Path: not-for-mail
From: Allegro987@gmail.com
Newsgroups: alt.sex.stories.d
Subject: Re: {ASSM} {REVIEW} Yotna's Reviews of The Solstice Fest ~ Summer by Diola Dragontail
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 19:16:38 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 449
Message-ID: <1182824198.356381.237000@n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com>
References: <56127asstr$1182802203@assm.asstr.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.168.231.234
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1182824198 30079 127.0.0.1 (26 Jun 2007 02:16:38 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 02:16:38 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <56127asstr$1182802203@assm.asstr.org>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.4) Gecko/20070515 Firefox/2.0.0.4,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: n60g2000hse.googlegroups.com; posting-host=71.168.231.234; posting-account=hztTug0AAADfpBzvqwvMikA37dcZYIFj
===================
Enough.
Yotna, if you're going to criticize the work of others, please learn
where to put a comma.
On Jun 25, 4:10 pm, Yotna El'toub <yotna_elt...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> File attached.
> <1st attachment, "Review_Summer .txt" begin>
>
> Yotna's Reviews of The Summer Solstice Festival 2007
>
> Summer
> A Summer Solstice Festival Story
> By Diola Dragontail
>
> Storyline
>
> <Brief outline only>
>
> Karen has a rather boorish husband - who seems to have lost
> enthusiasm for life. He has his reasons for this and in masculine
> style he tends to take them out on his wife. However he is
> invited to join her on her holiday for one day, to her surprise
> and delight he agrees.
Run-on comma. Pointless dash. Remove it and take "rather" with it.
Not to mention "in masculine style." After "boorish" you should be at
least a little confident in your readers' awareness of the world
around them.
Oh, and does one take reasons out on one's wife?
> He also agrees to do what she would
> normally do on holiday, for just one day; once again, he agrees
> to the condition and the dye is set.
Have you tried one of the new non-chlorine bleaches? They remove dyes
that might otherwise have been set.
Perhaps you meant: the die is cast.
> Merits
>
> <What was worthy of comment>
>
> There are some really nice phrases here, one that delighted me was
> in this paragraph:
Run-on comma'd phrase.
> Excerpt
>
> * "He was sure she had, but he didn't mind that. He understood
> her need and was willing to forgive her. Despite where her body
> laid, he always knew where her heart resided." *
>
> Isn't that simple and elegant?
No.
Where her body laid *whom*? "Where her body lay" would be closer to
normal usage. Not that the whole construct doesn't deserve
replacement.
Also, what's with the "that" in the first sentence? Wouldn't
simplicity and elegance be served by its excision?
> Another:
>
> Excerpt:
>
> * "Karen loosened her grip and let Victoria's hair slip out from
> between her fingers. The ebon strands uncoiling from her fingers
> like a nest of vipers retreating for shelter. Her hands
> immediately went to the front of Victoria's designer silk shirt,
> gripping it tightly and yanking it apart, the crimson stone
> buttons falling around their feet. *
> Again a nice phrase.
Would be nicer without the cliches ("ebon strands," "designer silk"),
the dubious similes ("like a nest of vipers retreating for shelter"--
if they're in their nest, where do they retreat to?), and so on.
""uncoiling from her fingers" is imprecise. They were coiled in her
fingers?
"Designer silk", "crimson stone buttons": one more and I'll begin to
suspect product placement. I suppose there are certain things you
just can't *say* in the Lands' End catalog. [Yes, that's where the
apostrophe goes.]
> Oddly, it also features in demerits (maybe harshly).
> The sex is hot and delicious, very well written and quite, well 'horny'.
Now you've missed a comma. If you're going to stick a "well" in
there, surround it with commas.
> Demerits
>
> <What detracted from the story>?
>
> I will start with an excerpt of the above paragraph:
>
> * "The ebon strands uncoiling from her fingers
> like a nest of vipers retreating for shelter." *
>
> I was unsure of 'ebon'; should be 'ebony'? It turns out it is an
> adjective of ebony, but ebony can also be used as an adjective -
> why make the reader pause over unusual usage? I would have read
> ebony and it would have flowed past me, ebon did not. Keep it
> simple and keep 'em involved.
With "nest of vipers retreating for shelter" cluttering up the scene,
*this* is what gets you hung up?
Whatever--doesn't seem to have impeded your urge to use run-on commas.
> Major flaw, and this one is so easy to slip up on - you invent a
> character but the name does suit them (once you start to write
> about them). So you change it, then you forget you changed it and
> call the character by both names!
> Poor old Peter is schizophrenic turning up in adjacent paragraphs
> as both Peter and Paul. Now that confuses and it detracts from the
> story.
"does suit them" or "does not suit them"? Leaving out a "not" is
worse than switching a name. Possibly worse than reusing condoms.
And look up "schizophrenic" before you use it again.
And put a comma after "Now." Won't cost you anything--you can barter
the extra "it" for a comma.
> The only other thing that concerned me was the continuity of the
> Phone call to Mom. I have to admit, may be due to laziness,
"maybe because of laziness"--is that what you meant?
> I lost
> the plot here and became confused who was Mom and who was the
> daughter. So much so, that I had to read back to confirm it.
If you save 100,000 commas and deliver them to your local fire
station, some tobacco company will buy a kid an iron lung.
> I think the problem was that the decision to make the phone call
> interrupts a quite introspective bit of the story. A sudden
> impulse that threw me as a reader.
"a quite introspective bit of the story" -- any suggestions on how to
make this phrase clank any harder?
> I also have concerns as to how this phone call marries into the
> 'reveal' at the end of the story. But I can't say too much here to
> avoid spoiling the read.
You can noun anything...
> Atmosphere
>
> <How well evolved was the environment> Marks out of 20
>
> <16>
>
> The environment was good for me, until we got to the pay - off
> part of the story.
Is "the pay - off part of the story" something like "the payoff"?
> Here there could have been a fuller
> description of the location (I'm being deliberately vague -
> spoiler). The emotional environment in particular the shift from
> hostility to confounded acceptance on Peter/Paul's part is very
> well done.
Shouldn't have squandered all those commas earlier. You need two
here.
"The emotion, particularly Peter/Paul's shift from hostility to
confounded acceptance, is done very well."
Or did you mean something else?
> Workflow
>
> <How well did the story progress and develop> Marks out of 20
>
> <10>
>
> Ah, herein lies the crux of it; Diola needs an editor.
Here's the crux: so does Yotna. "Herein" junkies shouldn't be
complaining about "ebon."
> I'm sure a
> lot of the flow issues such as naming and the phone call would
> have been spotted by a good editor. The flow is broken by the
> confusions that arise in the text and that is a real shame, as
> the story properly 'polished' is deserving of a higher score
> than it will get.
OK, class: where *should* the commas go?
> Reader (esp. me?) are a taciturn lot,
Yes, reader sure are.
> get too many interruptions
> to the flow and no matter how good the tale the enthusiasm is
> lost.
Run-on, while the topic runs off.
> Would I have finished the story if I had not been reviewing
> it? Well yes, but I am going to hit it hard on the shortcomings
> it displays.
Another "well" short a comma.
And are "the shortcomings it displays" anything like "its
shortcomings"?
> One of the most glaring for me is the feeling of slight
> incredulity the ending gives me.
"slight" and "glaring" in the same sentence. Hmmm. And whom are you
talking about, if not yourself? That "for me" is silly once you've
started to write a review of the storyteller's technique.
> I can't reconcile it too easily
> with certain part of the story as written.
There are uncertain parts of the story? Or parts as not written? And
is there a tax on indefinite articles in your county?
> A longer end phase
Is that like an ending?
> with a little more explanation may have helped here.
You mean, you don't know? Or do you mean: "might have helped here"?
> I got the
> slight feeling that as the sex was over the authors literary
> discipline slipped a little.
a) What's a "slight feeling"?
b) Does "as" mean "when"? Hint: no.
c) If you raise those commas up a few points, they become
apostrophes. Useful things, those apostrophes.
d) What the @#$%^ is "literary discipline"?
> Eroticism
>
> <Just how erotic a read is this (erotic, not sexy!)> Marks out
> of 20
>
> <17>
>
> Now this is a hot story, the sex is pungent and strong like the
> first shot of espresso in the morning.
Really good espresso is made with fewer commas and more periods.
> Excerpt:
>
> * "Lawrence kneeled close to Karen's hips, gripping the base of his cock
> and dragging the tip of it up and down her pussy lips, teasing her and
> spreading his pre-cum across her skin. Her hips shook and pushed
> back, trying to draw him inside her, but he only retreated slightly,
> continuing to keep her at bay.
>
> Victoria unhooked her slacks and let them drop around her feet,
> showing Paul her matching dark panties. The frills of lace lined the
> edges of it, showing him quite a bit of her flesh, but still hiding
> the most interesting parts. Like her bra, she quickly divested
> herself of these too, slipping her thumbs around the waistband and
> drawing it down. The wet center of it clung to her skin for a moment
> before exposing her freshly smooth pussy." *
>
> Wow, like wow, that sounds like fun.
Clumsy fun, but that's one of the best kinds.
--"Pre-cum"--is there no better word for this in the universe?
--"but he only retreated slightly"--wouldn't "merely" do better than
"only...slightly"?
--"showing Paul": you said it yourself--given names are risky.
"revealing" would work so much better.
--How can frills of lace show him quite a bit of her flesh? Last time
I checked, lace could only *conceal* flesh.
--"quite a bit" sounds like we're in the Clotworth College Common
Room.
--the ", but still" is presumably an ersatz "while".
--Who cares whether the panties match? (Each other???) For that
matter: whether they're dark? If they're not phosphorescent,
discussions of any fashion statement they might be making are a
distraction; and if they *do* glow in the dark, they'd better be a
serious plot device.
--"Like her bra, she divested herself...": what had her bra divested
itself of?
--"The wet center of it clung to her skin for a moment": you mean, as
opposed to some dry patch in the corner that stuck for hours?
--"freshly smooth pussy": if this were a Gillette ad, you'd be on to
something. In the event, "freshly" makes one wonder just how
spontaneous the whole business might have been.
>
> Mechanics
>
> <The boring bit, grammar, typo's etc.> Marks out of 20
Start with the typo in "typo's."
> <12>
>
> Once again the spectre of self-editing emerges (I presume).
"A spectre is haunting erotica--the spectre of self-editing."
> There
> are typo's (not many) a repeated word, the name confusion and
> some slightly odd phraseology.
Remove the apostrophe and re-use it as a comma. Crowd will go wild.
> Excerpt Karen & Peter:
>
> *"Did you bring pictures of your children with you?" Karen asked, the
> request seemed to float in the middle of the room, out of place and
> awkward for a second. Then she glanced at her husband. "We've been
> trying to have some of our own for years now. And I did mention yours
> to Peter."*
Run-on sentence; "for a second" excessive; no question mark after a
question.
> Excerpt Peter & Paul:
>
> *"Peter stared at the picture, trying not to show too much interest. He
> wasn't sure what the proper amount was, but he just felt envious now.
> The dark haired boy looked like an imp in the posed picture, bright
> red cheeks, eyes that seemed to glimmer with mischievousness. He
> couldn't help but feel envious.
"couldn't help but feel"--that would be Basque for "felt"?
>
> "And this," Victoria's finger shifted to the right now, following the
> train of pictures. "Is Cassy, she's our baby."
Period for comma! *Dude.*
> Peter could see Victoria's face start to glow as she gazed down at the
> picture, the pride and joy was almost palpable as it flowed out of
> her.
Run-on sentence, double error of number.
> The little girl, Cassy, couldn't be older than four or five.
"couldn't have been" would work better here. So would "Little Cassy"
and no commas.
> And if
> her older brother was an imp, this child looked like an angel. Bright
> blonde hair, tiny little features, and a face that just beamed
> happiness and wonder.
"just beamed happiness and wonder." Beam me up--the cliches are
suffocating.
> Paul snapped his eyes away from the pictures, searching for the right
> words to respond with. "You have a beautiful family."*
>
> Ooops! - That seems to sum it up.
To sum up *what*? Looks to me like extra words, not summing-up.
"Paul snapped his eyes away, searching for the right words."
> Except: Phrase or typo?
>
> * "Peter glanced at his wife for a moment; he could tell that this was
> all part of her plan. He wasn't sure if he should feel offended or
> not, but he was intrigued very so slightly."*
> Looking at this just now, I think it is a typo; I would anticipate
> the word 'ever' but not very? Unfortunately, it makes me stutter
> in reading once more.
Sucks either way. "all"; "or not"; "e/ver/y so slightly"--all
superfluous, all detracting from the images, from the story.
> Impression
>
> <What did I feel having read the story, did I want to read
> more?> Marks out of 20
Run-on. One day a comma's gonna gitcha in revenge...
> <15>
>
> Well after all my bellyaching the answer is I like the story. I
> do think the relationship between the ending and the main part of
> the story needs sorting and it cries out a bit for an editors
> shears, but it is a good story nonetheless.
Shears? This is a sheep? Or perhaps a dataset needing sorting?
(Another "well" needing a comma. Maybe it's the "well" of
loneliness!)
> Will I read more
> works by Diola? Yes, I will, once I get a certain glut of reviews
> out of the way.
Don't delay on *my* account.
>
> Total score
>
> 70 Yotties out of 100. <An average score would therefore be 50>
"therefore"? Wherefore? You haven't provided any reasoning for such
a claim.
>
> Readability guide 00-19 must try harder.
> 20-39 needs development
> 40-59 readable
> 60-79 good read
> 80-99 should read
> 100 reserved for my stories :-)