So, how is it that you buy a book from a seller on Amazon, two days after purchase they inform you they're processing the order and it should soon be on its way, two days after THAT they refund you and tell you the book is out of stock, then several days later they relist that book because suddenly, for some bizarre reason, it's available again? Assholes. If they'd jacked up the price of the book I'd chalk it up to an unscrupulous seller--I've seen it done before--but they didn't. In fact it's a bit less than the price I tried to buy it at. Even so, I still think they're dishonest. It's probably only lower because they're competing with another seller offering the same book for around the same price.

Just wish I hadn't already left feedback. It was negative (two stars--because they said they were processing the order, implying IT'S IN STOCK, and because it took them FOUR DAYS to realize it WASN'T, when Amazon sellers are supposed to ship to you within two days!), but in it I said that I didn't believe the seller was dishonest, just bad at communication. Scratch that--they're dishonest. I'm going to try to avoid shopping with them again. Assholes.

Oh yes, because of state budget issues, Medicaid cut all dental except emergency, so there go any plans of eventually fixing up my horrid teeth. I guess that's what you get, but they also cut, in addition to podiatrists (sic?) and chiropractors, things such as eyeglasses, contact lenses, and hearing aids. Podiatrists and chiropractors and cosmetic dental work I can understand--but hearing and seeing aids? Some people really need that kind of stuff just to FUNCTION, but for some reason Medicaid is deeming it unnecessary? Cripes. How long before they cut psych services, too? Because mental problems are all in your head and aren't real? I won't be surprised if they do. In fact I'm rather counting on it. Then there'll be no point in having the stupid Medicaid at all. -_- Then I bet they'll cut my disability as well. Not that I ever get to see my therapist anymore; Dad is supposed to take time off from work on the 22nd so he can drive me in rather than reschedule the f**king thing for like the FIFTH TIME. He isn't supposed to leave work on Mondays but he said I've missed enough appointments. I'm betting they're going to cancel that too. Times like these you realize how low priority and unimportant you are, when the mental health center cancels on you four times in a row. I was just starting to like going to see my psychologist; by now she's a stranger again and I'm so resentful, what's the point? Therapy is supposed to help you feel better, not remind you how unimportant you'll always be. I get enough reminders of that every single day of my life. Whatever small progress we were making has already been undone, plus some, just by these cancellations alone.

Yes, my stupid Internet or phone line is still acting up. It cleared up for about a week and I thought it was finally done, but I guess not. -_- And we're still getting analog TV--albeit crappily, but it was crappy before the so-called switch. What's going on? Even our local CBS, which made a point of live broadcasting their analog shutoff (my dad watched it at work on another cable provider), is still coming in in analog. We rescanned our TV--no new digital channels. Just the ones we already had, which don't cover NEARLY all the analog channels we have, and the analog channels themselves.

I really wish I knew what's going on. I don't think Charter knows what they're doing. I shouldn't bother mentioning it though because I fully believe that if/when our provider switches to all digital, we're not going to be receiving anything. That's how shitty it is. Now that I've mentioned it, I bet our analog channels--ALL our channels--will be gone.

I'm getting sick of paying for a bunch of shit that doesn't even work.

 

Yesterday as soon as I set foot outside to put food on the porch, I heard an awful THUMP, and saw a possum roll to the side of the road as a pickup truck sped by. The jerk didn't even slow down to see what he'd hit. I don't know if it was already dead or still alive, but I hope it died immediately, because I hadn't the heart to go and make sure; I can't get the memory of that poor skunk out of my head. I never told that story here as it was just too heartbreaking. There was one morning when I noticed a dead skunk lying at the edge of the road out front; as I did my things, I could have sworn that its head had just slightly changed position, but it must have been just me. I went outside with a big stick to nudge it into the ditch so it would avoid getting mangled further, yet as I tramped up the opposite side of the ditch and up to the skunk, it lifted its head and looked right at me. The poor thing was still alive, just lying there injured at the side of the road. I went back inside and of course my parents refused to do anything so I couldn't stop crying all morning, seeing it raising and lowering its head as it just lay there for hours. At last Dad went out with a hammer and finished it off. I wish I had the guts to do that, seeing as I'm the one whose heart breaks when I see such things. But I just don't have it in me. What if I don't hit it hard enough and just put it in more pain? Hence I couldn't bother to go look at the poor possum. I never saw it move and its body grew more mangled as the day went on. It's definitely dead by now, but I hope it was dead from the start. I read somewhere, on a possum rescue site I believe, that one should check pouches of dead possums for they could have live babies in them, but could you imagine doing such a thing? I know I haven't the heart. Stupid jerk in the stupid pickup. I know such things are inevitable but he could have at least slowed down to see what he'd hit. What if it had been a dog or a small child?

I'll be surprised if we manage to get any watchable channels following the digital transition coming up. Our cable service has grown progressively worse and worse in the past year and now much of it is unwatchable--the digital transition will just make it worse unless they increase their signal strength or something, which I doubt, seeing as our cable provider (Charter) is going bankrupt. No surprise considering how crappy they've gotten. They used to actually work most of the time. Then the analog channels started getting worse and worse, some terribly staticky, most of them flickering all the time. NBC became completely unwatchable, no exaggeration, which is incredibly infuriating seeing as it's the channel I watch most. Then we got a new digital TV and discovered that it picks up some digital channels already, and we could watch NBC on that, so all was well; I started to look forward to this digital transition. The digital channels came in and worked. But then they started to act up too, breaking apart/pixellating, the sound going out, freezing and locking up, blacking out completely with the screen saying nothing but "Digital signal strength is low" or "Digital channel encrypted." So the analog and the digital channels became unwatchable--the digital even worse than the analog, because at least you can watch and understand a staticky channel. Then, a couple of weeks ago, we discovered that we actually get a few HD channels even though we aren't subscribed to Charter HD. HD NBC came in spectacular and I considered paying a bit more to upgrade us to HD if it means we can at least watch TV...but that lasted all of one day. At first the HD was at least watchable compared to analog and digital, maybe breaking apart a tiny bit now and then, but today it was breaking up and blacking out and everything just as much as the regular digital now does. The kicker is that the channels only used to do this when it was really windy (and it's windy almost ALWAYS around here)...yet today it was as calm as anything. Not even raining, just cloudy. And still the channels were nothing but shit. Meanwhile Charter blithely airs their HD ads where a "weather man" is talking about how a little rain will knock out satellite channels but everything comes in crystal clear with Charter HD, upgrade now! And the offers we get in the mail talk about how wonderful and "crystal clear" (quote/unquote) just regular Charter digital comes in. I doubt Charter employees actually subscribe to their own service if they can claim this crap with a straight face. Someone could get them for false advertising. Their service USED to work...why has it stopped? We're paying even more than we used to when the service did work, and are getting less.

I've noticed more and more often how it seems everyone around us has satellite--at least, I see satellite dishes on every house. No wonder. Satellite is the only other option available in our area, but I doubt it's much better seeing as it too is digital and we're surrounded by trees. So unless Charter plans on improving their service come June 12, which I seriously doubt, we're going to be getting nothing but shit on our TV despite paying $50 a month. I know that even if/when I call them to complain nothing will come of it because I have no power to make people do things even if they're SUPPOSED to do them. Witness all the other services we pay for which don't work the way they're supposed to. They could at least own up to it, and get their service working before going bankrupt. We've been subscribed to Charter before they were even Charter here, back when they were Bresnan, back when they were TCI. You think that'd count for something, that $50 a month would count for SOMETHING working the way it's supposed to. They've never been the best or most reliable provider but at least they used to usually work. What burns me is how great they advertise their service as being, how it USED to work but for some reason in the past year has gone rapidly downhill (yet with prices always going up) with no improvement in sight. That does not point to a problem on our end, but on theirs. A problem they'd never in a million years own up to or admit.

I wish I had more power and influence to get things done.

I'm reading now in my DID book about "sandplay," which I thought was just swirling and making patterns in sand trays but in fact is about playing with little figurines and toys and such in trays of sand. This struck a chord with me. I used to do this when I was little, only without the sand. I had a huge collection of little toy animals I would play with and make up stories with. They had their very own miniature world. I adored those animals. I even got nostalgic and briefly searched at eBay for such little toy animals without any luck so quickly gave up. One of those sets of animals, I wonder what brand they were, I loved them so much. They'd be antiques by now. I played with them so much the paint on them wore off and I had a pink kitten and turtle and a blue hippo and a yellow cow and a stripeless zebra. The ears on the zebra fell off and the giraffe broke his long neck, so my dad carved the zebra's face to make her look like a weird ducklike creature, and I was always putting tape on the giraffe's neck and having him explain to his other animal friends how he'd broken it and now it was recovering. Whenever I lost an animal I'd have the other animals say he/she'd gone on vacation somewhere. Then when I'd find them, they'd be back from their vacation. I at last lost them one by one or else put them away and never returned to them lest the time I spend with them not be as great as it used to be. You know how you have such fond memories of something, that when you try to revisit it you find it's not nearly as great as it was before, because maybe you're too jaded by now or it was just much more meaningful back then. Still I miss those little animals.

My face feels like it's etched in a permanent scowl. I squint all the time--my eyes aren't as good as they used to be--and it just feels like my face is inhospitable. I imagine I look very uninviting to anyone who might look at me. Sometimes my parents ask me what's wrong when honestly nothing is, at least at that moment. I can only guess it's the unpleasant look on my face. I can even feel the tension in my muscles, but I have no real incentive to make it go away. I guess scowls suit me nowadays. If you're scowling, people won't tend to bother you. I'd rather look scowly and angry than whiny and depressed. I went and looked at myself in the mirror and tried to smile but it looked terribly unnatural whereas the scowl seemed right at home. I guess that's just me now. *shrug*

Hard to believe this journal is over a year old now, but still seems "tentative."

Tar for now...

 

Today was Damien's 40th birthday. He'll always be in his mid-twenties to me.

Happy B-Day, Dami.

 

My GOD I am SO F**KING PISSED OFF! I just got a notice in the mail today cancelling my 6/18 appointment and rescheduling it for the 22nd--a MONDAY, when I CAN'T F**KING GO IN!

28th--cancelled by them, rescheduled for 29th
29th--cancelled by us, rescheduled for 11th but they forget to inform Psychologist
11th--cancelled by them, rescheduled for 18th
18th--cancelled by them, rescheduled for 22nd, going to have to F**KING BE RESCHEDULED AGAIN

Why am I even in f**king therapy if I'm never going to get to SEE THE F**KING THERAPIST?

 

Last night was pretty shitty and today's not looking too hot either but I just wanted to say I just saw the male rose-breasted grosbeak! He was big and black and white with a cherry-red breast! He ate a few seeds, scratched his head with his foot like a cat, then flew away. This is first and only time I've ever seen him, though I believe I saw the female some time back (see the 5-8-2009 @ 4:37 pm EDT entry.)

Last night everything just went wrong. I wanted to go somewhere today, but Ma wants to go somewhere else. Fine, but not fine when everything piled atop it. The Internet started acting up at night (it usually works somewhat better then), even though it had been working just fine for Ma earlier and it was merely a 40kbps connection, which is usually tolerable--it's like it waits for ME to use it and then acts up; then I started a day early, just because I wanted to go somewhere the next day, of course; then I couldn't get to sleep; THEN my bladder acted up and I couldn't stop going to the bathroom. You'd think I'd have gotten it all out of me last night when I was trying to sleep, but it's still coming; it's doing this more often now. Why am I not dehydrated? I seem to be going to the bathroom more than I even drink, or at least, why does it all want to come out at one damn time? This is two nights in a row I've had trouble getting to sleep. I'm tired of this. Then this morning the Net acts up yet AGAIN, though I shouldn't say "again" because now it's normal for it to not work right. I'm so SICK of this. It took like six minutes for one of my folders here on WDC to load while I wasn't loading anything else whatsoever. I'm not kidding. SIX MINUTES. Actually MORE than six minutes because WDC only counts how many seconds after the title of the page loads, and there's quite a while before THAT happens.

I got so mad last night I disconnected and reconnected just so I could view my Amazon wish list, that's how bad the connection was, I had only a few more pages to look at and it wasn't even loading item pages right so I couldn't listen to CD samples--instead of the little play icons it said I had to download Flash which I already HAVE because I was just listening to samples earlier that same damn day! Then I bought a double-CD Hans Zimmer tribute set and a double-CD choral music set to mollify myself, though I probably won't like them and will regret that. I just wish things would start going well and working properly again.

Where the hell is the book I ordered way back on the 24th?? What's taking that so damn long??

Going now because I'm still in a bad mood and probably will be for quite a while. -_- Tar...

 

PS:

Recently found out Yahoo! is now shutting down Yahoo! 360. Good Lord, they never even got that damn thing out of beta stage and already they're closing it. Glad I didn't get too settled in there (though I did spend a good deal of time customizing and setting up my page and blog, and wanted someday to do some reviews, so much for that), but why does Yahoo! even come up with these things if they're just going to pull the plug? Check it:

*Yahoo! Briefcase--closed.

*Yahoo! Clubs--merged with Groups very messily, and from what I heard, many Clubs were lost/corrupted/messed up in the process.

*Yahoo! Photos--closed (after a major revamp, no less).

*Yahoo! GeoCities--about to close (ostensibly so Yahoo! can "concentrate on finding other ways for members to get in touch," whatever the hell that means, GeoCities wasn't a social networking site as far as I knew!).

*Yahoo! 360--about to close (see below).

Again, the site is closing so Yahoo! can focus on making Yahoo! Profiles "the" place for people to connect and keep in touch and get to know one another yadda yadda yadda doublespeak thoughtcrime doubleplusgood fourlegsgoodtwolegsbad. WTF? Who the hell even looks at Yahoo! Profiles? I haven't updated any of mine in years, they were so useless--could barely customize them, couldn't get the right interests links to show up on them, couldn't even contact people through them unless they had their e-mail listed publicly, which many people don't, for good reason. I used to check out profiles whenever people joined my Groups but gave up when I found that most people DON'T EVEN FILL OUT ANY INFO ON THEM. And what makes anyone think, if 360 failed to become a hot social networking site, that Profiles will be so much better? Really, what is Yahoo! thinking? How long before they shut down not only Profiles, but something like Yahoo! Mail? GOD I will be so f**king pissed off if/when they do that! Honestly, Yahoo!, figure out what the hell you want to do and then stick to it. You have more abandoned and unfinished projects littered behind you than I do.

Anyway, tar again, time for bed.

 

(Typed this up a few days ago, didn't get to post it. Here you go. I'm fine! Seriously. Especially now that I thought these points over. Just getting it out of my system.)


The more I think it over, the more it seems to me the person referenced could not have possibly read as much of TAC as they claimed. Their reviews made it seem clear they'd read possibly up to Part 26, where they first complained, so I'll give them that; but their complaints just reeked of them not having read much after that, of skipping around heavily. I think this is one reason the comments pissed me off so much when normally I can attempt to at least take such criticism in stride; I mean, I do say I'm looking for comments on characterization and plot, don't I? So to get upset when somebody does so, albeit critically, embarrasses me. However, I think, besides the points I already stated, the suspicion that this person was commenting on material they hadn't even read is what sticks with me.

This entry contains some spoilers for TAC.

One of the complaints, the one that irked me as the reader basically insinuated I have no idea how to write my own characters, was about Bakh'asu, who in one chapter breaks the character I'anen's neck and kills him. Why did he do this, the reader asked? It was so out of character because, even though Bakh'asu clearly comes across as a rapist in the story, he doesn't come across as a murderer--he didn't kill a guard he escaped earlier in the story, for example. For him to kill I'anen seemed unnecessary and, this reader stated, was the point when the story became unenjoyable and really bothered them. It was out of character.

This reader claimed to have read up to the part when Bakh'asu was killed, meaning they should have had plenty of time to see his motives for killing I'anen and what led to that moment. I just remembered this tonight. They couldn't possibly have read that material, or else were so set on nitpicking that they shrugged it off. Basically--Bakh'asu is a character from Djuta's past. Djuta once was the slave of Captain Tas'hukh, and an incident involving him and Bakh'asu got Bakh'asu relegated to the status of slave himself--making his life a living hell. Therefore Bakh'asu had a seething hatred for Djuta and Tas'hukh and anything having to do with them. When he shows up again in the story, he sets out to make THEIR lives a living hell. Seeing as I'anen is close to Tas'hukh, of course Bakh'asu would want to kill him! Now, I honestly can't remember if Bakh'asu knows I'anen is close to Tas'hukh, but I really think I did say this in the text. (I think I'anen offhandedly tells him so.) Bakh'asu had no need or desire to kill the guard or any others up to that point (killing the guard, e. g., would take time and would probably attract unwanted attention), but he had plenty of reason to kill I'anen, especially in such a humiliating way. Bakh'asu's actions in killing I'anen, thus, were perfectly in character. He had no reason to commit murder until THAT moment. Take a look at any criminal. For a lot of people, when they first commit a crime, everybody says, "But that wasn't like him at all!" Well, it wasn't, until he did it. So it is with Bakh'asu.

The other point, which I realized at the moment I read the review, regards the death of Nehekhi. When the reader first complained of the unnecessary killing of I'anen and how it seemed like I was just having things happen without any thought of future events, I mentioned how when Nehekhi dies, there is a LOT of fallout throughout the rest of the series. Then, after sending the response, I realized that Nehekhi wasn't dead in the story yet! I'd just spoiled it! Oh well, it wasn't like the reader seemed to be enjoying it much, and they'd already sent a review (I was replying to these hours after they were sent) complaining about that very incident. They took me to task about a chapter that took place several parts after Nehekhi's death, claiming that there was no fallout over the incident, nobody was reacting to or affected by it; it was very unrealistic. This angered me the moment I read it for I know it's not true. In fact, one of the reasons behind Nehekhi's death (another one of them being, I admit, that he had just outgrown his usefulness being alive in the story and his death would suit the plot better) was to show the intense effect it would have on everyone around him. IN FACT, as the story got longer and longer, I realized this is one of the ongoing themes--how seemingly trivial events have lasting and unpredictable repercussions in the far future. Take a look, Ameni getting lost in a sandstorm is what ends up setting off huge cultural change and intertribal warfare and whatnot. A leads to B leads to C. A butterfly flaps its wings and causes a hurricane. This is one of TAC's main themes. Individuals, and individual events, make huge differences in the long run.

How the heck could somebody actually READ this and claim that Nehekhi's death had no aftereffects?? I killed him off knowing there would be aftereffects, and maybe I wrote it so lousily that I didn't make this obvious, but nobody else has ever complained and it might sound bigheaded but I SERIOUSLY doubt I wrote it that poorly; if anything, one of my big writing flaws is that I can be TOO obvious and overstate things TOO much. Take a look how repetitive I am in my journal! These entries could be a quarter as long and still make the same point. I'm hardly ever that vague. Seeing as Nehekhi's death has a huge lasting impact on the story, there's no way that could be missed, if somebody really WAS reading it and not just jumping or browsing around.

Nehekhi's death, for example, is one of the main factors in Djuta's deterioration of morals, leading to the rape of Ri'hus, leading to Djuta's trouble with the law and Khetai's outing, leading to the trial that results in such trouble for them and for Ri'hus, leading to Tas'hukh taking Ri'hus under his wing and bringing out his potential (in unwritten chapters) and indirectly to Tefkha's troubles and then relationship with Be'shen (again, unwritten so far), etc. etc. etc., this isn't even mentioning the effect it has on Nehekhi's Moru (Ameni and Thi'usa, e. g.), or how it draws Tas'eta to the tribe, thus affecting his own tribe and family, and how the trial which leads to Khetai being given to Djuta then leads to her going with Fe'kheru to the River Tribe which helps lead to the two enemy tribes becoming allies against a greater foe hinted at in the early chapters, etc. etc. etc....I can't even outline all the connections, it's way too complicated and is one of the reasons work has stalled on the story, it's so intricate! Everything ties in to everything else. Nehekhi's death has a HELL of an effect on what follows. I don't see how anyone could miss it...unless they didn't read it.

This person's comments made it sound like they had read the first part of the story, to make the complaints they did, but I get the strong feeling that they were so angered when I started killing off characters that it blinded them to reading it indepth any further, despite their claims. And instead of doing so, they just browsed a bit more and picked up a few more points to bolster their argument, however flimsy. I know that when something angers me I'll often look for points to bolster that anger. Instead of thoroughly reading the story to see that it could negate their complaint, they browsed around and found a few things that seemed to validate their complaint, and fixed on that. I can't prove any of this, but it's my feeling this is what happened. I know I've done it, others can do it too.

How could I'anen "deserve" to die, this reader complained, seeing as I let somebody like "that bastard" Djiu get off "scott free"? In this reader's defense, said chapters have not by a long shot been written yet, but this is a serial, it says serial right on it, meaning they should have known better than to assume something like Djiu getting off "scott free" just because he went walking off, still alive. Anyone who's read TAC thoroughly can see that characters you least expect to see again can pop up at any moment, and the tiniest bit players can become major players. Djiu wasn't killed, was he? No, he walked off "scott free." Well then, how can anyone claim that's the last that will be seen of him and that he WON'T get his comeuppance at some point...? Without reading the entire serial (which, I admit, is not finished, but still), one really can't fairly claim things like this. That'd be like somebody stopping reading RTMI at Part 111 (er, I think) because they think, "CRIPES, Charmian is as good as dead! Screw reading the rest of this!" Take a look at the most recent part of RTMI's sequel, EFMI, and please tell me if Charmian is dead yet. Following this reader's logic, would you be able to tell this if you gave up at RTMI:111?

Another complaint about TAC that both this reader and one other (mentioned later in this entry) have made is that Ameni is no longer the main character. (Or, as this reader put it, "Why should I keep reading about all these characters I don't even care about?" Jeez, so sorry my own characters ruined my story for you. I'll try to keep my next story characterless. ) This wasn't planned, but again, it happens. If I'd known ahead of time how the story would go, I would have called it, perhaps, "The Apsiu Chronicles." But as I've already indicated, even I have no 100% clear idea how things will turn out. I fully intend to make Ameni a major player again in the future--when the plot calls for it. That's what such readers seem to forget at times. It isn't about what I or they or anyone else WANTS for the story. It's what the plot calls for to happen. Some really lousy things are going to happen to yet more characters in this series, and this knowledge upset me so much that I dreamed and dreamed of ways to prevent it from happening (another reason why their comment that I kill characters needlessly or because they're annoying/they deserve it bothered me so much--hell no!--I AGONIZE over the crap I put these characters through!), but it's not up to me, even as the writer. It's up to the PLOT. The PLOT called for I'anen and Nehekhi to die, and will call for others to die and be hurt. If I fight the plot, I lose, and the story loses. I want to write the best story I can, and if that means killing off a main character, or shifting the story's direction, then that's what happens. It's never unnecessary. It's ALWAYS necessary. If I write something "unnecessary," it sticks out like a sore thumb and I'll hate it. I was unfortunate in possibly giving TAC a misleading title and summary, but it's an ongoing story, so who can say if they're truly inappropriate? Even if Ameni never again becomes the main character that he used to be, it was he who influenced all the events currently taking place in the story, who was the catalyst who set it all in motion, so that's what counts. It's not like I'm the only one who's ever done this, either. Check out soap operas, do any of them still feature the same plot or entire cast of characters that they had back when they first started? I stopped watching the one soap opera I once had interest in because the plotline I was drawn to was finished, but I certainly didn't think, "My God, they should completely redo this and focus only on this plot, these other plots and characters suck!"--because I know that's how serials are.

I think the plain fact is, this reader got pissed off when they realized people were going to DIE in my story, and the plot was going to shift in a direction they weren't expecting, and that fed them up so much that they didn't want to read any more of it, but they couldn't stop themselves from browsing a bit, picking up on more death/plot points that they didn't agree with, then using that to bolster their points when they complained. It's too bad that people don't either keep really READING to see if they're right or not, or just get fed up and stop reading at the first chapter that pisses them off, and not even bother letting me know they did so. I might've committed a double negative there but you get the point.

I'd understand somebody saying, "This really upset me in the story and it didn't seem right, based on what I know of the characters so far; am I incorrect in thinking this? Is this something you should be fixing?" That's fine. It shows somebody is really reading and really cares about the story and knows better than to tell me, the writer, that I don't know what's best for my own work. However, to say, "Good God, why the hell did this character do that? And why did you kill these people off? Nobody even reacts to it! Nothing happens afterwards! This story is just drifting along without any point now that you've killed off these guys and I really don't think I'd enjoy reading the rest of it!"...well...what does a reader expect in response, "Gee, I'm sorry I wrote it that way, I'll fix it up right away just for you!"? Honestly. It's fine to disagree with something I do, but to get so huffy about it, as if to say how DARE I, the creator of the thing, do such stuff with my own characters and plot, is just way beyond hubris. Especially when one is making unfounded statements based on stuff they haven't even read yet. My dad always says that when you assume it makes an ASS out of U and ME.

After my last entry it occurred to me, perhaps I should be flattered that this reader came to like the story and characters so much that my killing one off pissed them off so much, but their comments showed some ignorance of the plot and characters that make me think they didn't read enough of it to form such an attachment, especially if they could break it so suddenly and easily. Oh well. *shrug* Happens. Just wish such readers wouldn't make a point of letting me know when it happens. Really, I love comments on my work, but if you're going to basically tell me how I ruined it for you and I should really redo it somehow (this applies also to the person who said that the "pop-culture" and modern-day references that Charmian makes in MI ruin the fantasy mood, and to the other person who said I should rewrite TAC again, retitle it, and split it into two stories since it's become more about Djuta than about Ameni)--"Bugger off," as Lt. Barrington from EFMI would say. Couldn't think of what somebody from TAC would say. In the first chapter this reader complained about, Bakh'asu says something along the lines of, "At least you can't say I left you unsatisfied!"--but that obviously doesn't apply here!

Anyway, no, I haven't been sitting here stewing about this nonstop since my last entry, in fact I was more concerned about this reader coming back to snipe more than I was about what they already said; it just occurred to me that I don't think ratings show up publicly on my items anymore, so I can just shrug this off and nobody will be the wiser (unless they read this, ha). I just like to clarify when I feel I've been misunderstood, and these reviews seemed like a HUGE misassumption or misunderstanding. I believe I'll be ignoring this reader from now on if they choose to return--I really do not need another stalker--so I thought I'd just say it here.

Anyway again, I had to disconnect and reconnect, and then was kicked off anyway and had to reconnect again, while typing this up and doing other things, so I'll be going now. Tar...

 

Today I got a 1.5, a 1, and a 1 on three parts of TAC because apparently, according to the reader who got halfway through it, I the writer seem to just kill off characters for no reason, don't put any thought into the realism or necessity of situations, make my characters do things that's totally out of character for them, and none of the things I have them do have any bearing on the rest of the plot.

The pros of this argument:

1. Given the nature of serials, where somebody basically has to read the entire thing to see the big picture, certain events and character actions very well could leave a reader thinking, "What was the point of that??"--for example, in EFMI, Charmian getting a certain object in like Part 90 and then not having a use for it until Part 190--if you read only part of the story, you get only part of the picture. It happens, unfortunately.

2. Along the same lines as the above, a reader has no way of knowing what the writer has in store for certain characters, and can't possibly know the entirety of their personality seeing as they aren't the one writing them. Some character actions really might seem out of character based on previous events, if the reader can't get the whole picture.

3. Seeing as I the writer have never been in most of the situations described in TAC, there might be an element of unbelievability to certain things, e. g., warfare. I'm also a female virgin, not a sexually active gay male, so frankly I'm surprised no sexually active gay males have called me out on the unreality of anything yet. I have limits on experience and thus on writing realistic scenes, even though the story in question features large furry winged guys so is meant to have an element of unreality.

4. Not every reader will agree with the choices the writer makes, especially in regards to killing off characters they've come to like; this is just a sad reality of writing. As I told the reader myself, even I don't enjoy killing off some of these characters and fought against doing it until realizing the plot called for it.

I'm sure I forget a few things.

The cons of this argument:

1. Given the nature of serials, where somebody basically has to read the entire thing to see the big picture, certain events and character actions very well could leave a reader thinking, "What was the point of that??"--so it's patently unfair, and unrealistic, to get halfway through something and then declare that the writer obviously has no idea what they're doing, without reading the rest (which, unfortunately, includes unwritten parts) to make sure.

2. Along the same lines as the above, a reader has no way of knowing what the writer has in store for certain characters, and can't possibly know the entirety of their personality seeing as they aren't the one writing them. Some character actions really might seem out of character based on previous events, if the reader can't get the whole picture. For this reason, a reader who tells a writer they must have no understanding of their own characters, when the writer has been working on/writing/developing said characters for years, is actually rather insulting. I am the one who CREATED the characters, and spent years writing them, and puts myself in their heads when I write, so I rather think I know when they're acting out of character or not. (And yes, I can admit when they are. Many of Djuta's actions partway through TAC are out of character for him...though he has a reason for acting out of character, I sometimes worry readers won't see this. Djuta was not the character being complained about, however, and I'm actually surprised that the actions of the characters declared "out of character" are seen that way.)

3. Not every reader will agree with the choices the writer makes, especially in regards to killing off characters they've come to like; this is just a sad reality of writing. For this reason, to continue to read a story that has pissed one off so much, to keep complaining how much one has grown to disagree with it, to keep rating poorly, and to keep subjecting oneself to something they so obviously dislike is beyond me. If I reached a chapter of a story that was so bad it made me want to give it a 1.5, I wouldn't even bother coming back for two more chapters (actually eight chapters, but there were only two more ratings/reviews). I don't want to torture/piss off people with my writing, I want them to enjoy it. So if one doesn't enjoy it, I'd prefer they not read.

4. Apparently, grammar, spelling, proper sentence construction, the ability to develop decent characters and plot and to tell a decent story (the reader DID say they enjoyed the first 26 chapters--at least, they had no complaints about them until then) don't count for anything when it comes to choosing a rating for an item. The only thing that seemed to count toward the 1.5, 1, and 1-star ratings was the fact that the reader disliked the choices I made for my own characters and felt I was just doing things for the hell of it. I find this perplexing and frustrating, especially given how very basic and important such things as spelling/grammar and actual storytelling are in the writing world. I wouldn't even get through the first PARAGRAPH of a story if these things weren't handled properly from the start. I rather think the fact that I got SOME things right (not to say that I got my characters wrong, as this reader claims) should count toward the rating, but it doesn't seem to. I wonder if they'd enjoy the story more if I didn't kill off the characters, but if I threw all grammar and spelling rules to the wind while I kept them alive.

5. I find it kind of funny, I find it kind of sad, but mostly I find it incredibly insulting that somebody could dare to hint that I, the writer, am just pulling this stuff out of thin air without any thought for what happens next. Given that TAC was first created probably around a decade ago and has been on my mind ever since, and I have slews of ideas for plot which have not even been written yet--anyone who reads this journal regularly knows how borderline obsessed I am with my own writing, I mull it over so much, I haven't a social life or job or obligations to distract me from it much--for somebody to tell me that I must just be pulling it out of thin air without even thinking about it is just...unbelievable. This reader likely doesn't know me or my writing process so they have little way of knowing this, but still, it pisses me off. I would never, ever dare to tell somebody I don't know, and have no way of knowing, what's in their own head.

6. The reader in question joined the site the same day (5/23) the reviews were sent, and the reviews were sent in the middle of the night, indicating that they first read the items while not a member, then joined simply to review the items in question. The time spacing between the reviews is rather odd as well:

Part 26 reviewed at 1:09am
Part 29 reviewed at 1:56am
Part 34 reviewed at 2:06am (five parts read in a mere ten minutes?)

Also, the chapters in question are 82kb, 95kb, and 57kb, respectively--NOT taking into account the chapters between them. (The five chapters supposedly read in ten minutes are 66kb, 98kb, 79kb, 67kb, and 57kb apiece--that's 367kb--virtually a short novel--in ten minutes!) There is NO WAY these chapters, and the ones in between them, were read immediately prior to the reviews being sent--nobody could read it all THAT fast. So it looks like the chapters were read ahead of time, then the reader joined the site and wrote and sent the reviews one after another. Meaning--this reader likely knew, when sending the first review (the phrasing of which, however, indicates that they do NOT know what's in store for the other chapters yet), that they already hated the rest of the story and would soon be sending along two even poorer reviews. Why go to so much trouble for a story one hates so much? Either this is what happened, or the chapters, especially the ones in between (e. g., Parts 30 through 33), were either not read or just barely browsed before the reviews were written up (meaning, reviews given on material that wasn't even read). If I hated a story that much, I wouldn't have even bothered going to so much trouble as joining and reviewing in the first place. I'd just say to myself, "Cripes, this story sucks," then forget about it and go find something better to read.

7. The tone taken got progressively ruder and more sarcastic the more the reader grew to dislike the story (though they did basically say, "No offense" at one point, it was rather meaningless). Brings to mind the person who offered "helpful critique" on Lucifer way back when--they started out critiquing me, then ended up flaming me. If I hate a story, I'll at least just say I hate it, not toss out a bunch of "For God's sake"s and "God damn!"s and other exasperated and sarcastic comments (as reviews are copyrighted, and I like to be polite, I can't quote the sarcastic comments used, apologies) to indicate my dislike. I'll just courteously say why the story didn't do much for me. I'll reserve my sarcasm, which takes time and energy to come up with, for the people who earn it, and just be courteous with somebody I don't even know yet. But as I've said before, courtesy seems to be a dying art nowadays.

I'm sure I'm forgetting some things but you get the point.

Anyway, my thoughts have kind of derailed, and I realize I should really have taken a break before posting this, but I wanted to get it off my chest; if I don't now I never will. If somebody wants to rate 1.5 and 1 and completely ignore all the things a writer got right (aside from saying they HAD enjoyed the story, up to this point, there were no other good comments given, and they had no good ratings or anything for the earlier chapters--in fact I rather get the feeling they wouldn't have commented at all had they ENJOYED the entire story, sad enough ), that's their choice, I can't do anything about that. And if a reader disagrees with the choices I make for my own plot and story, I can't change their mind or force them to keep reading (in fact I rather hope they don't--if they do come back and keep complaining, I think it'll be obvious it's changed from offering criticism into just plain harassing). It happens. But I'll be damned if I'll just sit here and be told I'm pulling my own story out of thin air and have no clue how my own plot or characters work. Anybody who knows me will see how laughable that is.

*aak!* I completely forgot a few points the reader made that REALLY irked me. They claimed that I seemed to kill off characters solely because

1. the character was annoying;
2. the character "deserved" it; or
3. I wanted the reader to despise the one doing the killing.

To that I say:

1. and 2.--I never, ever, EVER kill off a character just because they're annoying or "deserve" it--I love writing my characters, even the ones I kill off, and if a character was so damn annoying that I wanted them dead, I wouldn't put them in the story in the first place. As for a character "deserving" to die, well, if the plot calls for it, then I guess you can say they "deserve" it, but I don't kill somebody off just because they're bad and I hate them. If that were so then how come it's usually my GOOD characters who die off?

And 3.--again, I never kill off a character JUST to make their killer look bad or to evoke sympathy or whatever, BUT--seeing as a large part of getting a reader to like a story is to get them to root for the good guys and hate the bad guys, would this motive really be that bad? Yes, PART of killing off some characters is to make the bad guys look bad. I mean, DUH. (Allow me to be sarcastic in my own journal for a moment.) What else is a writer supposed to do? How else do you evoke emotion--whether it be sympathy, hatred, sadness, or whatever--than by having bad stuff happen? If one doesn't want to be "emotionally manipulated" in the least, then they should not be reading fiction, which is all about emotionally manipulating the reader into liking certain characters, not liking other ones, and emotionally reacting to whatever goes on. If all of my characters are completely likeable then I'm doing something wrong.

Anyway...

I'll accept (though disagree) with these three comments as they seem legitimate for the most part--somebody read the story, it wasn't what they thought it would be, they got mad and complained--but if more come after the reader has made it so clear they hate the story, I'll probably have to restrict TAC for a while. Like I said, if somebody hates my writing, I can't help it, they don't have to read. But if they keep reading and commenting, that makes it clear that offering helpful comments isn't on their agenda anymore. I can only hope they have better things to do than keep reading my story if they hate it. I know I wouldn't keep reading something if I hated it as much as this person seems to dislike TAC. But that's just me; not everyone is willing to be courteous. In fact, some people WANT to take the time and effort to be discourteous, a la the Lucifer incident. I will never understand such people. I don't have a life and even I have better things to do with my time than spend time on something I hate.

I do hope this reader is so fed up with TAC that they aren't interested in checking out anything else in my port. *knocks on wood* It's frustrating that the people who DO keep coming back to my writing often do so just because they hate it and want to make sure I know this.

I do owe a couple of e-mails, I know. Hoping my Internet is done acting up, it's been rather unreliable lately and every time I think it's cleared up, bam, it isn't.

Tar for now...

 

I GOT PICTURES OF IT!!!

*screams like a little girl*
 

ZOMG ZOMG JUST SAW A LITTLE BABY RED SQUIRREL GO CRAWLING DOWN THE CHIMNEY ZOMG ZOMG ZOMG!!!