blogs_blog_1497

Any post not about dinosaurs is now a disappointment.

 

Any post not about dinosaurs is now a disappointment.

 

 

Funny, from the reactions I've gotten, I was beginning to suspect my posts about dinosaurs were the disappointments.

Hmm, the premise of a teacher and student isn't a bad way to go, but overall it personally didn't feel like that much of a horror story. And it doesn't need to be gruesome to do so.

 

For example, you wrote the teacher with having a stern tone, which was neat, but the way you wrote her actions was a bit plain. Saying she walked to the window is just recording what happens. I'd recommend describing the actions more. How did she walk to the window? Gingerly, slowly, coldly, softly, boldly, sadly, etc. I'd pick a word that describes the action and character and then describe it from there.

 

Also I guessed she had long nails, the way you wrote them as claws. Are they polished and neat? Are they old and yellowed with time? Is the teacher young? Middle aged? Old? What about her intellect makes her a force to be reckoned with (I think that's the idea you were going for?). I'm rather curious as to how this teacher dresses. Is her dress code more formal or casual? Is her clothing kept neat matching her stern nature or is it ironically messy?

 

Then we have Billy. He appears to be anxious and doesn't do well in class. Why? Is he afraid of this teacher in general? Does he just have general anxiety? Is he putting all of his focus elsewhere and is he merely feeling guilt for dropping the ball on some of his classes? Does he feel generally stressed and would rather do nothing than try at this point? He is also a product of evolution, so what makes him a force to be reckoned with and where does his intellect lie?

 

Overall as it stands, I don't think the last line really fit. The teacher here is clearly the more intellectual of the two, so how in this case is she indistinguishable from prey? How is Billy indistinguishable from being predatory?

 

Overall it's a good concept, but I think it could use a bit more brainstorming if you wanted to pursue writing or going back to rewrite this one. I know asking scrupulous questions like those can seem tedious and unnecessary, but figuring out more about characters and their mannerisms can actually tell a lot about them. They don't need a paragraph explaining every detail of their lives, but little actions like those can do wonders.

Well, one thing I want to note is that the last line wasn't that she is indistinguishable from Billy, but from a human; the point is that she's a species that's developed aggressive mimicry of humans to get prey. If it's not obvious enough that she's not human, then I guess that's another fault.

 

Otherwise, many of your notes make sense. I wasn't really sure which way I was taking the characters at times, so it ends up a little uncertain. This is a draft to get the basic idea that started it out of my head and onto paper, so to speak: a horror-type story based on the idea of aggressive mimicry. Something that occurred to me after writing is that it might be more fitting if the teacher isn't stern and strict (which I chose to give her a predatory air) but to make her kind and friendly (to match her luring hunting style).

Ah, I see! I thought she felt like a bird of prey. I thought it was more of a metaphor for her personality, though. XP

 

In that case, I'd try and have this told from Billy's perspective and have him feel like something was off or unnatural about this teacher. Maybe describe what she actually is at the end with a physical transformation. But hey, it's your story and your choice. Go nuts!

I didn't want to pull a transformation at the end because that'd feel a little, I dunno, cheap? It wouldn't feel kosher with my vision of it. Mimics don't usually stop looking like the species they mimic when they attack. Still, it's probably too subtle; I was trying to keep it all subtle so it wouldn't be too easy to guess. I guess I erred too cautiously. I could afford to do some sort of clear indication she's not human. (i.e. something like a third eyelid like reptiles have retracting)

 

I definitely want to clean this up. i didn't expect a first draft I typed up at 2 AM to be perfect. Thanks for your input!

Hah, no problem. If you do rewrite this, let me know! I'd definitely be interested.

Love the twist at the end.  Short stories with unnerving final revelations are my favorite category in the literary horror/thriller genre.

 

My main gripe is this phrase:  "causing him to try yelping in pain, only to find he couldn’t."  The subject just jumps around way too much in that sentence, and there's a part of me that wants to parse "causing him to try yelping in pain" as an appositive.  Also, the "try verbing" construction suggests to me that the action was completed but ineffectual (think:  "try turning it off and on"), so the final phrase of the sentence is jarring.  (I could probably give this whole thing a quick once-over for usage/grammar if you'd like, but this is the only thing that jumped out at me.)

 

EDIT:  Also, what's this about a Crow Agricultural Revolution?  I assume more speculative fiction?  I only ask because I'm working on a project right now that has required I do a bit of research into early agriculture.  Do you need any resources on the subject?

EDIT:  Also, what's this about a Crow Agricultural Revolution?  I assume more speculative fiction?  I only ask because I'm working on a project right now that has required I do a bit of research into early agriculture.  Do you need any resources on the subject?

 

...actually it wasn't speculative fiction. The idea was literally to get a colony of crows, give them a large supply of seeds, and try teaching them to farm their own food so crow civilization could take off and they could become the next civilized species. It was mostly joking, because I acknowledge that, as clever and adaptable as crows are, this attempt could only end with all the grain being devoured and me being pecked to death by crows.

You'd want to start smaller, I think. Show the crows how to make fire by banging rocks together, maybe.

teach animals with the capacity for remembering faces and holding grudges how to make fire? what could possibly go wrong?

not as much as could go wrong if someone gave you a blog to rant about pronated dinosaur wrists on

that's such an egregious error though. it's not even a matter of speculation; it's the skeletons themselves that make it clear they could not turn their wrists like that.

Haha, that's great.  (Incidentally, I think Googling "crow agricultural revolution" turns up your blog posts on this--they're quite the tale.  I'd just like to quickly posit that since there's evidence agriculture actually worsened the quality of life for early man, preventing a crow colony from foraging could--from a certain perspective--be animal abuse.  So add potential felony charges to beak injuries in your list of risks associated with neolithizing crows.)

Huh. I'm not surprised it turned up my blog posts as much as I'm surprised I'm the only person to think of teaching crows how to farm (or at least the only one to vocalize it on the internet).

 

As for the agriculture thing, that's quite interesting. I learned in a history class I took recently that agriculture was the reason for the development of more complex societies and technologies, which was the idea behind this; if crows got good enough at agriculture, they could get the precious food surplus that allows some crows more time to think about non-food things. that allows crows to become inventors or metalsmiths or whatever. this is the first I've heard of it worsening quality of life, though admittedly my history class was focused far more on the long term effects than the immediate.

Sadly, my resources aren't currently accessible to me, and they're not showing up to easily on Google.  If you want some general resources, look up "original affluent society" or a similar term.  Suffice it to say that human remains indicate that the heights of people in early agricultural societies are substantially lower than the heights of foragers.  (I think I've seen claims that heights didn't return to Paleolithic levels until well after the Industrial Revolution--but don't trust my memory.  And let's also bear in mind that--beyond having a shoddy memory--I'm absolutely, emphatically not an expert in archaeology.)  We also know that modern foragers such as the !Kung have surprisingly short "work weeks" (working for under five hours daily).  In short, foragers actually had it really good, to the extent that it's hard to explain what pressures would sustain agriculture.

 

This is of course the problem with revisionist history--it's way too easy and appealing to just say "everything you thought you knew about the Neolithic is wrong!" but that's not a particularly responsible position.  In this case, we know that agriculture did eventually "win out" over foraging, so we're left wondering why.

 

EDIT:  Wow I completely hijacked this blog post, sorry.

i dont have anything constructive to add i just wanted comment #666

i dont have anything constructive to add i just wanted comment #666

xae is stan confirmed.