We apologize for the delay. One of our judges went missing, so I served as an emergency substitute and did the second set of reviews today.
Anyway, without further ado... the results!
Lady Vulpix's ratings:
"Red Earth" - by Houndoom_Lover
Plot: 5/20 - There weren't any contradictions, but the plot wasn't quite hooking.
Originality: 1/10 - The point goes for the Earl's strangeness. Nothing was really surprising until the "Earl of Millenium" line, which left me wondering what that meant. From there onwards, the events weren't very clear.
Writing Style: 10/20 - The story flowed coherently and was easy to read for the most part, but it was all described rather plainly, as if it were being reported by someone who was not involved in it. The Earl's identity, as well as his motives and methods remain unrevealed, but nothing in the text suggested that they were supposed to be a mystery. It's as if the narrator assumed his visit was a normal occurrence, like being robbed might be. The introduction was interestingly written, though.
Spelling & Grammar: 8/10 - Almost one grammar, spelling or typing mistake per paragraph.
Characters: 2/15 - The characters didn't inspire any strong emotions towards them, and the narrator's own emotions were only reported in a detached manner. About the Earl, we don't know anything (or at least I don't).
Settings: 10/15 - Good descriptions of the setting. Not very original, but very well depicted.
Overall: 4/10 - It was consistent and had all the parts a standard story's supposed to have. It was properly written for the most part. But I felt it lacked something important... the aspect of writing you can't find in a textbook, and which makes the reader get involved in the story and want to read more.
A couple of questions:
1. The last ingredient of the formula didn't sound very scientific to me. Was comedy the intention?
2. How was it a win-win situation? 2 advantages in the best-case scenario is not the same as an advantage in every possible scenario.
Total: 40/100 -
----------------------
"Red Earth" - by mario72486
Plot: 5/20 - A few twists, but there wasn't much of a plot, was there? This was hard to rate, as it was mostly static. It had a lot of reflection, but nothing actually happened.
Originality: 8/10 - Still, the perspective and the issues it raised were quite original. Interesting view of both dragons and humans.
Writing Style: 20/20 - Good descriptions and overall writing style. It flowed smoothly and kept me interested.
Spelling & Grammar: 10/10 - No mistakes found.
Characters: 8/15 - I think the view from the dragon's perspective was nicely done, even if there wasn't much character development.
Settings: 11/15 - Interesting setting. No big surprises there, but it's easy to get dragged into it.
Overall: 7/10 - It could be a great beginning for a story, but as a one-shot it looks rather incomplete. There were no events, no changes of pace, no character interaction... as an introduction it would have been perfect, but as a stand-alone story it leaves me with a bit of an empty feeling.
Total: 69/100 -
----------------------
"Merdeka!" - by darktyranitar
Plot: 4/20 - Another tough one. This looks like an essay rather than a story. A strong and touching work of social criticism, but there's no clear plotline, just short fragments.
Originality: 6/10 - I think the images and the way you linked them were quite original, even if there were no plot twists and little personal creation outside the way of presenting the subject.
Writing Style: 20/20 - Interesting writing style and descriptions. Terrible images, but well described.
Spelling & Grammar: 7/10 - There were several grammar mistakes and changes of tense, but not enough to make it hard to follow.
Characters: 10/15 - I could relate to Fathi. The other characters were well described, but more like parts of the background than like people. If I may ask you a personal question... I was shocked at your description of the sniper. Was that taken from reality? Are there really people who shoot Arabian children, and who want to wipe out all Arabians? I know there are many who treat Jewish people that way. Do we really have that much in common?
Settings: 12/15 - Very good. Nothing really new, but very well described.
Overall: 8/10 - I wouldn't call it a story, but as an essay or critique I think it was very good.
Total: 67/100 -
----------------------
"Emet of the Clay" - by Weasel Overlord
Plot: 20/20 - Compact, but it has everything I would look for in a story. You've done it again!
Originality: 8/10 - The main plot twist was unexpected and exciting. I liked the conclusion too. The reflection about immortality and loneliness has been done many times, but this one had a positive tone, which gave me an idea of how important life was to Emet.
Writing Style: 20/20 - The writing style was really fitting, if a bit slow. But even the slow rhythm had a positive effect, in that it made me think of the way in which Emet must perceive things, and the way he perceived them before. The changes of pace were good for conveying emotions. I think this is a great example of how the phrasing and choice of words assist in telling the story and add strength to the content.
Spelling & Grammar: 10/10 - No mistakes found.
Characters: 15/15 - I liked the main character and especially his way of thinking about himself and about everything (I'm using male pronouns because I don't like using 'it' to refer to sentient beings, and Emet sounds more male than female). The other characters were vaguely outlined, but it was clear that the mystery was intended, from the wayEmet thought about them all once they were gone.
Settings: 9/15 - Not much is clear about the world this story is set in, except for the parts of it in which Emet was directly involved. Emet's view of it is interesting, and it's clear he's only just beginning to take an interest in most things, but as a consequence we don't get to know much.
Overall: 9/10 - Great story. It would have been interesting to learn more about that world and how things went on afterwards, but I enjoyed it a lot.
Total: 91/100 -
----------------------
"Racing Lighting" - by River
Plot: 10/20 - Nice introduction, nice rounded ending and good shifts between scenes, but I couldn't find any climax or plot twists.
Originality: 3/10 - There was creation involved in the characters and the settings, but the story introduces no original concepts and there were no surprises. I liked the title, though.
Writing Style: 11/20 - Good descriptions of the landscape and the motions, and the scene changes were nicely handled, although I think there was a bit too much (or misplaced) description inserted in the dialogues; it broke the flow of the conversation. And this is a vague impression, but I felt the speech used in the narration was much more formal than the situation it was describing. I felt a contrast between the content and the form of the narration. And I think there were too many paragraph breaks; that too broke the flow of the story: there were sequences of very short paragraphs which seemed to have been cut arbitrarily and I think they'd have gone better as one.
Spelling & Grammar: 9/10 - A few mistakes here and there.
Characters: 10/15 - You were good at conveying emotions, but I was still left with the impression of not knowing much about the characters.
Settings: 12/15 - Nothing really surprising or thought-provoking about the settings, but I think they were well composed and nicely described.
Overall: 6/10 - The story has some nice images, but it didn't leave me thinking (except for thinking of how to rate it). I enjoyed it, though.
Total: 61/100 -
----------------------
"Dusk" - by mistysakura
Plot: 12/20 - The story has some good images and touching parts, but some parts were confusing, especially the one about the curse. For most of the second half I didn't quite understand what was going on.
Originality: 10/10 - I must admit I'd never read anything quite like this. Interesting perspective, too.
Writing Style: 13/20 - The first few paragraphs were intriguing.The story in general was beautifully worded for the most part, even if I found it a bit gorey at some points, and a bit too confusing. I loved the paragraph that started with "But her spirit is yet to be conquered".
Spelling & Grammar: 10/10 - Once more, no mistakes found.
Characters: 8/15 - Interesting characters, but the distant perspective makes it hard to relate to the humans, and the main character's the most confusing of all in spite of her well-described emotions.
Settings: 7/15 - Interesting, but mostly unclear. Sorry!
Overall: 6/10 - I think it could have been a great story if the setting and the ending had been clear.
Total: 66/100 -
----------------------
mr_pikachu's Ratings
Red Earth
by Houndoom_Lover
Plot (11/20 points): Interesting. So the guy wanted to bring back his wife, huh? Can't say I blame him. The one thing that really confused me, though, was why the guy refused the help of the Earl when his own technique failed. Perhaps his pride as a scientist was at stake, and maybe that was more important to him than his love. Or perhaps, in keeping with the philosophy of equivalent exchange, he was worried about what it might cost him. But either way, it wasn't fully explained, and it really needed to be. It also might have helped to have a little more information about what exactly he did in the procedure, but the inexplicable plot twist was really the bigger problem.
Plot Originality (3/10 points): Sorry, but I have to give a low score for this one. This is far too similar to the premise of Full Metal Alchemist, despite the addition of this “Earl of Millennium.”
Writing Style (12/20 points): Not bad. I liked the overall tone you set, especially the scientific approach to resurrection (and, in some sense, to love). But the pace was far too fast at critical points. I know there was a word limit, but you might've been able to spend a little more time with moments like Pliny's eventual failure while removing some less important elements (like his identity and maybe some of the backstory, neither of which proved to be significant).
Spelling and Grammar (5/10 points): The errors here wouldn't be a big deal in a long piece, but there's not really a good excuse for errors like “these activity” (plural or singular?), “claimer,” “discomfortment,” and so on in a one-shot. A little more editing would've been very helpful.
Characters (10/15 points): The characters weren't all that important, but then again, they didn't need to be. The acts in question were the point of this story, so you probably could've gotten away with never naming anyone. Frankly, the only real problem I had was that the characters were given meager identities. It's fine to go with total anonymity or to fully establish a character, but splitting the difference by setting up a one-dimensional character really doesn't work. I would've preferred that they were never identified, because then the incomplete picture wouldn't have been such a big deal.
Settings (13/15 points): This was shown well enough to give us an impression of the work area; no major complaints here.
Overall Appreciation (7/10 points): Not a bad piece, but the emphasis probably should've been different. See my closing advice.
Final Result: 61/100 = % (as a percentage).
Closing Advice: When you're limited in the length of your writing, it pushes you to emphasize only the aspects that need emphasis and cast aside the rest. In this case, do we really need to know about Pliny's lineage? Do we even need to know his name? And is his initial sorrow important (especially considering how he eventually rejects the help of the Earl)? Had these aspects and some others been cut, you would've had far more room to set the mood of this piece, to explain what he was doing, to delve into his thoughts (which really could've been dramatic), and to show why exactly he rejected the help of the apparently willing savior who came before him. So remember, trim the fat, and give us only the meaty goodness that remains.
----------------------
Red Earth
by mario72486
Plot (18/20 points): Ooh, I like this premise! Great transition from humans' fear of dragons as stereotypically destructive beasts to a realization that the creatures are simply misunderstood. I find it very interesting how the humans are eventually portrayed as the antagonists, especially now that we have ever more movies coming out with a “humans vs. dragons; who will survive?” theme. Very good twist. My only complaint is that the sneezing at the end does throw the whole “humans are misguided” thing into question. If the dragons are unable to control their power, can you blame people for wanting them gone? Maybe that was part of the point, but it does take away just a bit of this piece's power.
Plot Originality (7/10 points): Okay, so dragons killing people isn't exactly original. And maybe the whole “misunderstood creature” thing is also a bit ordinary (think of Pokémon's Absol, for instance). Still, it was different enough to still be good and surprising to a fair degree. It wasn't as if it was used as a big twist in the end, but the unusual take on dragons was very good for setting the tone.
Writing Style (16/20 points): Pretty good overall. You did a great job with the dragon's imagery as well as the backstory of the species in general. I was kind of thrown off by the series of ellipses at the end, though. That wasn't necessary at all, and it made the piece look much more amateurish than it had previously. First of all, even when you use an ellipsis, it only consists of three “dots.” And second, you almost never want a series of them like this in a textual piece; it certainly wasn't warranted here. That hurt, if only because it damaged the overall dramatic tone.
Spelling and Grammar (6/10 points): You faltered a little here. While there weren't any persistent problems, I did notice several occasional errors like shifting to the present tense, mixing singular nouns with plural verbs, and other assorted issues. It was enough that a even a casual reader could well take note of it, so a little more proofreading might be warranted in the future.
Characters (13/15 points): Good characterization of the dragon. You did a particularly good job with using that point of view to also characterize both the people and dragons in general without ever having to show them. You made us sympathize with the dragons despite their incredibly fearsome appearance, and the people's character almost made me think of an environmentalist perspective (i.e. “Stop destroying the planet for your own ends!”). Again, the degree to which we should detest the people was called into question at the end, but this was otherwise strong.
Settings (13/15 points): This was good enough. Aside from knowing that the dragon accidentally turned a village into a wasteland, we really didn't need to get more than a glimpse of the setting. You did a good job with providing that. I did think the explicit statement that the earth appeared red seemed a little odd, almost like a blatant attempt to justify the entry under the theme (which, I might add, wasn't really necessary; the thorough imagery of the land burning was more than enough). But still, you did a pretty good job in this area.
Overall Appreciation (9/10 points): It was a good read. Pure and simple.
Final Result: 82/100 = % (as a percentage).
Closing Advice: You lost far more points than you needed to drop on spelling and grammar alone. Every little thing is magnified in a short piece, so it would help to make sure there's nothing obvious like that in the future. In contrast, your imagery was excellent, and the plotline made your characterization all the more profound. You certainly chose the right points to emphasize, and that's half the battle in a one-shot. But make sure your plot doesn't clash with your purpose (i.e. the reason this village was burned in the first place), and try to refine everything a little more next time. Very strong entry, but it was on the verge of magnificent.
----------------------
Merdeka!
by darktyranitar
Plot (14/20 points): Okay, this was a pretty good idea. We don't see many historical commentaries here, especially with such strong dramatic sentiments, so this was a nice change of pace. And nice work in showing the difference between the heroism of years past in contrast and the poor character of individuals today. Still, there weren't really any twists; from the start, most of the story was pretty clear. That's not such a big problem in this sort of piece as it might be otherwise, but it's still worth noting. A bigger issue was the general disconnect between segments of the plot. Each story was impressive on its own, yes, but at times the work seemed more like a collection of short stories rather than one cohesive piece. It may not have been possible to tie them together completely, but some greater sense of flow would have been nice.
Plot Originality (9/10 points): Again, this isn't the sort of thing we see very often, and it's a tale that most of us would never hear at all.
Writing Style (9/20 points): A lot of points were lost here, some of which was due to the influence of the spelling and grammar (see next section), which made the piece difficult to read. Additionally, there were several unnecessary phrases and sentences that were encapsulated from the rest of the text by parentheses in the style of author's notes. To put it bluntly, author's notes really shouldn't be used. Not only was the information given in these examples largely unnecessary, but even if it was useful, it should probably be shown in the text itself rather than using artificial constructs. Additionally, as mentioned in the plot section, the various stories seemed to be a little disconnected from one another. You're obviously giving a wide range of tales about these characters, but it seemed it all probably could've flowed a little more smoothly.
Spelling and Grammar (1/10 points): This was... a problem. The piece was actually quite difficult to read at times because of the myriad of errors. Individually, things like switching tenses, flip-flopping between the second and third person, substituting incorrect words, forgetting end punctuation, and using singular nouns/verbs in place of their plural forms (and vice-versa) might not be such a huge deal. But when all of those things and more are put together with a high degree of frequency, especially in such a short piece, your reader's eyes begin to glaze over no matter how good the work might otherwise be. Again, in a short work, every slight error is magnified. When mistakes appear every few sentences, they tend to overshadow the writing itself.
Characters (12/15 points): Because of this piece's style, it wasn't as important to describe individual characters in depth as it was to give a broad range of people across the country and throughout time. You did a pretty good job of that here.
Settings (13/15 points): While the physical setting wasn't described extensively (to be fair, it didn't need much description here), the overall culture of Malaysia and its past was demonstrated well. Since that's what mattered for the content of this piece, you'll get a high score here.
Overall Appreciation (6/10 points): It's a good idea, making a statement about the present by looking into the sacrifices that were made so that today's world would be possible. But it still needs quite a bit of refinement.
Final Result: 64/100 = % (as a percentage).
Closing Advice: Definitely work on the spelling and grammar. If you're writing a long piece, individual errors don't stand out quite as much because the other aspects have more time to develop and entrench themselves in the mind of the reader. But in a short story, you need to deliver a powerful point fast. If your reader is distracted by various missteps, you've already missed your opportunity. And make sure your plotlines flow well, too. It may have just been a one-time problem in this case due to the very nature of this piece, but if you find yourself jumping between unconnected plotlines in your other work, try to establish a greater connection between them or at least make each section last for a significant length of time.
----------------------
Emet of the Clay
by Weasel Overlord
Plot (17/20 points): Very unusual piece overall. It seems like most of the texts focuses on establishing the being itself rather than developing a plotline (although that's not a bad thing, especially since the imagery you developed worked hand-in-hand with the one event of the piece). Furthermore, the shortened plot was heavily emphasized so that the one thing that did happen was cast in great importance. I only have two small critiques: the carving itself could have been shown in greater detail so that we saw more of the process itself (and perhaps the changes within the clay beast as his exterior was being altered) instead of just the eventual aftermath, and you might have been well served to add some sort of a conclusion, whether it was the end of the golem or some great realization he drew from his experiences. But it was pretty good as it was.
Plot Originality (9/10 points): The concept of a golem is something you'll see from time to time in fiction, but it's not an extensively explored subject. I've personally never heard of giving a golem new life by writing new words on its body... nice twist!
Writing Style (17/20 points): You did a pretty good job here. I do think the notes at the end were unnecessary. If you were genuinely concerned about copying the lyrics, you could've mentioned that before the piece rather than making the note part of the work itself. As for the latter note, it was already pretty clear what you meant from the context. Aside from that, it was fairly solid.
Spelling and Grammar (9/10 points): Aside from a few very insignificant slips (such as overused commas), this was just about perfect.
Characters (13/15 points): The only character that particularly mattered here was the golem; even the odd carvers were relatively insignificant by comparison. Both the physical and mental aspects of the creature were portrayed quite well. Maybe you could've gone into a little more detail about a few choice humans, like the golem's creator, but other than that you did a good job.
Settings (11/15 points): This could've been stronger. While showing the setting wasn't entirely necessary, it would've added another layer of depth to this piece, and it could've been done easily by looking at the golem's work in greater detail. Still, it wasn't vital, so it's not too big of a loss.
Overall Appreciation (10/10 points): This was a very enjoyable piece to read. Nice imagery, and great introspection.
Final Result: 86/100 = % (as a percentage).
Closing Advice: I thought the idea behind this was very interesting and the imagery was quite good. Overall, a solid piece. It might've been helped to have a slightly more definite conclusion at the end, and packing a little of the setting into a few choice sentences might have pushed you over the top. But still, nicely done. You clearly put a lot of work into this piece.
----------------------
Racing Lightning
by River
Plot (14/20 points): Heh, that's Parenting 101 for you. Think of what you'd do and don't let your kids get away with it! It was nice how seeing her daughter playing triggered that happy (although perhaps a tad worrisome) memory. A solid plot overall. The main critique I have here is that it was a tad predictable... from the start, it was pretty clear what was happening. Now, if one of the characters had been caught in the storm, even if it hadn't ended disastrously, that might have made for a more intense story. A couple of twists may have helped.
Plot Originality (7/10 points): Overall, this was pretty standard fare. Mother sees child, reminisces, and learns something (or maybe just enjoys the memories). Sure, it's not as common as something like a trainer fic, but it's not original enough to really be remarkable either.
Writing Style (17/20 points): Pretty good. I liked the references to the wake of a boat and the emphasis on racing as both leisure and a way of making a living. The whole memory idea itself was also quite good. The need to train and win also contrasted nicely with the carefree present.
Spelling and Grammar (6/10 points): This could've been better. Simple mistakes like using an apostrophe for plurals and leaving it absent from possessives, switching homonym forms, and other one-time errors were scattered throughout this piece. Once again, small mistakes are magnified when there's not much text, so you really have to do your proofreading.
Characters (7/15 points): This could've been quite a bit stronger. None of the characters were really heavily emphasized; the only one who really came into the spotlight was Evelyn. And aside from her hairstyle, we only learned that she was a caring, wistful mother who used to ride horses. There wasn't much beyond that... unfortunately, most everyone was fairly one-dimensional.
Settings (14/15 points): This was easily the aspect that received the most focus. If anything, it may have been mentioned a little too much, as the dirt, rain, or thunder seemed to be reiterated every few sentences. But overall, good job with this.
Overall Appreciation (8/10 points): An enjoyable piece.
Final Result: 73/100 = % (as a percentage).
Closing Advice: This was the sort of fluffy piece that doesn't need the drama to be too serious (although a twist or two certainly would've helped). But characterization is still pretty important. It would've been nice to see more of the girls than just their rebellion and love of competitive riding. It's hard in such a short piece, but some aspects probably could've been trimmed a little. Slightly less emphasis on the setting, for instance, may have given you enough room. Also, make sure you don't let spelling and grammar get in the way. Every time your reader notices a problem with that, it wrenches the focus away from your writing.
----------------------
Dusk
by mistysakura
Plot (16/20 points): Nice developments. From the mystery of the figure's identity to the her resentment, from her love of her children to her irritation at the boy's betrayal, and from her efforts to save him to her hope for the future, you built a good plotline here. Most of it was fairly cohesive; however, some of the purposes seemed a little unfocused. For instance, the perceived racism seemed to arise from nowhere, and it didn't help that it was rather extreme. (Would those onlookers have preferred that he died?) Also, the mystery of her form may have been held for a little too long; I was starting to think that we were talking about Stonehenge, or perhaps an Egyptian sphinx. But still, it was quite good overall.
Plot Originality (8/10 points): I liked the twist of having the kid slip and fall; that was very unexpected, and it was also a good way to bring the mountain back to motherly love. Still, pieces that focus on treating the planet with kindness aren't uncommon, so you'll lose a few points as a result.
Writing Style (13/20 points): Great descriptions of the throng early in the piece. The portrayal of them as a faceless mass was particularly insightful. Still, as I mentioned before, some of the later material didn't add up quite as well. In particular, I had to reread the part where the boy fell several times, because I didn't know what happened. At first, it seemed like he fell down some of the walkway. Then I thought he fell a bit off the path, but not too far. I'm still not sure exactly what happened, and considering how dramatic that moment was supposed to be, it's a problem.
Spelling and Grammar (9/10 points): This was quite good, with only a few unnecessary commas and the like to mar your work.
Characters (12/15 points): Good job with the main characters, especially the mountain. It was interesting to see her many moods: frustration at humanity in general, rage at her “traitorous” son, and desperate love for him when he got into trouble. The part about trying to “hold on” to the branch was particularly good. The boy, in turn, was described as well as necessary. But some of the minor characters really needed a little more, particularly those who reacted badly toward the boy. A little more information about that, even if it was just a few lines, would've helped quite a bit.
Settings (12/15 points): Comparatively, the setting was very well described. The problem is that, since the main character was the setting itself, we probably needed even more description. That would've also helped clarify what exactly happened to the boy.
Overall Appreciation (8/10 points): A good piece overall, even if I wish a few choice aspects had been explained a little more clearly.
Final Result: 78/100 = % (as a percentage).
Closing Advice: I liked this piece overall, and I think works of this nature have quite a lot of potential. But it wasn't clear what point you were trying to get across; in one-shots, it's hard to convey more than one critical idea without losing some of the work's power. Also, the crucial plot twist was partially lost in a bit of confusion. Make sure that such important moments are perfectly clear; otherwise, it takes away the drama of the moment.
----------------------
Lady Vulpix's Score + mr_pikachu's Score = Total Score (Average)
40 + 61 = 101 (50.5%) - Houndoom_Lover
69 + 82 = 151 (75.5%) - mario72486
67 + 64 = 131 (65.5%) - darktyranitar
91 + 86 = 177 (88.5%) - Weasel Overlord
61 + 73 = 134 (67.0%) - River
66 + 78 = 144 (72.0%) - mistysakura
Congratulations to the winner of the August 2007 Writing Contest, Weasel Overlord! I have to say, Emet of the Clay was truly a strong piece. It was a pleasure reading your work, and that of all the participants. Well done, everyone! And congrats again to the big winner!