ok I tweaked it a bit:

quote:

---

At least I was still alive, that had been the biggest risk. The fanatics were unpredictable, Jakob had been emphatic about that. I knew he didn't want me to chance anything. I also knew what was at stake if I let the trail die. The last three years of rebuilding my life from disjointed memories, but more importantly, the livelihood of the Antioch family. The longer I let the fanatics keep possession of the messenger ring, the better chance they had of finding the hiding-place first.

If they did, well, I'd lose those people forever. Assuming they weren’t already dead.

---

old:
At least I was still alive. That had been the riskiest part. The fanatics were unpredictable, Jakob had been emphatic about that. I knew he didn't want me to chance anything. I also knew if I let the trail die, a lot would be lost. More than just the past three years of rebuilding my life from disjointed memories, the Antioch family itself was at stake. The longer I let the fanatics keep possession of the messenger ring, the better chance they had of finding the hiding-place first. If they did, well, I’d lose those people forever. Assuming they weren’t already dead.

[This message has been edited by Zero (edited March 28, 2007).]

The main places I am thrown off would be the first 2 lines, and the last 2 lines. The first throws me off with "At least..." it seems like to have an "at least", you have to have a worse situation already occurring. So starting with that does throw me off. And the "riskiest part of" what? I want to know what that is.

hoptoad, lol, that was clearly a reference to my criticism of other names, no?

quote:

---

At least I was still alive, that had been the biggest risk.

---

Doesn't make sense. What had been the biggest risk? Staying alive?? That really doesn't make sense. Having it right at the beginning brings me to a dead-stop. Do you really need it?

NIT - The fanatics were unpredictable[.] Jakob had been emphatic about that. would make the thought clearer for me.

The modern word for the place is Antakya.

Jakob, on the other hand, reminds me of Jakob the Liar, however, you may be a Robin Williams fan. You may have good reasons to use it. Particularly if the character is supposed to be Eastern Euopean.

The silliest one was "messenger ring" it was way too dick tracy for me.

Taken on the whole,

• Fanatics looking for a 'hiding place'
• Unnamed pursuer
• Eastern European adviser — probably a learned Jew or religious type... an insider figure
• A family that seems to have links to the crusades, antioch and *probably* the knights templar
• Ancient devices holding secret messages, code, clues or properties
•To top it off we have a character with shattered memories, maybe it's a women, maybe she is the 'sang real'

the piece smacked of wanna-be Davinci Code.

Just because I think the names and set-up sound silly does not mean they are nor that you have to change them. It does not even mean that the -- perhaps unintended -- connotation have any bearing on the story. They just seem ill-considered and contrived and as if they telegraph your punches, in my opinion, but I know you appreciate people being straight with you.

this isn't in turkey, this is on a different completely fictional world, so does that give me liberty to use both Jakob and Antioch in context together? Or is that still too distracting?

By Antioch I am referring to a Citadel, part of the Syrian Tetropolis. My world is also centered in a tetropolis, so it is a tribute to the real deal. Plus, I happen to think it sounds cool. My bet is that you wouldn't stop reading over that, but do let me know if I am wrong.

I've never seen Jakob before. And I won't hide the fact that I pulled it right out my ass when I was writing this piece. In this world a lot of people take their names from stars Antares, Rigel, stuff like that. It is important for this character "Jakob" to not be named after a star, given his social role, however, I want his name to still fit in with the science fantasy environment. I don't think it really does that, my weak attempt at that was to replace the "c" with a "k." Because I thought if Antares and Jacob went to the ice cream stand together, someone might think something is off. If you have some name ideas I just might take one as a tribute to your assistance.

And as for "message ring" this isn't a cracker-jack box decoder ring. The term was messenger ring. Does that change anything? if not this term isn't a concrete one either. The truth is this ring is far more significant then just a map. I'm just not sure how to hint at its significance early on, since later our character, then an amnesiac, knows it's important but not why. I'd like the reader to have a clue and an advantage over our character. However, perhaps there is a much superior term. Again, I'm honestly asking for suggestions.

I changed message to messenger.

There were some other additions too.

As I thought and said above, you clearly were unaware of the unintended connotations of the names you chose. Yes, the names in the setting would probably throw me off and if you doubt that then be my guest looking at my comments in threads going back perhaps two or three years here on Hatack.

Like I say, most people don't realise the connotations of the names they use.

But that leaves me without a character name. I was serious when I said I was open to suggestions.

quote:

---

this isn't in turkey, this is on a different completely fictional world, so does that give me liberty to use both Jakob and Antioch in context together?

---

You can use any names you want. Just be aware of the connotations. Antioch and Jakob indicate that your world has Judaeo Christian historical connections and is a future ex-situ Earth colony derived from some Syrian cultural past. If this is the case then I would expect an equal amount of Islamic names to be represented in the text. If they are not I'd want to know why and what happened to the Moslems?

My story/world assumes that earth, as we know it, exists billions of miles away or never existed at all. This is a different planet with no space-faring.

Should I try to establish that better?

I do have a bit of a prologue, had you read this, would it work better, or not?

quote:

---

“Terra,” our planet, it cradled humanity for thousands of years, perhaps millions. Here we once grew and built great cities, monuments of technology, and weapons of unchecked desolation.

When the first missiles were fired they sparked an epoch of unrestrained violence.

The capital cities collapsed overnight. The fallout killed millions. Nuclear-winter followed; it killed billions.

It killed everything.

The eight mainlands became forever infested with radiation and debris. The few survivors reduced to tatters of their once great civilizations; scattered to forever experience the tribal ages of yestermillenia.

Except for us. The holocaust that ravaged Terra over 100 years ago left us untouched. The fallout avoided our island. Our cities still stand, we are all that is left of he greatness humanity had once had. Forever restricted to our small continent.

It is our entire world now. Tetropolis, only four cities. Two million people isolated in the deep southern sea.

Then came Antares to jeopardize it all.

That was five years ago.

---

Read it quickly as I expect it shall be deleted.

It is so common as to be virtually synonymous with Earth .

In most sci-fi, Terra will mean 'this' planet. The one we call Earth.

That's what I mean about connotations, be in control, don't let them run amok and spoil your work.

If you are using portugese ( as mentioned, Terra is not limited to portugese), syrian, catholic (Antioch), Eastern European, 20th Century earth nomenclature for stars etc etc etc there seems to be no apparent underlying plan nor defined backstory that will lead to well chosen names that help propel the story. At best they will be so random as to be invisible but more likely they will hinder the telling of your story.

If you really believe in the power of well chosen names that, of themselves, help tell a story, then work on the history and backstory in a logical and interesting way in order to inform your text rather than just asking for lucky-dip suggestions that may or may not be consistent with your world.

Whether you think that sort of time and effort will serve your goals as a storyteller is another question.

I would rather use real names and borrow from their symbolism then make up a plethora of my own gibberish based names.

It's, at least, good to be aware that I may be endangering the interest, or sanity, of some readers, like yourself. But even knowing that, I prefer my use of real names to gibberish ones.

And I actually love the link between Terra and Earth. It may be confusing at first, but before long it'll be obvious this is not earth that my story is taing place on. And even if it was, that isn't relevant to the story that I am trying to tell. And if at the end of the day one reader thinks "hmm... I wonder if this sort of thing could happen on earth," well, that's fine too. (Although there are some heavy fantasy elements in this story that cannot exist on earth as we know it)

If it's names, the same rule applies as for critiques in general. "This is stupid!" is not allowed. If you don't like something, a scene, a word choice, a name, a character, tell the author why.

Once the author knows why you don't like something, the author should not waste Hatrack space and Hatrack participant's time defending the author's choice. Can you say "arguing with the critiquer," boys and girls? I knew you could.

If it is something deeper than names, such as zero vs hoptoad no matter what, then I will have to ask zero and hoptoad to pretend that each other does not exist.

quote:

---

something deeper than names such as zero vs hoptoad

---

That makes me sad.

If I upset anyone, Particularly KDW, I apologise.

hoptoad will not be wasting people's time, was not my intention, but see the point.

There has been misbehavior elsewhere, and I posted my request here, Zero, in order to get your attention.

I take it I can't chalk it up to "being a bastard," and be done with it, then?

My recommendation of changes would be in restructuring the words in your sentences.

For example:
"The fanatics were unpredictable, Jakob had been emphatic about that."

Could be changed to:
"Jakob had been emphatic that the fanatics were unpredictable."

It makes the sentence more dynamic when the last word is the most important word. It rings in the reader's memory. I'd rather remember "unpredictable" than "that."

Your next couple of sentences are kind of wordy:
"I knew he didn't want me to chance anything. I also knew what was at stake if I let the trail die."

My suggestion would be this:
"He didn't want me to chance anything, but I couldn't let the trail die."

The next sentence sounds a little weird:
"The last three years of rebuilding my life from disjointed memories, but more importantly, the livelihood of the Antioch family."

I'd change it somehow, but I don't fully understand what it means.

Also, I would shorten this:
"The longer I let the fanatics keep possession of the messenger ring, the better chance they had of finding the hiding-place first."

To this:
"The longer they kept the messenger ring, the better chance they had of finding the hiding-place."

Or something to that effect. Throw off "first." We already know that you don't want the fanatics to find it first, second, three-hundred-and-fifty-eighth, or at all for that matter. It's a hiding place! ;-) And since "hiding-place" becomes the last word of the sentence, then it makes the reader wonder more about it. Like a surprise or a hidden treasure. Makes you wanna open it!