** Images For Use By Upgraded+ Only **
TITLE:Frobisher 262
AUTHOR : Puppycat
Date Reviewed: NOvember 26th, 2006
I. GENERAL Review:
My first impressions of your story: I very much enjoyed your choice for a "hook" line in this piece. It worked nicely for me. You fought the tendency, I thought, of "looping" the piece by using the last line (which would have been effective, but slightly misleading, in my view), which shows some sophistication in your writing.
I did enjoy reading the piece, but while I found it easy to identify the characters as they developed, I found it quite difficult to find empathy with any of them. Frobisher was the most likely candidate, and failed the test for me, personally. That, however, took nothing away from some excellent writing.
II. SPECIFIC Review:
A. The overall story: I enjoyed the story, overall. It was a fun, and entertaining read. It is well written, and some really excellent writing technique is displayed. As a reader, I got invested in Frobisher emotionally a bit as his folly develops, but only in the sense of watching someone headed for a train wreck. Two implausible situations developed, each of which resulted in conclusions that distracted me. The first dealt with "the aging gene" situation. The second dealt with Frobisher's participation in the process at all, given his reputation. But, brilliant people ARE known to do ridiculously stupid things, aren't they? :)
B. The theme: Bothersome for me, the theme(s) which drive this piece. Will "good" people make "bad" choices? For even the very best of intentions? Even with "terminal" outcomes, affecting not only them, but others as well? Well, sure they will! But not to research the "aging" gene. Perhaps Frobisher is discomfiting to me because his brilliance stops when he ambulates. (No common sense.) How far will a person, dedicated to their calling in life, go for what they consider personal success? (Ask a writer!) :) In this regard, I would suggest a different title for this piece: "Frobisher's Folly", perhaps.
C. The technical details including formatting (spelling, grammar, scientific or historical details), etc.: Excellent technical presentation. The writing was tight, the dialogue correct, with no distractions. I do not know of the history of your writing, but you do it well! Interesting choice of subject, and nice form throughout yielded a very interesting read. For me, personally, it was not what I would consider enjoyable, but that is only because of the implausibility of the premise. That distraction kept me from becoming fully invested in the writing. It did forewarn me, however. Very little good ever comes from a fool's errand.
D. What I loved about this work, and why: I kept wanting to see Frobisher "wake up" to his errors. Unfortunately, he never does. I went to the last word on that hope alone. In the end, he was brillant, but stupid. My empathy found its limit, and I never got a chance to revise my opinion.
E. What caused me problems, and why: The premise(s).
1. Aging has no genetic code marker, or gene, or DNA section. It is the result of a process, dependent upon other processes being completed. While one may "age gracefully", gravity and friction will not be denied. For me personally, I was simply unable to bypass this reality to invest in the story fully. But, it did cause yet another difficulty for me, with Frobisher himself.
2. A scientist, no less, with such "brilliance" would USUALLY never allow themselves to find the first moment, much less the final conclusion of this piece. Thirst for knowledge, desire for success, and the need for validation DO drive us, sometimes, to extraordinary ends, so the validity rests at "implausible" and does not make it to "impossible".
3. A third difficulty for me was the inclusion of Frobisher's family to such degree. I feel they would have better served the purpose with a one-sentence identification alone. Such description and detail add, quite frankly, nothing of substance to the story as it sits now, and create a false (to me) investment on the reader's part. I feel no empathy towards them from the story, save their innocent victimization by a fool. I'd give the entire lot a one-sentence reality, and keep the focus on the story.
III. FINAL COMMENTS: Excellent writing! It was a fun read, and as you may deduce from my review, an entertaining one as well. The thoughts I developed for my Review of this work indicate, to me at least, that I did participate fully as a reader in the work. What more could a writer ask? Good job!
Thank you for this opportunity to review your work. I try to make my Reviews relevant, helpful, honest, and tactful. If there is one item on this Review which helps make your writing better, I am satisfied. It has been my honor to visit your work today.
If you have any questions, concerns, or comments about my Review, or suggestions about how I can be a better reviewer, please do let me know. We are all learning, and growing, and sharing our craft—or at least we should be.
Write well!
M. B. “Bud” Fields, Jr.
kybudman@writing.com
|