Havoc Critique

~ Havoc Critique ~

First sentence is a weak hook, it is trying to give me my opinion on an idea instead of simply showing me the idea itself and exploring it.

A good hook creates context for the every other sentence after it to build off of and at the same time doesn't give too much away about the story and instead creates intrigue. You want to build a light foundation with your hook, no need for a huge run-on sentence, but also you want to build towards the goal of making the reader care about your story and its characters, setting, events, etc.

Example Hook: Death, the unknown, the eternal, the invisible horror gazing up at me through the murky water, I reject.

More dramatic? Yes. Does it work with your story? No. It's an example of a hook that does what I told you your hook doesn't do. Only you can write the best hook for your story. Take each example individually and apply it appropriately to your writing style and use common sense.

Second sentence established context, which is good, but still does not give me a reason to care, it feels bland and weak, void of emotion. This style can work, but only through resonance and consistency to convoke a mood and atmosphere portraying your main character as jaded and empty. Clashing jadedness with angst is a huge turn off for most readers.

Third sentence is good, creates more context and uses word choice that says something about the main character, their personality, emotional response to the current situation and is brief within a potentially intense event for the story.

Fourth sentence tells me a conclusion about an idea that the reader doesn't know about, thus the reader doesn't just not care about the idea, now they're annoyed that you told them what to think about the idea that they don't know about. It does not entice them to read on and find out what the idea is because you already gave them the conclusion, the trudge on through the story begrudgingly or strain themselves to fill in the void you've left in your narrative.

Fifth and sixth sentence same as the fourth.

Example for your second paragraph:

Water rushed inside of me causing me to choke and my lungs to burn. I know not why I brought this upon myself, this self-retribution, this pain. The lives of most would flicker and fade in such a situation, but for me, it was merely an exercise in pointlessness. No matter how much the specter of death mocked me, no matter how much I would try, I couldn't die.

Again, this example does not fit in your story, it's just using some pieces from it to show you how to write a more interesting narrative by employing layering, active voice, emotional voice, relating to the reader, building context, creating intrigue.

Let's explore those, shall we?

Layering: Context first, then build off the context and create intrigue by allowing the reader to draw their own conclusions, then show the conclusion when it is most appropriate for the story. In my example I created context by showing actively the character drowning, but it was more interesting because I didn't tell the reader, "picture me drowning, you got that?". Then I threw in some emotional voice and related the reader, giving them some reason to care about the character before I reveal what their real underlying issue is which is the conclusion of this paragraph and the point of the character telling the reader all of this. Wording when making generalizations is key, make it clear the character is making an assumption, an aside, some commentary outside of the main context of the story. Then at the end I finally show the conclusion after building up to it, giving clue after clue adding to the fires of intrigue, that the character cannot die.

It's fine to repeat words, but please avoid repeating pairs. If you say irritated lungs in one paragraph then say exhausted lungs or irritated breathing in the next if you must, but you might as well be as dynamic as you can and show exhausted breathing.

"My house", currently there is almost zero context to the sitting other than 'a pool' which is fine, as long as we're building context, that's good, regardless of the direction as long as it all comes together smoothly. However, I don't know if your house is on Mars, a castle, a mansion, a suburban three-decker or a ghetto in the projects. You're basically telling the reader, "picture a house", which is lame, take responsibility for the specifics of your story and give the reader some anchors to settle into the universe of your specific story, you don't even have to waste a sentence on it, just use a predicate. I looked at my run-down apartment complex and let out a deep sigh as I climbed out of the pool. Try to keep your sentences to three clauses disregarding "and"s.

He ran to the store after his alarm clock, which he received from his mother, went off and woke up the neighbors.

That sentence is fine in terms of number of clauses. It could be better, but that's not the point. Here is what you should avoid:

He ran to the store after his alarm clock, which he received from his mother, went off and woke up the neighbors, who were still mad about the dog you received from your cousin's mailman who had lyposuction last week before going on the diet he was always yammering about during suppertime at the racetrack.

That's a run-away sentence to exaggerate my point. 4 Clauses disregarding "and"s if you must, but please just use two sentences and rearrange your words so the reader can follow along smoothly. The better your flow is, the more the reader can immerse themselves in your story.

I find double "and"s a bit bland and awkward, but that may just be my preference.

Better example:

Looking down at my pale skin, I walked over to the back door and opened it with ease.

Please note, you should not be opening doors with ease while you are merely walking towards them not walking to them. It's a nitpick, but I wanted to say it.

Ah, a trick I learned to make dialogue flow better:

"Amber," I heard my mom call. "Go to the supermarket, we need some milk, but take the safe way please."

I should hope the character recognizes their mother's distinct voice, so cut the reader some slack and allow them to pick up on that themselves, don't throw in useless details that are redundant with other details or common sense unless for non-logical effect. Also, it's important to tag the dialogue to a new character that hasn't been introduced yet immediately otherwise we think the main character is talking and then when we read 'mom' we get confused and it breaks flow and immersion.

Trip to the store feels like a purposeless event contrived to pass time and get the character away from the setting in order to have them return and enact a cliché sequence. Please give order, reason, motivation and purpose to all of your events to build logical or emotional context, intrigue, plot, development, etc. It reads quite blandly otherwise.

"Picture a giant man, I'll give you a moment, no hurry, ok now I'm going to show you how I picture a giant man, why are you looking irritated?" That's what I read.

Example:

With tears streaming down her face as it turned from a red to a purplish hue, a muscular, scarred hand tightened around her throat. Tall and unshaved, the giant of a man gave off the impression of an ex-criminal, who had just come out of retirement it would seem.

Tighter clauses, keeping to details that promote logical and or emotional context, showing the reader the events of your story and its characters rather than blithely telling them things to picture.

You miss a lot of opportunities to provide specifics instead of vague details. Ground could be marble or tile, also what is the jug made of that it made a loud thud? Is it a grass hut? Little details can give subtle, but powerful hints to the nature of your setting without having to take attention away from the main events and mental status of the main character.

Never say cliche in a book, it's cliche! Also is a massive ejection button to immersion, flinging the reader through the fourth wall without even touching or mentioning it.

The story isn't mystery and I can't really follow where it's going with any of this, no scope for the plot has been established 2 WP pages in. Writing becomes more active which is good, but still follows many of the flawed patterns pointed out above.

"This boy was almost the polar opposite of…" Where the hell was this paragraph earlier? I dislike the vague references made to the other boy where predicates could have been used to add more depth to the story, but still overall this paragraph stands out as doing a lot right that many of the others don't.

Whoa, hold up there! "Alright, I have to spoil the story real quick, to hell with subtlety and artful narrative provoking thoughtfulness and atmosphere!" I don't care if it's dialogue, don't give away the mystery that easily after very weak build up with hints that don't connect to the conclusion you've decided. Experiments? What does this have to do with your mother being attacked? Why didn't Robert interrogate her for the main character's location and why didn't the mother scream for Amber to run away.

Towns have capital first letters for their titles, "Lonseon Town" or "the town, Lonseon".

Overall, it's a good start and a lot of it will come to you in time with experience and more drafts and feedback, I used to be awful at writing narrative, far worse than what's here. No, you definitely show the potential to write a good, interesting, engaging story here, you're simply not making the most of your words and ideas. A lot of my issues with the piece are phrasing related, i.e. you can say many of the same things here just fine, just say them better, so you don't need to start over, it is a fine core for you to work with. I would recommend rewriting each paragraph, parallel with the original events simply employing the ideas I've given you in my critique.

Remember though, at the end of the day, it is your story not mine, use your best judgment in addition to being open to feedback. I hope you benefit from this critique, if you have any questions please don't hesitate to ask.