|
the Dagon Knight4002 Posts
I've noticed a lot of writing people on TL lately, and wondered if people would be kind enough to read this over for me and tell me what they think. I'd appreciate any constructive criticism, really. Thanks 
When I was eight or nine, we used to stay with the grandparents in Wexford, down by the beach. We’d walk out to the dunes in summer and grow so thoroughly bored of the beach that we had no interest at all in going back after the first week, sick of sun and sand we'd sit around and mope.
From time to time, the father would be busy enough with school or work that we’d spend a week around Easter there too. The place was dead in Spring, the shops all seasonal and shuttered up, everywhere so different without the sunshine. We’d amuse ourselves as best we could in those pre-summer weeks, when the weather was poor enough that we couldn’t visit the beach for fear of windborne sand.
We’d go anyway though, and shield our eyes against the gritty gusts, to stumble through the dunes, cracking the wet-brown surface shell of sand to reveal the whiteness beneath. One afternoon, the sun breaking through for a warm few hours, we’d found a chrysalis hanging from the scrubby thorn-bushes that lined the shallow hollows of the dunes. We had found it just as it had begun to unravel; the first time I’d seen a cocoon and I’d be there to see it opened. How fine a thing it was.
From that husk emerged first a tiny speckled head, and, with great effort, the legs abdomen and crumpled wings followed, slowly unfolding to drink in the sun, to dry and prepare for flight. As we watched though, the butterfly extended further, sliding gradually from the limp shell to reveal a stretched, conjoined abdomen, a second set of wings, unfolding in turn. The second set of legs clutched at the stem as the wings unfolded, two butterflies laid end-to-end, hanging as they dried.
We were curious of the thing, beautiful as it was, in the way that only a child’s perception of a butterfly could be, splashes of red deepening in the warmth of the sun. For reasons I cannot at all remember, we had with us a jam-jar (all one word, in the way of the granny), and knowing this was too fine a thing to let escape. We filled the glass with plants and grasses, perhaps a little sand, and snagged it straight from the branch, using the lid to clip it free.
Once inside, the two flapped about in a confusion of compound eyes and glass, the black and red-orange of their wings a blur among the twigs and flora we’d scraped together. We grew afraid then, afraid that we had hurt them and that they might hurt themselves. We’d been convinced that their condition would prove fatal eventually, whether they simply couldn’t fly correctly, could never properly feed or would tear one another apart… it had seemed very unlikely they’d live.
So we did what any children would do. We walked down to the shore, the tide already going out, and flung the jar into the sea. Sadly, having only the throwing arms of kids, the jar failed to clear the sandbank about fifteen feet out, and we waded across to it, the jar heavy enough to have sunk to the bottom of the six-inch deep sea across the sandbar.
Under that thin pane of seawater was our glass, shining in the sun, the soft-green grass and bright red-on-black of frenetic floundering in that delicate bubble. One end was already an inch or two submerged in sand. We hadn’t the heart to cast the thing further into the sea, so we left it alone.
Maybe the tide drew them out along the bottom, our sweet Siamese submariners.
+ Show Spoiler +I did post this on my personal blog a couple of days ago, but I thought TL might be the place to go to for some honest responses. I hope that's okay
   
|
Children are the most cruel of all people.
I liked your little story a lot. I can't comment on your language as you clearly speak English better than I do. From a writer's perspective, I'd rework the first two paragraphs. It doesn't matter that you've been there in summer and that it's totally different in the cold spring - or at least, it doesn't deserve a mention the length of a whole paragraph, one (accessory) sentence should suffice, considering the story is overall kept short. Not a big deal though, it was very nice to read. Keep writing.
|
"perhaps a little sand, and snagged it straight from the branch with the lit to clip the little shell. "
Did you mean lid instead of lit? Over all the sentence feels odd. (Might just be me not understanding English well enough.)
As for criticism, what is the purpose of the text. Without a purpose criticism is impossible since it could fulfil one perfectly while failing at another.
|
the Dagon Knight4002 Posts
On May 30 2011 05:44 Yurie wrote: "perhaps a little sand, and snagged it straight from the branch with the lit to clip the little shell. "
Did you mean lid instead of lit? Over all the sentence feels odd. (Might just be me not understanding English well enough.)
As for criticism, what is the purpose of the text. Without a purpose criticism is impossible since it could fulfil one perfectly while failing at another.
It should definitely say "lid," thanks.
I suppose the purpose of the text was to be a very short story, something small and entertaining. To be a pleasure to the reader 
And thanks Spekulatius, that's exactly the kind of advice I was hoping for. There comes a point in editing where it's hard to see what's important and what needs to go. I'm too close to the text, I fear
|
On May 30 2011 06:12 SirJolt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 05:44 Yurie wrote: "perhaps a little sand, and snagged it straight from the branch with the lit to clip the little shell. "
Did you mean lid instead of lit? Over all the sentence feels odd. (Might just be me not understanding English well enough.)
As for criticism, what is the purpose of the text. Without a purpose criticism is impossible since it could fulfil one perfectly while failing at another. It should definitely say "lid," thanks. I suppose the purpose of the text was to be a very short story, something small and entertaining. To be a pleasure to the reader  And thanks Spekulatius, that's exactly the kind of advice I was hoping for. There comes a point in editing where it's hard to see what's important and what needs to go. I'm too close to the text, I fear 
You're welcome. I know how helpful a second opinion from someone uninvolved always is. One tends to lose track of the work that gets presented in the end through all the thinking that is happening in its creation.
|
This is beautiful, thank you for sharing it. I don't have any criticisms; I found the narrative very immersive, and loved its poignancy.
|
I think this is very well written. I do think you need a bit of grammatical work and punctuation to clear it up, but it is mostly good. One big note.
Tone: Read the word choice and attitude of your piece. It is an adult-conveyed childhood reflection on something beyond the grasp of the child. Words like "chrysalis," "conjoined," and "submariners" pollute the image, in my opinion. I think you have masterfully blended a child's memory with an appropriate reinterpretation, but just using "cocoon", "bound", and "sailors" or the like would keep the balance of maturity and childhood better. I lose all sense of inexperience with those word choices.
Very entertaining read.
|
Hey, you messaged me to give this a read and so I will! I'm not going to tell you about oddness in grammar and shit because 1. I'm terrible at it 2. I like critiquing more on content than grammar issues you can usually comb over with a second good read and 3. Funner to talk about!
When I was eight or nine, we used to stay with the grandparents in Wexford, down by the beach. We’d walk out to the dunes in summer and grow so thoroughly tired (could loathsome work here?) of the beach that we had no interest at all in going back after the first week, sick of sun and sand we'd sit around and mope.
From time to time, our father would be busy enough with school or work that we’d spend a week around Easter there too. The place was dead in Spring, the shops all seasonal and shuttered up, everywhere so different without the sunshine. We’d amuse ourselves as best we could during those pre-summer weeks when the weather was poor enough that we couldn’t visit the beach for fear of windborne sand.
We’d go anyway though and shield our eyes against the gritty gusts. Only to stumble through the dunes, cracking the wet-brown surface shell of sand to reveal the whiteness beneath. One afternoon, the sun breaking through for a warm few hours, we’d find a chrysalis hanging from the scrubby thorn-bushes that lined the shallow hollows of the dunes. We had found it just as it had begun to unravel; the first time I’d seen a cocoon and I’d be there to see it opened. How fine a process of life (thing is an ugly word, replace D:<) it was.
From that husk emerged first a tiny speckled head and with great effort, the legs, the abdomen and crumpled wings followed, slowly unfolding to drink in the sun, to dry and prepare for flight. As we watched though, the butterfly extended further, sliding gradually from the limp shell to reveal a stretched, conjoined abdomen: a second set of wings, unfolding in turn. The second set of legs clutched at the stem as the wings unfolded, two butterflies laid end-to-end, hanging as they dried.
We were curious of this being, beautiful as it was, in the way that only a child’s perception of a butterfly could be: splashes of red deepening in the warmth of the sun. For reasons I cannot at all remember, we had with us a jam-jar (all one word, in the way of the granny), and knowing this was too fine a thing to let escape. We filled the glass with plants and grasses, perhaps a little sand, and snagged it straight from the branch, using the lid to clip it free.
Once inside, the two flapped about in a confusion of compound eyes and glass, the black and red-orange of their wings a blur among the twigs and flora we’d scraped together. We grew afraid then, afraid that we had hurt them and that they might hurt themselves. We’d been convinced that their condition would prove fatal eventually, whether they simply couldn’t fly correctly, could never properly feed or would tear one another apart… it had seemed very unlikely they’d live.
So we did what any children would do. We walked down to the shore, the tide already going out, and flung the jar into the sea. Sadly, having only the throwing arms of kids, the jar failed to clear the sandbank about fifteen feet out, and we waded across to it, the jar heavy enough to have sunk to the bottom of the six-inch deep sea across the sandbar.
Under that thin pane of seawater was our glass, shining in the sun, the soft-green grass and bright red-on-black of frenetic floundering in that delicate bubble. One end was already an inch or two submerged in sand. We hadn’t the heart to cast the thing further into the sea, so we left it alone.
Maybe the tide drew them out along the bottom, our sweet Siamese submariners.
I'll try avoiding breaking up your piece, I usually hate that, but in some parts it does a feel odd like in the first paragraph where you always add this last part of detail. It's like you're trying to be precise of the subject, but reading it allowed feels so out of order (I underlined it for you).
I bolded words that could use changing or that I changed (such as "bored" and "the father" to "our father")
Second paragraph opening sentence is odd too. Like... your father's so busy (or busy enough) that you got to go to your grandparents? Can't we work that out better such as: Our father was so busy that sometimes we'd be dismissed back to the beach/our grandparents.
___________________
I agree with the above. The first two paragraphs are odd, they're implying more than we can actually safely assume. Here's my edited version: Back when we were children, around the ages of eight and nine, we'd stay at our grand-parents back in Wexford,'s beach. We’d dilly-dally extensively on the dunes in summer and grow so thoroughly loathsome of the beach after a week or so. By association, we grew sick of the sun and the sand we often moped and dig our feet in.
From time to time, our father would be so busy with school or work that we’d be punished a week during Easter at Wexford too. The place was dead in Spring, the shops all seasonal and shuttered up, everywhere was so different without the sunshine. We’d amuse ourselves the best we could during those pre-summer weeks when the weather was so poor that we couldn’t visit the beach for fear of wind-borne sand.
___________________
Everything looks good, lay off the drug-addicting commas (sometimes you don't need commas to show for a pause or to emphasize a certain part of reading the sentence). In the third paragraph, the underlining indicates it is hard to read or lacks flow.
Everything else is roughly good. Might want to give it a second gander for that occasional sentence.
Overall I liked it. Short, descriptive and cute. The ending was what I preferred more than the beginning purely because it seemed a lot more comfortable and clear than the setting of the scene or area.
Nonetheless, I hope those butterflies came out fine, so young in their life.
|
I actually want to disagree with Torte de Lini about saying "our father" instead of "the father" and such. I think there is solid evidence in literature to not use possessive pronouns. I like the feel. Kids don't think about the difference of their parents and others, so the current speech feels authentic.
|
On May 30 2011 10:25 Sleight wrote: I actually want to disagree with Torte de Lini about saying "our father" instead of "the father" and such. I think there is solid evidence in literature to not use possessive pronouns. I like the feel. Kids don't think about the difference of their parents and others, so the current speech feels authentic.
Yeah, I get it was intended to put the father instead of our father. But I don't think it works here. It's his or the sibling's father, not a specific non-determined father.
|
On May 30 2011 10:34 Torte de Lini wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 10:25 Sleight wrote: I actually want to disagree with Torte de Lini about saying "our father" instead of "the father" and such. I think there is solid evidence in literature to not use possessive pronouns. I like the feel. Kids don't think about the difference of their parents and others, so the current speech feels authentic. Yeah, I get it was intended to put the father instead of our father. But I don't think it works here. It's his or the sibling's father, not a specific non-determined father.
That's exactly what I am saying, it is "HIS" father, but if the child does not feel that "his" father belongs to him, he would not use such a pronoun. I feel that it adds a certain distance to the piece, underlying a deeper separation and emphasizing the driftlessness of the children as metaphorical drowning Siamese sailors. Their lack of guidance and the butterflies independent and isolated nature mirror one another and are a portent of struggles to come.
I think it SHOULD feel uncomfortable and not sit quite right. I think this piece is wonderful and could easily inspire later works.
I wonder if the OP has considered the trend in modern flash fiction as a medium.
|
the Dagon Knight4002 Posts
I just wanted to say thanks to everyone who took the time to read this and offer advice
On May 30 2011 09:51 Sleight wrote: Tone: Read the word choice and attitude of your piece. It is an adult-conveyed childhood reflection on something beyond the grasp of the child. Words like "chrysalis," "conjoined," and "submariners" pollute the image, in my opinion. I think you have masterfully blended a child's memory with an appropriate reinterpretation, but just using "cocoon", "bound", and "sailors" or the like would keep the balance of maturity and childhood better. I lose all sense of inexperience with those word choices.
I think this is some of the best advice I've heard in a long time, just in general. I think choosing words more carefully, if only to be more appropriate to the setting, is something I could really stand to spend more time on.
It seems like such a small thing to keep in mind, especially considering the potential payoff 
On May 30 2011 10:13 Torte de Lini wrote: thing is an ugly word, replace D:<.
This is pretty much exactly why I wanted you to read this Torte, much as you might denigrate your own ability, it really seems like you have a love for words. I knew I'd appreciate your input, even if I disagreed with some of the things you said. That kind of input is always valuable and not always easy to find 
I'll try to play nicer with commas in future too; I have a disappointingly 19th century approach to punctuation 
Edit: I completely forgot:
On May 30 2011 09:32 whatthefat wrote: This is beautiful, thank you for sharing it. I don't have any criticisms; I found the narrative very immersive, and loved its poignancy.
Thank you so much for brightening up my morning. This is one of the nicest things I've read in a long time
|
|
|
|