/lit/ - Literature

yeah it's still bad

like I know it's difficult to tell whether your own work is bad or not, but yours is bad

maybe wait a few weeks and read it over again and redraft before asking for criticism because the things wrong with it are so elementary that if you don't see them then it's a waste of tjme

also we have a criticism thread idk why you think your terrible text deserves it's own thread

Hey, OP, just read what you posted. Not gonna lie, I was impressed with your style. I little bit overly poetic at times, but overall good variety, made me want to read more. TIPS:
>>write. for the love of god, keep writing
>>don't get too preachy about innocence and childhood emotions
>>don't fall into romantic forest discription cliches
Other than falling into cliches and getting preachy, you should be well-off. Best of luck to you!!

>>5696553
Thank you for the wonderful criticism!

>>5696555
Thanks a lot, nice to see something positive, been shit on the past few days.

I wont ramble on about childhood emotions, the story gets uninnocent fast. Anyway, that scene was just a flashback I use to introduce the world.

also, I kind of want to be just a little cliche. I'd be going through a wide variety of landscapes, so while I'm in the "forest section" I want to exploit the living shit out of it.

>>5696563
Nothing wrong with being 'a little cliche,' as long as you throw something unexpected in there just before the reader recognizes it.

Sounds like you got at least half a plan. Where do you want to go after the flash-back?

>>5696573

I've already written the next 8k words. I've got a rough idea for the rest of the story, just working on specific plot points.

You might have seen my stuff in the critique threads, I usually said something along the lines of "This is a story I'm writing for a girl whos into this kind of shit"

It's still there in the current one, but, it's shit. so, I wouldn't look at it.

>>5696563

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic but it's good advice

writers go through several drafts over a long period before they're satisfied

the fact your first draft was a few days ago and that you probably wrote and "polished" this over a day or two really shows cuz the prose is terrible and just flat out wrong sometimes

>>5696581
Can you give examples? There are a few times I deliberately do incomplete sentences and be minimalistic, but other than that I'm not a good enough writer to find the problems, I'm shit at editing and judging my own work.

This is also the third draft, I know not to expect perfection right away, I've been constantly editing it over a week.

There's a reason I'm asking for critique.

>>5696573
Thanks I just became CEO.

>>5696600
Why anyone would go to 4chan at work is beyond me, even if it's a SFW board.

>>5696581
Not OP but it's not good advice. It's shit advice.
>the fact your first draft was a few days ago and that you probably wrote and "polished" this over a day or two really shows cuz the prose is terrible and just flat out wrong sometimes

His prose is terrible and wrong because it took him a relatively short amount of time to polish it? Where did you pull that logic from?
Your first comment is shit because you say the same stupid, arbitrary shit as you did in your second comment.

Yes, I am critiquing your shitty critique

I want to read more, so well done.

It seems to fly into the poetic, yes. It has a mild, dream like quality.

There are only two things I stumbled over a bit. Be aware, be extremely careful with the following feedback. Be prepared to let it pass and leave your work unaltered, for it is feedback not critique. More of an impression that is.

>singing a resonating ballad
I dislike the metaphor here, it's a mixed one - sound and light. I had to stop and think here. Changing this could destroy the effect you're aiming for here though.

>rattled
I might say chattered. Unless you really mean he's doing something other than chittering away.

>>5696639

Oh yeah, I've gotten plenty of criticism and feedback that I don't entirely agree with. But sometimes finding a compromise between the two views actually works the best.

>It's a mixed one - sound and light.
I actually meant a literal sound, but yeah it does look a little unclear. Supposed to be like a humming or something. I'll see if I can reword it better.

>rattled
I meant a shake, like shaking to fix his fur that was messed, but there's no other word than "shook" that I can use, and I already used it. My vocab is horrendous.

I think I'll change the first 'shook' to shudder, and rattled to shook.

>>5696624

Dunno about the rest of you, but I work from home and the work computer goes through a VPN, decentralized office in other words. This frees me up to do whatever the fuck on my private computer which is right next to it. No one can look over my shoulder, no logging and so on... it's not like I fap 5 times during work hours when it's slow or anything. Hell, I haven't worn pants to "work" in 2 years.

Also, the 2 minute commute from my bed to work is a nice perk.

>>5696547

I wouldn't say it's "shit", I want to read more so it at least captures my attention and interest. Sure, it's a bit purple at times.

> Each leaf was painted with every pigment of creation; a spectrum of color stained in the canopy. Rays of light pierced their branches, reflecting in a sparkling stream of spring water.

This, for instance, is a bit "muh poetics" and doesn't really add much either. Something like "The sunlight shone through the canopy, bathing the grove in a vibrant spectrum of color." would do just as well.

Still, well done, it's interesting and I'd like to see more. I especially liked the dialogue.

OP here

>>5697414
Ah same here. If you're great at multi-tasking working at home is the most amazing thing.

>>5697428
Thanks for the critique.

I actually was trying to hint that the leaves were rainbow-colored without using the word rainbow because I'm not a faggot.. right? ...right? Why is OP always a faggot, dammit...

Well, I'll see if I can reword that part a little better.

I usually find my dialogue is really bad, I just cant write memorable lines with consistency, so it looks like 90% of my dialogue is boring shit and then I've got a random line in there that's glorious.

>>5696547
>I rolled to my back, palms behind to cradle.
palms behind your head to cradle? palms behind to cradle your head? What are your palms cradling? Very nice, tone it down a bit in the beginning, no need to rush the reader into something so intense.
I really really liked it!!! Write more, anon, please

>>5696555

>Don't fall into romantic forest description cliches

This is important. Cmon, butterflies flying, sunlight falling down in rays, little birds singing... what is this, a disney movie?

>>5697508

Not OP; but if the setting he's trying to convey IS a type of fairyland-style forest, then these elements serves the story well.

It's ahrd to really comment on howyou describe the space if you have a particular goal in mind and we don't have an outline of the evolution you're going for. Still, there are more interesting ways of creating ambient and you should never try for or be happy with cliches, or openly corny stuff if you want a different tone over all. You have to understand that even if you have a reason to do things the reader can't and won't assume you do. If you have a more mature, analytical, dark or whatever tone later on you shouldn't leave the reader with the impression that you don't, try to find a middle ground between a Disney script and whatever you're gonna go for.
In Storms of Steel Junger dedicates time to talk about the flowers and taking naps under trees in the country and how sunset makes his favorite tone of red, but at no point you get the impression that it stops being a war novel.

>>5697487
I don't like sounding repetitive, I try to keep everything varied, i did mean cradling his head, but I didn't want to the word 'head' twice in back to back sentences

I should tone it down. my previous draft was lackluster so I may have overcompensated.

It's only intense like that when I'm setting scenes.

>>5697508
I hinted that coyotes slaughter squirrels come on man. That ain't disney yo.

that's about as cliche as It's gets though. Maybe it is a little overbearing.

>>5697534
Thanks, yeah I'm a little worried about the cliches. I tried to write them as grounded as I could, while still making it seem like a beautiful scene. I refused to use the really overused words like enchanted, magical, beautiful, ect. Those personally leave a sour taste in my mouth and feel like a shortcut.

This scene doesn't completely hint at the more negative themes, I did do a slight hinting at the whole darkest memories line.

I guess I won't know if it the overarching plot and it's writing style works until I've got a decent amount of it though.

>>5697563
(third anon here)
I think part of the problem is abusing adjectives, and going for "classical" ones
>vaulting over tremendous roots
>in an untamed grove overgrown with ancient trees
>fluttered through the vibrant foliage
It takes a lot of talent to exploit such an over the top style without sounding forced, even more in a time when it isn't the standard, and you're forcing it way too much. I feel it would grow a lot if you put the "quality" of the words you use on the passenger seat and focus more on doing a strong description.

>>5697595
Yeah, I was concerned about the wordsoup, specifically in the beginning. I'm not good enough to write poetic and vivid description, it only sounds like it is because I threw poetic words at it.

This draft, the very descriptive parts were a ~80% rewrite, so In my next editing cycle I'll see if I can address all the issues.

The only thing I don't think is in my power is the classical adjectives.
>tremendous
I have two options, remove it/rewrite, or change it out.

If it were a different setting I would use words like colossal, massive, immense, but in this very fantasy like setting I felt tremendous fit the role much better.

If anyone can recommended a modern work where the author does use classical and seldom used vocab, that'd probably help me improve and fix my issues with it.

>>5697515

That's no excuse. You can be "fairytaily" without being bland and generic in your descriptions.

>>5697648
>If it were a different setting I would use words like colossal, massive, immense, but in this very fantasy like setting I felt tremendous fit the role much better.
It's not a matter of the particular word, even though it matters, it's how you describe. You don't really need adjectives to describe, they don't even serve any purpose in most of your sentences, use them more sparingly.

>>5696547
With respect, your writing will benefit from understanding that 'it's' is a contraction of 'it is.' Please read your OP with this in mind.

>>5697703
Honestly I have a tendency to do it's as possessive on accident, if there's a typo somewhere that's just muscle memory.

I also do there and their for they're sometimes as well. Just bad habits, I know better though.