Trouble with Amazon reviewer

[Alistair]

Michelle wrote: "As a writer of twenty years, I can say that there's a lot of learning to be had. This isn't an easy gig to get yourself into. No overnight dream come true here. I've taken a writer's workshop class..."

Amen! I couldn't have said it better. :)

[Tony]

Miss M wrote: "J.M. wrote: "I got a middling ( 3 star) review for one of my early "The Centurion Chronicles" books. It turns out the reviewer was some clown from Montana who also reviewed household appliances. Mo..."
Nice one Miss M.

[Abigail]

Absolutely don't apologize! It helps to vent, and you've started a great discussion. It's hard to take criticism, but it's also necessary.

[Shara]

Well, thank you all for your help. It's alive again, after having gone through it with the fine toothed comb, and hopefully, it'll be okay now. It'll live. We'll see, what happens.

[Alistair]

Shara wrote: "Well, thank you all for your help. It's alive again, after having gone through it with the fine toothed comb, and hopefully, it'll be okay now. It'll live. We'll see, what happens."

One last little comment, and you'll hate me for this; can I suggest you shift from 'Internalisation' from Jerrik at the very start to a quick brush stroke scene setting phase to drop the reader into the story world; first a strong 'authorial voice' to give the 'history' - that will remove all the 'hads' and 'who hads' - but really compress it - just the facts - two sentences at the most - and then some physical scene setting - (almost anything - warm night air ruffling the papers on Jerrik's desk, carrying the odours of the great forest outside the tall windows, 'spring blooming whatevers' (or something...) etc.) Nothing mega or overdone - brush stroke. Then Jerrik pauses to ponder his brother's situation and you feed in his concerns, without the need to have him 'unnaturally' internalise the whole story-history of his people. The reader is able to 'reflect' with him in a more 'normal' way, and the story is off and running... :)

[Alexandra]

Alistair wrote: "Shara wrote: "Well, thank you all for your help. It's alive again, after having gone through it with the fine toothed comb, and hopefully, it'll be okay now. It'll live. We'll see, what happens."

..."

Thanks for that. I suggest much less telling, and more showing, but you put it better :D And YES for scene setting, help put the reader into the story, sights, sounds, smells.

What I noticed, just reading the first page, is that we're going over the same information twice, first in exposition, then in dialog. For example, first we're told about the brother being chosen for the envoy, then after that we get dialog about the same thing/event. I think these should be merged somehow.

[Alistair]

Alexandra wrote: ..."Thanks for that. I suggest much less telling, and

Well spotted! More good advice! The first 200 words are the most important apparently. Here's how I've tried to summarise it in the past;

"In that first interchange between reader and writer (apparently it happens in the first 200 words or so), the reader needs to be REASSURED that the writer has a tale to tell, and has presented the seed of that tale in an engaging-enough and CONFIDENTLY WRITTEN way. If the reader is reassured and engaged, they complete the pact by donning their suspension of disbelief hat. In other words, whatever the basic ground rules you stated are, they’ll go along with you.

Simply put;

Writer – “Hi, I’ve got a tale to tell, want to read it?”
Reader – “Yep, hmmm... that looks interesting!”
Writer – “Come on, take my hand; you’ll not regret it.”
Reader – “Wow! You really sound like you know what you’re doing. Just give me a moment to pull-on my Suspension of Disbelief hat.”
Writer – “Comfy?”
Reader – “Sure, let’s go!”

This is an incredibly fragile pact, and unfortunately (for the writer) the reader has virtually nothing to do with maintaining this ‘happy’ state of being. It’s up to the writer to sustain the flow of information in a good-enough way to keep reassuring the reader that the writer still knows where they are going."

Gosh! Did I write that? Anyway, that's how I feel about it.

Onwards and upwards, Alistair.

[Alexandra]

Alistair wrote: "Alexandra wrote: ..."Thanks for that. I suggest much less telling, and

Well spotted! More good advice! The first 200 words are the most important apparently. Here's how I've tried to summarise it..."

That's good stuff, Alistair.

As a reader I think of it as similar to an oral storyteller engaging a listening audience. The storyteller weaves the story, paints the scene in the mind, engages the audience, all with words. The listener is passive, beyond listening and picturing what is described in their mind. And beyond staying to continue to listen, or getting up and walking away. A writer of a fictional story does the same, only with printed words.

The author is planting the reader into a movie imagined in their minds for the readers to see and imagine in theirs. One where the author needs to not only convey actions and dialog, but also set the scene, what do we see? what do we smell? what do we hear? what are the character's facial expressions? A quirk of a brow? Smile tugging at the edge of the mouth? The author is set designer, costume designer, and directing the "actors", including expression and body language.

Here's an example, from my review of a different book,

"World Building: Here I think the story had some issues. I wish there had been a bit more description regarding the place and more shown regarding the society. Particularly since this is a place of the author's invention. There is some, but it's fairly sparse, and is typically there only when needed for the plot. I had trouble picturing the scene, and being able to feel I was right there. I think it could have used more atmosphere, sounds, sights, smells, description.

For example, characters take a "hack" to travel in the city a few times. There is mention of the driver. There is no mention of a horse or horses in the entire book. I wanted to be able to picture this scene in my mind. Was this hack horse driven? I don't know. It's possible in this place it was machine driven. I got no snorting of the horse, stamping of hooves, or petting of a velvet nose. But also nothing to imply it was machine driven either. This kind of thing bothered me, and I don't think would have taken too much to improve."

The above issue I had could have easily been handled by some mention of something to make it clear there was a horse, or a mention of steam rising, or smell of an engine. This was a fantasy world that did have some limited technology. So either horse driven or some type of machine would have fit. As it was I was left in the dark here. The "hack" was never described, and the mode of power driving it never even hinted at. In my mind this "hack" remained a mysterious blob, because I was given no clue. Too much of this sort of thing in a Fantasy world and a reader is going to become frustrated, or bored.

Might seem like a minor thing to some, but in a world entirely of the author's invention it's crucial. Set me in 1800's London and I pretty much know a hack is going to be horse driven. Set me in 2000's New York and I know I've got a machine driven taxi. Plop me down in a world you've made up where I've never been, one where both animal power and machine power are likely, and I'm going to need some clues.

Some authors might think writing a Fantasy story is easier, because they can make everything up and don't have to check real time/place facts. I think it would be harder, because you don't have to tell people what a phone looks like when they know what place and time the story is set in.

I also think the advice given previously about reading a lot, seeing how other authors write their stories, was very good. When it comes to fiction it seems to me most of the best authors are also readers, and when authors don't read much themselves it shows.

[Shara]

Thanks again. For now I just may have to let that pass. It's grammatically correct now, it looks reasonably okay, I think it'll live. But now I've got to change up the print version again, and I have other writing I said I would do for something (screenwriting not prose), and other things are getting in the way. So for now I think it'll be okay. And the next one will be better with everything that I have learned. So thank you all. Don't you hate it when life gets in the way, haha?

[Alexandra]

Shara wrote: "Thanks again. For now I just may have to let that pass. It's grammatically correct now, it looks reasonably okay, I think it'll live. But now I've got to change up the print version again, and I ha..."

I certainly understand life getting in the way. Though I'm not sure "looks reasonably okay" and "grammatically correct" are quite enough to offer something for retail sale as a professional quality published book, but that is certainly up to you.