Robinski

Sorry I'm late, but here we go. The title: I see the word 'caper' and I get kind of onerous. It's like 'cooky' and 'quirky'. If you have to tell me that, them I'm worried (a) that it doesn't come across in the story, or (b) that they story's main raison d'être is to be cooky and quirky, rather than necessarily to be exciting/entertaining. Setting that prejudgement aside, we continue! The opening line: Ha-ha... (Courtesy of Wiki-P...) "It was a dark and stormy night" is an often-mocked and parodied phrase written by English novelist Edward Bulmer-Lytton in... his 1830 novel Paul Clifford. The phrase is considered to represent "the archetypal example of a florid, melodramatic style of fiction writing", also known as purple prose. So, I'm guessing from the title of the story that you mean this ironically. I'm still not sure that I'm buying into the cockiness of the story, and proceed with a slightly heightened sense of caution. Because I'm comfortable with the style so far, with nothing major to draw a comment, I lapse into detail (as I just love to do!! )... I don't think lightning fades. To me it cuts off near instantly. I think 'faded suddenly' is an oxymoron. (Pretty sure that's 21 Scrabble points right there ) Not sure I get the link from raincoat to veneration. Also, some of the language around the blank space on the wall and people turning is a bit clunky. First or second draft? Okay, one page in: I'm okay with things so far. The discussion about nicknames is there to introduce the characters, I presume, and it works okay, although there are typos and some language clunkiness, as noted before. I'm still with it though, no major issues. Given that the girl deduced accurate facts about his past, I'm not sure why the director loses confidence in his hiring. "Remember, the ongoing storm is the same storm as the one two hours ago" - This sentence presents the storm as two separate ones. I find the wording overcomplicated, compared to, say, "Remember, this is the same storm, two hours later." Also, little details lead to a lack of precision in the wording which stands out to me. e.g. (1) the girl can deduce detailed pieces of personal background from little information, but she can't remember the name of the artist? Implausible, to me. (2) the painting still is a lesser work of Rembrandt, that hasn't changed; so this should be present tense, imo. (3) The painting is no longer in the museums possession, so I think that should be past tense. The girl's mode of speech and her deduction implies significant intelligence, and yet there are several obvious answers to the question that she asks about motive in taking that painting. Also, how on earth does she get to the deduction that the 'suspect' (sic) is still there. What is meant, I presume, is that the thief is still there, since the people still there are automatically suspect because they are there, and have knowledge. But surely they are all suspects. The logic here doesn't scan for me. Howe can a guest drink espresso if the museum, presumably including the cafe, is closed? "closed fist out and opened it" - huh? "seems to right on the money", "besides for that" - numerous typos and clunky language makes it hard to read in places. "The only one rich enough to afford that to wear as cufflinks is OMW" - Shaky logic. Anyone could have been left such a thing, or have stolen in from another. Three page in now, and I'm not sure I care about what's happening. What are the stakes? Presumably, the insurance will pay for the loss of the picture. Is the director going to lose his job, his house, his reputation? There are no personal stakes, it seems to me. "You see, it’s only when we’ve eliminate everything else when the truly improbable could happen" - what does this mean? I can see it's a paraphrasing of Holmes, but I don't follow the logic of it. "us three" - it's 'we three'. If trying to stick with her dialogue on the basis that she thinks she's talking very properly, but because of her youth, she's making various grammar errors that don't sit with the tone. "cannot imagine what anything that causes an open fire would do at all within" - loads of extra words make some sentences really hard to read. Speaking formally doesn't mean using lots of words, just the most appropriate ones. "You are lucky this isn’t a statue gallery, or that wouldn’t have been definitive evidence" - Why? How? I'm getting a bit fed up with people making these sweeping statements that are not explained, and the meaning or logic of which are not at all obvious. "like a fox trying to trick a turkey into thinking it’s a chicken so the fox can eat it" - What?! I'm... What? Both are flightless and likely to be eaten by a fox, so, how does this make any sense? "Your point is well seen" - Well made, it's well made. I feel like this is deliberately using the wrong phrasing so that the girl can deliver the line in response, but for me that doesn't work if it means delivering a line that (to me) feels all wrong. "flagrantly ignoring the man" - which man, or is it men? Two different spellings of 'grey' in the same sentence. I know it's a typo, but I just had to mention it. Never seen that before :) "tapped her foot in the opposite pattern to that of the director" - A good, detailed grammar pass would do a lot to make the story flow better; missing and wrong words make it hard to read in various places. "Near as I can tell" "then the third man out" - just strange phrasing. This sounds like a baseball analogy, but I don't think it is. The reader, I think, will expect the phrasing 'odd one out', making this sound 'off'. "this museum require unique electronic key cards" - bit I don't see how this demonstrates who the thief is. Someone could use someone else's card (as is always happening in shows now), a card could be cloned, borrowed and replaced, etc. "Just say who it was." - Hang on, what's happening here? Where's the end of the story? My reaction to seeing that the narrative stops is to think I've been hoodwinked, and that the absolutely definitive promise to the reader of a whodunnit has not been kept. That better not be the case, or I shall be mad!! "attempted to thieve it" - 'thieve' here sounds like London Cockney. What nationality are any of these people? Y's narrative was all very well spoken then something like this drops in which is very poor grammar and I don't know what tone it's trying to evoke. [words] - I just don't think I follow this logic; I'm not convinced it makes sense, but it's almost too convoluted to try to follow. "the locks are swapped" - I don't follow. The locks are removed and changed over? That's what it sounds like. What's the stuff about the order of people? It's another layer of complication. "is the thief!" - Too confusing and complicated for me, by this point, I don't care who the thief is. We've never seen anything of any of the suspects, so we know nothing of them as people. Consequently, I don't care who did it. I want to read stories about people, but it seems to me that the people have almost nothing to do with this one, it's all about the puzzle and the process of deduction. "The art dealer knows nothing about the museum’s security" - how do we know that? If the dealer goes there a lot (which I think was implied at one point), then he could have observed the security protocols in operation, at least some of them, enough to know something about the security. "the security guard can’t see the painting from his angle on the camera" - I don't believe we were over told this. The last line doesn't really zing for me. I can't pick out a clearly identifiable 'personal' mode of though in T's conclusion to distinguishes it from Y's logic. Like the story about the card game, I don't really have any characters that I want to root for, and the piece seems all about the process, with no personal stakes involved. It doesn't matter who stole the picture, because they are just titles (patron, janitor, guard) not people. Sorry not to be more positive. I know this story would be better for a good, concentrated language and grammar pass, but that still leaves my issues with character and stakes.These things said, I like the kind of story that you are attempting now, compared to your first period in RE, and you are to be applauded for that. Well done, and keep going!! :O)

I would like to submit on Monday, 27th also, please.

Yay! Thanks you Silk.

Yeah: I always thought it implied an accent too, but probably because of cultural associations.

Some people make it easy to be awesome right back Congratulations, and jubilations.

I knew this could only be Hall & Oates before I clicked on the link. Great tune It does. I think D is likely to appear again before the end, possibly Lady P too, but not as foci. I should draw more from the part where they go through the kitchens, but there were women present when J was raging through the halls before. As to the other questions, fair ones all. I will think on it. Thanks again!

Good grief, no, please don't apologise. I was just starting to become concerned I had offended you; I'm just so keen to get this aspect as right as I can. I'm so grateful for your patience in 'newbie wrangling' where these matters are concerned. Oooh, that's good. I wonder if it's a bit hammer-to-the-head given Lord P's later revelation... I like it better than my replacement, so will put it in this version. Good shout! Oh, mm, argh, yes; I see your point. I'll try it this way. Yes. I think I started with that as a justification in the very first submission, but it wasn't right, of course. Yup, right. I wasn't intending to be silent on the issue, but this submission clearly leaves a bad taste in the mouth. Working on it... I still believe that's what Lord P thinks, but clearly he needs work to deliver the smooth villain that I'm aspiring to. Whoopee... I didn't set out to take this on when I had the idea. Ch was a redhead in the short story in this setting (now substantially superseded by this novella), but having decided to cast her as a person of colour, I feel like I have a chance to learn a lot (more) and have a real go at getting this aspect more right than I have so far. Yeah, this is not a quick fix, but I will be vigilant for it in the edit: top of the list. Much obliged for the links. Second top of the list for the edit: give 'sidekicks' their own life (or reinforce what they do when not on screen). (1) - I feel like Lady P is or could be more of a character, with some work, and I was planning to try and flesh out D a bit more. (2) Not sure that going from BlkWit to Mn-Etr helps this - not that it was intended to, that wasn't my drift. I'll need to work on this; somehow. (3) I didn't really intend that, but appreciate it's gone that way to some extent. I'll need to try and address this; somehow. The 8 Absurdities link is excellent, thank you! 1 - Lone Representation: I feel like I do have other female characters, while still accepting that Ch is treated differently, I feel like she's not a Vin; 2 - Separate fighting style: I know you're not calling this one out, but I feel like I need to guard against it. Then again, with the magic system, I feel it doesn't call out any attribute that could be in danger of being considered 'unfeminine', J is cited by Lord P as having potential to be quite strong, but he's not Ch's superior in any way simply by being a man, I think. 3 - Enigmatic Decision-making: Hmm. I would not say Ch is any more enigmatic than D in her decisions, but that doesn't address the issue, I know!! Looking at my own writing (never any easy thing to do), I feel that this is a trait I have, but that it's not exclusive to the female characters. Anywho, I need to watch out for it. Check. 4 - "Feistiness": I'm glad you didn't call me on this one. I don't think Ch is 'feisty', I'm hoping she's capable, resourceful and intimidating (needs work). 5 - Femininity Balancing: I don't think I've done this per se, although I know I've trampled all over the 'not like other girls' thing. 6 - Frequent Reminders of Attractiveness: Guilty. I need to cut down on this. 7 - Sexual Abstinence: I really think I'm good here, Ch having been married and all, but also not displaying any signs of awkwardness in this area (I think). 8 - Gendered Magic: Again, I think I'm in the clear. I am forever in your debt for your patience in going over this stuff with me. Thank you. Those links are super helpful. I think there are 2 to4 subs remaining, and I'm going to try and bring this home with the above in mind. It'll still need loads of work, of course, but I'm willing to keep doing it.

Absolutely the best thing you can do is look on Wiki under 'patois'. Much better explanation than I can give. I clicked over there just now and was reminded of the term 'pidgin', which is one that we missed. I always thought of 'pidgin' as an English thing but 'patois' comes from French; so sayeth Wiki.

I have a bio, but not (yet) a short bio tagline. How short is short?

So pleased to have your comments, ID. Thank you Yes, it's a fair question, and a problem for me in that J is not participating in the heist, or at least his part in it has been usurped somewhat by Lord P dropping his reveal about the ledger. I will need to consider what to do about that, because I don't want to let the reader down on the matter of the heist. I'm planning to play up the earlier ticking clock aspects that drive the heist when I edit, but I agree I also need a way to keep the heist on track too. Thanks for calling out! Good point. The fact that the moniker was given to her by people who would be insensitive to the issues doesn't help with the fact that it's there on the page. It was certainly low-hanging fruit when I adopted it. Yep. ...and it kind of runs to the theme as well, bones and all. On the one hand, I think it's unlikely that the type of society here would steer away from using a racist sobriquet; on the other hand I don't want to drive away any readers. I've changed it to Corpse Ship Butcher, for now, but it's really quite awkward. I'll have another go in the edit. I've tweaked this; I think it's better now. Good catch. I've changed this. I was trying to not make that link too clear when he used them at first, so that it was not too obvious that it was the tiger that caused the attack. I was aiming for it to look like him, so that the reveal had more weight. Perhaps it is not working like that however. It's wasn't so much about the physiological reaction to consuming that kind of marrow, but his lack of experience in harnessing the power/rage that results from using it. Having said this, I like the idea of a physical reaction, and will insert that. Thanks! I don't think his is: that certainly was not the intention. Ch is from a country where there are tigers, etc. which don't exist in W. Lord P is factually correct. Ch (allegedly) has the ability to use that power which (apparently) Wen adepts can't/struggle with. Putting (apparent) facts aside though, this touches on an area where I've always been uncertain. Surely I can have a racist character in my story, as long as the narrative doesn't support his view, and calls him out or rejects his position in some way? Having said that, it's not my intention for Lord P to be racist, his position is much/goals are broader than that. Lol. Well, he's trying to sell a belief to J. Does he have any evidence? Is it all smoke in the wind? Maybe, maybe not... ...since D's position is also grey, and seems to be 'working', I'm hoping that the reader will also entertain the possibility that Lord P's position could plausibly have some degree of truth in it. I'll need to continue to the end to see how this all plays out, than go back and adjust earlier scenes for key points. I will take a note with me to work on D's role, but perhaps more so Lord P's diatribe. Thanks for calling out. As always, I hope, the very last thing I want to do in the story is convey any sense that I believe such things, which I don't, in even the tiniest sense. But, can I have a nasty character that voices this thought? My first reaction to your comment, which I very much appreciate and very much want to address, is that I have made the mistake of not having J recoil from the notion. Arrrgghh. That's definitely not my intention. I've tried (and I think I have) expunged all the bad stuff from J in the first (icky) submission. I really think I've got rid of the fetishistic stuff, and I'm high alert for it in the first full edit. I cut short this submission to get it in, but the next section, which now I will probably just make the second half of this one, is J rejecting Lord P's position. If you are willing to consider the question above, can I have Lord P come out with these comments, as long as the narrative/MC/sole POV rejects them (which is my intention)? Definitely not the intention. I'll cut the whole thing if I have to. Not the intention. I think it is, from the edits I've made, which I appreciate you haven't seen. I'm not saying it's there yet, but I think it's much better in that respect. Going back to my earlier point, I guess I'm just still not sure whether there is any way to write a racist character that is'acceptable'. I can only call first draft and rush to submit. I always need to work and rework such things to make them effective. I genuinely don't know what to do. Where I want to be is as you say above, but I don't want to be there if I'm still on thin ice Thank you so much for the comments, and for persevering. Great to have you back. <R>

Thank you so much for reading, @shatteredsmooth. That's good , and yes, it probably was... There's nothing previous; it is a possibly clumsy attempt to underline J's limited worldview. Hmm, yes. I'm not saying you're wrong. I suppose that's the difficulty with J accepting, or trying to accept what P is telling him. Unreliable internal monologue? Yeah, ok. There is dialogue earlier on about J crossing the rest of the group to keep more of the swag for himself and get a bigger share. Maybe there isn't a good basis or that, and maybe I need to call out his unreliable nature more. He is a thief, after all, and therefore inherently dishonest. Still... I will try and start out on the edit with a clear set of goals (which I don't always manage to do), one of which is to show that J ultimately is a nefarious wee sh1t. This is great news. I like the word 'rot', and will include it here somewhere for sure! Thanks so much for the comments. Much appreciated

Thanks so much for reading, Mandamon. Appropriately like clockwork for a steampunk(?) author Calling WRS on this, as they did split in the last submission. She if off to do the thieving and find Pen. Yes, good call. I'm sprinkling in some internal reaction from J. Excellent comments, both. Thank you. Unclear, thanks for calling out. Their abilities are permanent, all of them (allegedly). I've called that out better. Clarified, thanks! Super comments. Thank you

I've lost this week completely, still replying to posts from the last week! (Sorry.) By way of background, I might be 'drifting' in and out for a while; my mother (92!) was diagnosed with Vascular Dementia and Alzheimer's in January and it's starting to 'bite'.

I defer to your superior knowledge, and also, I can see the point of that.

That's the spirit!

Patois (often refers to low class); cant; brogue (again, perhaps particularly suited for the Gaelic languages); dialect (perhaps more to do with the actual language rather than the accent); inflection (probably more to do with the delivery or style of speaking than the accent).

I think you're right, something snappier is probably called for. Suggestions: "Challenging the Critiquing Echo Chamber" "Here's What You Don't Want to Hear" Learning to make (accept) the improvement is a different skill, I think. Seems to me that positive discrimination is limited in it's effectiveness, and can have counterproductive results. I felt it read a bit either as i) there are no men proposed for the panel, or ii) men are proposed by default. Great work! Also, suggest...

I'm tempted to say such on to the end, then you'll know what the plot is, and you can pick up the characters on the second pass. If you've got other things being published though, maybe you don't have time for that. I think you have interesting character bones, as has been said by others. I know I can like them. I almost think you could literally go back through the story and add one or two lines on every page like "The thought of it made my blood boil." "I banged the table in frustration." "My words caught in my throat as I felt Al's pain welling up." Whatever, just a line of emotion on each page to give the reader something to hold onto. This said, I think there is a plot issue too, as I've mentioned, because the stakes are unclear, or not sufficiently memorable or reinforced regularly. E.g. R could be at death's door and a ticking clock to find him 'unofficia' medical aid; there could be a known officer of the SE pursuing them, another time factor pushing them to act, get clear and stay ahead of the pursuit until they get across the state line out of SE's area of operation. Don't give up. I want this to be better, and I want to read more

Right, in light of the context, I am NOT going to make any grammar comments, I promise Chapter 7 (part) "but that only works..." - LOL. I can't remember the cause of the argument, but it's only WRS, I'm sure. I don't remember who/what Bacon is, but that is a hilarious name for an A.I./computer. Who laid the clothes out? It sounds like the butler did it. Confused about the pockets. If the pockets have built-in holsters, it sounds like they aren't pockets, but are holsters, because how can you put anything else in them, surely the gun wouldn't fit. I like the idea of the putty. Clever and deceptively complex future tech, and no need to offer any explanation at all of how it works; I just believe. Nice! I don't think you need a section break. All you need to do is say, 'I left the ship and trudge alone in the...' This is not the first of your section breaks that I though were unnecessary. I think it's far preferable to not have them if possible, as they are quite disorienting. I think they only deserve to be there if there is a meaningful time gap (which there isn't here), or changing POV / location. I know you are changing location here, but not sufficiently significantly, imho. Not sure about 'over ambitious gravity', but I love the blanket phrase. I thought it was odd that this was the same creature fighting another further back, it sort of reduces the threat if this thing is just jumping everyone that walks by. I thinks it's way more threatening if it has just appeared, and was waiting for just the right person; maybe evening lying in wait just for Di. I like the means of defeating the creature, and the 'boy' line, but the creature's line was pretty boring. Also, I thought Di dismissed the encounter too quickly, without any consideration or the whys and wherefores, like it never even happened. I don't buy that Di can run, after hearing about being too tired to talk out loud. Also, I don't understand the last line about knives and blasters. Also, also, no character reaction. Yes, ending is better, but I think the last line is a bit wordy. For maximum punch, I think it scans better if it is a short as possible; like "Uniform will be provided" which lands the idea in a short, sharp, punch. Chapter 8 The bit about the name of the ship felt like filler to me. I want to follow the plot now that they have a plan, so I skimmed that bit. Why are they trying to catch up to the FB600? Also, to do that, surely they would need to exceed the speed limit if they have slowed down? Confused. Getting into the 'illegal' port is way too easy. I got no sense that Di was passing any test in discussion with the controller, or that there was any hidden agenda, password, hidden code or anything. To me, that conversation would just direct them to the legit part of the yard. No scanning, no sensor sweep, hard questions or vetting process. Is the patched up yellow coat significant? It's an odd line to end the section on. I've forgotten that the stakes are, this feels like a long detour just to get fuel. I feel like I need a reminder that they are supposed to be rebelling about the galactic alliance, or something? What is the goal again? Is it just to be free of capture; to find Di's father; or is there more to it? B's line about DNA matching seems unnecessarily complicated. An AI's language would, I imagine, be very clear and sparing. The bottom line is that only those three will be allowed aboard. If the noise around Di is suppressed, I wouldn't use the word 'din', or state that it's not a din anymore, gone from din to ????, as din is loud, I think. I like the idea at the end of the chapter, about not taking sup, but the expression of it is a bit simplistic, I thought, a bit mechanical. Summary There's good colour and nice detail, but I've forgotten why they're doing what they're doing, and all this just to get fuel, it doesn't feel important enough to me. I don't have enough to care about. I don't really feel any jeopardy or character investment in this part of the story. I like the diversion of the story, the pace, colourful details, but I need it to mean something, and I need always to have the end game in sight; the big picture and the stakes. I hope this is useful. Sorry it's so late. <R>

I'll rein in my righteous anger Oh my, it certainly wasn't intended as a criticism. I'll go with SC, or 'hey you' Great comments: thanks again!

Hey Shasmo, (?! - I've been struggling to find a satisfactory abbreviation of your username for weeks now, one that didn't involve the first two letters...) Thank you so much for reading. Yeah. There's quite a bit that's rough and ready. Plenty of work required in the edit. Erm, not sure I know the modern connotation. I'm using it in the traditional sense, i.e. 'loot'. Ahhhh, that wasn't the intention. J feels his way around the cellar, and his intention is to guide Ch in the darkness to the next spot. He doesn't want them to be separated. I thought it was quite clear that it was D, who is mentioned in the previous line. I'll think if there is anything I can do to make that clearer. Hmm. Okay. Hear what you say. I can accept the dialogue is a bit clumsy. I'll take another look at this... And I've changed it up a bit. I think the dialogue is less melodramatic. We'll see what the alpha reader(s) thinks. Thanks for calling that out I've changed this to "done chasing her." I'll let this ride for the moment. Either he's an a-hole (entirely plausible) or he's deluding himself (equally possible). Neither is incompatible with the story, I feel. I've tweaked the wording very slightly, in the hope I don't need to rip this up completely. I take your point. I had mentioned it once (twice? - certainly once). I hear what you say, but the label has essentially been incorrectly applied by popular opinion and misdirected scuttlebutt. Mistyped - thank you. Good point, and lack of reaction from J is a theme running through the story. I will be punching this up throughout. I've punched this bit up, since we're talking about it. Super! I'll take that at first draft stage. Thank you so much for your comments. Very much appreciated!!

I'm constantly puzzled by how little crossover there is between thus esteemed group (that's you lot), and the Writing Excuses thread. Not only that, but there is a whole other world over on Creator's Corner, and again there seems to be very little crossover between the two/three(?). I went over there and critiques the first couple of scenes of Nath's play, because he asked nicely. I think one or two others from RE were linked? Anyway, I made my comments and I had some pretty significant issues, but I was rather surprised by some of the comments on the thread by others, and came to the ultimate conclusion that maybe it's just as well... Bottom line. You guys are great

Have fun!! I filled one out two, although I'm the least qualified to be present. What the heck.

Hey there, Okay, I've read Scene II, here are my comments. I hope these comments are useful. I'm increasingly sure that this 'story' is not for me. But I hope there is something in a different perspective that you can use. I think it needs work, but first drafts always do. Good luck. <R>