Critical feedback please

[Op_Cit]

I've posted this in SDC, but I also want to open it up for any pennies I can get (i.e. anybody's 2 cents). Posting here so those who don't have time to do indepth analysis can toss in simple stuff.

It was a very quick and dirty write: Best Intentions (mind control category, but I was trying to make it have wider appeal)

http://english.literotica.com/stories/showstory.php?id=181371

I really, really, really want critical/negative/constructive feedback.

What parts didn't work (and hopefully why) . That is don't mind you saying it sucked if you can point to what was suckable in it. (OK stupid humor there).

 

[HornyHenry]

I don't get it

????
I was liking it, then the ending suddenly happened, and I don't get it at all. Too bad. Some clue about what happened might help.

 

[Op_Cit]

Re: I don't get it

????
I was liking it, then the ending suddenly happened, and I don't get it at all. Too bad. Some clue about what happened might help.

Are you an MC fan?

That is, if you never read MC, then maybe that's the issue and I failed to give enough explanation about what was going on with the Mr. louis character. (?)

 

[NoJo]

i have to say that was my problem too..

can you summarise the story in a couple of sentences?

 

[Op_Cit]

i have to say that was my problem too..

can you summarise the story in a couple of sentences?

Actually it's a big failure if I have to explain it to you.

Maybe if you tell me what you think it was about or what happened I can figure out what was missing?

 

[elsol]

Because you asked...

I do read MC, I also write it.

a) Do not use breaks in the first parts... the only break should be between Part 1 and the End Part

b) Throw me a bone... show/tell me it's Katherine in the padded room at the end... I had to think about it and go back to part 1 then back to part II. I failed to make a connection that should be automatic; do not allow me anything other than it IS Katherine in the padded room at the end. (Orderly should say 'Katherine... or Dr. Wells has been like this...)

c) Throw me a bone... TELL ME what happened to Louis...

Here's your problem... the most logical connection is that Katherine is 'imagining' the first part because she's in the padded room.

I have the feeling there MIGHT be something else.

If you meant for the most logical to be what I'm left with

KILL the 'MIGHT' be something else.

If you want the something else...

KILL the most logical connection... Dead! Leave me with Louis did a number on our doctor, and only that.

Part 1 works well... but part II doesn't tell me what Part 1 means, that's the basic problem.

Sincerely,

ElSol

 

[Op_Cit]

elsol,

Do you mean the epilogish thing is part 2?

It was slapped on kneejerk-afterthe-fact-hmmmwhat does this do style.

Would the story be sufficient without it? That is, leaving both characters off at that point works? (i.e. it is up to the reader to fill in the blanks?)

The story was a writing exercise where I specifically flogged myself not to explain and just write. So the question is: is it only the unfinished threads that you had a problem with at the end, or were there places along the way that confused you?

 

[NoJo]

Actually it's a big failure if I have to explain it to you.

Maybe if you tell me what you think it was about or what happened I can figure out what was missing?

No, mate, that's really your job, to tell ME what you think it was about.

I enjoy writing and reading mind control stories, and I like with twists and surprises, too.

Your central character doesn't really exercise mind control on the doctor. He tricks her; and in a way that wasn't all that credible. So I don't see much mc in the story.

But, as I asked earlier, if you post a summary of the story, maybe you'll convince me otherwise.

Read my story Revenge of the Nerdette to see where I'm coming from.

 

[Op_Cit]

But, as I asked earlier, if you post a summary of the story, maybe you'll convince me otherwise.

Writing doesn't work that way. Authors don't get a chance to explain after the fact to the reader why the story is good or why it worked.

If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. I don't want to convince you that it worked or that it was MC. Understanding what you thought I was saying would help me figure out where I failed.

Thanks for trying anyway.

 

[NoJo]

Well, it's sometimes useful to remember that if you want to sell a story, you have to pitch it in a couple of sentences or less.

You put "Psychiatrist does her best to help strange patient" as a story logline. What would you have put instead if you wanted to "give away" the whole story?

 

[Op_Cit]

You put "Psychiatrist does her best to help strange patient" as a story logline. What would you have put instead if you wanted to "give away" the whole story?

Somewhere I mentioned that this story was a writing exercise in not explaining. It was an experiment in conveying without overtly describing.

Again, if it's that far off then it doesn't matter. I'll try again sometime.

 

[BlackShanglan]

Writing doesn't work that way. Authors don't get a chance to explain after the fact to the reader why the story is good or why it worked.

If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. I don't want to convince you that it worked or that it was MC. Understanding what you thought I was saying would help me figure out where I failed.

Thanks for trying anyway.

Agreed, but SubJoe understanding what you hoped to achieve would also be useful - not as an element of whether the story works as is, but to understand how to improve. If he knows what you were trying to do, he can tell you the precise point at which he lost that sense, or what barriers exist to him achieving that perception.

Personally, I think reviews work best as a continuing dialogue that involves both of those processes. Reader says what s/he saw; writer says what s/he was attempting; reader offers suggestions of how to get to that goal; writer asks if X, Y, Z might help.

Shanglan

 

[Op_Cit]

Shanglan,

I understand your point and for any other element/aspect or story I would go there (explain what I was attempting and discuss). But I had a specific task in mind for this writing effort: to explain without explaining.

Two so far have indicated that they had no idea what was going on, not even a starting point from which I deviated.

In that respect it is a failure, and I feel describing it only complicates things. I'll have to try to find a perspective on my own from which I can read it and not see what's going on.

Mind you, when I posted it I was half certain that nobody would get what was going on.

 

[NoJo]

Mind you, when I posted it I was half certain that nobody would get what was going on.

I get the feeling that you almost see that as a virtue in the story. It's not. It's a sign that you're probably not communicating your story as well as you should.

 

[Op_Cit]

I get the feeling that you almost see that as a virtue in the story. It's not. It's a sign that you're probably not communicating your story as well as you should.

No, it was a quick and dirty write: No more than three hours from the random neural firing about the story idea to submitting it to Lit. I wrote it fast, I did one read through cleanup pass without sleeeping on it, and sent it off.

I debated sitting on the story and going over it and over it, but I was more interested to see the effect as is. That's why I was half sure: because it was Q&D and my first attempt at the style.

Now if you have that good an imagination as to ascribe a motive behind my obscurity, how is it you were unable to imagine anything going on in the story? Have I unknowingly stumbled upon a method of effectively blanking the reader's mind?

 

[elsol]

elsol,

Do you mean the epilogish thing is part 2?

It was slapped on kneejerk-afterthe-fact-hmmmwhat does this do style.

Would the story be sufficient without it? That is, leaving both characters off at that point works? (i.e. it is up to the reader to fill in the blanks?)

The story was a writing exercise where I specifically flogged myself not to explain and just write. So the question is: is it only the unfinished threads that you had a problem with at the end, or were there places along the way that confused you?

As to the MC.... I particularly enjoy a 'is this really MC' type of story; or a little more subtlety than 'FUCK ME NOW! SLAVE!'

So that's fine for my taste.

The story is not really sufficient without Part II because it's not really a story then but a 'scene'.

Yes... Part II is what I consider the Epilogish...

Here's how I would do it...

Edit part II to include two elements...

a) Mention that Katherine is the woman in the padded room.

b) Make the since it happened... something like 'Since she attacked that Louis patient'...

*slap* *boom* *bang*

A more 'directed' path for the reader to think about...

But that's just me and as a writer I can't help but try to 'edit' someone's story to fit my image... hopefully at least this shows one path and will push you to think of the one you really want to take.

Sincerely,

ElSol

 

[HornyHenry]

This sums up the problem

Actually it's a big failure if I have to explain it to you.

Maybe if you tell me what you think it was about or what happened I can figure out what was missing?

It's not up to the reader to tell YOU what we THINK it is about.
It's up to the writer to tell us what it is about. It seems like either you don't know or are pleased that we didn't get it.

I only bother because I was looking forward to a nice MC story, and your writing was pulling me into the story.
Then, BAM, no story.

We all are trying to help you. Please understand that. Listen to what the people here were saying, please. You have potential. Why not rewrite the story and re-submit it in a completed state?