Hi Bill,
Thanks for letting me read this story. I thought it was very well written and thought-provoking. Your writing is evocative and I had a clear image of the setting and characters that made the story that much more entertaining.
The following points are just my opinion so feel free to disregard any/all of them.
PLOT:
A man is guiding a hunter in snow-covered mountains. They are watching a herd of elk and waiting a nearby pack of wolves to attack, so the hunter can shoot a wolf. They see a strange figure among the trees but dismiss it. The wolves being their hunt and the hunter shoots three wolves. This is two more than is legally allowed. This causes an ongoing tension between the two men. A blizzard approaches and after a brief argument they start the hike back to the vehicle. On the way they see the strange figure again, the hunter shoots it but doesn’t get a clean shot as the guide knocks his rifle. They discover the strange creature’s blood and tracks. Later the guide scouts ahead following a scent. He comes face to face with a sentient creature, which appears to be a Sasquatch. His race is connected to another alien race that acts as a warden of Earth’s nature. He leaves the guide pondering the implications of this when the creature says that humans are not acting in harmony with the world and the alien wardens would soon act to correct it.
This was a very clean plot, a few jumps forward in time as they are hiking but still one continuous narrated scene. I did find there to be a slight imbalance between the climax and the rest of the story. The final scene when he comes face to face with the creature comes a bit out of nowhere, and then there is quite a sudden info dump explaining a lot of background of the sasquatch and the reptilian aliens. I think if there was more interaction between the two or more foreshadowing earlier in the story it would help make it flow with the rest of the story more cohesively.
I also wondered about the Mr. Stewart – the hunter. His conflict/disagreement with Dakota over man’s role in the environment and his callous disregard for wildlife drives most of the dialogue and forms the bulk of the story. Yet he is not a part of the final scene. I felt a bit disappointed about that, as you create an implicit promise throughout the story that something is going to happen to Stewart by making him such a extreme character. I assumed something would happen to change his views or at least make him think. Instead Dakota has the meeting, but it only reinforces his pre-existing beliefs. So nothing really changes for the characters.
I also found there was a tendency toward ‘preachiness’, in that you obviously are trying to communicate a particular environmental message here which is quite forced, I think you could make it more subtle and not such a dominating feature of the dialogue. Allow the reader to infer your message and decide for themselves rather than ‘telling’ them.
I have an idea for the plot that might be interesting. What would happen if you wrote it from Stewart’s perspective and when he wants to stay he is abandoned by Dakota. He gets trapped in the blizzard or grows more and more paranoid as he tries to make his way out of the forest while being stalked by a strange creature. I just feel Stewart is the most dynamic character in the story and should be developed more.
STYLE AND VOICE:
Third-person limited. Didn’t catch any problems.
REFERENCING:
There is a lot of environmental history here, and explaining through dialogue, I think some of the dialogue needs to be more natural and subtle as it tends towards exposition. I also became confused at the end regarding the two alien species. The talking Sasquatch is a warden of Earth, then he says this: “ "You might say that's what the P'Sthok do, to atone for their sins." Which, combined with the description of the reptilian face on the communicator and other references to his race being reintroduced and the P’Sthok gave me a bit of confusion about the various relationships between the alien species. At first I thought the P’Sthok was the name of the sasquatch creatures race, but then it appears they are different. If they are the guardians then why is the sasquatch a game warden? And if his race has disappeared and the P’Sthok are thinking about reintroducing it where did the sasquatch come from? I think this is an easy change to make it a bit clearer. There is a lot to digest in only a few paragraphs about these points so it is understandable that it could create a bit of confusion.
SCENE/SETTING:
Really great, I had clear images in my mind throughout the story. Here are some of the images I liked:
“A pine grosbeak whistled a faint pui-pui-pui across the valley, and Dakota inhaled the scent of pine and damp earth. A high, cirrus cloud passed over the afternoon sun and a feathery shadow fled across the valley.”
“Wind whistled through the aspens and clouds raced across the skies. “
“Stewart plodded through the crusty drifts toward the wolves. “
“The hunter plopped down on an outcrop of gray rock and wiped sweat from his brow”
CHARACTERS:
Dakota is slightly holier-than-thou, but I liked his character and his thoughts and knowledge about the environment. I think it would be interesting to develop him a bit more, perhaps create more of an internal conflict regarding his role in the killing of the wolves, leading out this callous hunter. For some reason I liked Stewarts complete stubborn stupidity. He grew on me, but at the same time I couldn't wait for him to get his comeuppance, so I was a bit disappointed when he doesn’t take part in the main climactic scene. I also think Dakota is quite reactionary, and doesn’t drive the story himself, rather it is Stewart who is the dynamic force of the story creating the situations that Dakota then deals with.
LINE-CRIT:
Your writing is grammatically great, so I’m not going to discuss punctuation but rather focus on your sentence construction.
“He squirmed on his camp chair and returned his gaze to the herd grazing in the valley below them.”
This is the first description of them sitting down in the hide. I got the impression from before that they would be standing or in a ready position. If they are about to hunt wolves, would they be sitting down? Also their actions earlier such as moving the netting, looking through the telescope, etc make it seem like they are in a more active position.
“A high, cirrus cloud passed over the afternoon sun and a feathery shadow fled across the valley.”
I liked this description but I think the use of the word ‘high’ is unnecessary as cirrus clouds are by definition atmospheric.
“They nipped at the heels of the youngest, slowest member of the herd.”
I think you should show them separating this elk out a bit as it happens quite suddenly and there is no explanation for how it is on its own when you describe the herd running together as a single organism.
“This one lurched and fell, still undead, across the remains of the alpha male, its body wracked by spasms.”
It may be my preconceived notions of what ‘undead’ means but I automatically think of zombies when this term is used. ‘still undead’ is a bit awkward to describe something living. Perhaps use ‘not quite dead’ or something like that. You could actually take it out as the last part of the sentence shows that the wolf is not dead and this phrase is ‘telling’.
“ Dakota held his peace while he reflected that it had been a mistake to let Stewart hire him.”
This was a bit of a strange sentence for me as it makes Dakota extremely passive. ‘let Stewart hire him’. Perhaps you could change it to ‘agreeing to guide Stewart’ or something else that gives Dakota a more active role.
“He started to saw at her, too.”
You could take out the ‘too’ from this sentence.
“Blood poured from the wound onto the alpha before its wine-dark stain spread across the dirty snow.”
I may be reading this wrong but I think ‘wine-dark stain’ is not connected to the right subject and the whole sentence is a bit passive. It reads like the alpha’s wine-dark stain is spreading rather than describing the blood. I know what you mean but it is a bit distracting. Also the use of the word ‘before’ is implied because the blood would have to pour from the wound before spreading onto the ground. Perhaps something like: ‘The alpha’s wound bled a wine-dark stain across the dirty snow.’
The man glanced at the ground and did a little double-take. His eyes widened and his mouth split in a grin. "Them's mighty big foot prints. They look like a man's bare foot. About size twenty, I'd say."
"It's almost two feet long." He pointed. "Look, there's a big toe. It's just like a human foot, except huge."
Dakota basically repeats exactly what Stewart says.
“His grandfather would have been certain it was a sásq'ets, but Dakata knew that was just folklore”
I think the use of the word ‘knew’ here is a bit strong, you are clearly telling the reader that it IS folklore, perhaps allow room for the doubt or potential that it may be true. You could make it clearer that it is Dakota’s personal opinion that it is just folklore by something like: “…but to Dakota that was just folklore.”
“He walked in an envelope of sensation, with the forest appearing in front of him and disappearing behind him a fog of snowflakes.“
“envelope of sensation” is rather vague here, I found myself asking what sensations? Cold, silence, what? Maybe show a bit here.
“cut through the frigid air like a hot knife through butter”
“hot knife through butter.” has been used so much as to be cliche now, perhaps use another metaphor that would also be appropriate for the surroundings or the situation.
"He thought of the wolves, thinning the elk herds, and wondered what fate awaited humankind."
I’m not sure about comma splices but the middle clause seems to be hanging by itself. Are the commas indicating that ‘thinning the elk herds’ is a relating to Dakota or the wolves?
These are all my just my own opinion. I hope they are helpful. Thanks for letting me read your story, I did enjoy reading it and your descriptions are very good.
Cheers,
Craig
|
|