Just In
for Evil Space Wizards

10/14/2019 c12 James Birdsong
Good eleven chapters anyhow.
9/27/2019 c1 Hypocritics
I personally dislike first person POV.
That said, don't listen to tickbeard. The only way to write a 1stPPOV without the I-itus most suffer from is exactly the way you're doing it.
That said, it does come off as unnecessarily redundant in a few places. The writing needs some work in others.
Overall this is not my cup of tea, but its still a far better fic than most.
7/17/2019 c9 2TickBeard
Well seeing as how you asked for feedback...

I think that you could cut a lot of fat out of your writing and it would be stronger for it. Almost every sentence you've written could be trimmed a couple of words; or you could reorganize the paragraph and remove sentences completely. Its too flamboyant; too many descriptors.

Like, take this random shit I just made up for example:

"Donning my smoking jacket by the main entrance, I was briefly overcome with a most unfortunate case of forgetfulness and I forgot to retrieve my loft keys from the small, turtle shaped, novelty plate that I kept by the solid oak door. Ah, yes. I had fond memories of that particular porcelain piece. I had won it several years ago playing crotchet with my late Brother-in-Law - a rather oafish man, but a good sport regardless. What a match it was! Sadly, he had passed when he choked on a partially shelled pistachio leaving my sister a young widow. Reclaiming possession of my keys, I steeled myself before heading back out into the night."

Or you could just say:

'I took my coat and left. Halfway out the door, I remembered my keys so I grabbed them before heading back outside."

In my opinion, you have too many extraneous details burying the plot. It makes everything unmemorable. Save your writing flair for the important stuff and don't treat everything equally. I should stress that I'm not suggesting you rush the plot, taking your time developing things is good. Just that, you know, we don't need everything described to us in so much detail.

Well, that's my advice anyway. Good luck with your story! I'm sure that once you're finished, it'll be better than any of the garbage I've ever written.

6/25/2019 c8 27Hippothestrowl
Continues to be interesting with a style of its own. I sometimes feels I've missed some small piece of information - often enough that I suspect the info was not always there to begin with, but I'm reluctant to search back and analyse as it reduces the enjoyment of the flow. For instance, I saw something about fog but I didn't know before that it was foggy? That broke my 'picture' of how I was visualising the scene. Anyway, added interest now we are more in known areas of the magical world. Unsure where it's all going though.

- Hip
6/21/2019 c1 44Igenlode Wordsmith
Igenlode here from Writers Anonymous - as Hippothestrowl says, your first chapter is both readable and very interesting. I get the impression you actually know something about your setting, for one thing (if you don't, you've clearly done the research). I suspect the reason you're not getting reviews on your work is simply the 'crossover ghetto' effect :-(

Specific feedback (just on the first chapter, I'm afraid; I'll take Hippo's word for it that the actual Ch6 is fine):

The beginning is very good, with an excellent hook to get the reader curious and wanting to know more, and a world-weary gumshoe persona for the narrator (although I gather she is actually some kind of paranormal(?) investigator).

"Instead I merely dropped my jaw, my portable phone, my notebook and pencil, and my umbrella" : a lovely example of what I now know to be called 'syllepsis', but know chiefly via Messrs Flanders & Swann. It's picked up nicely in the following sentence, too, where the narrator adds a hasty "minus my jaw" to forestall the surreal image that has already occurred to the reader ;-p

From a practical point of view, however, I was a bit sceptical over the image of 'my pencil shattered'; that sounds as if it physically broke into smithereens, like a soup-tureen dropped from a similar height. While I can believe that the lead possibly broke (depending on just how soggy the ground was - clearly pretty squishy, judging by the rapid ruination of the notebook), that wouldn't be visible and the narrator wouldn't have any way of knowing about it until the next time she tried to sharpen her pencil, or at least to write with it. Maybe some other description, or other accident?
(Maybe it was a propelling-pencil, and some part of the mechanism broke? Maybe the point was simply visibly snapped off? Maybe the pencil rolled away and vanished into a ditch full of brambles and cow dung?)

"The mere thought of that made me weary to go near the property" - typo (weary/wary), I think.

"Without a word he watched them float in the air, my rear car window roll down, and the debris fly inside and clatter to their final doom on the floor" - this sentence doesn't appear to have any relation to the musings in the previous paragraph, and I don't think we have any idea of who 'he' is (if we do, I missed it on two readings), so it tends to induce a moment of blank confusion in the reader.
We don't know who 'he' is, we don't know what 'them' refers to (grammatically speaking, it would be the "other problems in my life", the last plural object mentioned), and 'debris' is singular/collective and not plural, so can't have 'their final doom' - assuming, given the other confusion, that this verb *was* intended to refer to the debris! It feels as if there is at least one prior sentence missing here which qould provide the subjects for all these pronouns.

Assuming, on the balance of probability, that the 'them' are the notepad etc., I still find it confusing, because the one thing the start of the story has emphasised about these objects is that they are *not* currently floating... After a lot of re-reading my guess would be that you are describing a process by which the narrator picks up everything she dropped and dumps it back in the car (although this apparently doesn't apply to the umbrella at least, which gets mentioned later on). But you really don't want to puzzle your readers to that extent, as it totally drops them out of the story :-(

"I discarded the umbrella. I could have simply resumed making it hover above, but its image was corrupt to me now" - "image was corrupt" felt like an odd choice of wording here. I think I know what you mean, but I feel there ought to be a better way of putting it than 'corrupt' - maybe just "the very thought of it was embarrassing" or something along those lines?

(N.B. I wouldn't have thought that having the umbrella in direct context with the wearer's head would have done that accessory any good either - even if it didn't fall far enough to damage the spokes, touching the inside of the canopy tends to make water start to come through. Another reason to discard it? And I wouldn't have thought she could initially *see* very much with the umbrella descending over her eyes; it doesn't appear to have obscured her view of M. de Fleurville at all.)

"Perhaps I was the first mutant he encountered" - should perhaps be "he had encountered", since the narrative is already taking place in the past tense?

Having the rest of the domain apparently restored by whatever event ruined the main chateau is an unexpected twist that makes this scenario all the more intriguing; it's not just a case of random accident or destruction. Something deliberate has been going on.

"If on top of that I wasn't partly local myself, there would be a mystery" - "partly local" is another intriguing hint suggesting that there is more to learn about the character's past.
I wasn't quite sure what the sentence was saying over all, however - too many stacked negatives make it hard to parse. (Re-reading again, I think you probably want a new paragraph at "North-eastern France is woefully depressed or "It's because there are so few people", since the subject shifts here from the condition of the chateau to the lack of reaction to the protagonist. It would make it clearer that the 'mystery' under discussion is (I think) de Fleurville's lack of curiosity about his visitor, rather than the uninhabitable deformity of the house.)
Incidentally, how does he *know* that she is partly local? Have they met before? Is she notorious?

"Have you tried going inside before?" - you might consider rewording that; it sounds as if she is asking whether he has ever been into the interior of building during the time that he has owned it (if it was derelict when he inherited, he may not have!), whereas I think the intended meaning is whether he has ventured in *since the accident*, which has rather different implications.

"At first I thought, nearly hoped that the mechanism itself had changed shape just enough to not be able to open anymore, but it turned out the door simply wasn't locked. It had warped so it wouldn't turn all the way, but still so far as to allow entry" - again, I was confused here. I think it is the *door* and not the mechanism that is warped and won't "turn all the way" in the final sentence? The natural assumption is that we are still talking about turning the lock and that the key won't turn all the way, but then that contradicts the earlier (and more effective) statement that in fact it wasn't locked in the first place.
(Although that does then raise the intriguing question of why it *wasn't* locked, given that the owner obviously assumed he'd left it that way...)

If it *is* the door, then you need a verb other than 'turn' to avoid the ambiguity; "wouldn't open all the way"?

Her claim that she had never been in a chateau before seemed a bit incongruous, given what came across as detailed knowledge about them at various points earlier on; she knows the heating is expensive to run, she explains exactly what a chateau is to people (Americans?) who might think it was some kind of arrow-slit fort, and yet she has never even been through the front door of one?

An interesting suggestion that the angle between wand and handle may be the result of the other deformations in the building; I always pictured them as straight myself, but maybe they are curved in the Potter movieverse?

I have to say that neither character appears to be taking the slightest precaution where fingerprints are concerned, given that we're told this wand is specifically destined for the fingerprint lab :-p

Right now we're still not certain whether the narrator is one of the X-men; I'm getting the general impression she probably isn't - she feels like an outsider - and yet she is definitely telekinetic and talks about being a mutant and "living in a world of people like me". Maybe it's a canon distinction between being an official member of the X-Men team and being a common or garden mutant...

"There's a pentagram on the floor." he said.
"Yes there is." I said
Basic dialogue punctuation error - this was unexpected, given the level of competence shown in the rest of the chapter :-(

I was a bit confused by the "if I have to speak to a single secret agent" bit and "the unfeasability of securing secrecy with paperwork" - it sounds rather as if she is trying to keep this event secret *from* secret agents, especially as we're not clear quite whom she herself is employed by. Is this a government cover-up, or a cover-up to keep the events *from* the government?
On balance it might be clearer to go straight from "Don't make it harder for us" to "he took his instructions well", though I'd be sorry to lose the references to "this and neighbouring communes", which is another nice bit of local colour.

I like the little touch about being nice to be thanked for one's time - no, definitely not something one normally sees in this type of story ;-)

"to allow room for my chair to lean back some" - at this point I was picturing her in a Professor X-type chair controlled by telekinesis, but since there are earlier references to "stepping closer" this presumably isn't the case after all. I think you probably do need to repeat the word 'seat' when talking about car interiors; 'chair' just isn't a synonym in this context :-(

"I drove straight home, enjoying the countryside" - while "it was pissing down"? Narratorial sarcasm here?

"How fool I was" - "how foolish" or "What a fool"?

Desktop Mode . Twitter . Help . Sign Up . Cookies . Privacy . Terms of Service