It is with great pleasure that I report that I've gotten back most of the feedback and criticism I requested for this fourth version of my short story, "Melbourn's Storm." I'm pleased to say that I am happy.
With only a trio of critiques still out - and one of those about half-reported - it's clear that, this time, there are no over-arching problems, no structural defects, no big "what?" questions that plagued the other versions. I have increased its length, as many thought that the third version was too truncated and it ruined the tale's atmosphere. After many re-readings, I was forced to agree.
I have back only half a page or so of notes. Most of those are one of two styles. The first is: "Would he or she say/do/think this at that time?" The second is: "Is that clear enough?"
I will definitely consider both. In most cases, I think that he or she said/did/or thought the right thing at the right time, but I'll consider some changes. I'm a little more worried about the clarity, so I'll probably be tweaking a line or two here and there.
I've still got two-and-a-half critiques back, so I can't consider my work done. But I am happy to say that with these little tweaks, I'm going to consider "Melbourn's Storm" done. It'll be nice to have a new piece to try to get published, though I'll probably be quite annoyed if it doesn't happen the very first time.
I say that with some sarcasm, of course. If I couldn't get it right the first time, I wouldn't expect someone to want to print it the first time either.
My last thought is that it was suggested to me to set this up as an online short story. That might be nice, but it's not my style. I am a big fan of ink-and-paper, and I'd prefer to see it in print - meaning print.
It always seems to me to mean just a little bit more when someone says, "That's great. I'd love to publish it for you."
I'll let you know how it goes.