\"Writing.Com
*Magnify*
SPONSORED LINKS
BY ONLINE AUTHORS
Printed from https://shop.writing.com/main/profile/reviews/robtailor
Review Requests: OFF
14 Public Reviews Given
26 Total Reviews Given
Public Reviews
1
1
Review of Little Ships  Open in new Window.
In affiliation with Showering Acts of Joy Group  Open in new Window.
Rated: ASR | (4.0)
This review is being made on behalf of "Invalid Item" Open in new Window.
** Images For Use By Upgraded+ Only **

Dear Jace, as part of your shower I've come to review this piece in your port! Please take no offence at any criticism I give, nothing I say is set in stone, and its all said in the spirit of fellowship and self improvement.


Overall Impressions:

Thankyou for writing this exciting little piece which I see won first prize in 'Short Shots' - already an achievement! I felt transported back to that bitter landscape of WWII, which, though we've all gotten well acquainted with thanks to Hollywood-isation, is always a legitimate source of inspiration.


What I liked:

1. I'm guessing you aren't French. I liked that you took it from a French POV. That is certainly different, we've all been flooded with stories from the other Allies, even the Russians.

2. You have an excellent sense of pace - there was palpable drama, a good descriptive eye that wasn't cumbersome. This would translate well to the big screen, which is always a complement for this type of fiction.

3. The writing itself is efficient, adequately evocative. Thankfully, not overly sentimental (a real risk in this genre). Sentence structure is close to perfect - you had a good array of variably sized sentences, the subject changed just enough to keep it sounding professional/expositional.

4. The protagonist was (just about) credible. I was happy to follow him, happy for him to tell his story.

5. I can tell you have a good sense for 'set up' - a story tactician, if you will.


What I didn't like:

1. Though I liked the French POV - it didn't seem genuine. Think of this as the counterpoint to the 'what I liked' in no1. I didn't get a great sense of 'this is a French boy' - not much culture, not very much of the French specific attitude to the war beyond obviously the damage done. This could have been made up with little comments here and there, like perhaps initial apprehensions to seeing English soldiers, or wondering how they must have been different to his expectations.

2. I saw no need/added value from having this told as a 'memoir' - this removes credibility from the story for me, having the age old/stereotypical old man looking at something remembering the war scenario(though the construct is classically an attempt to enforce credibility upon the audience, as it adds 1 level of authority, removes 1 level of the need for historicity). And it doesn't add any extra 'meaning' to the story you are telling here, other than the artificial pathos/profundity from the recounting of a tale by a venerated elder (lost on me). This tends to be a cliché ridden genre so its best to avoid all the clichés you can.

3. Is the French speech entirely correct/authentic? It is fatal if it isn't! I am not French myself but I studied it to a fairly advanced level, I wondered how correct some of the phrasing was, and if it would ring 'true' - firstly as something a French person would say anyway, and secondly, as something a French person would say in that period. Best get a French person to read it over. Hey, I might be completely off the mark here and you've already done that - if so,please forgive me!

4. Though I did eventually get attached to the protagonist I didn't feel much at all for the British soldiers, they seemed a little too cardboard cut out. No foibles, no unique characterisation - just complete unabashed bravery! It seems like a minimum requirement in any war fiction is that it be 'warts and all'. Have one pick his nose, have another scratch his crotch, etc...just to sell it.

5. Also - British solider sacrificing himself for French child he had literally just met a few hours previously - credible? And if it actually happened - what indication was there in this person's character that would make us believe it might be credible?


Edit/Language/Logic suggestions

1. played out a drama - I've never been much of a fan of this phrase. Its lazy/unimaginative, more than a little administrative. Maybe swap for some creative imagery.

2. my family owned one of the best hotels in Dunkirk - Which one? Why was it the best? Specifics here would help sell the history, definitely. Otherwise, it sounds a little vague.

3. we might ride out the onslaught of the German military machine. - 'German military machine' is a phrase I've seen in every historical text book and war documentary - it rapidly transports me to an old stuffy classroom. Always try to use phrases that open the imagination rather than close it.

4. The Allies made the Germans pay dearly for each meter of French soil they bought. - No big criticism here but the metaphor sounds a little forced - just because they paid dearly doesn't mean they had to have 'bought' it. 'Bought' doesn't sound aggressive, doesn't give justice to what the Germans were doing at the time.

5. My mother and sister were lost in that shelling. Miraculously, our hotel survived, though I was orphaned three days later when a Kraut sympathizer hoping to garner favor with the advancing German High Command shot my father in the back. - I'm sure you could get more emotional mileage here out of the death of his mother and sister. Maybe even saying how exactly it was they died, like collapsed ceiling, explosive debris etc...would increase emotional resonance rather than just saying 'they were lost'. I copied the 'my father' bit as i felt that was done better.

6. I met the lads on the first of June. At least, that's what they called themselves. - 'Lads' is a ferociously ubiquitous term in England. It would be better to call them something a little more unique, or at least not draw attention to it as if it were unique.

7. The jeune garçon never made it home. Rewrite to the 'jeunes garçons'?

8. "Aider! S'il vous plait!" - is that correct? would it not be 'aidez-moi'?

9. "Je suis encore là." - would he say 'im ALSO there?' - surely his young voice would preclude the need to say 'also'? and, 'ici' as opposed to 'la'.

10. "Viens ici. Nous n'allons pas vous faire mal," that one said, adding they wouldn't hurt me. - But you've already said in their speech that they wouldn't do him harm?

11. We were cut off," he added, unnecessarily. - 'unnecessarily' is unnecessary here, please excuse the pun!

12. Ours became a true friendship forged of the universal and common bond against evil. In those few hours, I learned to trust again. - How? Surely these circumstances would define it as an artificial friendship?

13. I saw a movement, and froze - omit 'a'.

14. asking, "Pourquoi?" - not need to say 'asking' as you already put a question mark in speech.

15. coughed sympathetically - I have difficulty visualising a 'sympathetic cough'.


Overall, I thought this was an entertaining read - with a few minor adjustments it can become very very good.

Wish you all the best and please continue writing. I am more than happy to explain any of my points further.

Regards,

Robert Tailor

** Images For Use By Upgraded+ Only **













































2
2
In affiliation with Showering Acts of Joy Group  Open in new Window.
Rated: 18+ | (4.0)
** Images For Use By Upgraded+ Only **
This review is being made on behalf of "Invalid Item" Open in new Window..

Dear Minnie - thank you for giving me the opportunity to read your work. Below I provide my critique - please take no offence at any criticism, they are only suggestions and might well be incorrect.

Overall Impression:

What I liked:
1. From the off, let me just say this story did the trick, or the trick I believe you wanted to play. It definitely shocked me, definitely angered me, left me wallowing in the injustice. Honestly, I got so angry over it! Well done.

2. I liked how the storm started brewing as the evil events unfurled, with the unsheathing of the knife like lightning, that was very apt.

3. You write efficiently, evocatively, with simple yet proficient imagery, and with a good sense of pace so I never felt bored. It's pretty well edited, I couldn't locate many grammatical faults.

4. I thought the speech was realistic, seems like the correct vernacular (I'm no authority however, not being an American myself). It all felt authentic, bar a few exceptions which I cover below.

What I didn't like:

1. Straight away - I hope this isn't borderline blasphemy - but I think this story would have been made (perhaps significantly) better, were you to syphon off that word count from the intro and ending, into the main body...just have written the whole thing as a memory. I felt the beginning and end didn't really add much - nothing beyond a sense of semi justice at the (natural) passing away of the judge, of whom we have no more corroborating information, no more characterisation or dimension than his passivity in the face of an horrendous crime, and tight lipped racism. It took away from the piece, made me slightly confused when you suddenly jumped into the memory, and felt artificial. That's in the context of a memory that was vivacious, shocking, very much alive!

2. I hankered for a tiny anhcor to Toby's looks, just perhaps one sentence of visual description. All I got was that he was black and young-ish...just even one simple visual adjective and he would have come more alive.


Language/Logic/Grammar/Edit Suggestions

A couple of the metaphors/phrases might benefit from a little change or rethink. And a few areas had suspect logic. My suggestions:

1. Paragraph 1, in the space of 2 sentences you use 3 metaphors (mind archive, ember, resurrect-ghost). It feels like trying a bit too hard, perhaps a bit too jumpy with the imagery. I read a rule somewhere what you ought to try limit a metaphor/simile to one per sentence, so you don't tire the reader out.

2. In paragraph 2, you mention the draft winding down, but then taking the scholarship and running. If the draft was winding down why would you make it more urgent that you 'run off' as compared to when the draft was in full flow under LBJ? It might make more sense just to say the draft was still on. Unless of course, he is running because of what is revealed later in the story - but you don't make that logic connection in this paragraph.

3. End of paragraph 2 - demonic demeanor feels incorrect - a demeanor is something you'd attribute to a person, not an inanimate object. You could just get away with saying 'though the gnarled branches of the oak loomed out to reach at me from between the headstones, I ran onwards, never looking back.'

4. i began to unlock the file - repeating the metaphor from before, and I wasn't a huge fan because it isolates the idea of a memory a bit too much, in fact it literally reads like you are grabbing at a file and opening it. it feels like a forced/artifical transition into 'the memory' - another reason why I reckon it would be better to omit the intro altogether. This might just be my taste though.

5. inertial arc - a physical object may have inertia, an arc cannot.

6. Daddy - would a late teen (I assumed late teen because of concerns regarding the draft?) be using the word 'Daddy'? Unless this is actually Mississippi vernacular, in which case disregard my point.

7. What is sitting 'Indian Style'? Is that sitting cross legged? It didn't make automatic sense to me as a London reader though it might to an American. Just worth a thought.

8. shake their heads, disapprovingly, when they saw as together Firstly, no need for the commas here. Secondly, in fictional writing, the adverb is our mortal enemy, try to limit its use where you can. Why? Because it tells, doesn't show. It is often a replacement for a strong verb, and they often break sentence flow. A suggestion here, would be to omit it entirely. If you weren't comfortable with that, say something like 'seen the town-folk tut and shake their heads' - gives more imagery, puts across their disapproval, avoids the treacherous adverb!

9. Is 'don't have a cow man' also authentic vernacular? The only other place I remember hearing it is on the SImpsons - of course they may have taken that phrase from the deep south. Please excuse my ignorance if thats the case!

10. As we weaved...I had never seen before - this paragraph - you use 'gnarled' for the second time. Not a major issue but because it is an uncommon word, and you use it within the space of a page or two, I definitely noticed it. Its like when JK Rowling uses the word 'surreptitious' about a thousand times in each Harry Potter book - it can be annoying! Also, I don't think it adds much value saying the girl was stuck under the sixth man, it feels like a little to carefully constructed an image - can just say she was stuck under one of them.

11. Toby's voice was both bold and unafraid? Those 2 adjectives are practically the same, not helped much by calling it a man's voice, repetition of information x 3. I'm sure there's a way of making his speech more unique here, it is after-all amongst the last words he says.

12. Toby swung at...in the grass - needs a rewording, subject becomes confused between Toby and one of the rapists.

13. pleading look of pure love - what is that? I know what you're trying to get at but show, don't tell!

14. nice, warm house never use 'nice' as an adjective.

15. what the Wilson boys were doing to Toby 'to Toby' is pleonastic - omit.

16. newly acquired education - i don't think one bit of knowledge would justify 'an education' - perhaps just 'newly acquired knowledge'

17. cried, helplessly, with a rage i'd never felt before omit 'helplessly'

With only a couple of changes here and there, I think this can become a 5 star piece, no problem. Please continue writing gripping fiction!

regards,

Robert Tailor

** Images For Use By Upgraded+ Only **

























3
3
Review of Time Enough  Open in new Window.
In affiliation with Showering Acts of Joy Group  Open in new Window.
Rated: 13+ | (4.0)
This review is being made on behalf of "Invalid Item" Open in new Window..

** Images For Use By Upgraded+ Only **

Dear Kim - Thanks for giving me the opportunity to read your work. Here's my review, or rather, critique of your neat little piece. Please take no offence at what I say, they are suggestions and I may be wrong about them.

Overall impression:

What I liked:
1. This strikes me as a well researched, tightly written short on the topic of domestic violence, in a period which I haven't acquainted myself with. But now I have more than reasonable word pictures and feel like i've learnt a little. Which is great.

2. Your setting in Michigan's icescape is clearly fitting, a pertinent metaphor for the isolation and coldness Beatrice must be experiencing in her stifling marriage.

3. Your writing style is very competent, expositional, mostly lean - practically publication quality, though there were tiny niggles (will mention below).

4. Great that all you told us was Beatrice picked up an iron poker, shooed away Clarence, and then we realise what's happened the next day indirectly by her brother's questioning - this is excellent story exposition.

5. The speech is well varied, never over long or intrusive, and sounds genuine.

What I didn't like:

1. I think conceptually one thing that didn't stick with me, was how she'd felt she would get away with maintaining any kind of status quo/marriage after having beaten her husband to a pulp...he sure as hell would make a meal of her once his head's in order, regardless of Floyd! Perhaps she is just unwise. But it seems like she's a headstrong woman, capable of great courage, independence - would she not have packed up and gone after? Or...have finished the job...I do relate that she keeps a brave, silent facade in the face of her humiliation and abuse, is worried of what the neighbours would say, and perhaps even careful and calculating...but that kind of caged, introverted attitude does not seem entirely compatible with her iron poker beat-a-thon.

2. Some of the imagery/metaphor could use a tiny bit of work, and some places might benefit from more show than tell...though a lot of it is fitting. Icicles, like stalactites - doesn't strike me as an original image, i feel the issue may be to do with how similar the two words sound already, doesn't sound neat. The second paragraph - my history may be rubbish, so disregard this if i'm off the mark, but would 'record amounts of snowfall' be a meaningful phrase in the context of 1919, associated with a specific depth reading of snow? It sounds a little like modern news speak...I don't know if Michigan records from that time would be that specific, or that the people living there at the time would know about it. But then again, I'm a London-er, I might be completely misinformed!

The waist deep snow and trecherous ice...impossible. I'd prefer if you gave maybe a little indication of what specific activities were effected - this sentence is slightly lazy.

many colored splendor that would be her left eye doesn't sound very neat. It interferes with flow a bit. And waiting for splendor to begin sounds a little non specific.

In describing Beatrice you use 'infectious smile' - please avoid, its a stereotype. There will definitely be something else unique and special about her smile. Also i'm not a massive fan of numbers when describing people, like weight or height, though i know opinions differ. And another thing - she came into the world with her husband's surname?

Beatrice adapted easily to married life - doesn't give me much unique information. A more exciting start to this paragraph would be indicated. Look at your paragraph after that - that socks you in the face! (pardon the pun).

A knock or a ring announcing someone's entrance is another cliché.



Language/Grammar/Edit suggestions

You use 'Bea' and 'Beatrice' as names for the protagonist throughout the narration - you must stick with one or the other.

1st paragraph - stared out the window into the darkness beyond - you can omit 'beyond' as a pleonasm.

Clarence shuffled out of the room dragging the heavy, gray, woolen quilt behind him. - three adjectives is a bit much, gives a sensation of dragging on its own right! You cant probably omit one and keep practically the same image.

Time enough for that she thought. Time enough to think up a story to tell the neighbors. Time enough. You may disagree - I felt you didn't need to add the last 'time enough' - it sounds like one time too many, that you get enough of the gravitas, enough of the effect with the first two sentences.

Beatrice Ketzbech had come into the world...Bea sat perched on a stool at their feet. 'jokingly claimed', then next sentence, 'family members joked' - repetitive - omit one or the other, exchange for something else.

Poland to Gaylord, Michign to work on an uncle's potato farm. sp of Michigan.


With a bit of work here and there I have no doubt this would become a 5 star piece. You are clearly talented. I hope you find my review useful!

Robert Tailor

** Images For Use By Upgraded+ Only **












4
4
Review of Life for a Life  Open in new Window.
Rated: 18+ | (3.0)
Dear LCVarnum,

I hope you find this review useful.

I enjoyed this piece overall, you have a good sense of pace and your description is, for the most part, your strong point and you ellicit vivid imagery, all the more important considering how grissly things get and how I assume that is the effect you are going for. I like the idea of him exchanging his life for the relationship with his dogs, but I didn't see why, in the context of the story, that was part of a necessary sacrifice. I see it as almost a bit too mean in a way, that he essentially did no wrong and still lost his leg. In fact, it seems like the second worst possible thing happened to him...he still lost his leg and he lost his dogs! But that is the content of your story and I probably shouldn't quibble, thats just how it appeared to me.

I had some issues with the prose styling, some bits are a bit overwrought, with use of uncecessary words.

Peter’s eyes snapped open and his hand came up lightning fast, smacking hard enough upon his cheek that it would turn red and warm for several minutes. Sliding his hand down towards his jaw line, he felt the crumpled body of the deer fly scraping against the stinging flesh. His fingers pinched inward and grabbed the lifeless exoskeleton then raised it before his eyes.

- This seems like almost too much description for what was essentially, just him swatting a fly on his face. Though this style is important for dramatic effect sometimes and i assume you want to communicate his disorientation, its a bit dangerous not to really get in on the action from the whistle blow.

Every so often, when Rooters howl would go up. - what does that mean, a howl that goes up? Possibly best just to say 'when Rooter howled'

The steel teeth had shattered the bones they had bitten into, sending fragments throughout the meat of his leg. - i liked the beginning of this paragraph, it came as a little shock to find out his grim circumstances. However, the logic of fragments being sent 'throughout the meat of his leg' seems a bit vague and medically naive. His bone would be shattered and comminuted possibly into fragments within a specific compartment over which the bear trap has clamped, but it wouldn't spread about like shrapnel which is the impression you give with this description.

How long had he been laying there? It had to have been hours, since the sun had been right overhead when he stepped on the trap and now it barely shown through the canopy to the west. - this feels too wordy. Maybe cutting it down to 'How long had he laid there? It must have been hours; the sun had been right overhead when he stepped on the trap, now it barely *shone* through the canopy *from* the west'

No one would notice his absence until he had long succumb to hunger and thirst. - *succumbed*

The man stood still, as though he was simply observing the situation. Peter winced and grabbed his leg, letting out a long groan. His waving had caused his leg to shift and made the teeth and fragments of bone move around. The pounding in his head grew worse.
“It is bad.” ------ I like the introduction of this enigmatic figure. However, 'as thought he was simply observing the situation' sounds very much like an obvious, filler line. Observing the situation might not be so simple at all. With 'it is bad' - is the protagonist or antagonist talking? Also, go for 'it's bad'.

His clothes seemed almost comical, a black linen tunic tucked into dark brown breeches. - i still don't see how you could justify the clothing seeming 'almost comical' after having described it. Firstly, almost weakens the comical, as if you are unsure whether you wanted to use this word in the first place. Secondly, i would avoid even describing clothing as comical at all, it is opinionated and therefore falls into 'telling' not 'showing'.

Peter laid their silent, not knowing what to say. What was this stranger getting at? - ----Peter laid *there* - and you can omit 'what was the stranger getting at' - it is quite obvious from his odd behaviour and the protagonist's reaction.

The final paragraph - i wasn't entirely sure - has he lost his foot then? Thats a definite? The dogs ate around it, releasing him but dissacoiating themselves from him in the process? fine - but he would most certainly die without medical attention after effectively sufferng a limb amputation!

I am sorry for dragging on and reading back this might seem as if i've just been picking at it - again i repeat that for the rest of it, i felt it was quite well written and i honestly felt there in the wilderness with the pain resonating. I hope you find this critique useful, and look forwards to more of your work.
4 Reviews · *Magnify*
Page of 1 · 25 per page   < >
Printed from https://shop.writing.com/main/profile/reviews/robtailor