Sci Fi & Fantasy / the still room

Loose his footing should be lose.

I would say you have an interesting piece and this small beginning has my attention and curiousity as to what this guy is looking for. My problem here is that I feel the man should be introduced in this chapter. Like name him in the beginning. Also, even though I am interested in what he is looking for I can’t really get into this because it feels like just a narrative. This guy is, what on a deserted planet? Earth before it’s demise? Whatever it is you haven’t written any emotion like how he feels as he mounts the wreckage and looks out at the world beyond him. Is he in awe? Disgusted with what has happened? A little bit scared? what is he thinking as he is looking for this object? More indepth feelings help a reader get “into” the story. Good luck!

Good start, although the search and finding of the unit seems, on the whole, irrelevant. Yeah, he found the unit. So what? It needs to have some relevance. We need, at least, a vague idea of why he is searching for it. Say something like: He shakes his head, never imagining that the future of humanity could come in such a small package. Or, something like that (doesn’t have to be so melodramatic) but it gives meaning to the search, and sets the impetus for the rest of the story.

Very simplistic sentence structure. It reads kinda like a camp-fire story. Mix it up a bit.

Heavy on exposition. It is better to flesh out details in the story rather than to explain them.

Examples:

He is breathing heavily after the exertion of the climb.

and

The rubber lining of his radiation suit is sticking to him.

Both are explanations of what happened. Describe it visually/audibly/emotionally. Also, both sentences contain the verb “is” which is a linking verb. Makes for a weak narrative. Action verbs are almost always preferred to linking verbs. Suggestions:

“Just need to…catch my breath, Ralph,”

That works the action of his heavy breathing into the dialogue. The content of the dialogue along with the pause in the text convey his heavy breathing without even having to say it.

He tugs at the armpit of his radiation suit, trying to unstick the rubber lining from his sweaty skin.

That gives the reader a visual. They can see him struggle with his suit, feel the sticky feeling, etc.

The first section break appears to be unneccessary. There’s no real change in the story there.

there are a few thin shafts of light piercing gaps in the wreckage above—Be careful with passive voice constructions like this. Statements like “There are…” separate the reader from the action. It makes it feel like someone else is describing the scene to them. Write it as though the reader is the one seeing it for the first time. Makes it more compelling: a few thin shafts of light pierce gaps in the wreckage above

Finally, and this is purely my own opinion, but I don’t favor using the third-person with the present tense. It could just be my own mental issues, but I think third-person works best with past tense. It could just be that I am used to it. To each his own.

• add/view comments (2)

August 28, 2008

by trismugistus

personal info reviewer stats

No. of Reviews	Overall Quality	Comment Followup
178	91.3% (69 votes)	33.7%

Age	Gender	Location	Last Login
32	M	United Kingdom	November 20

“Very simplistic sentence structure. It reads kinda like a camp-fire story. Mix it up a bit.”
I don’t really understand what you mean here.

August 28, 2008

by napalmwriter

personal info reviewer stats

No. of Reviews	Overall Quality	Comment Followup
43	77.8% (36 votes)	19.3%

Age	Gender	Location	Last Login
38	M	Annville, PA	December 02

What I mean is that the structure is simple. Each sentence reads a lot like the one before it. Like, the professor did this. Then he did that. And, he did the other thing. It’s like each sentence was written down as you thought of them, and they were left, as is. Ex:

Professor Steadman un-clips a terminal from his thick belt.  The terminal is about six inches long with a glass display panel and six over-sized buttons.  He presses one of the buttons and after a brief pause a bright green welcome messages flashes up on the display.

You have a sentence to say he unclips it. And, then, you have a sentence to describe it. And, then you have a sentence to say what he does with it. It seems choppy and disjointed. The description and the action could be incorporated together for a more-efficient, smoother read. Ex:

From his thick belt, Professor Steadman unclips the terminal, pressing one of its six oversized buttons. A bright green welcome message flashes up on the glass display pannel.

That is 28 words in two sentences versus 46 words in three sentences. They both convey the very same information, but the second one is a more concise, smoother read. And, it’s more active not only because there are fewer words to read, but also because there isn’t that speed-bump sentence in between to describe the terminal.

You must login to the site or create an account in order to post a comment.

I love this. How at first we wonder where we are: or a different planet or underground. Then once we find out we are on a radioactive air force base post-bomb, there is the wonder about what the Professor is trying to pull out of the ground (which we never find out). I love that.

It definitely made me want to read on, and it was easy to follow. The only thing that caught me up sometimes was the repetitive use of words like “drone”. But somehow it fit with the piece. Good work.

It was a bit confusing at first.  Specifically when I was trying to figure out what the terminal was.  But, once you began the meat of the story it became clearer.  The story was discriptive and I was certainly interested in what it was they were searching for and why?  I would be interested in reading more…

The prose is plenty clear, though you could combine sentences in places to vary sentence length, which would help with pacing.

At the end, I’m wondering what it was they uncovered, where they are, who these people are, what time period this is, why Prof. would let himself die when it didn’t seem at all necessary, and why the drone didn’t take the professor. I think you want me to have the first 3, maybe first 4, questions. Not sure you want me to have the others.

I think it’s clear in your mind that the professor’s death is earned and necessary, and you’re trying to make the watermelon thing more important than his life. But it’s not. Obviously they’re looking for it, but it doesn’t seem like it’s necessary for the professor to die over it. I suggest you either put him in calamity (his foot gets stuck or something) or else he has a more explicit conversation about its importance with Ralph. The conversation can be elliptical so as to retain the mystery.

I’d keep reading. Good stuff. Thanks.

Good story, but so-so delivery. The story is not as strong as it could be. I am left wondering not only what he found, but what his name is. It’s clear, but I would need more to want to continue reading.

It is not very compelling. Spend more time describing the scene and the actions and less explaining the character’s motivations. Show, don’t tell.

I applaud the attempt at brevity in the first sentence, but it’s vague. What does the figure look like? What kind of wreckage?

You don’t have to describe every motion he makes in detail, unless it is relevant. Ex: Do we need to know that he has to turn his entire upper body to see clearly? Or could you say something like “he struggled against his bulky suit to turn”?

Lots of exposition. Ex: “The air is choked with radioactive dust.” Consider something that shows rather than tells. Like, “The geiger counter in his suit clicked in his ear like a rabid cricket.” It gives the reader a sound to experience, rather than just being told there was radioactive dust. Again, show, don’t tell.

Sentence structure is repetitive. Try some compound sentences to break up the tone.

“These signals do not interest the man.” This is passive voice, and exposition to boot. Sentences like this are weak. Try having the character do something to express his disinterest. Maybe something simple as having him tell the terminal to “Shut up.” Active is better than passive in most cases.

“this way and that” is cliche. Consider revising.

“He ignores his comrade’s communications, pleading for his return.” Since this scene is mostly just the man (whoever he is), this would be a good opportunity for some dialogue. Have his companion say something over the communicator, etc. Show how he ignores it, etc. Break up the exposition.

A good start, but it needs polishing.

If this is your prologue, I can’t wait to read the entire story. From the beginning, you have hooked the reader into the story with a sense of intrigue and curiosity. Excellent use of descriptors for the surroundings and the character actions. The content was sparse yet held enough tension and suspense to keep the reader involved as the action unfolded. Great job.

I think the beginning could be even swifter, eliminating some redundancies like, “reinforcing them, holding them up”—take out the first phrase.

I like that the main character is old & stubborn, taking chances.  This is a grabber.  

About the lethal gray dust—perhaps that’s said too many times.

Too many very short paragraphs.  Consider consolidating some and varying the paragraph (and sentence) length.

The technical descriptions of gadgets could be shorter, or perhaps more vivid.  Here’s one:  ”It is a compact model—small, but powerful.”  how about “It’s the size of a washing machine, dull-gray, with a whine of engine he can hear through his suit.”  What I mean is, give us visual & other sensory detail.

Some parts are vivid, like “He is surprised by the sound of his own voice—it is distorted, metallic through the speakers.  He wonders if the drone will have trouble recognising him, “

Sad ending.  I don’t think we need the last two sentences—it’s clear he’s going out.

Sounds like a good prolog, but of course we haven’t met the main characters so I don’t know how the whole will go.

I am not a science fiction buff, but i enjoyed this piece because it is so well written. I was almost going to ask how the man lifted the steel but then i realized it was done by robotics. The piece has a good “science fiction” feel to it. It has mechanics, Drones, and radiation—all the things that humans are afraid of. Your descriptions were very well done. The writing was clean and error free. You also left your readers with a cliffhanger; the professor drowns in his own fluid. Good work! i would read more to see what happens next. Sandi

This idea is great.  I really like the way you keep the reader in suspense while the character moves through to his goal.  You even keep that goal in suspense.
The events were clearly set in place.  There were no questions on where the guy was in relation to the setting, etc.
I found myself wanting to know more.  Questions like “What was that object?  Who was that man?  What happened that there was so much radioactive material around?”  
Another question is, “What significance does this object have for the storyline?

The last was hinted at but the reason the plant went up is more the detail that was needed in my mind.

Overall I really liked this and would love to read more of it.