posted
I hate this story, one of those that stubbornly refuse to go in the direction you want it to. Anyway, if anybody would like to read the whole thing, it's a slightly flabby 7800.
Skyspear was their last refuge. A gleaming castle of blue, bright in the cold sunlight, nine spindly towers piercing the clouds from their mountain on top of the world. The last remnants of the proud realm of the Western Marches cowered in those thin, cold towers - above them fat white clouds and below them the swirling mists, dark and grey and secretive. And below those mists, the Ishtiraki, waiting, always waiting for those mists to melt away one final time. # “I take it that’s our young lord?” Annabelle arched a pretty eyebrow and nodded in the direction of a darkened alcove in the hall. “It is, my lady, he was returned to us three days ago,
posted
The story actually sounds pretty good so far. In my experience, when a story won't go the way you want it to go, that means it has taken on a life of its own. The stories I most enjoy writing are those where I don't know what is going to happen next. I'll read it, if you like.
[This message has been edited by Rick Norwood (edited August 16, 2007).]
Skyspear was their last refuge. A gleaming castle of blue, bright in the cold sunlight, nine spindly towers piercing the clouds from their mountain on top of the world. The last remnants of the proud realm of the Western Marches cowered in those thin, cold towers - above them fat white clouds and below them the swirling mists, dark and grey and secretive. And below those mists, the Ishtiraki, waiting, always waiting for those mists to melt away one final time.
It’s the opening with a description of the setting. That CAN work, but it doesn’t here. Why? I think the heart of the problem may be a dislocation between intention and impact in your description.
My mind just refuses – generally – to go along with a description written like this. Too many unconnected or vague details. It’s like holding one of those three-D wooden puzzles in one hand as you try to fit pieces into it with your other. It just collapses because what you have won’t hold together while you’re inserting the next piece. That make any sense?
I have read descriptive openings that did hold together. But somehow they built a coherent picture in my mind as I read through them. Why? What’s the difference? Better thought out description? They weren’t trying to do too many things at once? Here we begin with Skyspear” which means nothing at this point. And it was xxx’s last refuge – from what? Three unknowns in that first sentence. Too many for me to hold in my head while the author slowly explains.. I can’t get a real strong grasp of the setting. It’s on top of some mountain, is blue (!), and has nine thin towers like in some fantasy drawing or bookcover. UP there are mists ands sunlight and good, good, good folk and below are bad, bad, bad folk in darkness of climate and soul. The opening is saccharine?
It is totally wrong? Hey, these things do sell.
It feels like you are trying to make Skyspear impressive to me and to describe it physically at the same time. Two very different topics. Like in --
Skyspear. The name glows with the lustre of legend. A thousand years later, little dung heap inns call themselves after it and kings name their favorite stallions the same in hopes some of the magic still clinging to that word comes with it. The castle itself existed on a mountain top. A castle built of blue granite, shining in the morning sunlight while below the eternal mists clung protectively to the surrounding canyons and valleys. Beneath the mists waited morlocks, eager to snuff out the last brilliant light of the Western Marches. Despite all their magicks, that tenuous barrier of cloud and rain held...for a while.
Well, not terribly good, but now “I” have a better feel for the place. Not the same as the author wrote. I missed the nine towers and people cowering in the cold stone rooms. But does the sense of what’s said flow a little better?
posted
I agree with arriki, though I think this description could work if things were re-shuffled a little, the repetitions were cut, and the grammar improved. This is hardly perfect, but how about something more like this: - The last remnants of the proud realm of the Western Marches cowered in the gleaming castle of Skyspear. It was perched on the peak of the tallest mountain of the world, and it's nine spindly towers pierced the clouds. Below the cold towers swirled grey mists that cloaked the movements of the Ishtiraki. Yet the Marchers knew their ancient enemy lurked below, waiting patiently for those mists to melt away one final time. -
Since the castle is on a very tall mountain, I wondered why the clouds are above the castle. I've driven or hiked up many a tall mountain, and often I pass through the clouds on the way up. Yet the description implies that this is a very tall mountain and that the clouds are typically (if not always) above the castle. Also, if the gray mists are the protection of those in the castle, then I'd expect them to think positively toward the mist (rather than "dark and secretive") negetively toward what it hides. Just my nit-picks.
[This message has been edited by DebbieKW (edited August 18, 2007).]
Printer-friendly view of this topic
