>>25195279
Anna ran anon, Anna ran

I remember when bait used to be good.

>>25195288
Aren't they both correct? Past progressive usage seems more convenient for the context here, that the action is ongoing as the scene unfolds.

>>25195302
Idk what you mean, this is entirely serious.

I want you to know that every time you embellish a sentence with unnecessary adjectives, your readers eyes roll all way the back into their skull.

>>25195304
Do as you please I guess, I'm not the one you're sending the manuscript to

>>25195304
The "was" is the real problem, fights tense. "Was" always want to be past tense and even in the present tense tends to be just very recent present tense.
>what was the question?
Technically present but refers to the past when the question was asked and that past could be anywhere from 30 seconds ago to 30 years ago. It makes things feel off when you use it to refer to the the literal present.
>Anna runs her palm along the basket...
Cedar should either be in the first sentence, it's own sentence, or the third sentence should be reworked; "Cedar wood, of the sort" like this implies it is a property of cedar wood, not cradles. I think it should be in the first sentence.
>Anna runs her palm down the cedar wood of the cradle's basket,...
Also if you want to do this present tense stuff you need to maintain the movement, second sentence pauses it, have her hand running along the cradle cause the dangling toys to move so she can imagine the baby's wandering gaze in the present tense.

Present tense is a bitch to get right but quite good when we'll done. Gass' essay, A Failing Grade for the Present Tense is a good read on the subject.

I didn't read any more, maybe when i get home I will mark it up on my tablet for you.

Gonna be honest anon. I don't want to read a story about some dumb bitch single mother.

Haven’t you posted your stuff before? I think your initials are TEW

>>25195507
its not just that it gets more interesting, its a stillbirth case.

>>25195545
Nope.

>>25195279
>she could have been happy at the touch of the exuberant texture of the wood had the wind not come weeping through the levigating window cracks and into the room harassing the merry air and turning her ill at ease perhaps in precedence of the weeping to come
I've never heard of an exuberant texture, I didn't know wind wept, I don't know what a levigating crack is supposed to even mean, I don't know why the air is drunk, and you're using precedence to mean something more like antecedence though frankly neither would work well without complete revision.

This is such nonsense I'm not interested in continuing.

>>25195279
Boring and overwritten. Tonally flat because it's all the same rhythmic, loping sentimentality. Almost exclusively a collection of laboured and circuitous descriptions that do not serve whatever story you're trying to tell. If you want an exercise, figure out what's essential to the story and re-write it trying to halve the word count.

>>25195580
>it's not my fault I gave you the most boring part of my boring story
You have to earn your audience's attention.

>>25195279
jingly dangly joys got my can't take much more meter maxed, and "gadabout" tipped into nope shan't be reading.

>>25195598
>>25195279
I'd honestly love to know what you were even thinking with some of these words because they really make no sense at all.

E.g. levigate is an archaic word meaning to grind into a fine powder or paste. So really, what the hell is a levigating crack? Is the crack grinding? Is the absence of material i.e. the crack itself being powdered into some kind of nonexistant granule? Truly baffling.

Were you just trying to say the wood is deteriorating?

>>25195279
It's pretty good but also I think you can definitely tell you are trying to capture an older style of English that maybe isn't the most natural. I think it would definitely benefit from bringing some of the language down a notch and especially being harsh with yourself about using archaic words. I like the first line of the last paragraph though, I think that is a very nice line.

>>25195308
>exuberant texture
On the contrary, it's hilarious.

>>25196281
>I like the first line of the last paragraph though, I think that is a very nice line.
I think overall it's a bad piece (even looking past the actual nonsense), but it could be rewritten much better if OP took this line (which still ought to be rewritten) and worked from there. This line would quickly establish the mood, the setting, the pregnancy, and the mother-to-be's feelings about all of it. Everything else fills in from there.
>As soon as she returned, Anna knew she would raise him in the plains---just as she had been---believing that a newborn soul plunged into their infinite expanse would naturally turn out peaceful and content. For now she ran her fingers along the cradle's edge, imagining him there, his smiling gaze, with enough longing to nearly make her dizzy. A chill wind came through the cracks of the window. As the cold reached her skin, Anna felt only fonder of the small warm life in her belly, felt that their abandonment would bind the two of them even closer---would be a bond to overcome all their past woes.
etc. (doesn't really get the "ill at ease" feeling, but I think this is at least illustrative of what I mean)

>>25195279
it reads like chatgpt with the em dashes removed especially those loins throbbing with crimson excitement

>>25195279
It needs to be revised but it's a sort of an okay start. The structure of the paragraphs is the best part, especially the first paragraph, and if that got re-tooled a bit more, it would be perfect.
The main issue I have with it is that's it's tonally flat. There's not much rhythm to the sentences, and that will cause people to dose off.

>>25195279
It's clear that you're an amateur. You need to write things in active voice, first of all. Second, one of the hallmarks of an amateur writer is overusing adjectives in an insecure attempt to heighten what's happening.
In short, your sentences are bloated, like you're trying to pad it out. Plus, you're aping an older style of english that comes across as "rather" labored and "rather" inauthentic. Here's a tip, use of poetic language should be used to generate actual poetic meaning, poetic language should NOT be used to adorn literally every single noun you bring up regardless of whether it's meaningful or actually has purpose.
That's just the structure, the story itself is gross too. You couldn't even go ONE paragraph without discussing this girls genitals, it's so obvious you're writing with your hand around your cock.
Let me rewrite your whole first paragraph:
>"Anna ran her palm along the basket of a cedar cradle, faint-headed with longing for her boy-to-be. She had known little matrimonial joy--none, in fact--but she felt a sense of nervous optimism carried to her by the change in the wind, a whistle of hope delicately prying its way through the tight slit of her windowsill."
Vastly, vastly improved. Notice how there's even some subtle vaginal language ("tight slit") without needing to literally mention her crotch like a neanderthal. It's what I was saying about the purpose of poetic language: To create POETIC meaning. Not to be used to describe sensory points of fact in the most bloviating, elongated way possible. Poetic language should save you word-count, not ADD word-count. It's like the old saying, a retard makes the simple complicated, a genius makes the complicated simple.