Fire. My body's burning, the heat surrounds my room. Only I survive.
Don't worry I keep saying to myself, but what hope was there? I was going to die. Fire.
Dangerous fire. Why try to survive? Why not just let go? Because I need to. No matter the fire.
But will I survive, what will become of me? No-one has these answers when it matters most. Fire. It can destroy anything! Fire. I can't defeat it, it can defeat me. Fire. Why? Why give death? Fire destroys.
Fire is burning. Now it's my turn. To live. I destroy fire.
Hi smart flame, happy new year!
ReplyDeleteVery good attempt here. You have done well to create a story in such a limited word-count. I particularly like the turn-around of the last line.
Your writing seems to be rather fragmented, though. The repetition of 'fire' gave this piece an almost poetic form/rhythm. I think, though, that the fragmented, confused sentences didn't quite work. It makes the piece feel like it lacks focus, and I think the shorter the piece, the more focused it needs to be.
Very good attemp, but could be tighter. As I say, though: I love that last line.
In this piece, your central character is trapped in a fire. There is a lot of dramatic potential here, but also potential for a more reflective response, and that’s what you’ve gone for. What are the thoughts that go through someone’s head when they die? You touch lightly on some interesting ideas: the constant human struggle for survival; the inability to really accept one’s own mortality, even in the face of death; nature being more powerful than humans; what happens when we die. These are universal concerns, but located in a specific, dramatised narrative. It is because of this location that these interesting ideas become alive and of significance to the reader. The end, in particular, is strong.
ReplyDeleteThe repetition of ‘fire’ works well: it suggests panic (people often repeat things over and over in a state of shock), and grounds these high-falutin’ thoughts in a specific, dramatic scenario.
There are times when I’d like to see you describe (‘show’) rather than state (‘tell’): what image suggests that ‘fire can destroy anything’? (For example, you could put… ‘it burns up homes, histories’. That was off the top of my head – you can do much better!) What shows that fire is ‘dangerous’? This reliance on ‘telling’ over ‘showing’, the lack of more descriptive language, is a problem I also highlighted in your last submission. It’s a shame that you’re not responding to the moderator’s comments and experimenting more with language. Do you read the feedback you receive? Do you find it helpful? Or should we mods be doing something different?