On Sun, 26 Oct 1997, Richard Lawson wrote:
: On Sunday, October 26, 1997 4:05 PM, Nicholas Leifker wrote:
: > Richard Lawson wrote:
: > >
: > > I have deliberately left off the series tag; I want to know
: > > how long it will take you to get it. It's not Ranma, I'll
: > > tell you that much. I'd be interested in knowing when exactly
: > > you figured out who "she" is.
: >
: > Despite this, I was still expecting an alt-Ranma/Kentaro story at the
: > beginning. You've just written too much relationship angst there.
Nah, when I read that he left out the series tag and said he
wanted us to figure out who "she" is, I immediately thought,
"Well, can't be Ranma, then." After all, he already *did* that,
and while I called him predictable at times, he certainly is not
repetitive. :)
I went through the story wondering who the hell this could be,
ranging from a prequel to _To be in Love_ to something set in the
Kimagure Orange Road universe. Should have thought of SM, but it
never occurred to me until she was in the park, looking up at the
moon. That was mean, Richard, making us wonder which well-known
character this could be, when it wasn't one of those at all. :)
: > > I'm wavering between "The Cycle" and "The Next Cycle" or
: > > scrapping both for a better title. Your thoughts appreciated.
: >
: > "The Immaculate Conception"? ;P
Ouch!
: I was actually thinking about that during the moon scene. That's why I
: made it a point to have the queen say that Kenji would still be needed,
: to downplay this parallel.
And thanks for that.
: > > This is an experiment in writing for me. I tried for a more
: > > stream-of-consciousness approach and, I think, mostly failed. I
: > > may change this all to past tense. Let me know what you think.
: >
: > If you change it, I will come up to Minnesota (once my car's working
: > again) and I will hurt you. ^_^
:
: :) We're talking a twenty-hour drive, Nick. I have the feeling your
: car would die somewhere in Iowa, and then where would you be?
Err, in Iowa? Just a guess.
: Plus you'd have to get past the Foxes not once but twice. Is it really
: worth the risk? ^_^
Oh, the Foxes are really just big softies; their bark is worse
than their shooting, hacking, slicing, disemboweling and blowing
up. :)
: > > The breeze brushes softly against her skin. She shivers, not
: > > because she feels cold, but because she feels *good*.
: >
: > Interesting... third person present-tense.
It's been known to happen. :)
: Taken, interestingly enough, from a Stephen King short story.
I once read a whole book written like that, when I was 10 or so.
It was pretty confusing to me at first, but soon I didn't even
notice anymore.
You said that you thought the effect faded somewhat later on, and
I agree. Not only does the reader get used to the present tense,
but you also drift away from the heavily introspective, almost
stream-of-consciousness style, the further the story progresses.
In the end, the text is pretty much the same as you usual prose,
only written in present instead of past tense. If you want to
keep the effect intact, you have to actively work against the
reader's getting used to it.
: > Nice segues in this.
:
: Thanks. I was hoping they wouldn't come across as too cheesy.
Not *too* cheesy, but I found them a bit contrived sometimes.
: > > Oh my, you feel so strongly and deeply. Such love in your
: > > soul, causing you such pain. It should not be so."
: >
: > At the risk of sounding rude, get rid of the "Oh my" in there. It
: > distracts.
I agree.
: Well! I *never*. <sniffs loudly, turns on his heel, stalks stiffly
: away>
:
: Of course it's not rude, baka! :)
:
: Will remove the "my".
Better.
Sebastian