Other Reviews by dbialy 38

• 
  Not Silent Enough
  A review of Silent Crash
  by dbialy on 10/21/2008
  The good news is, the story is only two pages long. The bad news: It’s two pages long. I really don’t know what to say, except perhaps that the writer clearly has passion for writing – a solid foundation to build on. It would be a good idea to start with a simple question of ‘WHAT IS MY POINT?’ It doesn’t have to be a profound one. It doesn’t have to be unique... The good news is, the story is only two pages long. The bad news: It’s two pages long.
  
  I really don’t know what to say, except perhaps that the writer clearly has passion for writing – a solid foundation to build on.
  
  It would be a good idea to start with a simple question of ‘WHAT IS MY POINT?’
  
  It doesn’t have to be a profound one. It doesn’t have to be unique one either, or even worth telling. But it has to be reasonably clearly defined by the writer, to guide him in the process of writing and help focus the narrative.
  
  Even if the quality of the prose ends up inferior and full of holes, the story will at least have some resemblance of dramatic structure.
  
  Sorry to say that, but I find none of that in “Silent Crash”. I simply don’t get it. None of it. But it might be just me.
  
  My suggestion is:
  Just try to focus less on writing the words on paper (or screen), and more on what they could potentially evoke inside your reader’s head.
  
  Start with something that is not cool or cute. Something that makes you cry, for example. The results could surprise you. And you have the benefit of full anonymity here.
  
  Best of luck, and keep writing. read
• 
  Who am I?
  A review of The Epiphany
  by dbialy on 10/21/2008
  No doubt the writer has a knack for writing. The clear, smooth and natural flow of thought was joy to follow. Never left me confused or unsatisfied (except for the ending). The intelligent self-deprecating humor gives the story a rare honesty in exploring the folly of human nature. If we couldn’t laugh at the main character’s shortcomings, we would be gravely offended... No doubt the writer has a knack for writing. The clear, smooth and natural flow of thought was joy to follow. Never left me confused or unsatisfied (except for the ending).
  
  The intelligent self-deprecating humor gives the story a rare honesty in exploring the folly of human nature. If we couldn’t laugh at the main character’s shortcomings, we would be gravely offended by them. And yet, in some respects and to various degrees, he exists in all of us (at least in those who are able to recognize their own hypocrisies).
  
  The only reservation I have, is in regard to the ending.
  
  Are we talking here about reincarnating into a mosquito or a fly, at the instant of the main character’s death?
  
  If that’s the case, there should be some preparatory comments about the oddness of incarnation in your narrative, for the reader to make that connection.
  
  Or, is it just an alternative view that our consciousness wonders freely around anyway?
  
  Personally, I was expecting the POV to be that of the main character’s head or his brain which had been separated from the rest of the body and thrown out into the field during the crash impact, along with the still attached eyeball.
  
  I was surprised and somewhat disappointed with the ending which didn’t seem to have any internal logic governing it. Unless, of course, I’ve missed something and my own comment makes no much sense here.
  
  In any case, the ‘epiphany’, whatever it supposed to reveal to the main character, it tickled my inner parts sufficiently enough that it made the apparent lapse of internal logic just a minor annoyance.
  
  Great job. Good luck with it, and your other works (which I’m eager to check out). read
• 
  By the Meatball
  A review of By The Book
  by dbialy on 10/21/2008
  Good read. The story is twisted, witty and well structured. The sarcasm and cynicism is not in a short supply here, and the author knows how to use it (it's hard to believe such a sarcasm comes from a female's mind). At the conclusion however, the delightful irony is replaced by a serious and rational tone which, IMO, weakens the story’s overall appeal. What I like in this... Good read. The story is twisted, witty and well structured. The sarcasm and cynicism is not in a short supply here, and the author knows how to use it (it's hard to believe such a sarcasm comes from a female's mind). At the conclusion however, the delightful irony is replaced by a serious and rational tone which, IMO, weakens the story’s overall appeal.
  
  What I like in this story the most, is the skillful employment of the three parallel threads:
  1. The personal ‘struggle’ of an immature, self-pitying thirty-eight-year old loser with the emotional sensitivity of a meatball.
  2. His romantic relationship with Kathy (which climaxes with the statement: “I need you to marry me. I need to live with you, in your home, under your roof… or I’ll kill myself”)
  3. The brilliant meatball motif running throughout the entire story as a comic 'glue’.
  
  There really is not much I could criticize in this story. The following are only my suggestions:
  
  Try to make the most important descriptions and dialogues much more snappy.
  Eg.: “There’s another option. (You already mentioned library in the very first sentence) If it’s rare, used books can be very expensive. The library is your best bet, although, they may have to borrow it from another library. It’s called an interlibrary loan. I know this because I used to work at the library.”
  
  I know, you wanted him to sound like a neurotic chatterbox, but, IMO, it distracts. It is an opening scene, a very good one at that, so it should go right to the point. You could tighten it up to make it even better.
  
  “Three inch scar” could perhaps be changed to ‘ three-inch-long scar’, and without the: ”… slashed across his radius and ulna bones”. We already know it’s his wrist.
  
  “At thirty-eight, Tom was no child. Yet he still lived at home and he could not
  help but wonder what he was going to eat for dinner tonight.”
  Just wanted to say that the ‘Tom was no child’ seemed redundant here, but, on a second thought, the prevailing irony in the story perhaps requires that odd emphasis.
  
  The description of the Tom’s usage of the wax paper made me laugh out aloud.
  
  At some points in the story, you switch your narrative from the traditionally used past tense to the present tense (‘he suggests’, ‘she responds’). Avoid that. Keep it consistent.
  
  Apart from the issue raised at the beginning, about the sarcastic-to-serious change of narrative tone, there’s also the closing conclusion coming from Kathy – a secondary character. It seems to make a crack in the structure. In my opinion, it spoils a bit the otherwise good ending. Try to change it into narrator’s semi-ironic comments and see how it works.
  
  The sentence “In the meantime, Tom swims, while God decides what to do”, is great closing line for this story and very much in keeping with the overall tone. It also makes the reader wonder where Tom actually is. A good existential touch.
  
  One more thing. The obscure “Book of Death” is easily mistaken for “The Book of the Dead”, which is the famous Tibetan Buddhist text. It can be confusing in particular when you have Tom interested in Buddhist literature and Oriental martial arts. Try to avoid it somehow. I was expecting Tom to naively misinterpret the spiritual teaching of “The Book of the Dead” to guide his suicidal tendencies. Only a few pages later I had realized it was a different book all together.
  
  All in all, yours is a very good story.
  
  Good luck with it and keep writing. read