Holmishire — Roleplayer Guild

Well, I'm done.

Many of my reviews are harsh. I'm a picky guy, and it takes a lot to impress me. In some sense, that's a good thing—it helps me show you how I think you can approve. However, it can also be discouraging. Try not to be discouraged if I diss your entry. (Ratings are based off personal preference, and somewhat inconsistent.)

And remember, a bad entry does not mean a bad writer. I have seen some madly varying levels of quality from the same authors—myself included.



As a general note, I am not as experienced in reviewing poetry, especially free verse. Take that as you will.

In addition, I am judging only the writing and content of each entry. If I listen to the song provided, I do so only after my verdict has been concluded.

C
First, I'll note the necessary: typoes. They detract from the professionalism of the piece. Most were just homophone errors, and as such, had little negative effect.

There is little in the way of clear structure—however, while reading it, I could sense a rhythmic foundation that was well preserved. Some half-rhymes you provided were effective, such as "sometimes/eyes" and "face/wait", but in general the song was free verse.

The main issue I have with this poem is that its lyrics seem to me to be of a significantly generic nature. There is little—if any—figurative language to add a deeper meaning, and the concepts and content are common to a great many songs with little personalization.

As such, the song reads well, but is of a very simple nature.
C
I enjoyed how flashbacks were melded into the narrative so as to flow alongside the present. It is an effective way of evoking the nostalgia of the situation.

However, I found the description was all too often direct. The phrase "show, not tell" comes to mind. In many situations, a short description of something happening instead of that something happens would have greatly amplified the mood. A simple example from the start of the entry is the "creaky rocking chair". Seeing as she had just sat herself down in it, this seems to me to be an ideal time to point out its creakiness by actually describing it creak.

Other than that, the plot was straightforward and predictable, which isn't a bad thing in and of itself. I also found that Alfie and the protagonist were both only shallowly developed, in part due to the telling nature of the flashbacks. We barely knew a thing about Alfie other than that he was a charming, soft man who went to war—and seeing as this entry was written in first person, it feels as if she herself didn't know much more about him.
D
This is a scene, not a story, and a very short one at that. Because of this, there is very little with which I can work to judge quality.

There is almost no conflict in this entry. Sure, the protagonist fears this may spell the end of his relationship, but there are no reasons given to us readers to believe that possibility. Nothing is known of the boyfriend, no signs given that their relationship is anything but stable.

Without this conflict, I was unable to invest myself in either the characters or the plot. The entry also had very little description, and the dialogue which formed its core was neither witty nor thought-provoking.

Essentially, this entry was far too basic for my tastes.
D
There is a feeling of deeper meaning given here, what with recursive bad thing and its victims, but unfortunately I find the poem itself lacking.

Free verse or no, poetry is founded upon figurative language and hidden meanings—and yet for the life of me I see none of significance. Simply words thrown together to embrace an idea and a tone, which can be nice, but is lacking in the depth that makes it truly successful.

There are some hints that lead me to believe this sort of depth could have taken root. "See past the leaves, | See past the trees," is reminiscient of the phrase "can't see the forest for the trees" but wasn't really taken anywhere from there. Similarly, "As one they live separately. | Separately they live alone." comes very close to forming a antimetabole (or whatever that thing is called).
C+
A powerful scene that jumped to the finish line a bit too quickly. The dashes of figuartive language were nice, and the frequent flashbacks—though typical of the druggie's last moment type story—helped build the mood.

I had to primary issues with this entry. First, there was a lot of inconsistency in the perspective of the narrator, switching between limited omniscient—who knows only what Eric could know—and omniscient—who, for example, knew about the funeral invitation. There are a lot of ways to fix this, either by sticking to one or creating a regularized framework for each. The reason they clash is that it mostly points toward the limited form, with such staples as the in-text narrative questions, but then some of the information given can only be unlimited.

My second issue is the speed at which we transitioned between the injection and his funeral. Whereas before a number of paragraphs drew out his pre-injection experience, the post-injection was given by one frantic paragraph of his death, followed by his funeral. The sudden switch from introspection is rough.
C
It feels almost poetic, with the repetition of various lines and the consistent structure. (In narrative form, this is more commonly reminiscent of folk tales; however, the nature of the story and it's rapidity of plot convinced me that it was closer to a poem in intent.)

It is very short, which is harder to get away with in a narrative text. The plot moves rapidly, even whimsically, which actually amplifies the tone of the piece, so.

The dialogue, acting as the focus both content-wise and stylistically, is sometimes ungrammatical—"If you have me a chance"—and sometimes just really awkward—"Yeah!" (…) "Yeah!"
D
Well, free verse again.

You were so, so close to getting a single half-rhyme in that first stanza: "trust" and "such". I just love rhymes and that stuck out to me, not so much a criticism.

The stutter-like repetition used in the entry can be very effective. However, because it is seemingly randomly dispersed between and even within verses, it loses much of it rhythmic effect. Where a berse ends is important. if, for example, the third stanza's opening verse had ended at "knew, knew", the parallel with the following verse's "two, two" would have been far more impactful, regardless of the coincidental half-rhyme it creates.

Finally, the song is very anticlimactic. This piece is critical hy nature, dissing homophobia. And yet, it boils down to "you disgust me because I disagree with you". Almost no attempt is given to explain why there is a problem with that belief. The narrator gets more and more pumped up, and then right when the climzx feels nigh, the last stanza cuts it short with a seemingly calm and collected response.
B-
I really liked the intro. The narrative voice was evocative of a child, a task that is more difficult than one would think. In addition, bits like "so to speak" nicely meld this child's narration with the limited omniscient writer.

That dropped away once the father started talking, largely due to the switch of focus from description to dialogue. Like many super-short stories, it felt out of place. The father's advice was the sort used to push along character development in the young girl, but we had hardly any time at all for her initial state to coalesce. Character development is only effective when the starting state has already been established.

Your strength lies in setting the tone. The story that comes after needs some tweaking.
C-
Aw yeh, rhyming scheme! Unfortunately, I can't use this as too much of a bias in your favour.

A short and simple poem, the rhyming scheme is, as I said, nice to have, but there isn't really much else. The rythm isn't well defined, with only the "-ask" and "-eye" verses carrying matching syllabic lengths. There is also a distinct lack of figurative language. It takes some serious skill to get anything really deep in such few words.
B-
The flashbacks were something of a mixed bag here. A tried and true tool is the italicized flashback for exposition, but there are good and bad ways to go about it. The standard, effective way of using it is for action-packed, emotional, and descriptive scenes—these were used to great effect in the entry. On occasion, however, the flashbacks devolved into basic exposition, a relating of events not in a current-in-the-past way, but firmly in the past way. At that point, making it a flashback is unnecessary and detracts from the good ones.

The climax was jumped to a bit quickly, but overall the story flowed nicely, and the ending was poignant.
B-
The internal monologues are nice. They give a good balance to the other descriptive portions, though the parts where he talks to himself outside the monologues forms an unnecessary overlap.

However, the plot falls a bit flat. The depression is great and all, but it seems to me that forms the introduction, the status quo. The plot is his encounter with the woman. And for someone who forms the rising action, climax, and conclusion, she doesn't offer much. If she had just been an enabler, pushing him in that moment to his own self discovery, ideally with another internal monologue, that'd be fine. But as it is, she could use a bit more filling out for such a pivotal character.
C+
Suffers from an excess of ellipses. I like the plot, the time-parallels, and some of the description, but the dialogue fell short. The intent was clear, didn't feel polished her thoughtfully constructed—just a barrage of sudden emotion which, while perhaps accurate, isn't the most powerful narratively.
C
The two brothers are pretty angsty, and I'm having difficulty connecting with the plot. Two brothers achieving immense power and then fighting over its use is admirable, but their personalities make it into more of a petty squabble with extreme consequences. The supporting cast also feels odd—there should be a lot more fleeing and a lot less dakka after a certain point.

Things jump around a lot, te conflict is flat and seemingly without hope of resolve, and Zack's reaction to his first war seems to turn him into a flat, static character, because his initial state was hardly developed.

The core plot is cool, but it feels too angsty for my tastes.
C-
I'm not entirely certain I grasp what the poem is about. As far as I can tell, the narrator was in an abusive relationship, vowed to never do the same as was done to them, and then became an abuser anyways.

There's some subtle meaning in the verses, which is nice. The rhymes are kinda flippy-floppy, but they do add to the piece. I feel the doubling formed by the repetition of the first verse could have been amplified if the last two verses of the second stanza were merged. Structure is important, but free verse also has its uses, I guess.

My favourite verses are "This side-walk was never meant for two" (with its rhyme considered) and "Five-dollar feuds | Black-blue hues". They roll off the tongue well.
C
The contrastive theme is very strong here, and I like it.

Two minor grievances—some verses that started without a capital letter I'm pretty sure were meant to be direct continuations of the verse before them. That's fine, but it would've been less jarring if they were indented. The other thing is that many hyphens were skipped that confused me as I was reading: track-marks, mud- and blood-stained caps. Tey just help the reader follow what you're trying to say.

Now, for more important stuff. Some verses were very creative—"Track-marks the coat of arms that coat our arms"—so points for that. What that verse has in addition to wordplay is its conciseness, its subtlety.  I find too often the double meaning boils down to "this is the royal thing, which I'll now explain is actually this thing". Specific example of what I fond detracts from the power of the comparison: "We ride our noble steed in the form of a shopping cart with a broken wheel". This is similar to the difference between a simile and a metaphor—metaphors are typically more powerful, because we don't need to be told there's a comparison being made.
C+
Typoes. jussayin'

The tone in the beginning was nice, but felt somewhat inconsistent, jumping between "life sucks" and "isn't life awesome (but srsly it sucks)" if that makes sense. They're two sides of the same coin in a eay, so I can see how they might be part of the same person.

I liked the first half more, though it was a bit languid—probably the point. The second half was downright confusing. Sure, I understood it, but it just seemed so weird compared to the previous part.

I also personally am not a fan of internal existential reformation monologues, so that's a bias I have.

The eru last bit was nice, though. Very subtle approach to suicide, and with a touching end-phrase.
C
Good use of repetition, and I like the transition between fear to hope to final loss.

Other than that, I don't really know what to say. Nothing super good or bad really stands out to me.
C
The foundation of this entry was exposition. Describing that events happened, and what caused them to happen, but not describing the events themselves in narrative form. It is one thing to say "they suffered" and another entirely to describe them suffering.

This might be an effective intro, but it doesn't hold for the meat of a story. I'm more interested in finding out what comes after–in a sense, much like Fein himself.

In addition to this, the plot was basic, the main character overpowered, and through his self-declared heartlessness, unrelatable as well.
C+
So was this a dead kid and/or angel trying to make his friend feel better for accidentally getting him killed by making him happy? That's what I got out of it.

A simple yet touching entry with dashes of good metaphors and such in there. Not the most engaging entry, but it uses its sift-spoken nature to its advantage.
C+
The description was well-handled, forming  a nice start to the story. Really, I liked the writing in general for the opening part, with the vivid verbs and the figurative language and such.

However, I found the plot and character interaction poor by comparison. The protagonist gave no indication whatsoever of recognizing Mel, despite him being a long-lost lover who vouched for her. The husband is even odder, galloping off with no knowledge of where to go and seeing the smoke by chance—and once he gets there, he's just a bumbling idiot. But instead of trying to take her back, he tries to discuss the matter with her, which doesn't really fit with the context. The characters just move too quickly, seemingly without thought.
C+
Contains a nice sprinkling if figurative language—similes, personifications, metaphors. However, some of it seems rather nonsense-ical. What does "faster than probability" mean?

I feel the Greek celestial-body theme could have been extended to the Sun for consistency's sake, but that is but a minor grievance. There is some powerful imagery in here, I congratulate you.
B
Ah, this brings back memories.

A cute story, and well-written to boot. As far as I'm concerned, the only downfalls of this entry are a direct result of its meagre length.

There is little room for rising action, so the climax came about rather quick. The dénouement was also sped through, barely giving the reader any time to acknowledge the woman's transformation. Finally, the woman wasn't introduced well—leaving me confused at the start of the story as to whether the old woman was the mother, pretty much up until you said "the group of four".

But really, I liked it.
C
I'm not too fond of the conversation format. This is another case of an exposition-based entry, though admittedly it does feature the climax/punchline in the present setting.

If the characters had been granted more personality, spawning quips and emotion as they spoke, the dialogue format could have been very effective.

I also have some fine-tuning comments. The line "Marcus simply nodded in response to Ted's comment" came after Marcus had done a number of actions and spoken to the waitress. At that point, Ted's comment would have faded out of focus, leaving this nodding feeling very much out of place—a time issue. Of Marcus had nodded as looked over at the waitress and before he spoke, this particular action might've flowed much better.

The second thing is the line "Marcus sighed for the millionth time". Though this is likely just revealing an aspect of Marcus's character, because Marcus had not sighed once yet in the entry, it becomes a show-not-tell problem. Just feels out of place.
D
A lot of typoes.

The end-at-the-beginning trick is used half as a hook, half to jump-start tension, half to allow for big reveals/twists. While it did provide a hook, the simulation aspect removed most of the tension and it actually worked towards removing the potential twist it would have lead to had it been left uniquely at the end.

Other than that, the dialogue was a little disjointed, they didn't have much to discuss, and the entry was far too short for any kind of impactful plot.
C
You took the time to actually spread out the plotline despite this being a short story, which was nice. I also wasn't expecting that twist, though it is a relatively common one. It's great when an entry isn't afraid to conclude on a rough note.

That being said, there was a lot of repetition and redundancy in the writing. For example, the word "smirk" was used quite a few times in close proximity and "speechless" and "silent" in the same reference add little to one another.
B
Very touching entry with lots of good description and writing. The passion of the protagonist was splendidly evoked through his environment.

Indeed, the worst part of the entry that put me off was the first paragraph. Within it, "beach" was repeated three times, and the phrase "from the sea" twice. It was a tough read, as if too much imagery was trying to be forced into a small space.

Other than that, many cases where a semi-colon would have been used instead had a comma. Grammar doesn't usually bug me, just thought I'd note.
B-
I noticed that many of the lyrics were effectively used word for word in the entry, and not in such a way as to make it obvious. Admittedly, I only noticed this because I recognized the song and perused the lyrics you provided after I was done reading—if there are others who have done the same, I'm sorry for only singling out you.

That being said, the majority of your work was original, so it won't really factor into my overall judgement.

The writing was alright, and many of te scenes were very touching. However, they were very snapshot-y, and the sudden scene-changes broke the flow of my reading. The italicized lyrics used at the end of each section did help to tie them together, though, so there's that.
A+
Hate to say it mate, but you have to make mistakes to get constructive criticism.

You did a lot of things right that most do wrong. The cast was diverse and well-developed, with only Alexander feeling rushed in, and you addressed that. The plethora of unfamiliar place-names was confusing at the start, but each ecame clear by the end of the story.

There may be some minor issues hidden in there—I found it weird, for example, that Veit would get a prosthetic leg when he was literally told he was lucky it didn't hit the part of him that would make him losr a limb. However, there was just too much good in there for me to really spend time looking for something bad.

Sure, I'll reread it this weekend if I can, see if I can give some more useful feedback, but I figure at best it'll be nitpicking and more likely just nothing.


Why I would not vote for this entry:
1. Generic lyrics.
2. Too much direct description.
3. Little substance.
4. Mono-layered poetry.
5. Perspective inconsistencies.
6. Awkward dialogue and plot-run.
7. Ranty without poise.
8. Jumping the goat on chardevelopment.
9. Too short.
10. Hammer-screw flashbacks.
11. Flat plot.
12. Dialogue.
13. Angsty, erratic.
14. Short, lacking structure.
15. Comparison directly presented.
16. Weird internal monologue.
17. Plain.
18. Exposition-based.
19. Little conflict.
20. Shallow characters.
21. Hazy interpretability.
22. Speedy delivery.
23. Exposition-based.
24. Fractured.
25. Awkward writing.
26. Too much imagery?
27. Sharp scene-changes.
28. Adaptive nature.

Why I would vote for this entry:
1. Lyrics flow even when read.
2. Flashback flipping.
3. Decent hook.
4. Recursive central theme.
5. Strong flashbacks.
6. Poetic narrative.
7. Build-up in vehemence.
8. Strong narrative voice in intro.
9. Rhymes?
10. Nice flow, poignant climax.
11. Internal monologues.
12. Meaningful plot.
13. Cool plot.
14. Couple powerful verses.
15. Interesting duality.
16. Subtle ending.
17. Interconnectedness via repetition.
18. Decent writing.
19. Touching.
20. Good writing.
21. Strong imagery.
22. Well-written.
23. Some cast dynamics.
24. Interesting setting.
25. Sound plot distribution.
26. Powerful atmosphere.
27. Relatable, touching scenes.
28. Well-developed cast.

In the end, my vote goes to the Never Forget, with At the English Fair and Clear Tour Head and Open Your Heart as runner-ups.

Still need to read some of the reviews. Namely, those by mdk, Blitz, Aeonumbra, and Dark Wind. Just because.
Holmishire Member

Ghost with no home.

Status

Bio

Most Recent Posts
