mhzinski 2013-07-04 20:58:04

But key in on the word interesting. My point was that your story wasn't interesting. It wasn't novel or engaging. That doesn't have to do with simplicity or complexity. That has to do with creativity and originality. There were plenty of simple stories submitted that I enjoyed reading. There were no boring lifeless stories that were submitted that I enjoyed reading.

mhzinski 2013-07-05 17:55:46

No I definitely did. I'm sorry that you have to cry and whine that I didn't but I did. I can actually clarify it since you insist on pressing. I will in fact paraphrase what was used in my original review and elaborate with contextual examples of why what you contributed sucked.

---

"The story goes nowhere" - The plot can be simplified into. Girl (name is silly I am calling her girl) [that is an admittedly stupid opinion and has no bearing on how good/bad the story is] is blind, meets a guy. Guy is a cook, girl is a food critic. They both like each other. The end. See a story generally goes like this:

http://www.hacktext.com/wp-conten t/uploads/2011/03/Story-Arc-Diagr am-w-Subplots.gif

and your story goes like this...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikip edia/commons/c/c7/Oslo_Airport_Ga rdermoen_runway.jpg

Notice how there is not part of your story where any character has a problem. In fact the only part where there is an origin of a problem the story is concluded. There is no resolution to any issue and there is no dynamic. The story is just kind of there. A pyramid of peaches toppling over is not a problem. That is like saying deciding what shirt to put on in the morning is a problem that deserve deep introspection through thoughtful serious fiction.

And please for the love of God don't try and defend this by saying the story was about learning to ask for help because Daniel doesn't and the main blind girl doesn't. Ever. (The girl concedes to let Daniel help her and Daniel simply implies that the girl can help) Nor is the story about all the merits of blind people or keeping a positive attitude or anything because you cut off the story because anything happens. How do we know she doesn't F the pie up hardcore by trying to help. You seem to be implying to me that most critics don't know what they're talking about and I'm not even blind, so why would I be inclined to believe that anything positive is going to come of this? That would actually be an interesting story, what does she do to the pie. What happens to create this reversal of fortunes. What problems arise and are overcome.

---

"Why is the main character blind?"

Here's what we know about the main character. She's blind. She's a food critic. She doesn't understand the basic architectural stability of a pyramid. Or perhaps that she's just really stupid because she shops blind without asking anyone for help. I guess it is also characterized from the first few paragraphs that she's a total bitch to anyone who offers to help her. Then she gets over it because she is bipolar or something.

There is absolutely nothing added to her character by her being blind. It doesn't do anything to enhance her experience and doesn't do anything to highlight a struggle or reinforce the plot (mostly because there really isn't a plot). The only person who could possibly be more boring is Daniel who all we really know about is that he's polite and an unbelievably terrible cook (coming from someone who has made pies before, how do you fuck up crust from one pie to the next? Seriously we're to believe this guy makes pies for a living and can't consistently make crust?).

Blindness has nothing to do with anything. You even say in the early part of the story that the one thing that happens because the main character is blind is a mistake anyone could make. Are you like purposefully trying to discredit yourself? Blindness did nothing to this story thematically or otherwise.

---

"The story is emotionless"

I feel like this is pretty well covered by the other points. To reiterate. Nothing happens. Nothing happens. Nothing happens. Nothing happens. Nothing happens. The characters have no permanence other than advancing the story from section to section and then seem to morph into whatever helps move the story to the next section, apart from the whole main character being blind thing. Daniel goes from being someone who admits all people make mistakes at the beginning to someone who is in "despair" over the fact that he doesn't know "how to pie" at the end of the story. Rather misdirected there from the happy-go-lucky guy who was introduced all of 1000 words ago. Maybe the theme is everyone is bipolar. Or perhaps the theme is that this is truly terrible terrible writing. Just ghastly. Such a mess even when you try to find out what it's trying to be it can't agree on the proper answer.

---

Literally everything can be turned into a matter of opinion if you're stubborn enough. That is not a joke. The difference between my first review and this current one is that one grazes over some areas that should be review to make a story more articulate and clear and enjoyable. This current review takes your face and presses it against the glass looking in at what a mess you've made of things.

You seem to have the difference between opinion and a thoughtful review divided over the line of a positive and negative review. Which is hilarious. It's made even more hilarious by the fact that your defense of your writing makes it sound like you worked hard on it and I didn't appreciate it properly when there is no way I haven't spent more time writing about it and reading it than you did writing it. Sorry but it sucks. I know it, and if you're honest with yourself you know it. Get over it and try again, but don't try and say it's good and I don't know what I'm talking about or I don't get it or it's complex or any of that shit because it simply is not. Your writing, this time, was not good enough. In fact it wasn't even good writing. Sure that's a matter of opinion, but it's also a very informed matter of opinion. You don't have to value it, nobody is making you value it. But you can't turn around and discredit it by calling it weak or insubstantial just because you don't like it.

Take it or leave but if you complain about it you simply prove you aren't looking at it objectively.

mhzinski 2013-08-16 00:49:37

thank you