Reply
Thu 9 Mar, 2006 06:30 pm
Alright, I revised the first part of my story, and I believe it is more detailed and explains a little bit more of the scene. From now on, this post will be called The Knights of Falor, so if you wish to help me out on the next part, it will be called that.
Here it is:
Intro:
Hidden beneath an alcove of a devastated building, a rogue held a hand over his eyes to cover the flaring sun, fixating his vision on the surrounding landscape. Solid, limestone buildings surrounded him, creating a barrier before the town's walls, almost making the city seem like a maze. Waltzing around the center of the maze were the citizens, each one with his or her own task to complete, blind to everything else, but concentrated on their own duties. The thief crouched down low, and deeper into his refuge. He felt the soft sand that covered the solid rock, and glanced upward to the roofs of the limestone housing. He couldn't see a thing, but he knew that someone was there; someone watching him.
Across the busy main road, Guards were bustling and murmuring to each other atop the roofs of the limestone homes. They were hidden behind a solid wood barrier, looking from the sides to check the position of the thief. A tall, lean guard looked out to the left of the blockade, and noticed the thief move from his alcove of shadows. "Cap'n! Dat there Ren is movin' again!" The skinny sentry squinted against the bright sun, and took a step back at the captain's response. "Well Fargus, where the hell is he movin to?"
The captain's vocals were a harsh, strident voice, which shuddered into Fargus's ears. "Aye Cap'n. He went into the crowd, right and quick-like."
"Now we're getting somewhere. Arthur, get off this damned building and back to that dirty rock floor. Follow Ren, and track him down. Fargus, and everyone else, nock your arrows, we be killin us a thief."
"Aye sir." Arthur replied, as he began his descent down the ladder, and to the powdery sand the lay above the stone.
Ren pushed through the crowd, looking for a safe haven to protect himself from the Guard's watch. He ducked and weaved through openings in the mob, still desperately searching for safety. Ren turned his shoulder, and shot a look to the limestone building, and saw a guard begin climbing down a wooden ladder; the guard's head was surveying the oblivious crowd and his eyes squinting because of the sun's rays. Ren returned his view ahead of him, and barely dodged an oncoming man, his arms packed to the brim with clothing, baskets and fruit. Ren returned his mind to the present, and continued his lookout for the most obscure hiding place.
Arthur hit the ground and began his dash into the crowd. He had sighted Ren on his way down the ladder, and now was flying head on with the citizens of Contayarr, attempting to get towards the lone thief. Arthur slowed his speed down, and stealthily made his way through the crowd, sliding and dodging the passerby of the city. Switching his vision to the left, Arthur caught a glimpse of the fleeing thief. He quickened his pace, still attempting to dodge the screaming citizens. Arthur came to the other side of the street, and looked around. He noticed Ren's footprints implanted in the sand and dust, and followed them to the wall slightly beyond the houses. Turning around in a full 360, he checked the alleyway only to confirm his suspicion. Ren had fled the city.
The group of Guards had also made their way along the buildings, and reached Arthur with longbows in hand. Below them, Arthur shook his head, and the Guards frowned in dismay. They took the arrows off their bows, and back into their quivers. Arthur walked back into the lonesome street, and the other Guards solemnly left the building on which they stood. Once eager with the prospect of chase, the guards now fell quiet to the foreboding Lord Herriot who lay ahead.
* * *
As soon as the Guards had left, Ren crept out from a crack hidden in the shadow of the building. He squeezed his way, and slowly eased out of the jagged hitch in the side of the alley. His eyes glowed with joy, and the eccentric opinions that flooded him, after escaping the Royal Guard. His feet began to move again, and he strode back into the crowd, his mind now set on the task that lay ahead.
--------------------------------------------------------
I hope it's a little better in voice and sound, but the thing is I want to keep my prologue short.
Thanks for reading,
Sam (DBD) (Drowned by Darkness)
(sorry i did not post above)
Also, I am hoping to have the second part either tomarrow or saturday.
No D by D.
I stopped reading on "rogue".
I sense you have read some Flaubert.Am I right?
No, I havn't had time yet. I am planning to get to it soon, but it is hard for me to make time, if its not at around 12:00 to 2:00 in the morning.
Would you mind telling my why you stopped at "rogue"?
A publisher's reader might not give the nod to-
Quote:As soon as the Guards had left, Ren crept out from a crack hidden in the shadow of the building.
but you might have to throw a bucket of cold water over him to stop him laughing.
I like how your harsh. Its good for me. All right, I expected to have to change this again, but what do you propose?
Drowned, for your age, you write quite well.
I have taught creative writing at the university level, and I wouldn't take the word choice advice too seriously.
Experiment. YOUR voice will evolve over time as you read more.
Generally, your sentences are varied well, which can be difficult when writing an action-heavy story. Nice work.
Simply continue to write, and to read, of course. Flaubert is great if you're interested in how a novel is built, but no serious writer would try to emulate his archaic and flowery style, except as a joke perhaps. And a "publisher's reader" would laugh at THAT.
And for the love of God, if you're writing to please the publisher, you have no business writing. Have fun and don't set too many limits for yourself. And thanks for sharing!
I liked the first one better.
And, the word choice is your biggest enemy. This one is much more distracting than the first.
I can tell you love to write.
Do yourself a favor. Refuse to allow yourself to write another sentence until you read a book in the genre you want to write in. Take note of how they describe places and things and people. You don't want to steal their style, but you'll see how "pretentious" adjectives don't best describe what simple storytelling can describe.
I wrote "pretentious", too. Still do some times.
I think you have the attitude that leads to success.
Reading is JUST as important as writing for writers.
Er, I thought it much improved, and quite good.
You could have kept the original place name, Sam. Like Heinlein's "The door irised open", we immediately know we are not on earth-as-we-know it. Fafnir and the Grey Mouser might be right at home here.
Thanks for the positive feedback, Lash and Gargamel, I appriciate it. I will follow both your advice, and I will try to find a book that gets close enough to the plot that is in my head.
Thanks, Sam
Gargle wrote-
Quote:I have taught creative writing at the university level, and I wouldn't take the word choice advice too seriously.
It is impossible to take word choice seriously enough.
Quote:Generally, your sentences are varied well, which can be difficult when writing an action-heavy story. Nice work.
I can't see any use in that.
Quote:Simply continue to write, and to read, of course. Flaubert is great if you're interested in how a novel is built, but no serious writer would try to emulate his archaic and flowery style, except as a joke perhaps. And a "publisher's reader" would laugh at THAT.
The first sentence there is too obvious to be worth saying.The second is enough to make a cat laugh.
"He grinned sheepishly."(Gustave Flaubert).
I presume from this principled and ridiculous remark-
Quote:And for the love of God, if you're writing to please the publisher, you have no business writing.
that Gargle is a lady.
The publisher/editor represents his paying public.And it is a writer's business whether he has any business trying to please anybody he wishes, and nobody else's.
Sam asked-
Quote:Would you mind telling my why you stopped at "rogue"?
You don't say he's a rogue.You let the reader realise that from his actions.
Apologies for quote function finger trouble in last post but one.
spendius wrote:Gargle wrote-
Quote:I have taught creative writing at the university level, and I wouldn't take the word choice advice too seriously.
It is impossible to take word choice seriously enough.
Quote:Generally, your sentences are varied well, which can be difficult when writing an action-heavy story. Nice work.
I can't see any use in that.
Quote:Simply continue to write, and to read, of course. Flaubert is great if you're interested in how a novel is built, but no serious writer would try to emulate his archaic and flowery style, except as a joke perhaps. And a "publisher's reader" would laugh at THAT.
The first sentence there is too obvious to be worth saying.The second is enough to make a cat laugh.
"He grinned sheepishly."(Gustave Flaubert).
I presume from this principled and ridiculous remark-
Quote:And for the love of God, if you're writing to please the publisher, you have no business writing.
that Gargle is a lady.
The publisher/editor represents his paying public.And it is a writer's business whether he has any business trying to please anybody he wishes, and nobody else's.
So now we're critiquing each other, not the story? Could it be that you, who take so much pride in being "blunt" and "honest" about writing posted on a public website, can't stand it when blunt honesty comes your way?
You make vague assertions but do not clarify them. You simply disagree. Great. That's nice to know; I'm sure Drowned by Darkness will benefit greatly from this obvious fact.
I presume from the ridiculous presumption that I am a lady, that you are not only misinformed but possibly sexist--of course I don't know for sure, because I don't know you, and you don't know me. I am a man. And many of my published female writer friends would agree with my "principled and ridiculous remark," which, by the way, you went on to agree with.
Who gets on a high horse about providing criticism to fifteen year-old kid over the internet? Strange.
Gargle-
I'm sorry for getting your gender wrong but not many men would say those things you said.
I wasn't "critiquing" you personally.It was your advice to a budding male writer.
I don't see why you felt the need to inform us that you taught creative writing at university level.If you think such a piece of info gives credibility to your advice I would beg to differ.
As for the "story".That is at the embryonic stage and in need of care and attention.And other budding creative writers may well be reading this.
I'm at a loss as to what it is that I can't stand when it comes my way.You obviously haven't read the ID thread on S&M if you think that.I don't give a flying fornication what anybody says about me.
What vague assertions did I make?
Sam's writing will definitely benefit from making word choice a top priority.
I am sexist though.I will admit to that.I don't feel there is anything wrong in that.Sam should try to write from a male perspective in order to keep honest.The facts of life are sexist.Nancy Mitford,Germaine Greer and Madame de Staal were pretty damn sexist in my view and their writing is worth reading ahead of any wishy-washy,down the white line,hermaphrodite panderings so common these days.
I'm afraid that phrases like "female published writer friends" have no meaning for me.
I'm not clear what I went on to agree with.You'll have to explain that.
I forgot this.
Do you approve of "rogue" used where it was?
spendius wrote:Gargle-
I'm sorry for getting your gender wrong but not many men would say those things you said.
I wasn't "critiquing" you personally.It was your advice to a budding male writer.
I don't see why you felt the need to inform us that you taught creative writing at university level.If you think such a piece of info gives credibility to your advice I would beg to differ.
As for the "story".That is at the embryonic stage and in need of care and attention.And other budding creative writers may well be reading this.
I'm at a loss as to what it is that I can't stand when it comes my way.You obviously haven't read the ID thread on S&M if you think that.I don't give a flying fornication what anybody says about me.
What vague assertions did I make?
Sam's writing will definitely benefit from making word choice a top priority.
I am sexist though.I will admit to that.I don't feel there is anything wrong in that.Sam should try to write from a male perspective in order to keep honest.The facts of life are sexist.Nancy Mitford,Germaine Greer and Madame de Staal were pretty damn sexist in my view and their writing is worth reading ahead of any wishy-washy,down the white line,hermaphrodite panderings so common these days.
I'm afraid that phrases like "female published writer friends" have no meaning for me.
I'm not clear what I went on to agree with.You'll have to explain that.
Possibly I read too much into your post. And I haven't interacted with you on this site before, so maybe I'm just unfamiliar with your "style."
Sure, that I've taught creative writing doesn't give me more credibility than anyone else on this thread. I certainly wasn't implying that it makes my comments more valuable than yours. I thought it might be useful for D by D to know that I have experience dealing with budding writers much older than him. Also, I am finishing up my M.F.A. in creative writing, so I am constantly reading graduate level work...I wish it were possible to discuss any sort of art education without sounding like a pretentious snob...I simply wanted D by D to know the standards by which I was measuring his work, in order to put my comments in some kind of context. That's all!
Apparently, the idea that a writer should write for himself and not to please an increasingly under-read public, to you, is somehow tethered to a "female" line of thinking. Bizarre. And again, my art school reference put you off, but these are my friends, the people I go to the bar with. I should have said my male friends--we don't give a **** about the sometimes narrow-minded tastes of publishers. What does sex have to do with that? You concurred that a writer has a choice; you meant only to point out that I was stating the obvious.
And, um, yes, many men would agree with me. And if they did not, what difference would it make?
Of course gender is always involved in writing, and the author's persona should never be watered-down. However, that was not what you were referring to originally--you were referring to my opinion.
Yes, word choice is important. Yes, young writers reading this should learn from the "masters." But voice, character, and plot are important, too. Flaubert isn't the only author out there. There was this guy named Raymond Carver who wouldn't have been caught dead writing a line like, "The human tongue is like a cracked cauldron on which we beat out tunes to set a bear dancing when we would make the stars weep with our melodies." And he was published within the past few decades! Flaubert is elegant, certainly, but in our skeptical age, many publishers would be less inclined to digest such prose. You advised D by D to learn from Flaubert, to keep publishers from laughing. I disagree with this advice.
I do think one can learn from prolix classical authors, provided the style is reinterpreted.
Luckily, you don't give a flying fornication. You shouldn't.
I don't either!
Cheers.
I agree with your opinion on the word "rogue." It's a pejorative term an omniscient narrator should avoid.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace