posted
This evoke a clear picture of the monsters facing May?
quote: As they came closer, she could start to decipher what they looked like and her confidence vanished. Though their bodies were human shaped, their limbs were hideous creations. Their faces were ravens' heads, with huge, distorted beaks.
The rest of what they looked like was utterly indescribable, with masses of writhing tentacles, patches of wet fur, and thin layers of multicolored scales.
The enchantment blocking her, May couldn't step backward. All she could do was stare as they strode confidently closer, all thoughts of using magic gone.
One cawed, a deafening squeal. The terrible noise drilled into May, sonic pain spiking through her. Unable to bear it, she clutched at her ears, grasping them as tightly as she could. It didn't help.
[This message has been edited by Phanto (edited June 10, 2004).]
[This message has been edited by Phanto (edited June 10, 2004).]
posted
Um, no. Human shaped bodies? Does that mean just the trunk? And if it does, most animals have a barrel-shaped trunk. What is it specifically that makes them human-shaped? Breasts? Navels? My personal favorite animal body to use in such circumstances is the lizard--especially the horny toad--flat, splayed ribcage, narrow at the hips like a leathery teardrop.
And "...their limbs were hideous creations..." Why? What about them makes them hideous? The clearest description is of their faces. But then you say they are like raven's heads. So is it the head or just the face?
Then you say the rest of them is utterly indescribable, yet you go on to describe it. Hmmm.
And I don't imagine a grotesquely composite creature would 'stride' anywhere. It might writhe or slither. And how do you know the creature is confident? That's a POV shift that doesn't sit right.
I think the best line was the last, though it could use tightening by combining the first two sentences. Something like:
One screeched--a deafening squeal that drilled into May, spiking her with sonic pain.
posted
I mostly like the description, but I have to agree with dakota that it's not particularly clear. That's not necessarily bad; it's still interesting, but if clarity is what you're going for, this needs some tightening up.
The one thing I didn't like about it... "The rest of what they looked like was utterly indescribable"
Was it really indescribable? I think writers say that too often about things that are really describable. I mean, writhing tentacles, wet fur, scales, there's nothing there that can't be described. I think most of the time, what "indescribable" means when we writers say it is, "There was a bunch of stuff I don't want to take the time to describe."
Too sum up--interesting decription, but not clear.
posted
Hmmm...interesting. You see, these people ARE exactly human shaped. (Kind of because they're made from humans...)
An earlier phrase might have cleared the manner up slightly, [In the distance...]a large group of men-shaped figures appeared
True, though. Then you say the rest of them is utterly indescribable, yet you go on to describe it. Hmmm. I have to agree, it's an annoying thing to do.
I'm not focusing too much on clarity, but rather on the sense of grotesque creatures, highlighting one or two details.
posted
In that case, Phanto, I think it's a good description (except for the indescribable thing). That's kind of what I thought you were going for, and I think you did a good job. The general impression of grotesqueness definitely comes across. I think you give the reader enough info to form their own picture of what the grotesque creatures look like.
Posts: 1528 | Registered: Dec 2003
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
