Those are some visuals, Robert, but ants have highly developed senses of smell (and taste) that they tend to rely more on (and yes, there is the possibility that we are dealing with something other than ants).
What might the Leviathan smell like? Clammy and dirty as it was.
What might the Leviathan sound like? What might the aimless murmelings of a lone child exploring his backyard sound like to an ant?
<br>Careful. They'll start calling you Me Jr. (Mini-Me?) if you keep talking like that. :)<br><br><br>Unless I miss my guess, the vibe I get from the other critiques is that people like this story, but there's something not quite right about it, something no one has been able to put their finger on yet.<br><br>Generally, people seem to see this as a fairy tale, because it has a lot of those elements. The blurb sells it as a tale of Atraxes, and his bid to have history notice him--but that's not really what it's about. It begins then as if this were a legend, perhaps being retold about Atraxes. As a fairy tale, it really would be about Atraxes and his bid for glory, but it would follow him throughout. We'd see his weakness that the has to overcome or his folly that would be his downfall, ala a morality play.<br><br>Instead of a fairy tale, I say this is a long flash piece. That is, in a good flash piece (at least, to my way of thinking) the author sets up a situation, then reveals a surprise twist ending which causes the reader to reach a sudden realization wherein he or she connects the underlying, often hidden details of the text, with the new reality at the end. For example, suddenly we know
why the dust is falling all around the throne room. Billy is stomping around the ant hill. We know why the Leviathan was so big, and why it wouldn't leave them alone for long.<br><br>I say if you view this tale from that perspective, it's a better story than not. It does the twist well--suddenly, the tumblers click in our minds, and we get it.<br><br>Setting is difficult in a flash piece. You can't say too much, or the audience guesses the ending. In this regard, it's hard to know when to apply more or less of the sensory input I love and Dan E. called for in his message. I think the best rule in this kind of story is to use those kind of descriptives mostly to show character or establish mood.<br><br>In terms of characterization, I'd have started with Atraxes failing to stand out in some attempt to do so, and not have centered on the political interplay between the general & prime minister. They're secondary to the goal of getting Atraxes out against the Leviathan. Plus, you establish sympathy for the hero so that when he is facing the "monster", the audience feels for him. You want them to be rooting for Atraxes, worried that he might die, and hopeful that history will remember him. The only way I know to do this is by establishing a rapport by showing the main character's flaws and other endearing traits early on.<br><br>The plot is ok. Nameless guard tries to break out of anonymity by volunteering when the rest of the court is playing games and currying favor, then the monster turns out to be as it was. It works, save that I thought the first part should have centered on Atraxes.<br><br>Like others, I thought the POV jumped all over the place instead of staying with a logical lead character.<br><br>I thought dialogue worked. The different characters sounded like themselves: the blustery general, the quick-witted politician, the crackpot inventor, timid guard, small child and annoyed mother. However, DT's note on
neurotoxin was spot on. You have to match the lexicon to the source.<br><br>So, in general, I thought it was much better than Exile, but that there was still room for improvement.<br><br>Nate