My First Story

[dirk2024]

Hello,

My first story just published.

It's been favorited by several people, but there are no comments yet. I'd appreciate some feedback on it, how it reads and whether it is truly hot enough for Literotica readers. Since it involves stepsiblings, I put it in the Incest category, though it could go in the First Time category as well. I have several follow-up stories either in progress or already completed.


A Masseur is Born

My thanks to @SwitchSubKali for her advice with this story.

Thank you in advance!

Dirk

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Congratulations!

 

[MelissaBaby]

You did right putting it in Incest. You'd have caught hell if you'd put it elsewhere.

Welcome, and good luck!

 

[StillStunned]

It's been favorited by several people, but there are no comments yet.

They might show up in about an hour and a half. Most comments are moderated, and get posted in a batch. Here in CET (daylight savings) it's at 11pm - you'll have to work out for yourself what time that is in your time zone.

And welcome to the hobby!

 

[filthytrancendence]

Congrats!

I'll put it on my list to read and feedback-ize. Might be later today.

 

[TheLobster]

Congratulations! It’s always exciting, whether it’s your first story or twentieth (and I’m sure hundredth as well, I just haven’t gotten that far).

But although I haven’t read it in full yet, I’m afraid I need to advise you to either get an editor or pay more attention when reading over your own story. You have one awful typo right in the first sentence, and then another one (less glaring) in the very next one. This is something that can easily sour your first impressions, so you should really make sure it doesn’t happen in your next submissions.

 

[dirk2024]

Congratulations! It’s always exciting, whether it’s your first story or twentieth (and I’m sure hundredth as well, I just haven’t gotten that far).

But although, I haven’t read it in full yet, I’m afraid I need to advise you to either get an editor or pay more attention when reading over your own story. You have one awful typo right in the first sentence, and then another one (less glaring) in the very next one. This is something that easily sour your first impressions, so you should really make sure it doesn’t happen in your next submissions.

I re-read those sentences and I'm not seeing the errors you mention. I guess I don't have the necessary literary chops and am relying on Word to help find my errors.

 

[Bamagan]

I re-read those sentences and I'm not seeing the errors you mention. I guess I don't have the necessary literary chops and am relying on Word to help find my errors.

I believe he was referring to 'peaked' versus 'peeked' in the first sentence. Not the kind of error that a computer will always spot.

 

[TheLobster]

I re-read those sentences and I'm not seeing the errors you mention. I guess I don't have the necessary literary chops and am relying on Word to help find my errors.

“Peaked” should be “peeked”. Word’s spellcheck won’t catch that, since both words are correct in their proper contexts.

 

[dirk2024]

I believe he was referring to 'peaked' versus 'peeked' in the first sentence. Not the kind of error that a computer will always spot.

OH DAMN!

Thank you. I can't tell you how many times I read that and didn't catch it.

 

[HordHolm]

I re-read those sentences and I'm not seeing the errors you mention. I guess I don't have the necessary literary chops and am relying on Word to help find my errors.

"Jack peaked through the kitchen window..." should be peeked. Word won't highlight that one, as to peak (and therefore 'peaked', past tense) is also a verb. Just the wrong one.

Chaise lounges in the second sentence should be chaise longues.

 

[HordHolm]

OH DAMN!

Thank you.

We've all done it. Even those of us who claim we haven't. I still find things on the tenth read through - either errors or clumsy drafting that could be far more elegant/concise/simply better.

 

[Bamagan]

"Jack peaked through the kitchen window..." should be peeked. Word won't highlight that one, as to peak (and therefore 'peaked', past tense) is also a verb. Just the wrong one.

Chaise lounges in the second sentence should be chaise longues.

Maybe this is a cultural thing, but a chaise lounge is definitely a thing in the states. As I understand it, a chaise longue is a French term for a long chair. I guess they're basically the same thing, although I'm not a qualified furniture expert.

 

[HordHolm]

Maybe this is a cultural thing, but a chaise lounge is definitely a thing in the states. As I understand it, a chaise longue is a French term for a long chair. I guess they're basically the same thing, although I'm not a qualified furniture expert.

I thought that they were simply referred to as loungers in the US. As they are often in Europe when referring to pool furniture.

 

[MelissaBaby]

"Jack peaked through the kitchen window..." should be peeked. Word won't highlight that one, as to peak (and therefore 'peaked', past tense) is also a verb. Just the wrong one.

Chaise lounges in the second sentence should be chaise longues.

That's not so clear cut. In America, no one except Wet Leg fans pronounce it "chaise LONG" and lounge is generally considered acceptable.

And, if chaise longue is used, chaise is the noun, longue the modifier, so the plural is chaises longue.

 

[Bamagan]

I thought that they were simply referred to as loungers in the US. As they are often in Europe when referring to pool furniture.

Lounger, lounge chair, and chaise lounge are used more or less interchangeably, depending on how pretentious the speaker is trying to be I guess.

 

[StillStunned]

And, if chaise longue is used, chaise is the noun, longue the modifier, so the plural is chaises longue.

Chaises longues.

Finally a use for four years of French at school.

 

[TheLobster]

Sorry for focusing on a silly mistake, but it just really stood out to me and I figured it would for any other reader as well.

It's really unfortunate, too, because after reading the rest it's clear this is not representative of the text as a whole. You keep the language mechanics straight for the most part; there are a few minor issues with dialogue punctuation but nothing that would make the story hard to read.

I especially liked the way you marked internal monologues. There are many opinions on how it "should" be done, and yours sort of stands astride several common option while catering to none

 

[TheLobster]

Maybe this is a cultural thing, but a chaise lounge is definitely a thing in the states. As I understand it, a chaise longue is a French term for a long chair. I guess they're basically the same thing, although I'm not a qualified furniture expert.

My native language had pulled the entire compound wholesale from French, and even mangled its spelling to conform to the local orthography. But English rarely does the latter to its French borrowings, so my instinct is to just keep the original baguette spelling.

I did a quick search and found this Marriam-Webster article. It doesn't exactly call the "lounge" version wrong, but doesn't advocate for it either, though it also says both versions may actually refer to different things... So, uh, yeah, maybe it's not as clearcut as I thought? More research is needed, preferably while lounging on a chaise lo(u)ng(u)e.

 

[dirk2024]

I thought that they were simply referred to as loungers in the US. As they are often in Europe when referring to pool furniture.

Yes. Here in the US they are called chaise lounges, though there are probably people who simply call them loungers. Here is an image of an outdoor version.

Chaise lounge

 

[dirk2024]

Sorry for focusing on a silly mistake, but it just really stood out to me and I figured it would for any other reader as well.

It's really unfortunate, too, because after reading the rest it's clear this is not representative of the text as a whole. You keep the language mechanics straight for the most part; there are a few minor issues with dialogue punctuation but nothing that would make the story hard to read.

I especially liked the way you marked internal monologues. There are many opinions on how it "should" be done, and yours sort of stands astride several common option while catering to none

Thank you!

 

[ElectricBlue]

They might show up in about an hour and a half. Most comments are moderated, and get posted in a batch. Here in CET (daylight savings) it's at 11pm - you'll have to work out for yourself what time that is in your time zone.

And welcome to the hobby!

Comments are vetted for spam and html links and used to be done in batches across the board. Nowadays, if you're on the right list, a comment gets posted immediately. However, there's never been any evidence that the site moderates comments in that first run.

There has been evidence that the site periodically runs a scan for hate content, and pulls that down. But general moderation for shit posts, I don't think so. The site lets authors moderate their own posts, but I don't believe there's moderation as such.

 

[Voboy]

That's not so clear cut. In America, no one except Wet Leg fans pronounce it "chaise LONG" and lounge is generally considered acceptable.

And, if chaise longue is used, chaise is the noun, longue the modifier, so the plural is chaises longue.

My first thought was Wet Leg.

 

[filthytrancendence]

Alright, I read nearly all of it, the only bit I skimmed was the last sex scene and I don't want to beat a dead horse (you'll see later).

What I liked

This line:

"How did you know it was me? I could have been Freddy or Jason. You could be the victim of a horror movie villain right now."

That was a good moment. Got a laugh out of me, it was a great way to start the scene.

I liked the tone overall. It's playful, it's fun, it's not very serious. You get heavy summer vibes from the whole thing. Triggered a bit of nostalgia for me. I like the vibe overall, the characters are sweet, they're fun, and they're funny. Makes it easy and fun to read, most of the time.

Technical Stuff

1. @TheLobster is correct. You need an editor, my friend. I'd recommend asking over on the editor board. People seem to have more luck with that than cold emailing people from the list. There's a lot of small spelling and grammar errors that do not bother me personally too much, but will be distracting to a lot of people.
2. There's a fair bit of distracting non-standard punctuation. Parenthesis don't really have a place in narrative fiction. You used em dashes to interrupt your narrator voice. I'll get to internal monologue under the structural section, but those are inconsistently formatted and thus distracting.
   1. Here's my advice right now: if you feel the urge to type a non-standard punctuation mark (anything outside of . , ! ? ' " - ), do not do it. Find another way to do what you're trying to do. If you think about it for a moment and decide there isn't a better way, then go for it.
   2. Em dashes and ellipses should be used extremely sparingly. Almost every time you used an ellipsis you ought to have just described to us what led the character to trail off of their thought (or just used a comma). This is one of the dangers of overusing them. You're robbing yourself of the opportunity to paint us a picture of the character's actions and emotions.
      1. Example from your story: "Sunday...late afternoon most likely,"
      2. Example of a possible fix: "Sunday," he paused. A wistful smile spread across his face as he imagined his weekend getaway. "Late afternoon, most likely."

Structural Stuff

1. We need to talk about perspective for a minute. you start in 3rd person, but you're giving us cues that the perspective is locked to Jack:
   1. "Simultaneously, both girls raised their heads, lowered their sunglasses, and looked at him without saying a word, as if judging him."
      1. This only makes sense if the narrator is Jack. You're describing their reaction to him from his perspective, using only their body language.
   2. Then, without warning, your narrator is 3rd person omniscient. Like in the next paragraph or two after what I just quoted. We're seeing into the girl's thoughts and gaining information Jack could not possibly have. You spend most of the rest of the story in 3rd person omniscient, occasionally locking into one perspective or another haphazardly. It breaks my immersion immediately and forcefully.
   3. You have to pick one. Is it Jack's perspective, or is it omniscient? Flitting back and forth demolishes suspension of disbelief.
   4. If you struggle with this, I'd highly recommend starting from a default position of writing in first person. It's easier to obey the rules of your perspective from that frame, and frankly I think this story would be better in 1P anyhow.
2. You have to trust your audience to remember things more. There's things you reiterate a dozen+ times, and it is grating. Like how Jack and Kathy are virgins. Say it once in the beginning. Remind us once before the scene. Never mention it again. Describe the experience of someone who is a virgin, do not keep telling us explicitly that they are virgins. Make sense?
3. I don't think the internal monologues are doing your story any favors. You're telling us exactly what they are thinking. It is much more engaging if you lead us through understanding what they are thinking/feeling.
   1. I'll give an example, since that is pretty abstract.
      1. Here's your sentence with internal monologue: "Jack hated that nickname. 'Someday, she'll be calling me something else!' he vowed."
      2. Here's what I think is better, without internal monologue: "Jack bristled at the nickname. He grit his teeth and vowed silently that she would one day call him something manlier."
      3. See how my suggestion paints a picture of how Jack feels and reacts, rather than just saying words in his head?
4. Alright, this last one's a little awkward. I'm not trying to call you out in an unkind way, but I do think I need to call you out. There's quite a bit about the way you describe women's bodies that sets off my yikes-o-meter. In short, it's the way you describe their bodies as objects and not part of their person. I collected a fair few examples, but I will only go over the 2 most yikes-ey:
   1. "Normally he liked a little more flesh on a girl's bottom, but there was something about Richelle's curves that held his attention."
      1. This sentence is just a baffling contradiction, for one thing. But it's more than a little yikes that the most important thing to communicate upon looking at her ass was that he likes asses that are bigger than hers. It's not just objectifying, it's taking us completely out of the moment to explicitly state his hyper-specific body preferences when there is an exceptionally hot young woman whom he allegedly has a crush on directly in front of him. That does not matter to the audience, and it is going to be really offputting to a lot of people, myself included.
   2. "and stared at his first vagina"
      1. Yeesh. Part of this goes back to my point in #2. This is like the 15th way you're reminding us that he's a virgin. That's 13 too many. I already know, before this line occurs, that he is looking at his first vagina. How does he feel about seeing her vagina? Why is he so preoccupoied with seeing a vagina? See the difference?

I know that was a lot. It takes a lot of courage to put yourself out there, and I respect that as somebody that's done the same. All of that comes from a place of wanting to help you improve, not nitpick you or be unkind. If you have questions, I'm happy to answer them.

I wish you luck and hope you keep going!

 

[dirk2024]

Alright, I read nearly all of it, the only bit I skimmed was the last sex scene and I don't want to beat a dead horse (you'll see later).


I wish you luck and hope you keep going!

Thank you filthy, I appreciate the specific comments. After I reread them and try applying them to the other stories I am working on, I may come back to you.

Dirk