Critics column - 2

Review - 17

Author: greyeyefangs

Title: The Things One Does for Love

The title is fitting given that Dem sacrifices a lot for her love of Jekyll.

Cover:

The cover is pretty and reasonably eye-catching. I’m not sure it really catches the horror and/or events of the story as well as it could. I might consider going with a darker themed cover.

Blurb:

The blurb is essentially the epigraph. I’d probably try to expand the blurb slightly to include the names of your characters and/or some more hints at the central plot. Vague blurbs sometimes pull people in out of curiosity, but sometimes they make people believe there isn’t much substance to the piece.

Overall:

The short story starts with an epigraph which is usually meant to suggest the themes inherent in the story. It appears, from the epigraph, that these will be love and freedom. For the most part, these seem accurate based on the story itself.

A description is a double-edged sword. Writers need enough to pull in a reader so they can build the scene in their head, but not so much description that it bogs down the narrative or becomes unintentionally confusing. Phrases like “handsomely flipped” and “gruesome sight she had just witnessed” don’t necessarily add clarity to the narrative. In the first instance, it’s hard to figure out how someone handsomely flips through something. I’m not sure the phrasing makes sense. In the second instance, she doesn’t really witness anything. She’s present for the aftermath, but she didn’t witness whatever caused it. Similarly, Dem “sprints” despite the fact she has “frail lungs.” As someone who is asthmatic, I can confirm that it’s pretty much impossible to sprint when lungs are failing—staying conscious is more of a concern. Having descriptive phrases is essential, but they should always make sense within the context of the writing.

On that note, there are a couple other things to watch for when writing. Filler words like “just” can often sneak into someone’s writing without them realizing it. I’m going to re-write a paragraph as an example:

He could hear her clearly as if she was right next to him, sitting with her legs encased in those silky, dirt-stained leggings he has always longed to caress.

In the above example, I removed two instances of the word “just” and I also omitted the “wrapped around each other” because I couldn’t figure out if it was supposed to illustrate crossed legs or something to do with the leggings. I found that reference somewhat unclear.

At times, the language choices can be repetitive and happen in close succession. Varying word choices makes writing feel less repetitive and like it’s moving ahead. As an example, at one point the word “always” was used three times close together. Unlike other examples where repetition was clearly being used for a specific impact, it didn’t appear to be with that word.

Try to avoid introducing too many characters too quickly. When Dem Harper is introduced, the narrator calls her both Dem and Harper and it’s not until she enters the story that the reader understands that she is both Dem and Harper. I would avoid calling her both until it’s clear to the reader that she can be referred to by both her first and last names.

The paragraph “As if his longing…” is all one sentence. I would break this up for clarity and ease of reading. Additionally, special punctuation regardless of whether it is used correctly should be avoided for the most part. In academic writing (like essays) complex punctuation such as semicolons and colons are often rewarded, in fiction, it often reminds the reader that they’re in someone else’s head and/or along for the ride rather than keeping a reader immersed in the experience. On that note, some of the dialogue tags (punctuation and capitalization) aren’t always technically correct.

The point of view in the story sometimes shifts around more than I think it should. At first, the narrator feels omniscient, then appears to be third limited with Jekyll in charge, then shifts to Dem in third limited, then back to Jekyll and so on and so forth. Omniscient is, I think, extremely hard to do well, assuming that was the intention with this story. I would probably go back and have the story told from two clearly alternating perspectives – Dem and Jekyll with clear indications of whose head we’re inhabiting as readers.

Towards the end of the initial story, Dem has a big choice to make. There should be a lot of tension and suspense around this moment. However, I felt as though the inner monologues and some of the description detracted from the ratcheting tension. I would look at tightening up that section to make it pacier and filled with more tension/suspense.

I think the storyline itself is interesting and full of promise. I liked the naivety of Dem and her desire to give in to love. Jekyll reminded me heavily of Dr. Jekyll which I saw was your intention in one of your bonus chapters.

I hope some of this was helpful. If you have questions, you’re welcome to send me a PM. Keep writing. We all start somewhere!

Good luck!

RElizabethM