[Valentine 2014] The Aristocrat, The Peasant and The City
1
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
Readers might know that I detest shallow romances but I have never really got down to writing what I think is a proper romance story. This will be a very rare attempt in doing so. I will express the thoughts that went through my head writing this after posting the story proper and elaborate what I found romantic about my entry.
This is intended to be a parody of xninebreaker's winning contest entry. Parodies need not be satirical. A few might notice that this deviates from my usual writing style. I found my entry to be much longer than I would like to be and I found it explaining less than I wanted it to be.
The total word count is over 4300 words. Expect zero dialogue and very complex sentence structures. high_time threatened to give a summary of the story having read drafts of it. I think I will preempt his diabolical and evil move by coming up with my own summary of the story enclosed in that spoiler.
The entry in full will be posted below.
This is intended to be a parody of xninebreaker's winning contest entry. Parodies need not be satirical. A few might notice that this deviates from my usual writing style. I found my entry to be much longer than I would like to be and I found it explaining less than I wanted it to be.
The total word count is over 4300 words. Expect zero dialogue and very complex sentence structures. high_time threatened to give a summary of the story having read drafts of it. I think I will preempt his diabolical and evil move by coming up with my own summary of the story enclosed in that spoiler.
Spoiler:
The entry in full will be posted below.
3
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
The Ruined City, so called by many a person, stretched ever more across the horizon as David, a scion of a powerful line of politicians, establishment figures and warlords, was brought nearer to that city by an extremely noisy military transport accompanied with his soldier comrades.
David's destination was long ago a gleaming metropolis and a great centre of trade and commerce that was regrettably brought to its knees by being one of the first victims of a long, bloody and devastating civil war. That city fell into the clutches of many a warlord who lost hold as soon as they gained control with another round of plunder, pillage and rape for each change of hands. After many self-styled conquerors foisted their names onto that city in a display of disgusting egocentricity, the city was given that awful moniker, The Ruined City, by the man on the street to avoid confusion among her many names and perhaps to dissociate it from what it once was.
By the time the city fell under the control of David's family, the Ruined City was no more than a collection of ugly monoliths made of bones of steel, bodies of concrete and skins of glass. It must have struck those who took as much as a glance at the city to realise the destruction that terrible war wrought on life, property and much more. Indeed, it made those whose hearts were not hardened by the war feel as if their victory was a Pyrrhic and a hollow one.
Even David, who was no stranger to war felt his spirits slowly sink as he got nearer to the city with each passing second. He would rather be placed on missions that would help him and his family to wrest control over the whole country never mind that the civil war is drawing to a close in his family's favour. Under normal circumstances, he would have resisted taking part in what he unfairly thought as an empty charade of boosting morale and placating a handful of civilians in the Ruined City. As it was, David's reasons for heading to the Ruined City were much closer to the heart.
He was looking for an Elizabeth, a woman whom he held at very high esteem. Be it may that she was an unsightly woman with her freckled, dark beige complexion, her thick and closely knitted eyebrows crowning her eyes, her stubby and flat nose and her short, sturdy almost masculine figure, David found her a charismatic, resilient and above all a competent soldier, a person as worthy as the best officers his family sent to the pride, pomp and circumstance of that war.
Their first encounter with each other was barely romantic. Indeed, neither of them would ever admit to having anything resembling a romantic relationship with each other. There were no pleasant sights, no pleasant smells and the atmosphere was far from pleasant when they first met in the gruesome military training grounds ran by David's family. David, that modern aristocratic officer was teamed with the far from modern and not-so-aristocratic Elizabeth. There were very noticeable differences between them, be it of class, personality, outlook in life and so on.
David believed that Elizabeth, like so many of his comrades in arms, was from a family of peasants who lived from hand to mouth, doomed to be farmers, labourers or soldiers. David could only guess that her personality and her astounding ability at rabble rousing and leadership must be honed at the fields. Many a time, he imagined Elizabeth leading a few others, perhaps younger relatives, to till the fields. She looked every inch a person who toiled under the sun and she had a deep knowledge of plants and insects, all characteristic of a farmer. David observed that she knew little beyond agricultural techniques, weapon use and assembly and the art of persuasion but demonstrated remarkable physical and mental resilience. These too must be a result of the hard work she had to go through as a farmer and the social stigma she bore due to her lowly status.
Whether Elizabeth could tell what kind of upbringing he had had as a member of what would be the most powerful family that ruled the country, David did not know for sure. However, Elizabeth displayed surprising sensitivity that was quite uncharacteristic of her at the very occasional mention of his years as a child. The annals of history portray princelings like David either as being pampered and spoilt or thrown in at the deep end of the pool. It was painfully apparent that David was the latter. He was brought up in a spartan lifestyle with his stern mother, one of many of his father's concubines, as his companion and was deprived of the luxuries his family could well afford. Under the guidance of his mother, he was taught to love and fear his father, an unquestioning loyalty towards his family and country was inculcated in him, he was given the best education possible, he had to manage his own affairs with little to no help and he learnt how to conceal his emotions through the coaxing, chiding and the occasional beating by his mother. He barely had any contact with his father but it was under his orders that he was inducted into his private army when he became a teenager first as a lowly recruit and who rose to the rank of a junior officer within a few short but trying years.
Their formative experiences in their youth must have shaped their personalities that were as different night and day. Elizabeth was an ebullient extrovert while David was silent and inscrutable. Elizabeth was more concerned and more comfortable with tasks at hand while David cared more and preferred setting out long term objectives. Yet, they were brought together to handle the most challenging of tasks, be it the execution of tactical manoeuvres, the transport of military supplies, the operation of heavy weapons all the while operating in the most demanding of environments. Instead of allowing their differences to become obstacles to working together, they complemented each other's strengths and made up for each other's weaknesses. It was no surprise that the company that they led together did well in many of the military operations they undertook.
As the years passed and the country slipped inexorably into chaos, David gained prominence in his family's armed forces and enjoyed a meteoric rise through the ranks. With that came a few inconveniences. There was a lot of gossip by many a green-eyed soldier that his rise could only be possible due to his family ties, a point that David himself admitted to be true. He had to handle yet more responsibilities under the backdrop of an impending war that could range from mobilising troops to the bizarre attempts at getting a man of war like himself to engage in diplomatic overtures to possible allies and potential enemies. What bothered him the most is that Elizabeth, together with a few others that worked with him, were not recognised for their contributions to his family's army despite their supposed commitment to reward its soldiers based on merit. David knew the reason to be class prejudice. Yet, being indoctrinated since young to think for his family and enterprise, he saw it as a problem that needed to be addressed.
He recommended a few reforms to his father like the way rewards were issued, punishments were awarded and for more weight to be given to recommendations and testimonies for soldiers on the ground. He recommended a few persons for promotion and a handful of sergeants to be promoted into officers, Elizabeth being one of their number. When the letters and memoranda he sent containing those recommendations went unanswered, he sent them once more with the words changed but the proposals not. By the third and failed attempt in doing so, David decided to take matters into his own hands.
What David decided to undertake was on the verge of mutinous behaviour, quite alike knighting a few officers without approval from the monarch. While he did not openly commission Elizabeth and company as officers, they were given responsibilities that only officers can assume and with a salary commensurate with those responsibilities. Most interestingly and quite unexpected of David, he chose a very peculiar but strange way to pile pressure on those who ran his family's army to give in to his demands for reform.
He hinted to his father in a letter that he intended to marry Elizabeth.
When Elizabeth first heard of this proposal, she gave a hearty guffaw. Was it not ludicrous that an aristocrat would want to have a peasant not as a mistress, not as a concubine but as partner and wife? David remembered that he gave a rare and faint smile upon seeing Elizabeth's reaction. That marriage proposal was a thinly veiled threat that took advantage of his family's prejudices shaped by society and culture. Would his family's good name be put to question if that proposed marriage were to take place? His father as expected objected and offered a qui pro quo that David wanted which was a concession on military reforms and the promotion of Elizabeth and a few others as officers.
David's ruse was largely successful but he did feel a tinge of regret that his father objected to his proposal of marriage to Elizabeth. She had all the values his family valued in their wives namely tenacity, discipline, sense of responsibility, competence and above all, loyalty. David almost enjoyed work with Elizabeth covering him and pointing out things that he could have otherwise overlooked. Perhaps most of all, she was a natural host notwithstanding her less than attractive appearance and made good company.
Against the backdrop of military promotions and a failed marriage proposal, the central government finally collapsed in a violent military coup sparking a mad scramble by opportunistic warlords over large swathes of land. The implementation of the military reforms David suggested was timely in preparing troops for battle as the skirmishes became large scale sieges with many cities, the Ruined City included, falling victim.
It took an armed strike against David's family to serve as a pretext for them to take action. Finally, troops were mobilised, supply lines were established, men were armed and battle plans were drawn. Operating from their base in hilly and rather inaccessible terrain located in the far west of the country, David's family managed to sweep through neighbouring regions with relative ease. Although their triumphs in the battlefield doubtlessly serve as a powerful boost to morale, both David and Elizabeth both knew that a long and protracted war lay ahead in the plains east of the country where troop movement is less inhibited by terrain constraints and cities and other targets while easy to seize were even more easier to lose.
Their gains on the battlefield appeared to be thrown into doubt as they vied for control of the once affluent cities of the East. War comrades, some of them close to both David and Elizabeth perished while many others were maimed in ferocious battle. Yet, the fighting spirit of David's family never seemed to waver be it due to the lust of reward or fear of punishment courtesy of David's military reforms or Elizabeth's near miraculous ability to raise the spirits of many a soldier. The mutual admiration between David and Elizabeth grew ever the more stronger in the face of the ever increasing challenges of war. Every now and then, David contemplated marriage with Elizabeth should all go well. Alas, it could have come into fruition if not for the fateful siege of the Ruined City.
The Ruined City was not dissimilar to the cities east of the country being easy to seize and yet easier to lose. Unlike the other cities, it had both strategic and symbolic value that made many an army face their demise by spending too much blood and treasure maintaining their grip on the city as they became targets for bloodthirsty and envious rivals. David's family however was determined that they would keep the city firmly in its grasp. Like the many warlords before them who occupied the city then perished, David's family believed that taking over this city would pave their way for total domination of the country. Unlike their failed and vanquished rivals, David's family knew that in order to secure the Ruined City, they must bar their rivals access to the Ruined City by controlling the many roads and paths that lead to it. That meant the need to spread their forces to surround the city. In order for that strategy to be effective however, a unit had to serve to divert attention from the attempt to surround the city. That would be done by sending a unit to mount a risky and near suicidal attack the city.
The execution of this strategy became the excuse for David and Elizabeth to part ways. They would not be leading units to take down targets together, instead they would be operating separately. Both David and Elizabeth accepted and agreed with the strategy without complaint. However, there was an unexpected commotion about who would lead the troops to stage that attack on the Ruined City. It served as one of moments in David's life he would wish to forget but never would.
It started when two officers volunteered to lead the unit to stage that daring attack. Few of those who were present when the two expressed their wish to brave death attempting to take the Ruined City were unmoved for they were awed for their accomplishments in the battlefield and their unmatched courage. Yet, the two officers who volunteered themselves were both shock and dismayed that the other should want to undertake such a dangerous task. Indeed, the two officers in question were David and Elizabeth.
In a very rare outburst, David raised his voice with his cool and gravitas almost giving way. He asked why it was deemed fit for a woman and a person of such lowly status to undertake so important a task. The retort came unexpectedly from Elizabeth who then insinuated that it was brash and irresponsible to send an officer of such importance and lineage to die in a diversionary attack. With uncharacteristic sarcasm and dryness in her voice almost reminiscent of David's demeanour, she questioned David's ability to rouse his men to lay down their lives for him and his family.
Elizabeth's words removed whatever inhibition David had that kept his emotions in check. As soon as she uttered those words, David lunged at her with an animalistic yell, with no other thought in his mind except for a powerful urge to manhandle her. Before he could lay his hands on Elizabeth however, he was brutally restrained and removed from her presence. That was to be the last time David saw Elizabeth for he was punished by incarceration for behaving in such an unruly manner while the generals of David's family acceded to Elizabeth's request to stage an attack on the Ruined City.
The strategy to take down the city was successful and it gave David's family the momentum and boost in morale so needed to establish themselves as the dominant power in the land. Nonetheless, it was not without cost. David knew enough of warfare to know that Elizabeth would have little chance of coming out of this attack in one piece. As soon as he was released from his imprisonment, he was offered the mission to return to the Ruined City which he accepted. So ends the account of the events leading to David's visit to the Ruined City to find Elizabeth and begins the account of what happened thereafter.
David spent his time en route in the military transport thinking about himself, Elizabeth and the war despite the blaring noise of the engines before replaying the final unhappy moments with Elizabeth in his head again, again and again. He recalled his shock, grief and anger at Elizabeth's resolve to seek death at the Ruined City. Shocked he was as he did not expect Elizabeth to do so. Grieved he was as he did not want Elizabeth whom he so loved to do so. Angered he was as he believed Elizabeth ought not to do so.
What were the reasons behind that decision? Despite putting in much thought, he could not find the answer to that question though it did occur to him that Elizabeth must have felt the same grief and shock when he too volunteered to be cannon fodder at the Ruined City. Would Elizabeth ever know that David made that decision out of loyalty and commitment to family and enterprise? Would she know that she angered David for usurping his role as a willing martyr for his family? Would she know that by doing so she would be taking away the life of the person David loved so much? David would love to know the answers to these questions.
Silent David was as the military transport rolled into the Ruined City. If not for his companions in the transport reminding him that they have reached their destination, he could have sat there for much longer in deep thought. Their destination within the city was a clearing within the concrete forest of ruined towers with a boulevard of shrivelled and leafless trees that lead to a sanctuary that was of traditional architecture.
In that sanctuary took place sacred rituals filled with religious and cultural significance. There the inhabitants of the Ruined City once offered prayers at important festivals marking the solstices, celebrated the birthdays of very young children and coming of age ceremonies, held grand but solemn weddings and equally grand and solemn funerals. The place was filled with a great sense of foreboding as it stank of death and visible were the scars of many years of war. David's face betrayed little to no emotion though many memories, thoughts and feelings must be swirling in his mind like powerful and invisible undercurrents. For it was within that sanctuary where David would find the person he was looking for, the beloved Elizabeth.
There were many large chambers within that sanctuary, amongst them a grim and silent room tiled with scratched marble and enclosed with grey mortar walls. That particular chamber was where the inhabitants of the Ruined City performed rituals to send off those who have departed the mortal realm. With its seats removed replaced with lines of coffins leaving behind a lonely altar, that chamber felt more like a makeshift morgue rather than a funeral parlour. In that room, David found her.
She was not what David remembered her to be. Instead of seeing the bubbly optimism and drive that so defined her, he saw a worn out and listless woman. She looked as if she was many years older than she actually was, shrivelled and dispirited. No longer she was a soldier but a mere peasant. What a horrible difference that cruel siege on the Ruined City made! Aware of how much she had suffered, David who was then walking at a brisk and fast pace slowed down, his rigid posture changing to a gentler one. Approaching her, he called her name before placing a hand softly on her shoulder.
Unexpectedly, Elizabeth gave a squawk and struggled, with her right arm flailing while the other arm made no movement for it was a bad arm. She suddenly winced in pain then calmed down. Turning her head to see who had approached her, she sprung back, landing very awkwardly on her bottom. What followed was profuse apologising to which David responded with mirthful laughter. That must be the first time Elizabeth heard him laugh.
What was David laughing at? Was it her silly, clumsy and bumbling appearance? Was it vindictive laughter to see her like this after she slighted him before the battle? Or was it pure relief that both her body and mind have survived the battle? More likely it was all three. Elizabeth may no longer be a soldier with shrapnel still embedded in her limbs and her movement possibly impaired for the rest of her life, but Elizabeth she still was. Yet, at the same time David felt that his eyes were no longer dry. He did not weep but Elizabeth started crying and bawling loudly, unsettling many in the chamber.
Both David and Elizabeth were helped to chairs where David spent some hours listening to Elizabeth. She oddly recounted the many battles and skirmishes long ago in between sobs and the occasional blowing of her nose. The experiences they and their comrades had been through and the difficulties they had to surmount were recollected by Elizabeth in astonishing detail. When the deaths and grievous injuries sustained by many a comrade and even those of their enemies came up, she sobbed and blowed her nose harder. No longer a woman of war, she saw herself as a mourner for the terrible bloodbath that was the civil war.
Interestingly enough, she did not cover the recent and successful assault on the Ruined City, the one that landed many a fine soldier in those coffins. Perhaps it was because the assault occurred so recently, she did not want to be reminded of it. David had an impression of what Elizabeth and her unit had to go through in the Ruined City through the reports he was given. It was good fortune that the enemy was caught unprepared as Elizabeth led the assault on the Ruined City. Notwithstanding that, they encountered stiff resistance which led to Elizabeth and her men being party to a dangerous exchange of fire in what was to be days of urban warfare. Men who survived and were with Elizabeth would attest to her tremendous display of courage and fearlessness as she fought, dodged and fought in the face of enemy fire, her every action and word spurred them to fight harder until reinforcements arrived. It was as if nothing mattered but victory.
It could be said that for the bravery of Elizabeth and her men the Ruined City is taken. Some questions remained unanswered. Why did Elizabeth volunteer in what could be her last battle? Why was Elizabeth and for that matter the men who fought with her so eager to lay down their lives for his family's ambition? David never asked so he never had the answers to these questions.
He could fathom a guess that Elizabeth and indeed all of their comrades who fought with them were more than willing to lay down their lives in the hopes of laying their hands on treasure, titles and a better life. Most of the soldiers he knew lived in austere conditions before finding their fortunes in war. Elizabeth, he knew, would herself be a beneficiary for her deeds on the battlefield with her family honoured and her pockets lined with gold.
Was the lure of the betterment of her life the sole reason though? David thought not. As Elizabeth's outpourings were drawing to a close, she lamented quietly that she wished she could become David's bride, something that David's family could only accept if she were of higher status and if she had rendered outstanding service. Would David be the bridegroom of a paralysed woman? In response to Elizabeth's expressed wish to be David's bride, he patted the back of Elizabeth's palm with his. There were more urgent matters at hand that he had attend to that would be more difficult given Elizabeth's condition. One thing was for sure, he would need her help doing his duties in his brief stay at the now liberated Ruined City.
It took one to two days of celebration and visiting soldiers and civilians in the Ruined City, a few more months of overcoming whatever resistance against David's family and a bit more time persuading his family for Elizabeth to be his bride. Like their relationship before the wedding ceremony, the wedding ceremony was anything for it was solemn and sacred and attended by powerful families and figures. Indeed, it was a rather harrowing ordeal for Elizabeth's family who were not used to such pomp and circumstance. More importantly, they were now bound in matrimony and were now ever the more united to face the many challenges that will present themselves being so very near to heart of power in the country.
David and Elizabeth would find themselves hard at work placating and rebuilding the country, their efforts especially concentrated at the Ruined City. Eventually, they would be honoured with peerages and titles for their hard work and dedication and will be known to the world as Lord and Lady of the once Ruined City.
One can be forgiven for summarising the story of David and Elizabeth as a fairy tale where the ugly peasant caught the eye of a prince and became a princess. For Elizabeth was no mere peasant, David was no mere prince and both had to cross rivers of blood and shed countless tears and sweat to earn what they have. Let it be that their story inspire generations to come.
1
behold.
what was once a beautifully written piece, I will transform it into some indescribable schitt with the courtesy of Gizoogle.
proceed with caution.
here its
Da Aristocrat, Da Peasant n' Da City
what was once a beautifully written piece, I will transform it into some indescribable schitt with the courtesy of Gizoogle.
proceed with caution.
here its
Da Aristocrat, Da Peasant n' Da City
Spoiler:
1
Well, I think you succeeded in creating a tale of romance that isn't shallow. However, the way it's written makes it feel as though it drags on and on. The exposition and backstory take up more than half of it.
1
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
d(^_^)(^_^)d wrote...
Well, I think you succeeded in creating a tale of romance that isn't shallow. However, the way it's written makes it feel as though it drags on and on. The exposition and backstory take up more than half of it.The story proper is the exposition and the backstory in this case. You might have read the draft in the Cesspit which does not even cover what David did when he entered the city instead ending off as a cliffhanger. (I have edited it so that the ending is contained in a spoiler. I intend to pen another ending to that story.)
The long exposition and backstory should be consistent with my tastes in reading. Who the characters are? Where they are? What are they doing? All of these questions I would like addressed.
Finding our female lead is not really the point of the story. Isn't finding a woman much easier than going clearing that cesspit which is a civil war? The point of the story is to explain why that woman mattered.
As to how it drags on and on and on, I would be glad if you give me a few examples from the story. I believe it is the impression that I am not getting to the point of whether our female lead is found.
I do have some barbs to throw at you for your entry, though if it pleases you, I enjoyed your entry.
high_time wrote...
Dreadful ebonicsSplendid satire. I now understand how you felt when you read my entry. I want to reproduce our quarrel in this thread. Now that I am done writing this, I want to argue with someone.
1
The story proper is the exposition and the backstory in this case.
When you put it like that, it doesn't drag. But when you think about it in terms of the point being the search for Elizabeth like I did when I read it . . .
The long exposition and backstory should be consistent with my tastes in reading.
You and I have very different tastes, that's for sure.
I do have some barbs to throw at you for your entry, though if it pleases you, I enjoyed your entry.
Glad to hear it. Both parts.
0
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
high_time wrote...
behold.what was once a beautifully written piece, I will transform it into some indescribable schitt with the courtesy of Gizoogle.
proceed with caution.
here its
Da Aristocrat, Da Peasant n' Da City
Spoiler:
I intend to go ahead by copying and pasting our argument in the Cesspit tomorrow. Are you okay with this?
[quote="d(^_^)(^_^)d"]
When you put it like that, it doesn't drag. But when you think about it in terms of the point being the search for Elizabeth like I did when I read it . . .
In media res technique. Not really dissimilar to what you have done for your entry. I agree that unlike your entry that technique was not made clear.
0
In media res technique. Not really dissimilar to what you have done for your entry. I agree that unlike your entry that technique was not made clear.
Yes, very similar.
I didn't say this earlier, but all the exposition in your entry is very detailed and thought-out, though that's kind of where the problem I have with it stems from. A lot of detail all at once and no breaks in between.
0
leonard267 wrote...
I intend to go ahead by copying and pasting our argument in the Cesspit tomorrow. Are you okay with this?
go ahead, I think it's already unintentionally lulzy enough =)
1
xninebreaker
FAKKU Writer
leonard267 wrote...
She was not what David remembered her to be. Instead of seeing the bubbly optimism and drive that so defined her, he saw a worn out and listless woman. She looked as if she was many years older than she actually was, shrivelled and dispirited. No longer she was a soldier but a mere peasant. What a horrible difference that cruel siege on the Ruined City made! Aware of how much she had suffered, David who was then walking at a brisk and fast pace slowed down, his rigid posture changing to a gentler one. Approaching her, he called her name before placing a hand softly on her shoulder. Unexpectedly, Elizabeth gave a squawk and struggled, with her right arm flailing while the other arm made no movement for it was a bad arm. She suddenly winced in pain then calmed down. Turning her head to see who had approached her, she sprung back, landing very awkwardly on her bottom. What followed was profuse apologising to which David responded with mirthful laughter. That must be the first time Elizabeth heard him laugh.
Elizabeth's imagery and character crashing down hits pretty hard; the powerful description indicates that she's almost broken at this point. The following paragroups don't seem to be half as traumatic though. Evidently, she's still functional enough to help rebuild the city, but I'm not so sure sold that she is the same woman that David once loved. At one point she expresses her desire to marry David:
leonard267 wrote...
Would David be the bridegroom of a paralysed woman? In response to Elizabeth's expressed wish to be David's bride, he patted the back of Elizabeth's palm with his.While she is expressing her love for him, not once in the narrative does he explicitly reciprocate the love. With her willful spirit gone, and seemingly desperate grasp for happiness, it is almost as if David is just pitying her. Or maybe I'm putting an unnecessarily dark twist on the story. I blame my most recent English class. Nothing but negative connotations in the books and stories we read.
I don't think you needed the bit about sorting out the marriage at the end. It feels unnecessary, and cutting it out would make the ending flow a bit better I think.
Nonetheless, an enjoyable read!
0
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
d(^_^)(^_^)d wrote...
In media res technique. Not really dissimilar to what you have done for your entry. I agree that unlike your entry that technique was not made clear.
Yes, very similar.
I didn't say this earlier, but all the exposition in your entry is very detailed and thought-out, though that's kind of where the problem I have with it stems from. A lot of detail all at once and no breaks in between.
Can you give me an example from the entry? I am not sure what you mean by 'breaks'.
The story is told in third person and feels like a report or an oral account of what had happened. Perhaps this is why you felt that there are no breaks because right after the characters and the Ruined City are introduced, the events are explained. Once one event is explained, in comes another.
Maybe it is because of a lack of dialogue or little explanation of the many subplots. (By subplots I meant details of their training, how David's reforms affected his men, how did the feelings of envy aroused from his promotion affected his work and so on) If I had to elaborate on the subplots, I'd expect a full length novel!
xninebreaker wrote...
Elizabeth's imagery and character crashing down hits pretty hard; the powerful description indicates that she's almost broken at this point. The following paragroups don't seem to be half as traumatic though. Evidently, she's still functional enough to help rebuild the city, but I'm not so sure sold that she is the same woman that David once loved. At one point she expresses her desire to marry David Did not make it clear that left with nothing else to do and having no need to keep a stiff upper lip, she allowed the gruesome memories of war to overwhelm her. Her rather clumsy outpouring of her feelings upon seeing David showed that. Should also have shown that David was mistaken into thinking that Elizabeth had changed. Elizabeth was still Elizabeth but made an invalid.
xninebreaker wrote...
While she is expressing her love for him, not once in the narrative does he explicitly reciprocate the love. With her willful spirit gone, and seemingly desperate grasp for happiness, it is almost as if David is just pitying her. Or maybe I'm putting an unnecessarily dark twist on the story. I blame my most recent English class. Nothing but negative connotations in the books and stories we read.Strange. Though it was made clear that David loved her much earlier given his botched attempt to marry her the first time. Placing his hand over hers must be the first gesture of love he showed though. I see that gesture as a form of consolation after she gave the reasons why she felt listless and sad, namely her horrid memories of fighting a war. Also, it was reassurance that he would marry her after he is done with the war.
Consistent with what I expect of romance, no silly and empty shows of love, just dedication and devotion to duty and work as seen when both of them worked hard to establish control over western half of the country.
xninebreaker wrote...
I don't think you needed the bit about sorting out the marriage at the end. It feels unnecessary, and cutting it out would make the ending flow a bit better I think.Nonetheless, an enjoyable read!
I needed to include the marriage scene. Reflects perfectly what I think marriage ought to be - a very harrowing occasion, not romantic at all. How they can be Lord and Lady if there were no reference made to it?
Male lead is autistic, female lead is ugly, my kind of story. If this ending is not to your liking, I am thinking of preparing another one for you. Of course, this ending was more about Elizabeth's reasons for taking part in that dangerous siege (mainly out a desire to marry David), her relief that all went well and what happened thereafter.
1
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
Reasons Why This Piece Is No Good, Compiled by high_time and leonard267
high_time:
it's not about the length you see. I've read through all of those and enjoyed it, but I can't say I've thoroughly read it. I just read the parts that were understandable. still, there's many parts where I'm completely lost to what's going on.
particularly this usage of language isn't something of my preference. it just kinda sounds too formal and rigid to me, and I don't have that much of an expertise in reading to make up an understanding of this. at some points I can't even distinguish the parts you want to deem as important or the parts you want to stress out. most of time it's just me.
and don't get me started on the actual story and content stuff, I'm very cruel and unfair when it comes to this. really, the most thing I hate about writing is that I have to criticize people sometimes even though I can't really write any shit.
I think, if I were to write these kind of things, maybe it'll go along the
destruction of Rome by the barbarians and such. somewhat along the lines of a historical fiction. go get some few historical references from wikipedia and change it to adjust it to the story. maybe I can introduce Dave as a viking descendant, and Liz as a part of a nomad tribe known for its sexual prowess like the amazoness.
Dave being effeminate enough to pass out as a woman who pretends to be a man, and Liz, a woman with giant jugs and a large penis who masturbates every day. gave them a descriptions of ridiculous looking erotic apparel similar to cosplay, and give them the moe characteristics. every day they partake in a S&M relationship where Dave becomes the little girl and LIz as his mother.
due to the aftermath of Rome destruction by the barbarians, they go and set out to form the New City in the ruined place because they had ran out of places to have sex in public, and having sex both in the ruins and a new city in the same place would be good. because this story uses a hentai logic, they did not get pregnant even after having so much sex, particularly Dave, since he's a man, even though he's also a trap with thin, slender and prim body.
add some ridiculous absurdities and lots of obscene pornographic things and you get what I usually write. also add hermaphrodites, cross-dressing guys, tentacles and that would most likely offend many people in historical department, especially when someone wants to satirize their history and turning it into something made by a horny Japanese who reads too much and still can't even understand a single word.
later on I'll give the cliffhanger of Dave getting pregnant, and during the pregnancy he will form three titties, multiple genitals and a hymen-coated vagina. the adorable hermaphrodite kid, subject to be a violent masturbation fodder by pedophiles, lolicons, and many other people who are just looking for kinky fantasies. that's it when the kid grew up.
as the ending, Dave, the loli kid, and the mother would have lots of sex at one time, described in great length and detail on how pleasant an incest sexual intercourse between the hermaphrodite daughter, father, and mother. all of them being hermaphrodites of course. it goes to greatly offend the decency and prudishness of many people all around.
it will do a nice touch to end this by making the three of them commit suicide after that because the Author told them so. basically making the readers think 'what the fuck am I reading?'
or we could just go on with a cliched 'they lived happily ever after' the ruined city has now became a city filled with hermaphrodites and they had lots of happy sex - everybody was happy - the legacy continues on until the present. whenever you want to take the true path of a hermaphrodite, come and visit us anytime.
signed,
The Chieftain.
===
yeah just like that.
as an alternative to making it the city filled with hermaphrodites, I'll probably try to write something like this one.
http://yuri-ism.com/2014/01/17/release-224-earth-girls-finale/
make the girls had lots of sex and they would give birth to a child by laying eggs after having kinky girl-on-girl intercourse.
leonard267:
I will do a satirical parody of it if I have the time. I think it will take less effort.
If I had written it properly like a typical story with dialogue it could go to over 10000 words with me explaining what had happened in detail like the resentment among rank and file David felt when he was promoted to an officer of high rank.
I think just about every part of story is important. What I had done to show who David and Elizabeth are, what they had done in the years leading up to the successful capture of the Ruined City and how they feel about each other and the motivation behind what they did.
I believe the most important part ought to be the last time David met Elizabeth in a quarrel. David and Elizabeth's exploits in the military, the first marriage proposal can be left out.
That said, can you give me examples from what I have written that you did not understand? I suspect it was how the Ruined City would be taken. That style of writing I think was subconsciously taken from the Lord of the Rings appendices and journalist articles. Almost little to no dialogue at all.
Do ignore the part about me writing it properly. I realised some problems I had with my own writing namely my failure to make myself relate to these characters because I am writing in third person with little dialogue and you will not believe it, I felt that my story felt too general and not detailed enough.
As for your criticism, there are very good pieces of work that I disliked like Edgar Allan Poe's work which gave little mention of what is happening instead choosing to focus on one's feelings and thoughts. If you could take an example from that article and indicate that it made little sense to you, I would be glad.
high_time:
okay, let me go on with d's style of reviewing.
probably you want to shorten the sentences and using simpler words. using less commas and using less relative pronouns like 'who', 'whom', 'which', 'whose' could also make it easier to understand.
well it also depends on how you use the relative pronoun.
David's destination was long ago a gleaming metropolis and a great centre of trade and commerce that was regrettably brought to its knees by being one of the first victims of a long, bloody and devastating civil war.
probably a bit too long of a sentence.
"David's destination was once a gleaming metropolis. A great centre of trade and commerce. It was brought down during a long, bloody, and devastating civil war."
That city fell into the clutches of many a warlord who lost hold as soon as they gained control with another round of plunder, pillage and rape for each change of hands.
"The city fell into the clutches of many different warlords. Plunder, pillage and rape goes for each changing power."
the rest, well, you'd probably got the idea to make it much shorter and less infodumps.
After many self-styled conquerors foisted their names onto that city in a display of disgusting egocentricity, the city was given that awful moniker, The Ruined City, by the man on the street to avoid confusion among her many names and perhaps to dissociate it from what it once was.
could be worded in much simpler words.
"Many conquerors had arrogantly stomped upon the city, plasting their names and continue on ruining it. That's how the Ruined City moniker originates. It was given by some dirty peasant to avoid confusion. Names so much to remember, so they decided to stick to that instead."
By the time the city fell under the control of David's family, the Ruined City was no more than a collection of ugly monoliths made of bones of steel, bodies of concrete and skins of glass. It must have struck those who took as much as a glance at the city to realise the destruction that terrible war wrought on life, property and much more. Indeed, it made those whose hearts were not hardened by the war feel as if their victory was a Pyrrhic and a hollow one.
"When David's family came to power, the Ruined City was merely a collection of ugly steel monoliths, concrete bodies, and skins of glasses. Must be a shock when they had realized the terrible aftermath of war to this place. Even the victory felt as much as empty. Nothing good ever came from destruction."
===
that's how I word it. you probably can figure out the rest.
again, this is merely my personal preference. I find things easier to understand this way.
I'm sorry to be such an ass, but that's what I thought =/
leonard267:
I see. I thought what I have written is easy to understand. Thank goodness I am not writing a memorandum.
It was not my intention to show off when I write in this style but rather to set the tone of the story. This is a very grim affair from the point of view of a very grim aristocrat. The difficulty I had is to make sure each sentence sounds proper. If the story did not read well, it would sound like a McGonagall poem.
If you have read through the long articles in that journalist's blog I have shown you, you might realise that he is more verbose than me! Verbosity has always been my style of writing.
high_time:
I actually had understood your previous writings. probably because it's a generally narrative writing and I have trouble imagining descriptive things. your previous ones are monologues and it has about one or few things to tell so I can easily get a gist to what's going on.
either way, I think it's not really about the verbosity. I think, what it has in the Detroit article that made me understood, is the Author managed to convince me to read on because he has something a say. his political views and such for example. he had a certain point to tell rather than just merely describing things.
apart from the writing format and such, I might want to ask you stuff: what was the point of the story? why we must care about the meetings between David and Elizabeth? why must we kept read on and on about the details of things that were completely alien to us? what was the message the Author want to convey that were actually important for us?
no, not about the satirizing things. because when we want to satirize, we tend to exaggerate something, probably in a humorous manner. this writing doesn't get the same vibe as your usual satiric tones.
I probably complained about writing because I can't exactly get my finger about it and firstly got to the most visible problem.
you probably had said it once in xnine's thread about making readers care about what's going on. though, if you're going to mainly focus on the writings and the happenings along without focusing on the main essence, we probably had differences on thinking about things - not really your fault - it's just merely the differing preference.
compare your previous monologues that I find easy to understand and this one along with your attempt on creating a historical fiction. you probably see what I meant. or you can try reading Associate's winter entry that you liked.
either way, it's just my biased opinion. probably there's a point but I truly failed to spot the details right away. still, I can say that it's a well-written piece, and a lot of effort has been put to pen it down.
though I can also say, that I skipped the detailed descriptions while reading many stories out there, and mainly focus on the general idea as I could just try to imagine the rest as I want it to be. if I find something hard to read, I won't truly bother hurting my brain just to comprehend what's written. you can say that my opinion is unacceptable in the literary community, but that's fine.
what matters is that other people enjoy your works and my opinion doesn't mean anything much. don't let it get to you and just write the way you wanted - even if it's just to get things done.
===
damn, now I sound really rude and bigoted. I truly regret myself saying that.
leonard267:
damn, now I sound really rude and bigoted. I truly regret myself saying that.[/quote]
high, one ill turn deserves another. I know you have apologised but I am not going to let this pass because there are parts of your criticism that I cannot accept.
he had a certain point to tell rather than just merely describing things.
apart from the writing format and such, I might want to ask you stuff: what was the point of the story?
why must we kept read on and on about the details of things that were completely alien to us?
Man is in place. Who is this man? What is this place? Man is looking for woman. Who is this woman? Why is that woman so important? Where is this place and who is this man are addressed in the first four paragraphs. Who is that woman is addressed in the fifth paragraph onwards. It is made very clear. xnine's entry did not mention the woman Peter was looking for which was the very important in making the reader care. I attempt to address it here.
I can only imagine that you did not care about David even though it is plain that he is looking for someone very important and there are many, many paragraphs that are not just mere descriptions on why the woman mattered.
that I skipped the detailed descriptions
The only paragraphs that were purely description were about the Ruined City and the sanctuary within it. What you called mere description contained reasons why you should care.
I can accept that the verbosity of the language made it hard to figure it out what David's motivations are, established very early in the story. I will not accept that I am merely describing events that passed unless you give me a concrete example from what I have written.
if I find something hard to read, I won't truly bother hurting my brain just to comprehend what's written.
Well, this goes back to the problem that it is too verbose isn't it?
if you're going to mainly focus on the writings and the happenings along without focusing on the main essence.
What do you mean by essence?! Can you simply state that you would like the story to indicate why I should care about David?
I will say again that I accept that it is too verbose but will not accept that it is mere description unless evidence that indicates otherwise is provided.
damn, now I sound really rude and bigoted. I truly regret myself saying that.
You can try editing the parts you think you found offensive.
Keep it coming. Arguing and quarreling about a piece of writing is very invigorating. I think the real problem is that the font is too small or the fact that the journalist was writing in first person. I see little difference between the style of the journalist's articles and mine. He went through a lot of the history of Detroit and why it mattered.
high_time:
I don't like to argue, and I find it to be pretty much pointless, but let me rephrase myself. I do find my criticisms to be quite unfair given that I cannot really appreciate this kind of writing.
I have talked to you about this through PM many times already, so you probably would know it much better than anyone else.
It is made very clear.
I have written in the previous posts that it's not clear enough for me to understand.
it's also not that easy to read for me so I merely just skipped things. you know how raged and hurt I am the last time I tried to do a comprehensive reading of complex writings.
I can only imagine that you did not care about David even though it is plain that he is looking for someone very important and there are many, many paragraphs that are not just mere descriptions on why the woman mattered.
again, I have told about my selfish preferences when it comes to writing.
The only paragraphs that were purely description were about the Ruined City and the sanctuary within it. What you called mere description contained reasons why you should care.
I can accept that the verbosity of the language made it hard to figure it out what David's motivations are, established very early in the story. I will not accept that I am merely describing events that passed unless you give me a concrete example from what I have written.
I can accept that the verbosity of the language made it hard to figure it out what David's motivations are, established very early in the story. I will not accept that I am merely describing events that passed unless you give me a concrete example from what I have written.
refer to the above reply and the above.
Well, this goes back to the problem that it is too verbose isn't it?
exactly.
What do you mean by essence?! Can you simply state that you would like the story to indicate why I should care about David?
I will say again that I accept that it is too verbose but will not accept that it is mere description unless evidence that indicates otherwise is provided.
I will say again that I accept that it is too verbose but will not accept that it is mere description unless evidence that indicates otherwise is provided.
the main point besides the story.
I'll give one example about Norwegian Wood who deals with utter nihilism and the lack of willingness to live.
I take it as a romance story between a man and woman and how they go through hardships together. so maybe it's just me not reading through things enough.
You can try editing the parts you think you found offensive.
Keep it coming. Arguing and quarreling about a piece of writing is very invigorating. I think the real problem is that the font is too small or the fact that the journalist was writing in first person. I see little difference between the style of the journalist's articles and mine. He went through a lot of the history of Detroit and why it mattered.
Keep it coming. Arguing and quarreling about a piece of writing is very invigorating. I think the real problem is that the font is too small or the fact that the journalist was writing in first person. I see little difference between the style of the journalist's articles and mine. He went through a lot of the history of Detroit and why it mattered.
well, it just don't work anymore since you already read and quoted it right? =)
leonard267:
This is done out because I thought it fun.
high_time wrote...
I don't like to argue, and I find it to be pretty much pointless. If we are on good terms, there is no problem arguing. It clarifies matters which is what I am going to demonstrate.
I have written in the previous posts that it's not clear enough for me to understand.
I wouldn't call it not clear. From what you have told me, you said that you could not understand what I was writing because of the complex sentence structures (which is always a hallmark of my writing, satirical or otherwise). I believe I have spent entire paragraphs introducing the characters and the city. If one understood those paragraphs, the contents of the story would be made clear.
I would say "too verbose to understand".
I tried to do a comprehensive reading of complex writings.
I wouldn't call this parody a complex story. It is simply why a man is looking for a woman. The only thing I agree that is complex are the sentence structures. This is done because it is told in the point of view of a grim aristocrat.
the main point besides the story.
I'll give one example about Norwegian Wood who deals with utter nihilism and the lack of willingness to live.
I take it as a romance story between a man and woman and how they go through hardships together. so maybe it's just me not reading through things enough.
I'll give one example about Norwegian Wood who deals with utter nihilism and the lack of willingness to live.
I take it as a romance story between a man and woman and how they go through hardships together. so maybe it's just me not reading through things enough.
The word you are looking for is "theme", I believe. The main point of the story is a man looking for a woman.
well, it just don't work anymore since you already read and quoted it right? =)
Of course, if you are going to write remarks that you will regret in the future, I believe the advice for you to edit your post will come in handy.
1
Can you give me an example from the entry? I am not sure what you mean by 'breaks'.
The story is told in third person and feels like a report or an oral account of what had happened. Perhaps this is why you felt that there are no breaks because right after the characters and the Ruined City are introduced, the events are explained. Once one event is explained, in comes another.
Maybe it is because of a lack of dialogue or little explanation of the many subplots. (By subplots I meant details of their training, how David's reforms affected his men, how did the feelings of envy aroused from his promotion affected his work and so on) If I had to elaborate on the subplots, I'd expect a full length novel!
The story is told in third person and feels like a report or an oral account of what had happened. Perhaps this is why you felt that there are no breaks because right after the characters and the Ruined City are introduced, the events are explained. Once one event is explained, in comes another.
Maybe it is because of a lack of dialogue or little explanation of the many subplots. (By subplots I meant details of their training, how David's reforms affected his men, how did the feelings of envy aroused from his promotion affected his work and so on) If I had to elaborate on the subplots, I'd expect a full length novel!
Your story essentially has two parts to it. One is the report on what has happened, and the other is what's going on in the present. I would have jumped back and forth between the two parts to give breaks in the backstory because, as I've already said, It's just too much for me all at once.
I'd compare your story to a 2 hour movie where the first 3/4's of it is one, big action sequence. I don't care how amazing it is, you're going to get tired of it after a while.
And yeah, I imagine that you very well could turn this thing into a full novel should you wish to. I hadn't seen your reply by the way. Thanks for the message.
0
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
[quote="d(^_^)(^_^)d"]
Your story essentially has two parts to it. One is the report on what has happened, and the other is what's going on in the present. I would have jumped back and forth between the two parts to give breaks in the backstory because, as I've already said, It's just too much for me all at once.
I'd compare your story to a 2 hour movie where the first 3/4's of it is one, big action sequence. I don't care how amazing it is, you're going to get tired of it after a while.
And yeah, I imagine that you very well could turn this thing into a full novel should you wish to. I hadn't seen your reply by the way. Thanks for the message.
I disagree that it is one action scene like the battle of Helm's Deep (sic) portrayed by Peter Jackson's movie that dragged on and on forever. If I had to compare it with a movie, it would be a confusing movie like the Pirates of the Caribbean, The Lone Ranger or anything else that John Depp is in. Many plots and subplots which are not properly explained or moves too fast. (I happen to like those movies though)
I feel that I am your antithesis in so many ways. While you prefer things that are complex, I prefer the simple. (I'd argue that this story is very simple) While you prefer dialogues, I prefer monologues or third person narration. While you prefer exotic styles of writing like time jumps, I prefer things to be explained chronologically (of course excepting the very first part of the story).
I can say that my tastes in writing come from reading non-fiction where points are cogently set out. I really wonder what is yours. Your writing feels as if I am watching a film rather than reading a newspaper article.
Your story essentially has two parts to it. One is the report on what has happened, and the other is what's going on in the present. I would have jumped back and forth between the two parts to give breaks in the backstory because, as I've already said, It's just too much for me all at once.
I'd compare your story to a 2 hour movie where the first 3/4's of it is one, big action sequence. I don't care how amazing it is, you're going to get tired of it after a while.
And yeah, I imagine that you very well could turn this thing into a full novel should you wish to. I hadn't seen your reply by the way. Thanks for the message.
I disagree that it is one action scene like the battle of Helm's Deep (sic) portrayed by Peter Jackson's movie that dragged on and on forever. If I had to compare it with a movie, it would be a confusing movie like the Pirates of the Caribbean, The Lone Ranger or anything else that John Depp is in. Many plots and subplots which are not properly explained or moves too fast. (I happen to like those movies though)
I feel that I am your antithesis in so many ways. While you prefer things that are complex, I prefer the simple. (I'd argue that this story is very simple) While you prefer dialogues, I prefer monologues or third person narration. While you prefer exotic styles of writing like time jumps, I prefer things to be explained chronologically (of course excepting the very first part of the story).
I can say that my tastes in writing come from reading non-fiction where points are cogently set out. I really wonder what is yours. Your writing feels as if I am watching a film rather than reading a newspaper article.
0
I disagree that it is one action scene like the battle of Helm's Deep (sic) portrayed by Peter Jackson's movie that dragged on and on forever. If I had to compare it with a movie, it would be a confusing movie like the Pirates of the Caribbean, The Lone Ranger or anything else that John Depp is in. Many plots and subplots which are not properly explained or moves too fast. (I happen to like those movies though)
I wasn't necessarily saying that it's like an action scene. I was simply trying to say that it's very possible to have too much of a good thing. You have too much monologue of a guy recounting past events, its going to get boring after a while. If you have too many explosions, guns and too much slaughter, it's going to get boring after a while.
I feel that I am your antithesis in so many ways. While you prefer things that are complex, I prefer the simple. (I'd argue that this story is very simple) While you prefer dialogues, I prefer monologues or third person narration. While you prefer exotic styles of writing like time jumps, I prefer things to be explained chronologically (of course the very first part of the story).
The feeling is neutral.
I can say that my tastes in writing come from reading non-fiction where points are cogently set out. I really wonder what is yours. Your writing feels as if I am watching a film rather than reading a newspaper article.
I think it would be fair to say that my writing is influenced to some degree by movies. I'm trying to decide if the fact that my stories feel like movies is good or bad. I also read a lot fantasy, and I just happen to tend to like things that have more complicated structures. I mentioned Baccano! in my reply to your reply to The Tempest. It follows something like 17 characters across 3 different plot lines, and if that wasn't enough, it also jumps back forth between the past and the present. And it does all of that in 16 episodes. Needless to say, it's one of my favorite shows of all time.
0
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
d(^_^)(^_^)d wrote...
I wasn't necessarily saying that it's like an action scene. I was simply trying to say that it's very possible to have too much of a good thing. You have too much monologue of a guy recounting past events, its going to get boring after a while. If you have too many explosions, guns and too much slaughter, it's going to get boring after a while.
I am not quite sure what you are referring to now. Are you referring to the theme or the setting of the story being the same throughout the entire story or are you suggesting that the plot does not move? (I thought you are talking about the plot. I am quite sure that there were a lot of things that moved the plot of this story)
I would not mind that the whole story is told in a narrative or monologue provided that plot advances. If the entire story is a monologue or if the entire story is set in war, I would not mind it if something happens. I am reminded one contest entry that everyone except for me liked which involved spending 99 percent of the words on one huge action scene only for the reader to find out that they are fighting over a skin of water. This I thought was an example of something not happening.
The feeling is neutral.
Not 'the feeling is mutual'?
I also read a lot fantasy, and I just happen to tend to like things that have more complicated structures. I mentioned Baccano!
I see. Thank you for the recommendation. The anachronological cartoon that I enjoyed is Suzumiya Haruhi. I feel like stoning some twins after watching Yosuga no Sora. Even then, I had to make out how the episodes play out chronologically before I could appreciate them. Not confident that it can be done properly in writing.
The only fantasy stories that I've properly read is the Lord of the Rings and in the Hall of the Dragon King. Loved the Lord of the Rings for its almost non-fictional monologue and appendices. Not so much for the time skips where Book Six begins from where Book Four left off and Book Five begins where Book Three left off.
I feel that reality is much more fascinating than fantasy so I read up on current affairs instead.
0
I am not quite sure what you are referring to now. Are you referring to the theme or the setting of the story being the same throughout the entire story or are you suggesting that the plot does not move? (I thought you are talking about the plot. I am quite sure that there were a lot of things that moved the plot of this story)
I would not mind that the whole story is told in a narrative or monologue provided that plot advances. If the entire story is a monologue or if the entire story is set in war, I would not mind it if something happens. I am reminded one contest entry that everyone except for me liked which involved spending 99 percent of the words on one huge action scene only for the reader to find out that they are fighting over a skin of water. This I thought was an example of something not happening.
I would not mind that the whole story is told in a narrative or monologue provided that plot advances. If the entire story is a monologue or if the entire story is set in war, I would not mind it if something happens. I am reminded one contest entry that everyone except for me liked which involved spending 99 percent of the words on one huge action scene only for the reader to find out that they are fighting over a skin of water. This I thought was an example of something not happening.
I'm referring to the fact that your story is all monologue. Yes, the plot advances. We're discovering all the stuff about David's past and why he is going to the Ruined City, but I just don't like how it's all monologue.
Even then, I had to make out how the episodes play out chronologically before I could appreciate them. Not confident that it can be done properly in writing.
I don't get what everyone's obsession is with time. To know the order in which a story's events happen can certainly put things in perspective, but I'm of the opinion that they don't have to be told in chronological order to be told well. We have characters that need to be explored and problems that need to be solved. Those two aspects of storytelling are the crux that should be focused on.
I feel that reality is much more fascinating than fantasy so I read up on current affairs instead.
That reminds me of a line from one of the Sherlock Holmes stories about how the most ordinary of cases can be the most interesting and hardest to solve.
0
leonard267
FAKKU Non-Writer
d(^_^)(^_^)d wrote...
I'm referring to the fact that your story is all monologue. Yes, the plot advances. We're discovering all the stuff about David's past and why he is going to the Ruined City, but I just don't like how it's all monologue.
I see. Your dislike for third person narration mirrors my reservations for reading or using dialogue as a means of exposition. As I have implied many times when commenting about how I feel about what you write, I find it hard to appreciate your attempts in explaining the plot through dialogue. This is not really because I don't like exchanges in dialogue but rather because I find dialogues hard to decipher. In contrast, the parts of your entry that I liked were the first person explanations, an example being why our hero decided to give in to the villain's demands, delivered in a monologue.
I won't call my parody of xnine's work a monologue. Monologues I believe are characterised with the main character talking to himself, i.e. first person. This is more of a standard third person narration that really resembles a report of events, my preference of reading material.
d(^_^)(^_^)d wrote...
I don't get what everyone's obsession is with time. To know the order in which a story's events happen can certainly put things in perspective, but I'm of the opinion that they don't have to be told in chronological order to be told well. We have characters that need to be explored and problems that need to be solved. Those two aspects of storytelling are the crux that should be focused on.
Time is not really an obsession for my case but rather a practical concern. I am brought up to think that writing is a form of communication. If an instruction manual begins with Step 8, continues with Step 5, lists the rest of the steps and expects the reader to figure out the correct order, I would think that the instruction manual communicated information poorly. Same with a police report. Events are best explained chronologically to facilitate comprehension. We have a sense of time in which we could put events and characters into context. If one has difficulty deciphering content then it is impossible to sympathise with the characters and the plot. Writing chronologically does help to orientate me.
I hope it is alright if you can confirm my suspicions that you and the Winter Contest judges view reading and / or writing like figuring out a puzzle. As for me, when faced with any written material, I would expect the written material to convey information instead of presenting itself as a piece of art that can be interpreted in so many ways. This is what someone who communicates well least want to happen. Again, taste in reading.
d(^_^)(^_^)d wrote...
That reminds me of a line from one of the Sherlock Holmes stories about how the most ordinary of cases can be the most interesting and hardest to solve.
I am definitely obsessed with reality. I love history as much as current affairs which I see as an extension of history. This is why I don't think I could write fiction properly because there will be a niggling thought in my mind telling me to associate fictional material more with the real world i.e. non fiction!
I really have to ask, what did you mean by 'the feeling is neutral'?
I have so much more to talk about my entry, especially what inspired me to parody xnine's characters in that way. I was wondering if you felt the same for yours. I will post a question on your thread soon.
1
Your dislike for third person narration mirrors my reservations for reading or using dialogue as a means of exposition.
It's not that I dislike it. What I don't like is the extent to which you used it in your story. You have what amounts to 10+ pages of third person narration with no breaks from it.
This is not really because I don't like exchanges in dialogue but rather because I find dialogues hard to decipher.
I would agree in that sometimes dialogue alone isn't enough, and we need a little extra to go on outside of the dialogue. Usually though, I have no trouble with dialogue.
I won't call my parody of xnine's work a monologue. Monologues I believe are characterised with the main character talking to himself, i.e. first person. This is more of a standard third person narration that really resembles a report of events, my preference of reading material.
Yes, third person narration would be more accurate than monologue.
Time is not really an obsession for my case but rather a practical concern. I am brought up to think that writing is a form of communication. If an instruction manual begins with Step 8, continues with Step 5, lists the rest of the steps and expects the reader to figure out the correct order, I would think that the instruction manual communicated information poorly. Same with a police report. Events are best explained chronologically to facilitate comprehension. We have a sense of time in which we could put events and characters into context. If one has difficulty deciphering content then it is impossible to sympathise with the characters and the plot. Writing chronologically does help to orientate me.
Yeah, I understand. I mean, for one, we all live a world where time continues to flow without jumping back and forth. I'm not saying everything should screw with it, but I do think that it's not necessary for everything to adhere strongly to it. A guide that places Step 5 before Step 8 would indeed be a pretty fucked up guide.
I hope it is alright if you can confirm my suspicions that you and the Winter Contest judges view reading and / or writing like figuring out a puzzle. As for me, when faced with any written material, I would expect the written material to convey information instead of presenting itself as a piece of art that can be interpreted in so many ways. This is what someone who communicates well least want to happen. Again, taste in reading.
Trying to piece together what has happened can be fun. I think that not everything should be so clear cut, but like playing with the order of things, there's a time and place where you want to leave things up for interpretation and when you don't want to leave anything up for interpretation.
Quote:
The feeling is neutral.
Not 'the feeling is mutual'?
The feeling is neutral.
Not 'the feeling is mutual'?
Didn't see this! Yes, mutual, not neutral.
I have so much more to talk about my entry, especially what inspired me to parody xnine's characters in that way. I was wondering if you felt the same for yours. I will post a question on your thread soon.
I will check those out and wait to hear what you have to say about your inspiration.
1
Looks like this story has been very thoroughly critiqued already.
My complaint is again with the whole exposition stuff.
Yes Leonard you have explained in great detail who David and Elizabeth are and why I should care about them. For what it's worth I like the concept of your story. The idea of this nobleman pursuing a romance with a commoner while navigating the vagaries of war and politics is interesting. I especially like how David used the "threat" of marrying Elizabeth as a way to strong arm his family into allowing reform.
BUT reading this thing feels like squeezing bricks into my eye sockets. It reads more like a lore dump in a game rule book than an actual story.
Also I'm not sure how this story fits with the theme of fairy tales. Granted how well a story fits the event's themes is open to interpretation but I'm really not seeing where I can draw the connection.
Now I've read through some of the preceding criticism and I realise that you and I have different preferences in writing style. You want everything laid out in a clear and orderly manner. With that realisation I guess this story turned out exactly the way you wanted it to so there's no point in me critiquing it further.
My complaint is again with the whole exposition stuff.
Yes Leonard you have explained in great detail who David and Elizabeth are and why I should care about them. For what it's worth I like the concept of your story. The idea of this nobleman pursuing a romance with a commoner while navigating the vagaries of war and politics is interesting. I especially like how David used the "threat" of marrying Elizabeth as a way to strong arm his family into allowing reform.
BUT reading this thing feels like squeezing bricks into my eye sockets. It reads more like a lore dump in a game rule book than an actual story.
Also I'm not sure how this story fits with the theme of fairy tales. Granted how well a story fits the event's themes is open to interpretation but I'm really not seeing where I can draw the connection.
Now I've read through some of the preceding criticism and I realise that you and I have different preferences in writing style. You want everything laid out in a clear and orderly manner. With that realisation I guess this story turned out exactly the way you wanted it to so there's no point in me critiquing it further.