Fish Tank Story Comments - Not a Story About Andrew

The separator between the comment pane and the story pane is moveable. Drag it up or down if you need more room to read on the screen.

From: Vinnie Tesla
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 03:42:21 GMT

Tesla on Tesla:

Codes for A_H & c.: [MF oral anal spank]. There's a tiny pinch of [cheat], but not played in a squicky manner, I promise.

I'm particularly interested in feedback on (apart from the tense thing I mentioned) matters of pacing and tone. My usual tendency in both exposition and narrative is to write too briefly in the main thrust of my argument, and to engage in far too much digression and scenery-gazing along the way.

I think I did a decent job in overcoming the former problem, possibly going substantially overboard. I fear that it may read as a draggingly specific play-by-play. I tried to make the details vivid and unformulaic, but I'm not sure to what extent I succeeded.

As for my tendancy to digress, I succumbed to temptation a few times and included jokes & asides during the Big Sex Scene. Let me know if they're really annoying.

Pedants will be relieved to know that the more glaring spelling and typographic errors have been fixed since I sent the above draft to Desdmona. Those who find it too painful to look at can e-mail me for a cleaned-up copy.

I'm tempted to go on & on about what I was trying to do, but I should let someone else get a word in edgewise.

- Vinnie

From: Frank McCoy
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 04:05:23 GMT

[email protected] (Desdmona22) wrote:

1) 2 positive comments

Nice story about a quick encounter.
Descriptive sex.

2) 2 things to improve

A little too much side-tracking into irrelevant games. They distract from the overall story. The comment about the "Poison" book, is definitely an "in thing". Though I'll admit I've done the same thing myself in some stories.

Some warning (in a header) might be given about rimming. Some people get completely turned off by such.

3) Try not to repeat!

Didn't read the other replies.

/ ' /
,-/-, . __ /

(/ / ((/|/ / </ <

From: Gary Jordan
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: 13 Nov 2001 12:26:03 GMT

2 positives

I didn't find the little digressions at all distracting. Kept at the level you settled on, they were spice.

The story reminded me of Jordan Shelbourne (that's a compliment.)

2 Things to improve.

You said you had reworked the story, so there's no need to point out individual klunkers (and who'd believe them coming from me?) There were errors that needed a fix; even I could see them.

I had just a little trouble visualizing their relative positions once they got down to it - it didn't seem to flow quite right. Maybe that's just me. At one point I figured his arms must touch the floor when he stands <cough> erect.

Damn. I tried not to repeat - I just couldn't help myself.

Gary Jordan
"Old submariners never die. But sometimes, they're out of their depth."

"This communicating of a man's self to his friend works two contrary effects, for it redoubleth joys, and cutteth griefs in half." - Francis Bacon, Essays

From: Mat Twassel
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: 13 Nov 2001 16:54:21 GMT

Switching tense is not necessarily a sin. Henry Miller slips his action sequences into present tense all the time. Here, though, I think you can solve a lot of problems by putting the whole story into present tense. You get the benefit of the immediate, you lose the distraction of switching, and you don't have to worry about giving the narrator a stance. That last might be the most important because of where the story ends up. Given the opening, we expect some resolution beyond the acts of the evening, but the story cuts off. As it is, the end is inconsistent with the beginning.

I admire the narrator's voice, but there's lot of clean-up to be done beyond the basic punctuation, typos, and omitted words.

Molly briefly squeezed my hand with her cold fingers, and grinned infectiously "Vinnie Tesla!"

Too much shorthand here. And there's no reason for it. Dead rhythm. Nothing to lose by expanding the moment just a bit. For instance:

Molly grinned and gave my hand a brief squeeze. "Vinnie Tesla!" she said through her smile. Her fingers were cold but there was something feverish about that grin. I couldn't help but beam back at her.

This is just an example. You need to scour the whole story for rough edges.

The moment I like best is the connection.

She tries to steady herself by gripping my shoulders. I'm not quite steady myself yet, and we're suddenly very close. I want to say that our eyes meet, but that's not quite true. Our eyes are darting over each other's faces, searching for the source of the sensation washing over us.

"Uh-oh," Molly says.

"Yeah," I answer.

"Where are we gonna go?"

Partly why this works is that you haven't skimped on the setup. There might be a twist missing and an extra phrase: I think we need a word or two to get them face to face; I think I'd end the paragraph with source.

Lots of delicious sex stuff, neat details.

I pull the nipple roughly, stretching the crinkles smooth. "Yeah," she whispers in my ear, her hot breath sending shivers down my spine, ...

At the same time it's a bit kitchen-sinky, a bit cluttered, and amid the lovely details I'd like to see some personal details.

I pull at one of her cheeks, exposing her hidden parts. The skin of her anus is surprisingly dark, and fringed with wispy reddish hair. Below, the lips of her cunt are fat and swollen. She flinches a little when the wet handiwipe from my pocket touches the sensitive flesh of her asshole. I run it over the surface a few times, and then drop it onto the floor. My hands spread her cheeks, and I begin running my tongue along the skin just above her anus. Then I move down, and lick at her perineum, drawing a gasp from Molly. Finally i bring my tongue to her clenched little orifice, and rub against it with gentle pressure.

Vivid and exciting, but if we've never experienced it, is it enough? Perhaps that's the trap of porn. At the touch of that tongue, you make me want to be there.

- Mat Twassel

From: Desdmona
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: 14 Nov 2001 16:32:33 GMT

This is Not a Story About Andrew
by Vinnie Tesla

Vinnie~

This is a wonderfully imaginative and sexy story. I love the voice of Vinnie. The snippets of his thoughts work really well for me except during the sex scene. I realize that during sex sometimes our minds can wander - luckily he wasn't thinking about a computer game at the time - but for story purposes, I'd like it much better for him to stick with the here and now action and not add any parenthetical thoughts.

In fact, I'd like to see a couple of Vinnie's thoughts when he gets back up to the living room with Andrew. I mean Vinnie has to be thinking something; after all he just shagged (very nicely) Andrew's date.

Right at this moment, "The bib falls down in front and the straps drop behind her. Though she's no more exposed than before, my heart is hammering in my chest." I'm really hooked into the sex scene. It's so appealing, so naively juiced. I'm not sure I can even explain why it hooked me so much, possibly because it seemed so real, but it made me go, "ahhh."

One part I have trouble with is:

"Uh-oh," Molly says.

"Yeah," I answer.

"Where are we gonna go?"

I'm not convinced they both have the same thought. Sure they both want to have sex, and they may both be thinking they want to have sex, but would they in fact both know that's exactly what the other was thinking? I think a couple more lines of dialogue are needed here. Even if it's just Vinnie asking, are you thinking what I'm thinking? And Molly asking where they can go. You get the idea. Expand it just a bit, and it would work a lot better.

And just one more little thing, "The basement is cold and damp, and littered with cardboard boxes." Get rid of this statement. You've already basically said the same thing twice in conversation. It's cute when he repeats what she asks with just a minor difference, but by the time I read it the third time, it was annoying.

Just a hot, sexy story that with clean-up, editing and a couple of minor checks would just sizzle!

Thanks bunches Vinnie for allowing us a chance to squirm through your story! <vbg>

Desdmona

From: Desdmona
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: 14 Nov 2001 16:36:07 GMT

From: [email protected] (Gary Jordan)

I had just a little trouble visualizing their relative positions once they got down to it - it didn't seem to flow quite right. Maybe that's just me. At one point I figured his arms must touch the floor when he stands <cough> erect.

Damn. I tried not to repeat - I just couldn't help myself.

I have NEVER discouraged repeat erections nor will I.

Desdmona
(couldn't resist)

From: Ray
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 13:46:54 -0500

"Desdmona22" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected] ...

This is Not a Story About Andrew
by Vinnie Tesla

Vinnie~

Right at this moment, "The bib falls down in front and the straps drop behind her. Though she's no more exposed than before, my heart is hammering in my chest." I'm really hooked into the sex scene. It's so appealing, so naively juiced. I'm not sure I can even explain why it hooked me so much, possibly because it seemed so real, but it made me go, "ahhh."

Desdmona

(large SAG)

Are you sure that's not supposed to read:

Ah ... Ah ... Ah ,,,, A-h-h-h-h-h-

h- h!!!

Ray

From: Desdmona
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: 15 Nov 2001 04:51:23 GMT

Are you sure that's not supposed to read:

Ah ... Ah ... Ah ,,,, A-h-h-h-h-h-
h- h!!!

Ray

Shhh! don't tell anybody

From: Gary Jordan
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: 15 Nov 2001 06:05:56 GMT

Frank said:

[email protected] (Alexis Siefert) wrote:

Frank ~

You raise some interesting points. I'm sure that they will remain in my mind when I open this story again and finish it.

You know, these are the exact words I've seen recommended by various authors for kissing off some "fan" or other correspondent who doesn't get it and can't take a hint.

That was the idea.
The problems are not insurmountable for the story to work essentially the way you want it to. (I can think of several quick fixes, and one good one ... that takes a bit more writing.) It just will take some thought.

For its genre, the story needs none of the fixes you recommend - the "victim" is revealed to be a natural submissive with masochistic tendancies. In the BDSM Hum stories I've glanced at, no safe words are ever given. Does that squick you? You've admitted that it does.

Example of a quick-fix:
She walks in thinking, "At least HE will be here making sure nothing goes wrong." Then, when her neck is in the noose (figuratively, of course) he walks out, leaving her to their tender (Ouch!) mercies.

But he wasn't, and probably won't be. That's part of the submission and humiliation.

(Of course, those cameras could be for HIS [or his people] monitoring, not for their fun and games to do with afterward.)

They'll all get copies and half are probably carrying their own cameras. It's part of the genre.

A more comprehensive fix might be involving her in some PREVIOUS punishment (of a similar nature) for somebody else ... so she KNOWS the rules, because she had to abide by them herself in the past. That solves almost every issue I brought up. Only the mention being made that she HAD done such need be brought up somewhere in the introduction. A lesser possibility (not so satisfying) being that she was an observer to same, enforcing the rules.

Just two examples of how it's possible to resolve the brilliant-lawyer/trusting-bimbo dichotomy.

Trust is not very involved. It's s u b m i s s i o n . D/S.hum. It isn't my genre (so I squick easy, too. so what) It is a valid genre. Being a submissive does not require a low IQ. I would venture a guess that it takes low self-esteem at the core, and that satisfaction comes from being a good slave/sub/whatever.

I am not arguing that this is healthy, or normal, or desirable. I am arguing that it is a valid genre, and this story follows those rules.

Thank you for taking your time.

You're welcome. I hope you DO finish the story. As that type goes, it was quite a good start. Of course (as you know) that genre isn't my favorite. Sometimes examining the idea of torture and humiliation WITHOUT causing permanent damage (or better yet, without damage at all) can be ... well, instructive.

OH! Yes ... With that in mind: A PLUS for the story I didn't mention before:

That bit with the duct-tape was cute. She WAS warned to shave ... and ripping out loose hairs is pretty much accepted practice for those who want to get rid of such. People even PAY for such torture (if you can believe that)! They call it, "Waxing." ;-} Hmmm ... maybe wax would have been better than the duct-tape. HOT going on (not scorching skin, but hot enough to be painful) and doing a better job of removing any hairs missed by a razor.

But I LIKE the idea of her first punishment being on something she was warned about well in advance. (One thing I did NOT like about it, was the implication of her being punished AFTERWARD for something she had no control over ... stumbling. The idea, as I read the story, was her being punished for her deliberate actions. Ah well. I realize some people get off on the idea of punishment for the pleasure of punishing, with little or often no excuse at all.) I think it would be really CUTE (but not very likely or maybe not even possible) for ALL her punishments to be of that type: Things she was TOLD about, but didn't take seriously enough, where the pain comes from not following instructions completely. Toenails come to mind, along with hairdo. Other things might include having an enema, lube placed in her cunt, proper height of high-heeled shoes, the very outfit she wears, and (an extreme because it's a permanent change, but acceptable in our society) even making sure her ears are pierced. Still, it's hard to imagine such things going on all night. That wouldn't be quite consistent though, with her having observed such activities before ... because then she would KNOW to take extra care.

Consistency, consistency.

What I like (and rarely get, but really appreciate when I do) is when People tear MY stories apart, especially for inconsistencies. "Realism" isn't as important (in my mind) as a story following it's own logic or original premise. After all, "real life" is boring ... That's why we read (and write) stories about life on the edge of what "normal" people would never do, or things happen. They should be possible, even if highly improbable. (That's a hint: My story is supposed to be posted Monday.)

Ah well ... I've rambled on far longer than I usually do on the stories I really LIKE. Maybe it's easier to find the flaws in one that a person doesn't drool over.

That you don't like the genre is abundently clear. I don't understand S/M myself, nor hum. When people called me on the safeword issue in my FT story, they were right - I write rom cons with light bondage. Calling Alexis wrong for writing a D/S S/M hum is just not understanding the target audience, or the nature of the story.

And that's MY opinion.

Gary Jordan
"Old submariners never die. But sometimes, they're out of their depth."

"This communicating of a man's self to his friend works two contrary effects, for it redoubleth joys, and cutteth griefs in half." - Francis Bacon, Essays

From: PleaseCain
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: 16 Nov 2001 01:57:48 GMT

All kinds of good stuff to be found. The change of tense worked for me: the present tense that begins in the kitchen when they are about to go downstairs really lends immediacy, kicks things up a notch.

The sex is great, very sensuous with excellent detail:

" ... but the roseate shine from her cunt draws me like a fishingline ..."

Nice.

I also like your voice. Very clever, very smart-set, and the same goes for the dialogue.

Which leads to my first critique, in that somewhere in the first scene at the party, the asides become a little too much, defeating the narrative and drawing me out of the story (later examples occur within parentheticals in the basement, remarking at his own corny rhymes and "so to speak"). I hate to draw inexact suggestions, but I can't nail it down much more than to say that such self-consciousness can become overbearing, or a little too self-congratulatory. How much is too much, I can't say. The situation rights itself once the action commences; I suppose in that way it is like the mating-dance itself, because a couple's googley-eyes will usually just sicken a third-party.

Perhaps to know more about Andrew might be good, in spite of the title, since he is featured in the lead-in, although we know further complications and exposition will follow this particular story.

Great stuff - I'm looking forward to reading more.

Cain

From: Always Horny
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 16:34:16 +0100

Desdmona22 wrote:

1) 2 positive comments

I really liked the story. I was well sucked into the situation, and kept there for the most part.

The story is nicely sexy and erotic, too. All the while staying with a light and funny tone. Well done.

2) 2 things to improve

Kill the three parenthetical jokes. They are in the absolutely wrong time. And IMO they just don't belong at all: you do a more than good enough job of being light and funny throughout.

What does he feel while he fucks her? Some description here could really enhance the erotic power of the story for guys.

Bonus improvement: The "roseate shine" of her cunt. Roseate, really?

3) Try not to repeat!

Dunno coz I did not read the other responses before writing mine. (and I ain't gonna re-write after)

I'm aware that tense is appallingly inconsistent. There's sort of a reason for this.

Yes. And it is done well enough that it did not interfere with my reading, even though I am rather sensitive to this.

I thought I'd submit it to the critics for suggestions on how to resolve this.

Mine is to leave it as it is.

Very good job. Thanks for sharing. I hope there will be continuations.

A_H_01 at hotmail. com

From: Poison Ivan
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 22:07:58 -0500

Vinnie,

I liked this story a lot. I liked the edge to the sex. The armpits and rimming, in particular, put your characters on the edge of the mainstream, which makes them fascinating. (the kink factor doesn't hurt, either!)

Please Cain mentioned something about the parenthetical remarks in the sex scene, and I think the reason it didn't work for me is you are in present tense at the time, and the parenthetical remarks sound more like something someone would say looking back on the story. If you need the parentheticals, tie them closer to the action.

A small criticism early on in the story:

She (or he, as I'd assumed, embarrassingly, at the time) had waded merrily into our usual political battles, staking out surprising and unpredictable positions that had alternately vexed and charmed me.

I guess the "vexed and charmed" part seemed slightly off to me. It sounds like something a man would feel towards a possible love interest, and but if Vinnie thinks Snufkin is male, well, then, what is Vinnie's sexual preference? I came away from this thinking Vinnie might be bisexual, which is OK, but nothing in the story later on takes advantage of that possibility.

As others have noted, the party setting was great. For me, the best part is:

My
room was a bad idea - it opens on the living rooms, where the others were talking. My roommates' rooms were immeasurably worse. I barked out loud with laughter as I tried to imagine using one of the closets, jammed as they are with sweaters, croquet sets, pornographic videotapes, and dead computer equipment.

You ever read a description of a story setting that read like a long list of uninteresting and unimportant details? This is the way setting should be described.

Great stuff, Vinnie.

Poison Ivan

From: Ray
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 04:47:55 -0500

Well, it looks like I'm probably last this week, but here goes.

Initialy reiterating what everyone else seems to have said so far, I found it quite enjoyable, the prose and style were such to easily lead you through the story and maintain your interest.

I enjoyed the confussion as he rapidly tried to think of anywhere in the house the two of them might be safe from interruption. In a Frat in full party mode, I was surprised that the basement would be considered 'safe' - especially since it's known to contain mattresses among it's inventory.

I also enjoyed the clumsiness of their initial conversations and the eventual coming of minor verbal blows as the conversation drifted into something both felt strongly about.

As for corrective items, I will only make one suggestion, with a few examples. The suggestion is that before you consider posting the story, you do at least one more slow, careful, word for word reading of the story, or hand it and a highlighter to a trusted friend for perusal.

I found a few cases of missing words in sentences like:

"Near the end of the song, I noticed Andrew standing the doorway, sipping a beer." - the word 'in' is missing.

A few places where the descriptive terminology is confused, like:

"where her torso meets her back"

Sorry, but basic anatomy seems to dictated that if you chop of a person's arms, legs and head, you are left with the 'torso', and the back is part of it - so does not meet it.

Earlier in the story you were 'nudging smokers out onto the porch' , porch? Porches are part's of homes, and normally not much wider than the doorway itself.. Most Frats and Sororities I know of identify the front 'porch', especially if it is deep and travels the bredth of the house, as a 'Veranda' and any similar rear area as the patio or deck.

Although porch is perfectly acceptable and may be exactly what you intended, I simply thought I'd present another option.

The story is good ... I wouldn't change much at all.

Hope this is helpful.

Ray

From: Jeff Zephyr
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 16:59:47 -0600

On Sat, 17 Nov 2001 04:47:55 -0500, "Ray" <ray1031@_cac.net> wrote:

Earlier in the story you were 'nudging smokers out onto the porch' , porch? Porches are part's of homes, and normally not much wider than the doorway itself.. Most Frats and Sororities I know of identify the front 'porch', especially if it is deep and travels the bredth of the house, as a 'Veranda' and any similar rear area as the patio or deck.

Although porch is perfectly acceptable and may be exactly what you intended, I simply thought I'd present another option.

Front porches and back porches around here may have plenty of room on them, be enclosed even, and be similar to verandas or decks elsewhere. The size might vary, but ones as wide as the house aren't uncommon at all.

Jeff

Web site at http://www.asstr.org/~jeffzephyr/ For FTP, ftp://ftp.asstr.org/pub/Authors/jeffzephyr/

There is nothing more important than petting the cat.

From: Conjugate
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 19:59:59 -0500

Jeff Zephyr <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected] ...

On Sat, 17 Nov 2001 04:47:55 -0500, "Ray" <ray1031@_cac.net> wrote:

Earlier in the story you were 'nudging smokers out onto the porch' , porch? Porches are part's of homes, and normally not much wider than the doorway itself.. Most Frats and Sororities I know of identify the front 'porch', especially if it is deep and travels the bredth of the house, as a 'Veranda' and any similar rear area as the patio or deck.

Although porch is perfectly acceptable and may be exactly what you intended, I simply thought I'd present another option.

Front porches and back porches around here may have plenty of room on them, be enclosed even, and be similar to verandas or decks elsewhere. The size might vary, but ones as wide as the house aren't uncommon at all.

Here where I live, with many houses over a hundred years old, there are many homes that have huge porches, almost verandahs or "front decks". Some of these were enclosed over the years, when the residents finally acquired air conditioning. Before A/C, it was common to sit out on the front porch, and one would get to know one's neighbors by going over and sitting on their front porch for a while. Today, many of these houses have enclosed porches that have been turned into extra rooms. The place I live in, once a large one-family dwelling, is now six apartments, and the porch is now where two of the families keep their kids' toys.

Here where I live, in fact, reminds me a bit of "Pleasantville," the movie, or perhaps "Blast from the Past." In particular, there are still parking meters downtown that take pennies (almost all of them do, in fact) and when peoples' locks on front doors (many are 19th-century in make) stop working, they often don't bother to replace or repair them.

Conjugate

From: Vinnie Tesla
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 22:53:52 GMT

RL is being an overbearing tyrant this weekend.

Detailed responses to comments are forthcoming as soon as feasable. (tuesday?)

In the meantime, a thousand thanks for your encouraging and insightful responses. It means a lot to me.

- Vinnie

From: Father Ignatius
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: 19 Nov 2001 06:54:33 -0800

[email protected] (Desdmona22) wrote in message news:<[email protected]> ...

Vinnie is a new writer and a new contributor to ASSD. Hopefully we can encourage him in both endeavors.

1. Nah. Let's put his feet to fire and flay him. See if he's got what it takes. ;-)

2. <pedant>Hopefully? <shudder>
http://www.asstr.org/~FatherIgnatius/TheCraftOfWriting/hopefully.html ;-)</pedant>

1) 2 positive comments

1. Encouraging signs of fluid, confident writing style.

2. Nicely descriptive.

2) 2 things to improve

Uneasy about narrator being same person as author. Might find it limiting later and wish you hadn't.

K.I.S.S., fex, "After they'd deposited their coats on the front porch, he led her over to me." -> "They ditched their coats and joined me."

Pickiness. Sloppy readers won't notice or care about minor slip-ups but careful readers will be distracted from what you're trying to say and, eventually, irked.

e.g. ash-blond hair is masculine, ash-blonde hair is feminine.

Suggestion for tense-swapping (if you're determined on doing it): use visual cue

such as a row of stars to signal mode-switch. In non-plain-text, you might italicise instead.

Ya gotta sort out how you're going to present internal and dialogue. This is difficult-to-read, say-what, read-over stuff:

She shushed me, with a mock-stern look. "No politics - I'm here to dance. You wanna dance?" No. I'm not really a dancer. And I've got to run around and do hosty things. "Sure!"

Suggest conventionality. If you really want to be unconventional, find an equally readable way of being unconventinal. I prefer:

She shushed me, with a mock-stern look.

"No politics - I'm here to dance. You wanna dance?"

No. I'm not really a dancer. And I've got to run around and do hosty things.

"Sure!"

I'm rather (too much?) in favour of ad_hoccing adjectives with hyphenation myself, but (a.) don't over-do it, (b.) get it right.

the rather-less crowded darkened front living room -> the rather-less-crowded, darkened, front living room

Use a spell-checker: fex,

plausable -> plausible

hors d'ouvres -> hors_d'oeuvres

her baggy and androgynous clothes: can clothes be androdgynous? I would say not.

It remains conventional to capstart The Deity: Oh my god! -> Oh my God!

When you can't decide whether or not to run words together, a spell checker will help with the current norm and, when all else fails, hyphenate doubtful rather than run them together:

dance floor is prolly okay

dance-floor is prolly bitch-proof

dancefloor may be extra decoding effort.

Ecshew the nesting parentheses except in rare cases when you're doing it for deliberate, usually humorous, stylisitic effect.

(hers is a confusing mix of dot-coms, organic farms, and four (or was it five?) little liberal arts colleges),

Use em-dashes as an alternative, or re-write:

(hers is a confusing mix of dot-coms, organic farms, and four - or was it five? - little liberal arts colleges),

Capstart Liberal Arts?

And so on, and so on.

From: Father Ignatius
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: 19 Nov 2001 07:05:45 -0800

[email protected] (mat twassel) wrote in message news:<[email protected]> ...

Switching tense is not necessarily a sin. Henry Miller slips his

slipped ;-)

[ ...]

From: Mat Twassel
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: 19 Nov 2001 16:34:40 GMT

Father Ignatius writes:

Switching tense is not necessarily a sin. Henry Miller slips his

slipped ;-)

Probably, though I'm unthinking (and fast) enough to read in present tense, and by some miracle, the instant I'm ready for a new word, the author springs one in front of me. Never the same story twice, you know.

- Mat

From: Conjugate
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 17:45:06 -0500

mat twassel <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected] ...

Father Ignatius writes:

Switching tense is not necessarily a sin. Henry Miller slips his

slipped ;-)

Probably, though I'm unthinking (and fast) enough to read in present tense, and by some miracle, the instant I'm ready for a new word, the author springs one in front of me. Never the same story twice, you know.

- Mat

Historical Present: a valid English tense. As in, "The plot is well-known, but Shakepeare takes it further as he leads his characters ...." on the grounds that, each time you read the play, the author is doing it again (though deceased). It does sound strange, though.

Conjugate

From: dennyw
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 13:22:12 -0800

On 19 Nov 2001 06:54:33 -0800, [email protected] (Father Ignatius) held forth, saying:

Two quibbles.

her baggy and androgynous clothes: can clothes be androdgynous? I would say not.

Clothes certainly can create an air of androgyny.

It remains conventional to capstart The Deity: Oh my god! -> Oh my God!

Yes, but. There are many who worship/believe in (the two aren't the same) multiple gods, and they often don't capstart 'god' even when referring to their DOYC. That said, yes, generally 'The Deity' references are capstarted. Unless of course the speaker doesn't believe in the same deity ....

too many worms therein. I go back to my corner now. -denny-

"I fear that we have awakened a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve ... " - Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, Dec. 8th, 1941

From: Frank McCoy
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 01:24:01 GMT

[email protected] wrote:

On 19 Nov 2001 06:54:33 -0800, [email protected] (Father Ignatius) held forth, saying:

Two quibbles.

her baggy and androgynous clothes: can clothes be androdgynous? I would say not.

Clothes certainly can create an air of androgyny.

It remains conventional to capstart The Deity: Oh my god! -> Oh my God!

Yes, but. There are many who worship/believe in (the two aren't the same) multiple gods, and they often don't capstart 'god' even when referring to their DOYC. That said, yes, generally 'The Deity' references are capstarted. Unless of course the speaker doesn't believe in the same deity ....

too many worms therein. I go back to my corner now. -denny-

Allah, God, Krishna, etc., being specific people, are therefore Proper Names, and always capitalized (whether you believe in that particular deity or not). However, when talking about gods in general, a god is an ordinary noun; and therefore NOT capitalized.

When talking, while picking up the Idol of Kamu, the expression would be, "Oh God. It's a god!"

Similarly, while talking to her own brother in one of my stories, Karen says to her sibling, "C'mere, Big Brother. I want my big brother to fuck me!" Or, later on, "I want my dad's prick in me, Dad."

The difference is whether you're talking about a specific person as a NAME for that person, or just that TYPE of person. God is a god. Dad is a dad.
Big Brother is a big brother.
The first in each case is a proper name. The second is always just a descriptive noun. However, my big brother is a big brother to my little sister as well. Putting "my" in front, changes it from a pet-name I call my brother, to a description of him as something of mine.

Get it now?
Proper names, like the start of sentences, are ALWAYS capitalized. Them's the rules.

A slight confusion might come in, with the two totally-correct sentences below, however.

"Oh my. It's the Goddess Tamu," exclaimed Kate." "Oh my. It's the goddess, Tamu," exclaimed Kate."

Now who here has been listening and can explain why? (Some would even leave out that comma in the second line, and it would STILL be correct.)

/ ' /
,-/-, . __ /

(/ / ((/|/ / </ <

From: Poison Ivan
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 23:57:25 -0500

Father Ignatius said ...

e.g. ash-blond hair is masculine, ash-blonde hair is feminine.

Perhaps it's one of those English vs. American things.

According to my dictionary (AH), "blond" as an adjective can be used to refer to both sexes. So, at least according to Mr. Heritage, Vinnie's usage is correct.

They do say never use "blonde" as a noun to refer to a male.

Poison Ivan
^ had to look it up to find out for sure

From: dennyw
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 02:40:23 -0800

On Tue, 20 Nov 2001 01:24:01 GMT, [email protected] (Frank McCoy) held forth, saying:

A slight confusion might come in, with the two totally-correct sentences below, however.

"Oh my. It's the Goddess Tamu," exclaimed Kate." "Oh my. It's the goddess, Tamu," exclaimed Kate."

Now who here has been listening and can explain why? (Some would even leave out that comma in the second line, and it would STILL be correct.)

Actually neither one is correct. Not so long as they have that orphaned double-quote at the end. <g>

And, aside from that - 'the' in both sentences should remove the capstart from 'goddess' (which has been done in the second case).

And one more: 'God' is not a name - it's a title. 'Yahweh' (or YHWH) is a name - 'Allah' is a name - 'Krishna' is a name. etc.

-denny-

"I fear that we have awakened a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve ... " - Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, Dec. 8th, 1941

From: Frank McCoy
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 16:01:02 GMT

[email protected] wrote:

On Tue, 20 Nov 2001 01:24:01 GMT, [email protected] (Frank McCoy) held forth, saying:

A slight confusion might come in, with the two totally-correct sentences below, however.

"Oh my. It's the Goddess Tamu," exclaimed Kate." "Oh my. It's the goddess, Tamu," exclaimed Kate."

Now who here has been listening and can explain why? (Some would even leave out that comma in the second line, and it would STILL be correct.)

Actually neither one is correct. Not so long as they have that orphaned double-quote at the end. <g>

And, aside from that - 'the' in both sentences should remove the capstart from 'goddess' (which has been done in the second case).

No. The point being that in the FIRST case, the NAME of the goddess is "Goddess Tamu". (Like my name is two words, "Frank McCoy".)

The second case has her DESCIBED as a goddess, so the word "goddess" there is descriptive of her, NOT her name. (Like I could be described as being a frank McCoy, when talking about how I speak.)

And one more: 'God' is not a name - it's a title. 'Yahweh' (or YHWH) is a name - 'Allah' is a name - 'Krishna' is a name. etc.

When I say, "Dear God, help me." I'm talking to a particular deity, not any god. Yes, God is a title. It's ALSO a name! (Which is what causes the confusion with the "Goddess Tamu" above.) In the first case, it's part of her name. In the second, it's a title.

BOTH can be correct, DEPENDING ON WHICH IS MEANT BY THE AUTHOR!!! Which is the point I was trying to make. You could punctuate both sentences identically, but pick out which MEANING was intended by the author by which capitalization is used.

If You INTEND "Goddess" to be part of her NAME, as used by the speaker, then it's capitalized.

If you INTEND "goddess" to be her TITLE, (again, as used by the speaker) then it's NOT capitalized.

It's a subtle distinction; but one that is sometimes important to stories.

If I speak to the goddess Tamu, asking her a favor, then when I say, "I need a favor, Goddess," Goddess is capitalized because I USED it as her NAME, not her title. The same thing, if I say, "Help me God," in a prayer. I'm speaking to God, a specifically named deity, not any god that happens to be in the neighborhood. Yes, got can also be a title; and then it's not capitalized (though some would argue with that; pointing out that titles like "Doctor" and "Mr." and "Sir" and "Reverend" are all usually capitalized). Hmmm ... thinking about it, I changed my mind. Titles ARE capitalized. Nobody would (for example) write, "I saw mr. McCoy down at the store." And the abreviation "Mr." is capitalized beacuse the title "Mister McCoy" properly would be. A title becomes PART of a proper name. It's "Sir Daniel Addams" as distinct from any other persons named "Daniel Addams".

I stand corrected there; and will keep that in mind in any future titles, when I write.

All in all though, it's the usage that counts.

/ ' /
,-/-, . __ /

(/ / ((/|/ / </ <

From: Vinnie Tesla
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: 20 Nov 2001 17:38:37 -0800

Note: in this post, I shall use "me" to mean Vinnie the author, and "Vinnie" to mean Vinnie the narrator/character.

I don't respond to the positive comments in this roundup, but they meant a lot to me. Particularly Mat, Desdmona, Cain, and Ivan�your encouragement is very appreciated.

Quoth everybody:

Lose the annoying parenthetical remarks!

Done. Mostly.

Quoth everybody:

Other than that, the voice is nice.

I'm very glad you like it, and it's a good thing too, since if I'm not very careful, anything I write seems to slip into approximately that voice after about a page.

Quoth virtually everybody:

The tense thing isn't really a problem if you clean it up a bit.

Advice accepted.

Quoth several folks:

I'm looking forward to future episodes of the story.

I'm actually not sure there are any. The process of conducting an affair strikes me as much less fun to write about than the initiation of one is. There will probably be some more Vinnie Tesla stories, and possibly a couple more stories about Molly, but I'm not currently moved to do much more about their relationship with each other.

Quoth Frank:

The comment about the "Poison" book, is definitely an "in thing".

Well, yes and no. I feel that the reader knows that they're having a vigorous and friendly argument about a comic book that they've both read, and that's plenty. Having read the book yourself isn't necessary to understand the scene.

Quoth Gary:

The story reminded me of Jordan Shelbourne

I actually hadn't read any of Jordan's stuff before, but after that comment, I read Unwrap Party when he spotlighted it, and you're absolutely right�there are a lot of parallels, from the milieu of the story to the choices of physical details to describe. I love the opening of the story, but he kind of lost me with the dance floor confrontation, which felt melodramatic to me, and never quite sucked me in again. I definitely need to read more of his, and I do take the comparison as a compliment.

I had just a little trouble visualizing their relative positions once they got down to it

I'm surprised�I thought I had that worked out pretty well. Can you point me to the offending passages?

Quoth Mat:

As it is, the end is inconsistent with the beginning.

Damn straight, and for the reason you'd expect�I had a different set of ideas about the story going in than coming out. The germ of the story was a fairly vivid and nuanced image in my mind of this friend/rival of Vinnie's. The title "This is not a Story About <this guy>" struck me as appealing. Since this was derived from Andrew Bird's "This is not a Song About a Train," I named him Andrew in honor thereof.

At one point, I was even going to embed Bird lyrics in the story, which would of course have raised the inside joke level beyond critical mass. At any rate, once I started writing, I found myself thoroughly uninterested in detailing the interplay b/t V. and A., and eager to get to the naughty bits instead.

In the current draft, I've killed the intro paragraph, but I'll be damned if I can come up with a decent replacement title.

Quoth Des:

In fact, I'd like to see a couple of Vinnie's thoughts when he gets back up to the living room with Andrew. I mean Vinnie has to be thinking

something; after

all he just shagged (very nicely) Andrew's date.

I'm trying to imply more than state here. He's very uncomfortable, but whether he's feeling jealous or guilty or what is uncertain even to himself. I'll try to make that clearer, but I don't want to make it explicit.

� "The basement is cold and damp, and littered with cardboard boxes." Get rid of this statement. >You've already basically said the same thing twice in conversation.

Ah, but the first two times are just hearsay! The third is direct observation.

Quoth Ray:

� In a Frat�

Did anyone else come away with the impression that the setting was a fraternity house? My own image of the setting (which I'm fairly chary with the details of, I realize) is the second floor of a two family house, probably with the landlord living on the first floor. In my part of the world, a lot of people between college and marriage (and not a few after marriage) end up renting places like that. The controversial porch is a broadish, shallowish protrusion at the front or back of the house, with a roof, handrails, and a frighteningly creaky floor. I would never call anything a verandah in ordinary conversation

Quoth Dad Iggy:

Uneasy about narrator being same person as author. Might find it

� limiting later and wish you hadn't.

This is a very reasonable concern. Here's why I disagree: I intend to be completely unconfined with Vinnie's circumstances. Don't be surprised to see him show up as a space mercenary or president of Zimbabwe in future stories. Foithamoah, if I feel the urge, I can always just switch pseudonyms.

Ya gotta sort out how you're going to present internal and dialogue. This is difficult-to-read, say-what, read-over stuff:

She shushed me, with a mock-stern look. "No politics - I'm here to dance. You wanna dance?" No. I'm not really a dancer. And I've got to run around and do hosty things. "Sure!"

I'm gonna meet you half way on this one. I agree I should have put a paragraph b/t her quote and Vinnie's thoughts, but I want to keep the rest in a block. Vinnie is surprised himself to hear agreement come out of his mouth, so I'd like it to be just a little disorienting for the reader.

I'm posting this through Google Groups while visiting family. Hope it gets through okay.

From: Always Horny
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 08:30:39 +0100

Poison Ivan wrote:

e.g. ash-blond hair is masculine, ash-blonde hair is feminine.

Perhaps it's one of those English vs. American things.

According to my dictionary (AH), "blond" as an adjective can be used to refer to both sexes. So, at least according to Mr. Heritage, Vinnie's usage is correct.

They do say never use "blonde" as a noun to refer to a male.

Assuming that there is a valid reason for wanting to flex foreign words while writing English sentences,

<Edito-pedant mode>
if you are going to flex the French adjective "blond", you are at the very minimum supposed to flex it according to the noun it describes. Which here is the hair, not the person. So in all cases it should stay "blond hair".

Only when describing a feminine noun it would flex to blonde: A blonde girl. But even when they grow on a girl, "hair" is neutral, not feminine: Blond hair. </Edito-pedant mode>

One can write dictionaries, sell zillions of copies, be in the umpteenth revision, and still make incredibly primitively crude grammatical mistakes. That's kinda reassuring, somehow.

A_H_01 at hotmail. com

From: Poison Ivan
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 14:31:37 -0500

"Always Horny" wrote:

if you are going to flex the French adjective "blond", you are at the very minimum supposed to flex it according to the noun it describes. Which here is the hair, not the person. So in all cases it should stay "blond hair".

Only when describing a feminine noun it would flex to blonde: A blonde girl. But even when they grow on a girl, "hair" is neutral, not feminine: Blond hair.

One can write dictionaries, sell zillions of copies, be in the umpteenth revision, and still make incredibly primitively crude grammatical mistakes. That's kinda reassuring, somehow.

In case I wasn't clear the first time, The American Heritage dictionary only disagrees with Always Horny on a small point. The usage note does not address when to use "blonde" as an adjective; it simply says "blond" is OK as an adjective in all cases.

So, as I read the dictionary, "a blond girl" would not be wrong. Everything else AH says above is in complete agreement with AH (isn't that a tautology?).

I would say, "She has blond hair," and "I like brunettes better than blondes."

Poison Ivan
^ didn't even know "blonde" was an adjective until all this discussion came up

From: Vinnie Tesla
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: 21 Nov 2001 13:20:59 -0800

Mat,

I wanted to ask you for some clarifications ...

[email protected] (mat twassel) wrote in message news:<[email protected]> ...

At the same time it's a bit kitchen-sinky, a bit cluttered, and amid the lovely details I'd like to see some personal details.

You mean more about background and internal experiences, or appearance and conduct?

I pull at one of her cheeks, exposing her hidden parts. The skin of her anus is surprisingly dark, and fringed with wispy reddish hair. Below, the lips of her cunt are fat and swollen. She flinches a little when the wet handiwipe from my pocket touches the sensitive flesh of her asshole. I run it over the surface a few times, and then drop it onto the floor. My hands spread her cheeks, and I begin running my tongue along the skin just above her anus. Then I move down, and lick at her perineum, drawing a gasp from Molly. Finally i bring my tongue to her clenched little orifice, and rub against it with gentle pressure.

Vivid and exciting, but if we've never experienced it, is it enough? Perhaps that's the trap of porn. At the touch of that tongue, you make me want to be there.

That last sentence is an exquisitely nice compliment that I've come back to several times since, but I'm not sure what your overall suggestion is. More specific tactile details of what Vinnie's experiencing? I'm not sure what you mean the "trap of porn" is. That you can't really accurately describe expriences to folks who've never had them?

- Vinnie

From: Mat Twassel
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: 22 Nov 2001 02:26:17 GMT

Vinnie writes:

At the same time it's a bit kitchen-sinky, a bit cluttered, and amid the lovely details I'd like to see some personal details.

You mean more about background and internal experiences, or appearance and conduct?

I don't know. I don't know exactly why I even wrote that - as I said, the details you do have are great. Probably it's a matter of me wanting more, more, more. I'm so greedy. And at the same time I complained that there might be too much. Yikes! So what's missing? Vinnie's reaction, Vinnie's side of some of the experience. Below we get 'surprisingly,' which I think is a nice touch, but beyond that, in this crucial scene, we have what often amounts to a third person delivery. Nothing really wrong with that, except the story becomes pure graphics. And for straight porn maybe that's the ideal, at least in these moments of sex. It's really tricky to embed a first person narrator's sense of something in this kind of scene without ruining it utterly. So I don't know. For me the scene is sexy; maybe that means you should leave it alone.

I pull at one of her cheeks, exposing her hidden parts. The skin of her anus is surprisingly dark, and fringed with wispy reddish hair. Below, the lips of her cunt are fat and swollen. She flinches a little when the wet handiwipe from my pocket touches the sensitive flesh of her asshole. I run it over the surface a few times, and then drop it onto the floor. My hands spread her cheeks, and I begin running my tongue along the skin just above her anus. Then I move down, and lick at her perineum, drawing a gasp from Molly. Finally i bring my tongue to her clenched little orifice, and rub against it with gentle pressure.

Vivid and exciting, but if we've never experienced it, is it enough? Perhaps that's the trap of porn. At the touch of that tongue, you make me want to be there.

That last sentence is an exquisitely nice compliment that I've come back to several times since, but I'm not sure what your overall suggestion is. More specific tactile details of what Vinnie's experiencing? I'm not sure what you mean the "trap of porn" is. That you can't really accurately describe expriences to folks who've never had them?

The trap of porn: the excitement of the moment obliterates characters and story. We're blinded by the experience. The better the rendering and the more complete the association, the more the disassociation. Nothing wrong with that. And your ending gives us something of a handle, and a very nice connection to the magic of the initial connection it is; in looking back at the ending I like it more than I did the first time, though I wonder if the story doesn't need at least one more line.

- Mat Twassel

From: Always Horny
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 13:46:27 +0100

Poison Ivan wrote:

In case I wasn't clear the first time, The American Heritage dictionary only disagrees with Always Horny on a small point. The usage note does not address when to use "blonde" as an adjective; it simply says "blond" is OK as an adjective in all cases.

Actually, this is not a disagreement with me. As stated at the beginning of the post, when one writes English sentences I can't see much of a valid reason for wanting to flex foreign words, and even less for wanting to flex adjectives. (Unless counting showing off as a valid reason). So indeed when used as an adjective blond should stay unflexed.

So, as I read the dictionary, "a blond girl" would not be wrong. Everything else AH says above is in complete agreement with AH (isn't that a tautology?).

I would say, "She has blond hair," and "I like brunettes better than blondes."

Definitely right when talking about women.

There is a little bit of a funny twist, tho, as often happens in borrowing foreign words: "brunette" is not the right word for brown-haired women, unless they are somehow diminutive (like very young, very small or something). The correct word would be "brune". But hey, when speaking English, why not.

Other examples of such twists being that a "brassiere" is originally a woollen jacket for newborns, that "massage" is a noun not a verb (verb is "masser"), etc. The same happens the other way around, ofc: foreign words adopted in French often are given a meaning completely different from their original language: "le smoking" means a tuxedo formal outfit, and the german "blockhaus" (log cabin) is used for concrete bunkers.

The funny side effects of globalization ...

A_H_01 at hotmail. com

From: dennyw
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 02:01:22 -0800

On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 22:44:58 -0500, "Conjugate" <[email protected]> held forth, saying:

Always Horny <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected] ...

~~~~~~~~~~~

There is a little bit of a funny twist, tho, as often happens in borrowing foreign words: "brunette" is not the right word for brown-haired women, unless they are somehow diminutive (like very young, very small or something). The correct word would be "brune". But hey, when speaking English, why not.

Or had very short brown hair?

Other examples of such twists being that a "brassiere" is originally a woollen jacket for newborns, that "massage" is a noun not a verb (verb is "masser"),

Changing nouns to verbs and vice-versa is commonplace in English. Or should I say, it's a commonplace? Is it a good idea to change the parts of speech of words? Let's network about it.

Conjugate

My wellness suffers when I see people parenting badly.

-denny-

"I fear that we have awakened a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve ... " - Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, Dec. 8th, 1941

From: Father Ignatius
Re: Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 21:16:02 +0200

"Father Ignatius" <[email protected]> http://www.asstr.org/~FatherIgnatius/Stories.html http://www.asstr.org/~FatherIgnatius/Images.html ...and gradually, when he found that his sensitive organ was really grateful for those grim favours, he conferred them with a better grace. Henry James, Portrait_of_a_Lady <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected] ...

On Fri, 23 Nov 2001 22:44:58 -0500, "Conjugate" <[email protected]> held forth, saying:

Always Horny <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected] ...

~~~~~~~~~~~

There is a little bit of a funny twist, tho, as often happens in borrowing foreign words:
"brunette" is not the right word for brown-haired women, unless they are somehow diminutive (like very young, very small or something). The correct word would be "brune". But hey, when speaking English, why not.

Or had very short brown hair?

Other examples of such twists being that a "brassiere" is originally a woollen jacket for newborns, that "massage" is a noun not a verb (verb is "masser"),

Changing nouns to verbs and vice-versa is commonplace in English. Or should I say, it's a commonplace? Is it a good idea to change the parts of speech

You should say it's common.

of words? Let's network about it.

'Minds me of a recent Dilbert cartoon where the pointy-haired boss was driving Anne L. Retentive berserk by using nouns as verbs. He was keeping in reserve asking her to "timeline her project."

Conjugate

My wellness suffers when I see people parenting badly.

-denny-

"I fear that we have awakened a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve ... " - Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, Dec. 8th, 1941

Comments on Not a Story About Andrew, by Vinnie Tesla.

The web site does not currently support submitting comments on stories. If you want to join in the discussion on this story, come to the thread in alt.sex.stories.d and post a follow-up.