I saw people giving some good constructive criticisms on the other writings, so I was wondering if you could please do the same for this piece: It is eerie to listen, in the stillness and loneliness of the night, to the beautiful and uniform voice of the clock. To those monotonous, mathematically exact sounds which are ever marking one and the same thing: the untiring movement of life. The earth lies in darkness and dreams. All is still. It is the clock alone which, cold and hard, reminds one of the passing of the seconds. The pendulum ticks. And, with each sound, life is shortened by a second. This second, this microscopic atom of time, has been given to each of us, but it passes, never to return. Whence came this second and whither does it go? No one gives an answer....There are many other questions which remain unanswered, many momentous questions, on the answer to which our life's happiness depends. How shall we live so as to have the consciousness of not having lived in vain? How shall we live so as not to lose faith and willpower? How live that no second shall pass which is not moved by intellect and feeling? Will the clock never give an answer to that? Oh! this motion without an end! What does the clock say to it? There is nothing in the world more equanimous than the clock. It ticked with the same uniformity at the moment of our birth and at the time when we eagerly plucked the flowers of youth's dreams. From the day of his birth onwards man is moving ever nearer to the end, and, when he lies in extremis, the clock, cold and impassive as ever, will continue to number its seconds. And if he listens he feels in these dry counts something all-knowing and weary from all the knowledge. These tones cannot be excited about anything, and nothing is sacred to them. They are indifferent to us, and if we would live we must procure another clock, a clock full of feeling and thought, a clock full of actions, as a substitute for the many monotonous, dull, cold-sounding hours of life, which kill the soul with depression.
What is this, a narrative? If it is a narrative I think you should start with actions. I am not very good at giving criticism, but if you are going to tell a story I think you need to shorten the description of the clock. And furthermore, if it is a story, I think it is better to link the description of the clock with the action of persons. For example. He listens to the clock. It pounds his heart with the stillness and loneliness of the night ....etc I think it is more powerful like that. Remember take what I say with a grain of salt because maybe I am full of shit.
Thanks for that Marmot, it was really helpful. Anyone else?
I think its perfect the way it is...I really liked it. Even if it is intended to be a narrative it would be fine to start by discussing the nature of the clock, time, and the human condition and then "pan out" into something else.
I agree with both Marmot and Plaguearound; let me explain. As many of you have also noticed, narrative styles cycle in and out of popularity. Detailed, in depth, and more "formal" narratives will be popular, then phased out for shorter, "casual", first person, and action oriented forms. Your work there resembles the (first) writing style that was popular and used in the times of J.R.R. Tolkien and Alexandre Dumas, however that writing style isn't particularly popular among writers right now. I suggest that if you're more comfortable with this style, go ahead and write in it (but not exclusively); sooner or later styles will alter, and this work will appeal more to audiences. If, however, you don't have your heart set on this style, try others; a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush, and a published work today is worth more then many that sit on your desk for decades (posthumously published works don't do much for yourself fiscally, either.) If you finish this work, and submit it for publishing, don't be shocked if you must send it out for a long time before it is accepted.
Thank you for the comments. Anyone else? I need more people to offer criticisms.
No criticism - only praise
Ok, well, thank you but you defeated the purpose of this thread! At least, some of you did. I did not write that story, I took it from Gorky: The Clock The reason I did so was because I wanted people to criticize the text, and then show them that even the great writers were not "perfect" and "suitable for everyone". Writing is a very subjective thing, though of course you need to stay within some limits. There may be people who absolutely hate everything you write, and will criticize the smallest thing, but you shouldn't give up because of that, that's the last thing you should do! Funny story; Gorky actually gave up on writing for years when Korolenko, a well-known Russian writer, offered some honest criticism of his first writings. Gorky was very embarrassed and couldn't handle it, so just gave up on writing for years. Imagine if he had given up on it forever based on that...
Hahaha! That's hilarious! When I thought you had written I had all this criticism to give you, but when I reread after finding out it was Gorkys it seemed perfect, good point Led Zeppelin!
