>>georg

"Rx Only" on the box -- prescription only. Full of medical warnings. Etc.

Oh hey, wooden spoon. Considering that I've barely written anything in a year and a half and I was falling asleep while writing I can't really be too upset. Also most of the stories this time round were really good.

Overall I liked the concept of my story but I felt like I didn't have much to back it up with. I though the ending was sort of weak, everything past the first two paragraphs weren't particularly well written, the universe wasn't fully set up.

This was me getting back into things, I'll be sure to blow everyone away in a couple weeks.

>>GaPJaxie
Hah. That was something I considered commenting on: the box descriptions were -really- weird given it was an object, not actual medicine, but kinda wrote it off as just weird sci-fi. Definitely needs a bit more clarification if that's the route you're going.

>>Not_Worthy2
>>GaPJaxie
>>Not_A_Hat
>>Cold in Gardez
>>horizon
>>georg
>>libertydude
>>Monokeras

Eh. Don't have a lot to say here, since you all nailed it more less.

Started with the ending lines, more or less, and just never quite managed to build my way up to them. Overcompensated on trying to keep it milder so I could have a build to a breaking point, as well as have what I would consider a "sane" protagonist for a horror story (someone who got out fast instead of waiting for the doom), which amounts to a really unearned ending.

It is probably easy-ish to fix with an editorial pass, but, honestly, I'm not really sure it's worth it in this case.

>>GaPJaxie In the context of your story, an Rx (prescription only) warning was provided for what we the reader sees as a physical device "For the treatment of antisocial disorders, isolation syndrome, or mild to moderate cases of PTSD" which sounds an awful lot like providing a child with a rather complex (prescription strength) teddy bear in a medical emergency ward, meaning that this physical thing provides emotional comfort to someone who is mentally imbalanced. That's actually very plausible in the context of the story.

I liked this story (I voted it 3rd on my list, behind the top two winners), and if Alice was actually overdosing on an actual medicine, and the entire story was the result of a stroke-induced hallucination followed by death, then I just have to applaud you. But I have to agree with Georg: there weren't enough clues to indicate your intention in that direction, and very definitely not to indicate an aneurism or stroke.

I finally get a story in the finals, and it turns out to be one of the most controversial. Ain’t that something.

So I guess for this post-mortem, I have to state where this story came from. I wrote it just two days after I’d had lunch with my own father in an Italian restaurant. At some point, the topic of my autistic brother came up during that meal; specifically, about how my parents were changing the will so that he would have a trust after they passed. It didn’t happen anything like it does in this story (except for the Virginia Tech/Pitt game; that actually was happening at the time), but the conversation and imagery of the restaurant was still fresh in my head by the time this round came up, so I used the idea to convert it into the story you see now.

Now, the biggest criticisms I see here are for the story either a) not feeling too realistic in certain details, b) the lack of explanation for Jack’s condition, and c) Steve being a huge jerk. For the first criticism…I actually totally agree. I’m one of those people that don’t really notice small inconsistencies when I write, even after rewriting and scanning said stories. It is part of the reason I really like having editors go over my things before publishing them, and I feel like this story is a prime example of why I should stick to that. The issues this lot brought up all seem perfectly legitimate, and I’m glad that you picked up on them. I think this story’s adherence to realism is its greatest strength, and I want to do whatever I can to fix those things that ruin that aspect.

Now, as for why Jack’s condition is left ambiguous, there’s a bit of explanation behind that. Originally, I was just going to have either Steve or Dad flat out say that he has a form of autism that’s making his behavior deteriorate. However, given the broadness of autism as a condition and the fact I couldn’t really think of a specific form of autism to explain this, I was worried that saying ‘he’s aggressive because he’s autistic’ would rub people the wrong way and make it seem like this was some sort of hit piece against the autistic. I got rid of that idea, but I wanted it to be clear that Jack had some kind of condition, just so that Steve’s reminisces wouldn’t cast Jack as a complete sociopath. I eventually decided on Dad dropping the “mental condition” line as a sort of compromise, though now I wish I’d written it being said in Steve’s mind just so it doesn’t feel too much like an “as you know” dialogue.

The final criticism is one that seems tied into the second one. I wrote the story with the idea that Steve, while undoubtedly flawed and holding a grudge, was ultimately trying to do the right thing (even if it wasn’t for his brother’s sake). Though he’s rather selfish for being so dismissive of his afflicted brother, he also has some basis for his disdain through his brother’s bullying actions in the past. He’s not a clear cut character, and it was this grey morality I was trying to get across. I now get the feeling that had the mental condition been a bit more specific, perhaps more of you would’ve felt more sympathetic to Steve. Once I figure out how to do that, I’m confident that I’ll get this story closer to portraying that greyness better.

In the end, though, I’m glad I wrote this story. Not because it made me feel good (it sure as hell wasn’t that much fun to write), but simply because it made me work outside my comfort zone and deal with a subject matter that’s rather touchy for many people. In that way, maybe this story was doomed to have a “most controversial” badge. Hell, given the fact that a fair number of you abstained or said that this story hit close to home, I guess I at least succeeded in getting some kind of emotion out of you. I’ll probably revisit it at some point in the future and iron it out, and I’m glad you all could tell me what did (and didn’t) work about it.

Now, for user specific comments:

>>GaPJaxie
I’m pleased that the story worked for you. I’m also glad you enjoyed the simple dialogue. I’ve been reading a lot of Hemingway recently, and I really enjoy how his simplistic dialogue says a lot through just a few words. I’ve got a long way to go with that tactic, but I’m glad that my novice attempts were pleasing for you.

>>Not_A_Hat
The visceral quality is what really attracted me to doing this story in the first place. A surprising amount of emotions can appear within you when a new familial development appears, and I hoped to capture those (not always positive) feelings here. I also agree that the start is the weakest part of the story. That was the one section from my initial draft that wasn’t really revised, and it really seems to show. Glad the rest of it worked for you, though.

>>Cold in Gardez
I was trying to put the tension in the whole interaction, not at really any one place. The closest thing to a climax is Steve’s final ruminations before he agrees to be the executor of the trust. I actually originally wanted to end it right there, but wasn’t really satisfied with the sudden ending and thought just a little more had to be said. The pizza ending is just to show how he’s trying desperately to not think about the interaction anymore, primarily from just thinking about the pizza now instead of his brother.

Also, I think it’s very clear why Steve hates his brother. Look at that middle part about Jack punching Steve’s dog and other instances of him being a bully. Whether that’s the whole picture of the events or not, I think that gives Steve enough of a reason to not care for Jack. It’s perhaps a tad simplistic, but it’s there.

>>Orbiting_kettle
I’m glad you found it satisfying. Family obligations do often weigh on us, especially when it comes to physical and mental ailments. If there’s one thing I’m glad about this story, it’s that it showed that it’s just as hard for the people around the ailed as it is for the ailed themselves.

>>horizon
As I said to Not_A_Hat, yeah, that whole first section were the leftovers from my initial draft, so the problems do stick out. Glad you pointed them out. Also, thanks for the “diversion” compliment. I’ve used that trick a few times in other situations, and there were some people that thought it was an odd or just pointless maneuver. Happy it worked for you.

>>Astrarian
>>Haze
The section on the second criticism goes into why I didn’t specify the disorder. I hope that helps, and sorry that I wasn’t able to make it clearer.

>>Crafty
I really don’t get this criticism. I think the story had a very clear purpose: demonstrating a conflicted man dealing with whether to live up to his brotherly duties or not. Also, I don’t think he “retreats” from the issue. He does make a final decision of taking care of him, even if he doesn’t want to. There’s a beginning, middle, and end, and the character undergoes a (albeit) tiny change in character. I think it definitely qualifies as “a story”. If you want to argue that the execution was poor or the story isn’t memorable/relatable, that I can understand. Hell, your argument about the “poor realism” is actually astute in pointing out that you have to build upon the realism. But even that is worded vaguely enough I really don’t know how the story is a demonstration of “poor realism”, so I can’t really figure out how to adjust the story (I thought I had built enough upon the realism). A greater clarity in your critique would likely help me to figure out what’s wrong with this story.

>>libertydude
You’re me, so I can just ignore you.

>>Monokeras
You’re probably right about the mozzarella (I have no taste or scent for cheese), but I can guarantee you that flour does have a specific scent. Not the most obvious, but it is there. I’m also glad you mentioned the fact that it’s not a “fancy” concept. I was hoping for this to be one of the more down-to-earth stories of this contest, and it looks like I mostly succeeded. I’m pleased you thought it was decent.

>>AndrewRogue
I’m unsure here; are you saying it’s a problem because Jack punched the dog or that Steve punched the dog? The wording here is weird, so I’m not entirely sure what you’re trying to say. It was Jack that punched the dog, though. However, I’m glad you thought it was adequate.

>>libertydude
Jack punching the dog seems to indicate, to me at least, that Jack has a serious mental issue (something clinical, as opposed to just being a bastard). As such, Steve comes off in something of a negative light to me. While I can empathize with his viewpoint, it is still reflects negatively on him.

Basically, his brother seems less incompetent/assholish/bastardy and more suffering from some sort of actual mental issue, so while Jack's frustration can be understood, I don't necessarily sympathize with him.

Thanks to everyone for your comments. Barring a few 50-word vignettes on a blog somewhere, this is pretty much the first proper story I've published anywhere in a long time, and frankly, it was pretty exhilarating to see people reviewing something I've made (and even actually discussing it in a podcast!).

It's been written in a rush. I came up with the basic idea of "a guide shepherding someone through dangerous terrain" in bed, fleshed out the concept the next morning, and hastily wrote the entire story in like 45 minutes, to give it one more re-read a hour later, shortly before the end of the contest. Aaaand, literally a minute or so before the end, I suddenly noticed a glaring plot hole (why would the Guide need to take his charge on the deadly trip every time? Can't he just sacrifice himself alone, or even send out remote-controlled drones?), and I ended up racing against time to cram a coherent explanation into the almost-depleted word limit. Hence this random bracketed sentence:

(His visions had to include her presence; the Trap pattern changed depending on who accompanied you.)

Regarding the matter of the point-of-view, I wasn't having any specific POV in mind when writing the flashes of Rachel's deaths (apart from a generic omniscient narrator.) I haven't considered that readers would feel a glaring disconnect between the bulk of the story where we accompany Rachel, and the parts which show things she obviously couldn't have seen (i.e. her own dead bodies) without explanation. This is interesting to know, and I should keep this in mind for later stories.

>>libertydude

Besides, if the Guides had control of that kind of power, you’d think they’d have better things to do than guide people around trap-infested architecture.

I actually had a vague sort of explanation for this--I intended to explain how the Guides were people transformed by a certain room inside the City, and this transformation gave them precog powers but also made it impossible for them to leave the City without dying, plus maybe afflicting them with a few other demerits--all to explain why the Guides work in this job. Then I found out just how short a 750 word limit actually was, and the explanation had to go.

>>Monokeras

This feels much like Bradbury’s short story The City, on top of which you added a complex scientific-philosophical quantum mechanical-like take about time and forks in time.

I've never read "The City". But instead the setting concept is ripped wholesale from Silverberg's "Man in the Maze" (good catch, >>georg). I moved the City underground as a quick explanation as to why can't people just travel above its streets in a helicopter or something (I don't remember how this was explained in Silverberg's novel).

I was going to type up a retrospective for my stories, but as I was sitting here I realized I didn't have much to say about them. Not many issues were raised during the voting, and nothing about them seems to require explanation.

I'll only add that, after two years of participating in the WriteOff, I finally got third place in a round, and I still haven't earned a bronze medal.

>>AndrewRogue
Ah, alright. That was sort of the point of the story: Steve may have legitimate gripe with his brother, but it's clear that something is not quite right with Jack. You were supposed to sympathize with Steve to a point, but Jack was obviously not entirely well. I actually wanted to make sure that somebody mentioned he had some kind of condition just to get rid of that idea that Jack was just a plain old sociopath. In that way, I can understand why you don't care much for Steve.

>>Not_A_Hat
>>libertydude
>>Monokeras
>>Orbiting_kettle
>>AndrewRogue

My apologies for the very belated reply.

I was in a Vancian mood, and I had also in mind Joanna Russ’s SF story, Useful Phrases for the Tourist (such as “That is my companion. It is not intended as a tip.”) I tried to combine the two, but it seems that Vancian neologisms need firmer bedding than such a small chaotic work as mine can provide. If I continue with this piece, I shall work to enhance the story elements, or at least build interconnections between the entries so that the reader is not left entirely at sea.

Thank you all for your helpful comments!