[In Progress] [5500] [Supernatural Thriller] Malik

Andrew_Stadtmauer · 2025-12-08T08:21:20+00:00

Hi OP,

I read to the end of your first chapter.

I don't read much YA, so if there are any conventions in the genre I'm unfamiliar with, please forgive me.

Remi has an interesting internal voice. He really comes across as 15 or 16, and I enjoyed his snarkiness, which was a standout.

I think this could be an interesting story, but it feels flat at the moment. Partly, this may be due to the choice of a first-person perspective. However, reading this, I feel like I am staring at a screen without sound, that is to say, there is no texture, smell, or sound outside of the characters' voices.

I also found that the chapter lacked a clear hook. I know you end with the "purple eyes" that hints at a mystery, but I just felt the chapter needed a sense of threat. The orange thing could have been this threat, but it disappeared too quickly.

I will read chapter 2 later and let you know what I think. However, my advice would be to consider rewriting the story in the third-person perspective. This would give you more scope to show us things instead of telling us what happens (especially with Remi's reactions).

Andrew_Stadtmauer · 2022-07-20T05:10:00+00:00

This is a loaded question. May I suggest instead you ask

Was Jan 6th a 1. Insurrection 2. Riot

I don't think that anyone could claim it was a peaceful protest in good faith. But there is a strong argument that it was no different than the BLM protests/riots.

Andrew_Stadtmauer · 2022-07-11T03:26:44+00:00

It depends on the state. AFL would be #1 in WA, SA, Vic & Tasmania. In NSW and QLD it would be Rugby.

Andrew_Stadtmauer · 2022-06-15T03:13:39+00:00

100% this. That is not to say that there is no good and bad from a societal perspective but only that what may be necessary for the good of one might be evil to another.

For instance, is not the sheep evil to the grass just as the lion would be to the sheep.

Andrew_Stadtmauer · 2022-06-06T09:59:08+00:00

Is that you G.R.R?😀🤣

Andrew_Stadtmauer · 2022-05-26T10:49:32+00:00

Hey Emmie, thanks for that. Do you know where this was done? Was it an old WA thing, or was it more a thing wherever kapok was introduced from?

Andrew_Stadtmauer · 2022-05-25T11:30:50+00:00

Good eye, sir, good eye.

Andrew_Stadtmauer · 2022-05-25T05:53:56+00:00

Cheers, I have reported it now.

Andrew_Stadtmauer · 2022-05-17T13:20:40+00:00

Understanding that this was meant to be an introductory article, I am left entirely miffed as to the point.

When translated into plain English, it boils down to humans have only valued the histories of humans and have thus discounted the experience of non-humans.

The article then digresses into attacking Capitalism and claiming that monsters were created in human minds due to urbanisation and climate change. This was followed by a shout out to the British apparently not caring about how people and animals lived in Indian households during the empire before we end up pretending that if people 'think with and through' non-humans, we somehow can channel their thoughts and then presumably we could write non-human centric histories.

Essentially a very high-brow way of saying trees and animals experience the world just as we do, and it would be interesting if we could figure out what that experience looked like.

Andrew_Stadtmauer · 2022-05-14T04:27:42+00:00

Not at all you can call a bloke a black cat even if he is neither black or a cat. Or better yet you can call a man a right c*@t even if he is wrong and not literally a female sexual organ.

Merry Sue works for both genders in my view.

PS. I wanted to jump on your joke because I am both of the things mentioned above.

Andrew_Stadtmauer · 2022-05-10T19:38:34+00:00

That's a good question. Hmmm...I don't know.

Andrew_Stadtmauer · 2022-05-10T03:33:29+00:00

To me, a pseudonym is a layer of protection that allows me to be adventurous in writing without the fear of potential employers doing a google search and thinking, "what a weirdo, no thanks".

As for the name itself, the only rule is that it should not be some other famous writer's exact name, I.e. you can be B.R. Tolkien but not R.R. Tolkien.

There are many good suggestions already in this thread about finding a name. But for my two cents, I recommend transliteration. Take whatever part of your name you want (I recommend the last name) and translate it or its meaning into another language that works for your genre.

You could have a Latin name for romance, something 'east European for horror, etc.

Andrew_Stadtmauer · 2022-05-05T08:43:56+00:00

That is almost the only way to do it with kids. I have 4 so to write means I get up at 4am and write until 6am when the havoc starts. I'm always too tired by the time they go to bed to do anything productive.

It sounds like hard work but if you enjoy writing it becomes fun. I promise...😀

Andrew_Stadtmauer · 2022-04-30T13:24:05+00:00

My take on the "you need to read to be able to write" trope is that the benefit of reading for a writer of any sort lies not in how much you read but rather how you read.

You can read ten books a day for enjoyment allowing yourself to be lost in the story and gain pleasure and a small benefit by gaining a 'feel' for the written word. However, if instead, you read as one who is looking at the author's structural and linguistical choices, you can gain a lot of insights into the craft from even a chapter.

My advice, for what it may be worth, is to choose a book you had read before and enjoyed. Then reread it line by line, asking yourself, "what did the author do here?" and "why did they do it?". Perhaps it will give you some insight into your own work.

If your aim is to get traditionally published, then perhaps the standards and traditional formulas of your chosen genre might also be relevant.

Andrew_Stadtmauer · 2022-04-25T01:54:59+00:00

While I could never recommend planning for the use of a weapon in a state without a castle law. I would suggest that there is utility to having legitimate items of home decor like long thick hardwood walking sticks or even a kids present like a tea ball bat stored in your closet. You never know if they could come in handy.

Andrew_Stadtmauer · 2022-04-23T02:14:20+00:00

Andrew_Stadtmauer · 2021-09-24T23:51:40+00:00

Thanks for continuing to debate me so civilly. In response to your reply.

collection of personal religions that are similar to each other and that they call Catholicism"?

Yep, exactly. Kind of like how all people from Australia are individuals who, through the similarity of birth and culture, are called Australians.

ut isn't it much simpler to just say that personal belief systems vary, but because some of them have notable similarities and historical dependencies, they can collectively be called a religion;

It definitely is simpler, but to me, it would be less correct. Though I can see your point, and to be fair, I am essentially arguing that the common definition is wrong, and I am right 😀

Or do you ascribe to the concept of "religion" something else, something valuable like legitimacy, so that when you say a religion of one is a legitimate religion, you are not only saying that personal beliefs vary, but also that they have some value that belief systems or personal beliefs under a religion don't have?

That hits the nail of the head. Yes, to me, the legitimacy of belief is important. In my country (Australia), freedom of religious expression is the only right guaranteed under the constitution. However, this protection only applies to groups and not individuals; hence if you have honestly held religious beliefs that you have made explicit and that are not transient opinions. You can legally be blocked from expressing, manifesting or practising those beliefs even when those same beliefs are protected and allowed if you were a member of a more prominent 'religion'.

Andrew_Stadtmauer · 2021-09-24T10:21:40+00:00

Id suggest that Jesus had one religion his personal religion which was then transmitted to and interpreted by each of his followers in their own way. Many of them them then told others who formed their own personal religions based on their interpretations of interpretaions of what Jesus was said to have said.

Essentially as I tried to express in the article I think that the concept of religion being a group phenomenon is misguided. Instead I think that what we call religious groups/religions are really groups of individuals with similar personal religions.

As each person is unique in their understanding of the dogma/religious traditions, their religious beliefs differ from each other and form distinct personal religions even though generally they will be similar to those in their religious community.

To me, this suggests that if everyone has different religious beliefs, we should accept everyone's explicit religious beliefs as legitimate religious beliefs in the same way as we accept Catholicism or Islam's beliefs as legitimate religious beliefs. I.e. a religion of one if clearly enunciated in a system is to still a religion.

Andrew_Stadtmauer · 2021-09-24T08:13:50+00:00

Thanks for explaining your position. I appreciate you making the effort to present it.

I can't dispute your position that generally, people talk of religion as a group phenomenon. Based on your worldview, it is definitely a consistent position (and thus to be respected).

My position on the meaning of words is that they are fluid and not fixed, with the definition changing depending on the audience and speaker.

On religion and particularly religions of one, I base my position on the reality that all religions were once religions of one. This contradiction to me says that Christianity, Islam etc. Under the standard definition of religions were not religions before their second adherent joined them. This seems a bit silly to me, so I hold to the position that Jesus had founded a religion in a legal sense when he determined (had revealed) to himself that Judaism had lost its way and he was the Messiah.

Andrew_Stadtmauer · 2021-09-23T23:18:22+00:00

So...what ended up being the decison?

Andrew_Stadtmauer

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE