Critique for Novel needed - first 25,000 wds

Jasper is right, can you do that? Thank you, Jasper!

Nahhhhhhh......I just thought I'd see if could put them bloody apostophes in the right places for just this once. But then we're not talking to each other, now are we? )))Huummpphhh((((

Kj I've read this through twice now, and I like it a lot. My first comment would have to be that it reads like a published book, 'an ACTUAL book', if you know what I mean. I spent very little time (if any) questioning the style, which is a tesatment to you because it meant that your style reads effortlessly. There was only one small point of ciriticism that I picked up on though. When I read it the first time, there was something that didn't sit quite right, and reading it again, I feel the same but it's hard to pinpoint. I think what it may be is that the narrator can be a little casual, and I think that makes it a little difficult at times to distinguish that voice form the characters he is describing. To be a little more concise, I would drop some off the colloquialisms from the narration. 'Pulling technique' and 'in-yer-face' and expressions of that sort can cheapen the storytelling for me a little. Contast with the section which begins "sighing, professor edward chiswick...entered the great hall and gimaced", which goes on to have many, many paragraphs of wonderful clear prose. I like the italics, too. Sometimes I hate them but here I love them. Really well used, I think I found the whole thing amusing, certainly read most of it with a smile. It flows brilliantly, and you've nailed dialgoue generally. Really nailed it. Just as a little point, you've done wonders with the names. Raven is great. Oh, and the pictures are a really nice touch. So in summary: interesting, well written, flows well, but would look at ensuring consistency in the narrator's voice. This kind of thing (taking apart other people's work) really isn't my strong point. I'm sorry if everything I've said is useless. Also, haven't read the other comments so sorry if I've repeated anything above. Ben PS Loved Margret's death.

Many thanks for that Ben. Totally concur with the narration probem you describe: 'the narrator can be a little casual, and I think that makes it a little difficult at times to distinguish that voice form the characters he is describing' - spot on. I've actually just completed a redraft along those lines and pretty much sorted it out. I knew there was something wrong but couldn't put my finger on it. And it was this particular problem - I moved the narration from a 'narratror' to the charcaters and removed some of the more glib stuff. It was a lot of little things that added up to push it off kilter. Glad you like the names, spent a lot of time thinking about them. And the dialogue for different characters. I thought you put your finger on the prob - so good critique.

I liked this

I pretty much agree with Andrew. It's good but I'd increase the pace a lot and make it sharper. The first paragraph I liked a lot. But after that the thoughts kind of go anywhere in what is a very static scene. I read visually and what we have here is someone sitting looking at a parchment. In the second paragraph I'd cut from, 'And how on Earth..' to the end of the paragraph. In fact, I'd cut until, 'Of course no could know about Julie.' The other things aren't bad but it's too much information. Sorry, this is brief. My tea is ready and then I'm off to see Kylie.

You were doing great, Drew, until you mentioned 'Kylie'.

Hi Drew, Go on then, don't stop there!

Ah, I'm beginning to see a pattern...

Anymore comments? Not sure if I should post the next 25,000 words or delete what's up there...

Clickety click. [%sig%]

Whoa, managed to read all of that in one sitting (helped out by what turned out to be a real nice bottle of wine) without getting remotely bored, so it must have been good, and I would quite like to read the rest. First off, as an ex-physics student, I can inform you that the line "...it was easy to get repressed science chicks into bed with a few references to the Doppler Effect coupled with Black Hole Time Dilation bound together with a bit of Einstein and a curry" is complete and utter garbage. I read it out to my ex-physics-student housemate and he agreed. Secondly, italics, I hate them hate them hate them, I get horrid flashbacks to reading the DaVinci code and a shudder runs down my spine. But that might just be me. This reminded me a lot of Only Forward by Michael Marshal Smith and Good Omens by Terry Pratchet and Neil Gaimen, both books I really liked (I know Pratchet gets a bad press on this site but I like him so naaa). It is exaclty the sort of book I would lend a friend of mine if she didn't lend it to me first. I love that sci-fi occult hokum just under the surface of real life schtick. It's narrated in a very light, playful style that, whilst often very funny (the description of the host of the show not dissimilar to The Sky At Night was hillarious, I had to read that out loud to people), was occasionally tiresome. Kurt Vonnegut's maxim "the first task of an author is to seduce the reader" came to mind. I think you need to be very careful in the first few chapters that the voice of the narrator does not grate. Also I ened up with the vague impression that the narrator was acting as a veil in front of the characters, treating them perhaps too flipantly to allow the reader to connect properly. I feel I liked Raven (well done on not passing a single comment on the name btw) a lot more than I liked the narrator. The last chapter suggests there is more going on here though, so perhaps it will work. I also think it could be a lot funnier than it is. Comedy in movies is supposedly 90% editting room work and I suspect the same is true in books. There were bits when you could almost suspect you heard the ghost of Douglas Adams trying to get through. And the pictures were cool.

Ta for that! As for picking up 'repressed science chicks', I was trying to convey that Blyth Varne was a charismatic and rather sexist individual at odds to the 'average physics world' by being more interested in 'skirt' than String Theory. But yes, point taken - although I do think he's the type to pull it off. Italics - I use single apostophes for speech e.g. 'Hello' not double "hello" so when it comes to a reference or title the convention is to use italics. But yes, I hate stressing certain words but when you first meet a chasrcter I find it useful to portray the rhythm of their speech, which points to who they are. I am aware of them and have pondered them all. Narration - I know, it makes my head hurt. Glad you read it all the way through without being bored. You read the Da Vinci code?! The graphics are just a whimsy, but fun to do.

"You read the Da Vinci code?!" not all the way through.

Hi KJ - I would largely agree with Dan. It was certainly an easy enough read - though I think some chapter splits would help and it might be better to stay with one character for a bit longer (I tend to cut between characters a lot in my writing too, but here I ended up having to remind myself who people were). Jack was a better character than I'd imagined, I think you might have to be careful that Blyth doesn't end up too similar. (and one of the first edits I'd do would be to lose all the occasions when his first and surname are used together - because both are a bit 'poncy' it reads a little bit Archer). One thing to consider, I think is that the 'real' stuff is coming across better and more interesting than the 'interesting' stuff - the scene with Dave, the scene with Lucy, the astrology-dismissal all had more impact than the sinister bits, and it seems to me that this probably isn't what you intended. The big thing, I think, is for you to decide whether this is a comedy or not. At the moment, it seems like you are undecided, and when you blend comedy and thriller or comedy and fantasy, I think the only way is to really go for it. It has to be a book you'd laugh at on the train, otherwise it can become a bit grating - like listening to 18 year olds talking in the cinema before a film when they imagine they are hysterically funny. I'd have to say that I'm not a fan of the genre, I found Rankin tiresome and Pratchett disturbingly bad (with the exception of Good Omens, where Gaiman's talent leavens Pratchett's bad prose considerably). I haven't seen any examples of bad prose in it, so far, and it measures up to a lot of books that I've leafed through in bookshops (meaning that it is capable of being published with the right editor and agent). My best suggestion is to commit to it either being funny or dramatic, or at least if you intend to combine the genres, it needs to be more of both. I thought the early 'scary' bit with the cat was well done, and I think it would get a good laugh, but the problem thereafter is, you're not going to scare the reader again. And given that the two lead characters, Blyth and Jack are at best 'amiable tossers', it might be hard to make the reader feel much for them if they're in jeopardy. I'd set the scene a bit more with Julie at the beginning - I'd rather see him get made the offer rather than it unfolding in a slighly muddled way (I spent two paragraphs wondering why it had said 'his' bodily fluids rather than the writers, then realised that it was intentional and had to go back and read the first three pages again to make sense of what was happening, which is not a good thing for a reader to be doing in the first three pages. I think it has potential, the dialogue works - I could stand some more physical description from time to time (which is rare for me). Key question - is it going to be a comedy, and if so, I think you need to sharpen the comedy voice so that it doesn't just tread similar ground to Adams, Rankin et al. There must be another way of writing fantasy with comedy elements that isn't that sort of Angus Deayton detached smugness. And I liked the graphics a lot.

Hi Emily, Pleased the prose passes muster. Really pleased. Totally agree with the identity crisis of the novel (Dan also noticed this). This is what I pretty much felt was wrong with the opening. But the intention was to create something comedic with a dark edge - like drunken pranks that suddenly turn into something gruesome. Leading the reader into a dark and confusing world - as Raven moves from 'normality' into the 'supernatural'. But that is why I have had 58 bazillion problems getting the narrative right on these first chapters. I personally think this is the major flaw but if I can get the balance right, is something that would be a plus, not a negative. 'More darkness more comedy', you suggest - yes that might work. I feel the latter part of the book has a far better balance in this respect than the opening. Blyth and Raven the same? Didn't see that one coming. Blyth is a real stretch for me to write - sexist, confident, boozy. Raven is very much at sea in the world of relationships and women in general. So I see them as quite apart in their characters. On the whole I'm quite happy with my charcaterisation. More physical description? Of people or places or both? I personally find over-derscriptive prose quite distracting. And shy away from it. The scene with 'Julie' at the beginning - any more and it will give the game away on a major plot thread. And I do like to leave things 'hanging'. This is something I respond to in narrative and is why the story jumps around. I'm trying to generate a feeling of 'what the fuck is going on?' and hoping that readders will turn the pages to find out. I know this is not 'your genre' but did you feel you were intrigued by the story and what was happening? On the whole, I've learnt a lot writing this novel, but I don't feel too precious about it. Looking forawrd to something else in a different genre actually. That might suit me better. [%sig%]

I didn't really see Blyth as being someone who WAS successful with women, rather as someone who perceived that he was. They were both quite superficial people and it seemed to me that they were quite similar, only that Blyth was a bit better at conning people into believing that his front was the real person. Perhaps Dan is right, the narration can sometimes come between the reader and the characters, making them seem more like 'characters' than people we happen to be reading about. I think you could bring in more danger - the scene with the woman whose hair gets dragged under the vehicle for example. Because all of the narration had been flippant and breezy, the impact of that sort of got lost. Perhaps if the narration of that scene started out that way, making the reader think that we were about to see an incidental character get introduced, and then went quite punchy, this would have the impact needed. Sending the reader the message - this might be a wry novel, but people you end up caring about may get hurt too. I'd give the woman more personality, more space before killing her - make us feel something about her. I'm reminded of the Ray Carver story, Menudo, where he finds out his mother has died and it is going to the police station and seeing her package of ground mince starting to go brown that makes him cry. A small detail of ordinary life can be effective. I write most of my 'novels' now to learn about the process of writing a novel and to hopefully get better at it. You have the right attitude towards not getting precious. I think there's enough here to suggest that the book will work, with some tweaks. Dan is the audience for this sort of thing, as he says, and he liked it. I'm very much not the audience for this genre, and I still thought there were good moments in it. I normally don't like descriptive prose, but it is worth it for something like the college, so that we get a better sense of it. My view (unlike Dan Brown's) is don't describe things that people already know about - I don't need a description of the Eiffel Tower, it's the Eiffel Tower for Chrissakes. I also don't need a description of clouds, because - well, they're clouds, I can look at them whenever I want. But I've not met your characters and I don't know their surroundings, so some well-chosen description with a view to illuminating place and character wouldn't go amiss. In ref to the server, Are you library-using, or local-government-working?

I just read the first few pages. What strikes me immediately is that there are too many adverbs. Adverbs are clumsy. They make sentences long and heavy. Most of them don't earn their space, I think. Also a lot of adjectives. Better sometimes to choose the right word so that it doesn't need an adjectif. I'll read it in installments. Don't like reading long chunks on line.

I've had another look at the first ten pages based on Milkstone's comments. I didn't think that there were an excessive number of adjectives and adverbs - you tend to get a lot of adjectives in this style of writing anyway, the readers like it that way. Adverbs are always something that you look to cut, but I didn't find them off-putting here. What I did pick up on were a couple of sentences like this :- He finally pushed himself out of his chair, grasped a can from the now half-empty crate sitting on the floor under his desk, cracked it open, poured the contents down his throat and pondered. That's the sort of sentence you find in sci-fi/fantasy writing a lot, and it is not particularly clunky or awkward by the standard of the genre. in fact, I'd wager money Dan could find a sentence of that sort on most pages of books of this genre that he has on his shelf. Personally, I think 'he got up and drank some beer while he thought' says the same thing, in 10 words rather than 34. It isn't awful or bad writing, and you'd get away with it, but it would be worth a look on the rewrites for sentences that are taking a long time to say something simple. I think you could submit this to agents/publishers and certainly get some decent letters back. It's not of inferior standard to what's out there in bookshops.

Sorry to dissapoint but my shelves are distinctly slim on sci-fi since someone borrowed my HHG collection and didn't give it back. I read tons of the stuff as a kid but nearly all from the library (those lovely big yellow Gollancz hard-backs) and still love it, but don't really read that much these days. One or two a year maybe.

Question, sci-fi Dan - do you pronounce the 'c' in Gollancz, and if so how? I've always copped out with Goll-anze and can't imagine trying Goll-anckzie

I had completely forgotten, until I looked it up just then, that there was a 'c' in it. To my knowledge, I've never said it out loud my whole life.

or, goll-anch?

Hi Milkstone, Thanks for taking time to read my submission. I take your point about adjectives and adverbs. Not wanting to sound defensive, but this is really a stylistic choice. I spend a lot of time on all my sentences, none of them are throw-away. I think all comments so (apart from the idiots) have been very useful and give me new things to look at and consider, which I really appreciate.

Quotes: Re: 'A Winter's Tale' Winners Announced! Author: kjheritage (---.range81-154.btcentralplus.com) Date: 04-14-05 23:29 In my opinion, the Milkstone story has little merit, I cannot see how it could have possibly been chosen. It was 'thin' and contained two-dimensional charcaters that are typical of all the charcaters I've read from this writer (I read most of the submissions after this writer also was chosen as 'Writer of the Month') - the veiwpoint is always the dispassionate female teenager, the theme - sexual discovery. The style is simplistic, which there is nothing wrong with, but in the winning example, it just does not work within the short story format. This story which did not grab or say anything new. If this was the 70s maybe, but I don't get it. In my opinion, there were many more deserving stories. Utterly confused, totally perplexed when there was so much other wonderful stuff submitted that was more original, better written and, more imaginative. Re: 'A Winter's Tale' Winners Announced! Author: kjheritage (---.brighton-hove.gov.uk) Date: 04-15-05 14:31 Hi Emily, May I say how refreshing it is to read your posts. Yes, I think my reply was a little clumsy in comparison (blame 3 hours of continuous redrafting!). I understand about the minamalist style, it can be very effective, but not in this case. And I am a fan of 'realism'. But for either long or short peices of fiction, I want to care, or at least find out more about the characters etc. This didn't turn on any lights for me. Don't get me wrong, I'm not down on Milkstone, I find this author's stories 'compulsive' - much in the way I don't want to watch some earnest movie, but find myself compelled to do so as the story unfolds - a good sign. But this example was not compelling. The style lends itself to a longer peice of work, although it did not leave me wanting more. It was more of a 'so what?' feeling. I'm not usually the cynical type, but the subject matter was very old hat and I just felt that for a winning story, it just wasn't doing very much on any level. I would be intrigued to hear if anybody else felt the same way, or am I a voice of one, perhaps? Please send me the link to Sue Anderson's peice as you make it sound quite worthy. Re: 'A Winter's Tale' Winners Announced! Author: emily yaffle (---.as15444.net) Date: 04-15-05 14:16 You're - it's spelled you're. And by the way, someone shows their 'mettle' not their 'metal' unless they are the Tin Man, that is. Reply To This Message METTLE: 'definition' : Inherent quality of character and temperament of an only quality! METAL: 'definition' : An alloy of two or more essential elements. An object made of metal. Basic character; mettle. OPINION METTLE: And Industrial Organism at its hegemonic worst for ownership rights to the 'Art of hiding contradictions'. METAL: Ability to consider anothers particular matter and participation of meaninful interests to overall literary structure of motif variations, as imperative. Arthur Schopenhauer 1788-1860: "On Genius" Genius is its own reward; for the best that one is, one must necessarily be for oneself?. Further, genius consists in the working of the free intellect?, and as a consequence ?the productions of genius serve no useful purpose. The work of genius may be music, philosophy, painting, or poetry; it is nothing for use or profit. To be useless and unprofitable is one of the characteristics of genius; it is their patent of nobility. PROOF Richard Wagner (1813-1883): Socailist, Composer, and writer of Prose and Poetry. Greatests work: The Ring (both of Musical Opera and in illustrated text) The Ring is about 18 hours' music, held together by an immensely detailed network of themes, or leitmotifs, each of which has some allusive meaning: a character, a concept, an object etc. They change and develop as the ideas within the opera develop. They are heard in the orchestra, not merely as 'labels' but carrying the action, sometimes informing the listener of connections of ideas or the thoughts of those on the stage. There are no 'numbers' in the Ring; the musical texture is made up of narrative and dialogue, in which the orchestra partakes. The work is not merely a story about gods, humans and dwarfs but embodies reflections on every aspect of the human condition. It has been interpreted as socialist, fascist, Jungian, prophetic, as a parable about industrial society, and much more. John Ronald Reuel Tolkien (1892-1973) was a major scholar of the English language, specialising in Old and Middle English. Twice Professor of Anglo-Saxon (Old English) at the University of Oxford, he also wrote a number of stories, including most famously The Hobbit (1937) and The Lord of the Rings (1954-1955), which are set in a pre-historic era in an invented version of the world which he called by the Middle English name of Middle-earth. This was peopled by Men (and women), Elves, Dwarves, Trolls, Orcs (or Goblins) and of course Hobbits. He has regularly been condemned by the Eng. Lit. establishment, with honourable exceptions, but loved by literally millions of readers worldwide. Hmmm.... So,Tolkein, stole all his work from a German genius called, Richard Wagner....Interesting...No typical! Did you also know that it was Wagner's Art which influenced and constucted Adolf Hitler's Master Race with its Anti-Semitism? And as Tolkein stole Golem & Co from Wagner, do you wanna guess what all English Literature really is *WINK* FURTHER Purple Turtle: "So arrrr...do you really wanna keep playing this stupid little game of ?Allegorical Twatery,? Emily and KJH? Phantom: "We can really cut Jasper loose if you like?" Monkey: " Nahhhh, not one of these two has a interersting opinion, other than by what manner of thuggery they'll slag the innocent other off with....as per f***ing always!" Francis Bacon. First Baron Verulam and Viscount Saint Albans. 1561-1626. English philosopher, essayist, courtier, jurist, and statesman. His writings include The Advancement of Learning (1605) and the Novum Organum (1620), in which he proposed a theory of scientific knowledge based on observation and experiment that came to be known as the inductive method. Shakespeare, William. 1564-1616. English playwright and poet whose body of works is considered the greatest in English literature. His plays, many of which were performed at the Globe Theater in London, include historical works, such as Richard II, comedies, including Much Ado about Nothing and As You Like It, and tragedies, such as Hamlet, Othello, and King Lear. He also composed 154 sonnets. The earliest collected edition of his plays, the First Folio, contained 36 plays and was published posthumously (1623). NOTE THE DATES.....Gee, I wonder who posthumously published William's Work.... *WINK* FOX : "Sniff Snifff.....MMMMM...smells like Bacon playing Genius, while topped with very certain female mayonaise!" FACT: The Britsh claim of 'William Shakespeare being English' is pure bullshit! I am sorry for doing this, Milkstone, but I did try to warn them both to watch thier P's and Q's before I cut them to pieces. And the theft of 'Rhine Gold', by Ring hungry English Imps and Trolls, simply needed to be righted here! Excuse my lack of respect for ceremony, as I have none! "To my Art I owe only my brilliance, as it is to my life I owe my Genius" (Oscar Wilde)

kj-hay ya lern anythin about how ta write or whut...cumm ta me and i'll teech ya but yuh gotta ask nice like goin down on yer knees and grovelling in the mudddd...then i'll teeech ya...if not then fuck awff...

By the end of the month Jasper, either you or I won't be here any longer. Either way, I hope you enjoy talking to yourself.

Andrew, you've been one of the most dedicated, intelligent and truly delightful members of this site since you first arrived here. Are you really going to allow a sub-human to drive you away? I've resisted saying 'I told you so' to all those that kept giving the moron more rope, but I'm afraid the time has come. I saw him as one of natures failures from the start, and said so in other words. He is the most destructive, horrible person to ever pass through here with out a doubt. No one comes even close to him. I told you so.

Hi Guys, Agree wholeheartedly but can we not let him hijack everybody's threads in this fashion, we should be talking about writing not Jasper.

Absolutely - K J, can you drop me an email - I'd be happy to give you a more detailed crit, but I think that sort of detail is best done via email, rather than what would be a very long thread. Also, I wouldn't mind a name - calling you K J rather than even a nickname like "Bonzo" makes me feel terribly formal.

SOOK...call her SOOKETTE Re: All New Mastermind 4 Author: Tony Cook (---.ubertales.co.uk) Date: 03-30-05 14:13 Fair enough - but this is sharp humour given in a very tongue-in-cheek fashion. If you can't laugh at yourself then you're in trouble!

Author: emily yaffle (---.as15444.net) Date: 04-13-05 13:34 I really don't think anyone is 'picking apart' this poem because they are churlish about it winning the competition. This is a writing website and people are making creative suggestions.

You can call me Liz, if that helps. No prob about sending you a email for more detailed crit but how to pass on the address without muggins finding out?

Just click on Emily's name in red highlight at the top of the reply, and his Email addy pops up, Einstein!