Thanks for reading it.unforgibbon wrote:This was a good read overall, Nate. I won't touch the science; I prefer to leave that to better-informed readers. But I had a few quibbles.
I thought Capt Petrova's character was most compelling. The others were less engaging. Of them all, I'd like more depth in Jack; I didn't care as much about him as I should've. I also thought that Thevin wasn't dislikable enough. We were told he was a douche bag, but, I dunno, that didn't really come across strong enough. By contrast, I wanted to like Bobby more and didn't find much to grab onto; same for Nicolai.
First scene troubled me. Why, if Jack had sat in that room since he was nine, would he need to know how things worked in there? Unless the contraption was portable? Maybe so... But then what room were they in that Jack and his dad would've spent so much time there? And I felt there was too much straight forward, dry explanation about the contraption. Could there be a less clunky way to provide the reader with that info?
Other readers might not think this at all, but I felt a little shortchanged on a key event. I didn't like the way the "off page" Petrova-Thevin meeting was handled. Too abrupt. And I'm not sure what I would've preferred to have transpired. Not very helpful, I know...
Small detail: Could a three year old be entrusted to carry out those instructions? Struck me as a bit young, maybe not though. A five year old, and I'm not asking myself that question.
One last thing, Dad says he has two depositions from "two of them." I assume, from involved people, but which two? How are we getting Petrova's and Nicolai's perspectives throughout the story if the depositions aren't from them?
Good job, Nate.
It's hard to remember between all the different version but I think there was still something in there about their heads being found in the debris, and the depositions extracted from them. It may not have been clear enough.
On the 3 year old, I dunno. My youngest daughter could have been capable of "take that box to the policeman over there", but perhaps she was a prodigy.
Many of the other quibbles came from trying to please too many individuals. Just about every pro publication in the world rejected this at some point or other, and many of them sent "suggestions" for improvement, which would then be encompassed into the next submission to somebody else. I may be mixing up exactly who wanted what, but as I remember, K.D. Wentworth at WOTF wanted Petrova built up, because her drama was the most interesting, which lead to the whole "volume" theme for her character. Stanley Schmidt at Analog thought it needed a framework to support all the changing points of view, so that led to the trial, and the underlying themes of seeking approval from a father figure. Then Jetse DeVries at Interzone couldn't buy a father judging a son, so that had to be reworked, leading to the part where he was begging him to take the deal & not submit for judging. And it went on and on like that. Change one thing, and then the next editor wouldn't like something else. I mean, it was great to get all those personal replies from big names in the SF world, but in the end, it didn't help that much.
The onscreen version of Thevin's death made Petrova too cold, too ruthless. You thought she deserved it when she died, instead of sympathizing. I wasn't going for this is the villain and here 's what she did, but instead slicing an incident up in time, as it was. Everybody except Thevin was just trying to do their job/duty, and one crew wound up dead. That was probably too difficult a concept to sell, in retrospect.
Finally, I just had enough. No matter how I skewed it or gave a character depth, the root core of the story just wasn't good enough to get paid pro money for it. It pains me to have to admit that, but sometimes revisions can only go so far, and it's better to write something all new with the experience you've gained instead.
Nate