|
Thank you, I'll consider what's been said.
Tea Party Crasher fucked around with this message at 09:15 on Nov 3, 2014 |
#
?
Oct 29, 2014 02:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 13:14 |
|
|
I got really bored half way through and gave up because nothing was happening. What I got through (2k words) seemed like what happened before the story, not the actual story. There were a few proof-reading issues eg. "or Damien he got a tool kit and a tranquilizer gun, along a belt of ammo. Harnessing his belt and gun to his body, inhaled and sighed with pleasure. “Thanks jack.” Also some issues with ten-dollar words eg. "eclipsed" The main problem though was that nothing interesting happened before I got too bored.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2014 03:00
|
|
|
newtestleper posted:I got really bored half way through and gave up because nothing was happening. What I got through (2k words) seemed like what happened before the story, not the actual story. So should I start later in the story? Also thanks for pointing out the errors.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2014 03:02
|
|
|
Tea Party Crasher posted:
I'm not sure. I think you can probably set up the premise with a lot less preamble. It depends on whether interesting stuff happens later on. Tea Party Crasher posted:
You're welcome.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
Tea Party Crasher is right. This story is boring because nothing happens. Unless you are a really talented writer who can entrance people with the sheer beauty of your prose you need something to make the reader want to keep reading. Usually that means a character with a compelling goal who faces obstacles. Those obstacles supply conflict, I.e. plot points, and the way that the character overcomes (or fails to overcome) this conflict is the "story". You sort of have a conflict here, or at least you have a series of things that happen. But it takes too long for us to get there and when we do its sort of confusing and hard to relate to and just generally not that interesting. It doesn't help that it also turns out to be fairly cliche. The whole "science experiment turns on its master" is at least as old as Frankenstein, a book that came out like two centuries ago. Also I notice that your story has a lot of adjectives. In just the first three paragraphs we have "Hard soil"', "dry riverbed", "thin brown grass", "hot wind", "dry rocks", "audible thud", "long standing silence", "absolutely still". On their own these descriptions might be ok. Ut taken together they clog up the narrative and destroy any sense of pacing. I admit I didn't read much past that point so I don't know if you kept doing this or not. You don't need to tag every description with an adjective. If you just told us the riverbed is dry then we can infer that the rocks in the riverbed are also dry. If you removed most of these adjectives your prose would flow more clearly and whichever adjectives you decided to keep would have more impact.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2014 00:00
|
|
