[ OT ] 4yr Contest Voting - Round Two ( of two )

I vote for Greenland by /u/Barahagara. I know I appreciate feedback for these sorts of things, so here ’ s mine. Please bear in mind when reading my criticism that I like active characters and strong plotlines, so everything here should be taken with a pinch of personal opinion salt. 
 
 -- -- -- -- -- - 
 
 
 **Greenland**: so I commented on this one right at the beginning, and I reread it and here we are now! 
 
 
 
 What I liked: First of all, the first line. Bam, in your face. I loved that. I remember reading it and then going back and rewriting the beginning of my own entry because I just thought: ‘ oh dammit, this guy ’ s got it. He ’ s good. ’ Second, the descriptions of Antartica, because I actually sat there wondering if you ’ d been, and what you ’ d been doing there. Your characters are developed, flawed and fantastic. They all have their own agendas and that creates the right amount of conflict for me. The dreams of Chernofsky added tension for me and I loved that build up. 
 
 
 
 What I didn ’ t like: I don ’ t think there was enough time and space to develop each character ’ s motivation enough for the betrayal at the end to completely make sense. Mercer joining in was unprecedented for me, and Clark seemed to have a different agenda to begin with. If you had more space, I ’ d love to see that developed. I think a couple more tense days on the ice, discovering why Tania is speaking another language, why Clark would want to get involved, what Mercer ’ s stake is… I think those would all make the ending a lot stronger, if you chose to keep it as him being placed in the ice shelf. 
 
 
 
 **The King of Camp Wabanaki**: coming a close second to Greenland. 
 
 
 
 What I liked: well, boy did you get children right. The writing was technically proficient and made the story enjoyable to read. I never felt like I had to slog through it. You ’ ve got a great turn of phrase that really lets you get inside a kid ’ s head, especially with the ‘ he was trying to formulate his own Fernando. ’ Because of course he was, because that ’ s what kids do. It ’ s a great look into childhood bullying, mixed with that nastiness that some seem to have more than others. I don ’ t know if it ’ s intentional, but the parallel between Luke ’ s childish nastiness and Liam ’ s potentially much graver adult-ish abuse is a clever touch. It makes me wonder how you ’ d develop that relationship later on. 
 
 That links neatly with what I didn ’ t like: Jesse, this isn ’ t a story, this is a fantastic opening 4k to some other story that you ’ re not letting us read. Godamnit Jesse. There ’ s not a conclusion to it. My other issue is that the story has two build ups. The climax comes much too late and that ’ s because what you do is build up so many words towards Matt ’ s relationship with his parents and his grandparents. He loses his clothes, sure, but you could have done that in fewer words and still had the same effect. What this means is that the story builds up to a climax with his parents, him being dropped at a camp he doesn ’ t like, and then you rebuild a different climax with Luke. You need space for a resolution at the end, and there just isn ’ t one. The story doesn ’ t go anywhere at the end. What ’ s learned? Next time: plot plan. Get your arcs ready before you start. Give us a whole story, Jesse, I know you can do it. 
 
 **Diner du Duane**: Next fave. 
 
 What I liked: the accents, the cosy feel of it. I don ’ t know much about Tennessee, but it feels kind of cute and friendly. You write well and create scenes well, injecting the right amount of emotion into the bit with the man ’ s dead wife. It was fun to read, it really was. It read like a little domestic scene, but that ’ s where my problems with it come, too. 
 
 What I didn ’ t like: this didn ’ t feel like a story. It felt like a collection of cute little scenes stitched together, with you telling me what was happening rather than letting me immerse myself in it. I know it ’ s been mentioned before, but there ’ s no conflict to this story. The only bit where I actually felt like the characters were worried about the future of their restaurant was this: 
 
 
 > “ We need just about a hundred more customers like him in the next few months. Otherwise, come January -- - ” 
 
 
 And it ’ s just brushed off. There ’ s no resolution to that issue, which is really quite a serious issue. Even a problem with some of the stock not arriving, and them having to make a dish with half the ingredients, or a bailiff coming round and assessing the worth of their kitchen… Something that would make me wonder what they were going to do about it. I also find the way the characters tell each other information that they already know so that the reader can learn it a bit off. The bit at the end where Buck and Duane discuss their dwindling finances and hiring a busboy is something that should be shown, not told to us, and not told right before the big reveal that everything ’ s okay after all. This was a wonderfully heartwarming piece, but there needs to be a unifying thread running through it. 
 
 
 
 **Burden: ** 
 
 
 
 What I liked: I liked the worldbuilding. I thought that was good. I felt like the character did come through, despite the first person and us not learning much about him externally. We know that he reveres Ana, that he ’ s cautious, passive in some respects, but very loyal. I thought that was great writing. I liked the development of the relationship between himself and Ana. It was oddly realistic how they went out and they fucked and they went to the mountains together, despite living under a totalitarian regime. That reminded me of Wild Swans, if you ’ ve ever read it: the determination of ordinary people to live an ordinary life despite the tumultuous world around them. 
 
 
 
 What I didn ’ t like: I thought your prose was too flowery. Don ’ t get me wrong, I ’ m guilty of this as well, but in the second paragraph, you use one adjective for every crying noun. It slowed down the prose, it was too much for me. The nicknames for Ana made me feel like you were reaching for something post-modern, but the rest of your description is quite heavy handed, so for me it tended not to mesh. I think you could be a lot more efficient with your words. My other problem is that the whole piece just leads up to the ending where it meets with the prompt you ’ ve chosen. It ’ s written like an extended writing prompt response, and though there ’ s nothing wrong with that, the whole story just flip-flops between flashback and walking until it finally makes sense. I wish there was more structure to the piece. Maybe if you were to rewrite it, you could start with the thirty second window, and show how it came to be. 
 
 
 
 **Mother, may I? ** 
 
 
 
 What I liked: I liked the slow devolution of Victoria ’ s sanity. You start the story thinking that something dreadful has happened to Timothy, some awful accident. It evokes sympathy because of how much this woman wanted children, how much she went through to get one. And the seeds of her issues are planted early. Nancy Beth Harrington comes in straight away. There ’ s an overreaction there, and it ’ s overlooked until the next one, and the next one, until you realise there ’ s actually something dreadfully wrong and by then it ’ s too late. Clever, really clever. Good use of the first person too. You made me feel uncomfortable when she was talking to the other mother who invited her to the birthday party, and I enjoy writing that makes me react to things. 
 
 
 
 What I didn ’ t like: oooh you know, I almost wish Victoria had killed him herself. I know it ’ s her pills, but I really think it would have made more of an impact if she ’ d just lost it. I think that would tie in better with her rising hysteria through the piece. Aside from that, I feel like the climax is also a little late in the piece. With this character, seeing her eventual descent into wanting to commit suicide after causing the death of her son would be a fantastic post-climax reversal. The last line feels like a shock line, more could be done with it. 
 
 
 
 **Stitches: ** 
 
 
 
 What I liked: Your descriptions were vivid and came with wonderful imagery. You write good prose. The sentences are well structured and well written. 
 
 
 
 What I didn ’ t like: when reading this, I couldn ’ t shake the sensation that you were writing a story that you thought we ’ d want to read as opposed to a story you wanted to write. It ’ s *too* engineered an attempt to pull at heartstrings. A dead father, a combat veteran who ’ s out on the street, a struggling mother who kills him with kindness… It ’ s all a bit too much for me. I also felt like the whole story was leading up to the exchange at the end where Frank explains to Victoria what death is. The whole purpose of the story was to get the reader there and then to make the reader feel sad. I ’ d like to see more of a journey with the characters, a bit more development and nuance. More flaws all round, please. 

