|
TheRamblingSoul posted:
Goonreads is primarily a platform for self-publishing goons to promote their work. Goodreads is where you'll find reviews and recommendations for most books out there. One place to start looking is goodreads lists. You can browse lists by genre or look up your favorites and see what lists other people have put them on. I use goodreads pretty extensively to find new books to read. From what you said about last reading Grapes of Wrath a year ago, and only knowing a few big authors, it sounds like you don't read much for fun. Why is that? In my personal experience, my reading has suffered when 1) I don't prioritize it (this is a more accurate way of saying "I'm too busy,") 2) I don't let myself read what I really want to, and instead try to read all the really deep, important books I think I should read. Both of these require some mental adjustments to get over, but aren't to difficult to deal with. And for the record, I'm not saying reading the classics is a waste of time, it's not. They are classics for a reason, and most are worth sinking your teeth into, no matter what you want to write. On the other hand, if what you really love reading is horror, and you want to write horror, read a lot of horror! If you really love reading horror, but want to write something else...why? Another reason could be that you're just not that into reading (give yourself the chance to read a bunch of stuff you think you'll find really enjoyable before reaching this conclusion though.) if you don't like reading, I recommend doing some introspection about why you want to write. Writing is a love affair with reading taken to the next level. It's when you stop becoming a recipient of words, and get down on your knees and beg the reader to engage with words you're giving them.
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 18:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 00:36 |
|
|
Dr. Kloctopussy posted:From what you said about last reading Grapes of Wrath a year ago, and only knowing a few big authors, it sounds like you don't read much for fun. Why is that? That's very observant and astute of you! I think the main reason why is that I grew up enjoying video games over reading fiction as more "actively engaged" leisure. Plus, one of my earliest memories is getting a Sega Genesis with Sonic 1 from my pseudo-god father, so I grew up with video games and found them a lot more fun to enjoy. I hardly watched many movies or TV shows for the same reason (I still don't, another aspect I want to change now). I tried to get more into fiction later in high school when I discovered how much I enjoyed creative writing with elective creative writing classes (I've enjoyed writing stories since at least elementary school, I wrote a lot of video game-inspired fanfiction when I was a kid), but I found reading much more of a chore (both with assigned readings with AP English Lit classes like Heart of Darkness - it was a slog then but I'd probably appreciate the historical context more now - and "classics" I picked out myself like Paradise Lost I thought I needed to read to be a good fiction writer). So, "reading fiction" and "fun/enjoyable/leisure" never really crossed with each other in my experience. I was probably just trying to read what I thought good writers needed to read instead of just exploring more of what I wanted to read for my own enjoyment. ...Of course, it's only been in the last year or so I've really figured out my own identity and what I actually want on my own terms versus what I'm "supposed" to do, but that's another can of E/N worms not worth opening (and a can also resolved and behind me, in any case). [e]: Is it weird that I really, really love writing stories but don't enjoy reading fiction nearly as much (so far, in any case)? By that, I mean reading fiction in general. I absolutely loved Grapes of Wrath with its story, word-choice (the section where Steinbeck describes the farmer having an organic - no pun intended - relationship with the land and soil as opposed to the unfeeling mechanical man in his tractor is absolutely beautiful writing) and socioeconomic bent, but I tend to be a slow reader when I'm trying to read something I want to enjoy and absorb, which can be frustrating. Teriyaki Koinku fucked around with this message at 18:58 on Nov 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 18:40
|
|
|
Here is some stuff I recommend two things that are generally considered good but not weighed down with literary depth (and these are all GENRE, which are usually looked down on to an extent): Orson Scott Card - Ender's Game (HIGHLY CONTROVERSIAL because the author is a piece of poo poo. Honestly though the book is a very fun read. This is relatively short too, and it's "young adult" so it's a fast read. Joe Abercrombie - Look him up and find his trilogy or go to the SA thread I loving hate this author and all of his work, but 95% of people seem to love this dude. His books read like a videogame to me, which is one reason I hated them, but I think it will be a good transition for you. His books are very battle heavy, and the characterization is over the top, but it appeals to a lot of people. John Scalzi - Old Man's War. This guy wins a lot of awards, and people are mad about that, but Old Man's War has a lot of action while still making some decent statements about war and how pointless it is. Short story and Novellas are a good alternative to longer novels. You can read them for fun without feeling bogged down by hundreds of pages. Anything by Ted Chiang, but particularly Stories of your Life and Others and the novella The Lifecycle of Software Objects Chiang is a lot more "literary," but I find all of his short stories absolutely amazing. In over ten years, his whole body of work is so small that you can read it all in a day. He only writes when he has an amazing idea that he finds worthy of writing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 18:55
|
|
|
systran posted:Anything by Ted Chiang, but particularly Stories of your Life and Others and the novella The Lifecycle of Software Objects Chiang is a lot more "literary," but I find all of his short stories absolutely amazing. In over ten years, his whole body of work is so small that you can read it all in a day. He only writes when he has an amazing idea that he finds worthy of writing. I really respect and admire people like this guy (apparently) and other creatives like Akira Kurosawa who are incredibly demanding with their work and wanting to put out only top-quality material, no matter the cost. That's the kind of writer (fiction, film screenwriting, or otherwise) I want to be! I want to stand by work I can be proud of, the kind people would still be reading and talking about after I am dead and gone. That's huge for me. (I don't care about fame per se, but I do care about writing fiction good enough that would turn heads and warrant attention. So, I'm willing to work really hard for that.) I think I'll take you up on your offer and try reading more novellas and shorter fiction that still have great writing and stories. [e]: Also, how can fiction be "Not Genre"? Doesn't every piece of writing fall under a Genre somehow? Teriyaki Koinku fucked around with this message at 20:26 on Nov 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 19:29
|
|
|
TheRamblingSoul posted:I really respect and admire people like this guy (apparently) and other creatives like Akira Kurosawa who are incredibly demanding with their work and wanting to put out only top-quality material, no matter the cost. Genre means crime, romance, scifi, fantasy, etc. While literary fiction is arguably a genre, that's not what people mean when they say 'genre fiction'. E: also, I strongly recommend doing a few more rounds of thunderdome. The worst that can happen there has already happened, and it actually works to get people writing better; if you manage to win a round someone will probably buy you a new av. Pm me if you want me to give your story a once-over before you post it. Plus, read some books as suggested above; Michael Swanwick, Bruce Sterling and William Gibson are all solid stylists who write sci fi. Double plus, Systran is a big whiny baby who is ultra-wrong about Joe Abercrombie, The Heroes was the best fantasy I'd read in years. sebmojo fucked around with this message at 23:24 on Nov 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 23:14
|
|
|
No one mentioned Scott Lynch and his Gentlemen Bastard series. What's the matter with all of you. It's medievil Ocean's 11.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2013 23:39
|
|
|
I have a short story that I'm working on. My first chapter is nearly at the point of me not being able to find any flaws or things I don't like, so it's almost ready to post in here. I haven't posted any critiques though, so it wouldn't be fair for me to ask for feedback without giving some first, but there are no recent posts for me to even critique (other than the one by TheRamblingSoul, but I would just be repeating what has already been said). Should I wait for new posts? Or it would be acceptable for me to request feedback, and reciprocate in the future? Just tryin' to follow the rules. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 01:33
|
|
|
Optimus Prime Ribs posted:I have a short story that I'm working on. My first chapter is nearly at the point of me not being able to find any flaws or things I don't like, so it's almost ready to post in here. I haven't posted any critiques though, so it wouldn't be fair for me to ask for feedback without giving some first, but there are no recent posts for me to even critique (other than the one by TheRamblingSoul, but I would just be repeating what has already been said). It's fine.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 01:34
|
|
|
Jeza posted:It's fine. Cool beans.  I also managed to fix up my last few gripes sooner than I thought I would.Also I feel like I should explain why I'm starting out with a day of the week and time (it's not going to be clear from just this chapter). I did that because the story is going to take place over the course of a single night, and be resolved the following morning. It will really only be necessary for the final chapter to make it clear that it's the next day, but I'm doing it for all chapters for the sake of consistency. ----- Garbage Disposal (Chapter 1; 224 words) Tuesday - 10:54 P.M. I pressed the handgun’s barrel into the bastard’s forehead. He whimpered. A gale whipped his long, unwashed hair and blew dirt and filth into his face. The flickering light above our heads buzzed and hummed, and intermittently illuminated my friend’s cowering murderer. It was fitting that his duty was to take out the local pub’s garbage. A poo poo job for a poo poo person. He had had no idea I would be waiting behind the bin. That I would jump out, strike him over the head, and tie his body to a lamppost. It took him several minutes to regain consciousness. Memories of what the motherfucker did percolated through my mind. I clenched my left fist, causing my knuckles to turn white; my right hand, holding the firearm, twitched. “P-please.” His lips trembled. “I’m—” I pressed the gun harder into his forehead. “Look… I’m sorry! I’m sor—” I smashed the gun into his mouth. After what he did he expected mercy? He spat blood and two teeth onto the ground. His neck went limp. I squatted down, gripped him by his throat, and pulled his head up so I could look into his eyes. A torrent of tears flowed down his face. He didn’t deserve to cry. My friend suffered for years because of him. He didn’t deserve to live.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 02:50
|
|
|
Optimus Prime Ribs posted:
Your first paragraph is horribly purple and overwritten. Your last 3/4ths don't suffer from this as much. But at the end of the day, this story is one that's been done a million times, and offers nothing new at all. It's stock revenge scene. You also wrote it more like movie than a fiction piece. I have no idea about anything that makes this relevant or interesting. Your dialogue reveals nothing and seems more like a place holder than anything. That said, technically (besides my list below) it's not awful. You do some things well, and others not so well. You need to post more so I can see where it starts getting original (if it does) and tell you THAT's where to start your story. If you want to do this scene then you need to make it yours. Some punchy dialogue or twist on the whole trope of a dude in an alleyway with a gun in his mouth. Needless Adjectives: long flickering cowering Needless Adverbs: intermittently Needless Thesaurus Words: gale percolated torrent Needless Repititions: filth hummed had
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 03:38
|
|
|
Optimus Prime Ribs posted:
I don't have time to do a full crit, but lemme just put on my linguist hat for a hot second. This use of 'the bastard' reads weird*, because it's commonly used as a person deictic, even though it's a definite noun phrase. You're trying to use it as a definite NP to introduce a character, but it doesn't really behave like other definite NPs (for evidence, compare): My boss ate all of the cookies, but the bastard didn't know I'd baked them with Ex-Lax. My boss ate all of the cookies, but ?the man I work for didn't know I'd baked them with Ex-Lax. Both sentences contain a definite noun phrase (in bold), but the first one is fine and the second one is totally bizarro. That's because in the first one, we basically read 'the bastard' as a stand-in for 'he'. This is just a weird fact about the word 'bastard' and certain other expletives in English. The end effect is that I'm reading your opening sentence and going wait, what bastard?. Seriously consider introducing him in some other way and/or cutting down on your use of epithets like that, because if there's any part of a story that shouldn't be linguistically jarring it's the very first sentence. *so does your use of 'the motherfucker', but less so, because you've introduced the guy by that point. God Over Djinn fucked around with this message at 03:59 on Dec 1, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 03:56
|
|
|
First let me just thank you guys for the feedback. I really appreciate it. Those problems seem pretty obvious now, especially the telling (I'm bad for accidentally telling and then missing it in my multiple readings). Definitely have a bunch of things to fix. I agree that I did end up making the opening scene cliché (oops). Fortunately the narrator's revenge is basically a formality, since the story is going to be about him dealing with the repercussions of killing the guy. I can cut out that entire scene if I need to, which seems to be the best course of action. I'll try to work it into a way that doesn't suck first. crabrock posted:Needless Repititions: Is there ever a reason to write "had had" like I did? I remember reading on here (I can't remember who said it) that writing in past tense can be clumsy because sometimes you need to write "had had", and that's the only reason I did it. God Over Djinn posted:Both sentences contain a definite noun phrase (in bold), but the first one is fine and the second one is totally bizarro. That's because in the first one, we basically read 'the bastard' as a stand-in for 'he'. This is just a weird fact about the word 'bastard' and certain other expletives in English. I actually didn't know that, so the sentence read fine to me. Won't be making that mistake again.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 04:47
|
|
|
Optimus Prime Ribs posted:I actually didn't know that, so the sentence read fine to me. Won't be making that mistake again. That's really interesting, it's jarring to me but I'm also notoriously hypersensitive to that kind of thing. I wonder which of us more English speakers would agree with...
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 04:50
|
|
|
Optimus Prime Ribs posted:Is there ever a reason to write "had had" like I did? I remember reading on here (I can't remember who said it) that writing in past tense can be clumsy because sometimes you need to write "had had", and that's the only reason I did it. yes. It's correct, but it's clunky and weird. rephrase it to avoid that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 04:59
|
|
|
God Over Djinn posted:That's really interesting, it's jarring to me but I'm also notoriously hypersensitive to that kind of thing. I wonder which of us more English speakers would agree with... That was fascinating: i agree but wouldn't have had the right words to describe why.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 07:38
|
|
|
Most acceptable contraction of "He had had" would just be "He'd had". Very little reason not to use the latter. Also going to put it out there that there is nothing wrong with the opening sentence. To find it jarring - that's either your quirk as a reader, or a symptom of critiquing the story piece by piece rather than as a whole. A lot of things open in media res and open with a reference to something which as reader we aren't aware of, in the knowledge that the gap will be filled soon afterwards. God Over Djinn, you say your reaction is wait, what bastard? - well, that is the intended reaction. Also, I'm no linguist, but I just spent like an hour reading up on this. Feel free to tell me if this makes sense: in the opening sentence, "the bastard" is acting as an 'R-expression' while later on in the story "the motherfucker" is pronomial. So in this story, "the bastard" could be replaced with something like "Mark", while "the motherfucker" is just "he". So, like, "the bastard" contains a noun that is known to the narrator but not yet to the reader. side note: linguistics is hard
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 09:04
|
|
|
Optimus Prime Ribs posted:I agree that I did end up making the opening scene cliché (oops). Fortunately the narrator's revenge is basically a formality, since the story is going to be about him dealing with the repercussions of killing the guy. I can cut out that entire scene if I need to, which seems to be the best course of action. I'll try to work it into a way that doesn't suck first. For what sounds to be the pivotal scene your entire story rests on, the way you've approached it is surprisingly devoid of drama. It's too straightforward and over too quick; all we get is "the protagonist wants to kill this guy, then the protagonist kills this guy." Where's the conflict? I mean, yeah, we have the obvious conflicts of "guy who wants to kill vs. guy who doesn't want to die" or maybe "man's desire for revenge vs. man's basic morality" but the protagonist doesn't really struggle with either of those things. Cutting the scene entirely and not actually showing the moment could be an effective way to tell the story, but right now I think the reason people are bored with the scene is that the protagonist basically just gets what he wants without any meaningful obstacles (either internal or external) getting in his way. No obstacles means no drama, and no drama means we're bored. Maybe that's part of the point, that his revenge comes very easily and it's only afterwards that he has to deal with the consequences, but right now that's not coming across and there's no real reason for us to care. Opposing Farce fucked around with this message at 12:12 on Dec 1, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 10:30
|
|
|
Jeza posted:Also, I'm no linguist, but I just spent like an hour reading up on this.  Jeza posted:Also going to put it out there that there is nothing wrong with the opening sentence. To find it jarring - that's either your quirk as a reader, or a symptom of critiquing the story piece by piece rather than as a whole. Note: the rest of this post is about linguistics & its relationship with literature in general, not OPR's story. (I put this disclaimer in here because otherwise it looks like I'm careposting about literally two words in somebody else's post and even I don't do that, goddamn.) Okay, so what you're saying (that this is some reader-specific quirk) doesn't surprise me, but quote:A lot of things open in media res and open with a reference to something which as reader we aren't aware of, in the knowledge that the gap will be filled soon afterwards. that's not why. My point is actually about the specific referring expression, not the unheralded* reference in general. 'The first sentence of a piece of literature' is, like you say, one of the few places** where unheralded definites are totally normal. For some reason in literature we're willing to give the writer a blank check on felicitous*** references. Which is really, really convenient. Now on to the bastard. Usually when you use a definite noun phrase, the intention is to give enough information for the hearer to uniquely identify some thing. You can get unique identifiability from a lot of different sources: necessary uniqueness (The moon looks so huge tonight!), situational uniqueness (The man with the funny hat is drinking a martini, said when there's only one man wearing a hat in the room), etc. In contrast, the bastard is pretty much always anaphorically coreferring, i.e. it doesn't uniquely identify anything without some information earlier in the discourse to provide context. In this sense it's a lot like a pronoun. That's why there's a felicity difference between the two sentences in my previous post. In the second one, the writer is pretending like the reader needs to go identify the referent all over again. It gives you this impression that there's actually some other, previously unmentioned man. Because otherwise, why would the writer bother trying to get you to identify him? Why wouldn't she just say 'he'? It's the same reason why prose like this sounds like poo poo (at least to me): code:But then there's also a non-deictic, referential-type use of the bastard, and depending on where that one lives in your brain, you might find it just as prosaic as using 'the tall man' or 'the queen' in an opening sentence. quote:Feel free to tell me if this makes sense: in the opening sentence, "the bastard" is acting as an 'R-expression' while later on in the story "the motherfucker" is pronomial. So in this story, "the bastard" could be replaced with something like "Mark", while "the motherfucker" is just "he". So, like, "the bastard" contains a noun that is known to the narrator but not yet to the reader. Yes and no. It helped me understand what you meant (i.e. that you easily get a straightforwardly referential reading of the phrase, while I and apparently sebmojo don't), but R-expression is kind of a fraught syntax term & I'm framing this in terms of pragmatics because gently caress syntax. *technical term: a definite reference with no obvious referent already available, in a situation where you'd normally need one. In practice, 'unheralded' is almost exclusively used to describe certain uses of pronouns. For instance, I might say this as soon as my husband came home from work: code:** the other one is linguistics experiments. *** felicity : reference :: grammaticality : sentence structure God Over Djinn fucked around with this message at 10:50 on Dec 1, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 10:47
|
|
|
God Over Djinn posted:That's really interesting, it's jarring to me but I'm also notoriously hypersensitive to that kind of thing. I wonder which of us more English speakers would agree with... The first line didn't bother me at all. I just wondered what this person had done and why he was a bastard. OPR could possibly make the word Bastard uppercase, so it's more like the character's name and less like the author just forgot to mention who the term is referencing. I feel like it works the way it is, though. However, the use of "the motherfucker" later on reads weird to me, probably because you used "the bastard" the exact same way not far above it. I think it might sound better as "this motherfucker" or simply "he." Oh, and OPR please get rid of "percolated." Besides it being an unnecessary thesaurus word, I'm not sure you're using it correctly in this context. I read it as a replacement for "ran," like "all the memories of what he did ran through my mind," and percolate refers to filtering (water through ground beans to make coffee.) It could maybe work in a line such as "I allowed all of the ideas from the day's meeting to percolate through my mind until I was sure of the best one," but it's unnecessary there too.  Why did the protagonist tie his victim to a lit lamppost where they could both be seen easily? That may get explained later in the story, but my first thought was "that's a really weird place to kill someone." violetdragon fucked around with this message at 11:04 on Dec 1, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 11:02
|
|
|
Opposing Farce posted:No obstacles means no drama, and no drama means we're bored. Maybe that's part of the point, that his revenge comes very easily and it's only afterwards that he has to deal with the consequences, but right now that's not coming across and there's no real reason for us to care. Hit the nail on the head there. I didn't intend for there to be any conflict or significant tension until after murdering the guy. The responses I've been getting make me think I should just start the story off right at the point of him pulling the trigger (or shortly afterward). violetdragon posted:Oh, and OPR please get rid of "percolated." Besides it being an unnecessary thesaurus word, I'm not sure you're using it correctly in this context. I read it as a replacement for "ran," like "all the memories of what he did ran through my mind," and percolate refers to filtering (water through ground beans to make coffee.) I originally used the word "flowed" there, but realised I was using that I was also using "flowed" in the last paragraph. I started to think of a synonym, looked at my bong, and came up with "percolated".  Not that it was a wise decision, but that's what happened.violetdragon posted:Why did the protagonist tie his victim to a lit lamppost where they could both be seen easily? That may get explained later in the story, but my first thought was "that's a really weird place to kill someone." Because I'm stupid and didn't think about the implications of the guy being tied to a functional lamppost.  It's actually important that the narrator be somewhere where it's possible that he'd be seen, but I didn't want it to be probable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2013 19:11
|
|
|
Optimus Prime Ribs posted:Hit the nail on the head there. I didn't intend for there to be any conflict or significant tension until after murdering the guy. The responses I've been getting make me think I should just start the story off right at the point of him pulling the trigger (or shortly afterward). It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to open us up on a scene where there's no dramatic tension by design, so my advice is that the story should start when the tension does. What's going through your protagonist's head when he pulls the trigger? Does he have any second thoughts in that moment? Is the actual act of murder as easy as it seemed in his head, or does he linger on the decision? If he does, open on that instant and show us his inner struggle. If not, though, it's probably better to open on the moment afterwards, as he's realizing the gravity of his actions and what the consequences are going to be. Internal conflicts and unexpected complications are interesting; a plan going off without a hitch is not. Opposing Farce fucked around with this message at 17:07 on Dec 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2013 15:24
|
|
|
Echo Cian posted:Always read more. I can't agree with this more. A great way to "read more" is subscribing to one of the countless short fiction magazines out there. If you commit to reading each story in every issue (like I do) you will end up reading good stories you otherwise may not have been interested enough to pick up (a problem I often have). Also, you support fiction magazines that you should be submitting to anyway, so you're sowing what you'll hopefully eventually reap. Being a sci-fi and fantasy fan I'm currently subscribed to Clarkesworld, Beneath Ceaseless Skies, and the Daily Sci-Fi (free) email distro. The first two are paid e-book subscriptions (they automatically come to my Kindle), but you can also read the stories for free online if you're cheap. Stupefying Stories is another great magazine. On the Orson Scott Card thing that systran brought up - no offense brosef, but he's really not controversial outside of left-leaning internet circles like Something Awful. My recommendation to everyone is to stay out of authors' personal lives - if you look hard enough, you'll find something offensive (to you) in everybody. I'm sure everyone posting in this thread has some opinion or habit that other people would find disturbing/offensive/"lovely"/whatever. Read a work of fiction for the work, not the author's life and politics.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2013 16:44
|
|
|
Martello posted:On the Orson Scott Card thing that systran brought up - no offense brosef, but he's really not controversial outside of the types of people who read books not written by Sean Hannity.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2013 17:06
|
|
|
Well, to stem the derail, I specifically said that Ender's Game is worth reading despite whatever controversy there may be surrounding him.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2013 17:15
|
|
|
El oh el you are a comic genius systran posted:Well, to stem the derail, I specifically said that Ender's Game is worth reading despite whatever controversy there may be surrounding him. Absolutely, I just get irritated in general when people are all "oh but [insert author] eats non-grass-fed BEEF! so don't read him." Not that you were saying that, but it's stupid. Enjoy the art for the art, not the artist.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2013 17:20
|
|
|
I totally agree, because I think most artists are lovely people and I want to consume their works of [hopefully] fiction. But there are people out there who really care about the author's personal beliefs, especially in books like OSC's that deal with society and religion and government. Think about all the crazy people who worship Ayn Rand. I think OSC's a total shitbag (I think comparing his views to not eating grass fed beef is a little disingenuous at best), but I've still read like 4 of the Ender novels and went to see the movie. It doesn't hurt to make people aware that their money may go to support causes that they are actively against, such as rising up and destroying the US government (a particular stated position of OSC).
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2013 18:19
|
|
|
I highly recommend books by Elmore Leonard- huge selection, really fun crime stories, and he's an absolute master of dialogue. I especially enjoyed Glitz and Killshot, of the few I've read. Also anything by Kurt Vonnegut Jr., or Philip K. Dick if you like science fiction. Just find the kinds of books you like and read more of them!
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 18:46
|
|
|
What's the prevailing thought on critiquing query letters in this thread? I've just finished six months of rewrites and edits on my novel, and that process now seems painless compared to the horror of compressing the entirety of two intertwining narratives into a few hundred words of marketing hype. I have an early draft, but it's overly-wordy and far too long. Is that something you guys would be willing to take a look at (by which I mean 'tear to shreds')? Or is this not the appropriate thread for that sort of thing?
jeffLebowski fucked around with this message at 22:25 on Dec 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 22:23
|
|
|
jeffLebowski posted:What's the prevailing thought on critiquing query letters in this thread? I've just finished six months of rewrites and edits on my novel, and that process now seems painless compared to the horror of compressing the entirety of two intertwining narratives into a few hundred words of marketing hype. I have an early draft, but it's overly-wordy and far too long. Is that something you guys would be willing to take a look at (by which I mean 'tear to shreds')? Or is this not the appropriate thread for that sort of thing? Go for it dude. Unrelatedly this is a neat story I found on Metafilter and I didn't write it but I wish I had: Fulfillment. sebmojo fucked around with this message at 23:14 on Dec 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 23:09
|
|
|
Can't speak for everyone, but I don't see why not. I assume you've read QueryShark? I think she's pretty set on her method, but she makes some drat good points.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 23:10
|
|
|
Symptomless Coma posted:I assume you've read QueryShark? I have. It can be pretty illuminating, but at the same time, she is clearly targeting YA material. She specifically mentions middle school age ranges on several occasions. The sample query letters I've read from genres more in line with my own (crime/historical/literary fiction) seem considerably longer and far more detailed. I find the entire concept to be utterly confusing. I'd gladly sit down and write a fresh chapter over writing one single-page query letter. For every bit of query advice I find, I soon find another that states the exact opposite. It really is an odd science unto itself. I've posted my own bit of meandering word salad below. I'm really trying to emphasize the fact that there are two alternating narratives going on here. I've read that many people suggest picking one protagonist and focusing your query solely on that single character, but I'm not sure that will work for me. The alternating timelines and their interaction is the exact hook I want to push. Regardless, it's obviously far too long. And here it is, presented for the thread's summary brutalization: Foster Ettinger will be dead inside a week. He trudges west through the endless pinewood expanse of rural Missouri, tugging at the reins of a gunshot horse and peering over his shoulder with growing desperation. Inside his saddlebag rests a fortune in stolen cash. Behind him rides the host of furious men he stole it from. He is no stranger to the ways of the gun or the trail. He sees to it that the chase is long and bloody. But his pursuers are relentless. And when Foster hears their leader threaten to massacre the townspeople who have unknowingly offered him shelter, he makes a decision that will see the name of a middling train robber enshrined forever in local myth. The money he carried that day is never seen again. Thirty years later, his son Isaac drifts through the underbelly of prohibition-era St. Louis a broken man. Dismissed from his position as a detective, and embittered by a lifetime of comparisons to a legend he’s never met, Isaac leads a solitary existence hunting bounties for anyone with the cash to pay. His tracking skills are always in demand—as is his penchant for not asking questions. So when he receives a cryptic but well-paying job offer from the now-aging criminal who killed his father, Isaac thinks nothing of taking the payday and getting straight to work. But soon he finds himself in an unforeseen confrontation with his quarry that will force him to reconsider his mercenary ways—and the past he’s spent his entire life trying to escape. His father’s long-lost money has resurfaced. The lives of innocents are once again imperiled by the greed it rouses in the hearts of violent men. And Isaac will have to reckon with an army of hired guns, damning revelations of the past, and his own fatalistic nature if he is going to save them. Complete at 119,000 words, THE SILENT FUNERAL is a historical crime novel that intertwines the tale of an unlikely folk hero with that of the son he would never know—two desperate men parted by the span of decades, forced to flee the wrath of the same ruthless murderer, and unknowingly bound by the grim truth that for men like them, redemption is rarely bought with anything but blood. Thank you for your time and consideration. jeffLebowski fucked around with this message at 23:28 on Dec 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2013 23:24
|
|
|
jeffLebowski posted:And here it is, presented for the thread's summary brutalization: I could probably have formatted that less confusingly. Nevertheless, maybe some useful words in there. I think it mostly looks good though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 00:10
|
|
|
jeffLebowski posted:I have. It can be pretty illuminating, but at the same time, she is clearly targeting YA material. She specifically mentions middle school age ranges on several occasions. The sample query letters I've read from genres more in line with my own (crime/historical/literary fiction) seem considerably longer and far more detailed. I find the entire concept to be utterly confusing. I'd gladly sit down and write a fresh chapter over writing one single-page query letter. For every bit of query advice I find, I soon find another that states the exact opposite. It really is an odd science unto itself. I think that's decent, but you can afford to cut about half of it. Don't tell them the story - make them want to read the story.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 00:12
|
|
|
Jeza posted:Free wisdom sebmojo posted:Additional Free Wisdom Thanks to both of you. Your comments were extremely useful. It really is strange how often you find yourself thinking, "surely this information is far too important to omit from the query" as you're writing it. But then you read it again, this time with half of it cut out, and it makes just as much sense while reading twice as smoothly. I'm going to trim considerably according to both of your comments. Writing queries reminds me of writing ad copy, and not in a good way. And to answer a minor point... I was attempting to convey that Isaac is so cynical and money-driven that he'll gladly take a job from the man who murdered his own father if it pays well enough. Then again, I'll likely reword that sentence or cut it entirely. jeffLebowski fucked around with this message at 16:59 on Dec 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 00:25
|
|
|
crabrock posted:I totally agree, because I think most artists are lovely people and I want to consume their works of [hopefully] fiction. But there are people out there who really care about the author's personal beliefs, especially in books like OSC's that deal with society and religion and government. Think about all the crazy people who worship Ayn Rand. Haha holy poo poo, he really wants to overthrow the government? I'd think that would endear him to the D&D crowd, at least if he wasn't advocating the creation of Deseret, the perfect Mormon paradise. He wrote a series of short stories about a post-apocalyptic Deseret called The Folk of the Fringe that's worth reading. But if he wants to overthrow the government I think the Hannity crowd would hate him for it. And of course I was being sarcastic when I compared meat-eating habits to Card's censure of homosexuality and whatever else. You should know me well enough for that. The important thing is, we agree on the overarching point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 17:18
|
|
|
I was hoping I could get some critiques on something I wrote for an assignment where we were supposed to try to capture a "spot of time". Every Time - 343 words "Do you know Kaylee Hemming?" She asked with a twinkle in her eyes. He wondered about why she was eyeing him like that. He paused in thought before answering. "Yeah, sure. I know her." He let out, scratching his middle finger into the back of his pointer. She spoke to him about the girl's escapades, but he wasn't listening. He was lost in his own mind, wondering why, for whatever reason he had felt the need to lie to her about knowing some girl he'd never met nor even heard of. He'd felt it coming on before air left his lungs. That feeling of being one step behind, wondering what she was plotting. His mind ran odds, what had her done that could merit... No... What /might/ he have done to warrant suspicion. She stopped talking, he acted fast. His tongue slipped out a supposedly intrigued "Oh yeah?" before she pulled his arm to her warm body with a smile that he returned readily. She continued on scandalous tales, sipping her iced cola. It looked tasty. He had figured it wasn't about him, but it was always safer to take precautions. He looked at her quietly recounting stories of cheating boyfriends and vengeful exes. She offered him a sip of cola, which he accepted. The cola felt warmer than he expected, and slightly metallic. He assumed it must have come from a can. His voice refreshed he chimed in with the correct questions at the perfect time. He even paused as if in thought before asking the delicate question. The taste of slick metal persisted. "Are you busy later?" She asks, with a slight raising of her eyebrow. "Sorry, I'm tied up tonight." Truth is, he just wanted to be alone tonight. Do you tell a lie every time you speak? The glint in her eyes disappears, and she musters a smile. She offers him the rest of the cola. He takes it, and she kisses him. As she walks away, she looks back with a smile. "Love you!" He tells her. Every time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 04:40
|
|
|
Why did he feel the need to lie to her? What were those 'scandalous tales'? You're allowed to use the word 'said'. Mechanically, you're missing commas in a couple of places - at the end of a quote ("I know her," he said) & between clauses ("His voice refreshed, he chimed in...")
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 05:25
|
|
|
In general, a story that moves along by one character asking another character questions is really boring.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 11:53
|
|
|
You need to remember the most clichéd but important rule of writing: show, don't tell.Jade Mage posted:I was hoping I could get some critiques on something I wrote for an assignment where we were supposed to try to capture a "spot of time". I don't really understand what the point of this story is or why I'm supposed to care about what's happening. The meat of the story is seemingly his internal thought processes and the conversational tactics he is using to make it seem like he is following what she's saying even though he isn't. In principle that could have been interesting but for inexplicable reasons you opted to summarize all the parts of the story that might have actually drawn someone in. If you're going to do a piece that is pure character study and has no plot or action then you need to at least put us inside the head of the character so that we can identify with him. Instead you're just summarizing his thought processes and summarizing what she's saying. It just isn't that interesting. Also stop trying to find cute ways of avoiding "said", there's nothing wrong with it. Also I finish this story completely confused about the protagonists motivations. Why is he lying? Why does he want to be alone? For that matter, what does this girl see in him? Are they casual lovers or have they been together for years? Right at the end you seem like you're getting a bit more into the character's head. You start highlighting the contrast between what he's saying and what he's thinking, which is something almost anybody can relate to.If you'd done that from the start the story might have worked better.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 17:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 00:36 |
|
|
Thanks much, I'll take this to heart when revising!
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 20:59
|
|