we're "meant" to sympathize with Dean or Benny - but I also don't much care what the author intended. The words on the page stand by themselves. What I do care about here is clarity and execution, so unfortunately I have to count the ambiguous potential reads as a major drawback for this piece.
While that is a big deal, the rest of the piece is fairly solid. Good details, good characterizations (but maybe unintentionally so!), good format. Second biggest downside (arguably first, really, but I had to do the whole spiel above to bring focus to the reads) is that the hook is very weak. The piece could stand to trim around 150-200 words, drop some of the repetition and extraneous descriptions. Make things punchier, especially up front, and that will go towards fixing the hook at the same time. I don't understand the title. There's also no clear connection to the prompt... but eh, the prompt this round is so disappointingly weak that I can't bring myself to care; this is at least better than another "touching moment before the apocalypse" or "last thoughts of a dying person."
Overall a decent effort, probably going to wind up mid-high for me. Thanks for writing!
(And if the author or other readers do sympathize with Dean... don't. Be more Benny. You can be quiet and still make yourself heard in the right moments, if you're looking the right way and trying to build people up and increase enthusiasm. That's a different story, though.)
I covered another like this just a bit ago. Same comments apply here, the piece gets ahead of itself and dives into the deep end while leaving me in the dust. This whole style does not work in minis.
Thank you for writing, though. Don't get discouraged, learn, and come back stronger!
Thank you for writing, though. Don't get discouraged, learn, and come back stronger!
Same as the rest for me. Brief dialogue exercise with nothing much to it. The "no homo" bit sits poorly with me, but mostly because it's the only bit of non-generic substance in the piece.
Thanks for writing, and congratulations for finishing an entry. Hope to see you back and tackling more challenging material in the future!
Thanks for writing, and congratulations for finishing an entry. Hope to see you back and tackling more challenging material in the future!
Unfortunately, the grammatical errors in this piece were frequent enough to interfere with my reading experience. There's not much to be said about that other than keep learning, keep trying, and solicit a prereader or more in-depth assistance after the round. Kinda reads like English is not the author's first language, in which case, serious congratulations for the courage to participate anyway!
As to the story, I felt like I didn't learn enough about the protagonist to understand the meaning behind it. Too many important details are missing. Who is screaming, why is his name being called? What are the pills? Is he calling animal control to take care of the cats, or get rid of them? Who is in the hospital? What does he want one more minute for? And so on.
Overall this didn't land with me, but thank you for writing, and best of luck next time!
As to the story, I felt like I didn't learn enough about the protagonist to understand the meaning behind it. Too many important details are missing. Who is screaming, why is his name being called? What are the pills? Is he calling animal control to take care of the cats, or get rid of them? Who is in the hospital? What does he want one more minute for? And so on.
Overall this didn't land with me, but thank you for writing, and best of luck next time!
>>Kritten
Basically this.
We've seen entries do this sort of lifting before. Same stuff I said back then applies here as well. Here's the game script for reference, you'll want to look down into Anomalous Materials a bit. This is... even more lifted than Inevitability was, though. Even dialogue is copied. Making it a time loop instead of a portal storm is a change, I guess, but not a good look.
Setting that aside, though, time loop twist endings are also overdone. What does this piece have to say other than "lol science caused a time loop"?
Thanks for writing, though, author. I don't know if this will get DQ'd or not, but even if it does, don't feel too bad about it. Just don't do this again. Your prose is competent, so I know you can do it. Write your own dialogue, set your own scene, borrow and use elements, but make them your own instead of copying them, and give your writing meaning. Find an idea in your heart and communicate it. Till next time, then!
Basically this.
We've seen entries do this sort of lifting before. Same stuff I said back then applies here as well. Here's the game script for reference, you'll want to look down into Anomalous Materials a bit. This is... even more lifted than Inevitability was, though. Even dialogue is copied. Making it a time loop instead of a portal storm is a change, I guess, but not a good look.
Setting that aside, though, time loop twist endings are also overdone. What does this piece have to say other than "lol science caused a time loop"?
Thanks for writing, though, author. I don't know if this will get DQ'd or not, but even if it does, don't feel too bad about it. Just don't do this again. Your prose is competent, so I know you can do it. Write your own dialogue, set your own scene, borrow and use elements, but make them your own instead of copying them, and give your writing meaning. Find an idea in your heart and communicate it. Till next time, then!
I didn't understand or hook into this piece at all on a first read, and with 16 entries to get through on my prelim slate, that's the read that counts. Clarity and hook are essential elements, especially in minifics.
While I'm sure there are things going on if you read closely and get into the allegories or whatever's going on here, I think the most helpful feedback I can give to this author is to refuse to do so. None of the fancy stuff matters if 90% of your readers have their eyes glaze over and can't buy into the piece to get to it. Don't dismiss this and say "Ok, I get the intro was weak but that was intentional, what do you think about the way it conveyed the feeling of drowning and the Buddhist blah blah"... No. Don't even think in that direction. Go back to the drawing board, focus on accessibility, put forward a strong hook and introduction, and then start thinking about going deep on metaphors.
Thank you for writing, though. Please do not be discouraged by this feedback. Quite the opposite, we want to see you succeed as an author. Make this a good learning experience and come back stronger for it!
While I'm sure there are things going on if you read closely and get into the allegories or whatever's going on here, I think the most helpful feedback I can give to this author is to refuse to do so. None of the fancy stuff matters if 90% of your readers have their eyes glaze over and can't buy into the piece to get to it. Don't dismiss this and say "Ok, I get the intro was weak but that was intentional, what do you think about the way it conveyed the feeling of drowning and the Buddhist blah blah"... No. Don't even think in that direction. Go back to the drawing board, focus on accessibility, put forward a strong hook and introduction, and then start thinking about going deep on metaphors.
Thank you for writing, though. Please do not be discouraged by this feedback. Quite the opposite, we want to see you succeed as an author. Make this a good learning experience and come back stronger for it!
What everyone else said. Competent writing, but I'd have preferred to see fewer characters and a more focused story instead of a brief "everyone and the kitchen sink" snapshot. The latter doesn't work too well as an actual entry, because there's no room to explain or introduce anything, so people who don't already know the 'verse are left in the lurch.
Still, nice execution. Makes me want to see this author do more full stories. Thanks for writing!
Still, nice execution. Makes me want to see this author do more full stories. Thanks for writing!
Submitted works to this event should fall under the following description:
Fiction not dependent on work under U.S. copyright.
NOT FICTION, NO SALE - okay okay okay I kid.
... Unfortunately, I don't kid by much. This is a very obvious idea, one of the most commonly repeated in Writeoff and similar competitions, and the execution here is bare bones. Relatability is a fine goal, but it has to be balanced with originality and flavor.
Congrats on completing an entry, though. Thanks for writing, and hope to see you back next time, taking on some more challenging material!
Fiction not dependent on work under U.S. copyright.
NOT FICTION, NO SALE - okay okay okay I kid.
... Unfortunately, I don't kid by much. This is a very obvious idea, one of the most commonly repeated in Writeoff and similar competitions, and the execution here is bare bones. Relatability is a fine goal, but it has to be balanced with originality and flavor.
Congrats on completing an entry, though. Thanks for writing, and hope to see you back next time, taking on some more challenging material!
>>Baal Bunny
I'm mostly with these comments (and the others). This piece is very ambitious, which I respect, but it's a rough ride. I'm not sure I can claim to fully understand what's going on, and my attempts to figure out things beyond the text, like "how does this guy even have this job, socially and financially?" haven't gone too well.
There is one interesting angle I can think of, though. It's a long shot, but... is this stealth Calvin and Hobbes fanfiction? We have:
- Tracer Bullet-style noir
- Spaceman Spiff's trademark rocky alien valley
- "Sam," the lady who doesn't quite get the whole transformative fantasy shindig
- General thematics of mental transformation, with an ending similar to the punchline panel of many C&H strips revealing some normal person shouting at Calvin as he reinterprets them
- Very Calvin-style dialogue, citing seemingly random, oddly specific statistics and metaphors
I dunno. Just a thought.
I'll be interested to see what the author has to say about this one. Thanks for writing!
I'm mostly with these comments (and the others). This piece is very ambitious, which I respect, but it's a rough ride. I'm not sure I can claim to fully understand what's going on, and my attempts to figure out things beyond the text, like "how does this guy even have this job, socially and financially?" haven't gone too well.
There is one interesting angle I can think of, though. It's a long shot, but... is this stealth Calvin and Hobbes fanfiction? We have:
- Tracer Bullet-style noir
- Spaceman Spiff's trademark rocky alien valley
- "Sam," the lady who doesn't quite get the whole transformative fantasy shindig
- General thematics of mental transformation, with an ending similar to the punchline panel of many C&H strips revealing some normal person shouting at Calvin as he reinterprets them
- Very Calvin-style dialogue, citing seemingly random, oddly specific statistics and metaphors
I dunno. Just a thought.
I'll be interested to see what the author has to say about this one. Thanks for writing!
Some nice concept work here, as everyone else has been saying! Unfortunately, the execution didn't do well for me. Horizon has some good specific advice you should definitely keep in mind, but for my taste I'm more in agreement with >>Not_A_Hat that the piece would be best off with a large session on the chopping block, rather than trying to make small revisions work.
Drop the diary angle, drop the overload of fantasy names, cut everything before Day 4 or 5 except for the homunculi, work the homunculi uncanny valley stuff in a little later and focus the story more tightly around the relevant action. Instead of giving us ten names of people and places that don't mean anything to us, give a smaller number and then explain them. Who was Heramesa the Brickkicker? In what manner would they advise an adventuring party to proceed?
Conserve your detail. A red herring or two, or flavor bits here and there, those are fine, but for the most part try to keep things relevant and well explained. Make sure all your concepts are linked to one another thematically, and not only will the story be easier to follow and more effective for the readers, I think you'll find it makes the writing process easier, too, as new connections suggest themselves!
Really great learning piece here. You have some great concepts here, and are clearly aiming high. Keep working on your execution and you'll go far. Thanks for writing!
Drop the diary angle, drop the overload of fantasy names, cut everything before Day 4 or 5 except for the homunculi, work the homunculi uncanny valley stuff in a little later and focus the story more tightly around the relevant action. Instead of giving us ten names of people and places that don't mean anything to us, give a smaller number and then explain them. Who was Heramesa the Brickkicker? In what manner would they advise an adventuring party to proceed?
Conserve your detail. A red herring or two, or flavor bits here and there, those are fine, but for the most part try to keep things relevant and well explained. Make sure all your concepts are linked to one another thematically, and not only will the story be easier to follow and more effective for the readers, I think you'll find it makes the writing process easier, too, as new connections suggest themselves!
Really great learning piece here. You have some great concepts here, and are clearly aiming high. Keep working on your execution and you'll go far. Thanks for writing!
That callout, though.
Much like Outer Rondax, this is a stock fantasy Call to Adventure formula that sets up a pair dynamic and a couple of fluffy twists. Less fluffy here though, more on the razor's edge of something that could go to some very dark places if things were just a little bit different.
>>devas sums it up well. Good ending line, but it does have the feel of a beginning rather than a complete piece. Even though the line is a strong closer, the story doesn't feel closed, if you get what I mean? And the comment on the idea being unsustainable is spot on. I was expecting the reveal itself to be the end of the story, because, well, you can't really do much with the concept after the reveal without going full mind control/consent issue thornbush. That one line there, left ambiguous, is about as much as you can possibly milk the "giving orders to Zorion" thing without either dropping the conceit, turning Kepa into a villain, or invoking Suspension of Fetish Disbelief.
Very, very web serial or light novel ish. See Tales of MU's Two for a very similar character; I would be entirely unsurprised if that was an explicit inspiration here.
That callout, though. Daaaaaaaaaaaamn, son. Uh, no comment on my actual guess for author, but it does indirectly put the piece to a bit of the same "safe fantasy wheelhouse" I talked about with Outer Rondax, other than the PG-fication of the mind control. Still, strength of prose and execution of concepts that could've very easily swerved into nighmarish territory put this at a respectable showing for me. Thanks for writing!
Much like Outer Rondax, this is a stock fantasy Call to Adventure formula that sets up a pair dynamic and a couple of fluffy twists. Less fluffy here though, more on the razor's edge of something that could go to some very dark places if things were just a little bit different.
>>devas sums it up well. Good ending line, but it does have the feel of a beginning rather than a complete piece. Even though the line is a strong closer, the story doesn't feel closed, if you get what I mean? And the comment on the idea being unsustainable is spot on. I was expecting the reveal itself to be the end of the story, because, well, you can't really do much with the concept after the reveal without going full mind control/consent issue thornbush. That one line there, left ambiguous, is about as much as you can possibly milk the "giving orders to Zorion" thing without either dropping the conceit, turning Kepa into a villain, or invoking Suspension of Fetish Disbelief.
Very, very web serial or light novel ish. See Tales of MU's Two for a very similar character; I would be entirely unsurprised if that was an explicit inspiration here.
That callout, though. Daaaaaaaaaaaamn, son. Uh, no comment on my actual guess for author, but it does indirectly put the piece to a bit of the same "safe fantasy wheelhouse" I talked about with Outer Rondax, other than the PG-fication of the mind control. Still, strength of prose and execution of concepts that could've very easily swerved into nighmarish territory put this at a respectable showing for me. Thanks for writing!
Paging WIP