Will you critique my story ("Gayden's Tulips")?
LOL. That's great. You've made the opposite mistake you are supposed to make. Many beginning authors fail to be descriptive enough so they are encouraged to "describe!" You took that advice to and past its limits, and the text is so full of description, especially flowery description, that you have forgotten about the most important ingredient: the story! Get rid of all the description that is not essential and let's see a story. Let's see it start, develop, and resolve into an ending. But writing is supposed to tell a story. It's not supposed to leave the story behind! Good luck. You also need very, very, very short sentences and equally short paragraphs. That could be even more important than your over description. Your text is impenetrable!
Can you read this short beginning to my story and rate 1-10?
Right now I'd give it about a 6.5. It's not bad, but needs a lot of work right now. First of all, if it's the beginning, don't write about the weather. It's one of those cliches that's best avoided. Try to find some sort of hook or action to get the reader involved right away. The older sister (elder makes her sound like an old lady) seems to come out of nowhere right now. The words 'the mother' are used very close together, perhaps you could say 'their mother?' or give her a name? Mix it up. No need for the colon after needed, a semi colon is fine. Small type-O pedal. Is slothed really a word? No need to say 'As soon as the cat passed,' just go into her riding on. Maybe she could find the note when she gets to the cafe? 'wasn't distracted again' is a little wonky right now, you can make it better. I'm not sure that fortune is demanding, maybe inspiring? Maybe you could make her fortune collecting more important, like she never throws the note from the cookie away? Good luck with it. I liked it and you can keep improving on it!
I think highly of Critique Circle Online Writing Workshop. As you asked, you can post your short stories or chapters there, and get feedback from the community. Generally you'll get ~5 or so reviews of about 300 - 500 words on each submission. I've pushed two novels through there, one of which I've since published and is getting very good reviews at Amazon, which I attribute (in part) to the help I got at CritiqueCircle. They have a free option, but you do have to do ~2 reviews of other people's work to get enough "credits" to post your own work. 99% of the people there will provide constructive feedback and will be supportive and helpful, though sometimes the advice and feedback (though well intended) can be suspect...they are repeating what other people have told them without really understanding why or what it means or if it is relevant in every situation. This is true of every such site, though. And there are also accmoplished writers with popular books on the site, so you'll certainly get some very thoughtful feedback as well. I have not surveyed every site, but from a purely process and easy of use perspective, I don't think you are going to do much better than CC. Good luck no matter which path you pick.
Do I write a critique in first person?
The Joy Luck Club A Semiotic Critique The Joy Luck Club A Semiotic Critique The Joy Luck Club as an exercise in semiotic critique. Luckily, the film lends it’s self very well this discipline. There are four main subjects of the semiotic method: Rhetorical is the film’s intentional meaning or message. Realist means true to life, does June act the way real humans would? Do the characters stay true to themselves? Formalist illustrates how the shots of the film combine to “mean” use of flashbacks, long landscape shots, and short quick editing. Mise-en-scene is the environment of the film, the sets, lighting, and costumes. Now, while these are not the only semiotic guidelines but they are the ones I’m going to focus on for this paper. The Rhetorical aspects of this film are apparent. If you believe the following: that the film is directed toward women, that it being the story of four mothers and their daughters and family is universal, that the relationships between mothers and their daughters are as complex and emotional as any relationship could ever be. What the film attempts to show us is that the mothers are Chinese and their daughters are Chinese-American and face a set of problems, that although may se Some topics in this essay: Luck Club, Wayne Wang, Lindo Jong, Waverly June, Harold Lena, Rhetorical Rhetorical, Club Lindo’s, June Woo, June Waverly, luck club, joy luck, joy luck club, Joy Luck, mothers daughters, gap june woo, aspects film, women story, establishing shots, gap june, film takes, june goes, june goes china, goes china, Join now to see the rest of the essay! Approximate Word count = 1560 Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page double spaced)
Here's what Roger Ebert said: Writing daily film criticism is a balancing act between the bottom line and the higher reaches, between the answers to the questions, (1) Is this movie worth my money?, and (2) Does this movie expand or devalue my information about human nature?This also serves as a kind of shorthand for the difference between what are commonly called "Movie Reviewers", who focus on question 1 and are largely concerned with the short term (and whose work is largely irrelevant once the film in question is out of theaters or stores) and "Film Critics", who focus on question 2 and who (in their own mind at least) write for the ages. Bad reviewers follow a formula. "[Title] is the new [genre] movie starring [X, Y, and Z]. [Plot Summary]. It is [good/okay/bad]. The End." Unless you have some underlying reason to know and trust this opinion -- which this type of review seldom provides -- this is as useless as life advice from a random stranger on the street (which is basically what it is). Bad critics follow less of a formula but are just as useless, so lost in Film Theory and themselves that they simply cannot see the film they are talking about as a product that others might want to purchase (or not). The worst critics will have strong reactions to movies but not enough self-awareness to understand them; their writing turns into convoluted attempts to justify their gut feelings in terms of "directorial intent" and "deconstructivism" and "Saussurean tradition" and whatever other theoretical constructs they learned in grad school. Good film writers, whether they call themselves "critics" or "reviewers", manage this balancing act, or at least provide value in both categories. To do it you have to both understand the underlying history, technology, theory, personalities, genre conventions, and production mechanics and the fact that none of that stuff matters to the reader if you don't give them the information they need to decide whether to see the film or not. Great film writers (and Ebert was one of these) can both give you their reaction to a film and enough additional context and information to allow you to gauge how your reaction might be different. At the same time, they will often manage to teach you something, not just about this movie, but about movies (or art or, if they are on a roll, life), and the place of this movie in that context.
King is without a doubt a great popular author. Perhaps too popular. As his success has increased his self-editing seems to have decreased and, because of that same level of success, he’s under less compulsion to follow objective advice of editors and publishers. His short stories can be amazing. But some of his novels — much less trilogies — are, there’s no other word I can use, rambling. It’s not world building but rather rambling about a created world and including more and more casual observations of the world and its people. That’s OK for a travelogue but it doesn’t work well for a novel. The phrase that comes to mind is “victim of his own success”. But when he’s “on” he’s a damn good writer. He seems to turn out one or two “very good” to “great” stories a year, mainly because his raw output is very high. Numbers are own his side.
The reader usually learns the who, when, and where of a story during which part of the plot?
If you're talking about Yahoo users, it's usually when they get some other idiot to cut and paste some idiotic summary from Shmoopnotes.
Hey there!Getting noticed on Wattpad in my experience, can be a troublesome deal at first. Because whatever you start, doesn’t get too many views at firstㅡ or it doesn’t get views at all.But it’s the more reason to ALWAYS complete the story you’ve started. No matter if you’re getting views or not; don��t feel discouraged! Especially if you are liking the story yourself. Finish it at all costs. Add good tags, the ones that ARE RELEVANT to your story. And you can join contests too~And you never know when your books start getting more attention (that happened to me!). And ofcourse, read other books and comment on those; NEVER advertise your books on other’s people’s work or profile, that looks desperate and believe me, there’s not 1% of chance that I’ll want to read a book coming from a desperate promoter.Also, there’s always going to be people who love your work, and those who dislike it and will spam your book with negativity or criticism; remember to smartly avoid it. And always reply politely. Remember that as a responsible author and writer of the book, you have to be humble at all times and thoughtful of the words you use to reply to others. If non-haters notice you being rude to others (except replying to haters), they’ll most likely leave.I had a fanfiction that didn’t get much views for a lot of months, like 6-7 months, and as I started writing more chapters, it slowly got attention. When it was around 800 views, i decided to rewrite it and hence I started editing again. It reached 1k and in another month, it reached 2k. It hit 1 year old on 9th Dec 2018 and had 10k views. It’s been a month since then and it reached 4.5k in a month :) rn it’s at 15.7k views ^-^ So I think, as more and more people begin noticing your book and reading it, your views will amplify too!You can also share your book on social medias if you wish. Google+ and ARMY amino are some medias you can share on.And, most importantly, have fun!