SCP by Series
SCP Tales by Series
SCP Library
Discover Content
SCP Community
User Resources
Here are my greenlights: http://www.scpwiki.com/forum/t-13480965/scp-idea-wasted-potential#post-4729449
About 3.4K words, I'm a little worried about the characterisation, but any crit is great and probably needed. http://scp-sandbox-3.wikidot.com/r4-ex
Thanks in advance.
[Placeholder from PM]
If deemed necessary, SCP-XXXX-1 is to be subject to questioning over any suspicious activity of SCP-XXXX-2 monitored during an SCP-XXXX-A event.
This is overly wordy. Simplify it to "SCP-XXXX-1 is to be questioned over any suspicious activity from SCP-XXXX-2 during an SCP-XXXX-A event."
SCP-XXXX-1 is a British Caucasian male who is the epicentre of all SCP-XXXX-A events.
This is an incorrect usage of Caucasian, unless you mean specifically that this man is from the Caucasus region.
These conversations involve SCP-XXXX-1 being taught on a variety of subjects.
Awkward phrasing. Try, "During these conversations, SCP-XXXX-2 instructs SCP-XXXX-1 on a variety of subjects, such as…"
SCP-XXXX-A events will occur between a minimum of 2 hours to a maximum of 3 days.
Awkward phrasing. Try, "SCP-XXXX-A events occur a minimum of once every two hours, and a maximum of once every three days."
Each designated SCP-XXXX-2-A to SCP-XXXX-2-C which manifest in front of the subject during SCP-XXXX-A events.
Awkward phrasing. Try, "They are designated SCP-XXXX-2-A, SCP-XXXX-2-B, and SCP-XXXX-2-C, and manifest in front of SCP-XXXX-1 during SCP-XXXX-A events."
Now's as good a time as any to mention that you have serious designation bloat here such that it makes the article unnecessarily complicated and obtuse and makes the descriptions difficult to follow. Not everything here needs its own individual designation.
Gonna slow down on pointing out awkward phrasings for now, although they continue to show up throughout the draft.
SCP-XXXX-1 was recovered on 13/1/2019 from Exeter, UK after police reports were picked up by agents at 11:25pm of an SCP-XXXX-2 instance manifesting in front of SCP-XXXX-1 while drinking at a bar.
The specific time is unnecessary here. Additionally, if you've given a specific designation to this event wherein SCP-XXXX-2 manifests, then you should use it.
Y'know now that I think about it, I don't think I even know what you're business is called.
Change "you're" to "your".
As I referenced above, there is serious designation bloat here. SCP-XXXX-1 doesn't need a designation, as he's not actually anomalous on his own, and neither do these manifestation events, as they are just extensions of the properties of SCP-XXXX-2 instances.
SCP-XXXX-1 accepts this all far too quickly and is far too pliable to be believable to me. Incorporeal versions of himself show up and he's taking lessons from them almost immediately. He doesn't have to completely freak out, but the way he reacts right now is written such that it feels like it's skipping the "wtf" bit of his character arc in an effort to speed the plot along. It's contrived and it hurts his character arc as a whole, which weakens the article quite a bit given it's written around that arc.
The general build-up here isn't bad, but it didn't really evoke any emotion in me. We join SCP-XXXX-1 at the tail end of the events and actions that spark the whole narrative, and by virtue of that, we have very little reason to actually be invested in him as a character and in his struggle in particular. The point of the narrative is he's a person who needs to self-improve, but I never cared whether he did because what he needs to improve about himself is so nebulous and ill-defined that it's very difficult to invest in. Additionally, the way he talks about his own issues is so vague and yet matter-of-fact that it feels like it's barely an issue. The incident that gets him caught by the Foundation, wherein he goes to get a drink and is discovered, only actually felt like a mistake and issue on his part posthumously when the other characters said it was outright because the way he talks about it in the diary entry makes it sound so utterly normal. It's a dude going to get a drink, and unless you've really explicitly set up and cemented the fact that that is a problem, readers won't notice.
The payoff on the build-up here is the biggest issue. The ending just does not work. SCP-XXXX-1 arguing with the SCP-XXXX-2 instances is, broadly speaking, good stuff, but it's hampered by not being well built-up to. One day he's a little tired with the lessons, the next he's completely done with them, and then he's done with the -2 instances entirely. It's all far too fast and jumpy and doesn't feel natural. Additionally, the reasons for his response aren't well communicated. It's all told to the reader; vaguely through the diary entries, and then more directly in conversation with the -2 instances, but it's all telling and very little showing. Why are these lessons so bad? Why are these books so bad? Why are these exercises so bad? You need to show the reader this, rather than telling them rather vaguely. That's what separates really quality writing from the standard stuff.
The final issue I'd like to raise is the ending.
Addendum: After the conclusion of the events recorded in Surveillance Log #3, the maximum time between occurrences of SCP-XXXX-A events has increased to 8 days.
Perhaps this is just me, but I don't know what this is meant to indicate, metaphorically or literally. Does it mean the -2 instances are just visiting him less often because they're annoyed with him? Or are they not giving him lessons anymore? Or…? It's unclear, and it causes the ending to lose any impact it might have had. On top of that, this doesn't work as a strong payoff. If the idea here is that the -2 instances aren't actually helping him, then the payoff should reflect that more clearly, because right now all that's happening is it's telling us they've fallen out. It's not impactful, and it's far too flat. It's a too-neat ending that doesn't feel like it actually says anything, so it doesn't feel satisfying.
This isn't a terrible draft, and there's a solid framework here, but the current execution and presentation of the story don't work for me. It's not focused enough on the important elements of it's own story, and by virtue of that, it's unsatisfying. It's not unworkable, and with some revisions, I could see myself more on board with this article. Good luck!
Hi OCuin,
I've fixed the line by line issues. I've made some edits to the ending and the argument leading up to it. Hopefully this improves the jumpiness of it. Designation bloat has also been fixed. If there are any other issues that are still persisting it'd be good to know.
Hope the changes helped.
[Placeholder from PM]
SCP-XXXX instances manifestations occur a minimum of once every two hours, and a maximum of once every three days.
Typo on "instances manifestations". I'd just cut "instances" wholesale, it's unnecessary.
Conversation with SCP-XXXX instances is limited due to them preferring to talk with Hennessy
Awkward phrasing. Try "Conversation with SCP-XXXX instances is limited as they prefer to talk only with Hennessy."
They've even told me what they're plan is for me.
"They're" should be "their"
You refer to Hennessy by object pronouns throughout this. I'm mentioning it here as I'm not sure if that's an error or not, as it's possible that this character goes by it/it's, however, it reads as though this might have been an error to me.
Many of the structural issues from the previous version remain here. Notably, the ending is still fairly weak. Although it's clearer what it literally means now, it's still poor payoff because it's not well established and setup.
This is something I touched on last time, but Hennessy's "problems" are far too vaguely defined. As an article built on the basis of "this man needs to improve himself, but the efforts of others to do so end up being harmful", it is essential that the reader clearly understands what those stakes are and what is being improved upon, but that's really not clearly set up enough.
Additionally to this, it's not clear what you and what the article thinks about these problems; the subtext on the lessons and the SCP-XXXX-X instances is clear, they're bad, but the problems themselves that are being worked on have no clear moral alignment within the article's subtext. Leaving it ambiguous or grey would be fine if not for the fact that the audience needs that judgement to be able to fully engage with the article's commentary on the -X instances. The problems are referenced vaguely, particularly drinking, but because the lessons don't seem to clearly work to counter that, instead focusing on much more nebulous attributes, I'm left with a very lacking understanding of what's actually wrong here. It's the equivalent of a movie-goer not understanding why the protagonist and antagonist are fighting, it harms the entire narrative arc because it's very difficult to engage with and attach to it.
The pliability of Hennessy that I pointed out last time didn't appear as much of an issue this time, so props for fixing that, but I still think the arc here is weakened by poor characterisation and weak setup and payoff. I think you need to put some thought into how Hennessy as a character is established and how the reader is made to care about him and his conflict - it's the root problem that's weakening the whole article, in my opinion. We're joining him right after all the context to this story, and the attempts to infer said context that has to be done makes the article feel poorly constructed and major elements feel ill-defined. Like I said before, there is a solid base here that could absolutely be made strong, but right now the character work and general execution leaves far too much in the air for it to work for me.
Thanks OCuin, I've made some edits to the draft with the crit you gave me. Hopefully these changes have helped.
Hey R4_EX,
I read over your draft, and I have a few comments.
First of all, I think the idea totally deserves the green light it got. How horrific would it be if more successful versions of you came to lecture you? Awful. Just awful. But I think you need to play into that more. Show the anguish of your SCP. You didn't really convey much emotion beyond annoyance.
Part of that is because you do have some technical grammar stuff you need to work on. Primarily: comma splices. I won't explain them here and now, because we all have that amazing tool known as google— but go through your writing and check for them. The problem with comma splices is that they really weaken the impact of a sentence.
In addition to this, I found the journal post you included to be juvenile and unnecessary. Why is a grown man writing in a journal like a fourth grade girl, first of all? If you can find some way to explain that, I'm good with the journal remaining. Otherwise, there were a number of grammatical issues in the journal itself (once again, mainly comma splices), and it didn't convey much emotion.
I hope that you keep editing this! The idea is fascinating, and I truly want to see where it goes!
Thank you Barheru,
I'll have a look through for comma splicing and make sure to fix them. I think that trying to convey more emotion in this piece is definitely important. I'll try and fix this too. As for the journal, adults can write journals too, but if it did come across as juvenile then I will need to fix this. The idea behind the journal was his therapist told him that he should keep one, but I guess I needed to make that more obvious.
Thanks again for the crit; I'll make sure to keep editing!
Placeholder! Got summoned via PM to take a look-see. Will crit in a bit.
Alright, here’s my take.
At the moment, I’m still seeing a lot of issues that OCuin pointed out. Most notable is the designation bloat; you have SCP-XXXX-1, SCP-XXXX-A, and SCP-XXXX-2-A through -C without an actual designated SCP-XXXX! I’m sure there are ways to either condense or remove some of these.
In addition, I agree that the ending is currently rather anti-climactic. Your protagonist has barely started resisting, and a small quantitative change like the one you’ve mentioned doesn’t tell us much. What is the reader meant to feel at the end of this?
I’m also not seeing a real purpose for all of the journal entries you have in this at the moment. A lot of the exposition that they provide can be inferred from the logs following them. What would you say they contribute to the narrative?
All in all, I do think you have the foundation of a good article here. You just need to work on what’s built on top of it.
Hi Sonderance,
Sorry that the changes took a bit, I managed to fix the designation bloat that OCuin mentioned and make a change to the final addendum. I'd like to ask then whether or not you think I should remove the journal entries if they don't add anything to the narrative. I thought that they provided a bit of context for the character. But if you think otherwise I'll need to take this into consideration.
Thank you for your crit.
The designation bloat has been addressed. There's a chance that the current version might not wholly comply with clinical tone, but that's an arena I'm less familiar with.
As for the final addendum, I do think it has improved; however, it still feels moderately anti-climactic. What message are you trying to leave the readers with here?
What areas of the draft do you think need to be improved with clinical tone? I'll have to try and fix those areas.
As for the final addendum, I'm trying to give the message that Hennessy found the ways the XXXX-X instances were helping him were too harmful and decides to continue the lessons in his own way. He still wants to improve so that's why he's continuing his requests for equipment. Do you think there would be a better way to show this?
Thank you for your crit on this, it's definitely helpful.
This isn't my area of expertise; however, here's one example:
SCP-XXXX-3 claims to be a professor at the University of Cambridge, but questioning on which subject SCP-XXXX-3 teaches has been inconsistent and seems to consist of a variety of unrelated subjects.
The way this is written seems to imply that the questioning itself was inconsistent, not the answers given by -3. This is, of course, only one example.
As for the ending, hmm. I think it might be difficult to convey that in a potent way within the confines of clinical tone. What specific aspects of that message are you hoping will resonate with your reader? That could inform how you structure your ending.
Ok, I get what you're talking about with the clinical tone. I'll have a quick look through the draft and fix any lines like that.
What specific aspects of that message are you hoping will resonate with your reader?
I think I want the idea that he hasn't given up on himself yet and still wants to improve. I think you have a point that this might be difficult to show with clinical tone. Maybe I could show this a little better with maybe a small accompanying tale? Just a tale showing a slice of his life dealing with the instances and containment to work as an epilogue. This is just an idea obviously. What do you think would be a good way to convey the message better?
Thanks for your critique by the way. It's been really helpful so far.
I tend to caution against tying articles to tales, especially when starting out; it can make the article seem like it can't stand on its own, especially for readers who don't feel like reading multiple pieces to understand the full picture.
As for how you could convey the message, you've conveyed quite a bit of emotion in both journal and interview form. Is there a succinct way you could display your protagonist's desire to self-improve on his own terms in a similar manner?
I can understand why you'd caution about a tied tale. It probably wouldn't be the best for me to do it. Could a final interview with a member of staff and Hennessy be a good way to show that idea? Maybe an instance could appear during the interview? That might be a good way to show the message.
That could certainly be a method of communicating that growth in the protagonist, yes. Though I suppose that hinges on what you actually include in that interview.
Hmmm, I suppose the framing of the interview could be similar to a weekly/monthly check-up. With questions being asked by the interviewer and Hennessy answering. An instance appearing could also communicate better Hennessy's current feelings about them and how they currently view him. Hennessy could try and ignore them to carry on the interview while the instance attempts to get a rise from him. Would that be something that could work?
I think so, yes! It's perfectly plausible that such a psychologically focused sapient anomaly would have regular 'check-ups', and a change in how he deals with the apparitions would be a good way to display positive growth.
Oh, I like that a lot! I think it conveys your hopeful ending really well. I'd recommend running it by some other critters (considering it's a large change to your original document), but it does a solid job at taking whatever sympathy your reader has developed in your protagonist and rewarding them for it.
Hello,
I don't have a lot of comments about the grammar, etc, as this is pretty competently written. And given I am going to suggest other edits, it doesn't seem like a good idea to roil over SP&G when it might get edited over, so, allow me to proceed.
I have 3 central criticisms of this piece. One if procedural, two are content.
Problem the First: Ben
Ben Hennessy is clearly anomalous, in addition to the 3 versions of him which appear to "Help" him grow and learn. Referring to these apparitions as SCP's but not the subject is…just flatly wrong to me. I think you've chosen to do this in an attempt to humanize the story a bit more, and I get that, but the lack of regard for Ben as an "object" seems very non-traditional or otherwise out of place to me. It's not…article breaking, but it's a formatting problem that is present from the very beginning and I have obviously latched onto it.
You may have to consider addressing Ben as SCP-XXXX-Prime or by some other designation. Calling him Hennessy in your logs is probably okay but you'd have to see how it looks.
Problem the Second: Pacing
There is plenty of room on the wiki for longer character pieces like this, especially one that explores getting out of your own way and finding the resources to succeed within yourself. To that end, I have no problem with this article's length.
Having said that, several letters and then 4 somewhat lengthy log entries that follow it make for a lot of "baseline" followed by a slow walk up a gentle incline. If I were in your shoes, I would decide between the value of showing Hennessy's baseline versus showing the level of interference later on, and then trim whichever I valued less.
If it were me writing this, I would consider trimming down both. You wrote logs that each distinctly feature one of the clones. You could probably shorten *all* of these and/or achieve the same effect by involving multiple ones in the same scenes. Something to consider.
If you feel truly nothing can be trimmed to deliver the emotional payload you're looking for, that's your call as the author.
Problem the Third: Stakes
The stakes in this article are extremely low and remain as such for the entirety of the piece. There is a simple exchange for any reader going on: You spend attention to read, and you need intrigue then payoff to keep going. "What is going on here?" or "What will happen next?" are very important questions and your piece really doesn't pose either of those.
From the onset, the problem is very clearly understood and we simply passively watch the main character resolve it. Then, we swoop in at the end with a previously unmentioned doctor and try to be the good guys and save the day.
Nothing through out this piece feels at risk. Ben gets frustrated and internalizes things. The Alter-Bens just disappear. Everyone stays nice and neat and tidy and in their place, and then Ben ends the article.
I see a resolution but I, as a reader, do not feel one.
Hi,
Thank you for your draft crit. I've made some changes to the designation of Ben. I've also cut the article down quite a bit.
I had a bit of a think about what I could do to solve the problem of stakes and I think the changes I've made might make it a little more interesting but I'm not 100% sure. I'd definitely like to know your thoughts on it.
Many thanks again.
Placeholder! Got summoned via PM to take a second look. Will crit in a bit.
Frankly, I’m not sure if the mind-control aspect you’ve added works or not. In terms of adding stakes, it seems like a danger that’s introduced and then immediately shaken off in the next log with minimal noted consequences. In terms of the narrative, it alters the dynamic to be more of a physical hostage situation than the initial psychological one. It’s certainly different, but the way it’s built from your original concept makes it difficult for me to gauge its efficacy. I’d recommend reaching out to someone about that.
I also do think that the ending has similar problems now as when I first took a look at this piece. A request for a tutor may be a big step for Ben, but I’m not sure how well the “confirmation pending” conclusion caps off your narrative.
I wasn't awfully sure about the mind control idea either. It was very out of left field so I've decided to change it back to an earlier revision.
This brings me back to my earlier problem of stakes that I'm a little unsure how to resolve. Do you have any ideas what I could do about this? The advice was a little bit vague, so any thoughts you might have would be helpful.
Thank you for all your help on this, I hope that something good comes from all this time.
Well, we already know what the best-case scenario is here: Ben improves on his own and moves beyond his alternate selves. With that in mind, what would you say is the worst-case scenario for him here? Thinking about that might help us identify some stakes that could be heightened.
Hmmmm, the ways that the alter-Bens try to improve Ben ultimately are harmful to Ben's mental and at some points physical health. The other him do know this and therefore the worst-case scenario could involve Ben being completely disheartened by this and thinking that he can't improve at all and that these alternate versions of him are simply better than him/he doesn't feel like he can get to the points that all of them reached in their lives. Either way he gives up on trying to improve himself and falls back into a state of despair and spirals downwards thinking about his place in the world when so many other, better, versions of him exist.
Something like that could be the worst-case scenario, but I'm not quite sure how I would convey that idea in the story. Would he show doubt about his own abilities and keep comparing himself to them? Which they encourage more and more until he realises they aren't good for him? I don't know how I would go about that. But if any of that sounded like a good idea I could give it a shot.
I do think that focusing on Ben's self-esteem at points in the story would help establish the stakes. After all, there's a massive psychological difference between "I'm bad at this" and "I'm bad at this for now".
It probably helps that your ending has consistently been the exact opposite of this worst-case scenario. A directed plan to improve is a solid antithesis to a spiral of despair.
Ok, I've given adding some more uncertainty from Ben's side a shot. I'm not sure if it's enough right now but I think it's a good start. I hope it manages to create a bit more reward for him succeeding.
It definitely feels more like a win for Ben, in my view. I'm not so sure where the journals fit on that emotional arc, but the logs feel more consistent when it comes to fitting to the stakes and resolution of tension.
I guess for me the journals give the idea of what Ben was like at the beginning of his emotional arc and also shows his feeling towards the alter-hims and how it changes. But if it doesn't feel like that I may have to reconsider their inclusion.
It does describe how Ben is feeling at the point, but I'm not so sure that such a description merits three pages of journal entries. What does starting the emotional arc at that point accomplish that isn't done by starting with the logs after it?
