Lesbian story feedback requested

[AwkwardMD]

I would like to get feedback on one of my recently posted lesbian pieces, Dream Girl.

https://www.literotica.com/s/dream-girl-18

 

[AwkwardMD]

Spoilers below. Do not read past here unless you've read the story.

I wanted to try to write something with an unreliable narrator, and I used a character who was in denial to do that. Throughout the story, there are things happening that foreshadow the twist that Des actively attributes to other causes. Doing that allowed me to try to write something that changes if/when you read it a second time. The clues that were always there jump out, and Des' forced obliviousness appears that much more starkly.

Of course, I don't expect anyone here to read it twice.

This story also represents my best effort (by my own scale) to pack a lot of backstory in the least amount of space.

Those are elements I would love to hear back about specifically, but any feedback is welcome and appreciated.

Thanks in advance!

 

[MelissaBaby]

I was impressed. I think you hit exactly the tone you were looking for, it was romantic and sensuous, but with a subtly unsettling undertone through out.

Some very nice use of language that I really liked.

You had me at "She tried to bring her legs together and found incredible resistance in the shape of her girlfriend's head."

An ambitious work, well executed.

 

[Alice_Rosaleen]

A lovely, touching story. The unreliable narrator aspect worked very well, though I felt switching it to first person could have pushed it further. You delivered just the right amount of backstory as needed to give the characters dimension. I thought the end portion with Dani was a little unresolved- might have been interesting to show Des having one last conversation with "Paige" before letting her memory go.
Like MB said, ambitious work and you pulled it off beautifully. Thanks for sharing.

 

[AwkwardMD]

I was impressed. I think you hit exactly the tone you were looking for, it was romantic and sensuous, but with a subtly unsettling undertone through out.

Some very nice use of language that I really liked.

You had me at "She tried to bring her legs together and found incredible resistance in the shape of her girlfriend's head."

An ambitious work, well executed.

Thank you so much!

 

[AwkwardMD]

A lovely, touching story. The unreliable narrator aspect worked very well, though I felt switching it to first person could have pushed it further. You delivered just the right amount of backstory as needed to give the characters dimension. I thought the end portion with Dani was a little unresolved- might have been interesting to show Des having one last conversation with "Paige" before letting her memory go.
Like MB said, ambitious work and you pulled it off beautifully. Thanks for sharing.

I had to think long and hard about doing it in third person over first because you're right. The loss would have been more grueling in first person. In order to pull off the denial and unreliability, I worried that I would have had to skirt more toward lying to the reader to avoid tipping my hand earlier than I wanted to. I didn't want to lie, I wanted to 'casually avoid'.

First person unreliable is, as near as I can tell, the hardest to pull off, and I wanted to get my toes wet with this perspective first. Maybe when I level up a bit more, I can try what you suggested

 

[Alice_Rosaleen]

You made it work in third person for sure- very well done. Poe and Dostoevsky mastered writing unreliable, first-person narrators with disturbing results. Probably more than you were going for

 

[TANSTAAFL58]

I'm speechless. What a ride.

You used distraction like a magician. You gave the reader the hottest sex imaginable. Period. Sex between people in love AND lust is always hot. This couple doubled down on that. They are deeply in love. And, they make love, fool around and fuck. They fuck beautifully, get the reader aroused and emotionally involved. And Des seems a little distracted, and you wonder why. But then, bang! More very hot sex. Who among us, gay straight or bi hasn't looked with erotic intent to the produce department? You delivered! Two very sexy lesbians having kinky sex that just gets better and better. I found myself thinking, "this is great. I wonder what's wrong with Des? Oh, this is really amazing! So sexy..."

And then you deliver the gut punch that we could all see coming. And it still shocked me!

Thank you for this, both as an entertaining read and a great lesson. Five stars because that's all I can give.

Oh, I'd like to steal that line about "her favorite tongue".

 

[AwkwardMD]

Oh, I'd like to steal that line about "her favorite tongue".

Just make sure I receive 5% royalties, and we're square.

 

[ElectricBlue]

The sense of unease and uncertainty worked - maybe a bit too well. I found myself wondering quite early what the twist was going to be, which actually got in the way and made the intimacy seem a little distant. I can't put my finger on it - I'll be the first to say it could be my stream of consciousness style versus your more constructed writing approach, and we've previously discovered we have different intimacy thresholds. Maybe I read it too much as a "writer's exercise," which is probably unfair.

The only thing that jumped out at me technically were the occasional sentence fragments. Most of it was written in long, smooth flowing sentences which had a lovely feel, then there'd be a few sudden, short sentences and fragments. Enough to notice and wonder about - I think you've commented previously that a reader shouldn't "notice" the writing - but it's an observation, not a fault.

 

[thewinedarksea]

I think I had already commented on it but I'll happily double down here and say that I found it delightful.

 

[TANSTAAFL58]

Just make sure I receive 5% royalties, and we're square.

Deal!

 

[TANSTAAFL58]

The only thing that jumped out at me technically were the occasional sentence fragments. Most of it was written in long, smooth flowing sentences which had a lovely feel, then there'd be a few sudden, short sentences and fragments. Enough to notice and wonder about - I think you've commented previously that a reader shouldn't "notice" the writing - but it's an observation, not a fault.

I assumed that was part of whatever was wrong in Des's life. It seemed to fit anyway. If it was unintentional, it still worked for me.

 

[LWulf]

I'm not a fan of same sex stories as I can't relate to any character involved, but critiquing allows me to observe without enjoying. However, that makes my critique to be more clinical and less enthusiastic.

"Des groaned unhappily as she took Paige's cheeks in her hands"
Perhaps it's me, but when I see "cheeks" I don't think facial. When I realize it's facial, I think "Is she gripping them?" which doesn't make sense. A way to waylay such thoughts might be to using a different phraseology. Also, "unhappily" doesn't sound right.
"Des groaned regretfully as she she lovingly cupped Paige's face in her hands."
Try not to be so forceful in terms like "took," in such moments; be more languorous. I understand that passion sometimes prompts action and such sounds invigorating, but, in my mind, tender moments are better expressed with gentler terms, leaving action terms to more dynamic moments.

Lines like:
"(It) Took every ounce of her willpower."
Seem stunted, but maybe that's a style you are writing to.

"She'd never understood how she'd gotten so lucky as..."
Long form on the sentence would be...
"She had never understood how she had gotten so lucky as..."
Seems like too many had's:
"She never understood how she got so lucky as..."

I might be nitpicking, but...
"Paige was hers and Des belonged, heart and soul, to Paige."
The paragraph this was in was all about a third person perspective look inside Des' mind. So, "Paige was hers" seems out of place.
"She was Paige's, as Des belonged, heart and soul, to Paige."
...might be a fix. I believe (not a redundant caveat because I'm expressing uncertainty) you're trying to say 'She was to Paige as Paige is to her,' but it doesn't read that way. It seems like like you're trying to put the reader into both minds from the 3rd person perspective (which is fine), but then put more of a 1st person perspective from Des' mind, which is where it gets confusing.

I would avoid using specific years. In ten years time, if this site is still open and the story still posted, anybody reading it will think references to specific years to suggest the characters are older than you might want. Leaving time references more oblique will allow a reader to temporalize with their own time frame and allow them to place themselves in the position of either character and enjoy it more.

The paragraph that starts with "Paige hovered over her..." is giving a blow by blow, third person perspective which is fine. However, it starts with Paige and ends with Des. The next paragraph talks about "the brunette" So, the reader will likely intuit that Des is "the brunette" since only pronouns are used, but halfway into the paragraph, we find "the brunette" is actually Paige. You might want to either restructure your paragraphs, or reintroduce Paige as the objectifier earlier on to avoid confusion.

"Paige turned and sauntered out of the bedroom, rolling those magnificent hips."
There's a lot of things wrong with this sentence and I'm not sure I can explain it well enough.
First, I think (I really cant stand using that redundant caveat. I don't have ESP so of course I am stating what I think), it should be "her" instead of "those." Second, it sort of changes the perspective from 3rd person, to 1st person, because pride is a 1st person emotion. To keep it 3rd person perspective, you would change it to "she rolled her hips that she was proud of" or "she rolled her hips, thinking this to be her most pleasing attribute" or some such. Instead, it comes across like you were trying to do more than one thing all at once; 3rd person perspective of Paige walking out of the room, and 1st perspective of Des, especially with the use of "those."

"The glossy shine gave definition"
I believe "shine" is an inherent term, while "sheen" is

"'Honey,' her mother s̶a̶i̶d̶ addressed Des, awkwardly lilting upward at the end, as if she had something to say, but couldn't put what followed into choice words."
Don't truncate what you're trying to say to the point of being obscure. ...or was her mother offering Des honey to put into her coffee instead of sugar? Or was she addressing her husband?

"'You know I can't technically live at Paige's while she's on scholarship.' Her father nearly choked on his coffee. Des handed him a couple paper towels..."
Try to break up paragraphs into person objective structures. In this paragraph, you start with Des talking, transition to her father choking, before reverting back to Des' actions.

"Des handed him a couple paper towels and took an experimental sip of her own coffee, to make sure she'd gotten the taste right, on her way toward the door."
First, run on sentence. Second, I think (NOT a redundant phrase because I'm expressing something questionable in my mind) you are trying to express a lot of action going on all at once. However, NOTHING happens all at once, unless you have three hands and can fold time.
"Des took an experimental sip of her coffee, as she reached for some paper towels. As soon as her father took the offered towels, she was headed for the front door."

I'd further add, that I suspect the terminated conversation will be picked up again later, but don't leave the reader totally unawares. At first, even with the page break, I figured the pregnant elephant in the room was because Des walked into the kitchen all starkers. I'd suggest adding some narrator dialog, or some such, after the door closes where the mother admonishes the father with a "why didn't you say something?" and a response of "we can talk with her when she gets home." As it is, you leave the reader at a cliffhanger, without even a "until next time" to let them know this will be better explained later.

For reference, "jogging" is an up and down motion not suited to carrying coffee. "walking briskly" is a more sinuous pace that might not result in a coffee mishap.

I'd rather the order of sequence to flow as:

"'Des?' her mother called, and repeated more stringently, when she didn't gain the other's attention.

'Gotta go. Already late for work. Probably won't be home until late."
"Don't wait up.' she added as the door closed behind her."​

Also, it's perfectly fine to truncate people's speech to suggest a hurried exit.

You might consider truncating phone text to reflect how people normally text. It wouldn't include splashy phrases like "formidable will," and consider indenting phone text to be different from the dialog text, but that might go to personal style, but it would differentiate better with later internal dialog.

"When she finished, on the spur of a heated moment, she texted to Paige.

Hey
Know you can't respond
Just got done with a woman whose ass reminded me of yours
Not as firm, but I sooo wanted to spread her legs​

Des smiled naughtily and added,

and lick her ass for the full hour!
Every time I looked at her, all I could see was you.
I think she could smell how turned on I was."​

​

"while she touched herself right there in the kiosk, in the middle of the hallway."
Presumably she is standing, or is she sitting? Kiosks are usually podium-like furniture and therefore you stand AT a kiosk, unless it's a cubical then you could sit IN the cubical.

"that that" is usually, but not always a mistake.

"Paige likely wouldn't respond at all."
I thought Des was just saying Paige couldn't respond, which makes this either redundant, or incorrect. If you're trying to transition as to why Paige wouldn't respond, then stick to that reasoning. Also, this paragraph isn't internal dialog, it's narrator/3rd person perspective, which shouldn't be indecisive. You might also mention internal motivators, like being aroused from the risk of being caught diddling herself.

I'm sorry, but I can't get into reading the story further, with as much commentary as I am saying. The story concept reads as interesting (for those who might enjoy such), the characters are not two dimensional. But it's a little choppy.

I will add:
"No" Des whined suddenly very self conscious.

Figure that the reader is an idiot. They need to be spoon fed some things like why people are saying or doing something. In my opinion (redundant caveat), in the end, it will read better.

 

[AwkwardMD]

The sense of unease and uncertainty worked - maybe a bit too well. I found myself wondering quite early what the twist was going to be, which actually got in the way and made the intimacy seem a little distant. I can't put my finger on it - I'll be the first to say it could be my stream of consciousness style versus your more constructed writing approach, and we've previously discovered we have different intimacy thresholds. Maybe I read it too much as a "writer's exercise," which is probably unfair.

The only thing that jumped out at me technically were the occasional sentence fragments. Most of it was written in long, smooth flowing sentences which had a lovely feel, then there'd be a few sudden, short sentences and fragments. Enough to notice and wonder about - I think you've commented previously that a reader shouldn't "notice" the writing - but it's an observation, not a fault.

Where do you think I could have removed some foreshadowing?

 

[AwkwardMD]

First of all, thank you. This amount of response is impressive, and it’s excellent to get feedback of this volume. It helps me immensely.

"Des groaned unhappily as she took Paige's cheeks in her hands"
Perhaps it's me, but when I see "cheeks" I don't think facial. When I realize it's facial, I think "Is she gripping them?" which doesn't make sense. A way to waylay such thoughts might be to using a different phraseology. Also, "unhappily" doesn't sound right.
"Des groaned regretfully as she she lovingly cupped Paige's face in her hands."
Try not to be so forceful in terms like "took," in such moments; be more languorous. I understand that passion sometimes prompts action and such sounds invigorating, but, in my mind, tender moments are better expressed with gentler terms, leaving action terms to more dynamic moments.

I want to point out that this criticism is unfair. The sentence, in the story, reads

Des groaned unhappily as she took Paige’s cheeks in her hands, pulled her so that they were face-to-face, and kissed her.

It is not unclear that we are talking about her face, but you quoted part of a sentence that makes it look like I didn’t clarify.

It doesn’t say gripping, it says ‘took (...) in her hands.’ Of course it doesn’t make sense if you change the phrasing to words that are barely synonymous. To ‘take something in your hands’ is not the same action as to ‘grip something in your hands’.

As far as unhappily vs regretfully, that seems like six of one and a half dozen of the other. On the other hand, one of my biggest flaws has always been that my writing is blunt and efficient rather than beautiful, and I envy writers with better prose than I have. I am actively attempting to do better at this with every story.

Re: forceful actions, this was a choice that was dictated by the flow of the scene. Des was actively attempting to stop the sex because she didn’t have time to keep going. It was intended to be abrupt and active.

Lines like:
"(It) Took every ounce of her willpower."
Seem stunted, but maybe that's a style you are writing to

You are not the first to point out my use of sentence fragments. I do use them intentionally in moments of passion as part of a working theory I call Literanarrative Agreement. In capturing moments where the characters are reduced to an animal brain, I try to shift the writing down to capture that. The goal there is to make the reader feel the same way, and I can see how that would be lost on someone in a pure critical mode.

Rest assured this is intentionally done with style and that I know how to construct a proper sentence.

"She'd never understood how she'd gotten so lucky as..."
Long form on the sentence would be...
"She had never understood how she had gotten so lucky as..."
Seems like too many had's:
"She never understood how she got so lucky as..."

Are we rationing hads? Also, doesn’t saying “She never understood” turn that into an indictment of Des’ ability to comprehend love over the course of her entire life, where “She had never understood” captures her incredulity in the moment without condeming her to never get there?

I might be nitpicking, but...
"Paige was hers and Des belonged, heart and soul, to Paige."
The paragraph this was in was all about a third person perspective look inside Des' mind. So, "Paige was hers" seems out of place.
"She was Paige's, as Des belonged, heart and soul, to Paige."
...might be a fix. I believe (not a redundant caveat because I'm expressing uncertainty) you're trying to say 'She was to Paige as Paige is to her,' but it doesn't read that way. It seems like like you're trying to put the reader into both minds from the 3rd person perspective (which is fine), but then put more of a 1st person perspective from Des' mind, which is where it gets confusing.

"She was Paige's, as Des belonged, heart and soul, to Paige." is redundant. My original statement says, from a third person perspective “I own you, and I belong to you.” It’s a complex feel, but I don’t think I captured it incorrectly.

First person requires an “I think/I thought” statement. I don’t know where you got that from in the story.

I would avoid using specific years. In ten years time, if this site is still open and the story still posted, anybody reading it will think references to specific years to suggest the characters are older than you might want. Leaving time references more oblique will allow a reader to temporalize with their own time frame and allow them to place themselves in the position of either character and enjoy it more.

You are totally right on this, but I don’t honestly know how to fix that except to state at the beginning that this takes place in 2018. I don’t want to refer to ‘the last olympics’ and ‘the one before that’. That feels inelegant. Also, 2012 and 2016 aren’t specifically important, but the scope of it, with about six years between that important event and the ‘current’ moment in time for the story, is semi-important.

The paragraph that starts with "Paige hovered over her..." is giving a blow by blow, third person perspective which is fine. However, it starts with Paige and ends with Des. The next paragraph talks about "the brunette" So, the reader will likely intuit that Des is "the brunette" since only pronouns are used, but halfway into the paragraph, we find "the brunette" is actually Paige. You might want to either restructure your paragraphs, or reintroduce Paige as the objectifier earlier on to avoid confusion.

While I agree that it is not 100% clear who has what attributes immediately, I straight up refuse to write a description of a character that lays out attributes I will later use as identifiers. In my mind, a paragraph or two where features are described in bits and pieces, and then fleshed out over the course of a story, is better.

Also, since the previous paragraph states that Paige is on top of Des while Des is on her back, having Des "bounce up" with a pushup makes no sense. It is easily inferred, through action and blocking, who is where.

"Paige turned and sauntered out of the bedroom, rolling those magnificent hips."
There's a lot of things wrong with this sentence and I'm not sure I can explain it well enough.
First, I think (I really cant stand using that redundant caveat. I don't have ESP so of course I am stating what I think), it should be "her" instead of "those." Second, it sort of changes the perspective from 3rd person, to 1st person, because pride is a 1st person emotion. To keep it 3rd person perspective, you would change it to "she rolled her hips that she was proud of" or "she rolled her hips, thinking this to be her most pleasing attribute" or some such. Instead, it comes across like you were trying to do more than one thing all at once; 3rd person perspective of Paige walking out of the room, and 1st perspective of Des, especially with the use of "those."

It’s not first person, but it is disingenuous to attribute judgement to Paige’s features in third person. This sentence is one of those “Kill your darlings” moments that I must have seen a hundred times while writing it, and I just never fixed it. It should have been “Page turned and sauntered out of the bedroom, rolling her hips in a way she often did when she was trying to tease Des.” Or something.

"The glossy shine gave definition"
I believe "shine" is an inherent term, while "sheen" is

I think the word you intended here is correct, and you would be right.

"'Honey,' her mother s̶a̶i̶d̶ addressed Des, awkwardly lilting upward at the end, as if she had something to say, but couldn't put what followed into choice words."

This correction is bad. It’s a head hop. Des doesn’t know what her mother is going to say. I didn’t write this story in third person omniscient. It’s third person limited in an attempt to follow Des while she is in denial without revealing said denial. If I’d written this story in third person omniscient, I would have had to lie to the reader about why Des was in denial, and that defeats the entire purpose.

Don't truncate what you're trying to say to the point of being obscure. ...or was her mother offering Des honey to put into her coffee instead of sugar? Or was she addressing her husband?

Of course I’m obscuring. The point is to write a story about a character in denial. I know you weren’t invested because it was all ladybits all the time, but come on.

"'You know I can't technically live at Paige's while she's on scholarship.' Her father nearly choked on his coffee. Des handed him a couple paper towels..."
Try to break up paragraphs into person objective structures. In this paragraph, you start with Des talking, transition to her father choking, before reverting back to Des' actions.

This is a problem I struggle with. I think, in earlier revisions, her father choking was within the same sentence as Des handing him the paper towels, and I felt like that justified keeping the paragraph together. Later, I rewrote the sentences, and I should have broken it apart.

"Des handed him a couple paper towels and took an experimental sip of her own coffee, to make sure she'd gotten the taste right, on her way toward the door."
First, run on sentence. Second, I think (NOT a redundant phrase because I'm expressing something questionable in my mind) you are trying to express a lot of action going on all at once. However, NOTHING happens all at once, unless you have three hands and can fold time.
"Des took an experimental sip of her coffee, as she reached for some paper towels. As soon as her father took the offered towels, she was headed for the front door."

Not a run on. I don’t know about you, but I can hold paper towels with one hand while holding a cup of coffee in the other as I walk across a room. These are concurrent actions. I didn’t describe her reaching for the paper towels, yes, but I also don’t describe her diaphragm contracting every time she exhales, and releasing every time she inhales. Any time I can imply basic action rather than explicitly stating it, I count that as a win.

I'd further add, that I suspect the terminated conversation will be picked up again later, but don't leave the reader totally unawares. At first, even with the page break, I figured the pregnant elephant in the room was because Des walked into the kitchen all starkers. I'd suggest adding some narrator dialog, or some such, after the door closes where the mother admonishes the father with a "why didn't you say something?" and a response of "we can talk with her when she gets home." As it is, you leave the reader at a cliffhanger, without even a "until next time" to let them know this will be better explained later.

I really feel like, since you decided to check out on the story because all ladybits all the time, you missed a lot of the forest through the trees. A) It’s third person limited, not omniscient. B) The story is following Des, not an ensemble of characters. C) Your suggested additions create too much tension too soon.

Imagine you are playing poker and you get a Royal Flush. The best possible hand. You will win this round no matter what. If you show your hand immediately, you win. If you wait and raise the stakes, you will still win. The difference is in the value of your winnings, or in the case of my story, the emotional impact. The reader will actively prevent themselves from getting attached to characters if they think they’re going to die/go away, so the trick is to lure them in and only foreshadow.

Now, was my foreshadowing too much? Some have said yes, and I think that’s fair. It’s a tough juggling act.

For reference, "jogging" is an up and down motion not suited to carrying coffee. "walking briskly" is a more sinuous pace that might not result in a coffee mishap.

Forest through the trees. Des is actively running away from an uncomfortable conversation that would force her to confront truths she is not ready for. She may indeed spill her coffee, but that is a price she pays to not have her parents talk about the death of her girlfriend.

I'd rather the order of sequence to flow as:

"'Des?' her mother called, and repeated more stringently, when she didn't gain the other's attention.(This is head hopping)

'Gotta go. Already late for work. Probably won't be home until late."
"Don't wait up.' she added as the door closed behind her."​

Also, it's perfectly fine to truncate people's speech to suggest a hurried exit.

Des is not a chatterbox. This dialog would be perfectly suited for a character that fills space because quiet is uncomfortable. Now, I realize that Des is not a chatterbox because I made her not a chatterbox, but adding this would require me to change the way Des handles silence through a lot of other parts in the story, and I don’t know what that really adds.

You might consider truncating phone text to reflect how people normally text. It wouldn't include splashy phrases like "formidable will," and consider indenting phone text to be different from the dialog text, but that might go to personal style, but it would differentiate better with later internal dialog.

"When she finished, on the spur of a heated moment, she texted to Paige.

Hey
Know you can't respond
Just got done with a woman whose ass reminded me of yours
Not as firm, but I sooo wanted to spread her legs​

Des smiled naughtily and added,

and lick her ass for the full hour!
Every time I looked at her, all I could see was you.
I think she could smell how turned on I was."​

​

This is how I text when I have the time to write more than 40 characters. I don’t know why you would think that some people don’t text in paragraphs. Des knows she has the time to craft a few whole sentences because she knows Paige won’t respond right away. She’s lying to herself about why, but that’s not the point.

"while she touched herself right there in the kiosk, in the middle of the hallway."
Presumably she is standing, or is she sitting? Kiosks are usually podium-like furniture and therefore you stand AT a kiosk, unless it's a cubical then you could sit IN the cubical.

If I’m reading this right, then it seems that you don’t understand how a woman can simply slide her hand down the front of her pants and touch herself. We don’t need to open our pants to pull anything out, and we can do it standing up.

"that that" is usually, but not always a mistake.

Unhelpful. Is it or isn’t it a mistake?

"Paige likely wouldn't respond at all."
I thought Des was just saying Paige couldn't respond, which makes this either redundant, or incorrect. If you're trying to transition as to why Paige wouldn't respond, then stick to that reasoning. Also, this paragraph isn't internal dialog, it's narrator/3rd person perspective, which shouldn't be indecisive. You might also mention internal motivators, like being aroused from the risk of being caught diddling herself.

This is one of the moments of foreshadowing that I feel like I failed the most. It’s disingenuous to third person, AND it’s disingenuous to the twist that comes later. I should have done better.

I'm sorry, but I can't get into reading the story further, with as much commentary as I am saying. The story concept reads as interesting (for those who might enjoy such), the characters are not two dimensional. But it's a little choppy.

I say this with love, but if you can’t enjoy a story at all then you should consider not reading it. I feel like a lot of the things you brought up were things that readers with even the slightest bit of buy-in (or suspension of disbelief) would have accepted without question.

I will add:
"No" Des whined suddenly very self conscious.

Figure that the reader is an idiot. They need to be spoon fed some things like why people are saying or doing something. In my opinion (redundant caveat), in the end, it will read better.

No. I do not spoon-feed readers. Never have, never will. I write stories like jigsaw puzzles, and actively attempt to leave pieces out for the reader to make logical assumptions about. Right or wrong, that is my style.

My goal is not to write for the reader. They are not my purpose. I write as therapy, and I share my work because I’m proud of it. For me, the value of a story is in the catharsis of the tension and the crafting of the art. At least half of my submitted works are experiments like this.

I did not write Dream Girl because I came up with the story of Des and Paige. I started with:

I want to write an unreliable narrator
I want to write a gymnast
I want to see what it’s like to write a character who is actively in denial
I want to write a lesbian piece
I want to write about Lucid Dreaming

These are the building blocks, and the story is what came from making those pieces fit together.

 

[thewinedarksea]

I like this piece so much that I feel like I have to try to give you something that you might be able to use, so here goes. I have some observations that you can take or leave, but this is what stood out.

I thought the foreshadowing was judged correctly. The nature of foreshadowing is that some people will get it and some people won’t, no matter what you do. You struck the right balance. The title was the biggest clue, but it’s a lovely title, so I’d sooner have it.

I’d like to register my support for the judicial use of sentence fragments, which you employ well to convey excitement and pace.

One exception, for me: Paige smiled broadly as she stood up and leaned over the table. Both hands planted. I think a comma would be better here. This is an unremarkable detail that doesn’t benefit from the special treatment. Especially as you repeat “both hands” starting a sentence at the end of the paragraph. Would “Both hands cupped Paige’s face” be better than “cupping”? To my eye, yes.

A stylistic preference: I think the bold italics are too much. They stick out too much visually, and you easily have the skill to make Des scream with other tricks.

dew-slick folds — this phrase is electric, as was most of the intimate description. I loved the zest and bubbly horniness. Perfect tone.

I find this fragment awkward to read. Reverently adjusting everything just so to match how it had been before.

Punctuation and spelling comments on first two pages (I have to get back to work). If you’re not interested in this type of feedback, please disregard.

"I don't," she said, pausing the kiss only long enough to speak and draw air, "but tomorrow. Definitely tomorrow."
The commas suggest that this is your sentence: “I don’t but tomorrow.” I feel like “But tomorrow” is a new sentence, so:
"I don't," she said, pausing the kiss only long enough to speak and draw air. “But tomorrow. Definitely tomorrow."

re: copper blonde hair. AP and Garner’s suggest blond = adjective; blonde = noun, in US English (UK differs). I only learned this this week.

re: She had her room setup[set up] so that she was often facing away from the door to show off her ass. “Setup” is the noun, which is more awkward here.

Re: Once Des was a few steps into the apartment[,] she saw the box on the floor half-full with medals and memorabilia[] and exploded. “Once Des was…” is a conditional clause, so needs a comma. But seeing and exploding seem to be better happening at once.

 

[AwkwardMD]

I like this piece so much that I feel like I have to try to give you something that you might be able to use, so here goes. I have some observations that you can take or leave, but this is what stood out.

I thought the foreshadowing was judged correctly. The nature of foreshadowing is that some people will get it and some people won’t, no matter what you do. You struck the right balance. The title was the biggest clue, but it’s a lovely title, so I’d sooner have it.

I’d like to register my support for the judicial use of sentence fragments, which you employ well to convey excitement and pace.

One exception, for me: Paige smiled broadly as she stood up and leaned over the table. Both hands planted. I think a comma would be better here. This is an unremarkable detail that doesn’t benefit from the special treatment. Especially as you repeat “both hands” starting a sentence at the end of the paragraph. Would “Both hands cupped Paige’s face” be better than “cupping”? To my eye, yes.

A stylistic preference: I think the bold italics are too much. They stick out too much visually, and you easily have the skill to make Des scream with other tricks.

dew-slick folds — this phrase is electric, as was most of the intimate description. I loved the zest and bubbly horniness. Perfect tone.

I find this fragment awkward to read. Reverently adjusting everything just so to match how it had been before.

Punctuation and spelling comments on first two pages (I have to get back to work). If you’re not interested in this type of feedback, please disregard.

"I don't," she said, pausing the kiss only long enough to speak and draw air, "but tomorrow. Definitely tomorrow."
The commas suggest that this is your sentence: “I don’t but tomorrow.” I feel like “But tomorrow” is a new sentence, so:
"I don't," she said, pausing the kiss only long enough to speak and draw air. “But tomorrow. Definitely tomorrow."

re: copper blonde hair. AP and Garner’s suggest blond = adjective; blonde = noun, in US English (UK differs). I only learned this this week.

re: She had her room setup[set up] so that she was often facing away from the door to show off her ass. “Setup” is the noun, which is more awkward here.

Re: Once Des was a few steps into the apartment[,] she saw the box on the floor half-full with medals and memorabilia[] and exploded. “Once Des was…” is a conditional clause, so needs a comma. But seeing and exploding seem to be better happening at once.

I agree with pretty much all of this. I thought blonde implied woman as both an adjective AND a noun!

 

[AwkwardMD]

Dear Mr. Wulf,

"I'm not a fan of same sex stories as I can't relate to any character involved, but critiquing allows me to observe without enjoying. However, that makes my critique to be more clinical and less enthusiastic."

I glossed over this part here before in the spirit of being appreciative, but over the course of the day it has come to bug me more and more. If I wanted to be perfectly polite, I’d point out that it's fine for a specific fantasy or circumstance to not resonate strongly with the background of different readers. Responses to narrative are, of course, highly subjective, and that's a good thing. That's the point. We write narratives to explore our beliefs, biases, and subjectivities, and here on Lit those tend to manifest as porn/power/sex fantasies. Reducing critique to a clinical examination of objective story quality on a word-by-word basis is a reductive, shallow and unhelpful form of analysis.

A more skilled reviewer might look for what points and thematic beats they can empathize with and explore what connections they do find, while acknowledging the differences in lived experiences that make it hard for them to provide informed and nuanced analysis on a subject they have little experience or interest in.

Instead you just threw up his hands and said "lawl itz queer and Im not queer yall are different from me" which is transparent bullshit. You can’t empathize with being attracted to a woman? You can’t imagine a scenario where friends become lovers, and maybe more? You can’t understand needing to be loved by your significant other?

Queer media almost always touches on fairly universal themes, even if the specifics are rooted in the queer experience. We all want to belong, we all fear ostracization and want the approval of the society around us. You, meanwhile, feel so secure in your normalness that you can pass judgement on things you absolutely nothing about while openly admitting you won’t try to learn anything about them.

That, sir, is bigotry, and you can shove that up your ass.

 

[JasonClearwater]

I glossed over this part here before in the spirit of being appreciative, but over the course of the day it has come to bug me more and more. If I wanted to be perfectly polite, I’d point out that it's fine for a specific fantasy or circumstance to not resonate strongly with the background of different readers. Responses to narrative are, of course, highly subjective, and that's a good thing. That's the point. We write narratives to explore our beliefs, biases, and subjectivities, and here on Lit those tend to manifest as porn/power/sex fantasies. Reducing critique to a clinical examination of objective story quality on a word-by-word basis is a reductive, shallow and unhelpful form of analysis.

A more skilled reviewer might look for what points and thematic beats they can empathize with and explore what connections they do find, while acknowledging the differences in lived experiences that make it hard for them to provide informed and nuanced analysis on a subject they have little experience or interest in.

Instead you just threw up his hands and said "lawl itz queer and Im not queer yall are different from me" which is transparent bullshit. You can’t empathize with being attracted to a woman? You can’t imagine a scenario where friends become lovers, and maybe more? You can’t understand needing to be loved by your significant other?

Queer media almost always touches on fairly universal themes, even if the specifics are rooted in the queer experience. We all want to belong, we all fear ostracization and want the approval of the society around us. You, meanwhile, feel so secure in your normalness that you can pass judgement on things you absolutely nothing about while openly admitting you won’t try to learn anything about them.

That, sir, is bigotry, and you can shove that up your ass.

MD, that's not fair. If the story didn't involve sex, and wasn't posted on a sex site, perhaps. But this is an erotica site, and I fully understand if people don't enjoy reading same-sex work, because they can't relate to it, and don't enjoy reading that dynamic. And I say as someone who writes exclusively GM.

For someone who feels that way to give such in-depth feedback to the best of their ability, shows they're not a bigot, they're just not into it. In the same way some people aren't into long romances (me), or long anything, no matter how well it's written.

A bigot is someone who marks it down, or tells you to get your 'gay shit' off their site, simply because it contains queer content.

You've asked for feedback on a smut site, then come back at a person giving honest feedback and said, 'A more skilled reviewer would...'.... it's a smut site, where people try to help each other out. There are no claims here to being skilled reviewers. Just trying to help.

Be fair. LWulf read at least some of the work and tried to give feedback. This is a good thing, yeah?

 

[AwkwardMD]

MD, that's not fair. If the story didn't involve sex, and wasn't posted on a sex site, perhaps. But this is an erotica site, and I fully understand if people don't enjoy reading same-sex work, because they can't relate to it, and don't enjoy reading that dynamic. And I say as someone who writes exclusively GM.

For someone who feels that way to give such in-depth feedback to the best of their ability, shows they're not a bigot, they're just not into it. In the same way some people aren't into long romances (me), or long anything, no matter how well it's written.

A bigot is someone who marks it down, or tells you to get your 'gay shit' off their site, simply because it contains queer content.

You've asked for feedback on a smut site, then come back at a person giving honest feedback and said, 'A more skilled reviewer would...'.... it's a smut site, where people try to help each other out. There are no claims here to being skilled reviewers. Just trying to help.

Be fair. LWulf read at least some of the work and tried to give feedback. This is a good thing, yeah?

I don't know what you want me to say here. Praise him for being an honest bigot?

A site like this is where I would expect to see MORE tolerance, not less. We're all here to explore things ordinarily hidden behind doors if not worse. We're all living in glass houses, but we don't all act like it.

It is NOT expecting too much for all of us to act like human beings to each other. It is NOT too much to ask to not be dismissed summarily, and treat each other decently. Honestly, I'm surprised you're not offended too.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Where do you think I could have removed some foreshadowing?

As winedarksea notes in her commentary, it's a balancing act, and I'm not sure I could say, "there's the point where it became too much or too obvious for me" because I don't think there is one. Doing it as you did, right from the outset, is the right way, I reckon. If the twist was delayed I think it would be seen as "too clever" - you caught the unease of the people around Des really well, and that was necessary for the story's foundation.

I think you say it yourself, you write your stories as puzzles, making each piece fit. And they do fit, extremely well, but it also shows; the construction and the seams. You and I have shared an amiable understanding of our polar opposite writing styles and approaches, and I acknowledge that, when I read anything new of yours, I approach it perhaps as an academic thing, "What writerly challenge has MD set herself this time?"

Which I shouldn't do, let my knowledge of your (very) structured approach get in the way - in that sense my reading isn't fair to the work itself. Because, as others say, you have some wonderful sentences and your joy for the sensuality shines through - dare I say it, when you relax into your prose, when it becomes less mannered.

Your Literanarrative Agreement theory - thanks for the explanation - I figured it was something like that, zeroing into heightened moments. Just for me, it actually broke the moment. Possibly because, when I write my intense sex scenes, I find myself doing the complete opposite - I forego punctuation and it becomes one long stream of words, often repetitive, trying to conjure up the rush of approaching orgasm. So I get what you're doing there, but my brain works differently, so I noticed it. Don't get me wrong, it didn't jar, it didn't throw me out; but it did make me think, "oh look, I see what she did there."

As always, MD, your passion for the craft is evident .

 

[JasonClearwater]

I don't know what you want me to say here. Praise him for being an honest bigot?

A site like this is where I would expect to see MORE tolerance, not less. We're all here to explore things ordinarily hidden behind doors if not worse. We're all living in glass houses, but we don't all act like it.

It is NOT expecting too much for all of us to act like human beings to each other. It is NOT too much to ask to not be dismissed summarily, and treat each other decently. Honestly, I'm surprised you're not offended too.

I'm not easily offended. If this was said to me, it wouldn't offend me. But to me, tolerance is letting it exist in your space. Acceptance is making an effort to understand and embrace it. Bigotry, on the other hand, is being told your sci-fi has no merit because the protagonist is bi, and having your work work bombed for daring to contain queer content, as I've had. That's when I get offended. If someone doesn't read it because of the bi protag... so be it. I don't understand the issue, I'll be honest, but I will accept it, as long as they don't take negative actions.

I understand your frustration - you're writing about the human condition, not the 'lesbian' condition. It's a touch like a man saying he can't relate to a book with a female protagonist because she's female, or dismissing all stories about women because they're just about women, so not overly interesting.

But the element I take into account is that stories on this site involve sexual content, which is still a very personal thing to people. Especially hetero people, for whom same-sex is a 'squick'. As the world moves and changes, as we see same-sex relationships become normalised, and people have more exposure to stories that move away from the 'straight male' hero, this will change. But I can't take offence to someone not wanting to read my content because it contains graphic sexual content they don't enjoy reading.

I think tolerance goes both ways. Baby steps, and all that, yeah?

 

[MelissaBaby]

Be fair. LWulf read at least some of the work and tried to give feedback. This is a good thing, yeah?

My impression is that he didn't care for the subject matter, so he wrote a hypercritical review in which he criticized phrases he had lifted out of out of context, made incredibly nitpicky complaints and misconstrued things that were perfectly clear.

 

[MelissaBaby]

I'm not easily offended. If this was said to me, it wouldn't offend me. But to me, tolerance is letting it exist in your space. Acceptance is making an effort to understand and embrace it. Bigotry, on the other hand, is being told your sci-fi has no merit because the protagonist is bi, and having your work work bombed for daring to contain queer content, as I've had. That's when I get offended. If someone doesn't read it because of the bi protag... so be it. I don't understand the issue, I'll be honest, but I will accept it, as long as they don't take negative actions.

I understand your frustration - you're writing about the human condition, not the 'lesbian' condition. It's a touch like a man saying he can't relate to a book with a female protagonist because she's female, or dismissing all stories about women because they're just about women, so not overly interesting.

But the element I take into account is that stories on this site involve sexual content, which is still a very personal thing to people. Especially hetero people, for whom same-sex is a 'squick'. As the world moves and changes, as we see same-sex relationships become normalised, and people have more exposure to stories that move away from the 'straight male' hero, this will change. But I can't take offence to someone not wanting to read my content because it contains graphic sexual content they don't enjoy reading.

I think tolerance goes both ways. Baby steps, and all that, yeah?

If he didn't want to read it, he shouldn't have read it. It's hard for me to not think he read and critiqued it because he wanted to tear it it based on the subject matter.

I've seen him write some very good commentary. It is often unnecessarily brutal, but usually well reasoned. This just looked like a hatchet job.