Okay. I liked the structure of this story, with its textbook interludes interacting with the casefile, plus the addition of an actual hostage negotiation near the end. I liked the science. Very authentic-sounding, like I'd know. Nothing much wrong with the characterization; consistent with canon.
I didn't much like the style of writing, though it wasn't generally *bad* per se, particularly for such an ambitious and process-filled piece. But the writer's desire to contrast Mulder and Scully's stoic refusal to communicate with their *intense* inner torments led to some pretty overdramatic description. I mean, "...as if his inner ear were mounted on a wobbly platform suspended from some unseen hook high above him." C'mon. Or "Mulder considered how his creativity had lately improved to provide him with more excuses (which she surely saw through) to be near her. How strained once-easy dialogues had become, and how simply once-guarded topics could be broached.... So much easier to say he wanted her to share her pain than attempt to coalesce his myriad irrational emotions into rational communication." What? Then, the sex: "The narrow furrows of flesh with graced the landscape of an inner thigh invited his tiny nipping kisses like fertile soil begs the farmer for seed," etc. I don't begrudge Mulder his tension-release, but don't like the lurid.
I'm not trying to be mean, but to object to something without illustrating is meaningless. I'm a fan of show-don't-tell, also less-is-more. Explaining angst gracefully is really hard to do, which is probably why I prefer dry wit. But I realize that those who like this stuff really like it, so claim prejudice and ignore me.
It was neat when Mulder explained why the PM had to hang up on the queen. There should have been more of that.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
winterfish
no subject
Date: 2009-05-20 06:18 pm (UTC)I didn't much like the style of writing, though it wasn't generally *bad* per se, particularly for such an ambitious and process-filled piece. But the writer's desire to contrast Mulder and Scully's stoic refusal to communicate with their *intense* inner torments led to some pretty overdramatic description. I mean, "...as if his inner ear were mounted on a wobbly platform suspended from some unseen hook high above him." C'mon. Or "Mulder considered how his creativity had lately improved to provide him with more excuses (which she surely saw through) to be near her. How strained once-easy dialogues had become, and how simply once-guarded topics could be broached.... So much easier to say he wanted her to share her pain than attempt to coalesce his myriad irrational emotions into rational communication." What? Then, the sex: "The narrow furrows of flesh with graced the landscape of an inner thigh invited his tiny nipping kisses like fertile soil begs the farmer for seed," etc. I don't begrudge Mulder his tension-release, but don't like the lurid.
I'm not trying to be mean, but to object to something without illustrating is meaningless. I'm a fan of show-don't-tell, also less-is-more. Explaining angst gracefully is really hard to do, which is probably why I prefer dry wit. But I realize that those who like this stuff really like it, so claim prejudice and ignore me.
It was neat when Mulder explained why the PM had to hang up on the queen. There should have been more of that.