FAWC 5: Line, Please!

[xelliebabex]

One of the 25 posted at least. Which reminds me: Can we get back to discussing stories for a bit? Feeding trolls is all well and dandy if one has nothing else to do (or the bridge is in dire need of cleansing), but we're here for a reason I thought.

I started reading from the bottom up regardless of the size of the story, I am amazed and pleasantly surprised at the number of sci/fi/fantasy there have been so far. I have read 10 so far.

I have already mentioned how much I liked the 7 page The True Oracle and encourage people who don't usually read the long ones to give it a go. On the other end of the scale though I can say I truly like the single page story of Lorelei's Call I didn't feel short changed by the brevity of the story in fact I felt as satisfied as I had with the one previously mentioned. Kudos to both authors you deserve the red H you are both currently sporting. Thank you for great reads

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

The whole of human information at a keystroke and that was the best source you could find?

Joseph Lister used carbolic acid as an aseptic after the American Civil War was over, and he was following protocols to fight childbed fever developed in a Viennese hospital in the 1840s. He didn't have anything to do with heat sterilization. If there were literally no aseptic practices in medicine that he was familiar with whatsoever before then, how did he decide contamination was a problem in the first place?

Look, I get the whole rummage sale G. Gordon Liddy performance piece you have going on here, I've just opted out of it. If you're going to say a story is ruined by factual errors, at least be right.

I have a medical library. I've studied the Civil War since 1960. Under my alt account I write historical fiction that includes amputations. The bottom line is, your thesis is nonsense, and the story details are bogus. A minie ball wound wasn't treated as depicted.

One of my ancestors discovered the analgesic property of opium during the Revolution (he was a medical giant and medical philosopher), yet morphine wasn't discovered till 1814, and I don't believe it was used during the Civil War at all. It existed, tho.

You need to join one of my medical fights over on the HOW TO board.

 

[Blind_Justice]

I have to agree with Ellie, "Lorelei's Call" is a fun little number. A tight little package, all in all. There are some small niggles, though. First, according to the Lorelei legend, the lady (in this case ladies) in question are supposed to be blondes. In the legend it says "she combed her hair which was like spun sunlight", but I can let that slide as artistic liberty. Next, it's "Schloss Rheinfels", notice the "c" and the "h" respectively. "Rheinfels" is the german for "Rhine Rock", because the castle sits upon a rocky outcropping next to the river Rhine (which was spelled correctly). If I were to nitpick even more, I had to mention that Castle Rheinfels doesn't have such a high tower.

And finally, this phrase struck me as odd.

"Your name, I don't know your name," Lambert murmured from inside her lasting embrace, his staff still moving gently in and out, inside her, sliding through his own cum.

The author did such a good job to stay away from modernisms, only to fall back to the tried, true and lame "cum". "release" or anything BUT "cum" would have been a much better choice here.

But these are minor things, stuff another pair of eyes would have caught in an edit. A solid five stars for a great read.

 

[AMoveableBeast]

The divergence from the legend bothers me not at all. No more than "Midnight Ball" bothers me for not being "true" to the Cinderella story. Artistic license is half the fun--particularly when it comes to myths and folk tales. Hell, even most of the "traditionally correct" ones aren't actually traditional or correct.

I have to agree with Ellie, "Lorelei's Call" is a fun little number. A tight little package, all in all. There are some small niggles, though. First, according to the Lorelei legend, the lady (in this case ladies) in question are supposed to be blondes. In the legend it says "she combed her hair which was like spun sunlight", but I can let that slide as artistic liberty. Next, it's "Schloss Rheinfels", notice the "c" and the "h" respectively. "Rheinfels" is the german for "Rhine Rock", because the castle sits upon a rocky outcropping next to the river Rhine (which was spelled correctly). If I were to nitpick even more, I had to mention that Castle Rheinfels doesn't have such a high tower.

And finally, this phrase struck me as odd.



The author did such a good job to stay away from modernisms, only to fall back to the tried, true and lame "cum". "release" or anything BUT "cum" would have been a much better choice here.

But these are minor things, stuff another pair of eyes would have caught in an edit. A solid five stars for a great read.

 

[Blind_Justice]

The divergence from the legend bothers me not at all. No more than "Midnight Ball" bothers me for not being "true" to the Cinderella story. Artistic license is half the fun--particularly when it comes to myths and folk tales. Hell, even most of the "traditionally correct" ones aren't actually traditional or correct.

That's why I said it's a small nitpick. I noticed and I thought I'd share. It's about constructive criticism, and I tend to stumble over such trivialities. I even acknowledged artistic liberty. Sue me

In fact, the hair color of the Lorelei and the spelling minutiae didn't bother me as much as the use of "cum" in that particular instance.

 

[sr71plt]

Also, if you google, you'll come up with "Reinfels" as often as "Rheinfels." (So, if it had been rendered "Rheinfels, chances would be good that some insulted German would post that it really was "Reinfels"--and that was the original German--Rein--for the river as well--which is rendered in English now as Rhine, rather than Rhein anyway.) From the photos I saw, you'll be hard pressed to come up with a tall tower, though. Not too many photographs from when this story was written about, however, so maybe the Franks just knocked it down later. D)

Same could be said about this one as the Civil War one, though. Was the story internally plausible enough on the main themes of the story? Did it give a new twist to the Lorelei legend while using well the exercise requirements?

 

[sr71plt]

A general comment on reading through the FAWC entries and reading through the general file. The FAWC entries are several steps above the general file in literacy--at least in what I've read.

 

[Blind_Justice]

Also, if you google, you'll come up with "Reinfels" as often as "Rheinfels." (So, if it had been rendered "Rheinfels, chances would be good that some insulted German would post that it really was "Reinfels"--and that was the original German--Rein--for the river as well--which is rendered in English now as Rhine, rather than Rhein anyway.) From the photos I saw, you'll be hard pressed to come up with a tall tower, though. Not too many photographs from when this story was written about, however, so maybe the Franks just knocked it down later. D)

Same could be said about this one as the Civil War one, though. Was the story internally plausible enough on the main themes of the story? Did it give a new twist to the Lorelei legend while using well the exercise requirements?

I am German and I'm not insulted in the least. I have just offered the current, correct German spellings whenever applicable, and used the official "Schloss Rheinfels" website as my primary source for correction. If anyone knows, it should be the current owners. And even if the author deliberately went for the old spelling, he or she wasn't consistent in using it. My point, to finish this off, is if you're using local flavour, just be consistent and thorough. Fine?

As for your second point: The story was coherent start to finish, and this particular interpretation had at least as much merit, if not more, as any of the bazillion rewrites of the Arthurian legend. A good read.

 

[PennLady]

I find trying to evaluate the stories a bit of a struggle at times. I try to separate whether I think they did a good job for the theme and their category versus whether I like them or not.

For example, I thought "Desperate Times and Desperate Measures" was well-written and probably fits well in Loving Wives (maybe even Romance, although not for me), and made good use of the items on the table, but I didn't really care for it.

It was interesting to me that in fact, pretty much everyone did use the items in their stories. No one took the option of kind of turning away from the table and going in another direction.

 

[PennLady]

The divergence from the legend bothers me not at all. No more than "Midnight Ball" bothers me for not being "true" to the Cinderella story. Artistic license is half the fun--particularly when it comes to myths and folk tales. Hell, even most of the "traditionally correct" ones aren't actually traditional or correct.

I think that's part of the appeal of taking fairy tales, folk tales, whatever, and using them -- reworking them not just to be in a contemporary setting, but to go in another direction. I did that with "King's Bay," where I took some elements of "The Odyssey" and used them but not necessarily in the way they were originally used.

I thought "Midnight Ball" was a great twist on the Cinderella story.

 

[patientlee]

pl is one of the very hardest to pin down, I think. She is a bit of a chameleon. I have about seven dead-to-rights at this stage, I think. The rest...

I'm pretty sure you haven't read it yet. I got an email this morning from someone that picked it out. (He also pointed out that it's not my best work.)

I didn't make any effort to hide myself. I mean, other than writing a crappy story.

 

[sr71plt]

And my point, which was the same for the Civil War story, is that you suck all of the life out of a story by getting hung up on debatable minutia and let it overshadow the main thrust of the story (and, in this case, it is debatable minutia, as you will find variant spellings if you google it). Especially considering how many of these stories hang on no reality/plausibility whatsoever. The anal retentive might as well just not read stories at all if their main purpose for this is to pick at the fabric of the story looking for dropped stitches that don't, in themselves, detract from the beauty of the piece.

(Which is the official castle Web site, by the way? I couldn't find one maintained by the castle itself in my Web search. That, indeed, would be the controlling spelling--for the nitpickers.)

 

[sr71plt]

I find trying to evaluate the stories a bit of a struggle at times. I try to separate whether I think they did a good job for the theme and their category versus whether I like them or not.

But, as you say, a good critique assesses the story on what it is and what it's striving to do in that context rather than the evaluator's personal tastes.

 

[PennLady]

But, as you say, a good critique assesses the story on what it is and what it's striving to do in that context rather than the evaluators personal tastes.

True, but sometimes I have to wonder if my personal taste is affecting the critique, although I try not to let it.

I thought Roger Ebert put it well: It's not what it's about, it's how it is about it. He was talking movies, but I think it still applies.

 

[Blind_Justice]

Ye gods Pilot, you try your hardest to insult me, right? Yes, they were minutiae, but I also repeatedly mentioned that they did not detract from the overall quality of the story. How often do I have to write "good read" until I drive that home?

The website, by the way is http://www.schloss-rheinfels.net/

It's used as a theme hotel nowadays.

 

[sr71plt]

True, but sometimes I have to wonder if my personal taste is affecting the critique, although I try not to let it.

I thought Roger Ebert put it well: It's not what it's about, it's how it is about it. He was talking movies, but I think it still applies.

Hence why legitimate story critique is hard work. It certainly isn't a one-line barb. I'm heartened to see that some of the commenters on the stories in this exercise are being expansive and detailed in their postings.

 

[sr71plt]

Ye gods Pilot, you try your hardest to insult me, right? Yes, they were minutiae, but I also repeatedly mentioned that they did not detract from the overall quality of the story. How often do I have to write "good read" until I drive that home?

The website, by the way is http://www.schloss-rheinfels.net/

It's used as a theme hotel nowadays.

Thanks for the citation. That hadn't popped up in my search. Looks like a fun vacation destination. I've floated below it several times.

I think my primary problem with what you're posting is that the spelling is, in fact, miniutia, and variants of the spelling can be found in research. So, what's the big deal?--big enough to mention and to detract in any way from the thrust of the story. I'm putting my reaction to this in context with the jabs that were made on the Civil War story, where the minutia is just that--the central issues of the story don't swing on anything that was being picked apart in the technicals--and a beautifully written thematic story was being bogged down and muddied in petty anal retentiveness (and, in that case, bitter vindictiveness--made me wish I could go and slap another 5 on it that would stick).

 

[AMoveableBeast]

I could not agree more. Unfortunately, this is the rarest of gifts--to be able to separate taste from worth. Just talk about music with a teenager.

True, but sometimes I have to wonder if my personal taste is affecting the critique, although I try not to let it.

I thought Roger Ebert put it well: It's not what it's about, it's how it is about it. He was talking movies, but I think it still applies.

 

[sr71plt]

Just talk about music with a teenager.

And that's a particularly slippery slope. Brings to mind the music of the Beatles--taken back to conversations on when they first hit the United States in 1964. Remembering the discussions with my parents then when actually neither of us--me following the fad and the parents seeing it as just noise--were able to appreciate how much of it has survived history with many of the tunes now accepted as brilliant jewels.

 

[Blind_Justice]

Thanks for the citation. That hadn't popped up in my search. Looks like a fun vacation destination. I've floated below it several times.

I think my primary problem with what you're posting is that the spelling is, in fact, miniutia, and variants of the spelling can be found in research. So, what's the big deal?--big enough to mention and to detract in any way from the thrust of the story. I'm putting my reaction to this in context with the jabs that were made on the Civil War story, where the minutia is just that--the central issues of the story don't swing on anything that was important to the storyline--and a beautifully written thematic story was being bogged down and muddied in petty anal retentiveness (and, in that case, bitter vindictiveness--made me wish I could go and slap another 5 on it that would stick).

I just did that for you. After all, I had to go see what all the fuss is about. To be honest, without all the ruckus in the thread I wouldn't have noticed the inaccuracies. "An Account for a Bullet" was masterfully done. My wife and I are just not clear about the ending and anyone with more interpretation skills than mine is welcome to help out. The last scene, where he puts his hand over her throat - is he trying to kill her or is it just foreplay? It let the story end on a decidedly dark note.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Thanks for the citation. That hadn't popped up in my search. Looks like a fun vacation destination. I've floated below it several times.

I think my primary problem with what you're posting is that the spelling is, in fact, miniutia, and variants of the spelling can be found in research. So, what's the big deal?--big enough to mention and to detract in any way from the thrust of the story. I'm putting my reaction to this in context with the jabs that were made on the Civil War story, where the minutia is just that--the central issues of the story don't swing on anything that was important to the storyline--and a beautifully written thematic story was being bogged down and muddied in petty anal retentiveness (and, in that case, bitter vindictiveness--made me wish I could go and slap another 5 on it that would stick).

Did you see BRAVEHEART? Much of its the sort of bullshit you love. The story implies William Wallis fucked Edward IIs wife, and Wallis was the father of Edward III. Never happened. Isabel was 8 years old when Wallis died and never set foot in Britain while he lived. Numnutz like you luv that shit, cuz making shit up is easier than uncovering the real story.

Ditto Mels movie THE PATRIOT. In the movie his gang of shitwits attack Charleston SC. In reality the Brits anchored a prison ship there, fulla Patriot prisoners, many of whom were starved to death and tossed in the water. Mel ignored it.

 

[SecondCircle]

Minute inaccuracies in stories, like the spelling and civil war thing, are things I treat like I do grammar and punc. One or two little inaccuracies I catch are like one or two missed commas or misspellings. If it isn't central to the story and is just a hiccup here and there, it's fine by me. If there's so many that they totally derail the story and burst the bubble of plausible, then it's impacting the experience as a whole.

I don't think these incidents rob the stories of their main aura. I mean I haven't read them yet. Including the two I just finished that makes...two. But it doesn't sound like the inaccuracies or whatever totally squash the overall read.

 

[SecondCircle]

Did you see BRAVEHEART? Much of its the sort of bullshit you love. The story implies William Wallis fucked Edward IIs wife, and Wallis was the father of Edward III. Never happened. Isabel was 8 years old when Wallis died and never set foot in Britain while he lived. Numnutz like you luv that shit, cuz making shit up is easier than uncovering the real story.

Yeah that's what's known as "Hollywood" and they take plenty of liberties with historical fact. I'm sure the Spartans wore bronze chestplates rather than body oil and the immortals weren't demon looking things, they were an ever replenished standing army of ten thousand men. When a hundred fell they replaced them with a hundred more. Benjamin Martin was never an actual character in the Revolution, but Mel Gibson did a pretty good job.

We gotta look past the tiny little clues and examine the big picture, or we'll rob ourselves of the main experience.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Yeah that's what's known as "Hollywood" and they take plenty of liberties with historical fact. I'm sure the Spartans wore bronze chestplates rather than body oil and the immortals weren't demon looking things, they were an ever replenished standing army of ten thousand men. When a hundred fell they replaced them with a hundred more. Benjamin Martin was never an actual character in the Revolution, but Mel Gibson did a pretty good job.

We gotta look past the tiny little clues and examine the big picture, or we'll rob ourselves of the main experience.

I spent 5 years researching a story I posted at LIT. Others I spent years collecting the salient facts. The facts guide the story. Otherwise readers who really know laugh at you.

 

[SecondCircle]

Dunno how many I'll get to read, but I'm giving it my best shot. I'm kind of doing the feedback thing and leaving detailed comments (all just personal opinions). I'm not too sure how people feel about it, a few didn't really like them in F3, but I'm being as honest and supportive as possible.

I do review stories by first examining their intent and theme and all, but I also lace in its affect on me personally. I never say, "this part didn't work for me so I thought you were completely wrong". I just offer opinions on how I felt about elements in the story. Constructively, unbiased, and honestly. Isn't that what feedback is... sorta? I don't fling my preferences and recommendations on the author as some sort of standard, but rather just say "I liked this part BECAUSE, or I didn't like this part BECAUSE".

It's not mandates, not suggestions, or even advice. Just response. As an author (I guess) when I do something wrong ot something you don't like in a story, I want you to cut me open and show me why. When it's perceived as good, why was that? Tell me what was hot, what didn't make sense, what was stupid, what flowed, what it did for you, good or bad.

That is all I offer in comments. I'll just taste the chilli and say "meh, little salty" or "that's pretty fuckin good". I don't seek to show someone how to cook their own chilli.