Hoping for feedback on oddball story

rutger5

Really Really Experienced
Joined
Feb 26, 2017
Posts
467
Story in non-human genre and is just under 15k words in length. Main character is unusual to say the least. Story hasn't done bad in the ratings and received a few comments but hoping for more feedback. I believe it has heart and humor and wonder what others might think.


https://www.literotica.com/s/hoary-the-horny-snowman
 
Nice

It's a nice story and it definitely has heart, it's certainly imaginative and clever. One problem I have is that it seems unnecessarily long for the story that it is and I wish there had been a more magical end. The ending seemed like it ran out of steam and was far too practical for an otherwise whimsical tale. That's just my feedback, I may be insane for all you know! That said, very great idea, interesting approach and just plain fun. Nice story!
 
There's a lot of good things happening in this story. It's got a cohesive arc, grounded in more emotional depth than I'd thought it would have at first sight of the title. It's relatively well-written, and it's interesting.

It's also extremely unfocused. You threw tons of good ideas at this story, and at times they almost fight each other for control over the direction of the story. The stuff early on with Tommy's mother drowning her sorrows is powerful, and plants great seeds, but it is also completely lost in the childish antics as "Tommy Builds A Snowman!"

This is something I struggled with when I first started writing (and I'm inferring that this is one of your earlier works based on you stating that it is copyrighted as of 2013 but not submitted until 2017). I wanted my stories to be amazing, and so i included every single idea I had regardless of whether it was appropriate or even good. More complex is more better, right?

Over time, as i've become a more confident writer, I've learned to let go of a lot of that need to control and be overly specific. Instead of describing a character walking as a series of movements, in alternating fashion, of the left and right foot, or even describing the walking, I might just skip to the part where character A arrives at the destination because that's where the actions and events will finally be plot-relevant again.

And really, that's the heart of it. You need to have a hard talk with yourself about what kind of story you are writing. Sort out the tone you want, and get all your set pieces working toward a common goal. Don't build sympathy for Tommy if Tommy is going to disappear completely once Mom and Hoary get together. Spend that time building sympathy for the Mom.
 
I tend to agree with AwkwardMD - good ideas but unfocused. If it were my story I'd be looking either to give Timmy a stronger ending, or de-emphasise him in the first act, rather than building up reader attachment to a character who just fades out. I'd be tempted to kill him off in backstory along with dad, and have his mother get drunk and build the snowman for old time's sake.

(Sorry Timmy, no hard feelings if you're reading this.)

The chemical drum vs magic wand thing was a smaller example of this. It felt as if you were suggesting two different explanations for how Hoary comes to life, but you only need one. Probably the wand; chemical waste isn't a good fit for something that feels more "magic" than "science".
 
Just a quick comment - describe your characters when you introduce them. For Tommy, I was really confused about his age. Initially based upon the "young man" comment, I guessed he was a teenager. Then I kept making him younger and younger as the story went on. It would have been much better if you had said in your opening line:
"Mom, I'm going outside to play. Don't worry, I'll be back before dark," Six-year-old Tommy Jones called out as he pulled on his worn winter coat.
It would have been good to describe what Tommy and Jill look like in that initial scene.
 
Just a quick comment - describe your characters when you introduce them.

Or don't, because that is a stylistic choice and not a function of good writing. Tommy's specific age is unimportant beyond the fact that he's under 18, and at no point was that unclear. Whether he's 6, or 8, or 10, or 12 doesn't matter at all to the story. He's believably written as is.
 
Last edited:
Just a quick comment - describe your characters when you introduce them. For Tommy, I was really confused about his age. Initially based upon the "young man" comment, I guessed he was a teenager

8letters, that's your personal preference being stated again, but you shouldn't be stating it as an absolute "writers rule." It's not. Not all readers want to be or need to be spoon fed, just sayin' :)
 
8letters, that's your personal preference being stated again, but you shouldn't be stating it as an absolute "writers rule." It's not. Not all readers want to be or need to be spoon fed, just sayin' :)

Hardly *any*, actually. :p
 
8letters, that's your personal preference being stated again, but you shouldn't be stating it as an absolute "writers rule." It's not. Not all readers want to be or need to be spoon fed, just sayin' :)
Let me google up "advice for writers character description. Clicking on the first link, I get:
Here are some character writing tips to help you develop characters that feel like real people:
1. Backstory: We are born a certain way, but our life experiences continually mold and shape us. Each character has a life before the story begins. What is it?
2. Dialogue: The way we talk depends on the language we speak and where we live (or grew up) but there’s also something unique to each person’s style of speaking. We repeat certain words and phrases, inflect certain syllables, and make certain gestures while we speak.
3. Physical Description: Our primary method of identifying each other is the way we look; hair and eye color, height and weight, scars and tattoos, and the style of clothing we wear are all part of our physical descriptions.
:

link #2:
:
4. Select physical details carefully, choosing only those that create the strongest, most revealing impression.

One well-chosen physical trait, item of clothing, or idiosyncratic mannerism can reveal character more effectively than a dozen random images.
:
As you describe real-life characters, zero in on distinguishing characteristics that reveal personality: gnarled, arthritic hands always busy at some task; a habit of covering her mouth each time a giggle rises up; a lopsided swagger as he makes his way to the horse barn; the scent of coconut suntan oil, cigarettes, and leather each time she sashays past your chair.

Link #3:
2: Ask yourself if police could identify your character in a line-up based on your description

All of those articles recommend you describe your character enough that your reader can have a picture of them. None of them recommend not spoon feeding your readers.
 
These links are for developing characters. That's a function of world building, and working on how we as authors think about our characters. How we create an entire person, with layers and motivations, and not just a trope or a stand-in. None of these advocate frontloading a story with a complete, detailed, physical description like you want. In fact, that second link you provided wants you to choose one telling characteristic to share, because that's actually what human beings often take away from initial meetings, as first impressions.

Edit: yes, all of them advocate describing a character completely, but none of them sat anything about doing it all at once, and certainly not immediately like you want.
 
Last edited:
Edit: yes, all of them advocate describing a character completely, but none of them sat anything about doing it all at once, and certainly not immediately like you want.
All I recommended was that the writer mention that Tommy was six when he's introduced. I didn't recommend a full description of Tommy.

I think it's important to start building a picture of a character when they're introduced, but it's okay to dribble out a description. In my story "My European Summer Vacation", I start with a vague description in paragraph 2:
My European Summer Vacation said:
I looked up from the travel guide on my tablet and smiled sheepishly at a woman about my age.

There's four paragraphs of dialogue and then more description:
My European Summer Vacation said:
She gave me a big smile. She was very pretty with long, dark blonde hair and pretty brown eyes. Tall and thin - I would guess 5' 10" or so. She looked a year or two older than me. She was dressed in a simple royal blue dress. It had a conservative length and cut, but nicely showed off her figure and made her hair look stunning.

17 paragraphs later, I provide more description:
My European Summer Vacation said:
Sinead gave me a smile. She had a brilliant smile that melted me. As we talked, she picked out some fresh fruit, berries and vegetables. She paid for her food and we left the market.

Sinead had a definite Cork accent. It was mainly how she pronounced her vowels, particularly before an "r". I had grown up listening to a Cork accent so I knew eventually I'd hear a "th" become a "t" as in "think" pronounced "tink" and "three" pronounced "tree". Mother would be "mam", pronounced like the American "ma'am". The Cork accent had a sing-song quality that made it very pleasant and I enjoyed listening to her talk.

I spend the first half of the first page building detailed character descriptions while advancing the story.

On the other hand, I think it's a terrible idea to provide basic character descriptions like hair color on page 2. By then, I think the reader has a mental image of the character and finding out that the character doesn't look that way is jarring.
 
This is a pattern for you. You want to know everything up front. You want the title to be ultra descriptive, and you want the description to be ultra descriptive, and you want the opening paragraphs to always be structured in such a way that tells you who what where when and why. You wanted that podcast post to answer all your questions and couldn't be bothered to read until the 5th post where the original poster had already answered the questions you had.

There a field of study called Historiography. It's sort like studying history, except you pay more attention to the hand that's doing the recording and the words they choose to describe things instead of the course of the events being recorded.

One very notable case study is on two books (the titles of which i can no longer remember) written about this one police unit that operated in Poland while occupied by the Nazis. One book, using primary sources, concludes that everything that they did, down to tying their shoes, was drivrn by anti-Semitism. The author, well-respected, pointed to numerous instances in these contemporary reports and depositions from the Nuremburg trials, to draw really rabid conclusions about hate and the effects of hate speech. Another author, using basically the exact same documents, wrote a completely different book painting citizens called into duty operating in a nation at war, at times callous and at others generous, that is much more sympathetic

Neither is 100%. Neither is accurate. Both say as much about the subjects as the authors thrmselves. Historiography is about watching for bias, and the way that unfairness creeps into our narrative without malicious intent.

I say that because you are being unfair to others in your feedback. It's not because you're trying to be mean, but you have your thumb on the scale and you're not aware of the impact that your own personal obsessions are having on your ability to be objective.

Edit: Hitler's Willing Executioners by Daniel Gold, was the one about anti-semetism, I think.
 
Last edited:
You are Michael Bay. You write direct, easy-to-read, easily-interpreted stories. That's fine. There's a place for you, and a place for writing like yours just like there's a place for writing like mine.

Now picture Michael Bay telling an indie filmmaker that they need more explosions.
 
Don't know the book you're describing, but...

Daniel Goldhagen wrote Hitler's Willing Executioners.

Ordinary Men by Christopher Browning?
 
Last edited:
Good

I'll look for them. I was lost in a (failing) doctoral pursuit when this whole controversy began and I missed it for the study of antebellum proslavery fiction, perhaps the most sickening of American fictions.

Thanks for mentioning the books. I've seen Executioners not realizing the controversy; I'll look for Ordinary Men.

Malraux
 
I'll look for them. I was lost in a (failing) doctoral pursuit when this whole controversy began and I missed it for the study of antebellum proslavery fiction, perhaps the most sickening of American fictions.

Thanks for mentioning the books. I've seen Executioners not realizing the controversy; I'll look for Ordinary Men.

Malraux

Reading them back to back was fascinating because you could see where each author would hold up the exact same event as evidence of their thesis, differing on which parts, or which viewpoint, of an event to focus on.

In my opinion, the truth of the matter was probably closer to Browning's assessment, but he seemed bound and determined to exclude Anti-Semetism as a factor completely, and that seems disingenuous. Or at least, that was what I remember thinking at the time.
 
I think of Anne Frank's famous quote: In spite of everything, I still think that people are basically good at heart. Prejudice is not all that we are. We are also compassionate and gentle and good, in many ways.

I haven't read the books yet, but I'm not completely ignorant of the prejudice/desensitization theories. I lean toward Ordinary Men, that the goodness of them was subsumed by gradual dehumanizing philosophy and events. I think of soldiers who can't stop killing after the heat of battle, the loss of compassion by exhaustion or hardening, such as the wantonness of My Lai or whatever happened at Haditha (or many other atrocities).

I think someone should have said no. No one was ever killed for refusing to kill Jews, I read somewhere.


Thanks again.
 
To circle back around, the larger point is that it is entirely possible to construct an argument and say "I only wanted you to say that Tommy was 6 in thr first few paragraphs", but the larger trail of evidence suggests that even if Rutgers HAD stated that exactly as you'd suggested, you'd have found something else similar to complain about.
 
This is a pattern for you. You want to know everything up front. You want the title to be ultra descriptive, and you want the description to be ultra descriptive, and you want the opening paragraphs to always be structured in such a way that tells you who what where when and why. You wanted that podcast post to answer all your questions and couldn't be bothered to read until the 5th post where the original poster had already answered the questions you had.
I provide advice based upon what I've read about writing and my personal experience. If I had to summarize it, it'd be:
1. Have an interesting premise
2. Have two likeable characters who have an obvious attraction for each other
3. Get into telling us about #1 and #2 quickly
4. Describe your characters when they are introduced. Give an amount of description based upon how important they are to the story
5. Your characters shouldn’t come into existence when they appear in your story. They should have a backstory and an age-appropriate on-going life. In particular, they should have a reason for being unattached at that moment
6. Every fact about your character and every action they take has implications. Be sure that your story is consistent with those implications. A main character has a six-pack stomach? That’s has a lot of implications for how he spends his time and the people he knows. A main character drives a top-of-the-line Mercedes convertible? That has huge implications for her tastes and the life she lives
7. Avoid omniscient writer syndrome where what you write makes sense because of facts you know but haven’t told the reader
8. Show. Don’t tell

I think all of this is common sense.

Aside about title and descriptions >>>>
Yes, I think the title and description should be ultradescriptive. For example if you look at my list of stories, you’ll see:
My Sister Set Me Up on a Blind Date (4.82) With herself!
I give away the whole premise of the story in the title and description. When she sets up her brother on a blind date on page 2, the reader knows that the blind date is with herself. Why would I spoil the story like that?

That story had 55K views, 1162 votes and 37 comments on the first day, the most of any of my stories. LitE readers wanted to read about a brother being set up on a blind date by his sister that turned out to be with herself. If I had gone with a title and description that didn’t give the premise of the story away, I wouldn’t have gotten the views, votes and comments that I did.
<<<< End of aside

On the other hand, I don’t get where you and electricblue66 are coming from with your advice. Make the reader guess the age of the main character child? Make the reader guess that time period a historical fiction story is taking place? Don’t provide a physical description of a character right away? Point me to something that explains why readers like that.

There a field of study called Historiography. It's sort like studying history, except you pay more attention to the hand that's doing the recording and the words they choose to describe things instead of the course of the events being recorded.

One very notable case study is on two books (the titles of which i can no longer remember) written about this one police unit that operated in Poland while occupied by the Nazis. One book, using primary sources, concludes that everything that they did, down to tying their shoes, was drivrn by anti-Semitism. The author, well-respected, pointed to numerous instances in these contemporary reports and depositions from the Nuremburg trials, to draw really rabid conclusions about hate and the effects of hate speech. Another author, using basically the exact same documents, wrote a completely different book painting citizens called into duty operating in a nation at war, at times callous and at others generous, that is much more sympathetic

Neither is 100%. Neither is accurate. Both say as much about the subjects as the authors thrmselves. Historiography is about watching for bias, and the way that unfairness creeps into our narrative without malicious intent.
I have no idea what this has to do with giving rutger5 feedback on his story.

You are Michael Bay. You write direct, easy-to-read, easily-interpreted stories. That's fine. There's a place for you, and a place for writing like yours just like there's a place for writing like mine.

Now picture Michael Bay telling an indie filmmaker that they need more explosions.
Have you read any of my stories? My latest is about domestic abuse and cyberbullying. The one before that was about a woman wanting to find her birth mother and the damage family secrets had on her life. The one before that discussed positive consent.

I write READABLE stories. They are very long for LitE but most readers can't stop reading my story once they start. Typical comment:
What else can I say but wow? This is a beautifully written story. It grabs you and holds on, plus it's impossible not to care about the characters.

Tangent: are the eight letters in question E-N-G-I-N-E-E-R?
I wanted a name that told people absolutely nothing about me. I do have a technical background.

To circle back around, the larger point is that it is entirely possible to construct an argument and say "I only wanted you to say that Tommy was 6 in thr first few paragraphs", but the larger trail of evidence suggests that even if Rutgers HAD stated that exactly as you'd suggested, you'd have found something else similar to complain about.
Rutger5 requested feedback on a story. To me, feedback includes suggestions for improvement. So, yeah, any feedback I give will include suggestions for improvement. Not sure why you think that’s wrong.
 
Thanks to all that commented on the story.
r5

P.S. - call me crazy but I think a thread should be started in the style of Siskel and Ebert featuring Lit's bickering critics AwkwardMD and 8letters.
 
Aside about title and descriptions >>>>
Yes, I think the title and description should be ultradescriptive. For example if you look at my list of stories, you’ll see:
My Sister Set Me Up on a Blind Date (4.82) With herself!
I give away the whole premise of the story in the title and description. When she sets up her brother on a blind date on page 2, the reader knows that the blind date is with herself. Why would I spoil the story like that?

That story had 55K views, 1162 votes and 37 comments on the first day, the most of any of my stories. LitE readers wanted to read about a brother being set up on a blind date by his sister that turned out to be with herself. If I had gone with a title and description that didn’t give the premise of the story away, I wouldn’t have gotten the views, votes and comments that I did.
<<<< End of aside

Read this again, and then say "Oh. I am Michael Bay!" out loud.

On the other hand, I don’t get where you and electricblue66 are coming from with your advice. Make the reader guess the age of the main character child? Make the reader guess that time period a historical fiction story is taking place? Don’t provide a physical description of a character right away? Point me to something that explains why readers like that.

I'll point you to something. Your own rules. #8. You are telling your readers more information than any person typically notices about any other person too quickly. Showing takes a long time.

I have no idea what this has to do with giving rutger5 feedback on his story.

What it means is that you are allowing your personal preference to color your feedback but still presenting it as objective. This is like me saying "Your story is badly written" because incest makes me sick (it doesn't, that's just an example). It's not objective.

Have you read any of my stories? My latest is about domestic abuse and cyberbullying. The one before that was about a woman wanting to find her birth mother and the damage family secrets had on her life. The one before that discussed positive consent.

The Rock is about veterans issues. Armageddon is about an extinction level event. There's nothing wrong with being Michael Bay.

Also, I have read some of your stories. I don't generally give feedback unless it's asked for.

Rutger5 requested feedback on a story. To me, feedback includes suggestions for improvement. So, yeah, any feedback I give will include suggestions for improvement. Not sure why you think that’s wrong.

Because your suggestions have more to do with your preferences than actual writing. It's like saying "Don't write about redheads. I like blondes better."
 
Last edited:
Back
Top