Blessed Harvest / Discussion

This is the discussion related to the wiki page Blessed Harvest.

Author Post

Nequin Tis 14 Aug 2018 15:32

The Foundation can be a bit too capture-happy.

Thanks to Zyn, Cyantreuse, and dankaar for draft reading and feedback.

Last edited on 17 Aug 2018 13:15 by Nequin Tis Show more

SoullessSingularity 14 Aug 2018 15:56

I like where this is going and I feel it captures the feeling of homecoming and family well. However there are architectural flaws too deep in the tale to ignore. One of the significant flaws is a lack of place or setting in the world; characters seem to exist in space with only a vague or handwaved backdrop. This was mitigated in the first scene as the character interacts with their environment. However, the second scene had pretty much no sense of placement at all, and all the characters were basically the same character (voice, behavior, etc.). Lastly, there’s a lack of fundamental pacing, such that the “action” occurs with little rampup, and the payoff is just as vague. If we look at a short story structure, I don’t know what the ending concludes and what the conflict was. I don’t even have a sense of stakes.

I would recommend looking in the future at the broad way events are unfolded during the progression of the narrative. It should quickly make apparently lopsidedness.

---

Living the dream, or dreaming the life?

Nequin Tis 14 Aug 2018 19:58

Thanks for the critique. The sudden action was quite intentional as Foundation agents suddenly barge in, but I can see how the pacing is all over the place.

The ending concludes that one civilian was captured, one killed, and three more seek revenge. The youngest child might join the fray, too. But most importantly, the Foundation has permanently shattered a happy, content family for the sake of Secure, Contain, Protect.

I will take your critique into consideration in the future.

Last edited on 14 Aug 2018 21:59 by Nequin Tis Show more

(account deleted) 14 Aug 2018 19:29

Upvoting as I said I would in the draft thread, but I still want to express that I'm not fond of this Foundation's behavior. I ought to have elaborated on why: I could see them assigning someone to creep on this guy, or maybe talking to him and explaining that he needs to keep his shit secret, or maybe even containing him on-site on his land. I know you wanted the Foundation to seem egregiously gross here, but a lot of people don't want to read the Foundation as egregious gross, ya feel?

Also, the literary crit Soulless provided above is solid; I wish I'd paid more attention to elements other than grammar and premise in the draft forums, because those are legitimate issues.

Nequin Tis 14 Aug 2018 19:53

What, like taking sides for sports teams? I guess people are way too stubborn about that stuff, yeah. That's too bad. There's always many sides to every story.

(account deleted) 15 Aug 2018 16:03

What, like taking sides for sports teams?

I more mean that while site members are accustomed to different portrayals of Foundationverse content and concepts because There Is No Canon, it's still possible for someone to think an interpretation is so far from the usual that they can't get into it or see it as realistic. (I'm not saying the viewpoint is objective by any stretch, but I think it's worth noting, because I doubt I'm alone on this one.) The canonical element in question here is the Foundation's operating ethics, and what I was saying was that they're worse than I could feasibly see because there are several other alternatives. The Foundation doesn't appear to have a reason to be this shitty here.

Nequin Tis 16 Aug 2018 00:18

I definitely disagree with baseline benevolence. For a worldwide organization to consistently exercise goodwill without it being their first and foremost MO? That's too naive. Some employees might buy into the whole Protect deal, some would be interested in Secure or Contain. But in any organization, each employee has some leniency in carrying out their duties. And kindness is definitely not mandatory.

Still, I most certainly could have given more explicit reasons as to why the Agents acted the way they did. I kind of skimmed over those parts as well.

The Agents confiscated the teddy bear, and presented it to the family as "confirmed evidence". This caused a reaction from the little sister, who slapped the agent in return. Unfortunately, the four siblings, familiar with the teddy bear and its background, were backing the 'feeling' of reproach towards the Agent. As solidly established later, they amplify when in sync. So the slap became a neck twister, and a misunderstood escalation begins.

I didn't think this would really change the whole "reason for Foundation being shitty" thing, cause they still use lethal force regardless. Plus, I wanted the scene to be abrupt. Maybe I should have kept elaborating, dunno. I'm sticking by the first point. If that makes people uncomfortable… maybe I'll make a series about less-than-ethical Foundation employees. That sounds nice.

Last edited on 16 Aug 2018 00:44 by Nequin Tis Show more

Zyn 14 Aug 2018 21:08

I remember reviewing this in the forums, and I'm happy to see it on the site! As I mentioned, it reminds me of Lawrence Yep's work, especially his retold folk tales with atypical plotlines like in The Rainbow People. Plenty of fairytales have happy endings or morals, but a lot of Yep's retellings are just about human people who make human mistakes/do bad human things when they encounter the supernatural. Sometimes the protagonists end the story with an indisputable loss and the reader is just left with the memory of their struggle and what they had before.

I do agree that this seems kind of in pieces, and feels a little more like a prologue than a full story. However, I have to say that I kind of like that too, if just for the mood that it gives the piece.