Search options (Page 2 of 30)

Well, doesn't it suck that I can't give an honest, unvarnished opinion on this topic!   As a newbie three times over (since 2005?) I do remember a change from a site containing members inclined to give impersonal and honest content review, thumbs up or thumbs down, to now a kaffeeklatsch of Chardonnay sipping chatterers. Not that that there is anything wrong with that, mind you, but it could explain an off-putting nature for newbies, who are not the only ones who will neglect to thank a reviewer, but certainly the only members who never thank, or comment, and resort to delete a newbie review and block the newbie reviewer for giving an honest Simon Cowell opinion.

For the benefit of those who missed it, what is the name of your forthcoming book and what is it about? When do you think it will be released and how much will it cost and which literary awards do you predict it will win?

There is an accursed in-your-face approach to your method seeking enlightenment.

Pretty much the same question: how are you incentivizing anyone to pay for a book in an expensive way by dribs and drabs. I thought the point would be to tease (cost-free) to buy the entire book. On the other hand,

you imply that an "episode" is self-contained (not really a serialization of a novel) without a need to buy the "overarching" book, just maybe more episodes in which the math rules out buying all episodes for anything less than an entire book. Are these episodes like episodic TV shows essentially?

There developed a cultural phenomenon when sci-fi gravitated away from science into medieval fantasy, quite early on from the mid-1960's with Dune, exemplified by the Star Trek (science)/Star Wars(medieval fantasy) divide. Linking this to the Strongest Start contest would it not be a good standard if an author signals in the first thousand words the sub-genre type of sci-fi he is crafting! Fantasy, especially of  the YA type, signals this quickly, often effecting a strong start of this type, but sci-fi writers do not do this and only eventually drift off into fantasy fairly unrelated to science at all. Where are the Asimov's who know science?

Hi John. The forum concept on TNBW is something that didn't fly after the first year, so all forums are "dead" in a sense that members do not interact so much for social chit-chat, and I discourage that here, nor seem to want to converse  to topic. The exceptions are in the fantasy and sci-fi forums.

As moderator here I can speak to the fact that I do not treat this forum as if a blog where I or anyone writes and everybody else reads without interaction. So, I suspect that is a reason for a sense of deadness.

If you want to post to the topic I am pleased to reply. The primary issues have been "just what is literary fiction?" and "the importance of style over plot."

I am curious to what you consider "literary fiction" and how your writing fits that.

, *-ing blah blah. is as correct as:

Bob and me love pole dancers, considering them dangling boobs and all.

There is almost always a disconnect between the intended subject and a trailing -ing participial modifier, so, at least, the first of the following two is better in being in proximity to the subject:

Having five kids and another one on the way, my mother always keeps the ironing board up.
My mother always keeps the ironing board up, having five kids and another one on the way.
https://menwithpens.ca/dangling-participles/

https://www.theguardian.com/media/mind- … articiples
Excuse me, but I think your modifier is dangling
There are far too many, just hanging around and annoying the reader. It's time to cut them down.

As a "reviewer" who would dictate your own meaning into the author's words, you would say that, wouldn't you? As to style of choice of words, even assuming equality of meaning and grammatical propriety between two choices, and that is not the case here, the author's preference, often from his first instinct as a native speaker of the language and immersion from birth in the culture of its origin, is primary over any reader's opinion.

Just us or just me is idiomatic of object following on an adverb. There is no need to edit the amended version which is grammatically normal and clear in meaning.  Just (us)= Just (Joe, Bill, and I).