Though the actual story flew over my head (I'm bad with things that are deep like this) I thoroughly enjoyed it. Your voice and imagery is amazing. I loved the imagery with the bird in the cage especially.
like I said, the actually story was lost on me though I think I got it. I'd rather not guess, I hate feeling stupid, but could you tell me what the story was so I can see if I was anywhere close?
I'm not sure what I could critique you on... I loved it. You have a way with words that certainly surpasses mine. I'd love to read anything else by you.
“It's necessary to have wished for death in order to know how good it is to live.” ― Alexandre Dumas, The Count of Monte Cristo
This is ambitious, which is a good thing, but for me unsuccessful. It falls down on the basics. First, where’s the hook? Even after three paragraphs you don’t give me, the reader, a reason to continue on. This is disappointing, because you are usually so hot on this point – especially in your critiques.
Like the reviews above, I do like your imagery – at times it is quite brilliant. It is, however, overdone. The first paragraph is a good example – it’s packed with imagery and resonation but the power is lacking because it sounds like a ranting preach. This rant is too characteristic of the whole piece, forming a barrier between the text and the reader. The narrative suffers most, which becomes repetitive and rather flat. The rant, which darts back and forth (often clumsily - such as the passed tense narrative of the third paragraph) across subject and in style, contradicts too much the omnipotent narrative that you seem to have attempted. As for the structure – I’m not so sure there is any, or at least that you have given it any major consideration.
Disappointing, Brad, because in light of your poetry and critiques, this piece is rather thoughtless – instinctive rather than polished. It reads like you have had this passionate idea, and rushed to get it down on paper. The core of the piece – the imagery – is there in abundance and the tone is somewhere in there too, but that’s not enough to keep the reader (well, when I’m the reader anyway) interested or impressed. As such it reads like a good first draft, but only a first draft and not yet ready for an audience.
As a perfectionist (which you appear to be) I do hope you revise this and when you do I’d like to read it again – if you can pull it off it could be really very good.
Thanks for taking the time to read and respond. This is, indeed, junk.
worgs--
I have never heard of the writer having to motivate in fiction; that is, in my experience, a solely poetry-based initiative. It may be true, this doesn't give you a reason to read on (then again, really, only educational works CAN give you a reason to read on), neither does the work by Stephen King, or by Harper Lee, or by Ralph Emerson.
That is just my experience, at least. I think this is bad for reasons other than preachiness or the imagery or the tone--all of that is subjective. The problem with this, I think, is its reliance upon Catholicism, the doctrines of Catholicism. It can not reach its full, haunting potential because it is bound to fleshy reality.
Just a think.
Take care,
Brad
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders." -Hal Abelson
Do you really feel like that? - I think that re-drafted into a more 'proper' (crap word - sorry) fiction this could work and work well - that it relies on Catholicism doesn't change that (in fact I love the subject matter and where it could lead!). Some fiction is comparatively shallow or equally constrained and is still great fiction.
As to the other point, sorry, i did not explain myself at all well. My feeling is all writing that is meant for an audience needs to give a reader a reason to read - especially good fiction and prose (sorry for my bias coming out!). It doesn't have to be monumental or life affirming, but has to give something to / take something from the reader. This can be as simple as a fright, good chuckle or a heartfelt tear or whatever. King, Lee, Emerson certainly do that – and I feel your piece really could – with proper revision. Maybe 'reason to read' is too heavy a phrase but hopefully my gist is clear.
"that it relies on Catholicism doesn't change that (in fact I love the subject matter and where it could lead!)."
I think that is your answer. Another draft of this is in order, as you suggest; I only wonder to what end one can take perversion before it itself becomes meaningless.
As this is, I see it having plenty of reason to motivate discussion, because--while perhaps not a real piece of fiction--it is at least a fictional character sketch. (American) Society tends to be consumed with this notion of perversity lived out to its fullest; I think that is what motivates the reader: that they see in this piece desire of the priest, the forbidden, what is pure.
I'm usually wrong, though.
Regards,
Brad
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders." -Hal Abelson
Incandescence wrote:I live for the wine of your confusion, the vague insistence of your loyalty.
This line really stuck out to me. This was beautifully written, even with the very sophisticated diction you used. I enjoyed reading this. I hope you write much much more!
Pandora
Gender:
Points: 890
Reviews: 915