FFS! Flash Fiction Selections: Skeletons in the Closet
- Thread starter Nemopedia
- Start date
- Status
A
Ananfal
Guest
To make a long story short, we're all intellectuals here and whether we hate em or love em, everyone knows who Shakespeare and Hemingway are. :P
- Invitation Status
- Not accepting invites at this time
- Posting Speed
- One post per week
- Slow As Molasses
- Writing Levels
- Adaptable
- Preferred Character Gender
- No Preferences
Whooot, some deep discussions here, but let's keep it on topic shall we? If you want to go into deep analysis about authors there are better places for that. Let's focus on the pieces submitted in a civil and constructive manner. c:
Also, the judges are doing their best in choosing the Finalists and possible Grand Finalist. It should be up sometime this week along with our reviews!
Also, the judges are doing their best in choosing the Finalists and possible Grand Finalist. It should be up sometime this week along with our reviews!
Last edited:
- Invitation Status
- Posting Speed
- One post per week
- Online Availability
- Late night PST
- Writing Levels
- Intermediate
- Advanced
- Preferred Character Gender
- Primarily Prefer Female
- Genres
- Fantasy, Post-Apocalyptic, Superpower'd, and some Sci-Fi.
I know you're all waiting with bated breath to hear who we chose as the finalists in this iteration of FFS, but bear with me just a moment longer while I explain what is going to be happening in this post.
First and foremost, your winners will be announced. Then there will be one review from all five judges. We thought about this, and while we each had individual reviews written out, we found that we all had relatively similar feelings about the pieces and it just made more sense to combine our reviews and give one, instead of five. So, now that we've got that cleared up...without further ado, I am very proud to announce your winners.
We had a total of THREE finalists in this round.
@Greenie with "What's in the Closet?"
@Peregrine with "Untitled #2"
Anonymous with "One Day on a Planet Called Sidbury"
Our Grand Finalist with an outstanding entry was…
*drumroll*
@Doctor Jax with "Where O' Where Could My Baby Be?"
You'll all be getting your ribbons shortly. Now, you may be asking why we chose these, and let me tell you, it was not an easy choice. There were so many great entries this time around! But, we had to choose winners, below are our reviews, we hope that they are enlightening as well as constructive. Enjoy, and we hope to see you next time!
Cohesiveness: With but a single scene, this entry nonetheless tells a full story without relying too heavily on exposition. There was a good build-up of tension as the spectre's control over her was determined to be increasingly complete, and the cutting reference—"Dance."—to the earlier use of the prompt was an effective way to end the story without overstaying its welcome. By leaving out the gruesome details of the attack and ending on an unambiguous yet abrupt note it is able to skillfully maintain the atmosphere of creeping horror that permeates the whole piece.
As a minor note on the plot side of things, it was unclear how familiar Ailbe was with the spectre: initially she asks "Who are you?", but later makes assumptions about whether or not it should have the capacity to feel and seems to have some awareness of its connections to her family.
Engagement: By way of its powerful imagery and simile, the entry effectively conveys each sensation as it afflicts Ailbe. In particular, the opening paragraph was a great hook, paired with a punchy second paragraph to ease the transition towards the more active events that follow.
There was, however, a lack of information on Ailbe's background or character that made it difficult to become invested in her following the initial pain she suffered. While there is certainly something to be said of her compelling struggle for control, without motives of her own or anything identifiable about the neighbours, the latter half of the piece left some judges less engaged.
Still, the mystery surrounding her relationship with the spectre—if largely unresolved—was a source of intrigue in its own right.
Originality: An interesting take on the prompt, and hinting at a larger story extending throughout her family line.
Polish: The entry was well written, with perhaps a few paragraphs that could be split to better delineate various actions, descriptions, and dialogue.
That being said, the abundance of epithets (the girl, the redhead) in use when referring to Ailbe did occasionally detract from the flow. Especially when used in the same sentence following a typical she or her, it unintentionally gave the impression that the actions were being undertaken by two individuals instead of just Ailbe.
As a minor note on the plot side of things, it was unclear how familiar Ailbe was with the spectre: initially she asks "Who are you?", but later makes assumptions about whether or not it should have the capacity to feel and seems to have some awareness of its connections to her family.
Engagement: By way of its powerful imagery and simile, the entry effectively conveys each sensation as it afflicts Ailbe. In particular, the opening paragraph was a great hook, paired with a punchy second paragraph to ease the transition towards the more active events that follow.
There was, however, a lack of information on Ailbe's background or character that made it difficult to become invested in her following the initial pain she suffered. While there is certainly something to be said of her compelling struggle for control, without motives of her own or anything identifiable about the neighbours, the latter half of the piece left some judges less engaged.
Still, the mystery surrounding her relationship with the spectre—if largely unresolved—was a source of intrigue in its own right.
Originality: An interesting take on the prompt, and hinting at a larger story extending throughout her family line.
Polish: The entry was well written, with perhaps a few paragraphs that could be split to better delineate various actions, descriptions, and dialogue.
That being said, the abundance of epithets (the girl, the redhead) in use when referring to Ailbe did occasionally detract from the flow. Especially when used in the same sentence following a typical she or her, it unintentionally gave the impression that the actions were being undertaken by two individuals instead of just Ailbe.
Cohesiveness: The entry successfully maintained a light-hearted and humorous tone throughout, while presenting a solid start, middle, and finish to its narrative joke. There was still room for some extraneous details not tied to the plot—such as her mother's sickness or the justification behind the manga—and narrative qualifiers—in her opinion—to be cut, as they were ultimately distractors.
The short back-and-forth dialogue paired with short actions as Radha was about to reach Skellington in the closet in particular did well to match the style of the narration with the tension of the narrative.
Engagement: The second-hand embarrassment from reading Nisha and her mother's awkward banter did well to keep the judges entertained, and the twist was an effective punchline fitting nicely with the tone of the piece and tying the theme of this month's challenge in as a bonus. It was a fun read.
The characters were fairly bare-bones, which while not crucial to this type of story still would have helped create more lasting engagement beyond the narrative punchline. Also note that some judges *cough* @Holmishire* *cough* felt Nisha's attempts at defending Skellington's presence did too well to "explain away" the joke, thereby diminishing its effectiveness.
Originality: Certainly this entry took a unique approach to an otherwise grim theme, standing out with its uniquely light-hearted tone. Despite their supernatural peculiarities, the characters were relatable, and the piece took full advantage of its metatextual context in its humour.
Some judges *cough* @Turtle Knight *cough* even went so far as to call it "adorable".
Polish: A few minor mistakes, be they doubled words or comma misplacements, were spread across the piece, but none so great as to significantly impact flow or comprehension.
The short back-and-forth dialogue paired with short actions as Radha was about to reach Skellington in the closet in particular did well to match the style of the narration with the tension of the narrative.
Engagement: The second-hand embarrassment from reading Nisha and her mother's awkward banter did well to keep the judges entertained, and the twist was an effective punchline fitting nicely with the tone of the piece and tying the theme of this month's challenge in as a bonus. It was a fun read.
The characters were fairly bare-bones, which while not crucial to this type of story still would have helped create more lasting engagement beyond the narrative punchline. Also note that some judges *cough* @Holmishire* *cough* felt Nisha's attempts at defending Skellington's presence did too well to "explain away" the joke, thereby diminishing its effectiveness.
Originality: Certainly this entry took a unique approach to an otherwise grim theme, standing out with its uniquely light-hearted tone. Despite their supernatural peculiarities, the characters were relatable, and the piece took full advantage of its metatextual context in its humour.
Some judges *cough* @Turtle Knight *cough* even went so far as to call it "adorable".
Polish: A few minor mistakes, be they doubled words or comma misplacements, were spread across the piece, but none so great as to significantly impact flow or comprehension.
Cohesiveness: The plot-threads felt rather scattered, with little tying the intrigue of the door to the bulk of the story—the hang-out with George. Ultimately, the backdrop added little to the mystery save an excuse for Lisa to pass by the door, when through offered hints and foreshadowing—such as through subtle clues about a missing wife—it could have greatly foreshadowed the ultimate disappearance and tied both halves of the plot together. (There was the implication that George had come from the basement via Lisa's reflection, but this was not addressed later and therefore left entirely unresolved.)
The ultimate result of this is that while the story builds up some tension and delivers an eerie conclusion, the middle overstays its welcome and does not adequately support the core mystery.
Engagement: With so much focus placed on the door through Lisa's thoughts and little realized dialogue, the entry did more to tell what happened than to show. Due to this and also in large part due to the lack of follow-up on implied plot-threads regarding the door, it was ultimately difficult to engage with the story. That isn't to say there was no intrigue; simply, it is that this intrigue was not resolved in a satisfactory manner.
The characters, too, were not sufficiently developed through action or dialogue for any of the judges to become invested in them.
Originality: The concept of the door and the consequences of its use were interesting, and with some more cohesion would make for a very compelling mystery. As it stand, it unfortunately does little to defy the expectations it sets up early on.
Polish: Could use some more proof-reading, as there was some repetition in the first paragraph, a splattering of comma spllces, and a verb tense issues permeated the piece. There were also some fairly long-winded sentences, and dialogue was generally pretty stiff in part due to flowing out of implied conversation rather than transcribed ones.
The ultimate result of this is that while the story builds up some tension and delivers an eerie conclusion, the middle overstays its welcome and does not adequately support the core mystery.
Engagement: With so much focus placed on the door through Lisa's thoughts and little realized dialogue, the entry did more to tell what happened than to show. Due to this and also in large part due to the lack of follow-up on implied plot-threads regarding the door, it was ultimately difficult to engage with the story. That isn't to say there was no intrigue; simply, it is that this intrigue was not resolved in a satisfactory manner.
The characters, too, were not sufficiently developed through action or dialogue for any of the judges to become invested in them.
Originality: The concept of the door and the consequences of its use were interesting, and with some more cohesion would make for a very compelling mystery. As it stand, it unfortunately does little to defy the expectations it sets up early on.
Polish: Could use some more proof-reading, as there was some repetition in the first paragraph, a splattering of comma spllces, and a verb tense issues permeated the piece. There were also some fairly long-winded sentences, and dialogue was generally pretty stiff in part due to flowing out of implied conversation rather than transcribed ones.
Cohesiveness: The structure of the story was good, properly setting up the life that would soon be turned on its head. And yet, there was a lack of care given to developing the relationship between Liam, his mother, and his father. It seemed to be building up to a reveal on the nature of his profession, which it did in the barest sense—but the true reveal was the relationship between his father and his mother, two characters whose backstories and motives had not be adequately represented prior.
Engagement: Perhaps in part due to the lack of development regarding Liam and his mother's relationship, his detached attitude towards her and his eventual violent outburst went contrary to the supposed guilt he felt for his betrayal. Due to this inconsistent characterization and his general assholery, it was harder for some judges to connect with his motives.
Still, the tone of the piece was consistent and the hints at his darker activities were enough to create a compelling intrigue, begging for the reveal that it dropped with the weight of a heavy object.
Originality: Even if the basement itself was predictable, the foreshadowing was effective and the real twist of the story was unexpected while still falling within the general bounds set forth by the story. The perspective character himself was very interesting, and passed through a compelling if grim personal evolution from guilt, to justification, to revelation and downfall.
Polish: Well-written with no notable errors in its narration.
Engagement: Perhaps in part due to the lack of development regarding Liam and his mother's relationship, his detached attitude towards her and his eventual violent outburst went contrary to the supposed guilt he felt for his betrayal. Due to this inconsistent characterization and his general assholery, it was harder for some judges to connect with his motives.
Still, the tone of the piece was consistent and the hints at his darker activities were enough to create a compelling intrigue, begging for the reveal that it dropped with the weight of a heavy object.
Originality: Even if the basement itself was predictable, the foreshadowing was effective and the real twist of the story was unexpected while still falling within the general bounds set forth by the story. The perspective character himself was very interesting, and passed through a compelling if grim personal evolution from guilt, to justification, to revelation and downfall.
Polish: Well-written with no notable errors in its narration.
Cohesiveness: A generally well-constructed story in which all parts directly supported the ultimate conclusion—even if that conclusion was made somewhat redundant by the initial dream sequence. There were still a few elements that felt tacked on—in particular, the kids were not explored much, acting more as shock-amplifiers than real aspects of the plot.
Engagement: None of the characters were given much individual depth, so most judges had some difficulty connecting with Lainie on a personal level. There was, however, a lot of emotion packed into the piece—dread, anxiety, anger. Paired with the shared disgust at Scott's betrayal, the story was able to keep the judges engaged from start to finish.
Originality: The use of the prompt in a both literal and metaphorical fashion was nice. Even more so, the dream made for a very interesting introduction for an otherwise straightforward simple plot.
The dream was not explored to the full extent of its potential, however. Its origin was not explained nor hinted at, and Lainie did not seem at all affected by her sudden capacity for premonition. Building on the intriguing nature of the dream could have been helpful in bolstering an otherwise entirely expected ending to an unexpected story.
Polish: There were a few awkwardly constructed sentences resulting from extra words, and perhaps some more variety in sentences—as many started with I—would be welcome, but overall it was well polished.
Engagement: None of the characters were given much individual depth, so most judges had some difficulty connecting with Lainie on a personal level. There was, however, a lot of emotion packed into the piece—dread, anxiety, anger. Paired with the shared disgust at Scott's betrayal, the story was able to keep the judges engaged from start to finish.
Originality: The use of the prompt in a both literal and metaphorical fashion was nice. Even more so, the dream made for a very interesting introduction for an otherwise straightforward simple plot.
The dream was not explored to the full extent of its potential, however. Its origin was not explained nor hinted at, and Lainie did not seem at all affected by her sudden capacity for premonition. Building on the intriguing nature of the dream could have been helpful in bolstering an otherwise entirely expected ending to an unexpected story.
Polish: There were a few awkwardly constructed sentences resulting from extra words, and perhaps some more variety in sentences—as many started with I—would be welcome, but overall it was well polished.
Cohesiveness: There isn't a single cohesive tale being spun here, instead a collection of the backstories behind a man, his father, and his ultimate escape. Each part does little to support the others, and there a certain loose ends that go unresolved—such as the dwarven companion of his father's mysterious disappearance.
Though it doesn't have a clear resolution for itself, it does act as an effective vignette of Dareskilith's past that would be useful as an introduction to a larger story.
The tone of the piece was consistent both with itself and with the narrator's attitude, helping to tie together the other disparate elements.
Engagement: That being said, the apathetic nature of the protagonist—which then bleeds heavily into the narration—did little to engage the judges. Without much emotion or any clear motives, his escape and betrayal of the dwarves were just as factual as his lineage, and therefore not a compelling reason to become invested in the character.
Originality: The entry took an interesting direction, making use of its unusual—if not entirely original—setting.
Polish: Coming across somewhat stream-of-consciousness, this entry also suffered a splattering of typos—including in particular missing words and inconsistent use of plurals.
Though it doesn't have a clear resolution for itself, it does act as an effective vignette of Dareskilith's past that would be useful as an introduction to a larger story.
The tone of the piece was consistent both with itself and with the narrator's attitude, helping to tie together the other disparate elements.
Engagement: That being said, the apathetic nature of the protagonist—which then bleeds heavily into the narration—did little to engage the judges. Without much emotion or any clear motives, his escape and betrayal of the dwarves were just as factual as his lineage, and therefore not a compelling reason to become invested in the character.
Originality: The entry took an interesting direction, making use of its unusual—if not entirely original—setting.
Polish: Coming across somewhat stream-of-consciousness, this entry also suffered a splattering of typos—including in particular missing words and inconsistent use of plurals.
Cohesiveness: Though its form holds some apparent structure and it certainly functions on merit of its artistic style, both halves of the narration are too abstract to make sense of. Less a cohesive story than a collection of snippets, if there is a unifying plot it is not one the judges were able to grasp.
Still, the tone of each half is distinctive, and helps to create an intriguing atmosphere. Also, @Holmishire would like to know, was the switch near the end to present tense—as well as the apparent shift from an impartial narrator to Ilya himself as evidenced by mother becoming mom—intentional?
Engagement: To an extent, the intrigue was enough to keep some of the judges engaged as they strove to make sense of the poetic puzzle that was its intertwining parts. Regardless of initial curiosity, however, the judges had difficulty being truly invested in a story and character they did not understand. Ilya's own motives were presented as uncertain in the end: be they accomplishment, expertise, or love?
Originality: Creative in its execution and perhaps even subject matter; ultimately, too much so, as whatever story was sought to be told was lost in translation.
Polish: Well-written and polished, with creative and compelling imagery.
Still, the tone of each half is distinctive, and helps to create an intriguing atmosphere. Also, @Holmishire would like to know, was the switch near the end to present tense—as well as the apparent shift from an impartial narrator to Ilya himself as evidenced by mother becoming mom—intentional?
Engagement: To an extent, the intrigue was enough to keep some of the judges engaged as they strove to make sense of the poetic puzzle that was its intertwining parts. Regardless of initial curiosity, however, the judges had difficulty being truly invested in a story and character they did not understand. Ilya's own motives were presented as uncertain in the end: be they accomplishment, expertise, or love?
Originality: Creative in its execution and perhaps even subject matter; ultimately, too much so, as whatever story was sought to be told was lost in translation.
Polish: Well-written and polished, with creative and compelling imagery.
Cohesiveness: Transitioning smoothly from a light tone to a dark one, the story is well structured and the conversation largely supports Death's eventual riposte. The other three horsemen, however, were hardly utilized—their presence helped somewhat to expand on the setting, but otherwise they served no more purpose than filler when compared to the two central verbal combatants.
Engagement: Benny himself is not very well explored, his purpose in relation to the four horsemen not clearly defined. In addition, neither Benny nor death had much character on display besides their snide wit, so there was little emotional investment on either side of the battlefield.
Still, the battle of wits was entertaining, and in particular it was nice to see how Death was able to turn the tables on Benny and put him in his place. In that sense, there was some nice character development for Benny, even if he didn't grow better for it.
Originality: The choice of setting was an interesting pick in regards to the theme set forth, and the choice of characters allowed for some meaningful banter holding greater weight for the fate of the world below them than the characters might initially betray. The hints at the deeper mechanics of the setting—by describing the weakening of the other three horsemen—was a nice touch that poses interesting questions about the state of the world.
Polish: A few punctuation slip-ups, but otherwise good.
Engagement: Benny himself is not very well explored, his purpose in relation to the four horsemen not clearly defined. In addition, neither Benny nor death had much character on display besides their snide wit, so there was little emotional investment on either side of the battlefield.
Still, the battle of wits was entertaining, and in particular it was nice to see how Death was able to turn the tables on Benny and put him in his place. In that sense, there was some nice character development for Benny, even if he didn't grow better for it.
Originality: The choice of setting was an interesting pick in regards to the theme set forth, and the choice of characters allowed for some meaningful banter holding greater weight for the fate of the world below them than the characters might initially betray. The hints at the deeper mechanics of the setting—by describing the weakening of the other three horsemen—was a nice touch that poses interesting questions about the state of the world.
Polish: A few punctuation slip-ups, but otherwise good.
Cohesiveness: With clear and concise narration, this piece masterfully kept only those parts essential to conveying its eerie tone and grim subject. The story flowed smoothly, pacing aided in part by the varying lengths of its sentences and paragraphs to match the flow of action and dramatic tension.
What little exposition and flashbacks it had was also incorporated just as smoothly as the rest.
Engagement: Despite how quickly the ultimate resolution was made apparent and the brief nature of the piece, it was able to build and maintain tension that remained even after the final word by virtue of its pseudo-cliffhanger. The emotions conveyed by the narrator—those of guilt and compassion—came across clearly but not in-your-face. Instead they were developed delicately through the child's relationship with their mother during this traumatic time.
Particularly effective—and moving—was the subtle switch from "Mom" to "Mommy" in the child's dialogue. And the powerful imagery as they drew closer to their mother was nothing to scoff at, either.
Originality: While the foreshadowing prevented a real twist from occurring, the choice of perspective in and of itself was a unique approach to a fairly familiar plot. The various uses of the prompt, paced properly throughout the piece so as to not become repetitive, was also quite interesting.
Polish: Very well written.
What little exposition and flashbacks it had was also incorporated just as smoothly as the rest.
Engagement: Despite how quickly the ultimate resolution was made apparent and the brief nature of the piece, it was able to build and maintain tension that remained even after the final word by virtue of its pseudo-cliffhanger. The emotions conveyed by the narrator—those of guilt and compassion—came across clearly but not in-your-face. Instead they were developed delicately through the child's relationship with their mother during this traumatic time.
Particularly effective—and moving—was the subtle switch from "Mom" to "Mommy" in the child's dialogue. And the powerful imagery as they drew closer to their mother was nothing to scoff at, either.
Originality: While the foreshadowing prevented a real twist from occurring, the choice of perspective in and of itself was a unique approach to a fairly familiar plot. The various uses of the prompt, paced properly throughout the piece so as to not become repetitive, was also quite interesting.
Polish: Very well written.
Cohesiveness: A well-constructed story, in which the narration switches deftly between shorter and longer sentences to convey desperation and the creeping fear of inevitability, respectively. That being the said, the flashback in particular was jarring in its placement. While useful at the end so as to properly subvert her relationship with the killer, it could have benefitted from being more smoothly integrated and transitioned with the police car scene.
Engagement: By matching the tone and the narration to slowly build up the tension and assumed horror at both the killer and the brother's slow approaches towards the closet, the piece was able to create a compelling scene.
The protagonist, however, betrayed little of her emotions throughout the story; it was difficult to become invested in her as a character. Even after her brother's death—especially after her brother's death—the psychological barriers that popped up in her defense prevented the judges from experiencing the horror expected to result from such a traumatic experience.
And this is then followed up by a cold flashback, and then a blank-faced ride back to the police station.
Originality: The shift of the perspective—both in terms of this month's theme and narratively—from the murder-victim to an observer hiding in the closet was very interesting and worked well. The political spin was also interesting, if a bit forced by its manner of inclusion.
Polish: The distinct use of present tense, while consistent throughout the piece, was unconventional and at times led to awkward sentence construction; not inherently problematic, but it detracted from the experience for some judges. There were also a few exceptionally long sentences, such as the opening one. Otherwise, very well written.
Engagement: By matching the tone and the narration to slowly build up the tension and assumed horror at both the killer and the brother's slow approaches towards the closet, the piece was able to create a compelling scene.
The protagonist, however, betrayed little of her emotions throughout the story; it was difficult to become invested in her as a character. Even after her brother's death—especially after her brother's death—the psychological barriers that popped up in her defense prevented the judges from experiencing the horror expected to result from such a traumatic experience.
And this is then followed up by a cold flashback, and then a blank-faced ride back to the police station.
Originality: The shift of the perspective—both in terms of this month's theme and narratively—from the murder-victim to an observer hiding in the closet was very interesting and worked well. The political spin was also interesting, if a bit forced by its manner of inclusion.
Polish: The distinct use of present tense, while consistent throughout the piece, was unconventional and at times led to awkward sentence construction; not inherently problematic, but it detracted from the experience for some judges. There were also a few exceptionally long sentences, such as the opening one. Otherwise, very well written.
Cohesiveness: Though primarily featuring dialogue, what little outside narration it has is often confusion. Many of the judges were initially confused as to which entity was being described—and ultimately, whether either of them were human. This was in large part due to the pointedly unorthodox means by which they were described, without first grounding either character so as to be identifiable.
The way the excerpts were interspersed was also a bit jarring. While each fragment was metaphorically matched to the dialogue, from a contextual standpoint they came out of nowhere, the letter having long since been taken away from both the characters and the narrative.
Ultimately, there was also a lack of a resolution to the story, in part because the nature of the alien threat and their role in the plot was not adequately developed.
Engagement: While there was some interest in the hints of the world built around the two characters, there wasn't enough rope given to truly tie anything down. Neither character betrayed much in the way of emotions or motives either in their dialogue or in their body language—and from them, it was difficult to determine what tone the piece was going for.
Ultimately, there were a lot of questions presented, but not nearly enough answers for a satisfactory round-up.
Originality: What clues were given made for the impression of a complex and compelling setting, but not much of it was revealed in this short snippet. Lots of potential, with perhaps a bit more context.
Polish: It was mostly dialogue, and what narration was present was good. Still, the description as mentioned earlier were confusing—one of the judges *cough* @Turtle Knight *cough* recommends reading those passages out loud to get a better idea of what works.
The way the excerpts were interspersed was also a bit jarring. While each fragment was metaphorically matched to the dialogue, from a contextual standpoint they came out of nowhere, the letter having long since been taken away from both the characters and the narrative.
Ultimately, there was also a lack of a resolution to the story, in part because the nature of the alien threat and their role in the plot was not adequately developed.
Engagement: While there was some interest in the hints of the world built around the two characters, there wasn't enough rope given to truly tie anything down. Neither character betrayed much in the way of emotions or motives either in their dialogue or in their body language—and from them, it was difficult to determine what tone the piece was going for.
Ultimately, there were a lot of questions presented, but not nearly enough answers for a satisfactory round-up.
Originality: What clues were given made for the impression of a complex and compelling setting, but not much of it was revealed in this short snippet. Lots of potential, with perhaps a bit more context.
Polish: It was mostly dialogue, and what narration was present was good. Still, the description as mentioned earlier were confusing—one of the judges *cough* @Turtle Knight *cough* recommends reading those passages out loud to get a better idea of what works.
Cohesiveness: Despite its short length, this entry does have a clear structure. Every little detail seems to have been carefully chosen to impact the story in some meaningful way—as just one example, the empty gun case informs two key aspects of the story: first, as a gift, that there is (or at least was) affection in this marriage; and two, that Hamilton is in grave danger.
While it ends abruptly, this is perhaps to its favour as it adds to the mystery of the piece. It is, however, lacking in the needed context to really understand it as a full story.
Engagement: Expertly creating a cunning set-piece in so few words, the fraught emotions of the Hamilton and Emily—again made clear through little details—were compelling and intriguing. Just what was this choice?
Originality: There's not a whole lot to go off of in this regard, but the execution was certainly unique, and a risk that paid off nicely. In a sense, it truly embodies the spirit of flash fiction, to say as much as possible in as few words as possible.
Polish: Nothing to fault here.Proof-reading this massive piece must have been a nightmare! @Holmishire, shhh
While it ends abruptly, this is perhaps to its favour as it adds to the mystery of the piece. It is, however, lacking in the needed context to really understand it as a full story.
Engagement: Expertly creating a cunning set-piece in so few words, the fraught emotions of the Hamilton and Emily—again made clear through little details—were compelling and intriguing. Just what was this choice?
Originality: There's not a whole lot to go off of in this regard, but the execution was certainly unique, and a risk that paid off nicely. In a sense, it truly embodies the spirit of flash fiction, to say as much as possible in as few words as possible.
Polish: Nothing to fault here.
Cohesiveness: Taking a slower and measured approach to its story, this entry benefited from a healthy dose of worldbuilding to support its insidious plot. The transitions between scenes were handled smoothly, and each scene built off the last to create a seemingly light-hearted—but also fiercely political—story.
The occasional parentheses, however, did detract from the flow—and the information they provided could either have been seamlessly integrated into the narrative, or left out entirely, as they were often less crucial details.
Engagement: The transition from light-hearted to politically insidious made for a compelling narrative, and there was just enough information on the setting to carry through the plot while still leaving much to ponder about.
There wasn't as much of an emotional connection to Varete as a character, with only the barest hints at his personality and motives. Instead, this entry seems to rely—just as effectively—on the connection with the Bungee people as a whole, both in their treatment and in the curious nature of their uprising.
Originality: The development of the setting was interesting, and the darker twist at the end certainly surprising. It was nice to see alternative cultures developed and used as a pivotal feature of the plot.
Polish: Besides a few syntactical errors resulting perhaps from efforts to overstuff individual sentences, it was a well written and edited piece.
The occasional parentheses, however, did detract from the flow—and the information they provided could either have been seamlessly integrated into the narrative, or left out entirely, as they were often less crucial details.
Engagement: The transition from light-hearted to politically insidious made for a compelling narrative, and there was just enough information on the setting to carry through the plot while still leaving much to ponder about.
There wasn't as much of an emotional connection to Varete as a character, with only the barest hints at his personality and motives. Instead, this entry seems to rely—just as effectively—on the connection with the Bungee people as a whole, both in their treatment and in the curious nature of their uprising.
Originality: The development of the setting was interesting, and the darker twist at the end certainly surprising. It was nice to see alternative cultures developed and used as a pivotal feature of the plot.
Polish: Besides a few syntactical errors resulting perhaps from efforts to overstuff individual sentences, it was a well written and edited piece.
- Invitation Status
- Looking for partners
- Posting Speed
- Multiple posts per day
- 1-3 posts per day
- One post per day
- Multiple posts per week
- 1-3 posts per week
- One post per week
- Online Availability
- Depends on how crazy my life is at any given moment, but I'm usually online- at least for OOC purposes- at least once a day.
- Writing Levels
- Adept
- Advanced
- Adaptable
- Preferred Character Gender
- Primarily Prefer Female
- Genres
- Medieval Fantasy, SciFi, Modern/Superhero, Dystopian
Good job, everybody! And congratulations to our winners!! :D you all did a great job. Thank you, judges, for your reviews. I will definetly put those suggestions toward my next project. I sincerely hope there will be another!
R
Ravenfrost
Guest
Congrats to the winners and thank you to the judges. Your reviews (I read all them all) were very well-written and helpful. I'm grateful to you for demonstrating how a review can be constructive, civil, and even (cough) entertaining, whether giving praise or pointing out flaws. I've posted reviews in the past and thought they were fine, but now I'm determined to do a much better job in the future, given your example.
- Posting Speed
- Multiple posts per day
- Online Availability
- 8:00 AM - 4:00 PM
- Writing Levels
- Prestige
- Preferred Character Gender
- Male
- Primarily Prefer Female
- Genres
- Political intrigue, fantasy, futuristic, sci fi lite, superheroes, historical fiction, alternate universes. Smittings of romance, but only as side plot.
Congrats everyone! Horror isn't my genre at all, but the submission winners were very well written and I enjoyed reading all of your work!
- Invitation Status
- Looking for partners
- Posting Speed
- 1-3 posts per week
- One post per week
- Slow As Molasses
- Writing Levels
- Advanced
- Prestige
- Preferred Character Gender
- Male
- Female
Congrats to everyone who participated, and especially those who won! (: Well done.
- Invitation Status
- Posting Speed
- One post per week
- Online Availability
- Late night PST
- Writing Levels
- Intermediate
- Advanced
- Preferred Character Gender
- Primarily Prefer Female
- Genres
- Fantasy, Post-Apocalyptic, Superpower'd, and some Sci-Fi.
Hey all, quick addendum—@Ravenfrost has decided to reveal themselves as the author of One Day on a Planet Called Sidbury!
Also, I'd personally like to thank everyone who entered, as well as those who kept the thread alive. It was a blast judging and I'm not-so-secretly glad to be judging FFS with its short entries because otherwise those reviews would have taken waaay longer to write.
Also, I'd personally like to thank everyone who entered, as well as those who kept the thread alive. It was a blast judging and I'm not-so-secretly glad to be judging FFS with its short entries because otherwise those reviews would have taken waaay longer to write.
- Posting Speed
- Slow As Molasses
- Writing Levels
- Beginner
- Elementary
- Intermediate
- Adept
- Advanced
- Adaptable
- Preferred Character Gender
- Male
- Female
- Primarily Prefer Female
- Genres
- Fantasy, Supernatural, Horror
Oh wowza! Out of all the entries, I'm so thrilled to see that my little thing was a finalist!
Thank you all for the reviews and the kind words!
And congratulations to the winners, the grand finalist as well as everyone who participated!
Thank you all for the reviews and the kind words!
And congratulations to the winners, the grand finalist as well as everyone who participated!
A
Ananfal
Guest
Eh, I mentioned before how I knew that this wasn't my forte and went for it anyway, so the reviews reflected that. I know I have a lot of work to do. :P
Congrats to the finalists, and the grand finalist! You guys definitely deserved it.
Congrats to the finalists, and the grand finalist! You guys definitely deserved it.
- Invitation Status
- Not accepting invites at this time
- Posting Speed
- One post per week
- Slow As Molasses
- Writing Levels
- Adaptable
- Preferred Character Gender
- No Preferences
Good job to all who entered and congratulations to the Finalists, especially the Grand Finalist. I'm surprised that the judges all nominated the same piece, but at the same time not so as it was an amazing read! :D
Seeing the popularity and demand of it I think a round 2 of FFS will be likely. I for sure enjoyed organising this event, so I'm definitely aboard for it.
Seeing the popularity and demand of it I think a round 2 of FFS will be likely. I for sure enjoyed organising this event, so I'm definitely aboard for it.
Last edited:
- Invitation Status
- Looking for partners
- Posting Speed
- Multiple posts per day
- 1-3 posts per day
- One post per day
- Multiple posts per week
- 1-3 posts per week
- One post per week
- Online Availability
- Depends on how crazy my life is at any given moment, but I'm usually online- at least for OOC purposes- at least once a day.
- Writing Levels
- Adept
- Advanced
- Adaptable
- Preferred Character Gender
- Primarily Prefer Female
- Genres
- Medieval Fantasy, SciFi, Modern/Superhero, Dystopian
- Posting Speed
- 1-3 posts per week
- Online Availability
- 3PM CST - 9 PM CST
- Writing Levels
- Intermediate
- Adept
- Advanced
- Adaptable
- Preferred Character Gender
- Male
- Female
- No Preferences
- Genres
- Fantasy, Scifi, Urban Fantasy, Horror
LOUD INARTICULATE SCREECHING
Along with my pellet stove finally working THIS IS THE BEST THING I HAVE FOUND OUT ALL DAY.
Along with my pellet stove finally working THIS IS THE BEST THING I HAVE FOUND OUT ALL DAY.
- Posting Speed
- 1-3 posts per week
- One post per week
- Slow As Molasses
- Online Availability
- Anytime, I have no life.
- Writing Levels
- Adept
- Advanced
- Douche
- Adaptable
- Preferred Character Gender
- Male
- Nonbinary
- Transgender
- Primarily Prefer Male
- Genres
- Fantasy, romance, slice of life, anti-hero stories, "you're our only hope", fandom non-canons, soft scifi, transhumanism, magical girls, horror, suspense / mystery, detective noir, fractured fairytales
- Invitation Status
- Posting Speed
- 1-3 posts per week
- One post per week
- Slow As Molasses
- Writing Levels
- Intermediate
- Adept
- Advanced
- Prestige
- Douche
- Adaptable
- Preferred Character Gender
- Male
- Female
- Primarily Prefer Female
- Genres
- Fantasy, Magical, Romance, Dystopian, Religious, Post-Apocalyptic, Zombies (but the plot has to consist of more than just mindlessly murdering the undead), Steampunk
Congratulations to our winners and I would like to say that I really enjoyed organizing and setting up this event. I'm really glad that it got the participation that it did! Thank you all for making this great!
- Status