AwkwardMD and Omenainen Review Thread

[Enchantment_of_Nyx]

...As I said before, we needed to see these characters as human beings first. Instead, because of the first impression on the page, the way your explanation reads to me is "Every rapist needs a victim," which is equally true.

I don't believe in the idea of true love. Often, when stories try to show this, what I end up seeing is an unhealthy, co-dependent relationship with complementary mania. MotH did not disprove my theory.

I did ask for clarification, and I do appreciate the time you took to provide it. I'm disappointed it that it's so overtly hostile that it's difficult to separate the writing critique from the other issues. You've refused to accept my premise about what this was intended to be, and therefore, your responses don't really help me understand how I could convey what I intended, rather than what you read.

You're engaging in a one-sided argument about the morality of a situation that I've explained is not what I intended to present. Other people have not seen it the way you do, which indicates that what's on the page is not open to only one interpretation. I'm sure, however, that other people share your point of view, which is why I was trying to understand better how I could have presented it differently.

Basically, I asked, "how do I do this differently?" and your response was to hammer home that you think I've done it wrong. The fact that I did not acknowledge the error of my rape-writing ways is not because I don't understand that you view it that way. Your understanding of the factual events of the story, much less how they should be interpreted, is fundamentally different from mine. I haven't tried to argue about which one is correct because that would be pointless. Instead, I tried to figure out what was causing you to see something that was different than what I intended to write.

You are certainly the arbiter of your own perception of the story based on what ends up on the page, but I'm the arbiter of my intent. I feel like what's happened is that I've said. "Okay. That's not what I meant to portray. Here's what I intended to portray. What could I have changed to make what you understood match what I meant?" And in response, you've said, "Yes, you did intend for it to read this way, but you don't understand that because you don't understand what rape is."

There's nothing I can take from your clarification and say, "Oh, I see how I could do it differently." It's very personal, focuses on your perception of my intent, and frankly gets a little extreme. I think the repeated references to my characters as animal-like is rather questionable, but to push it so far as to say I risk thinly veiled bestiality? That's extraordinary.

From your initial review, I was crystal clear on what you thought of what you perceive to be my morals and what you perceive to be my ignorance, but I did think there were things I could learn from it, so I followed up. The clarification seems to amount an effort to make very sure I understand how terrible, destructive and ignorant I am. It wasn't that I didn't hear you the first time. It's that I was trying to focus on what was usable. It would be futile to try to disturb your firmly formed opinions about me or my values, and pointless even if it were possible to do so.

I've seen a lot of your reviews that were very insightful, even when they were gratuitously harsh or even insulting. I'm prepared to put up with a lot of insult to get to something I find helpful. I was perfectly willing to accept the nasty digs in the first go-around in order to benefit from the insight I hoped to gain when I asked for clarification. I couldn't do that by attempting to litigate the accuracy of your perceptions of my thoughts and opinions, so I didn't address them outside of the context of what I intended to portray and how I could better have accomplished it.

This isn't a sour grapes response. If I were looking to be offended or to slap back at you, there was more than enough fodder from which to draw insult in your initial review. I persisted because I did value the insight I thought I could gain. I think this comment is sort of a review of your review. I realize you didn't ask for it, the way I asked for a review of my work, but it does seem fair for a reviewer to accept the same type of feedback.

I've seen you go back and look at your initial reactions objectively, and I hope that at some point, you'll see something useful in this comment. To be clear, I'm not asking you to objectively revisit my story. I'm saying that my intent in making this comment is to offer something that might be helpful in focusing on what is useful to writers who seek your help.

Thanks again for the time you put into this.

 

[Enchantment_of_Nyx]

"Her recent workouts gave him the idea that she might be heading toward the buildings. Lately, her workouts reminded him of parkour. "Workouts" might not be the right word. She had no patience for disciplined workouts and never used their exercise equipment. Exercise for her was a period of sustained, unstructured, high-energy activity. Recently, he had seen her running along the stone wall that bordered the road in front of their house. As she progressed along the wall, she periodically vaulted back and forth across it, running on one side and then the other. He had also seen her climbing around on the roof of her art studio."

Me, visualizing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VhnU3_-KUY

That's more what it would look like if I tried to do parkour, especially the part where he jumps into the empty refrigerator box. Dwight hanging off the side of the desk was the highlight, though.

 

[Emirus]

Robert Palmer

You’re flogging a dead horse, Nyx.

 

[Maria_McGeorge]

You’re flogging a dead horse, Nyx.

That’s exactly what I feel, but the other way around. Drawkward is the one flogging the dead horse here.

 

[AwkwardMD]

At many points in your response, you said things like "I don't know how to do this better. Where did it go wrong?" I was trying to answer both, but they are fundamentally different AND completely interrelated questions. To me the underlying problems overlapped heavily, so the answers might have been samey and repetitive.

I'll reiterate the most important point in the form of advice: try to take 60% of the backstory information relayed in the narrative and express it in dialog.

 

[MelissaBaby]

You’re flogging a dead horse, Nyx.

She made a definitive response to Awkward’s comments. Why is it that Awkward has free reign to use her reviews for insulting comments and those who receive them are expected to just bow their heads and say “thank you?”

 

[Emirus]

She made a definitive response to Awkward’s comments. Why is it that Awkward has free reign to use her reviews for insulting comments and those who receive them are expected to just bow their heads and say “thank you?”

You’ve got it the wrong way round, Melissa. My comment was in support of Nyx. I know myself what it’s like trying to get constructive criticism and answers to questions out of Awkward. That’s what Nyx was trying to do and because she isn’t going to get them Nyx is, as in the saying, flogging a dead horse.

 

[AwkwardMD]

My feedback is only ever helpful if the recipient believes that I'm trying to be helpful. There's no constructive path if they think I'm being vindictive or petty.

A big part of that is the word choices I use to frame my ideas, and I am far from perfect. That's on me. I'm never trying to be insulting or demeaning, but I do have a habit of being very blunt. It's an inseparable part of the package.

I'm not trying to be insulting, and I'm sorry if you were insulted.

That being said, I stand by my criticism.

 

[MelissaBaby]

You’ve got it the wrong way round, Melissa. My comment was in support of Nyx. I know myself what it’s like trying to get constructive criticism and answers to questions out of Awkward. That’s what Nyx was trying to do and because she isn’t going to get them Nyx is, as in the saying, flogging a dead horse.

Thanks for clarifying. I think my comment stands either way.

 

[Vix_Giovanni]

That’s exactly what I feel, but the other way around. Drawkward is the one flogging the dead horse here.

Agreed....

I read MotH. I’ve read After the Fall. I thought AMD’s review and rebuttal both were measured, insightful, helpful and, particularly, respectful. I absolutely do not understand the level of vitriol and meanness being thrown her way in response to giving her, asked for, opinion. I had two cents to add that I thought would be helpful, but I’m soured by this back and forth.

However, as a fellow volunteer editor for writers on this site, I’ll say this: it’s not just time and effort that AMD’s putting into these reviews, but also a high level of care, consideration and personal vulnerability. She has no requirement to have to answer everyone’s questions or meet everyone’s expectations. She’s not getting paid for this. She’s not soliciting this. She’s not providing you all a service. She’s not obliged to like every story or come around to seeing things from every author’s perspective. She enjoys reading and reviewing stories; period.

As a reviewer, it would really be easy to just tell everyone, “Great story, bruh! I really like how you... [fill in the blanks].” And if she did that, you all probably wouldn’t want her feedback. If she did that, you wouldn’t wander through to read her analytical comments. It would be really easy for AMD to curry favor by couching difficult feedback in a positivity sandwich (now, you didn’t do this well, but these are the things you really did do well), or not expressing the opinions she feels strongly about. She’s not required to be anybody’s positivity coach. This forum trends towards brutal cliquishness and, with writers who are well armored with the power of words, snide dismissiveness. AMD, like everyone else, has feelings too. If we can’t keep those basics in mind, then what are we all doing here on her review thread????

When I started editing for other Lit authors, I quickly found that it’s generally true that writers accept my feedback on technical mistakes without much discussion, and want to rehash my analytical feedback. Unlike AMD, I don’t engage or indulge: if you ask my opinion, you get it and you can do with it what you like. But I can only give an author an opinion about what she/he has written. I don’t know you; I don’t know how you think; I don’t know your intentions. Any negative comment I make on your internally, personally held intentions that weren’t put forth in the story are too easy to interpret as a comment on your personhood, instead of the content you’ve written as a writer.

AMD was very clear about what she thought could have given the author the results intended with MotH. Communication between the characters. More dialogue and less choreography. Focusing on and framing particular character motivations. More acts between Cara and Felix that show what they appreciate in each other, rather than the multitude of ways they can hurt each other. Since Felix is largely going along with it all, reframing the narrative from Cara’s point of view to give her more autonomy and make it clear these are all her own decisions and frustrations. I’m leaving some of her insights out; these are just the first that come to mind.

When I was in college and law school, I had a lot of classmates that would go to office hours to beleaguer a professor with arguments-veiled-as-questions. The more successful had the intended result of browbeating the professor into raising their grades a few points....

Now that I’m writing so much in this post, I’m gonna go on and throw in my observations of MotH:

The flashback was unequivocally a rape scene and that set the tone of the story. To me, the rest of the story then came off a bit like the Roadrunner/Coyote cartoons; there was too much backtracking from the clear and present dangers presented (rebar! setting traps! falling through flooring! dislocating bones! threats to increase violence! kniiiiives!) and too much effort to make the violence come off as reasonable or, at least, to brush it off as something less serious than it would be IRL (i.e., one of these people is going to kill the other someday!!). I thought it made the story come off as less serious, less dark and less profound than the author seems to have intended it all to be—without relationship consequences to things like Cara gleefully hoping Felix will fall through the floor, and Felix not caring whether he pulls her leg out of its socket, these two may as well be falling off a cliff with a little smoke puff and sign that says “Bye bye.” I thought that AMD’s observation of “unearned emotion” was an excellent way of describing what I felt was an inability to relate to the escalating violence, characters’ reasons behind it all, the story’s denouement.

To me, the biggest issue was underplaying the escalating violence as if it were something temporary and controllable when the characters were written to be primal and out of control—to me, they came off as two people who hate each other (haaaaaaaaaaaaate each other), who do not have basic levels of understanding and human care and interaction (who takes delight at watching her husband—or anyone—fall through a floor?!?), who have too many emotional vissicitudes to take real pleasure in the animalistic “hunt” (he catches her and she unmans him by calling his dick a weenie... didn’t seem like she was scared, but also didn’t seem like she wanted it), and in the end have socially misdirected ideas about what “resolution” is, temporary or otherwise, in a relationship. This all may be outside a “social rubric” whatever that is— but therefore, by that very standard, their behavior is antisocial. That’s not relatable at large. To be able to relate to unrelatable behaviors, readers need more information so they can meaningfully buy in.

Nyx, for me, your reply message affirmed that I was reading the story as you’d written it, but that you had personal intentions that weren’t captured in the narrative. As an editor, personally, I wouldn’t have responded to you—I would have asked you to rewrite your narrative with the ideas that you had, so I’d have something concrete to respond to within the restricted context of the story. AMD’s a better and more experienced editor than I am and she was able to give useful feedback on those questions you had about getting your intentions across.

Last, minor observation: when Cara threw divorce papers at Felix, he wasn’t served. Service requires an uninvolved third party. So for me (and fwiw, for the SO too—I read parts of MotH out loud to him, so that’s another unbiased reader), since Felix wasn’t served, that was another part where I had difficulty relating to the 0-to-100 type escalation.

 

[MelissaBaby]

She’s not soliciting this.

She literally started a thread asking people to provide her with material to review.

I don’t know you; I don’t know how you think; I don’t know your intentions. Any negative comment I make on your internally, personally held intentions that weren’t put forth in the story are too easy to interpret as a comment on your personhood, instead of the content you’ve written as a writer.

But since Awkward puts so much time and effort into doing just that, no one should find it objectionable when she does it to them?

 

[SimonDoom]

Quote:
I don’t know you; I don’t know how you think; I don’t know your intentions. Any negative comment I make on your internally, personally held intentions that weren’t put forth in the story are too easy to interpret as a comment on your personhood, instead of the content you’ve written as a writer.

But since Awkward puts so much time and effort into doing just that, no one should find it objectionable when she does it to them?

I don't read AMD's criticism as doing this. I don't see her as criticizing the author's intentions or attacking the author for bad faith so much as delving under the surface of the story's words to analyze whether the story is accomplishing what she believes the author is trying to do, based upon her best interpretation of the words of the story themselves. I think that's a legitimate thing for a critic to do, whether or not one ultimately agrees with the critic's opinion about how well the author pulled it off.

EoN took on a very challenging concept for a story. It's the kind of subject that lends itself to second guessing: why write about this? what's the purpose? what's the author trying to say? what is the author's point with these characters and their relationship? So, invariably, any critique that's more than skin deep probably is going to raise questions that are uncomfortable for the author, and may also make the critic look more aggressive than the critic intends to be.

 

[Vix_Giovanni]

She literally started a thread asking people to provide her with material to review.

That’s not what “solitication” means.

But since Awkward puts so much time and effort into doing just that, no one should find it objectionable when she does it to them?

All this is really off topic from my points, but that being said:

If by “it” you mean AMD reviewing someone’s story unfavorably, then no. Like everyone on this site is so very fond of saying, you get what you paid for.

I don’t actively participate in things I find objectionable; especially when I have no skin in the game. I’ve asked AMD for feedback because I value it. If I didn’t value her opinions then I would stay off her thread and start my own. There’s limitless space in the forum.

 

[MelissaBaby]

That’s not what “solitication” means.



All this is really off topic from my points, but that being said:

If by “it” you mean AMD reviewing someone’s story unfavorably, then no. Like everyone on this site is so very fond of saying, you get what you paid for.

I don’t actively participate in things I find objectionable; especially when I have no skin in the game. I’ve asked AMD for feedback because I value it. If I didn’t value her opinions then I would stay off her thread and start my own. There’s limitless space in the forum.

You know damn well that is not what I meant. I referred to your remark about commenting on someones personhood, rather than the content of their writing. I see exactly that in Awkward's reply to Nyx, and I've seen it from her before. If you don't see it, then we just have different perspectives.

 

[Vix_Giovanni]

You know damn well that is not what I meant. I referred to your remark about commenting on someones personhood, rather than the content of their writing. I see exactly that in Awkward's reply to Nyx, and I've seen it from her before. If you don't see it, then we just have different perspectives.

Whoooooooa! What the literal fuck?!? I asked what “it” was cause I didn’t know. Back the fuck off, bub.

Did you read MotH? Did you read either AMD’s full reply or EoN’s questions? Or, is this just that you don’t like AMD?

I’ve got zero skin in this game. I explained what I saw from the perspective in Nyx’s reply and that I saw where AMD was coming from. What were your takeaways of the story, and how were they different?

Edit:

As to my comments on avoiding commenting on anyone's personhood: I said that, in my opinion and experience, I think it’s too easy for someone to (mis)interpret a comment made about the intentions they didn’t capture in the actual story as being a comment about their personhood. Nyx asked for feedback on her intentions and whether they would have made the story meet her expectations if she’d written to her intentions. I did NOT get the impression that AMD was responding with comments about who Nyx is as person, what she believes, what she values, etc—like Simon, I thought that AMD took on a critique of difficult material (something I wouldn’t have felt comfortable doing) and came at it from a measured and respectful way. So yeah, we have different perspectives on it... I don’t know why that’s basis for an argument, and especially don’t understand why you think that my having a different POV from you on that is a problem or something that makes you either right or righteous in how you see it. AMD already—generously, in my opinion—apologized that her tone came across harshly to the author because it wasn’t intended; that should have been the end of that question (i.e., whether it was ok for AMD to comment on personhood—she didn’t).

If you think that AMD’s intentions actually are to read things into such a request for help with framing intentions within a story, then I’m the wrong person to ask. I’m not her, and I’m not the author here—to quote Jadakiss, “I can only speak to the things I’ve been through.”

I don’t believe in threadhijacking, so even though I brought up personhood, since its being taken so far out of context of my comments, I’m not personally engaging any further on anything else about it.

 

[MelissaBaby]

Whoooooooa! What the literal fuck?!? I asked what “it” was cause I didn’t know. Back the fuck off, bub.

Did you read MotH? Did you read either AMD’s full reply or EoN’s questions? Or, is this just that you don’t like AMD?

I’ve got zero skin in this game. I explained what I saw from the perspective in Nyx’s reply and that I saw where AMD was coming from. What were your takeaways of the story, and how were they different?

I read the complete exchange between Awkward and Nyx, and my comments are entirely based on that. I did not read the story. I have not commented on the story, but on Awkward’s treatment of Nyx in her comments. In my opinion it was out of bounds. It may well be the case that my previous, negative experiences with Awkward color my opinion.

I read most everything you post, and respect your opinions. If you find Awkward’s critiques helpful, I am glad for that.

 

[Vix_Giovanni]

I read the complete exchange between Awkward and Nyx, and my comments are entirely based on that. I did not read the story. I have not commented on the story, but on Awkward’s treatment of Nyx in her comments. In my opinion it was out of bounds. It may well be the case that my previous, negative experiences with Awkward color my opinion.

I read most everything you post, and respect your opinions. If you find Awkward’s critiques helpful, I am glad for that.

I read M&A as well as your forum posts and respect your comments on the forum as well, and am surprised that we’re not on the same page on this because I usually presume that I’m on the MB side. But I don’t think it’s a problem to disagree. I think, if anything, this demonstrates, like AMD said, the comments for this story we’re going to be a bumpy ride and, like Simon said, the subject matter of Nyx’s story raised to a difficult level of critique.

 

[AwkwardMD]

I want to comment on my insistence on what is and is not rape in MotH, as well as my comment about bestiality.

It is probably not common knowledge that I have written much worse content than this. I think some of you aren't trusting me when I said "there's no judgement." I have written about dehumanization, grooming, and mind control. Systematically breaking down the personality of a human being for sexual gratification.

I don’t say this to make it a competition of who is the most hardcore. The difference is that I knew I was writing about awful characters and an awful subject, and I never treated it as anything less, and I think that's an important thing to bear in mind when addressing difficult subjects

 

[SimonDoom]

I read the complete exchange between Awkward and Nyx, and my comments are entirely based on that. I did not read the story. I have not commented on the story, but on Awkward’s treatment of Nyx in her comments. In my opinion it was out of bounds. It may well be the case that my previous, negative experiences with Awkward color my opinion.

I read most everything you post, and respect your opinions. If you find Awkward’s critiques helpful, I am glad for that.

Sometimes online conversations go sideways when participants move away from the specific to generalizations. What specific statements by AMD made you interpret what she's saying this way? I'm curious. You might have picked up on something I didn't. Or maybe you are responding to an overall sense of her tone rather than something specific she said. AMD's tone is not for everyone, but my interpretation of the way she responds is that she's not getting personal with people.

This strikes me as one of those cases where the appearance of disagreement may exceed the reality and it may be useful to get back to looking at what, specifically, people have said to find out just how extensive the disagreement really is.

 

[MelissaBaby]

Sometimes online conversations go sideways when participants move away from the specific to generalizations. What specific statements by AMD made you interpret what she's saying this way? I'm curious. You might have picked up on something I didn't. Or maybe you are responding to an overall sense of her tone rather than something specific she said. AMD's tone is not for everyone, but my interpretation of the way she responds is that she's not getting personal with people.

This strikes me as one of those cases where the appearance of disagreement may exceed the reality and it may be useful to get back to looking at what, specifically, people have said to find out just how extensive the disagreement really is.

I think the particular quote that set me off is this one:

This whole passage is an extremely dangerous attempt to equivocate violence with sexual violence. Please meditate on this, and ask yourself why it is that you write non-con. You don't need to provide this answer to me, or justify your motivations as an author, but some soul searching might be in order.

Apparently, I read that differently from most others. I found it outrageous.

I admitted in my last post that I am likely prejudiced against Awkward in this discussion. Having previously been told by her that everything I have ever written is a waste of my talent, and that I don't challenge myself as a writer, I no doubt see such comments from her from a very different point of view. She doesn't know me, she has no idea what I have gone through to even be able to put my words "on paper," yet she was willing to cast judgment. I see her, in this thread, doing the same to Nyx. Understandably, others won't share that perspective.

 

[Enchantment_of_Nyx]

I'm going to suggest that we all move on to something else. AMD has made her thoughts clear, and so have I. If she has anything else to add, I'm sure she'll do so. While I'm very interested in other opinions, this has gotten unreasonably acrimonious with unnecessary collateral damage.

Vix, you don't have any reason to jump all over Melissa. Her comments weren't rude and they weren't directed toward you. You have no reason to be rude to her.
I'm not going to address your opinions. I'll explain two factual points, since you addressed your comments to me directly.

You've mistaken my comments about AMD's clarification for comments about AMD's initial review. I didn't say that there was nothing constructive in AMD's initial review. The comments that you generously rephrased and identified as constructive criticism were from the initial review. It was the second post that I said contained nothing I could use.

The story did not say that Cara served the divorce papers, and I can't imagine why you thought that was the intent. I don't know if your portfolio includes domestic law, but the parties quite frequently give each other a copy of the papers to provoke a reaction - which is what Cara was doing here.​

If anyone would like to share their thoughts on the story, I'd appreciate that, but it would probably be best to do it by message. Obviously, this is just a suggestion, but I hate to see people getting attacked because of something I wrote, even if it's only indirectly the reason.

 

[Vix_Giovanni]

I think the particular quote that set me off is this one:



Apparently, I read that differently from most others. I found it outrageous.

I admitted in my last post that I am likely prejudiced against Awkward in this discussion. Having previously been told by her that everything I have ever written is a waste of my talent, and that I don't challenge myself as a writer, I no doubt see such comments from her from a very different point of view. She doesn't know me, she has no idea what I have gone through to even be able to put my words "on paper," yet she was willing to cast judgment. I see her, in this thread, doing the same to Nyx. Understandably, others won't share that perspective.

I certainly empathize; I think that it’s true for many of us on who write on Lit that we put heart and soul into what we write and we’re laid bare when we share it with the world. In the real world, readers and marketers and reviewers would know something about us: here, we all write in a vacuum. If it feels like someone’s cut away at who and what we are without any basis, then of course, the feeling is magnified. Obviously, I can’t speak to what AMD meant in her review to you or Nyx or anyone else. But I am surprised that, with the very little that I know about you two, there’s not a path for understanding each others’ meanings, intentions, sensitivities and vulnerabilities.

 

[HollyLoriAnnalee]

My First Piece

Hey all, and hey AwkwardMD,

I'm just posting here so that when you get around to reviewing my first piece, people will know that I asked you (I requested feedback through private message). I've read a little of your past reviews in this thread, and I am completely ready to be thrashed and ripped apart! Personally I don't mind--I have a very strong vision for my stuff (parts 2 and 3 are almost done, should we wait until they're ready?) and I just want that vision to come across as well-written as it can.

I should probably add a warning at the beginning that it is kind of heavy on body fluids, but it's in Noncon so I didn't think I needed to originally.

Here it is:
The Dream Girls Pt. 01 - 'Hot and Bored'

Have no mercy!

 

[AwkwardMD]

Parted, by Vix_Giovanni

Link

This is the second time I’ve given feedback for Vix. The first one, Ten Thousand Spoons, is one of my favorite recent reviews. I spent a lot of that review praising it, and it was worth every word. This story, Parted, is also very strong, but I’m going to skip gushing about the positive parts to avoid repeating myself. Everything that was good about TTS is good here.

I feel like the big difference between these two stories is the presence, or balance, of details. Both stories are about lawyers, but Parted spends a much more significant amount of time dealing with the minutia of Mike’s job. Some increase was necessary here because Mike’s failure to perform his job is a big part of his comeuppance, but I felt like it bogged down the reading a bit.

Now, it’s clear that you have loads of knowledge. I myself have leaned on you for support in getting some legal details right in a story (for which I am incredibly grateful), but I think that’s working against you here. Because Mike’s story is so close to your own area of expertise, Parted runs dangerously close to something I’ve talked about before, and that’s the weasle-y line between fiction and non-fiction. I think your sensibilities as a lawyer helped you construct this specific set of circumstances that brings about the downfall of a morally reprehensible character, but the execution of those circumstances negatively affected the pacing.

Somewhat. The surplus details were, at worst, a mild problem. It slowed things down when I wanted them to move a little faster, and I felt like being a bit more vague here or there wouldn’t have cost you any clarity on the part of the reader. I've read a lot of your work, and I don't think is a problem elsewhere.

The bigger problem, for me, was Mike’s sudden turn in the sex scene. I didn’t like Mike, and that was by design so kudos, but I didn’t understand his degrading dirty talk. I didn’t feel like he needed to be any slimier, so him suddenly borderline-assaulting his sexual fantasy seemed like an unnecessary turn. I felt like having him live out his Dd/lg dream would not have redeemed or enabled him—and in my opinion would have been hotter if the sex was more straight forward—since the rest of the story was definitely dovetailing in such a way that he had no escape.

One thing I know I agonize over, in the stories where I have a character that is some type of antagonist, is how ‘evil’ do I make them? How bad is bad enough? Making a villain the right level of hateable is important because they set the tone almost moreso than the protagonist does. They set the bar that the protagonist has to rise above. I know Mike lives in an ambiguous area where he is both the protagonist and antagonist, but the principle still applies. For me, his strangely aggressive language in the sex scene pushed him into ‘over the top’ territory, and that makes him harder to take seriously. If I can’t take Mike seriously, then it’s harder to take the consequences of his actions seriously.

Again, this is a matter of degrees. If a few of his lines of dialog were a little softer, I’d be singing a different tune.

All in all, a really strong story.

 

[Louetta]

It matters not how much time you spend writing this stuff. I'll somehow never get past the fact that you said Isolated Property is a "masterpiece of non-cons". And it contains lines like "His thick cock came to rest at her entrance". I'm going to go play with MY entrance.