Bleh. Most of what I wanted to say has been said by Eldar, so for what it's worth, it's a nice little piece IMO. You use a particular style, and while my lack of knowledge on boring literary history prevents an eloquent description of that style, you and I both know what it is, I hope. The style is never wildly subverted, but that helps give a consistency of timbre and a sor tof cohesion to a story that might otherwise sway about its axes a little too wildly.

 

On the cohesion issue, I did experience some confusion on the Iain/Narrator area, but I didn't need to read twice to get it sorted out. I don't see it a sa flaw in your writing, really.

 

Jeremiah's introduction made me feel that the story was reaching a second arc, and it did feel a little abrupt or even rushed when it got to the actual killing. On one hand, I like the fact that this construction lends to the character's attitude to the murder, while on the other hand it leaves you a little shor. Hm, but then that's not such a bad thing either, huh?

One thing you have to understand is that the text is very restrained, self-censored even. There are a lot of things missing, though I might add them after The Festivities.

 

Examples:

 

- "****", "****", "****" and various other expletives;

- Homosexual undertones, yes, Jeremiah had another purpose in mind, originally;

- More detailed acts of violence (though the one in near end shows the banality of murder well);

- Sexuality;

- The Bismark city life;

 

 

Oh, and Tigranes, which version did you read? The one that's now on page 2, edited by Meta, or the original one? The original was less obvious about the whole Ian\Narrator thing.

Edited June 12, 200619 yr by Baley

page 2, since that's the only full version I see, but I also read the thread and the edits.

 

- Homosexual undertones, yes, Jeremiah had another purpose in mind, originally;

 

Somehow I was actually expecting that, so I suppose that's credit to your writing.

page 2, since that's the only full version I see, but I also read the thread and the edits.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Iain's original writing style was closer to The Narrator's. There was also no reference to the napkin. Just paper, I think.

 

And

 

Part 2 of his story, pretty much the same except this portion:

There was something on the ground, a piece of paper with drawings on the sides, a napkin. I read it. Bored me. Poor bastard. Decided on leaving him alone for a while.

 

 

- Homosexual undertones, yes, Jeremiah had another purpose in mind, originally;

Somehow I was actually expecting that, so I suppose that's credit to your writing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I definitely still left a few hints. Sure, if you're mind is, say, less in tune with my previous writings, you might consider the whole thing a purely platonic binding.

 

 

 

Think I should rewrite it? Add some of those things I mentioned, tweak the style a little. Gonna do Part III of TOMBS tonight after a Woody Allen movie.

 

So, should I? Tigranes? Eldar?

Sometimes a rewrite spoils the original intent and mood purely through your remediation. If you do decide to, I'd say do a full rewrite, then compare it to the original, which might well end up being the better of the two.