Care to read my first story? Feedback is very much welcome...

[subwatcher]

Hi, as a newbie, I am not quite sure of the "protocol" about this, but I will just dive right in and ask you to read my first story, and hopefully get your thoughts...

http://www.literotica.com/stories/showstory.php?id=447876

 

[_Lynn_]

Your first sentence should 'grab' the reader.

I woke up to the sound of the door opening, but the lights had already come up, so that I could see my Mistress Catherine walk in, carrying a tray with several bowls on it, wearing what could pass for a silk kimono.

She's wearing something that could pass for a silk kimono. Which means what? It's fake silk? Or is it a piece of material made to look like a kimono? Or is it a dress? Or what?

Her hair is flowing off her head, in a ponytail, pulled to one side.
A flowing ponytail pulled to the side? Confusing.

Without saying anything, she sets the tray down, and she knelt beside it, and me.

Here you change tense. "Sets" is present, and "knelt" is past. The next series of sentences contains several fragments.

You are telling this story, but not showing it. "She does this, then I do that" becomes boring. Scanning through a bit, you have her hair flowing around her breast. I thought it was in a ponytail?

This is a scene, not a story, but intended as a stroker I assume. In my opinion, it lacks emotion, the sex is flat, and there is nothing defining the characters.

 

[subwatcher]

Your first sentence should 'grab' the reader.

I woke up to the sound of the door opening, but the lights had already come up, so that I could see my Mistress Catherine walk in, carrying a tray with several bowls on it, wearing what could pass for a silk kimono.

It was intended to convey the mood of the man who was bound sitting on the floor still in a half state of sleeping...

She's wearing something that could pass for a silk kimono. Which means what? It's fake silk? Or is it a piece of material made to look like a kimono? Or is it a dress? Or what?

Again, intended to convey his sense of not knowing how else to describe what he saw.

Her hair is flowing off her head, in a ponytail, pulled to one side.
A flowing ponytail pulled to the side? Confusing.

Her hair is intended to be quite long, and not all pony tails are wrapped closely to the scalp, it was long enough to wrap to one side of her head and over her shoulder.

Without saying anything, she sets the tray down, and she knelt beside it, and me.

Here you change tense. "Sets" is present, and "knelt" is past. The next series of sentences contains several fragments.

Ok, this I can work with. I do know that I have to work on the tense part, but some times I can't quite see all of them...

You are telling this story, but not showing it. "She does this, then I do that" becomes boring. Scanning through a bit, you have her hair flowing around her breast. I thought it was in a ponytail?

This is a scene, not a story, but intended as a stroker I assume. In my opinion, it lacks emotion, the sex is flat, and there is nothing defining the characters.

Hum, it is strange how different people can read the same things and get two completely different views. Someone else wrote via the comments link with the story itself, and she said something very different than you did. Also, this is intended to be part of a longer story, and the other parts are hopefully going to address some of these critisms...

 

[sr71plt]

Hum, it is strange how different people can read the same things and get two completely different views. Someone else wrote via the comments link with the story itself, and she said something very different than you did. Also, this is intended to be part of a longer story, and the other parts are hopefully going to address some of these critisms...

Yes, it's quite common for readers to take a scene differently--because they've come to the reading with different experience and different issues in their mind. It's even more interesting/strange how often the writer hasn't really written what his/her mind intended to convey in a scene. That's why it's almost always unconstructive for a writer to tell a reader they didn't understand what "was clearly written." Nine times out of ten, it wasn't clearly written--even if the writer clearly visualized it--and it's the reader, not the writer who determines what is understandable to the reader.

 

[_Lynn_]

It was intended to convey the mood of the man who was bound sitting on the floor still in a half state of sleeping...

1. Intending to isn't the same as doing.

Again, intended to convey his sense of not knowing how else to describe what he saw.

See #1

Her hair is intended to be quite long, and not all pony tails are wrapped closely to the scalp, it was long enough to wrap to one side of her head and over her shoulder.
See #1

Ok, this I can work with. I do know that I have to work on the tense part, but some times I can't quite see all of them...



Hum, it is strange how different people can read the same things and get two completely different views. Someone else wrote via the comments link with the story itself, and she said something very different than you did. Also, this is intended to be part of a longer story, and the other parts are hopefully going to address some of these critisms...See #1

You asked for my thoughts. I gave them. If you want criticism, I can do that too.

Yes, it's quite common for readers to take a scene differently--because they've come to the reading with different experience and different issues in their mind. It's even more interesting/strange how often the writer hasn't really written what his/her mind intended to convey in a scene. That's why it's almost always unconstructive for a writer to tell a reader they didn't understand what "was clearly written." Nine times out of ten, it wasn't clearly written--even if the writer clearly visualized it--and it's the reader, not the writer who determines what is understandable to the reader.

I agree.

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

Yes, it's quite common for readers to take a scene differently--because they've come to the reading with different experience and different issues in their mind. It's even more interesting/strange how often the writer hasn't really written what his/her mind intended to convey in a scene. That's why it's almost always unconstructive for a writer to tell a reader they didn't understand what "was clearly written." Nine times out of ten, it wasn't clearly written--even if the writer clearly visualized it--and it's the reader, not the writer who determines what is understandable to the reader.

I remember running across and article by SI Hiayakawa from Berkley years ago which I have never forgotten. He said every time you say or write something you write four things.

1. What you think you said/wrote.
2. What you meant to say/write.
3. What the listener/reader heard/read.
4. What the listener/reader thought you meant.

I always think about this when I write.

 

[_Lynn_]

I remember running across and article by SI Hiayakawa from Berkley years ago which I have never forgotten. He said every time you say or write something you write four things.

1. What you think you said/wrote.
2. What you meant to say/write.
3. What the listener/reader heard/read.
4. What the listener/reader thought you meant.

I always think about this when I write.

Very fitting, and so true.

 

[elfin_odalisque]

Wow! subwatcher, you have achieved unanimous agreement here and that's a first.

Lynn gave you some major points - the tense confusion is major, you must rectify that immediately or readers will just click out. Try an editor.

A few minor things that irritated me;

her auburn hair now flowing gently off her head,

Is she going bald?

chewing lustfully, and enjoying the taste.

If you're writing in first person, how can you know if she was enjoying what she was eating. You need an 'apparently' or 'seemingly' here.

wearing what could pass for a silk kimono. . . .
She parts the front of the kimono

You replied that 'I' didn't know if it was a kimono then, minutes later he is sure. This is inconsistent.

With her hands on each side of her hips, exposing her round, full breasts, her stomach with its small love handles, her neatly shaven pubic hairs forming a drop falling upward from her pussy. With one hand she caresses her opposite breast, and with her other, she parts her pussy lips so that I could almost see inside her.

Without laboring the point, most of this is physically and anatomically impossible. Read it carefully as a third party would. The line where she parts her pussy lips with her spare breast made me smile.

The rest of your physical description is more in your mind than you express in writing. Just as Jenny and sr say, the proof of the pudding is what the reader understands, not what the writer meant.

 

[_Lynn_]

Wow! subwatcher, you have achieved unanimous agreement here and that's a first.

Lynn gave you some major points - the tense confusion is major, you must rectify that immediately or readers will just click out. Try an editor.

A few minor things that irritated me;



Is she going bald?




If you're writing in first person, how can you know if she was enjoying what she was eating. You need an 'apparently' or 'seemingly' here.



You replied that 'I' didn't know if it was a kimono then, minutes later he is sure. This is inconsistent.



Without laboring the point, most of this is physically and anatomically impossible. Read it carefully as a third party would. The line where she parts her pussy lips with her spare breast made me smile.

The rest of your physical description is more in your mind than you express in writing. Just as Jenny and sr say, the proof of the pudding is what the reader understands, not what the writer meant.

Are you saying you don't keep a spare one around for just such an occasion?

I'm shocked!!

 

[elfin_odalisque]

Are you saying you don't keep a spare one around for just such an occasion?

I'm shocked!!

It must be spare. He's already used the opposite one. Or should I go back to Anatomy 101