Since there are so few anthology entries, I think I can give feedback to all of them this afternoon. This is the one I read first. As usual with Kevin's work, there's a plethora of funny lines. There didn't seem to be much of a plot, so I imagine the story is one of those "peeks into someone's life" sort of works. I think it did succeed in creating that sense of world/atmosphere. In short, this was a nice, pleasant little read.

On the other hand, I didn't really enjoy the abrupt changes in emotion. I felt as though I'd landed in a daytime soap opera. Greg and Trevor fight and make up very fast -- not necessarily in terms of the time within the plot, but, rather, in terms of the pacing between. Moreover, although I did get a rather fuzzy feel from Trevor and Greg's lovey-dovey-ness, the atmosphere wasn't convincing enough to make me stop wondering, So what's the point?

I would recommend it to someone who's in the mood for sugar.

Greg and Trevor are the kind of couple that is miserable both together and without each other. I'd have to say their relationship isn't the healthiest in existence. Kevin, this is your best anthology yet, and I am certainly pleased with it. Keep up the great work.

I can't really decide which anthology of yours I liked better. The last one was painful and made me sad...just like Greg's...you two are EVIL.

This one didn't exactly leave me feeling happy either, although the ending did give a sense of hope. Greg and Trevor do love one another, and as much as Greg tries to be cold out of pride or something, he's a big ol' softies...when Trevor's sleeping. I liked that at the very end, he was the most truthful. He had said he loved Trevor earlier in their conversation, but he never got emotional. The tears at the end was perfect. It really hit home that as dangerous and codependnt as their relationship was, they'd always be together.

You did a good job showing their verbal fight. It was described so well, the back and forth nature, the cruel words, alternated with the soft words, made me visualize an actual physical fight.

At times I was seriously hoping they would break up in the end and just call it quits for good. I almost got my wish when Trevor said he was unhappy. It's almost a sure thing they would always be together and you did a good job of showing how people are scared to let go, of how people hold onto something bad for safety and security. Love isn't enough to hold a relationship together, but Greg and Trevor are making it work. They're stupid, LOL, but admirable! It's the lesser of two evils: they're miserable together, but they'd die being apart.

As usual you have great dialogue and wonderfully humorous lines. You're just a funny guy, Kev. My favorite line was at the end, about gnawing off their limbs until they'd be reduced to nubs. Good image, gross as well, but very endearing.

Excellent job as always Kevin!

I really, really liked this very well written story.


The humour and witty dialogue provide an excellent counterpoint to an underlying darkness. This sort of unhappy but co-dependant relationship is very realistic - I've seen such relationships myself, though thankfully from the outside.

Although we may get pleasure from reading about the sort of idealised romantic relationships we can find in some other stories, there is also the implication that we may be failures if we can't achieve that ideal state. On the other hand, when we compare our relationships to that in 'Giving Up' we can (hopefully!) feel that we have achieved better. We can experience a sort of Schadenfreude.

I regret to have to admit that this is the first of Kevin's stories that I've read, but it has certainly made me want to go and read more.

Thanks for a great story!


Kit

How different this is in tone to "BMAD"!

This is the first of the anthology entries that I read, and I was very impressed at how well you managed to describe, in a few poignant scenes, what is essentially my worst nightmare.

See, all my life, I've had friends who have stayed in codependent relationships simply because they were afraid of being alone or, like your characters, they "don't know who they are" without the other person. And all my life, I felt sorry for them, just like I feel sorry for Greg and Trevor.

I know they do love each other in their own way, but they just can't see that their form of love is slowly killing them both. I always got so mad at people who would stay in a bad relationship for the wrong reasons, and I found myself getting similarly frustrated with Greg and Trevor. I've always been the fiercely independent type - maybe a bit too much so - but I've never wanted to fall into the trap you describe so well in your story.

Great job! Reading this made me happy to be single.

Quelle domage! I can think of no happier situation in life than to be in a loving, committed relationship. Having someone with whom to share your hopes and dreams, someone to receive and return your love, will make you complete.

With so many marriages ending in divorce and so many couples (gay and straight) living together for the sake of convenience rather than due to a commitment to each other, relationships often seem bleak and unattractive. But if two people can make a commitment and develop mutual trust, love can flourish.

Admittedly, Greg and Trevor don't have their act together. They are immature. Neither has ever made an honest commitment to the other. It takes some effort to be happy in a relationship. It takes a heap of living to make a house a home.

Please don't take comfort in being alone. There is something better...something that can make you happier still.

It's strange to me that people seem to think that the relationship between Greg and Trevor isn't a good one.

Yes, it's volatile. Yes, it's not smooth sailing for them. But just because they can't say they like each other, that doesn't mean they don't. Look at the actions, not the words. They have a strong relationship, one that has weathered a lot of storms. They've done a lot of experimenting about how to live together, and some of those experiments haven't worked, but they're still together.

Is it really unhealthy? It's not normal, but that doesn't make it wrong. It is the right relationship for them. We only see snippets of their lives together, but while they've had crises, they've always come back to each other. If it was really that unhealthy or unhappy, I don't think that would be the case. They may be prone to hysterics and theatrical behaviour, but that's their personalities.

Just my opinion

I'm sorry to have to disagree so strongly with a friend, but, to me this is like saying 'you'd be happier if you were straight and married'.

People are different. The same things do nat make everyone happy. Not everyone enjoys heterosexual sex. Not everyone enjoys living with another person as part of a couple.

Do you pity a gay man because he hasn't yet found the right woman he can settle down with? So why pity a person who enjoys living on his own? Why assume that he's just not met the right person yet?

Some people enjoy being independent. They relish the freedom to eat, sleep, watch TV, go out, stay in, write, read, listen to music, etc without having to take into account what anyone else wants. They enjoy the fact that they can have solitude to think and meditate whenever they want. For someone who enjoys living alone, being on their own doesn't mean they are lonely. They might well have lots of friends, a good social life and a good sex life. They enjoy having visitors but always they are relieved to get their home back to themselves.

Such 'loners' might be in a minority, but it doesn't mean that they would be happier if they were like everyone else. We are all different. We have different needs, different desires, different priorities. Just because the majority of people might be happier sharing their lives with an intimate partner doesn't mean that everyone will be.

So, despite the fact that I like and respect Mike a lot, I think that the statement quoted above is presumptuous almost to the point of being insulting.

Kit

Wow, I guess I got misinterpreted. All I meant was that I'd rather be alone than be in a bad, unhealthy, miserable relationship due to fear of being alone.

Aside from that, I'm looking for love as much as the next person. I've even been lucky enough to have found it, or some approximation of it, once or twice in my life. I'm single at the moment, yes, but it's not like it's deliberate.

I was mostly commenting on co-dependency, and on the people I know who are literally terrified to be alone for even five minutes. They tend to either stay in bad relationships forever, or to jump quickly from one bad relationship to another. They are people who have never found a sense of self that didn't involve being one-half of a duo, and they will sometimes stay in god-awful relationships full of emotional or even physical abuse rather than face their fear of leaving. Or, more often, as Kevin depicted so well in this story, they will just "settle", despite the fact that they don't even like each other all that much, because it's all they know how to do.

That's what I was getting at, and I'm sorry if I gave the opposite impression.

I've really enjoyed the comments and discussion on this so far! Thanks everyone! I want to respond in more detail to several of you and your different points, but I have to dash in a bit, and I wanted to make a few comments on the most recent two posts.


Personally, I think this sums me up extremely well. In fact I can't think of any part that I don't feel is true for me.



I don't think this quite describes me though. I mean, I think under the right circumstances I could probably be just as happy with someone, and possibly happier (although I'm pretty happy to begin with ).

In fact, finding a suitable boyfriend is on my list of things to do in the nearish future. Mind you, it's below quite a few other things.


I think this personally sums me up quite accurately as well. I would never stay in a bad relationship simply because I was afraid of being alone. Being alone holds absolutely no fear for me, and as Kit said, it isn't 'lonely'. Actually, as he also said, I have a very satisfying social life and quite a few friends (and I probably have more sex than most single people ) so being lonely really isn't an issue at all. In fact, my general feeling is usually "I'd like still more time by myself".

But yes, I definitely think it'll be lovely to settle down with one person eventually and do the slice of suburbia, happily every after thing (although I think I do still want to do it in the city ).




Goodness, this describes a friend of mine perfectly! He's petrified of being alone and simply does not know what to with himself. As a result he's intensely clingly and has a tendency to come on too strong. I can usually handle that, but I worry about him and his lack of independence.

A month or so ago I had church with him and another friend (who is his roommate). After church we went our separate ways and I returned to my apartment to get ready for a lunch/afternoon get-together I had planned with someone else. While I was getting ready I received a frantic call from my co-dependent friend. He was very upset because our other friend (his roommate) had plans with his family that afternoon, and he now "didn't know what to do with himself"

And he was quite alarmed and distressed. I just can't fathom becoming so flustered simply because you don't have plans one afternoon. Naturally I ended up inviting him to come with me to my lunch thing (it was either that or be on cell phone standby anyway )




But yeah, that's perhaps a bit off-topic. As I said, I want to address all the other points later, but I will generally say that my main purpose in writing the story was to ask the questions,

• - "Are these two people better off together or alone?"
• - "Should they break up?"
• - "Why can't they?"
• - "Will they stay together forever?"
• - "Will they ever have a 'happy' relationship in the traditional sense?"
• - "Do they need one?"
• - "Are they happy in their own way?"

-Kevin

Wow, Kevin, what a wonderful story. It really makes me look back on my last relationship and see so many things that went right and wrong, almost like looking in a mirror. I'm glad that there was no real resolution between them, other than the fact that they can admit to each other that they suck as a couple, but they suck more when they're split up. Hopefully the two of them can get into couple's counseling and figure out how to be happy in their lives, even if it isn't as an item.

I really enjoyed reading this story. I certainly didn't expect a plot like this (which is a good thing, i like surprises ). I was drawn between hoping they would finally find a way to stop hurting each other, or would break up for good at the end. But it seems the way their love-hate relationship is - is just the way it is supposed to be for them. And maybe they will even find some happiness after they give up on trying to change it, and just accept it the way it is.

Great work Kevin !

This story raises lots of interesting questions about relationships in general beyond the two delightfully quirky characters involved. Whatever it is that holds relationships together beyond initial infatuation, it is not moonlight and roses. It's really hard to define when the various forms of give and take move from "healthy" mutual support to "unhealthy" co-dependency.

Personally I figured out a long time ago that I am not a relationship person. The long term relationships that I have observed from the outside have usually looked to me like they cost a lot to maintain. Of course nobody can fully appreciate the reality of any particular relationship from outside. It's only the people involved who can really decide if they are better off with it or without it.

This was a most enjoyable read. It's was a nice chance of pace from conventional romance.

Kit...it's OK to disagree with a friend. I'm not sure we disagree all that much, although you may have misunderstood what I meant (or what I meant to say).

Everything I said applies to everyone...gay or straight. I understand some are very happy being alone, independent, and/or self-sufficient. I would only urge all of them to be open to the possibility of a relationship with someone else. I certainly would not say that a heterosexual relationship is good for a homosexual person, but I earnestly believe a loving, committed relationship is preferred over solitude.

I don't pity the gay man who hasn't found the "right" woman. Indeed, I don't think there is a right woman for a gay man...not for purposes of marriage of cohabitation.

Now it appears I may have misunderstood CR's original statement:
She later explained: I have no argument with that.

I still contend that the happiest of singles (gay or straight) would be happier still in the right relationship.

You are still my friend and I yours.

Thank you



There doesn't seem to be much room for misunderstanding in the above quote.

I contend that there are some happy singles (albeit a minority) who would be less happy in any form of of live-together relationship. So I'm afraid it is a basic disagreement.

People are not all the same, and just because something makes most people happy doesn't mean that the same thing will make everyone happy.

Now, as far as I know, there is no conclusive evidence that my contention is correct and your contention is wrong. However, if mine is wrong, and if people accept it, the worst that could happen is that a happy single might not bother to look for even greater happiness in a relationship, so he/she is still happy, but just less happy than he/she might have been.

If your contention is wrong, and if people accept it, then someone who is really happier as a single might become unhappy and might also make other people unhappy. This is because, believing your view to be true, they will feel like they are missing out, and they will look for the 'ideal' relationship, which for them will not exist. Their search will be futile, they will feel like a failure and be unhappy. They will probably also make their partners unhappy.

I apologise if I seem to be making too big a deal of this, but the assumption that everyone would be happier in a relationship irks me sometimes. This is because behind that assumption there is the implication that there is something 'abnormal' (or just plain pig-headed) about a person who is really happier outside of an intimate relationship.

There seems to be an analogous assumption in general society that the lives of all heterosexual married couples would be improved/enriched if they had children. This is probably true of most such couples. However, there may be exceptions, and by making these exceptional couples feel that there is something wrong with them, society pressurises them into having children. That couple will then be less happy, and the chances are that the children, who were not really wanted, will be resented. The children will then have to suffer a less-than-ideal emotional atmosphere during childhood.

I don't believe that there is a one-size-fits-all formula that will make all people happier, even if that formula works for the vast majority. I do believe that people can be made unhappy if they are led to believe that such a one-size-fits-all formula really exists.

Kit

Kevin,

This story was a ride of emotions for me. It had me confused in the beginning as to why these two people were in a relationship when they obviously couldn't stand each other. Then came the emotion of shock, learning about their past. Then the warm fuzzy feeling and the smacking of the forehead when I realized what Greg and Trevor shared.

Truly, this is one story that I thoroughly enjoyed reading. A splendid piece of writing.

BeaStKid

Thanks Corvus, I think that's generally true of the majority of my stories. I'm naturally more interested in people, emotions, feelings etc. than on actual events and action. I'm sure that shows in my stories. I think I probably tend to write much more character than plot based tales.


I see your point...obviously though I did that on purpose. I was less inclined to write about the mundane events of their lives (and obviously there would have been quite a few given how long they'd been together) precisely because I wanted to show the highs and lows.

Do you feel like the story would have benefit from some more 'down time'? Would have made the dramatic bits ultimately more effective and resonating? I'd really love thoughts and feedback on this!


You mean what's the point of reading? What's the point of Trevor and Greg's relationship? Or what's the point of the story itself?

If it's the point of reading, then my objective was to entertain my reader and portray a controversial, atypical relationship. I wanted to get people thinking about this relationship and questioning whether or not the characters should be together. I wanted people to imagine themselves in such a relationship and decide how they would have acted and reacted, whether it would have been worth it to them. I wanted to show that Trevor and Greg were both to blame for their dysfunction and also both to credit (or perhaps blame again?) for the survival of their relationship. Basically I wanted to show that they both kept screwing up but they both kept fighting to make it work. Lastly and most simply I wanted to ask the questions of "how much is too much?" "What lines can't be crossed?" "When should a couple give up?"

What's the point of Trevor and Greg's relationship? That's kind of a subjective answer and will depend on how the readers answer the questions above. I hesitate to say what I think is the objective point of their relationship because that would still just be my interpretation and it would squelch other opinions.

What's the point of the story? What's the point of any story? As I said, this one was mostly to get people thinking about how they viewed relationships and what is and isn't dysfunctional. I admit that there really wasn't any change for Trevor and Greg. One could argue that they ostensibly decided to make a firmer commitment to keep making each other miserable, but the whole thing is subjective and by the very nature of their relationship there's a good chance that they'll break their own rules. There's also a good chance that they'll get back together regardless. So did this 'story' see in character growth? Any development in terms of their relationship? As I said, that's a subjective opinion. I would tentatively say that they did renew and deepen their commitment in the end. I won't say whether I think that's a good thing or a bad thing though.

I guess ultimately the story was only about the lives of these two characters and their feelings for each other, but the purpose is only in how it is interpreted by the reader and not actually in plot or character development. Thanks for making me consider this more.


So you ultimately view it as a 'happy', positive sort of story then? Good to know


Thanks Tim! So you preferred it to If No One Notices? I'd actually love to hear other thoughts on this. Which one do you guys like better?

As I said, this anthology was actually supposed to be for last anthology, but I misunderstood the topic


LOL, thanks, Tiff! I think


Good observations!

I was trying to portray Greg and Trevor in very different ways but ultimately show that neither was really better-adjusted or easier to get along with than the other.

In many ways I think Greg comes off as the traditional, cold, unemotional, stand-offish male, and like many of these types it doesn't mean he doesn't care, sometimes he can even say that he cares, what it means is that he won't show that he cares openly (only doing so after Trevor's gone to bed).

With Trevor, I suppose he's actually more of the traditional overly emotional, nagging 'female'. He's romantic, but he gets nasty when his expectations aren't met. He'll say and act as though he cares, but he'll purposely do things to test Greg, perhaps even to hurt him. He's constantly looking for and needing proof that Greg cares.

In many ways I feel like this story would have worked almost as well if Trevor had simply been a woman. Indeed, I feel like this story expresses gender/relationship roles that I normally purposely try to circumvent. I by no means whatsoever mean to say that this is how I actually view the average man or the average 'woman'. Nor is it a reflection of how I view gay male and/or lesbian relationships that do adhere to these more structured roles of dominant/passive etc.

However, it's certainly no coincidence that their relationship is heavy on 'traditional' roles and as such I've portrayed it as so painful and many times unsatisfying. I didn't even mean to do it, but it's probably a commentary of my general attitude toward traditional roles in a relationship (male/female, male/male, or female/female, I just don't like set relationship roles and expectations).

Perhaps that's also why I ultimately gave the relationship some hope. I personally think that 'traditional' relationships are less than ideal, but I think it is possible for them to survive and that many people even purposely enter them. So by giving Trevor and Greg a little hope, or a little light at the end of the tunnel, I wanted to say that "this isn't how I think it should be done, but if it works..."



Anyway, which character did you like better? Do you think my assessment of relationship roles is accurate and valid with regards to this relationship?


I'd meant to reply to most of the comments in this thread with this post, but I've already gone on for quite awhile so I'll stop here for now.

I'd love to hear back from you, Corvus and Tiff, about what you thought of my comments to your questions/comments, and I'd also love to hear what others thought about these issues!


Thanks everyone

-Kevin

I find it interesting that both your recent anthology stories - this one and "If No One Notices" were about completely different topics, and had completely different characters, but they had one thing in common: They both made me screamingly mad at the characters (that's a compliment, by the way; it meant your characters were real enough to make me want to wring their necks).

In one story, you have a suicidally depressed teenager who is trapped in the prison of his own mind, and he's incredibly sympathetic, of course, but it's so frustrating because all he has to do is reach out and ask for help in order to free himself, and he doesn't know how. In the other, you have a couple who could have been happy a long time ago if they dared to imagine a future where they could each build a sense of self, and find people who would love them for that self, rather than clinging to co-dependency.

You are truly the master of painting portraits of characters struggling with these very real issues. Of course, it always seems simple to the outside observer. It's never simple when you're in that situation, though. You portray that very realistically.

As for what you were trying to accomplish here, I'd say it was successful. Due to how much of a debate there seems to be over whether this relationship is good for the two characters or not, I think you toed the line very artfully. The rest, as they say, is all subject to interpretation.

absolutely not. I think it flowed quite nicely.


absolutely not!


neither and yes.

I agree w/ MikeL that they are both immature and need to learn how to compromise a little. I don't think either of them would be any better with anyone else, so I guess they deserve each other.

I enjoyed this story. The constant back-and-forth, the flashes into their past. Even the mention of how they'd been ready to leave so many times they couldn't get assistance moving because no one took them seriously anymore.

I don't think Greg and Trevor have the 'perfect' relationship in the typical sense. I do think it's perfect for them, however. Greg knows that Trevor just wants confirmation for what they have. I'm not sure why he refuses to give it to him, unless it would make him feel weak. On the other hand, I'm equally positive Trevor knows what they have is permanent and that Greg will never cede to some kind of public affirmation, so pushing for that is rather pointless.

I'm reminded of a phrase I heard once: "If I didn't act the way I do, you wouldn't know it was me."

Great job, Kevin!

Thank you very much, Kit!

That's pretty much what I was going for in terms of the tone of the story. I wanted dark, but I wanted palatable as well. Actually, eventually I intend to write a properly 'dark' story (and a properly 'happy' story). Right now though it's more enjoyable to balance the two. With this one and If No One Notices I was definitely going for dark overall (obviously much more so with INON).


Thank you very much! I hope you do get a chance to check out my other work


Despite trying to write the actual story in a non-biased, fair way that presents a case for both sides...this is definitely a good assessment of how I would feel in either of their situations.

In all honestly, Trevor and Greg manage to break all three of my 'cardinal rules' when it comes to dating.

I've always said that I would never stay in a relationship in which:

-There is every any physical or emotional abuse/violence
-There is any cheating
-There is an overly structured, role centric focus and dynamic


So obviously I personally would have left the relationship long ago (I HOPE!!), but I hoped to show that perhaps that's not always as easy as it sounds, and maybe, just maybe, these sorts of relationships can hold some positive value for the people involved.

Also, I tried to indicate that the physical violence and cheating were one-time incidents (which I believe they very seldom actually are in real life, but in the story I tried to indicate that they were).


I think this is an excellent assessment as well, Mike! Thank you very much!

Such a balanced opinion of views is exactly what I was shooting for! If everyone had felt one way or the other I'd have been very disappointed.

Also, I think that is a very compelling case, and obviously a good enough case for Trevor and Greg.



That is a really excellent point, Graeme!

Another thing I wanted to show is indeed that they had weathered a lot of storms, that they had 'gone throw hell' in their relationship and hung on. Perhaps this is a bit bleak and negative, but what relationship is without its trials and tribulations? Maybe Greg and Trevor have had a few more than most couples, but I think nearly every couple that's together very long-term goes through at least one or two 'crises'.

I think these crises inevitably change the dynamic of the relationship and the surface way in which the couple interact. If there's one major aspect of the story that was in my original objective that ultimately got left out, it was emphasizing that Trevor and Greg once had a very happy, affectionate relationship. It was always misery and arguments, they did have their fair share of good times - especially in the beginning before events jaded them.

As I said, I failed to show that though. It was partly an unintentional failing, but it was also because I allowed the story to take itself in the direction that felt right. Ultimately focusing on their happy, conflict-free times didn't feel 'right' for the story.

I actually think that by so doing I would have made it a much darker, more cynical piece. Instead of "look at this couple always at each other's throats" it would have been, "look at this couple that was once so sweet that is now always at each other's throats"

So you guys tell me, would have been more depressing to show a relationship that very clearing went from soft and tender to hardened and acerbic?

Wow, thanks for the praise, Nick! I'm really touched and flattered!

I agree that ideally they could learn better interpersonal skills!!!


Thanks Pete!

I'm glad you were surprised!

Trevor and Greg definitely 'gave up' on something. It's a bit open to interpretation what exactly they gave up. But if I portrayed any actual change in their relationship I wanted it to be that henceforth they will 'give up' on some certain set of expectations. Perhaps the expectation of ever separating for good. Perhaps the expectation of every having an openly affectionate relationship (again?). Perhaps the expectation that either of them will ever change. Or, perhaps more positively, the expectation that they would continue to purposely hurt each other.


That's an great point, Richard!

Actually, that was another theme I wanted to peripherally explore. I think very often there is a (typically true perception) that young love is sweet and tender, and 'old love' is more enduring but ultimately less romantic and more functional, perhaps even hardened in this way. I think to some extent that's very natural and unavoidable. As with knowing the difference between a healthy relationship of give and take versus one of co-dependency, it's also difficult to know the difference between a 'naturally seasoned' relationship and one that has just plain soured.


Thanks very much, Richard


Thank you Beasty! These comments mean a lot to me and really cut to the heart of what I was trying to do


Thanks CR

I hadn't truly thought about it until you pointed this out, but now that I think about, I think all my stories (both posted and the ones in various stages of completion which I haven't posted yet), address very different topics and themes. I think they have a lot of similarities, but I definitely not the kind of author who is going to repeatedly write stories about X, Y, or Z topic. Well at least I haven't done that yet anyway



Wow, thank you very much


Thanks, Steph!

I was a bit worried about the flow. I was concerned that it might have drug on a bit right before the end.


Thank you very much, Dion! I really appreciate that!

With regards to your bolded comment, I think it's very very accurate. It also reminds me of something amusing I once saw on either a movie or on television. It basically went like this:

Character one: "What's with you? Why are you acting so strangely?"
Character two: "I'm just trying to be nice"
Character one: "Well stop it. I didn't fall in love with someone nice. I fell in love with you"


Perhaps that's really what Greg and Trevor's relationship comes down to



Thanks all
Kevin

To adequately respond to Kevin's inquiries, I'll provide more commentary than did my previous review. It'll be a bit more frank (i.e. harsh), but, since I want people to respond honestly to what I write, I better not be a hypocrite and do the opposite.

I read stories predominantly to be emotionally engaged and moved. Trevor and Greg's story didn't engage me very much because: a) I couldn't take the narrative voice seriously, and b ) I couldn't take the characters seriously.

Example of a):

Excuse me, but how do you share a kiss *through* lips? And -- "mutually busted"? Are we talking about Al Capone or ghosts? I wouldn't object if this story were a parody, but since it doesn't seem to be one, I'm afraid this is simply writing that doesn't work. I don't know what you wanted from the reader, Kevin, but the response it elicited from me was a disbelieving choke.

I've singled this out because it's an egregious example. But there's a lot of clumsiness throughout the story, such as the excessive and maudlin descriptions, the strange lack of commas (have you been talking to Gary??), etc. These, unfortunately, make me unable to take what's written seriously.

Explanation of b ):
Trevor and Greg had lots of volcanic interactions. Lots of highs and lows, yes. But I never had a feeling that what I was reading involved real people interacting. I'll take the scene starting with Trevor's infidelity as my example. Firstly, Trevor's motivation would be feasible only if he were stupid, arrogant, or manipulative (or a combination of all three -- but given his dialogue, only the first is possible). Secondly, the mis en scene is unrealistic -- except in horribly corny TV serials, you'd notice if you were pouring out your heart in a supermarket. Thirdly, the dialogue ("I'll follow you anywhere!") would give anyone diabetes.

Objection a) is based on tenants of what I believe good writing should be; objection b ) is based on my personal taste.

I'll now respond to the rest of Kevin's comments.





I don't object to your portraying highs and lows, but I'd like to see highs and lows I can actually believe in.


Since I didn't feel involved in the highs and lows (i.e. they didn't affect or resonate with me), I didn't feel the story needed more down time.


Hmm. I'll refrain on the entertaining bit. You did portray a controversial and atypical relationship, but I didn't think about whether the characters should be together, because I was more concerned with how I'd review the story frankly without being... mean. I couldn't imagine myself being as melodramatic as either Trevor or Greg, so I didn't put myself in their shoes. The closest I came to considering the relationshippy questions you aimed for the reader to think about was to be aghast at how similar Trevor's words were to my ex's. He'd say: "I love you!" "I know it's not a justification for _______, but I love you!" "I've tried so hard to forget you, but I caaan't!" later: "I know you hate to hear this, but I love you!"


Won't squelch mine.


The purpose of a story should never be to *demonstrate* plot or character development. It uses plot and character development for entertainment and emotional engagement. Please cross reference my response from earlier re: getting the reader to think about Trevor and Greg.



Kevin, after reading your thoughts about gender roles, etc., I went back to your story, because I thought, Wow, that sounds cool, did I overlook all this? I did. It was so buried under objections a) and b ) that I didn't notice. Since I'm unwilling to let day time soaps get redeemed just because they deal with gender roles, I'm afraid I can't make the same exemption for your story.


Edited because all of my b )'s became sunglasses... rawr...

[quote name='corvus' date='July 29 2008, 08:27 AM' post='147913']

"I read stories predominantly to be emotionally engaged and moved. Trevor and Greg's story didn't engage me very much because: a) I couldn't take the narrative voice seriously, and b ) I couldn't take the characters seriously."

I found it quite easy to take them seriously. Perhaps that comes from ample experiences with the messiness of life and relationships. Their situation may have been a slight exaggeration for dramatic effect, but it felt like reality to me.

A lot of authors benefit from criticism, but sometimes it's best to do so privately (like via PM or email). Just an observation.

Personally, I love Kevin's narrative voice, but I'm a sucker for engaging dialogue and when thoroughly engaged, tend to ignore some of the descriptions that might not make complete sense. I remember pausing at corvus' example, but dismissed it as quirky and funny and kept reading.

My biggest annoyance at this story was that it was sort of like watching a car wreck... I couldn't tear my eyes away, but I didn't really want to be reading it --which goes back to my comment on flow... I probably would have stopped reading if there were any downtime in the story. I still can't decide if I actually liked the story, but I know I enjoyed Kevin's dialogue.



I understand both your and corvus' points of view. I'm sure Kevin will speak up if he did not appreciate corvus' public criticism.

Thanks, Nick, I really appreciate the support


Of course I would speak up!

As a matter of fact, while as I said I really appreciate the support, and I also definitely agree with Nick that detailed criticism is often best done in private (you never know how the author will react unless he/she has mentioned it before). In my particular case I have no objection to it at all and actually really appreciated Corvus' thoughtful comments!


Thanks Crovus, I too would be a massive hypocrite if I did take offense since not only did I directly ask for your further feedback on this, but I definitely always say (and mean) that I appreciate constructive criticism. Indeed, while I appreciated your first comment alot, I ultimately have to say that I find this one much more useful.


I'm glad you pointed this out, and also glad that Steph commented on it as well. I have a fairly 'colourful' style of describing things and I was genuinely unaware that this description was ill-fitted.

Personally, in an idiomatic sense, I think you can share a kiss through lips, but I think you can only do so if the lips have an adjective attached. I know that sounds weird but what I mean is:

"They shared a kiss through lips"

Sounds ridiculous to me. However:

"They shared a kiss through hungry lips"
"They shared a kiss through throbbing, desperate lips"
"They shared a kiss through lips which had been lonely for far too long"

All sound okay to me. I'd say that the style of "through mutually busted lips" is most similar to example number two. I know it seems ridiculous that I base the suitability of the idiom on whether or not there is an adjective/descriptive phrase attached to 'lips', but in terms of simply reading it and deciding whether it's acceptable or ridiculous, that is the criteria I used in this case.

However, I don't want my stories to only sound acceptable to me. You and Steph have both stated that that phrase stood out. Steph ultimately seems to have decided it was acceptable (please correct me, Steph, or feel free to add to the topic), but for you it obviously didn't work at all. I definitely need to know these sorts of things. I by no means am trying to argue that 'shared a kiss through mutually busted lips' is acceptable, only that it seemed acceptable to me. That's why it's so useful for people to comment on these things, otherwise I'd never have given it any thought at all.

You found "mutually busted" inappropriate as well? Why? Did you find the word 'busted' too colloquial?

That general style is definitely common for me to use - not just in writing but in speech as well. I routinely say things like "I'm similarly afflicted" if my friend is telling me about a cold or other ailment which I am also experiencing. Or I might say, "equally hungry", "correspondingly suitable", etc. So "mutually busted" (or 'mutually bloodied' if it's 'busted' that you object to) is definitely something I would naturally say and write.

However, here again, I try to inject flavour into my writing, but I don't want my characters and narration to sound exactly like me. In fact, I want my characters to be completely unique. In one recent chapter of BMAD I had Aaron use the word 'queue' because I'd already used 'line' in the same paragraph. I was very concerned that it would seem unrealistic or troublesome to the reader. I use words like 'queue' on occasion, but I'm aware that the average southern boy Aaron's age might not. Sharon and Tim didn't object though - in fact Tim complimented the use - so I decided it was ok and worked given Aaron's generally odd 'voice'.

But yeah, I definitely want to know about these sorts of things!



If you are readily able to supply other examples I'd love to hear them! I found the ones you mentioned quite useful and interesting.

Regarding the lack of commas, lol no Gary had nothing to do with that. I'm actually a bit surprised. I thought I would tend to stray more toward over over comma use rather than under. I think my informal, conversational style writing (forum posts for example) is definitely more comma-heavy than my 'formal' (or what passes for it) writing style. Regarding Gary, as I understand it he used to be a journalism editor; they're notorious for their minimalistic approach to comma usage. Perhaps I am subconsciously affected by this approach.

Do you find my forum posts to be spartan on commas? You've read some of my other work, right? Have you noticed this there as well?

This is definitely something I'll ask Sharon and Tim about. Have any of the rest of you guys found this to be the case?



Only the first was possible? I definitely meant for him to be manipulative; indeed that was supposed to be one such example.

Stupid and arrogant are debatable, but not inappropriate by any means. (Well, I didn't intend for him to be 'stupid' in terms of intellect, but stupid in terms of judgment certainly)


I didn't/don't find the scene particularly unrealistic. They were supposed to have been apart for a year (I believe it was a year, I'd have to check, but in any case it was their longest separation) and they were also supposed to have been pretty miserable and obsessed with each other the whole time. After a year of agony and obsession, I don't find it odd that they'd get carried away and create a scene in the supermarket. I particularly don't find it odd given that it's Trevor and Greg.

When I was in school one of the biggest laughs and most notable moments was when one of my female classmates removed her shirt in public. She was not trying to be an exhibitionist nor was she stupid. She was simply oblivious and focused on what she was doing, which was chatting intently with her friends. They were walking toward the locker room - where obviously they would be undressing - and she simply got a headstart without thinking about it.

Point is, if you're not a particularly self-conscious, introverted person AND you're focused on a more selective task, I think it's very easy to act socially inappropriate without being aware of it.

Another factor is that even if they were peripherally aware of their setting I don't think they would have particularly cared (Trevor certainly wouldn't have, Greg may have a bit I suppose *shrug*). I'm not one for making a scene in public, but I think their conversation was more important than simply following the rules of polite society. If I were miserable and I ran into someone and was faced with the opportunity to perhaps remove or lessen that misery (at least in my own mind), I hope I would be willing to knowingly create a scene if necessary, and I'm really not the kind of person who goes around causing scenes. Indeed I try to avoid them, but in my opinion what that boils down to is, "You're just buying groceries. This is my life we're talking about! Deal with it"


Thanks Corvus, as I said I really appreciate your comments about 'a)' and please feel free to point out more if you think of any. I think they're definitely worth my attention and may indeed result in me deciding to write slightly differently.

Regarding 'b )', I also appreciate hearing your opinions, but I'm afraid I do agree that it's just your personal taste and I'm less likely to change my writing as a result of it. However, I'd love to hear more thoughts you might have about it, and I'd love to hear from anyone else (and obviously if it's universally thought that this sucks I would consider changing it!)


Well don't worry about that for my stories! I appreciate the review and I'm sorry if you felt you had to censor yourself in the first place.


Obviously I love gay males (I'm a gay male, I date gay males, and the majority of my close friends are gay males), but believe me when I tell you that, as someone who's known quite a few of them and had extensive contact, the only segment of the population that could possibly rival the 'average' gay male in terms of melodrama is the 'average' teen girl.

That's obviously just my opinion, and it's just my opinion about the 'average' person in those groups (not that I even really believe in 'average people' anyway). Also, I'll concede that quite a few gay males (and teen girls) aren't melodramatic at all (perhaps you for example).


Thanks, Corvus

Take care and have a great day!
-Kevin

BTW, the sunglass thing drives me crazy too!

Thanks Richard! I'm really grateful for more feedback on how this came off!


Thanks Steph! I'm really happy and flattered that you found it an engaging read!

I'm also glad (in the sense that it's informative) to know that you also paused over Corvus' example. I'll have to try to consider these things more carefully. On the other hand you ultimately decided that the line was a net positive for the story? Or that it was simply largely irrelevant?



Thanks

Sounds like it came off - for you (and several others ) - exactly as I intended, so yay lol!

It worked for me. It's colourful language that evokes a picture and mood. The fact it's not strictly literally accurate is irrelevant. If a story says 'Jon could swim like a fish' do you expect it to have the literal meaning 'in the manner of a fish' (in which case you might ask what sort of fish, because different types of fish swim differently) or do you expect the more usual meaning of 'as well as a fish'? However, even the more usual meaning is unlikely to be any more strictly accurate than 'kiss through mutually busted lips'.



Whether or not maudlin descriptions are excessive is a matter of taste, depending on how much one enjoys them. If by clumsy you mean they seem awkward to you, then that, too, is a matter of taste. If you mean clumsy as in unintentional (which one presumes you do, because you use lack of commas as another example of it) then how do you know the maudlin descriptions were not intented to be so?



Obviously, you have little experience of real gay people if you think that the above examples are unrealistic. I can assure you that I've seen gay men behave in ways that are far more theatrical than those described in this story. I've also seen both gay couples and straight couples who somehow manage to stay in relationships that are at least as dysfunctional as the one in this story.



Presumably, here you mean tenets, not tenants?
As far as I can see, much of what you list under a) is very much also your personal taste.



Again, I can believe in such highs and lows because I've seen such things in real life (e.g. my parents!) and they affected me and resonated with me. Just because your limited experience of life does not enable you to believe in something does not mean that that something is unbelievable.



A story can be a way of trying to get a glimpse into the totally different lives of others. It doesn't always need to relate directly to one's own experiences and one's own personality. I can't really imagine myself with Alzheimers, but if I read a good story about it, then maybe I can get a glimpse into the life of someone with a disappearing and fragmented memory.


Kit

Actually, that sort of thing has happened to me a few times...

Like the time I drove into uni in my slippers and didn't notice until I'd parked the car and got out. I had lectures all morning so couldn't get home to change into shoes until lunchtime. (They were lectures I especially didn't want to miss, and as there were only nine people in my class, I would have been missed!)

Or the even more embarrassing time in a pub, when I was chatting with friends at the bar, decided to sit down and, without looking, reached out for the empty barstool behind me. Unfortunately, since I'd last seen that the stool was empty, someone had sat down in it and I ended up accidentally groping his bum. Fortunately, the guy accepted my explanation and apology! (Although maybe he wouldn't have been quite so understanding if I'd been on my own and not with several friends!)

Kit

Thanks, Kit! I'm relieved that for some it did successfully evoke the imagery I had in mind.


Oh I dunno. As an author 'good writing' is the ideal entity of which to be a 'tenant'. Indeed, I hope to get a lease there myself one day.


In all seriousness, I've made the exact same error before and only narrowly managed to catch it and edit it out before everyone noticed. Darn homophones!



Thank you, Kit! I really appreciate these comments and I think those are excellent points!





I got a big kick out of these stories! They seem like exactly the sort of situations I'd find myself in as well.

At least you had some type of 'shoe' on your feet. I managed to g