My Novel -- selected chapters for review

[dwai]

Friends,

 

I've published a few chapters of my novel (still work in progress). If you get a chance, read and give me some feedback...

 

http://www.medhajournal.com/sections/articles-mainmenu-157/the-walker-of-infinity.html

[JustARandomPanda]

Been reading it.

 

Have suggestions but first I would like to know whom is your intended target audience for this story? Your novel seems to be targeted primarily, maybe even exclusively for other Indians (or at least other people who practice Hinduism) and is hosted on a site for Indians yet non-English words are explained in parentheses like your fellow Indians/Hinduists would not know these words?

[JustARandomPanda]

Here's one suggestion that's a good rule of thumb for writing a story. Show, don't tell. The latter is easier to do but almost always makes stories boring.

 

One thing in your favor is that I think you've probably got a character for what could really become a very good story for someone like me - but then, I'm always interested in subjects that have hints or spiritual truths hidden in them. I'm guessing this story is going to center around your "holy man" and maybe how he gathers some companions and/or students along the way as they overcome the story problems?

 

Some other suggestions: too much unnecessary detail. And the kind of detail seems more fitting for a sociology textbook than a novel.

 

Here's an example:

 

It was 5:00 AM the next morning, and Madappa's household started waking up slowly, before dawn broke. Sarojamma, Madappa's wife had woken up and bathed, getting her archana (ritual offerings) samagri ready. Before that she had swept and washed the rough stone courtyard and now she started offering prayers to the Holy Tulsi (Basil) plant at the center of their courtyard. The rest of the household stirred, slowly awakening to the rhythm of their natural cycles.

 

Look at the first sentence. Look at "5 AM" and "before dawn broke".

 

Which of the above is more important to advancing the scene, plot and/or breathing life into a character? My tendency would be to stick with the "before dawn" rather than the 5 AM unless that 5 AM figures in some important way to making a character's persona feel "true to life" or to advancing the plot itself. Otherwise it'd be getting the same idea across twice when neither plot, character or current or future dialogue calls for it.

 

You could collapse those sentences into one and it'd get the point across:

 

Sarojamma, Madappa's wife woke up before dawn and readied breakfast.

 

Then again...I do not know what you are trying to accomplish by adding in the bits of info about archana samagri. It might add to making your characters feel "real" rather than like cardboard. Or you might end up boring your reader and having some accusing you of "info-dumping" them with details better fit for a sociology class rather than a novel.

 

Without knowing if rituals done wrong, right or not at all somehow quickly becomes important to your story's plot I can't really tell.

[dwai]

Been reading it.

 

Have suggestions but first I would like to know whom is your intended target audience for this story? Your novel seems to be targeted primarily, maybe even exclusively for other Indians (or at least other people who practice Hinduism) and is hosted on a site for Indians yet non-English words are explained in parentheses like your fellow Indians/Hinduists would not know these words?

 

Hi SB

 

I Was contemplating whether I need to summarize the plot... But truth be told I only have a rough outline... The story writes itself

 

I can reveal that it spans continents and is my attempt to render through fiction a subtle message. Hence the parentheses ( my target demographic are those interested in this kind of thing)

 

It's hard to proof read one's own work and I like your suggestions. I like to follow a narrative technique of a story-teller and try to evoke imagery ( test is in whether i am successful in it).

 

The bit about 5 am is very familiar to those from southern india... And I can see how someone without context can be a bit tired by stuff like that...

 

Thanks and keep the review/critique coming

 

[JustARandomPanda]

Hi SB

 

I Was contemplating whether I need to summarize the plot... But truth be told I only have a rough outline... The story writes itself

 

Ah. That makes more sense. Will keep in mind this is a first-time, rough draft.

 

I can reveal that it spans continents and is my attempt to render through fiction a subtle message. Hence the parentheses ( my target demographic are those interested in this kind of thing).

 

Hah! A tautology if there ever was one. Every author and author-wanna-be says the same. Hate to say it but at least to Americans the parenthesis would come across as weakening the storytelling itself in the desire to convey a sense of living culture. The story might be able to withstand some limited parenthesis but not as many as the first draft has currently. Better might be to simply convey the culture's habits in a believable way and let go of the desire to educate your audience about its real-world name unless you can find a way to make each of those real-world labels also important to the story's plot or character dialogue.

 

It's hard to proof read one's own work and I like your suggestions. I like to follow a narrative technique of a story-teller and try to evoke imagery ( test is in whether i am successful in it).

 

Can definitely understand the liking for evoking imagery. One thing I would add is that on subsequent re-drafts or edits try to find imagery that somehow is meaningful beyond just being imagery filler. The better you are able to aim for that goal with each imagery draft the more powerful the story will end up being. JRR Tolkien was pretty good at writing imagery imo yet a lot of people on Amazon complained they found his descriptions excessive, tedious, boring and were utterly unable to get into The Lord of the Rings because his imagery scenes were too much like reading paragraphs from geology/landscaping textbooks.

 

The bit about 5 am is very familiar to those from southern india... And I can see how someone without context can be a bit tired by stuff like that...

 

Yep. You start the "info-dumping" from the very first page. I can kinda see you're trying to convey a sense of a living culture and its citizens but to a lot of non-Indians it will likely get old very fast. Especially since you are doing it a lot.

 

Another idea you might consider and see if it strengthens subsequent drafts. I'd make the opening scene more interactive and try to liven it up. The first two chapters are almost exclusively telling, not showing. It's basically a long drawn out scene of how one culture extends courtesy to a stranger broken up by a very brief snippet of the villagers curious about the stranger's "profession".

 

Well...that scene is common to any culture and doesn't need a novel to convey it unless it's important to the story's plot problem. Change the details here and there and there's nothing special about the first 2 chapters. It runs a risk of losing even readers who would otherwise find the story premise interesting. People value that which is scarce. Figure out a way to make that opening 1st chapter 'courtesy to a stranger' scene direct, immediate set up for the story's plotted problem. If you can figure out a way to do that you'll grab their interest FAST.

 

So how do you make that opening scene with the stranger and villagers 'rare' or unusual in some way via action and/or dialogue so that it will hook your potential readers? That's a good way to 'show, don't tell' and do it in a way that hooks the reader from the get-go. And if it turns out you can't then consider alternative opening scenes that introduce the important characters and plot better.

 

 

Thanks and keep the review/critique coming

 

 

Keep up the writing!

[JustARandomPanda]

Dwai,

 

Here's the first of 5 Youtube vids of a seminar on writing fiction that Fantasy/SF author Brandon Sanderson gave.

 

I know it uses Fantasy and SF as the genre but the actual fiction writing 'how-to' Brandon explains is true of any genre of fiction, not just the ones he specializes in. Note what he says about the very first page of anyone's writing.

 

[Birch]

I read the first chapter. I will read the others.

The one suggestion that sprang immediately to mind was to elaborate on some of the villagers' dialogue rather than saying such and such said this, I'd have fun reading what each said. Otherwise only a couple of the characters say anything. I guess the words that aren't known could be changed for a US Edition.

[Birch]

Ok, I read the second one:-)

I agree that once you've explained the setting (the house) nothing else has to be explained (that he is of modest means becomes obvious). Same comments on explaining the women's meal. You could put some of the explanatory cultural things somewhere apart from the story to educate people if you wanted.

[GrandmasterP]

It's very Indian. Check out some current western popular novels via Amazon Look Inside , notice the different structure... Popular sellers to a western readership tend to be pacier with shorter episodes and much more action.

I read similar works to yours when I worked over in India , they'd be those colourfully bound railway station bookstall novellas. Nothing at all wrong with those and they do help pass a long journey by train.

India has the biggest English language publishing output in the world so if your work sells in India then you'll probably cover your overheads plus, if you can get it onto Kindle it'll sink or swim alongside the rest.

All kudos to you for having a go at writing, the more you do the better you'll become. Keep it up.

Edited January 16, 2013 by GrandmasterP

[Vmarco]

The vocabulary is sufficient, but where will the message be going?

 

The stranger Bhadramanu could be a good lesson in groupthink stupidity. He said, "I am just an old homeless vagabond",...the people took that to mean he was a Sadhu. If the story continues and shows he was actually more than an old homeless vagabond,...1. he is a liar, and 2. it encourages the disgusting groupthink that those who don't know, and feign humility, are wise.

 

The truth is, as Wei Wu Wei said, humility is just a degree of pride. Without pride, humility is impossible.

 

Can you imagine approaching Buddha or Lao Tzu, and asking if they are enlightened, only to hear, "no, I am not a Buddha, I'm just old homeless vagabond"

 

The message that humanity needs is that not only do those who know, don't know, but that those who don't know, don't know either,...in addition, those who "gnow" are not dishonest about their gnowing.

[dwai]

The vocabulary is sufficient, but where will the message be going?

 

The stranger Bhadramanu could be a good lesson in groupthink stupidity. He said, "I am just an old homeless vagabond",...the people took that to mean he was a Sadhu. If the story continues and shows he was actually more than an old homeless vagabond,...1. he is a liar, and 2. it encourages the disgusting groupthink that those who don't know, and feign humility, are wise.

 

The truth is, as Wei Wu Wei said, humility is just a degree of pride. Without pride, humility is impossible.

 

Can you imagine approaching Buddha or Lao Tzu, and asking if they are enlightened, only to hear, "no, I am not a Buddha, I'm just old homeless vagabond"

 

The message that humanity needs is that not only do those who know, don't know, but that those who don't know, don't know either,...in addition, those who "gnow" are not dishonest about their gnowing.

 

Hmmm that explains your lack humility somehow ?

 

 

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

your response is ironic, dwai!


One cannot lack humility unless they also lack pride!

[joeblast]

The vocabulary is sufficient, but where will the message be going?

 

The stranger Bhadramanu could be a good lesson in groupthink stupidity. He said, "I am just an old homeless vagabond",...the people took that to mean he was a Sadhu. If the story continues and shows he was actually more than an old homeless vagabond,...1. he is a liar, and 2. it encourages the disgusting groupthink that those who don't know, and feign humility, are wise.

 

The truth is, as Wei Wu Wei said, humility is just a degree of pride. Without pride, humility is impossible.

 

Can you imagine approaching Buddha or Lao Tzu, and asking if they are enlightened, only to hear, "no, I am not a Buddha, I'm just old homeless vagabond"

 

The message that humanity needs is that not only do those who know, don't know, but that those who don't know, don't know either,...in addition, those who "gnow" are not dishonest about their gnowing.

Would you know im if you saw im? Besides, nobody that is enlightened will say they are - humility overcomes pride but it is not produced by pride, so that correlation doesnt not hold much water.

[Vmarco]

Hmmm that explains your lack humility somehow ?

 

Bodhisattvas let go of pride, thus humility no longer can exist,...like the letting go of fear, dissolves all hope. There can be no hope without fear,...just as there is no yang or form, without yin or emptiness.

 

Could you imagine the Heart Sutra if Avalokitesvara was suffering the egoic need of humility.

 

The Bodhisattva of Compassion is beyond humility. For relative focused beings, the focus on humility, near always a dishonest enterprise, does allow for the observation of pride,...which is helpful,...although uneccessary. In honesty, neither humility nor pride can manifest. Humility and pride are always a lie.

[Vmarco]

Would you know im if you saw im? Besides, nobody that is enlightened will say they are - humility overcomes pride but it is not produced by pride, so that correlation doesnt not hold much water.

 

If an enlightened person were asked if they were awake to the dream of the 6 senses, and said no, they are awake. For such a Truth Realized being would not spew such a dishonesty.

 

Most today would not recognize an enlightened person if they saw one,...the faith and belief-based seek faith and belief, and would thus desire to kill an enlightened being.

 

"Anyone who gives you a belief system is your enemy"...and certainly not enlightened.

 

You can recognize a truth realized being by the fact that they are intolerant of anything that steps between a sentient being and their direct experience.

Edited January 16, 2013 by Vmarco

[thelerner]

I assume its hard to predict what an enlightened person would do. With enlightenment comes <again I assume> a huge degree of freedom. And they're still individuals not cookie cutter identical to everyone else.

 

One martial artist I took a few seminars from was Sensei Mitsugi Saotome. I don't know if he was enlightened but he did have satori experiences, or so his books says. From my viewpoint as an Aikidoist he showed complete freedom in his movement. He responded with confidence and beyond technique. Very very impressive.

 

 

I think the lack of tolerance in RB's (Realized Beings) may be more reflective of Vmarco's viewpoint then a universal one. In many cases they seem to open up to the beauty of the world and take everything especially foolish human actions with compassion and a grain of salt.

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

I assume its hard to predict what an enlightened person would do. With enlightenment comes <again I assume> a huge degree of freedom. And they're still individuals not cookie cutter identical to everyone else.

 

One martial artist I took a few seminars from was Sensei Mitsugi Saotome. I don't know if he was enlightened but he did have satori experiences, or so his books says. From my viewpoint as an Aikidoist he showed complete freedom in his movement. He responded with confidence and beyond technique. Very very impressive.

 

 

I think the lack of tolerance in RB's (Realized Beings) may be more reflective of Vmarco's viewpoint then a universal one. In many cases they seem to open up to the beauty of the world and take everything especially foolish human actions with compassion and a grain of salt.

 

 

In regards to your first admitted assumption, all predictions are difficult to pin ANY person down.

In regards to your second admission, freedom is obtained in every passing moment whereupon the mind is not preoccupied by its bondage.

 

Freedom is the emptiness of a bottle, or the vacancy of a hotel room.

 

Once freedom is occupied, is it still freedom, or something... "else"?

 

For even in enlightenment freedom is still foreven on the horizon, but i guess, perhaps, the perceptive focus is adjusted...?

 

 

It is as though you end your first paragraph with the "answer" to your assumptions...

 

 

as well as your "conflicts" with Vmarco...? or am i just imagining things?

 

 

Edit in: The freedom is never "not" there, any more than it is an object wich you may possess.

Edited January 16, 2013 by Northern Avid Judo Ant

[sati]

You can recognize a truth realized being by the fact that they are intolerant of anything that steps between a sentient being and their direct experience.

_________________________________________

 

From the Abhaya Sutta, MN 58 ( source : "Abhaya Sutta: To Prince Abhaya" (MN 58), translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Access to Insight, 12 February 2012,http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.058.than.html )

 

 

"[1] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual, untrue, unbeneficial (or: not connected with the goal), unendearing & disagreeable to others, he does not say them.

[2] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, unbeneficial, unendearing & disagreeable to others, he does not say them.

[3] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, but unendearing & disagreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them.

[4] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual, untrue, unbeneficial, but endearing & agreeable to others, he does not say them.

[5] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, unbeneficial, but endearing & agreeable to others, he does not say them.

[6] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, and endearing & agreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them.

Why is that? Because the Tathagata has sympathy for living beings."

 

[sati]

Hi dwai,

 

I just realize that I am contributing to derailing your thread.

I am sorry. I will not post here again unless it is related to your first post.

[konchog uma]

once again a thread is derailed and vmarco needs to be pointed out some basic learnings

 

it gets old

[Vmarco]

I think the lack of tolerance in RB's (Realized Beings) may be more reflective of Vmarco's viewpoint then a universal one. In many cases they seem to open up to the beauty of the world and take everything especially foolish human actions with compassion and a grain of salt.

 

 

From the above statement, I must assume your definition of tolerance is faith-based, not neccessarily descriptive of what is tolerance and intolerance.

 

For example, real compassion (in contrast to a relative compassion like Mother Teresa) is, according to those, like Avalokitesvara, the Bodhisattva of Compassion, impossible with an wareness of emptiness. Most, like Mother Teresa, would negate a compassion that only arises through the realization of emptiness, that is, to see things as they really are.

 

Real compassion is contrary to egoic thinking. A Bodhisattva's compassion for example, actually arises not because the 5 skandhas are not real, but because of the imagined suffering of sentient being. If you saw your child having a nightmare, on a relative level you may wish to comfort her,....a bodhisattva see all of perceived life as a nightmare for sentient beings, and wishes to see them liberated from thier neurotic delusions.

 

A Bodhisattva is intolerant of that which brings about neurotic delusions,...whereas ordinary egoic folks, caught up in their belief systems, preach tolerance of faith and belief,...tolerance of neurotic delusions. Tolerance of neurotic delusions is not compassion,...except for ego.

 

What is "beauty in the world?" How does a Bodhisattva see the world? The Heart Sutra is rather specific about how a Bodhisattva sees. For another example, what does ACIM say about it?

 

What about the beauty and goodness in the world? (a question posed to ACIM)

 

Following the above answer, we can see that the so-called positive aspects of our world are equally as illusory as the negative ones. They are both aspects of a dualistic perceptual universe, which but reflect the dualistic split in the mind of Man. The famous statement "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder' is also applicable here, since what one deems as beauty, another may find to be aesthetically displeasing, and vice versa. Similarly, what one society judges as good, another may judge as bad and against the common good. This can be evidenced by a careful study of history, sociology, and cultural anthropology. Therefore, using the criterion for reality of eternal changelessness that is employed in the Course, we can conclude that nothing that the world deems beautiful or good is real, and so it cannot have been created by Reality.

 

Therefore, given that both beauty and goodness are relative concepts and thus are illusory, we should follow the injunction to always ask ourselves: "What is the meaning of what I behold?" (text, p. 619; T-3I.VII.13:5). In other words, even though something beautiful is illusory, it remains neutral, like everything else in the world. Given to the ego, it serves its unholy purpose of reinforcing separation, specialness, and guilt. Given to the Holy Spirit, on the other hand, it serves the holy purpose of leading us to an experience of truth that lies beyond perception. For example, a sunset can reinforce the belief that I can find peace and well-being only while in its presence, or it can help remind me that the true beauty of Man is my Identity, and that this beauty is internal, within my mind and independent of anything outside it.

[konchog uma]

i am curious why you use katte instead of just saying embankment? and hotel instead of just saying restaraunt? but this from an american perspective, so not meaning anything except curiosity.

 

i agree the parenthetical content is hard to handle, because it breaks up the flow of the text. When i reach a set of paretheses my mind sort of resets and the flow of the story is broken so that i can assimilate what is in the parentheses. in chap 2 for example you could say that the king was a Vijayanagara king with commas instead. I found a lot of examples where the parentheses were extraneous.

 

i don't know a lot about writing, like others here seem to, but i know what is readable in a fluid way, and i think that it would benefit the story to remove the extraneous parts and smooth the sentences where lengthy explanations are given, like when the traveler is introduced. It sounded scientific and precise, and i thought if it were looser and more casual, the story would read more fluidly

 

then again as someone else pointed out, perhaps its due to particularities of the Indian way of reading/writing, or something else done purposefully for your target audience. i must say i did not feel like your target audience

 

also agree with "show dont tell" and think that an eye to that would improve the writing

 

i like the content, and the simplicity of how it is presented. Its not flowery or adorned with extra words for their own sake, and the character of Bhadramanu is likable.

 

at the end of chap 2, perhaps it would serve the mystery of his accomplishment better to have him say that he would not be sure he could help? i found that strange that a person who claimed to be a stupid wanderer would hear a vague account of supernatural darkness and follow with "i think i can help"... seems perhaps he should keep up his ruse??

 

well im going to stop there, i started reading chap 3 but since i don't know enough about writing to offer truly helpful advice, i can only hope that my perspective is useful because i am ignorant. Apologies for all the criticism and the sparse complements, its nice to read your work, whether its written for americans or not lol

 

thank you for sharing

 

[Vmarco]

once again a thread is derailed and vmarco needs to be pointed out some basic learnings

 

it gets old

 

What gets old are Spoilers, who, stuck with neurotic ideas for their identity, want to suppress any honest discussing.

 

If you (konchog uma, and other Spoilers) believe that only those who say they don't know are really wise,...fine,...but insisting that everyone should believe like you, that if someone says they are an old homeless vagabond, they must be a Sadhu, is both insane, and fully inconsiderate of others.

 

As the Spoilers seem to have missed the message of my first post here, I'll repeat it:

 

The stranger Bhadramanu could be a good lesson in groupthink stupidity. He said, "I am just an old homeless vagabond",...the people took that to mean he was a Sadhu. If the story continues and shows he was actually more than an old homeless vagabond,...1. he is a liar, and 2. it encourages the disgusting groupthink that those who don't know, and feign humility, are wise.

 

The truth is, as Wei Wu Wei said, humility is just a degree of pride. Without pride, humility is impossible.

 

Can you imagine approaching Buddha or Lao Tzu, and asking if they are enlightened, only to hear, "no, I am not a Buddha, I'm just old homeless vagabond"

 

The message that humanity needs is that not only do those who know, don't know, but that those who don't know, don't know either,...in addition, those who "gnow" are not dishonest about their gnowing.

[Vmarco]

_________________________________________

 

"[1] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual, untrue, unbeneficial (or: not connected with the goal), unendearing & disagreeable to others, he does not say them.

 

Why is that? Because the Tathagata has sympathy for living beings."

 

 

Yes, Tathagata's have sympathy for those who perceive themselves as living beings,...but do they lie? Are Tathagata's dishonest? Do they feign humility for the sake of the ego's around them when asked a question?

 

Is the sense of timing from 2500 years ago the same as today? Would a Tathagata promote dishonesty out of sympathy for those who believe themselves to be living beings.

 

"The Tathagata cannot be destroyed, killed or annihilated, but also it cannot be seen very clearly within the alayas"

Edited January 16, 2013 by Vmarco

[konchog uma]

lets just stay on topic please

 

sorry to "spoil" your fun vmarco but i would rather you not turn another thread into your soapbox for "real compassion this and bodhisattva that" and your unique brand of pseudo-buddhism.

 

put down the polemic and slowly back away from this thread... its for dwai to receive feedback on his writing. anything else (including your neo-dharma rants) is hijacking it.

 

spoiler over and out