Okay, this one is pretty cool for me, because:
1) I don’t know Teri at all – we weren’t even connected via Twitter until after this.
2) Teri like actually seems to know how to critique a work from a literary standpoint.
As to point one, I’ve had a small fear that you need to know my “voice” to totally get where I’m coming from sometimes, which I why I got this out to some people who don’t know me, have never read either blog, have never seen anything I’ve done, etc.
For point two – simple. I’ve never written a book before, so like obviously the quality was of interest to me from a “is this like a good book” POV.
I ejected some personal pleasantries and such at the beginning, because they are personal and pleasant.
Everything after the break is Teri, until such time as I note that it’s me again. I implore you – if you plan to buy and read this at some point, and you want to go in completely fresh, there are some things in here that could taint you.
Not spoilers per se, but tonal/structural things.
——————————————-
Hi Brian,
I’ve finished your work, and please, accept my apology for the time it took to get back to you.
The good parts:
ORIGINAL CONCEPT: You don’t see many works these days that dare to be original conceptually. The back and forth between storyline/narrative is something I’ve seen done before, but rarely well. I think that while it may be confusing for some readers, it’s not for the ones who can actually think for themselves. Any poor feedback on this regard is going to come from parties in the second category. Well done.
HUMOR FACTOR: Smart there. A balance of dry, in your face, subtle & sarcastic is like finding a surprise mix of flavors in a good Merlot. Well done.
FOLLOW-THRU: Well done there as well. Story follows the concept without wandering. Sure there’s a number of unexpected twists and turns, but that’s the way its meant to be or face it, it’s too boring.
CONCERNS: The biggest thing that hit me than showed up repeatedly, was the sense that this was a combination of a novel & a screenplay. Screenplay perspective can appear somewhat butchered and detached to someone who doesn’t know the difference.
You can’t have a 1st person perspective; maintain a detached point of view. It’s almost in places, like we the readers, are being told how to view this scenario, how to follow it. This is incredibly helpful for directors, actors etc in a screenplay, but somewhat insulting to a reader.
Books this evocative, original, etc., need to leave a fair amount of space for doing those very things: being evocative of thought, being original in concept. The reader needs to be able to take away their own take of your work, allowed to follow the scene setup as the observer, and not be led heavily.
So I’d say with regard to editing, go more personal with the narrative, more descriptive with your main storyline, and for GOD’S sake take out the bits where you insult yourself. People will appreciate your book for what it is, smart ; original…evocative. But they will put it down every time if it’s self-deprecating in the first person.
Hell, we do that to ourselves enough as it is every day. They’re not going to want to read it in a book meant to invoke a positive relationship between the reader; the author. You can HATE a story, LOVE one etc…but the Author itself is not the target, the material is. You put a target on yourself for acerbic reaction in several places. You’ll lose your reader if you keep that in.
——————————-
Okay, it’s me again.
If you’ll note the snapshot snippet of the back cover above, and certainly if you’ve read the book, I think it becomes clear concern #1 was done 100% on purpose, so some comment on this was not a surprise. Concern #2 was also done on purpose, and is actually pretty integral to the main character’s story arc, as well as one of the overall themes/jokes.
This makes me very happy, since while those things that didn’t quite work for her, it’s not like they’re issues I wasn’t aware of.
Thanks again to Teri, and any of you who have read Prelude to a Super Airplane, I am dying to hear your feedback/critique.
