I've came across over this short story randomly. I did finish the lecture, which means has some seed. However, the fruit is a little immature. I had prepared a full review. If Hannah it's interested in a sincere feed back, please contact me. It's my gift for her gracious sharing.
Surviving the Fog
on Aug. 01, 2012
I could not finish this book. I am sorry to be against the most of the opinions here, but Mr. Morris has to read the book again. From 100000 words he count in there, 1/3 are useless.
Like here: "Of the cabins on each side of the river, one on each side was reserved for the counselors. Two counselors shared each cabin. The counselors slept in comfortable double beds, instead of the bunk beds used by the teenagers."
Dear reader, count yourself the repetitions. And his book is full of them. The good thing: Mr. Morris masters well the grammar and I assume most of his errors are typos. But the text as a whole needs a good shake.
Thank you for making the book free, though. We all can learn. Please do not consider this a malicious comment. It's a alarm sound over the writer's gaucherie. A think easy to fix.
I hope I didn't generate resentments.
Open for comments, Gabriel
I had read the short story almost twice. I did enjoy it and I think this is a solid piece of writing. I will like to thank Mr. Blake for the well polished content: if there is any mistake in his story, I haven't seen it.
The storyline is just a little chipped by the too common ending. And my final impression is that the text could not stand alone. It will make a great piece in an anthology with different authors.
Anyhow, it is a very good reading, if not a great one.
Far from home...
I think is a good title, and not the only good thing across this book. As some other reviews stressed already, the choice of characters and names is very good. The action is sustained and griping. The space encounters are cinematographic presented. It is a good read.
Yet I have a bad eye, and I have to point to a couple of negative aspects:
The dialogues are at times uneven and too full of rhetoric: as the captain asking if the torpedo tubes are loaded with what... Sorry, I won't buy it. I'm just thinking of a tank or submarine commander: will he ever ask which ammunition is loaded or he'll order to use that ammunition?
At other times I had the sensation I'm walking over a grass field. All looks smooth and nice; suddenly, I trip myself: "The imaging processors showed the blips on their sensors to be ships Draxx ships."
I don't want to be misunderstood: the "goods" are far more numerous than the "bads." Yet there is a little more space for polishing.
Thank you very much for sharing the text gratis with us, Mr. Healey.
I would be a horrible liar if I would say I did not enjoy the lecture: definitely, I did. Thank you!
This is definitely the most complete work I’ve read in a while from Smashwords. Without reading at first the author’s statement, I could guess that here was involved a big deal of polishing and editing. This was the most pregnant impression I had reading Broadcast 0: a well finished work. Then, after I read what Mr. Lalonde has done to bring it into this shape, I realized that most of us would give up long before. Take in consideration the re-writing of eighty pages of dialogue only!
The title I found it superb and the subtitle very well inspired.
The action is fast paced and keeps the reader connected. The intricacies are revealed just at the opportune time and that makes the lecture very accessible and pleasant.
The personages are clearly drawn and strongly individualized. After the reader get to be acquainted with, he would guess who’s speaking without the author’s specification.
The obvious subsequent conclusion is that the dialogues are well implemented and highly personalized. Mr. Lalonde offers a very precious example of how to write a credible and natural dialogue.
Undoubtedly, the novel deserves the acquired fame and I’d love to congratulate Mr. Lalonde for his tenacity and especially for his final result.
Because of my natural grumpiness, I need to signal out a certain lack of originality but please ignore my rancorous observation and enjoy a great read: Spinward Fringe. Broadcast 0
The review was also published on the reviewer site.
Reading this story left me with a contradictory feeling. Although well written, something seemed not to be right, and I proceeded to a second reading. Only then I could see a couple of shadowy flaws creeping from behind the text lines: the dialogues and the clues. I don’t think somebody can write a prehistoric fantasy using only grunts and moaning for dialogues, but I believe the exposure of language should be wisely guarded. In the story line, I didn’t really appreciate the way the clues of the mystery came at hand. A little too convenient, I thought. The shard of flint and the circumstances of discovery it just didn’t geared with me.
Besides, the technique is well mastered, and I loved the delicious break after the she-wolf attack, amongst the other piquant moments.
As final conclusion, I positively appreciate the manner of writing (again) and the story as whole. It is a pleasant lecture and many thanks to the author for making it available for free.
“Long Odds” is a short story with a strong personality: the mechanics of the epic are well greased and functioning perfect together.
At first glance, it may seem a little dis-articulated but isn’t. The sci-fi element is strong and also the odds of happening, up to a point, in a well designed world.
Although the world is just a guess, it is very well portrayed by the description of the characters. The manner of acting and interacting gives a perfect view of the “outside,” which, for a short story like this one is quite a performance.
The only thing I found it not so inspired it was the ending: it made me taste like overcooked. The “brother” thing came just as too much fire over a perfect seasoned steak.
As conclusion, the story is impressing by clarity, the genuine world depicted and the well developed action.
That was a poor one.
Idea: Very old, very much used in movies and writing. (Rating: 3/10)
Storytelling: Not entirely bad but somehow repetitive and / or redundant. The story is too short to allow repetitions. The descriptions lack very much in originality, as this fragment shows: “The creatures were diminutive in size but had unusually large heads and bulging red glowing eyes. Their bodies were covered by some type of metallic armor, they communicated without words, somehow telepathically mind to mind. They worked quickly exploring Willie’s body with electronic probes of some sort. Willie was not harmed, not yet at least, but that would change as the procedure continued.” See what I mean? Flat, redundant and banal. (Rating: 5/10)
Personages: cartoons. It is true that the short story telling does not allow lots of space for developing full ranges of emotions, but I could not sympathize with none in this story: Willie is passive, the guards are passive; the dogs are the best. For me, seemed like AI driven characters in an old computer game (Warcraft I, maybe). (Rating: 4/10)
Conclusion: although I hate (I really do) the contemptuous comments like “waste of time,” as being generally too though and ungrateful on writer’s effort, this time I have to advert you: find something better to do (read).
Final rating: 4/10