As for omniscient: I like omniscient. I read it in new books from Bernard Cornwell, Robert Low, Conn Iggulden, Robyn Young, Kevin J. Anderson, etc. David Gemmell was one of my absolute favorite writers (and one of the only ones who I have read every single book he's written), and he ONLY used 3rd Person Omniscient. If used well, it can make for a quick, informative read.

AS for Dune: it's the best selling science fiction epic of all time. I think it's fine the way it is. Those who didn't enjoy it, wouldn't have with any changes.

quote:

---

Those of us who've been here a while had grown a tougher skin

---

Even if I don't agree with what's being said, it is, after all, the opinion of someone I'm attempting to win over as a reader. I have no delusions about winning over absolutely everyone who can read, but every outside thought gives me insight as to how others perceive my writing, and such insights are valuable to me. As far as my realization goes, the only thing my thick skin and honest approach has not really defended me against is when a reviewer decides to rewrite portions of my story for me; others might find that valuable feedback, but that tends to annoy me.

For me, the most valuable thing I picked up from OSC was that there's only really 3 comments your readers should give, that you absolutely may not argue with. I don't remember exactly, but it's something along the lines of:

Huh? - Translation: I don't understand this part of your story.
Yeah right. - Translation: I don't believe this part of your story.
Who cares? - Translation: I don't care about this part of your story.

Anything beyond that may or may not be useful, but if your reader is confused, disbelieving, or bored, you don't get to argue with them about it, and they ARE ALWAYS RIGHT. Feel free to second guess their reasons for WHY they are confused, bored or disbelieving, and you're also free to NOT CARE! Sometimes you're just not trying to get certain people to like your story; They're not your audience.

Good readers are the ones who remember it's their PERSPECTIVE that's valuable, not necessarily their advice.

For me, the valuable part of this is not the "why" people are telling me, though it CAN be valuable. For example, the "the whole intro felt rushed" . . . that may be, but if I'm TRYING to do that, I'm doing things perfectly. The real message under that is "who cares?". Rushed or not, somehow, I didn't make that reader care about my into. PERHAPS they're right about it being rushed, but maybe not. (in this case, I think they are) Either way, it's my job to be a good enough writer to fix the problem.

Is that a congrats to skadder?!

Let's see if any of you'll even come close to winning the next one.
Ha!

Just kiddddding people.
Very well deserved is all I'll say.

There were some excellent openings, and a lot of interest in the challenge.

Also congratulations to Crank for that winning title. It really added to the implied promise of the story.

Thanks skadder for running this. And to snapper, for keeping us entertained. Next time skadder will be a little reticent to let you take over, I suspect, because you keep forgetting to delete his paragraphs.

As for my part, I'm very happy with the feedback. I knew getting dark would have a cost, and those who were repulsed were even so because I'd achieved what I had set out to.

I did think it strange how many were drawn to write the Hunter/Hunted instead of Day and Night or Fire and Ice. I'd like to see a challenge like this where the genre is determined, and each writer would have to step out of his or her comfort zone. And I'd like to see hooks to actual short stories. I'd also like to see those stories submitted. Then the contest winners would be obvious...

Now, if you'll excuse me, it's time to finish that story and send it out to another type of contest...!

We just need to push a particularly compliant person...