The Wanderer's Library
Collections
Browse…
Community
Join & Create!
My first piece of work for the library yet, it uses a first-person perspective and the subject actually comes from a real-life theology called "Apophatic Theology"
Sandbox: Sandbox
What I'm looking for is the understandability of the subject, since it's hard-to-understand but easy-to-explain in nature, (which is why it's relatively short) I want to make sure every reader can come in completely blind and still understand it.
Readability- while this is definitely readable, I think it switches between fornsts quite a bit. I think it would be greatly improved by focusing and honing your writers voice, focusing on your comedic tone and religious aspects of the piece.
Overall there are positives to this piece- the comedy manages to shine through, and clarify your position throughout the piece a bit more.
I watch the yonder hills
See foodwrenches toil in dust
Let their cacophonous calls
Rend our bodies to rust
thanks for the crit! i will look into 'em, but especially thanks for the praise for my comedy, my friends say I'm pretty good at it xd
Aye, I've myself studied Palamas. Interesting stuff, intresting stuff, the via negativa. Anyhow. Now I agree primarily with Gatoni and agree that the writers voice could be honed, I'll give some practical applications. I also am a little confused as to what, exactly, this is. While I'm wholeheartedly interested in informational works on the Library, I'm not sure this is that. If it isn't, then there isn't really a story yet. But, is this an essay? A personal thought? Satire? It's a little muddled what your aim is. My guess is as good as anyone's, I suppose, but some indication of what the point is.
My God, the one I trust the most about being the creator of the earth, heaven, you, and me.
What is this opening line trying to accomplish? Not saying anything negative about it, but just literally just what is it trying to say? It seems out of place, thrown out and never explained.
Don't get me wrong, I am not religious. But I am not an atheist either, none of the religions I had taken a peek into has gotten my interest.
For example, here. For one, the punctuation and word choice here could be refined. Something more like (though not this, you want it to be yours), "don't get me wrong, I am not religious; none of the religions I have examined have appealed to me. Neither am I an atheist." Then I would clarify what you are, agnostic or whathaveyou. Tightening up the grammar can help voice shine, while simultaneously clarifying.
Other religions such as Buddhism on the other hand tell you that you should be good for the sake of being good to enter a paradise-like place
More like a paradise-like state of being. Not really a place. And in most forms of Buddhism it is more like a complete destruction of the self, and more even like a statelessness. It's a wide term, ambiguous dependant on what branch of Buddhism you're talkin' about. Anyway, 'state' would do you better than "place."
I don't believe in such Gods, I honestly don't even believe in an afterlife either but I can neither say there is something nor there is nothing but something we can't really know unless we die and see it by ourselves.
This sentence needs parsing.
What do I believe in? Something I shouldn't be able to believe in. Like a "believe because of it's absurdity" type of thing, you know?
This is a little confusing. Clarify. Also, is the frame of this article a conversation? Like, a monologue? An essay? Try to decide on one, and hone in on that.
Similarily,
Ah— sorry, I tend to get excited when sharing my mind with others, especially when it's against the norm, haha!
Is a little jarring. Are you talking to the reader? Some other fictional person in the room?
In some religious scriptures, such as the Holy Qur'an,
Later, you use footnotes to quote which passages of the Qur'an say what about Allah, but earlier you said the same things as you're saying here towards the Abrahamic God, who is the same. Some restructuring, perhaps? A single paragraph devoted to the Abrahamic God?
I don't know if there are any other humans with my views of God, I am just a human with crazed theories but I have a deep, deep sharp feeling that I'm right…
I really wouldn't end on "well I'm crazy, I dunno" here, it just feels weak. One must say what they want to say, unapologetically, methinks.
—Oli
Fires rage just below the surface of the ice.
very big thanks, i will fix them as soon as possible!
What is this opening line trying to accomplish? Not saying anything negative about it, but just literally just what is it trying to say? It seems out of place, thrown out and never explained.
this was more of a Kickstarter for "My God and your God having similarities when it comes to creating" type of thing, but now that you pointed it out it kind of looks out of place, hmm…
For example, here. For one, the punctuation and word choice here could be refined. Something more like (though not this, you want it to be yours), "don't get me wrong, I am not religious; none of the religions I have examined have appealed to me. Neither am I an atheist." Then I would clarify what you are, agnostic or whathaveyou. Tightening up the grammar can help voice shine, while simultaneously clarifying.
thanks! i will try my best because being abnormally casual and basic in vocabulary is a force of habit of mine, probably because i learned English through the internet lol
More like a paradise-like state of being. Not really a place. And in most forms of Buddhism it is more like a complete destruction of the self, and more even like a statelessness. It's a wide term, ambiguous dependant on what branch of Buddhism you're talkin' about. Anyway, 'state' would do you better than "place."
Big thanks for that, i know very little about Buddhism, and what I could find about it, it always referred to it as a place instead of a state.
This is a little confusing. Clarify. Also, is the frame of this article a conversation? Like, a monologue? An essay? Try to decide on one, and hone in on that.
(this also goes for the quote below) I was trying to talk to the reader here, but in a non-metafictional way, you and the character are in the same place and he's talking to you, but you don't really play a role in the story
Later, you use footnotes to quote which passages of the Qur'an say what about Allah, but earlier you said the same things as you're saying here towards the Abrahamic God, who is the same. Some restructuring, perhaps? A single paragraph devoted to the Abrahamic God?
I did notice this last night, i talked about him a bit too much, thanks for pointing it out though
I really wouldn't end on "well I'm crazy, I dunno" here, it just feels weak. One must say what they want to say, unapologetically, methinks.
i agree!
