[HEADING=3]Brutally honest answer:[/HEADING]
This reads like a list of the most meaningless, overused clichés in literature. You've made an obvious effort to be descriptive with your spamming of adjectives everywhere, yet after three full read-throughs I still have no idea what the setting is like or even what is going on.
SassyCarrot said:
It was a dark and extremely cold autumn night, the chill of harsh, bitter loneliness swept through the night air.
Try changing "It was a dark... night" to "The night was dark" to avoid the biggest cliché ever! [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It_was_a_dark_and_stormy_night] (I find it funny that your piece accurately resembles all the negative connotations associated with it). On second thought, "the night was dark"is still to close, unnecessary and, according to a future sentence, wrong, so should be changed completely.
The second "night" is also irrelevant; you only need to mention it is night-time once at most.
Instead of saying it was an autumn night, you should imply it through mentions of brown leaves or falling leaves. Maybe a chilling wind knocking some sepia leaves from the branches?
Since there is no mention of a character being forced out of their comfort zone, into the night alone, there is no feeling of loneliness in the air, thus this noun is giving the wrong image and should be changed/removed.
The word "swept" is of a grand gesture that implies a large, open area. From what I understand, the scene is set in the woods, so I find a phase like "wind weaving between the trees" to produce a better image.
The sinister rustling of the auburn trees and the demonic hooting of the owl as it gazed over its unsuspecting prey was the only life that had been in this place for centuries.
This sentence highlights your overuse of ominous adjectives which is one of your major problems; I have no freakin' clue what you mean by "sinister rustling" or "demonic hooting". What differentiates sinister rustling from normal rustling? How can an owl's hoot sound demonic? These adjectives are redundant since the noises themselves are (overused,) eerie, atmospheric noises.
I find it very hard to believe there has been no other life for centuries. For a predator like the owl to survive, there needs to be many small animals living there already. After setting up living trees and owls, it is just silly to claim no living creatures for centuries. How about stating that the only signs of life were rustling leaves and a distant hoot?
How come the owl is hooting whilst stalking its prey? As far as I'm aware, it's harder to sneak up on an animal whilst making noise.
This line would work better if it stood out more. It wouldn't be a bad idea to make this a separate paragraph. It's another large cliché though, so probably better to remove/revise this sentence.
This night, was a very special night, a night that had been long awaited by some and thought as only a nightmarish legend by others, because, tonight was the night that they returned.
Why are you so adamant towards reminding us what time of day it is? You used night six times in one sentence. Unless you're trying to be the next Dr. Seuss, this is very bad and is in severe need of revision, or just delete it since it's rather redundant. Drags on too long as well.
There was a faint crunching sound of leaves underfoot that was growing closer and closer, louder and louder, until there, stood underneath the tallest oak tree that grew and stood majestically in the centre of the wood, over shadowing its peers was a cloaked and hooded figure, silhouetted by the moonlight.
This should be split into at least three sentences; it runs on far too long!
Punctuation! Learn it! it was only on the third read-through that I realised you meant that the oak tree was taller than the other trees and not the hooded figure. If you must keep this all in one sentence, a couple of hyphens should separate the tree description from the hooded figure description.
Huzzah! We finally have some proper description of the setting! We're in a wood, there are leaves on the ground and a large oak tree. This also happens to be the only proper description of the scene.
Since we are already hearing the sound, it cannot be getting any closer; the sound's source maybe, but not the sound itself.
There is no need for the repetition in "louder and louder". It should be just "louder". You may be trying to emphasise the description, but this method does not work, and it's totally unnecessary to emphasise this part anyway.
Where is the source of this noise getting closer too? You have failed to give any significance of the area from which this scene is being viewed from. The language used so far seams to suggest a character waiting in the bushes to witness what actions this hooded figure takes, but no person is reviled to us.
This figure removed its hood with long, delicate and pale fingers to reveal the beautiful face of a young woman that warmed this cold night.
You never use "it" when referencing a person (unless you are speaking from the view of someone that considers themself above humans /whatever race the person is). Instead you would use the singular they [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they], e.g. the figure removed their hood. Using "one" is also acceptable, e.g. the figure removed one's hood, but, unless you're currently using the Queen's English, it would most likely break the flow.
Avoid using "and"s with adjectives preceding nouns, e.g. long, delicate, pale fingers. This also incorporates the Rule of Three [http://www.copyblogger.com/rule-of-three/] which is very powerful in moderation.
The hooded figure turned out to be a ravishing woman?! That's so original! *sigh* Surely it couldn't hurt to come up with a less clichéd character.
The shining reflection of the moonlighted bounced off her silvery blonde hair and silhouetted her features so that she looked like she had been carved out pure marble by the angels themselves.
In this sentence, the only new piece of information is that she's a platinum blond. You've used far too many words to convey this one small detail. Most of this is just meaningless cliché (especially the carved from marble by angels) that does little more than suggesting that there is a man (or lesbian) who is physically attracted to her watching and describing what he sees to us. If the scene is not being narrated by a character, then descriptions need to be neutral with no opinion based adjective, e.g. small instead of cute.
The adjectives 'shining' and 'refection' are redundant due to the words 'moonlight' and 'bounced' already encompassing these terms.
She walked further to the tree and placed her soft, delicate hand on its hard, cracked trunk. The pale hand then caressed the dark wood of the oak tree as the light blue, sinister yet beautiful eyes, watched in deep concentration. The tight, pink lips of the unmasked face then curled, slowly, into a smile.
Did you randomly decide to throw in some dryad erotica? This reminds me of the time I read a page in a 19[sup]th[/sup] century book devoted to how the main character enjoys caressing his pets, except he had the excuse that these words had different connotations in those days and I actually knew what he meant was happening, unlike in your little segment. Your narrator has been downgraded from 'man/lesbian with physical attractions' to 'teen who wishes it was his trunk she was currently touching' and listening to the thoughts of a teenager is rarely pleasant.
The woman then throughthrew her head back and let out the cackle of a tormented soul and then, there was silence once more and the silhouette started to mutter words of a language so ancient that it would fall short on the Creator?s tongue.
Again! Sentence should be split up into smaller ones and it's filled with nothing but completely vapid expressions! What caused her to throw her head back? Why was she cackling? Why would she sound like a tormented soul? Why would she be muttering something clearly important when she believes herself to be alone? How does a language become so ancient that it would fall short on the Creator?s tongue? What the hell does that even mean?
The head was then thrown back again as the woman made another loud, demonic cackle as she watched the once calm, clear and peaceful sky be broken, shattered and watched as a stream of blood red light soared from her fore finger and her long nail and sliced through the peaceful sky and a swarm of dark, cloaked, intimidating, hooded figures flew madly and excitedly through the trees as the howling wind was drowned out by the sound of their joyful cackles and screams.
Cut. This. Shit. Down! Seriously! There is no need for all this to be in one sentence! Most of the adjectives and adverbs are either redundant or conflicting as well and would lighten this sentence a lot when removed.
Again, why are they all cackling?! Has their been a sudden release of nitrous oxide into the atmosphere? Are all witches descended from Hyenas? Are they all setting out to play a huge prank on someone? Please tell me, I'm truly curious as to the reason behind this.
Blood red light? Like, seriously? Is that really the only colour you could think of? Here [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_colors]'s a handy list of colours if you're genuinely stuck.
I'd suggest you replace 'through' with 'amongst' or 'between' unless they are flying in the astral plane.
?COME TO ME MY BROTHERS AND SISTERS OF OLD, GATHER ROUND, FOR THERE IS WORK TO BE DONE!? shouted the mysterious woman in a voice that sounded like a call from the heavens yet also like it belonged to a person who could kill with a twitch of their finger and not a seconds thought.
Gaahhhhhhh! I've had it with these mother-fucking run-on sentences in this mother-fucking story! The problem this time is the description of her voice, far too long. You should replace it with something like: "her voice was like ice-cream, sweet, chilling and gave me headaches whenever she graced me with large amounts of it." (Okay all that is necessary was the sweet and chilling adjectives, I was just very proud with this simile and wanted to share it.)
Remember, the rule "Caps Lock is cruse-control for cool" only works on the internets. If you are writing a story and not a forum post, a single exclamation point is all you need. Unless you're quoting a sign, a forum post or a man with a megaphone.
Don't give up hope! Just because your writing is crap now doesn't mean that your writing will always be crap. Learn from your mistakes and you will be able to do great things.
[HEADING=3]Not so brutal yet still honest answer:[/HEADING]
This needs
a lot of work before you attempt to add any more to the story.
alphaxi said:
Also, you seem to have plural/singular form issues. They/them/their only refers to a group of people or things, never a single person.
As I've posted above, there exists something called singular they [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they] which is the most widely used gender-neutral third-person singular when referencing a person. Other than that, my only complaint about your critique is that you weren't harsh enough.
