Activity

@ariella-newheart, hey there! What a beautiful name. And it’s a pleasure to meet you (truly). Your resume fits perfectly, and I simply love where you mentioned INFJ meaning ‘one who makes extroverted energy for others to use’ (paraphrased). You might say ENTJ means ‘one who utilizes any and all energy around him’… which can mean turning it and shooting it into other people. *laughs at the thought*

Your snippet, your shared inkling of your story bears a fun intrigue. Or should I say, bares a fun intrigue. I see an interesting character building, especially in Jax. The mysterium surrounding him, his dagger, the fact that he’s awake… might you by any chance be a plotter? I’m also interested to see how you set up her exposure, and though I’m a bit confused about whether or not they did actually see her, you used a tactic that fits within a stereotype… if I may be so bold as to apply it.

I was reading an article written by Maddie Morrow about portraying the opposite gender in storytelling (https://storyembers.org/five-methods-that-help-writers-portray-the-opposite-gender/). One thing she mentioned is the stereotypical way that men and women process what they see. Here’s what she said:  _”…For instance, I’ve observed that men notice shapes while women notice color.”_

Now… I’m going to add (and this is something Maddie said, if in slightly different words) that I think one of the most interesting things that can be done is throwing off a stereotype… if it’s done correctly.

BUT! If you look at our texts, they are different. Yours looks at what is put out by the setting (its color), mine looks at what is happening with the setting (its shape). We see the woman (you) writing about the feel of the environment itself, what is there in a more abstracted sense (which correlates with women tending to write more emotionally driven work), but I (the man) write something that looks at the concretion of what’s happening.

This seems to create an effect that might seem contrary to design. I think when the man writes (specifically in this case), he’s writing to actually fill the setting with whatever is going on, where the woman sets it up to be internalized by the character and be seen in the character.

Now, this might be particular to your snippet vs mine, but I bet we’d see it actually working and correlating a large degree with other works.

Thank you for your comments… style is something I enjoy playing with, so it pleases me that you noticed. 🙂

And if you’d like to point out those grammar errors, I’d love to hear them.