Post by James on Jan 21, 2010 15:27:42 GMT -5
Drall
Spelling & Grammar - 5/5
Ease of Read - 4/5
Use of Topic - 8/10
Entertainment - 11/15
Quality - 10/15
Total: 38/50
Well done, Drall. An excellent story.
Flawless on the spelling side of things, which is always a pleasure to see. Again, and I think it was you I've spoken to about it, is when dealing with a new world try not to pelt every name in the first two paragraphs. You definitely didn't overwhelm with the new and unusual names, but at the start I think the titles could have been dropped just to help the flow of the piece.
I actually disagree with the perspective part with Pete. Yours was a third limited story, for instance Brooks or Martin are Third Limited authors and they change perspective regularly. Third Limited just means that at that time, until the change, you can only see one person's thoughts. Even with Mel's piece, she had the reader seeing at least two characters' thoughts in each section.
The fantasy element was a refreshing touch onto the political topic, but I agree with the "I'll tell you the plot now!" comment of Pete's. There are other ways to do that, through internal thoughts, actions or if you can get dialogue perfect, by drawing it out.
And I brought up dialogue because it was my one concern. The narrative was great, you're really improving as a writer, but the dialogue at times still felt a little... something. This was a moment of great emotion and stress, you've found out that the King's best friend is trying to kill him, and the tone of the dialogue read like I was talking to my mate in the kitchen. I just couldn't feel the emotion, the sense of urgency in the dialogue.
Besides that, great work Drall.
Ali
Spelling & Grammar - 3/5
Ease of Read - 3/5
Use of Topic - 8/10
Entertainment - 12/15
Quality - 11/15
Total: 37/50
I've got to agree with Pete here and say that some really trivial mistakes let you down, Ali. Also at times your narrative felt a bit 'heavy', trying to cram all the emotion and action into one bit, that turned out to be quite difficult to read.
The topic as Pete said wasn't very creative but I did think you used the narrative very well. I'm quite a fan of a very personal third person narrative and you pulled it off quite well.
Despite the mistakes, I found myself being drawn in and in and I think it was due to that nice little touch of not telling us who was the man behind the podium until towards the end. I wanted to know who it was.
So besides from the mistakes, a very good piece Ali.
Taed
Spelling & Grammar - 5/5
Ease of Read - 4/5
Use of Topic - 9/10
Entertainment - 12/15
Quality - 13/15
Total: 43/50
Another excellent piece, Taed.
Pete apparently caught a spelling mistake but I apparently missed it, so clearly it didn't disrupt from the piece. There was something about your narrative though that just irked me, the sort of commentary like feel just made it a bit harder to get into and feel immersed.
The topic was as Pete said brilliantly creative, and you used the third limited perspective well (barring that commentary feel that crept though, which is just a personal preference probably).
Once again, it's slightly below your normal for detail of descriptions, which is something I far prefer. Just like last time the balance between keeping it simple and poetic descriptions was just right. You managed to make me feel something for Zug and that made the ending just excellent.
Great work, Taed.
Spelling & Grammar - 5/5
Ease of Read - 4/5
Use of Topic - 8/10
Entertainment - 11/15
Quality - 10/15
Total: 38/50
Well done, Drall. An excellent story.
Flawless on the spelling side of things, which is always a pleasure to see. Again, and I think it was you I've spoken to about it, is when dealing with a new world try not to pelt every name in the first two paragraphs. You definitely didn't overwhelm with the new and unusual names, but at the start I think the titles could have been dropped just to help the flow of the piece.
I actually disagree with the perspective part with Pete. Yours was a third limited story, for instance Brooks or Martin are Third Limited authors and they change perspective regularly. Third Limited just means that at that time, until the change, you can only see one person's thoughts. Even with Mel's piece, she had the reader seeing at least two characters' thoughts in each section.
The fantasy element was a refreshing touch onto the political topic, but I agree with the "I'll tell you the plot now!" comment of Pete's. There are other ways to do that, through internal thoughts, actions or if you can get dialogue perfect, by drawing it out.
And I brought up dialogue because it was my one concern. The narrative was great, you're really improving as a writer, but the dialogue at times still felt a little... something. This was a moment of great emotion and stress, you've found out that the King's best friend is trying to kill him, and the tone of the dialogue read like I was talking to my mate in the kitchen. I just couldn't feel the emotion, the sense of urgency in the dialogue.
Besides that, great work Drall.
Ali
Spelling & Grammar - 3/5
Ease of Read - 3/5
Use of Topic - 8/10
Entertainment - 12/15
Quality - 11/15
Total: 37/50
I've got to agree with Pete here and say that some really trivial mistakes let you down, Ali. Also at times your narrative felt a bit 'heavy', trying to cram all the emotion and action into one bit, that turned out to be quite difficult to read.
The topic as Pete said wasn't very creative but I did think you used the narrative very well. I'm quite a fan of a very personal third person narrative and you pulled it off quite well.
Despite the mistakes, I found myself being drawn in and in and I think it was due to that nice little touch of not telling us who was the man behind the podium until towards the end. I wanted to know who it was.
So besides from the mistakes, a very good piece Ali.
Taed
Spelling & Grammar - 5/5
Ease of Read - 4/5
Use of Topic - 9/10
Entertainment - 12/15
Quality - 13/15
Total: 43/50
Another excellent piece, Taed.
Pete apparently caught a spelling mistake but I apparently missed it, so clearly it didn't disrupt from the piece. There was something about your narrative though that just irked me, the sort of commentary like feel just made it a bit harder to get into and feel immersed.
The topic was as Pete said brilliantly creative, and you used the third limited perspective well (barring that commentary feel that crept though, which is just a personal preference probably).
Once again, it's slightly below your normal for detail of descriptions, which is something I far prefer. Just like last time the balance between keeping it simple and poetic descriptions was just right. You managed to make me feel something for Zug and that made the ending just excellent.
Great work, Taed.
I'm pretty sure I agree with everything both of you said and I could have shot myself over the spelling mistakes. I'm usually so good about that! I'm guessing it was sleep depravity that got me there, I did another read over after I slept yet also after I posted and smashed my nose due to facepalming. Arg!