|
|
Post by ASGetty ((Zovo)) on Feb 17, 2016 19:01:38 GMT -5
I've also read and talked with a few other amateur writers; and, as James can attest, I plug AWR as often as possible.
I dunno, I can just see a blog/projects network being a really interesting extension of the AWR forums. Personal space for each member and the forums as a sort of meeting place.
|
|
|
|
Post by James on Feb 18, 2016 4:16:43 GMT -5
Less than 24 hours to go!
|
|
|
|
Post by Kaez on Feb 18, 2016 15:21:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by James on Feb 18, 2016 21:12:15 GMT -5
Less than 6 hours to go! Review, review, review. Because it's going to suck if this great competition ends with a final no one reviewed.
|
|
|
|
Post by James on Feb 19, 2016 2:00:40 GMT -5
One hour to go!
|
|
|
|
Post by ASGetty ((Zovo)) on Feb 19, 2016 12:24:53 GMT -5
Alright, the results are in.
Let's talk Rounds 3 and 4.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kaez on Feb 19, 2016 13:03:01 GMT -5
Alright, the results are in. Let's talk Rounds 3 and 4. I wrote Sex Cult 1. I found the critiques of it to be incredibly accurate, honestly. Someone said I "sped up the boring bits" -- that's true, I did. Someone said it felt like I only really wanted to write the ritual scene -- that's true, I did. I really appreciated the positive comments I got about that scene. I really fell into it and had a ton of fun (well, when I say fun...) writing it. It was the most intensive, engaging writing experience I've had in a very long time. I'm personally very conflicted about the ending. Some people loved it and some people hated it and, honestly, I can see both. I don't have a better way to end it than the way I did, but it also left me feeling a little empty. I still haven't decided if I like that ending or not. I also appreciate that people enjoyed, mostly, the bit where Trish starts to realize she's got a crush. I was happy with that bit. But I didn't spend enough time and thought on the characters and giving them distinctive voices, IMO, as I was, again, really rushing to get to the "interesting bits" for me. This has been my struggle in every competition -- I don't like writing what I don't want to write. I'm picky about only writing stuff I'm interested in. And that means I drop out 90% of the time. I was determined not to this time, so I did write something, but... I skipped out on some bits that should've been given more time and thought. The only objection to the critiques I got was that someone had a problem with the word 'ass' in there. What, did you want me to say 'butt'? College kids don't look at butts, they look at asses. Also, I actually didn't realize 'Christian' was the name from 50 Shades of Grey until you guys pointed it out to me. So. LOL. Mah bad on that one. |
|
|
|
Post by ASGetty ((Zovo)) on Feb 19, 2016 13:12:56 GMT -5
Someone said it felt like I only really wanted to write the ritual scene -- that's true, I did. I really appreciated the positive comments I got about that scene. It's funny how easily that comes through, isn't it? Like I can say with some certainty that the parts of all of my submissions which I was most enthusiastic about writing were the dialogues; and in every single set of reviews, those were pointed at as the highlights. Even my shit-tabulous Round 1 submission. It's the transitions and setting the scene and getting really immersed in the not-quite-as-exciting moments that I (and I think you) struggled with. |
|
|
|
Post by Kaez on Feb 19, 2016 13:33:02 GMT -5
Someone said it felt like I only really wanted to write the ritual scene -- that's true, I did. I really appreciated the positive comments I got about that scene. It's funny how easily that comes through, isn't it? Like I can say with some certainty that the parts of all of my submissions which I was most enthusiastic about writing were the dialogues; and in every single set of reviews, those were pointed at as the highlights. Even my shit-tabulous Round 1 submission. It's the transitions and setting the scene and getting really immersed in the not-quite-as-exciting moments that I (and I think you) struggled with. That's a tricky and essential part of writing: making -everything- interesting, even the bits that... aren't interesting. Your Witch Train story is an example of doing that fairly well, I think. You spiced up the travel by eliminating the sense of vision -- it made something that could have just as easily been either boring or simply written off with exposition into something that was as interesting as the 'interesting parts'. And by keeping the reader caring and curious and engaged during those transitions, they care even -more- when the good bits come. Which is a big part of why that story was, IMO, really good -- it held my interest continuously. |
|
|
|
Post by ASGetty ((Zovo)) on Feb 19, 2016 13:36:33 GMT -5
On the subject of critiques we had problems with, Pete, I'm a little grumbly about your review of my final submission.
I tried something there, which, admittedly didn't work. That's fine. I sort of keep trying to do this thing where I'm actually funny (it's sort of a personal challenge; a hurdle I can't get over), and it doesn't work, ever. I'm going to stop doing that. Every other review realize I tried something and that it simply didn't work; and that's fine, that's true, that's all valuable information.
Your review spends almost 800 words chastising me for not writing the story -you- felt like the beginning you wrote deserved.
I feel like that was a little unfair.
|
|
|
|
Post by James on Feb 19, 2016 13:52:52 GMT -5
I sort of keep trying to do this thing where I'm actually funny (it's sort of a personal challenge; a hurdle I can't get over), and it doesn't work, ever. I'm going to stop doing that. I don't know if it's a case of not working. That line about Spike and Chang was killer. And often it's not really the joke that are falling flat but rather the set-up. But written comedy is fucking hard to write. I'd argue the hardest thing to write of all. |
|
|
|
Post by Kaez on Feb 19, 2016 13:53:25 GMT -5
On the subject of critiques we had problems with, Pete, I'm a little grumbly about your review of my final submission. I tried something there, which, admittedly didn't work. That's fine. I sort of keep trying to do this thing where I'm actually funny (it's sort of a personal challenge; a hurdle I can't get over), and it doesn't work, ever. I'm going to stop doing that. Every other review realize I tried something and that it simply didn't work; and that's fine, that's true, that's all valuable information. Your review spends almost 800 words chastising me for not writing the story -you- felt like the beginning you wrote deserved. I feel like that was a little unfair. Well, I apologize if you got that impression. That's not how I actually felt, and I'm sorry it came off that way. I didn't realize you were trying to do the thing that you were apparently trying to do. I didn't realize you were trying to do this sarcastic version of an action movie thing. Everyone else picked up on that, I guess, but I didn't. I also didn't realize that James was trying to do what he was trying to do either, which Jason -clearly- understood perfectly. So. You can fault me for, apparently, 'missing' both of the final stories. But I don't feel like you betrayed the beginning at all, or that it "should have" gone in a direction it didn't. Not at all. The intro was pretty explicit in establishing a quiet setting. There are little noises being heard. You then introduce a ton of characters and action into the house. That contradicts the intro. Has nothing to do with where I wanted the story to go, it's just outright not faithful to the intro, and I've picked on stories the whole competition for doing that, regardless of which intro it was or who wrote it or any of that. You also just really flew through the house. You just zoomed through it. I did make a statement about how the intro was really slow paced and I wished the story was slower paced as well, but -- pretend I didn't say that. Ignore that statement entirely and just focus on the fact that you flew through the house. He went upstairs, saw all the rooms, came back downstairs in a matter of three sentences. That just felt so rushed. It felt like I didn't get to see anything. I couldn't picture it. I wanted some more immersion, some more painting the scene, some more sensory information that I didn't get. Now, that would have been more forgiving -if- the intro had established that kind of pacing. So I think that's what I meant to say. But since the intro didn't establish that kind of pacing, as a whole, the story ends up reading like: We're in a quiet room. Here are a ton of details about the room. Here's a very visceral, sensory idea of what the kitchen is like. Details. Details. Details. And then also in this one sentence here's the entire rest of the house. I just wish the story took its time and allowed me to get immersed and invested. But yeah, I apparently just totally missed out on the sort of action movie critique thing you were going for. Both you and James had distinct styles and vibes and tones you were trying to establish and, for me, neither of you really managed to establish them. But most of the reviewers got it, so this could just be me being a shitty reader, I guess. |
|
|
|
Post by James on Feb 19, 2016 13:57:09 GMT -5
By the way, in the novelty of a sex scene in Symbol 1, and the two crazy stories of the semi-final, your semi-final story sort of slipped under the radar, Adam. So I just want to take the moment to say it was really good. I really liked it.
I actually think we kind of mirrored each in this competition. In Round 1 we tried something different and had quite specific flaws. In Round 2 and 3, we both wrote strong stories. And then in the final we wrote stories that actually shared a few flaws from our Round 1 stories.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kaez on Feb 19, 2016 13:59:56 GMT -5
By the way, in the novelty of a sex scene in Symbol 1, and the two crazy stories of the semi-final, your semi-final story sort of slipped under the radar, Adam. So I just want to take the moment to say it was really good. I really liked it. I actually think we kind of mirrored each in this competition. In Round 1 we tried something different and had quite specific flaws. In Round 2 and 3, we both wrote strong stories. And then in the final we wrote stories that actually shared a few flaws from our Round 1 stories. Yes and yes. Both you and Adam wrote great stories in Round 2 and 3, and less great ones in 1 and 4. |
|
|
|
Post by ASGetty ((Zovo)) on Feb 19, 2016 14:17:05 GMT -5
On the subject of critiques we had problems with, Pete, I'm a little grumbly about your review of my final submission. I tried something there, which, admittedly didn't work. That's fine. I sort of keep trying to do this thing where I'm actually funny (it's sort of a personal challenge; a hurdle I can't get over), and it doesn't work, ever. I'm going to stop doing that. Every other review realize I tried something and that it simply didn't work; and that's fine, that's true, that's all valuable information. Your review spends almost 800 words chastising me for not writing the story -you- felt like the beginning you wrote deserved. I feel like that was a little unfair. Well, I apologize if you got that impression. That's not how I actually felt, and I'm sorry it came off that way. I didn't realize you were trying to do the thing that you were apparently trying to do. I didn't realize you were trying to do this sarcastic version of an action movie thing. Everyone else picked up on that, I guess, but I didn't. I also didn't realize that James was trying to do what he was trying to do either, which Jason -clearly- understood perfectly. So. You can fault me for, apparently, 'missing' both of the final stories. But I don't feel like you betrayed the beginning at all, or that it "should have" gone in a direction it didn't. Not at all. Perhaps this is a misinterpretation issue on both of our parts then. You say you didn't judge based on how it "should have" gone, but when I read you review I really took issue with this bit: To me that says; "You wrote this story wrong, that's not how it's supposed to go." There was actually a conscious decision here where I abandoned that. The idea was that all of this very visceral, overwrought, super-gritty, scene-chewing stuff was a product of Michael's action-hero delusion and when Leah snaps him out of it, I deliberately dropped it. The silence was part of that; this idea that he's literally tuning out everything which doesn't fit into his weird fantasy; the idea that there are things happening and people around him which he just isn't seeing. That's something which I didn't communicate well, and I suppose that's my failing. I think you make a good point about the upstairs though; when Michael was all alone touring the house, he probably could should have dropped back into that mindset without anyone there to keep him focused. It's something that actually occurred to me about an hour after I'd set it to Sensar. Which is, again, probably one of my failings. Like I said, I'm not super comfortable with a comedic format, so I chose to not over-stay my welcome. I kept it short because I knew that the more I tried to pack in there, the more I'd hurt myself. @james Yeah, the "Chang" joke actually felt really good as I wrote it. Oddly enough, though, it was the one I was most worried about people "getting." Figured folks would ding me on not being consistent with the character names. Then what I felt was perhaps the most obvious and accessible joke (the one about the gangsters ethnicity) apparently didn't read at all. Perhaps those are things I need to look at as far as "how to write comedy." |
|
