posted
Okay, so the crit I got on my first go-round with this caused me to just start over with a different approach entirely. Please tell me how you feel about this in regards to the original... --------------------
There was a time when I believed I was a god, but that façade has long vanished, and now my soul is free.
And I know that there was a time before that - a time when I was not Hephaestos, but bore another name - but I have no recollection of it. Just as when mortal men feel an inkling of their premortal existence, so do I feel an echo of a memory of the simpler time.
A poet once said that we have only Past and Future, while God has only Present. I believe that now. Though I’m sure that I, like other men, must have been frustrated by the falsehood of mortality, I still yearn for it over this stagnant shadow of life that I have become.
[This message has been edited by Hylas (edited August 14, 2006).]
I'm Hephaestos. I'm not a god, but I am immortal, and it sucks.
So you might boil it down to just that. (OK, without the out-of-place slang.) I find the opening dull, and I think it's because it's taking a long time to say something relatively simple.
I'm not hooked by a boiled-down version, either, because the idea that immortality sucks is too familiar. But you may have a new take on it, taht makes it new. Waht is that new take? There's your hook, I think.
posted
I like the poetic style and the depth of the thoughts you're expressing, but then I'm 60 years old and a former English major. I don't think you'll grab a younger, mainstream reader with that beginning. I think there will be a place for those thoughts after you "set the hook."
I agree with wbriggs that the idea that imortality "sucks" may be a little over used. Still, it's what you do with that idea that could make it interesting.
I feel like I should add, "I'm not a published writer, but I did sleep in a Holiday Inn last night."
posted
I like the original story and if you could somehow "marry up" the two - I think it may improve it. I find this one a little dry, and it seems the MC is just babbling - bored. I can sense the poetic feelings the MC is trying to establish, but it does not pique my interest. There is no reason given for his disgruntlement, why is he there? Whats his purpose?? Probably if you give a general synopsis - maybe I/those who read these 13 lines may understand your premise...all in all, I like the way your writing flows and by no means am I the "expert".
Humanity, through science, has essentially reached the capability to live indefinitely - even against physical harm. A bunch of people said, "Hey, I guess we're gods! But...we've got no worshippers. So let's go to an out-of-the-way planet and raise up a race of mortals to worship us as gods! And we can assume the roles of various Greek gods...that would be cool!" So they did so, but they wanted it to be a "perfect" world - i.e. the mortals lack the capability to harm one another. Hephaestos, though, became disgruntled with this, and he assumed the role of Prometheus - who doesn't exist in their new pantheon - and gave the heavenly "fire" (agency/will) to Man. The gods, then, robbed him of much of his godly powers and condemned him on the crags like Prometheus of old. Now, Pollux - Zeus' bastard son, assuming the role of Hercules - rebels against the gods and frees Hephaestos. The two begin to work together to overthrow the gods, but their ideology turns out to be far different, which brings them against each other in the end. They also have to rely largely on the help of the wild-card Hades, who has his own agenda. Various gods in the story embody various ideas that people have of the One God, who Hephaestos/Prometheus believes in. Pollux embodies the noble (atheist/agnostic) humanist perspective.
And, of course, it all ends in tragedy. Well, kind of.
posted
It sounds like pretty standard Greek/Roman mythology to me! It's not necessarily what I'd normally read, but that is just me. I didn't get to read the first draft, and the rewritten version seems well written to me, but I agree that it would probably appeal to a more mature/intelligent audience, than a mainstream one. (That IS a compliment, BTW)
Posts: 105 | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
MommaMuse is right. Why go for the mainstream all the time? Maybe that's why the mainstream is so messed up these days - too many folks are catering to their weaknesses. Go for it!
Posts: 98 | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
Once, long ago, I thought I was a god. A god of wheels and metal and light and fire, all wound up in a twisted bundle of faultless flesh and self-indulgence. I called myself Hephaestos. But I know there was another name - a truer name, from before I began to believe my own lies. That native name, though, is a thing that I know of only in the way that mortal men know they existed before they were born. I think now that, while I was enrapt within that mortal coil, I’m sure I must have had such inklings - such subtle memories of the previous eternity. But I have some understanding of the plight of Tithonus, I think, in that eternal aging has clouded my senses. I can’t feel such intimations anymore; all is haze. They say the truth will set you free. I used to think that once
This is a book I would buy and read. I really like what you've done here. (I should also point out that a guy I used to share an office with once said that if you looked up weird in the dictionary, you'd find my picture.)
I didn't think "enrapt" was correct, but I looked it up, and if we were playing scrabble the point would be yours. Sorry for doubting.
posted
Sounds, good, Hylas. My e-mail is available on my profile. It will be my first since joining Hatrack, though.
Posts: 98 | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
