Pianissimo

WHOA!!! Not what I expected in teh least. The end of it that is. Man, that was intense. Awesome. There were a few times that it looked like there was a few grammatical things I could catch, first being.


She had flung his arms

I think you meant her arms.

Then when you were writing dialoge you didn't hit enter when a new person started to write. But then again, I really liked it.

Sad, sad story. It's a shame that such love can seemingly go to waste.

I loved this piece, if only because I'm a sucker for pieces with music incorporated into it. I was sucked into it from beginning to end. You did a great job developing your characters: I honestly felt sorry for Raymond and his predicament with Lydia and Peter. Excellent, excellent work.

My only major critique before I start nitpicking is your specific use of chord notation:

The audience gasped, for the chord sounded atrocious! Raymond bit his tongue and glanced at the keys. An A major chord. That wasn’t correct. He slowly lowered his third finger so the C sharp descended to C natural. The chord still wasn’t right. The C sharp had horribly ruined the ending.

After taking a college level music theory class, I understand what is meant by this. I'm sure several other people on this site understand it, as well. However, if I showed this to my parents, they would have no idea what's going on. While detail is great, sometimes it's too much.

Look at it this way: I work at a radio station. If I said the main part of my job was ripping program segments and CD tracks into the SMARTSCASTER, you'd have no idea what I was talking about. However, if I said I downloaded programs into our broadcasting system, that's a little easier to swallow. When using specific language, dumb it down enough where normal people can understand it, while people specialized in that category don't feel like they're being ridiculed. Confusing I know, but I hope you get the point.

And now, for some nitpicks:

Raymond’s eyes rose to the music on the piano. The notes were just notes now. There was no meaning behind them; no emotion anymore. They were just notes. No music could come from them.

A month ago, those notes had rang with excitement. A month ago, they had been loud and clear, playing a full orchestra with one piano. A month ago, the music had swelled with a crescendo and ended with the chord that made her squeal.

Now all that was left were notes.

This section really stuck out, in a good way. I love the comparison between emotion and crecendos and the music being "just notes". I think it definitely sets the mood and says something about Raymond's character.

Then, he realized, that was what his life was. A huge jumbled mess.

I would put a colon instead of a period after "his life was". "A huge jumbled mess" is a sentence fragment, because the mess isn't doing anything.

It’s impossible to play from the heart if you don’t have one…

A great line, probably the greatest one in the entire piece, but why is it italicised?

Sighing, he reached out and grasped it in his left hand and slid out from the bench. It rocked on the back two legs and crashed to the floor. The sound echoed throughout the empty practice chamber.

I noticed it earlier, but it's blatant here: what is "it"? I know "it" is the music, but since it's not mentioned in the paragraph, "it" could be anything: the piano, the bench, his right hand (if he grasped it in his left). Make your pronouns clear.

“Are you alright?..."

I believe, in this instance, the correct usage is "all right?" But I'm not too sure.

“Nuh uh! We are leavin'!"

"Nuh uh"? From a proper man from the 30s? No way. "No! We are leaving!" is much much better.

“He has forced me."

Unrealistic dialouge + passive voice = puke in my hat. "He forced me" sounds more realistic, plus it has the added advantage of making Peter even more of a sleezeball character.

He took his piano piece in his hand and tore it, shredding it into tiny pieces. I’m going to start anew.

And a fantastic ending to the piece.


Overall, I loved it. Absolutely loved it. From beginning to end, loved it, loved it.

Keep up the good work!
kf

1) Are the characters credible? Do they need some fleshing out?
I think only Lydia needs some fleshing out. The character of Raymond was brilliant. I could feel his emotions.

2)Do you understand the main plot?
Yes. I don't know if you could care, but the line that said

He eyed in conspicuously. Why did she write that? She knew that it would tear him down. And on the night of his first performance!

gave it away for me that she didn't write that letter in truth. I was just waiting at that point to see whhat the real deal was. I think the whole Peter forcing her seemed like you couldn't think of a much better reason for the letter not being what Lydia actually wants.

3) Do you think I need to add/subtract some descriptions?
Sure there are specific examples...

He was thin, probably in his sixties and wore a pinstripe suit. His tie was flashy, red and gold combined to make a dazzling effect. But then again, Ray knew, Hugo was a dazzling man. After everything he had done for him – given him an act at Concerto Hall, promoted his music – he was extremely well connected.

We don't need all that. You could say he was an older man, well-dressed, and then explain that he has connections. That alone will give the readers a clue to what he's like.

She had loved him endearingly for naming his song after her.

This isn't about description but about unnecessary words in general. You do not need the word endearingly. That is redundant. Look for this throughout the story. There are quite a few unnecessary adverbs. You can tell how someone is doing something through what they're doing. Also, don't use the word "suddenly" to begin a sentence. You used it only once, I think, but it stuck out like a sore thumb to me.

4) Do you feel that I am lacking something? If yes, what?
Nothing besides the things I mentioned above.

Despite all I said, this is getting a gold star. Good stuff, indeed. I dig the title too.

Okay, there were quite a few things that I found and wanted to point out, but I have almost no time left and here are two parts that stuck out like a sore thumb to me:

The notes were just notes now. There was no meaning behind them; no emotion anymore. They were just notes. No music could come from them.

Has a bad feel of repetition to it. I notice that you use the word notes far too much, and not just here. Go back and try to cut a few, or replace them with a different word.

Raymond could feel the stinging tears crawling, desperately, out of his eyes.

Crawling does not feel like the right word. It ruins the tension and sorrow of the moment. It makes me think of spiders *Shudders*. Try another word. Like falling? Also, hate to sound like a broken record, but desperately doesn't feel right either. Are tears ever desperate? I don't think so. Aren't they melancholy? Or angry?


As to your questions:

1) Are the characters credible? Do they need some fleshing out?
I would say that they are partly credible. You've given us a beginning of an idea on who your MC is. We know he likes to play piano. We know he's hurt and angry. What else? And as to the woman he loves - why does he love her? Give us an idea. I'd like a true glimpse into who he is, and her, also. Does that make sense? So yes, I do feel that they need fleshing out.

2) Do you understand the main plot?
There's really nothing not to understand. You've laid it out simply (in a good way).

3) Do you think I need to add/subtract some descriptions?
I would like more, actually. I didn't really have a visual of your characters or their surroundings.

4) Do you feel that I am lacking something? If yes, what?
I feel that you are just lacking detail. Descriptions, really.


All in all, interesting piece, is what I say. Keep writing.

...WOW.

That was so good! I really liked it a lot. I really couldn't stop reading, and I'm honestly annoyed it ended that way. I want to find out what happens, and that is a reaction you want from any reader.

I'm a musical person myself, I play several instruments and so I could easily follow what was going on. I think that's why I liked it so much, I could easily relate to how notes are just notes until there is emotion-love, hate, joy, etc.--hence FEELINGS put into them-until then they cannot be music.

You did a great job interpretting that, and I really hope you continue to write.

Hey, Jared!

Oh my goodness, I'm so glad to have finally read something of yours. I really loved this story--the thirties are definitely a rad time period to write in. It's got most of the convenience of a modern setting, but with a lot more drama, which you pulled off really well. Poor Raymond! Even though the story was mostly sad, I could still identify with him and cared about him, simply because of the way you portrayed him.

As usual, though, there are a few things to discuss. ^_^

JUST GO WITH THE FLOW, MAN:

Style is one of the most difficult things to explain to writers, in critiques or just in general. I know I have one, and you know you have one, but it's almost impossible to explain 'why' or 'how', which is why it's really, really hard to critique.

With this piece, the only thing that bugged me about the style was the flow. There were a lot of sentences where it felt like you could put accents--grace notes, if you will--but you didn't. This isn't necessarily a bad thing; it's just something that will improve your writing a lot when you learn how to recognize and regulate flow.

There was a letter placed on the grand piano. The note, wrinkled from many openings, was addressed to a young man sitting at the bench.

Raymond Simmons stared at the white and black keys, distraught. His fingers brushed along the soft edge of the piano while his face hung limply, pale and cold.

The transition from the first to the second paragraph is kind of awkward. Why? Pretend you're a movie camera. You're focused in on the letter so far that it's blurry, and then you zoom out to Raymond, but the camera buttons are all jerky and so it's not a smooth shift in focus.

In the second paragraph, do you see how the sentences have an independent/dependent clause pattern? This leads to a rhythm in your reader's head that gets kind of repetitive, and so they can "feel" what you're going to do with your words next. Sound weird? Reading is kind of an odd process, if you think about it--but thinking about it is key to working the system so that your audience gets the most bang for their buck.

In order to improve flow and shake up your rhythm (sounds kind of like an oxymoron, doesn't it?), vary the kinds of sentences you make, and make sure that that camera-zoom isn't overly obvious.

There was a letter on the piano. It was crumpled and folded--the pencil on the front read, in blurred handwriting, Raymond.

Raymond himself sat behind the piano bench...

See how that goes? Of course, this is my interpretation (and flaunting of my love for hyphens), but by shifting the way you write your sentences, you can make that camera zoom smoother and more natural, so that the audience doesn't feel slightly motion sick when they walk out of the theater.

JARED FEATURE FILMS PRESENTS...

#1 Biggest Fan, here!

Well, I must say, I quite enjoyed this piece--first of all, because I relate to Raymond, with his musical-ness. I play the piano as well, though no where near his level. I don't even know what a pianissimo is. Hahaha. Second of all, I love anything placed in the early 1900s, hee hee. And thrid of all, it is beautifully written. Some of the others say it doesn't have enough imagery, but I think it's wonderful the way it is. Some stories don't really need imagery so much. Of course, imagery is always nice, but again, this is fine just the way you've written it. A very nice plot--simple but lavished with a lot of polishing and descriptive words.
I would like to get to know the whole Peter/Lydia situation though. It was a bit vague and a little confusing. Okay, so Lydia was forced to marry Peter. How'd that come about. When did she meet this guy, how could she ever fall for him (or did she). In the part where Lydia is talking to Raymond, I think you should make it longer, and maybe somewhere more private, where Peter can't hear a word they say. Have her explain some more of this stuff, so we get to know the Lydia and Peter a little better.

Happy writing!
Holly

Hey, Jared!

Oh my goodness, I'm so glad to have finally read something of yours. I really loved this story--the thirties are definitely a rad time period to write in. It's got most of the convenience of a modern setting, but with a lot more drama, which you pulled off really well. Poor Raymond! Even though the story was mostly sad, I could still identify with him and cared about him, simply because of the way you portrayed him.

As usual, though, there are a few things to discuss. ^_^

JUST GO WITH THE FLOW, MAN:

Style is one of the most difficult things to explain to writers, in critiques or just in general. I know I have one, and you know you have one, but it's almost impossible to explain 'why' or 'how', which is why it's really, really hard to critique.

With this piece, the only thing that bugged me about the style was the flow. There were a lot of sentences where it felt like you could put accents--grace notes, if you will--but you didn't. This isn't necessarily a bad thing; it's just something that will improve your writing a lot when you learn how to recognize and regulate flow.

There was a letter placed on the grand piano. The note, wrinkled from many openings, was addressed to a young man sitting at the bench.

Raymond Simmons stared at the white and black keys, distraught. His fingers brushed along the soft edge of the piano while his face hung limply, pale and cold.

The transition from the first to the second paragraph is kind of awkward. Why? Pretend you're a movie camera. You're focused in on the letter so far that it's blurry, and then you zoom out to Raymond, but the camera buttons are all jerky and so it's not a smooth shift in focus.

In the second paragraph, do you see how the sentences have an independent/dependent clause pattern? This leads to a rhythm in your reader's head that gets kind of repetitive, and so they can "feel" what you're going to do with your words next. Sound weird? Reading is kind of an odd process, if you think about it--but thinking about it is key to working the system so that your audience gets the most bang for their buck.

In order to improve flow and shake up your rhythm (sounds kind of like an oxymoron, doesn't it?), vary the kinds of sentences you make, and make sure that that camera-zoom isn't overly obvious.

There was a letter on the piano. It was crumpled and folded--the pencil on the front read, in blurred handwriting, Raymond.

Raymond himself sat behind the piano bench...

See how that goes? Of course, this is my interpretation (and flaunting of my love for hyphens), but by shifting the way you write your sentences, you can make that camera zoom smoother and more natural, so that the audience doesn't feel slightly motion sick when they walk out of the theater.

JARED FEATURE FILMS PRESENTS...

One thing that will help your writing out a lot is the fine art of thievery. Learning how to be a sneaky thief--that is, one who covers up his tracks--is essential to being a good writer. It's impossible to come up with a completely original idea, so you may as well take other peoples' and go with theirs, right? Right. All you need to learn to do after that is cover it up.

The one thing that I noticed in this story, especially when Lydia is getting ready to leave Raymond, is that it sounded like it was coming straight out of a movie. Let's dissect it, shall we? *dons scrubs*

“Lydia, how dare you come here with that… that… fiend!” Raymond yelled. He hurled himself, fists raised, at the man but Lydia screamed, “No! Stop it!”

Raymond and Lydia collided, and she was sent flying to the ground. Her head made a sickening thud as she landed.

Here, it looked like you were enamored with the dramatic "No! Don't!" fight break up--which always comes from a damsel in distress. Sure, a dapper piano playing dueler is romantic, but how could you make this more original? How could Lydia react so that she doesn't make a fool of herself? When you write something that you really like, be sure to question it. Why do I like this?--and the converse is also true. When you write, question. It's the only way you're going to get your influences and your style straight.

So! When you steal, cover up your tracks. Modify. Make it Jaredtastic--you can't go wrong.

__

Thanks for the read, Jared! I'm on to part two. PM or IM or poke in my general direction if you have any questions.

BigBadBear - I’ll cut the apologies for the delay and continue with the critique ^^



Quote:
Now all that was left were notes.
Very nice.


1) Are the characters credible? Do they need some fleshing out?

-> Raymond. Before and during the concert - very nice. I liked the way in which you portrayed his emotions. All in all, he’s a well-crafted character, and the beginning was terrific.

After, though… I’d like to see a smoother transition from Raymond A (up to concert) and Raymond B (after concert). I’d like to see how his behavior changes, etc. Right now I know that it does, but that is not enough. I know by his actions, and solely by his actions. I, on the other hand, would like to “see” his mind.

Comment to Raymond concerning the “after” scene as below.

-> Lydia and Peter. I’m afraid I do, but I suppose that comes with me feeling the scene after the concert a bit rushed. That may also have something to do with the dialogue (and only that, after a general description of how they looked like, enables the reader to really envision them), which was a bit unnatural (awkward) at times. It was rushed, a bit melodramatic at first, and yet, as was said, that is the only option available to me to get to know the two characters. The tags consisted mainly of showing the reader how each dialogue sentence was said. (There was a lot more, I know, and I’m exaggerating, but still…) While yes, that is the primary function of a tag, I felt that was not enough. In consequence, Lydia was okay, but only okay, and Peter… Okay, too, but a tad bit behind Lydia.


2) Do you understand the main plot?

-> Well, yes, I think so.


3) Do you think I need to add/subtract some descriptions?

-> I’d like more description between him reading the note and him collapsing on the piano.

-> Scene after the concert. That was already rambled over. That needs to be extended and elaborated. Mostly, I’d like to see more of Lydia’s reactions, but in action, not words. It needs to be slowed down, but without, well… too much of that “slowing down’. I’ll leave you with that, heh.


4) No. 4 will be Additional Comments, in no particular order.

-> I’m big on letters, notes and etc. to be all in italics, not just the heading. That way they are separated more from the rest of the text, and are able to stand out. Here the rest of the note (apart from the heading) seems to merge with the story built around it.

-> And quotes deprived of any (or hardly any) link to grammar:

Quote:
A month ago, those notes had rang with excitement.
The repetitions in the previous paragraphs worked very well, that I admit, yet here it ceases to do so. I’d suggest cutting out that one, and leaving the next (and former ones) intact. That way the whole positive impression will be preserved, and nothing will irritate jumpy Esme.


Quote:
Suddenly, without any further knowledge, Raymond collapsed on the piano.
I don’t like that “without further knowledge”. Without further knowledge?


Quote:
How could he manage to express his love, devotion and attachment to a woman who didn’t return the favor?
Don’t like “return the favor” either.


Quote:
If he did, the audience wouldn’t understand the underlying message.
Me no like that sentence. “Underlying message”..?


Quote:
He was messing up the notes!
Don’t like the expression in this context. All of those unlikable (to me, obviously) expressions are so only when referred to the text as a whole (the atmosphere, time, etc.).


Quote:
The audience gasped, for the chord sounded atrocious!
I’d throw that exclamation mark in with the false enthusiasm. And the audience already gasped once. Add “again”, if it needs to be kept.


Quote:
He slowly lowered his third finger so the C sharp descended to C natural. The chord still wasn’t right.
Emphasize the contrast more, i.e. with “but”. (Not grammar! Not grammar! It’s a content-wise suggestion!)


-> “A month ago”. It’s personal preference, I suppose, but I didn’t like those repetitions to much. They irritated me more than anything else, and in my opinion didn’t add up to the atmosphere.

-> “It’s impossible to play from the heart if you don’t have one…” - I don’t really understand why that is in italics, or why that is there at all. Later on those parts are mostly acceptable, though I still don’t really like them.

-> And do fix the grammar. I overlooked the errors (and yes, and the person speaking to is one who makes millions of them in her own work), but those have to be corrected. Some really did stand out, and ruined the otherwise smooth read. Their disappearance would be a huge improvement.


I liked it, I really did. The title caught my attention, and the text, later on, succeeded in not letting it escape. The only thing that really bothered me was that last scene.



Cheers,
Esme