Dear Tom


Congratulations on being selected for a professional critique through YouWriteOn. I really enjoyed reading your sample chapters of AFTER THE ECLIPSE. I was impressed with the quality of the writing: what I read I thought was inventive, well-crafted and vividly depicted. While I don’t think the material so far needs a lot of re-working, as it is already in very good shape, I hope these notes will give you some editorial pointers on what can be honed and polished in the existing chapters, and what to pay attention to as the story progresses.


Plot:


I liked how you confound all expectations and, as such, open up the reader’s mind to something wholly new but, at the same time, introduce them to a world that feels very familiar. You set your story far in the future, yet this feels anything but futuristic. The world has inevitably evolved and progressed in three centuries, but not in the way we would expect it. Science and technology have almost taken a backseat to social and cultural changes, and it is these norms that govern society.

While this is satire, it is presented in a very plausible and realistic manner. The background behind the inequalities between blacks and whites is a shared and far-reaching history. This inevitably underpins the narrative, but AFTER THE ECLIPSE turns all our preconceptions on their heads. It is an interesting idea that the progression of racial equality could evolve to the extent that there is a complete reversal in terms of discrimination, and where black people now become the makers and writers of history. By extension, this implies that racial discrimination is almost inevitable in society, and that equality is perhaps an elusive and even unattainable notion.

You also upturn sexual discrimination on its head, and present a society that is almost matriarchal, and where the female is the head of the family. Similarly, I liked the idea of what is accepted in society and what is considered taboo can interchange, and what we view as necessary and commonplace becomes vilified, and what is usually seen as personal and secretive is widely accepted and embraced.

Through presenting these radical inversions as the norm, you highlight how ingrained societal norms and codes of conducts have become, and in fact how arbitrary these views are. We are conditioned to view the world in a certain way, and it is not that far-fetched that in 300 years time, a while new set of societal norms have taken precedence. The white inhabitants are depicted as superstitious and spiritual, and this raises the question of whether this is regression or progression?

From the review, it is apparent that January Beeswax will lead and navigate the story, and it is his journey through Rudisha that the reader is taken on. The review hints that this will be as much a spiritual and emotional journey as a physical one. And just as January reaches a new level of understanding, so too will the reader. The review also states that the narrative is ‘meticulously plotted, producing a Byzantine succession of twists and turns’. While this is a journey from a to b, this should never feel too linear, but should surprise and engage the reader throughout, and it appears that you know the importance of this.

The reviewer states that: ‘poor January is subjected to an apparently endless series of mishaps and complications, all driven by a mystery that becomes ever more complicated’. This sounds like this is an area that perhaps needs some attention and development. ‘Endless’ implies that the struggles that January faces seem never-ending and relentless. While you don’t want your meaning to be compromised, you also don’t want the narrative to become too dark or depressing. There has to be light as well as dark in your story to keep the reader engaged. The comment about the mystery becoming ‘ever more complicated’ also raises a slight cause for concern. The mystery should be intriguing and keep the reader second-guessing, but it should never become so complicated that the reader is overwhelmed as this risks them feeling disengaged and switching off.

I really like the idea of a final and unexpected twist that once again shifts the reader’s perception and prompts them to view the story in a completely different light, and question everything they have just read. I think this is a very fitting end, and in keeping with the style and aim of your story.


Structure:

I like the structure of a story within a story. It gives the narrative a layered texture and an added dimension. It is impossible to tell from the review, but I wondered whether January’s story would be the focus of most of the narrative, or whether the story outside of the story would feature more significantly, or rather just bookend the main action? There are pros and cons for both techniques, and it’s really about working out what suits the style of your story the most.


Characterisation:

January Beeswax is initially set up as a character to fear, given that we are told from the beginning that he is a spirit who has possessed the body of an old woman. But he is a warm and affable protagonist, and one that you want to follow through the story. He is depicted as innocent and naive about the ways of his country, and so is the perfect protagonist to accompany the reader as he explores Rudisha.

I was interested to know who the person was that introduces the story and how he knows January. As I discussed above, it is hard to tell whether this other story will feature heavily, and whether this unnamed character will have a strong narrative presence.


Tone:

While this is satirical in nature, it doesn’t aim to be controversial or divisive. Rather than going for overt, direct satirical references, AFTER THE ECLIPSE is very subtle in what it does, and I think it is stronger for this. You are not spelling out what you want to say to the reader in an obvious and blatant fashion, but instead immerse them in your world and almost without them realising it, encourage them to question their own thoughts and belief system.


The tone feels quite intimate, and as such quickly draws the reader in. As the majority of the story is narrated by January, it almost echoes the oral tradition of storytelling. The tone is very much dictated by the characters, and draws the reader in to their world, and to see it through their eyes. While this is an objective story in essence, it also feels very subjective. January is quite naive and innocent, and it is almost like he is looking at everything anew and with fresh eyes, and so it feels like the reader and January are embarking on this story together.


Setting:

Setting often gets sidelined in storytelling, but it is an important element of any narrative. You use the setting here to great effect, and your writing is richer and more colourful for it. Whilst Rudisha 300 years from now is an entirely fictional place, on page it is a living, breathing, thrumming country. Your descriptive prose is wonderful, conjuring up the atmosphere and essence of a setting with ease.

It is unclear whether this reversal in racial discrimination is something that has happened worldwide, or whether it is contained within the borders of Rudisha. Is this an anomalous island in a sea of equality, or is it an extension of what is happening elsewhere? I think this needs to be clarified for the reader. The review refers to how the history, hierarchies and rituals of Rudisha are detailed and explained, and this will not only give added realism to the setting, but also greater meaning to the story as a whole.


Genre/Market:

This would fall under that wide umbrella of ‘literary fiction’, and is likely to appeal to readers who want something that challenges them and is thought-provoking, yet not too heavy-going. I think you have struck just the right balance, and have created something unique, yet still very accessible.


Conclusion:

I hope these notes have been helpful to you. As I have said before, AFTER THE ECLIPSE is already in very good shape. Hopefully with a little more polishing, it will really leap off the page. I wish you the best of luck in making that happen, and hope you continue to enjoy writing.


Best wishes

Natalie Braine

Malume,
I must congratulate you on such a great review, so 'congratulations.'
Also with regard to your submissions - start at the top and work your way down, not the other way around.

With the larger publishers you have to get the timing right. 10 years ago your ms would probably have less relevance than it has today. Just think of yourself as being before your time.

I was subbing articles 4 or 5 years ago suggesting that governments had to take control of consumer spending and more importantly, tighten controls of the large corporations which were quite happy to feed the 'much wants more' consumer. All were rejected. Ah, if only they'd listened!
But the timing wasn't right and quite possibly 10 years ago the world was not ready for your book, although I get the feeling it would be now.

Work on the suggestions and, if you haven't already, get it out elsewhere without delay.

I agree with Dollywagon, it is just a matter of the book being right for the times.

As to the review, I agree with most of it, but wouldn't spend too long tweaking what is there already and in 'very good' shape.

Better devote time to finding a publisher. The editor would then take you to task on what they want tweaked.

And in the meantime, write another one.

I think it is great writing, but probably too in the face of its time to be published back then.

Andrew Memory... What was that?

Malume

the cause is almost certainly the use of a forbidden symbol, eg, < or > or other.

If you google for html encode for you particular special symbol, it will show you somthing like:

For <: & lt followed by a semicolon - can't put it all together or else you get < ...

If you hit the reply to post button, you will see in the first paragraph the correct encoding.

The reason for these restrictions is to avoid people putting malicious links on this, a trusted site.

Andrew Memory... What was that?

< >

Aha! I am wrong. I find that the error only arises if you type in an HTML link of the form <a href="me">

So YWO is more sophisticated than I gave them credit for.

Not sure then what your problem is. Ask Ted?

Andrew Memory... What was that?