blain

Sorry, I'm new here and don't know. Where is Flux at? If I can find it, I'll try to give some useful feedback. Sounds like you're looking for some higher level feedback, which is okay with me. I don't know anything about Finnish, I'm afraid, but I can discuss story elements and stuff.

Wyvern -- Thank you for the welcome, the acceptance, and that wild ride through my application. That was fun. I think this will be a good thing. Now I just need to do some more writing. Take care, Blain

LP -- I know what you mean. I'm someone who notices whoppers in films. I just watched Timeline and was choking on the amount of silly stupid stuff going on (and the notion that someone speaking English from the 14th Century would be able to understand someone speaking Standard American English). OTOH, a couple of things to consider: 1. This was "Troy" not "The Iliad". 2. The Iliad doesn't describe the full 10 years of the war either. It's conceivable that you could get someone to do an artsy version of the Iliad that attempted to follow the story there faithfully. It would feel somewhat good to know that it was there, but I don't think anybody would really enjoy watching it. It would be very unlikely that it would make enough money to pay for a decent production. But it sure can be fun to gripe about these things. I did the same thing with LoTR (although I was grateful for many of the changes they made -- I didn't miss Tom Bombadil, personally). Not sure what you mean about the plague being a trick. In the Iliad, the plague was sent by Apollo to punish the Greeks for Briseis. Was it otherwise in the film?

Cool. Twice. Well put together, and I really like the content. The third version of the fourth line is a little rough. With what comes after, it would seem to want to have some kind of a transition going on there. Perhaps something in between the third and fourth stanza -- a particle, a fragment, whatever -- would serve that purpose as well or better. And I really like the content. Did I mention that? I like anybody pointing out that there are nonviolent options available even in extreme anger, and that they lead to being calm faster/better than the violent options do. Thanks for this.

Thanks everybody for the welcome and feedback thus far. It is helpful. Katzaniel -- I have found that much more than 5% of women are beautiful. I worked in retail (discount retail) for 14 years, so I've seen a pretty decent cross-section of the population. Mind you, my criteria may be a bit different than yours. I know what you mean about those sentences. They bugged me at the time -- I was getting tired about then. Your suggestions are certainly more clear than what I wrote, but they're not my voice. Let me try this way: I'm just asking you to wait until they actually do something besides simply looking at you before you glare. or I'm just asking you to hold your glaring until after they've done something more offensive than looking at you. The latter is more along the lines of your "Better" option structurally, but the word choice is more like mine. I'll let this simmer overnight. I may make that change then in the top of the thread. This is useful feedback. I'm generally concerned about flow and clarity, especially when I'm writing in this conversational tone. Thanks again, folk.

Personally, I'd add to the third stanza -- the second seems adequate to me, and the third seems clipped. And I'd add the part you wrote after that as a couplet at the very end. Otherwise, I think it flows reasonably well.

I like this also. Imagery is good. Flow is a rough in spots but otherwise good. Rhyme thing is a little odd, but not terrible. I particularly like the brain-rhyme of the last two lines where contracting the last line would make a rhyme. Would suggest changing the line : to read: This way addresses Aleaha's point about "And" and makes it sound like the speaker actually had (and knows now) which words they wish they'd said. And I think it flows a little better, since "the" takes less rhythm space than "what". I like the invocation of religious imagery as well -- you talk of repenting, sins, and atonement. This poem could be speaking to love lost, or it could be lamenting a lost relationship with God. Either way, the speaker is accepting that the loss is a result of their own choices. They built this house of shoddy material, and have lost what they intended to keep. And, although sorrowful, are not capable of fixing the problem even though it's clear there is a problem. Good stuff.

I think it's got some potential. I'd suggest a bit more use of punctuation to help with flow and clarity, but your use of line breaks is good.

I like the effect of having the end-rhymes not being the end of the phrase quite consistantly. That three-line second stanza is interesting also. It could be interesting to fill in another line, but it's interesting leaving it as is too. The last line of the third stanza implies that the answer to the question will be "no" for every reader, which may not be the case -- there are some odd ducks in the world. Perhaps making it "Not I" would work as well, without making that assumption. Overall, quite good. Enjoyable. Cute at the end.

I suppose I ought to introduce myself a bit, and discuss why I'm here. I'm Blain. I'm here because I'm interested in doing some editorial/column style writing, and I understand from my sources that this is a good place to come for feedback on writing style. At some point in the process, I hope to submit my columns for publication, but I want a space to hone the craft a bit before I do so. I should be clear that I'm looking for feedback on how these articles are written, and how they can be improved as writing, rather than discussion of their content (although that can be fun too, I admit). I tend to prefer feedback that is rather direct in style, and that gives reasons. I deeply love my own writing, but I understand the need for revising and rewriting. I do better with "This sentence is fun, but extraneous, so cut it or merge it with another" than with "this is good, but a little wordy." And I accept that I am not likely to get exactly what I want, which may be what I need or may not. Y'all don't have to be what I wish you were. This doesn't have to be a perfect fit for me. If there's a better space for me to hang out, I'm okay with that too. Just let me know. Take care, Blain

Pretty ones: Yes, it's me again. I know it's been a long time since I wrote last -- 19 years now. More than half my life. I decided to write this because I'm finding that I'm seeing you differently, and I thought you should know. When I wrote you before, I was 18. In other words, young and dumb. I was so struck with how perfect looking you were. How great it felt to see you and think about you. It was electric. Except when I found that you didn't see me the same way. I wrote that all down in that poem I called Pretty One. I finished up asking if you could see me at all. With the water that's flowed under the bridge since then, I've learned a lot. I have daughters of my own who are among you, actually. And I've thought a lot about what it must be like when virtually ever male who sees you wants something from you (something in particular). I've also thought about how you are like me -- you like pretty people and want to be with/around them too. And I'm not pretty. I'm not something a cat would bury in the sand, but I look nothing like anybody on those "hottest" lists. The closest person to me on those lists would be Jeff Goldblum -- tall and geeky, without Geena Davis. Just like I look past average-to-less-attractive girls to look at you, you look past me to look at the Brad Pitts of the world. It still hurts, mind you, but I understand it better now. Oh, I spent many years obsessing over you. That's what I was trained to do -- obsess, infatuate, lust after. Those of you who have done modelling and acting did a lot for building up those obsessions, infatuations and lust-fests, and those of you who work so hard to look like them drew that attention toward yourselves. It got really unhealthy there, because I wasn't really responding to you, I was responding to fantasy people I made up in my head who looked like you (and your clothes, hair, makeup, etc.). I didn't know most of you enough to have any idea of who you were. Models are hired to sell products, not to enlighten or build up those who view them. The reactions I was having were intentional -- not your intentions, those who paid to put the images in front of me. And the look that's presented for me to look at centers on girls about 15-19, or young women who look like they're 15-19. Well, after quite a bit of work, I've found that lusting doesn't do me any good, that obsessing and infatuating waste my time, and that comfortable fantasies are far more destructive than harsh realities. I've learned that those reactions I have are natural, but that I don't need to follow up on them in any fashion. Particularly, I've learned that it's okay to like looking at you. I like looking at sunsets. I like looking at mountains and at the sea. I like looking at cute little kids and at pretty women. I coined the term "kid crush" to describe the feelings I had for cute little kids in my life -- a totally non-sexual attraction one feels when looking at those adorable little kids in the mall or in the movies. And I found that it fits when I'm looking at older and older "kids." Including many of you -- especially the 15-19 year olds. And it feels better. Lots better. I've let go of that "if only..." thing at the back of my mind when talking to you. It's not about pursuit. I'm not looking for your attention or a response from you when I run into you on the bus or at the mall. I'm just enjoying the view. I'm looking at your face, hair, and basic shape, rather than trying to look down your shirt. I'm not staring for minutes on end. I'm not trying to come up with a line. I'm not going to try to follow you anywhere or get your phone number. I'm not going to try to touch you. I'm not fantasizing about what I'd like to do to you -- for heaven's sake, many of you could be my daughter. The fact that you're pretty doesn't give us anything to talk about, so I'm not going to try to make something up to grab some of your time and attention. I say all this because I've learned, since I asked 19 years ago, that you do, in fact, see me. Being tall and geeky means that I'm tall, and noticeable in a crowd for that reason. And, in noticing, you notice that I'm looking at you, and you don't seem to like it very much. So I want you to know that I'm just looking and not lusting, so, perhaps, could some of you withhold the look that you think I'm a stalker/rapist/serial killer? It gets old. I recognize that my approach is not the same as many or most guys -- they really do want to talk to you and touch you and stuff. I'm not suggesting you suddenly trust every guy who seems to be appreciating your face, hair or basic shape. I'm asking you to hold off on glaring until after they've done something more offensive than just looking at you. I think that takes care of it. At this rate, when I write again, I'll be writing to your daughters/granddaughters, and reminiscing about the good old days when genitals were covered with clothing. Scary to think about. Keep smiling, and take care of yourselves, Blain

It was funnier when the little guy with the big ears said it, though.