AwkwardMD and Omenainen Review Thread

[AwkwardMD]

Hi,

With regards to the reviewing service of @AwkwardMD and @Omenainen, which might be best kept as the focus of this thread, I am seeking to improve my craft and having recently become aware of it (this thread, your service), I thought I'd very politely ask for one of your in-depth analyses of my most recent story.

Currently a 2.2

I never a lot of negative comments about grammar, so I don't think it's that. Will you, or anyone with a minute, please let me know what I did wrong?

Currently the queue is at least 5 stories deep. We will get to this as soon as we can!

 

[dmallord]

I would also like to point out, somewhat relatedly, that we have always argued that authors not go back and edit their work. Take in what we're saying, and use that to make the next one better (even if you get there by ignoring what we're saying). We've never ever suggested anything even remotely to the effect of "And you should take it down" I can't imagine how bad a story would need to be to cross that line.

A published story is done. It's out there. We can't police anything. The only reason to seek help is for the next one.

There is reason for a writer to edit the published work you reviewed. Your point on this is too confining, just as your word choice, 'always argued,' smacks of being overbearing. It is an author's choice and an option you should not downplay. By the way, you are not the only Lit authors to view re-drafting a 'finished' work as pointless. So, you are in good company with others with whom I have had this discussion. Still, you and they are not that persuasive on the point that "The only reason to seek help is for the next one."

First, look at it from the standpoint that a published story is just another iterative draft. Perhaps the 'last' draft, yet but a draft nevertheless. The fact that 'it is out there' and, therefore, you 'can't police anything' doesn't register as valid. Of course, you can make adjustments. But to what end?

Obviously, the author gets to practice what you, as the reviewer, 'taught' in your critique. It becomes easier to adjust their opus as they have what you pinpointed fresh in mind. In short, they have further guided practice in drafting a story. Perhaps you might liken it to memory muscle or the older expression, 'Practice makes perfect.' Further, new readers of that story benefit by having those corrections in place; perhaps, even better enjoyment of the content due to those changes/corrections. If not for the latter point alone, the 're-drafting' of a published story serves a good purpose.

The not-so-obvious take you overlook is the writer has been challenged by your observations and now has an emotional element with which to deal. It may be lighthearted, such as "Oh well, on to the next one." Or it may be an emotional turmoil like the one you precipitated in the Em review that went so rancid because of your soapbox stance on the subject matter. In such cases, reworking the original can be a cathartic process and bring closure for the writer. Then, they may be ready to write the next one, perhaps even better. Practice makes perfect, especially when it is guided by someone who has the heart of a teacher.

I encourage you, once again, to temper your acerbic comments and teach with the heart of a teacher. If you are unsure of that term - just Google it.

 

[alohadave]

There is reason for a writer to edit the published work you reviewed. Your point on this is too confining, just as your word choice, 'always argued,' smacks of being overbearing. It is an author's choice and an option you should not downplay. By the way, you are not the only Lit authors to view re-drafting a 'finished' work as pointless. So, you are in good company with others with whom I have had this discussion. Still, you and they are not that persuasive on the point that "The only reason to seek help is for the next one."

First, look at it from the standpoint that a published story is just another iterative draft. Perhaps the 'last' draft, yet but a draft nevertheless. The fact that 'it is out there' and, therefore, you 'can't police anything' doesn't register as valid. Of course, you can make adjustments. But to what end?

Obviously, the author gets to practice what you, as the reviewer, 'taught' in your critique. It becomes easier to adjust their opus as they have what you pinpointed fresh in mind. In short, they have further guided practice in drafting a story. Perhaps you might liken it to memory muscle or the older expression, 'Practice makes perfect.' Further, new readers of that story benefit by having those corrections in place; perhaps, even better enjoyment of the content due to those changes/corrections. If not for the latter point alone, the 're-drafting' of a published story serves a good purpose.

The not-so-obvious take you overlook is the writer has been challenged by your observations and now has an emotional element with which to deal. It may be lighthearted, such as "Oh well, on to the next one." Or it may be an emotional turmoil like the one you precipitated in the Em review that went so rancid because of your soapbox stance on the subject matter. In such cases, reworking the original can be a cathartic process and bring closure for the writer. Then, they may be ready to write the next one, perhaps even better. Practice makes perfect, especially when it is guided by someone who has the heart of a teacher.

I encourage you, once again, to temper your acerbic comments and teach with the heart of a teacher. If you are unsure of that term - just Google it.

If you don't like the advice, don't follow it.

I had a story reviewed last year and instead of revising the story, I wrote a whole new one (currently in the queue) and I think it was the right choice.

At some point you need to consider that the story is published, so leave it alone. Going back to rework it when you find something to fix means that you are spending time on an old story when you could be applying what you've learned to the new story.

If they were beta reading/reviewing an umpublished story, going back and revising it would make a lot more sense, but that's not how it works.

 

[dmallord]

If you don't like the advice, don't follow it. [That is what I tried to convey, basically. Don't tell someone not to edit their finished work. Leaving some room for others to have the attitude to make their own decisions has been the point. I don't follow the advice - it seems counterintuitive to do so - it is a good learning tool. Before computers, I often used the process in written-on-paper form. It was laborious, but it is so much easier with word processors.]

I had a story reviewed last year and instead of revising the story, I wrote a whole new one (currently in the queue) and I think it was the right choice. [You made that your decision - a choice of your choosing, not a preached to one. I'm glad you were comfortable with the outcome. I look forward to reading it.]

At some point you need to consider that the story is published, so leave it alone. Going back to rework it when you find something to fix means that you are spending time on an old story when you could be applying what you've learned to the new story. [This is what the others have repeatedly declared as the mantra to be followed. I think you missed my points. I guess I didn't explain it well enough - there is room for improvement in published work. It is a choice that can bear good fruit. Perhaps not for you, but I find it edifying and believe the next reader benefits. It's not all about quantity.]

If they were beta reading/reviewing an umpublished story, going back and revising it would make a lot more sense, but that's not how it works. [I would really welcome someone who started working with some 'teaching points' as you indicated. A thread that takes a story through various changes as a how-to-improve would be a wonderful idea. I envision that as a back-and-forth dialogue in a thread where followers could see how and why those changes came about. I'm glad you thought of it. Perhaps someone will run with it. I'd love that.]

I knew someone would tag this in a rebuttal along with the gang 'liking' this. I'm okay with that, too. Live and let live. Be kind.

 

[AwkwardMD]

I knew someone would tag this in a rebuttal along with the gang 'liking' this. I'm okay with that, too. Live and let live. Be kind.

Bye, Felicia

 

[dmallord]

Bye, Felicia

Who is Felicia? I believe you tagged the wrong person.

ADDED

I'm the guy in the other thread:
AwkwardMD said:
We live rent free in your head because you allow it. You should do something about that.]

That was your remark after I offered sage advice on how to comport yourself. I see that even after the moderator locked your thread, you came right back in attack mode calling out the person you skewered. Clearly, you didn't come away with having learned anything from it. So ... NOW who is living RENT FREE in your head - awkward?

 

[lilshymynx]

Your point on this is too confining, just as your word choice, 'always argued,' smacks of being overbearing.

Like this?

That is what I tried to convey, basically. Don't tell someone not to edit their finished work. Leaving some room for others to have the attitude to make their own decisions has been the point.

Hypocritical much?

There is merit to both approaches and benefits to each. It's a shame you don't follow your own advice and allow others to make that decision for themselves, based on ALL advice given, rather that attempting to silence those whose viewpoints you disagree with.

 

[dmallord]

Like this?



Hypocritical much?

There is merit to both approaches and benefits to each. It's a shame you don't follow your own advice and allow others to make that decision for themselves, based on ALL advice given, rather that attempting to silence those whose viewpoints you disagree with.

My point was clearly stated. Let each author decide if they want to edit their work. I'm not the one advocating going down Awkward's one-way street view on not editing a published work. I have never told anyone to stay in a specified lane for writing. She stated that they have always advocated for not re-editing. Nor have I ever attempted to silence anyone by suggesting a one-way approach.

There is room for multiple viewpoints expressed in my comments on this thread. I have expressed mine politely in the spirit of fostering open communication. I am not out to run anyone off the road based on non-agreement with my posts.

Hypocritical def: involves acting in a way that goes against your stated beliefs.

Hypocritical? No. I am upfront and open to change. Fair-minded, yes.

Are you saying I should have no opinion that disagrees with you and curl my tail at your displeasure?

I'm just an old guy, 85+, who has seen a lot of grief and little time for the likes of individuals who want to pontificate at the expense of others, causing grief without any sense of remorse. Everyone, including you, is privileged to speak freely in this nation. I fought for it, got the medals, came back with a hole in my shoulder, lost fingers in a POW camp severed one-by-one by a sadist, and thankfully was rescued by Reconrangers. I offer help to others in writing on occasion. I approach it with the heart of a teacher mode, never spelling it out as a have to take my view. I've learned to get over a lot of anger, and this thread has been filled with too much.

So get over trying to preach to me about being hypocritical. You don't know me. I don't know you. And nothing I have said points to being hypocritical - much.

 

[MediocreAuthor]

https://literotica.com/s/encased
https://literotica.com/s/encased-ch-02-released
First submission got a bit borked and the ending was cut off, so had to split it in two. 4 pages in total, about 13k words. I know you've said any genre is okay but this is true non-con verging on horror, if that's too much I completely understand!

@vagrantx
Link

Ignoring all the review drama, you requested a review from A&O, but I know they're busy, so I'll hop into help. I haven't been here nearly as long as them, but I write mostly NC/R, and I'm reasonably popular, so I'll give it my best shot. You can judge for yourself how useful my advice is.

@AwkwardMD has welcomed reviews from others in the past.

---

Alright, I enjoyed this story, but not as an erotic work. That’s fine, of course; I have long held that not every story on Lit needs to be particularly erotic, as long as it has erotic elements that might keep it out of the mainstream, then it’s 100% golden here… even within erotic categories.

First off, I would like to say that I loved the set up. 'A dystopian world where the rights of the accused have evaporated and the punishments lean sexy' is a super common trope for a reason. It works. Those of us who have had the misfortune of being on the wrong side of the law know that you feel completely helpless… and guess what? Feeling helpless is an ideal part of writing for NC/R and D/s. So far, so good.

Also, on a personal note. I like the way you turn phrases. When inside the FMC’s mind, she kept repeating:

It was unsightly, to say the least. Unprofessional. Revolting, even.

I liked that! I’m sure I’m not the only one who has a phrase continue to repeat in my mind when I’m dealing with similar situations over and over. That’s only one small example, but it illustrates a larger point. Your characters felt human. A+ on that.

Now I have something that I think could be improved. I have learned (fairly recently) that there are at least two styles of telling 3rd person perspective stories.

• 3rd Person Close (Tells the story in third person, but only from one character's "mind". If a character doesn't know info, neither will the reader.)
• 3rd Person Omniscient Narrator (The Narrator tells the reader anything and everything. No restrictions necessary.)

When I wrote my first story, I actually didn’t know that these things were different. I sort of wrote in a hybrid style where most of the time I kept things in the former style, but every now and then I dipped into the latter.

You did the same thing.

This isn’t a flaw, necessarily, but it is often frowned upon. When you are telling a story from one person’s inner monologue, and then you swap to another’s, it is jarring for the reader. There are benefits to both styles, of course, but I think my advice here would be “Pick a lane”.


Since we get most of our info from the Alex, randomly hopping inside the attorney’s head to hear what he thinks about the topic throws readers for a loop. Not awful, but not ideal.

Clever congressmen. Clever, dirty old congressmen.

"....fuckity fucking double-fuck. FUCK! FINE!" A few quick strokes of the pen, and her full name was on the dotted line at the bottom of page number one hundred and thirty one, in sloppy but legible cursive. It was done. A calm washed over her as her choice had been made, nothing to do now but go with the flow. She pushed the stack of papers over to her lawyer.

"Thank you, Miss Williams. I apologize for my outburst earlier." The man, in a noticeably finer hand than the girl, swirled down a quick Benjamin Delgado on the line next to the already filled one.

"Well then... I... wish you best of luck. Hang in there, Alex." He gave her a forced half-smile, knowing exactly what weight the signatures carried.

"Uh-huh... Thanks, Del. For everything." There was really nothing else left to be said.

He knocked twice on the reinforced glass paneled door and was buzzed out. They wouldn't see each other again for the next two years, but once they did, they'd have a lot to talk about.

Due to Alex's last minute change of heart, the aging transport driver was informed late of their new destination. With a heavy sigh, he swapped the address in the GPS from SQ, or San Quentin's Rehabilitation Facility, which was their original route, to the EIRF, or, the Encased Incarceration and Re-education Facility. It was several hours drive further out of the city, in the middle of the arid wasteland which had once been known as Kings Canyon National Park. He wouldn't be home for dinner. Again. The missus was going to give him an earful. Again. Might be better just to sleep at a motel on the way back.

The above section starts by giving us direct inner monologue from Alex, but then continues on to tell us about the attorney's plans for his evening. That's jarring.

Okay, back to the good things. You spent a fair amount of time in this story with world building, and I thought you did an excellent job on that. I had no problem suspending my disbelief to enjoy the world you created, because you didn’t rush things. A+ again.

Now for my biggest complaint… relax, it’s a relatively mild one.

I don’t think this is a NC/R story. I mean don’t get me wrong it is a noncon story, through and through, and maybe that’s what you wanted to highlight… but to me this read so much like erotic horror that it trumped the NC/R elements.

If you read TTT’s guide on categories, he would have told you to place this story exactly where you put it. And so perhaps you did right. But FUCK that was such a horrific ending that it removed any of the little bit of erotic passion I was feeling for the story.

OR perhaps “removed” isn’t the right word. The story went from a decent tale of NCR edging and such, to a fucking pitch black tale that made me very uncomfortable, in the way that only truly dark horror can.

I’ll be honest with you… I thought that Alex was dead. When the text said:

A wild bloodshot eye spinning round and round in its socket.

I thought she was dead, and the machine had somehow transferred pressure behind her eye to make it literally roll. I briefly considered reporting the story for snuff (which of course is not allowed on Lit), but then I continued onward and realized, “Oh, she isn’t dead, she’s just endured more torture than probably any human who’s ever lived."

That is why I feel like it belongs in Erotic Horror. It contains what I consider to be the most horrific twist in any story I’ve ever read on Lit. It reminds me of an erotic version of "The Jaunt" by Stephen King.

That isn’t a gripe, btw. The story was pitch black as intended, and I enjoyed the ending. But that’s the reason that I feel like it belongs in Erotic Horror.

Now, for the record, EH is often referred to as “the place good stories go to die” so maybe Fetish would be a better fit? Or maybe NC/R was fine. Your call.

[Obviously, this is more publishing advice, and less story advice, but I think selecting the proper category is still really important]

At any rate, I liked the story, and I gave it 5 stars. I would have given it 4 or 4.5 if I could, but you’re new, and everyone needs a little positive nudge in the beginning. Good luck.

 

[lilshymynx]

My point was clearly stated. Let each author decide if they want to edit their work. I'm not the one advocating going down Awkward's one-way street view on not editing a published work. I have never told anyone to stay in a specified lane for writing. She stated that they have always advocated for not re-editing. Nor have I ever attempted to silence anyone by suggesting a one-way approach.

There is room for multiple viewpoints expressed in my comments on this thread. I have expressed mine politely in the spirit of fostering open communication. I am not out to run anyone off the road based on non-agreement with my posts.

If advocating or recommending a particular course of action or offering advice is telling someone what they should do, then you are guilty of the same thing. That's exactly my point.

AwkwardMD (and others) have suggested not editing a published work, taking the feedback, and using it on their next project. You laid out a case for editing a published work as an practice and way for improvement. Both are are valid arguments and there are merits to each course of action. Anyone reading this thread (or many others on this forum where writing advice is given) is free to evaluate that advice and act on it.

Clearly you don't see offering up a counter viewpoint as telling someone what they should do, so why is it telling someone what they should do when a suggestion is made the first time?

 

[dmallord]

If advocating or recommending a particular course of action or offering advice is telling someone what they should do, then you are guilty of the same thing. That's exactly my point.

AwkwardMD (and others) have suggested not editing a published work, taking the feedback, and using it on their next project. You laid out a case for editing a published work as an practice and way for improvement. Both are are valid arguments and there are merits to each course of action. Anyone reading this thread (or many others on this forum where writing advice is given) is free to evaluate that advice and act on it.

Clearly you don't see offering up a counter viewpoint as telling someone what they should do, so why is it telling someone what they should do when a suggestion is made the first time?

Your point? – no one is guilty here. You are pushing some agenda, perhaps. There is no guilt, just differences of opinions.

Awkward leans to moving into new stories while advocating for leaving older stories lie fallow. I'm not opposed to that. If the writer chooses that path, I am fine with it.

The counterpoint is that she does not provide her audience with any advantages of editing an existing story. I've said that in different terms and as sussciently as I could. You don't clearly see that.

I merely point out that is an alternative she does not explore. I did. It is feedback and informational to anyone not having another angle on why it is valid. Both are viable solutions.

My emphasis is based on my experience with editing those previously published stories. Those edits are teachable points. I have worked with many students, getting their feet wet and exploring the writing world. I've used those first drafts and even the rewrites of published pieces as continued vehicles for improvement. Successfully, according to the feedback.

I brought it up as an alternative as Awkward did not offer pros and cons on the approaches.

Is that clear? We, Awk, and I, have similar goals of helping writers improve. It's not preaching on my part. It offers a divergent viewpoint.

 

[vagrantx]

Thank you so much for taking the time, M!

Now I have something that I think could be improved. I have learned (fairly recently) that there are at least two styles of telling 3rd person perspective stories.

• 3rd Person Close (Tells the story in third person, but only from one character's "mind". If a character doesn't know info, neither will the reader.)
• 3rd Person Omniscient Narrator (The Narrator tells the reader anything and everything. No restrictions necessary.

[...]

This isn’t a flaw, necessarily, but it is often frowned upon. When you are telling a story from one person’s inner monologue, and then you swap to another’s, it is jarring for the reader. There are benefits to both styles, of course, but I think my advice here would be “Pick a lane”.

I appreciate you pointing this out. I started out trying to write an omniscient voice with a personality, one who would peek into a characters head and be influenced by that, if that makes sense? As opposed to a flavorless narrator without inflection. So for example, the repeating phrases in plain text are all the narrators voice, while the cursive ones would be the MC's. Alas, I realize I bit off more than I could chew, and I found a solution: abandon ship. "Pick a lane" you say, and I did. I now write in first person It was an interesting experiment but on re-reading I completely understand that it feels jarring. Maybe I'll try it again in the future.

Now for my biggest complaint… relax, it’s a relatively mild one.

I don’t think this is a NC/R story. I mean don’t get me wrong it is a noncon story, through and through, and maybe that’s what you wanted to highlight… but to me this read so much like erotic horror that it trumped the NC/R elements.

If you read TTT’s guide on categories, he would have told you to place this story exactly where you put it. And so perhaps you did right. But FUCK that was such a horrific ending that it removed any of the little bit of erotic passion I was feeling for the story.

OR perhaps “removed” isn’t the right word. The story went from a decent tale of NCR edging and such, to a fucking pitch black tale that made me very uncomfortable, in the way that only truly dark horror can.

I’ll be honest with you… I thought that Alex was dead. When the text said: [...]

I thought she was dead, and the machine had somehow transferred pressure behind her eye to make it literally roll. I briefly considered reporting the story for snuff (which of course is not allowed on Lit), but then I continued onward and realized, “Oh, she isn’t dead, she’s just endured more torture than probably any human who’s ever lived."

I ran into a bit of an issue during the (purposefully) horrific ending, with the fact that MC had no real way to communicate to the outside world. It was hard to write the Discovery without any real input from her mind, or anything in her voice, but when I tried I realized that I couldn't do justice to the frame of mind of someone who'd gone through what she had. So yes, I pushed it far, maybe just for the sake of seeing how far I could push it. I'm happy (who am I kidding, I'm fucking ecstatic) to hear I was able to evoke such an emotional response from you, but I'm also sorry I didn't make it clear for a few paragraphs that she was ("okay"? "fine"? hardly) alive.

Regarding the categorization, I put it in NCR due to the sexy-times fitting there. Yes, once the Test chapter is over the story takes a hard U-turn into EH, but I figured I'd put it in NCR to reflect the nature of the sexy stuff. I'm still not sure if that's the right call or not, but I'll definitely keep your input in mind if I ever write something similarly dark again. (My next short story is being published today and it's more akin to BDSM with a note of romance. Easier pill to swallow.)

That is why I feel like it belongs in Erotic Horror. It contains what I consider to be the most horrific twist in any story I’ve ever read on Lit. It reminds me of an erotic version of "The Jaunt" by Stephen King.

That isn’t a gripe, btw. The story was pitch black as intended, and I enjoyed the ending. But that’s the reason that I feel like it belongs in Erotic Horror.

And here we are at the point of the review which has me bawling my damned eyes out. I read it an hour ago, on my phone, in bed, at 6 AM, I've got work in an hour and I'm still puffy-eyed. My silly erotica reminded you of my favorite author, what? I've been reading King for 30 years, and my habit of writing characters internal monologue in unquoted italics between paragraphs is something I stole adapted from him. I can't remember now which book it was, but years ago he used it to interrupt dialogue with intrusive
i don't deserve praise like this, what the fuck is going on
thoughts and I absolutely loved how it looked, felt, read. Truly, thank you. I don't harbor any illusions of grandeur that what I managed to jot onto paper is even in the same realm as anything the master of horror ever put out (thankfully, there are other worlds than this one, sai), but to even be mentioned next to him fucking broke me, in a good way.
(Quick shout-out to other legendary horror/sci fi authors like Dean Koontz, Harlan Ellison, Ray Bradbury and many, many more)

At any rate, I liked the story, and I gave it 5 stars. I would have given it 4 or 4.5 if I could, but you’re new, and everyone needs a little positive nudge in the beginning. Good luck.

Thank you, again, for taking the time to read my story and even writing a review. The switch in me would have accepted any rating (you can't hurt someone who loves both praise and pain!), but a solid 4 is something I embrace with open arms.

I was expecting a note or two on the language used (I was actually steeling myself to be eviscerated), I'm not a native English speaker and realize my vocabulary is a bit lacking and I overuse conjunctions, but I'm trying to work on that. Anyway, I'll leave it at that. I've read your entire review, and then re-read my story with it in mind, then read it again, but for the sake of brevity (meh, mission failed) I won't reply to everything you wrote. Just know I've internalized both critique and praise and I'll strive to improve.
Have a wonderful day M!

 

[Omenainen]

Thank you for saying this, but the way. Actually acknowledging a misstep is the right thing to do, when one makes a misstep.

I would have counted it as a fault in the review if the point we were making was invalid. As is, I do not. We could have picked a better quote because some people read our reviews not to focus on the point being made but on some minutia in how we express it.

And in this case you moved on to a new topic, so unlike so many of your “maybe I was wrong” statements, there wasn’t a stack of follow-up paragraphs reversing into the conclusion that you weren’t actually wrong. Keep this up. This helps you improve your credibility.

Get awkward to do the same thing, and we’re talking true progress!

Be sure to bring this up in our next performance review. Maybe we'll get demoted. What's below "anonymous people volunteering to review smut on the internet?" "Anonymous people who snipe anonymous people volunteering to review smut on the internet?"

 

[Omenainen]

My memory failed me. The victoria14x story and therefore discussion was a foot fetish story i think. (Still on my phone. It’s clumsy to do research.). Not sex work. Mea culpa on that specific item.

Claiming that saying "this story feedback post should be on a story feedback forum" is some kind of reflection on the story being mentioned is stretching it quite a bit. Do you suggest I wouldn't have thought so if the story was about something else? Why would that make a difference?

And if you’re saying that mistake changes whether what happened was a spat, considering omen’s self acknowledged irritation, then I am left speechless.

I don't consider my irritation with the misplacing of a forum thread and then doubling down with the placement "a spat". This, what we're doing here now, yes. I still think it wouldn't affect the way I would review your story if you presented one to be reviewed. You're free to think what you want.

 

[Omenainen]

There is reason for a writer to edit the published work you reviewed. Your point on this is too confining, just as your word choice, 'always argued,' smacks of being overbearing. It is an author's choice and an option you should not downplay. By the way, you are not the only Lit authors to view re-drafting a 'finished' work as pointless. So, you are in good company with others with whom I have had this discussion. Still, you and they are not that persuasive on the point that "The only reason to seek help is for the next one."

First, look at it from the standpoint that a published story is just another iterative draft. Perhaps the 'last' draft, yet but a draft nevertheless. The fact that 'it is out there' and, therefore, you 'can't police anything' doesn't register as valid. Of course, you can make adjustments. But to what end?

Obviously, the author gets to practice what you, as the reviewer, 'taught' in your critique. It becomes easier to adjust their opus as they have what you pinpointed fresh in mind. In short, they have further guided practice in drafting a story. Perhaps you might liken it to memory muscle or the older expression, 'Practice makes perfect.' Further, new readers of that story benefit by having those corrections in place; perhaps, even better enjoyment of the content due to those changes/corrections. If not for the latter point alone, the 're-drafting' of a published story serves a good purpose.

The not-so-obvious take you overlook is the writer has been challenged by your observations and now has an emotional element with which to deal. It may be lighthearted, such as "Oh well, on to the next one." Or it may be an emotional turmoil like the one you precipitated in the Em review that went so rancid because of your soapbox stance on the subject matter. In such cases, reworking the original can be a cathartic process and bring closure for the writer. Then, they may be ready to write the next one, perhaps even better. Practice makes perfect, especially when it is guided by someone who has the heart of a teacher.

I encourage you, once again, to temper your acerbic comments and teach with the heart of a teacher. If you are unsure of that term - just Google it.

The advice to "think forward" is based on the diminishing returns in reader attention. Most readers find the story when it's fresh in the new lists. After that, the traffic trickles down to random tag search results, someone looking into your back catalog after reading something else of yours, and the like. The more you put your effort into already existing stories, the less you put out new stories that might bring new readers to also to your older stories.

If you have other motivations to rework a story, then of course you can do that.

 

[Omenainen]

I encourage you, once again, to temper your acerbic comments and teach with the heart of a teacher. If you are unsure of that term - just Google it.

We're not here to "teach with the heart of a teacher." The point of a review is to take the finished story and see how it turned out, to examine what is on the page. If it failed to turn out like the author intended, then the learning comes from seeing why exactly that happened. We're not here to teach anyone how to write. We're here to tell how we perceive the story presented to us and why. It's up to the author to decide what, if anything, they want to learn based on that.

Anyone wanting to "teach with the heart of a teacher" (and having some skill backing that up) could consider volunteering at the editor program.

 

[Omenainen]

@vagrantx
Link

Ignoring all the review drama, you requested a review from A&O, but I know they're busy, so I'll hop into help. I haven't been here nearly as long as them, but I write mostly NC/R, and I'm reasonably popular, so I'll give it my best shot. You can judge for yourself how useful my advice is.

I saw the beginning of this and went what, have I been reviewing in my sleep?

Non-con trumps Erotic Horror as a category. Here's a good "how to" on categorization:
Love Your Readers: Categories by TxTallTales

edited to tag @vagrantx too

 

[Omenainen]

Okay, I have waded through this thread and our backlog at the moment is as follows:

alohadave / Taking Pictures
Joy_of_cooking / Her First Foot Boy
TheRedChamber / The Demonization of Humberstone Road
amberlynch / Shadows from the House of Scent
vagrantx / Encased
TheseLegs / Passion's Journey: Helpful

Let me know if anything fell through the cracks.

 

[vagrantx]

I saw the beginning of this and went what, have I been reviewing in my sleep?

liian aikasta tällaiselle, mene takasin nukkuun!

 

[Bazzle]

I am going to add my last years Halloween effort to your list.
https://literotica.com/s/phantom-flings

It at least has sex.

B

 

[Omenainen]

liian aikasta tällaiselle, mene takasin nukkuun!

Apua et kai sä oo suomalainen! Nyt rupee liippaan liian läheltä!

 

[vagrantx]

Apua et kai sä oo suomalainen! Nyt rupee liippaan liian läheltä!

olen routsilainen, but my SO is swinnish. i've been taking some classes, but liian vaikea!

 

[AlinaX]

I ran into a bit of an issue during the (purposefully) horrific ending, with the fact that MC had no real way to communicate to the outside world. It was hard to write the Discovery without any real input from her mind, or anything in her voice, but when I tried I realized that I couldn't do justice to the frame of mind of someone who'd gone through what she had. So yes, I pushed it far, maybe just for the sake of seeing how far I could push it. I'm happy (who am I kidding, I'm fucking ecstatic) to hear I was able to evoke such an emotional response from you, but I'm also sorry I didn't make it clear for a few paragraphs that she was ("okay"? "fine"? hardly) alive.

One of my earliest stories here was The Middener's Curse, a short little tale that I placed in SFF because it very definitely is a sci-fi story. One of the comments was:

A little disturbing but because she dies at the end, a more appropriate category would be erotic horror.

And maybe so. I hadn't really intended it as such, but maybe so. The narrative throughout was third person close, but the very end switched to omniscient. This kind of switch at the end is, I think, a fairly common narrative device: the MC is dead, or practically so, and the epilogue gives us a different perspective.

For longer stories, you can get away with switching briefly to omniscient. I'm pretty sure Stephen King does it a lot, but it's years since I last read him. It's a very deliberate way (and needs to feel deliberate to work) of giving the reader a new perspective on the scene and events.

Anyway, I read Part 1 of Encased the other day and got as far as the cut-off, and it felt like a deliberate cut-off, implying the endless horror of her new existence. It works well in NC/R, and indeed it's the kind of NC/R I like to read because the story is focussed on Alex.

Part 2 - and I know this was accidental, but still - is a single Lit page broken up into distinct and disparate sections: Test, Carrot, Stick, Interlude, Oblivion, Release, Aftermath. I'm not sure you needed the Aftermath; I guess you wanted to soften the horror of the ending. I do quite like the final paragraph, but it's a rather obscure reference to an early part of the story that had me wondering for a while if the whole story was just the nightmare of the comatose victim of a car crash.

Fundamentally this kind of story suffers because there's only one character and she can't do anything. She can't even talk to anyone. She can only endure. Part 1 plus Test/Carrot/Stick works because it's all about the transition.

The rest of Part 2 feels like it's pushing the story beyond its natural end. The horror of her condition means that after that first week she's barely even a character in her own story, which is almost more about the arrogance of a prison system that sees its inmates as less than human, to the point that close medical supervision is an unnecessary expenditure.

It might have been more interesting, as a Part 2, to have the two years play out as intended, and follow Alex's rehabillitation into society. What has the intensive programme done to her body and mind? What is her new life like?

 

[Omenainen]

olen routsilainen, but my SO is swinnish. i've been taking some classes, but liian vaikea!

Terkkuja siipalle! Suomi rulaa!

Devinter är också svensk, om du visste inte. Jag är den ända finsk jag känner här på forums, men jag har sett några på berättelse siden.

 

[vagrantx]

I know it's a mortal sin trying to "defend" your work against a review, so please note that that's not what I'm trying to do here; I'd like to try to explain what my intent was, but I know also that I fell short in expressing my intents. I hear, and accept, your experience with the story, and I realize that it has both strong and weak points.

One of my earliest stories here was The Middener's Curse, a short little tale that I placed in SFF because it very definitely is a sci-fi story. One of the comments was:

And maybe so. I hadn't really intended it as such, but maybe so. The narrative throughout was third person close, but the very end switched to omniscient. This kind of switch at the end is, I think, a fairly common narrative device: the MC is dead, or practically so, and the epilogue gives us a different perspective.

For longer stories, you can get away with switching briefly to omniscient. I'm pretty sure Stephen King does it a lot, but it's years since I last read him. It's a very deliberate way (and needs to feel deliberate to work) of giving the reader a new perspective on the scene and events.

I honestly did not intend for the focus/intent/nature of the narrator to swap throughout the story, I think any positive perception of that swap is purely accidental. Then again, happy little accidents are part of everything, no? I'll chalk it up to luck.
I'm not perceptive enough to notice such literary shifts in Kings writing, especially since I read in English it usually flies over my head. I'll happily read through the Curse tonight, to see if I can spot the shifts in style!

Anyway, I read Part 1 of Encased the other day and got as far as the cut-off, and it felt like a deliberate cut-off, implying the endless horror of her new existence. It works well in NC/R, and indeed it's the kind of NC/R I like to read because the story is focussed on Alex.

Part 2 - and I know this was accidental, but still - is a single Lit page broken up into distinct and disparate sections: Test, Carrot, Stick, Interlude, Oblivion, Release, Aftermath. I'm not sure you needed the Aftermath; I guess you wanted to soften the horror of the ending. I do quite like the final paragraph, but it's a rather obscure reference to an early part of the story that had me wondering for a while if the whole story was just the nightmare of the comatose victim of a car crash.

I think the story severely suffered from being broken into two pieces with such a big gap between them. I tried editing the story just minutes after publication, but after a week the edit still hadn't been pushed through so I instead added it as a second chapter, which took another two days or so. Unfortunate, but, things happens. Unhappy little accident. Since I knew what was missing I hadn't even thought that it could be perceived as a deliberate choice, but now that you mention it that's bloody genius, and I kind of wish I'd have ended it like that!
The callback to the wires in the glass would maybe have worked better if the gap to the callback had been smaller? I wanted it to show how while some things work out "well", others things do not. The world is indifferent to the absolute horrors of Alex's life. I wanted to show that while imprisoned, the world moved on without Alex, and once she got out, it didn't even stutter. Reading it through unknowing eyes is hard, but I definitely see how I filled in those blanks in my head but not on paper. Thanks for pointing it out.

Fundamentally this kind of story suffers because there's only one character and she can't do anything. She can't even talk to anyone. She can only endure. Part 1 plus Test/Carrot/Stick works because it's all about the transition.

The rest of Part 2 feels like it's pushing the story beyond its natural end. The horror of her condition means that after that first week she's barely even a character in her own story, which is almost more about the arrogance of a prison system that sees its inmates as less than human, to the point that close medical supervision is an unnecessary expenditure.

It might have been more interesting, as a Part 2, to have the two years play out as intended, and follow Alex's rehabillitation into society. What has the intensive programme done to her body and mind? What is her new life like?

I agree! The final half of part two was the weakest link, I struggled a lot with how to tie it all up, and the back and forth between Alex's thoughts/the Uncaring AI/the narrator wasn't enough to do so, especially once the first two disappeared. My fallback was to further dehumanize all the "characters" and make it as bleak as possible, and while it worked in a sense, you're right in that all the voices and personalities were gone; I overcorrected.
I didn't have the fortitude or skill to push this story into a mastodont that would continue to describe her life through the time skips, and the story is worse for it. I was so excited to push it out into the world that I let it go half-baked. It works for what it is, a fetish NC/R scene, but the core of the latter story could have been fleshed out a lot.

Thanks for your input AlinaX, you helped me identify weak points I hadn't thought hard enough about!