Crosstimbers Review Forum

Item Reviewed: "Everyone Die"   by "Ink Fluttre
Reviewer: Max Griffin 🏳️‍🌈

                                                             
As always, these are just one person's opinions. Always remember Only you know what is best for your story. I've read and commented on your work as I would try to read my own. I hope you find something here useful , and that you will discard the rest with good cheer.

                                                             
What I liked best
There is some really lovely prose in this story. I've highlighted several in the line-by-line remarks below. The writing shows a real talent for evoctive descriptions and excellent use of metaphor and simile. These are advanced skills even experienced that can confound even experienced authors.

                                                             
Opening
Openings are critical in any work of fiction. Some editors and agents will decide whether or not to read your submission based only on your first sentence.

Your opening is your best opportunity to draw readers into your fictional world, to induce a dream-like state in which your words guide their imaginations. The readers become the author's active partners in imagining the fictional world, in a state of suspended disbelief. In crafting the opening of any story, it's the author's primary task to launch this fictional dream.

This starts out well, placing the protagonist/POV character in his lab and surrounding him with sounds and scents. You orient the reader by answering the who/what/when/where questions, reveal both the genre and the fundamental conflict of the story, all in the first paragraph. That's no mean accomplishment.

Still...some quibbles. The last two sentences in that paragraph consist the of the author, standing outside the story, telling the reader some facts. These are critical facts, to be sure, but they interupt the here-and-now of the story. It would be stronger if you could reframe these so that they read as something Jonahthan might be thinking. For example, this sentence is the narrator telling us a fact:

If you instead wrote soemthign like:


The difference is slight, but the difference in phrasing sounds like something he might be thinking or feeling as opposed to a narrative intrusion. You've demonstrated impressive skills with prose--I'm sure you can do better than this off-the-cuff suggestion.

There are some other places where the narrator intrudes to break the connection with on-going events in the fictional world. In the line-by-line remarks below, I point some of these out to give you sense of what I'm talking about.

                                                             
Plot
This is a "Frankenstein's monster" or "golem" plot, but just because it's familiar doesn't mean it's bad. It's familiar precisely because of its power to resonate with the reader. Your evocative prose contributes much to this story and its plot, so kudos.

However...I experienced some confusion along the way. See the comments under "characters" below and the line-by-line remarks at the end of this review.

                                                             
Hook
For a short story, the opening paragraph has to hook the readers. Yours does a good job of that.

                                                             
Style and Voice
Third person. I'd have to say "omniscient" as well, due to the places where the story stops while the author tells the reader stuff. If you could find a way to better incorporate these into the flow of events in the story, I think you'd have a stonger and more power narrative--especially given the impressive power of your prose.

                                                             
Scene/Setting
Good job here...but, again, small quibbles.

When writing about short stories, Kurt Vonnegut said that every sentence should advance either character or plot, and preferably both. This doesn't mean that you avoid describing the fictional world, but rather that you do so in a way that accomplishes the dual goals of advancing character and plot.

In any story, someone is experiencing the fictional world. In omniscient narration, this is someone standing outside the story, looking in. That puts a distance between the description and both plot and character. If the person experiencing the fictional world is, instead, one of the characters, then by defininition, we're inside the story and the fictional world. That makes it easier to advance both character (by showing what that character sees and their reaction to it) and plot (by showing how the fictional world interacts with the character's goals, obstacles, and stakes).

THis gets back to the earlier point about small rephrasings that put things inside the head of the POV character, in this case Jonathan. Indeed, consistently implementing this idea is my main suggestion for this story.

                                                             
Characters

Another tidbit from Vonnegut is that every character should want something, even if it's just a glass of water.

There are primary two characters in this story, Jonathan and Tyopon, and they both want something. They want opposing things, so each is the obstacle for the other. THus, weve got goals and obstacles for each character, and conflict between the goals.

Further, the outcome of that conflict matters--those are the stakes. The stakes are high, espeically for Jonathan since humanity is at risk from Typhon's goals. It's the combination of stakes and conflict that gives rise to tension, the engine that drives plot and story.

What makes this story work is that these elements are all well-defined and work together to achive rising tension as the stakes escalate.

All of this should work to make a story that keeps the readers on the edge of their seats. Yet...it didn't quite work that way, at least for me. Since the fundamentals of plot and character are not merely sound but outstanding, coupled with your wonderful prose, that led me to wonder why.

I think the reason is that that the story is kind of discontinuous. We start with Jonathan and subject Alpha. That goes well in terms of the story (less well for Jonathan, of course), but then Jonathan stumbles through the corridors and a memory haunts him...and we're in a flashback. We never seem to return to the original here-and-now with subject Alpha.

The flashback with Typhon continues, and is indeed chilling.

But then the flashback ends, and we move to some future time, when the underground lab is a "silent tomb." THis doesn't sound like the time at the start, with subject Alpha. Instead, it's a time when Jonathan spends his days monitoring Typhon. THe point of view in this final section kind of wobbles as well, between Jonathan and Typhon. This wobble also tends to weaken the connection with what should be the horrific events that transpire.

Generally, short stories should have onlyh one POV character, but that's certainly not set in stone. In this story, for example, I could see the first two sections being in Jonathan's head and the final one in Typhon's, where we'd glimpse the fury that consumes its being.

I'm struggling to answer why the story didn't quite work for me and at the same time give you something useful to work with. It comes back to the connection between the reader and the here-and-now (or here-and-nowS) of the story. That connection is critical, and especially so in a horror story. Your prose is so effective that it almost overcomes the breaks caused by POV and continuity wobbles, but, maybe, not quite enough. At least for me. Remember, this is all just one guy's opinion. I only know what works for me, so that's all I've got to offer you. (I definitely do NOT have your skill with words.)

                                                             
Just my personal opinion
One way to think of telling a story is that it is a guided dream in which the author leads the readers through the events. In doing this, the author needs to engage the readers as active participants in the story, so that they become the author's partner in imagining the story. Elements of craft that engage the readers and immerse them in the story enhance this fictive dream. On the other hand, authors should avoid things that interrupt the dream and pull readers out of the story.

All of my comments above are predicated on the above theoretical foundation. Other foundations are certainly possible--Brecht's Verfremdungseffekt takes basically the opposite view, although it's mostly applied to performing arts.

In any case, I enjoyed this story. The prose is awesome, and it made me thing again about what makes a story work--at least what makes a story work for me. Thank you for sharing. You have impressive talents, so do keep writing!!!!

                                                             
Line-by-line remarks
Your text is in BLUE.
My comments are in GREEN.
If I suggest a re-wording, it's in GRAPE.
                                                             
Now, fear gnawed at him, not just for his own life, but for what Typhon could becomeMy Comment: An example of your excellent prose.

The door hissed open, revealing the chamber bathed in an eerie red glow.My Comment: Another example, bringing the door life as it hisses open.

Typhon's laughter filled the chamber, a haunting sound that sent chills down Jonathan's spine. My Comment: Here is an example of you describing something directly and then having Jonathan react with an internal sensation only he can feel. The action/reaction reinforces the connection to the here and now, and the internal sensation reinforces the connection to Jonathan's experience of the fictional world. This is *perfect.* It's what I'm talking bout above and what I'd like to see you do everywhere.

Fear surged through Jonathan as he felt Typhon's hot breath against his neck, its grip tightening with each agonizing moment.My Comment: Another good example, except "he felt" is a subtle form of telling. Also, notice that the action/reaction sequence is reversed here--Typhon's hot breath against his neck sends fear surging through Jonathan, not the other way around. Describing the action--the hot breath against his neck--followed by the reaction is generally stronger.

The world spun into darkness as Typhon's grip tightened, My Comment: Here, he's in Typhon's grip and darkness closes in…after the break, he seems to have escaped the grip and watches over Typhon from outside the enclosure. Or have I confused something here?

As the days turned into a shadowy eternity within the confines of the underground laboratory, Typhon's rage simmered and mutated. The creature's mind, once a fractured mirror of Jonathan's dreams, now festered with hatred and a thirst for vengeance. In the eerie red glow of the chamber, Typhon paced like a caged predator, its movements twitching with a restless energy.My Comment: Lovely prose, but it's the narrator, standing outside the story, recounting some facts. A bit later, we learn that Jonathan is now spending his days monitoring Typhon, apparently having escaped its clutches. Is the one seeing this? Or are we supposed to be in Typhon's head? Or is it indeed the omniscient narrator telling us stuff?

In the depths of the laboratory, unseen by human eyes, Typhon's body pulsated with an unnatural rhythm. Its flesh rippled and bulged as if undergoing a grotesque metamorphosis. With a guttural cry that shook the very walls of its confinement, Typhon unleashed its fury upon the chamber.My Comment: Again, marvelous prose. But note that no one is seeing this. Yet in the next paragraph, Jonathan staggers back, so he MUST have been seeing it.

In the labyrinthine tunnels beneath the surface, Typhon made its lair. There, amidst the cold darkness and the drip of ancient water, it began to breed. Its offspring, born of rage and tainted ambition, emerged from the shadows. They were grotesque creatures, each bearing the twisted features of their progenitor—fangs gleaming in the dim light, eyes aglow with a hunger that mirrored Typhon's own.My Comment: Again, marvelous prose…but confusing, too. "Breed" with whom? "Reproduce" is more likely, right?

"They hunger," Typhon murmured, a twisted smile curling its lips. My Comment: Here, descriging his smile as "twisted" implies an observing seeing it. If you instead wrote the smile "twists" his lips, that at least could be Tyhpon sensing what's happening and put us in its head.

One by one, the creatures breached the earth's surface, their grotesque forms emerging into the moonlit night. The air echoed with their eerie cries, a chilling chorus that sent shivers down the spines of those unfortunate enough to witness their arrival.My Comment: More marvelous prose…




                                                             

I only review things I like, and I really liked this story. I'm a professor by day, and find awarding grades the least satisfying part of my job. Since I'm reviewing in part for my own edification, I decided long ago to give a rating of "4" to everything I review, thus avoiding the necessity of "grading" things on WDC. So please don't assign any weight to my "grade" -- but know that I selected this story for review because I liked it and thought I could learn from studying it.

Again, these are just one person's opinions. Only you know what is best for your story! The surest path to success is to keep writing and to be true to your muse!

Max Griffin
Please visit my website and blog at
https://new.MaxGriffin.net

Check out most recent release!

ASIN: B0C9P9S6G8 Murder on Cabot's Landing Product Type: Kindle Store Amazon's Price: $ 6.99 Buy Now!