Webnovel Feedback Roasts For the Fearless

HouseDelarouxScribbles

Active member
Joined
Sep 29, 2024
Messages
13
Points
28
The detective genre peaked in 2000s, and nowadays is dead aside from the cable TVs and those obscure sites for mystery webnovels (you know the place),

「KISAME」! What did you just say about the mystery genre?!?! I’ll have you know that Agatha Chrxstxe started out as a webnovel writer, but offline!



Take this! This is an Umineko forgery, a mystery based on the same rules as When The Seagulls Cry, but the game masters are 4chan girls!!


In one chapter, see for yourself if can solve for the central mystery: “Does magick exist? There can only be yes or no!"

As a great senator who would have made Amxrica great again once said, 'duck ethos, duck pathos, duck, ALL OF IT!' Today, this Jxjx shall expose your lack of understanding of the mystery genre by MUDA MUDA MUDA MUDA MUDAing your logos into the ducking ground!!!

As proof this is a proper mystery, I call upon the following great-witches to certify that this mystery follows all rules set forth by the mystery genre!

Come forth, Witch of Miracles, Lady @BernKatstel !!

Come forth, Witch of No-Sleep, Lady @TechnologicalHuman !!!
 

BernKatstel

Miracle feline/Part-time Aphrodite
Joined
Jan 21, 2024
Messages
256
Points
108
「KISAME」! What did you just say about the mystery genre?!?! I’ll have you know that Agatha Chrxstxe started out as a webnovel writer, but offline!



Take this! This is an Umineko forgery, a mystery based on the same rules as When The Seagulls Cry, but the game masters are 4chan girls!!


In one chapter, see for yourself if can solve for the central mystery: “Does magick exist? There can only be yes or no!"

As a great senator who would have made Amxrica great again once said, 'duck ethos, duck pathos, duck, ALL OF IT!' Today, this Jxjx shall expose your lack of understanding of the mystery genre by MUDA MUDA MUDA MUDA MUDAing your logos into the ducking ground!!!

As proof this is a proper mystery, I call upon the following great-witches to certify that this mystery follows all rules set forth by the mystery genre!

Come forth, Witch of Miracles, Lady @BernKatstel !!

Come forth, Witch of No-Sleep, Lady @TechnologicalHuman !!!
I am afraid the site isn’t loading it for me, so this witch holds her tongue as of this moment.
A6B5641A-91FD-453E-B78A-0109030FAC0B.jpeg
 

TaciturnHuman

We/Tch
Joined
Feb 13, 2019
Messages
4,672
Points
183
「KISAME」! What did you just say about the mystery genre?!?! I’ll have you know that Agatha Chrxstxe started out as a webnovel writer, but offline!



Take this! This is an Umineko forgery, a mystery based on the same rules as When The Seagulls Cry, but the game masters are 4chan girls!!


In one chapter, see for yourself if can solve for the central mystery: “Does magick exist? There can only be yes or no!"

As a great senator who would have made Amxrica great again once said, 'duck ethos, duck pathos, duck, ALL OF IT!' Today, this Jxjx shall expose your lack of understanding of the mystery genre by MUDA MUDA MUDA MUDA MUDAing your logos into the ducking ground!!!

As proof this is a proper mystery, I call upon the following great-witches to certify that this mystery follows all rules set forth by the mystery genre!

Come forth, Witch of Miracles, Lady @BernKatstel !!

Come forth, Witch of No-Sleep, Lady @TechnologicalHuman !!!
This great witch thinks it's funny so why the hell not. Approved.
 

anonjohn20

Pen holding member
Joined
Mar 22, 2023
Messages
665
Points
108
「KISAME」! What did you just say about the mystery genre?!?! I’ll have you know that Agatha Chrxstxe started out as a webnovel writer, but offline!



Take this! This is an Umineko forgery, a mystery based on the same rules as When The Seagulls Cry, but the game masters are 4chan girls!!


In one chapter, see for yourself if can solve for the central mystery: “Does magick exist? There can only be yes or no!"

As a great senator who would have made Amxrica great again once said, 'duck ethos, duck pathos, duck, ALL OF IT!' Today, this Jxjx shall expose your lack of understanding of the mystery genre by MUDA MUDA MUDA MUDA MUDAing your logos into the ducking ground!!!

As proof this is a proper mystery, I call upon the following great-witches to certify that this mystery follows all rules set forth by the mystery genre!

Come forth, Witch of Miracles, Lady @BernKatstel !!

Come forth, Witch of No-Sleep, Lady @TechnologicalHuman !!!
Sadly, no smut in this story. lol jk
 

Tempokai

Overworked One
Joined
Nov 16, 2021
Messages
1,026
Points
153
I wanted to like your story—I really did. But it’s like your webnovel looked me dead in the eye, raised a middle finger, and said, “Nah, I don’t want you to like me. I’m just here to marvel at my own reflection.” What you’ve given me is the case study for my anti-guide on storytelling (Dao Of Rhertoric), and I quote myself:

“Creation is not enough. A world, no matter how perfectly crafted, is meaningless if no one wishes to dwell within it. The act of worldmaking is divine, yes—but the act of persuasion is survival.”

And my dear author, you have fumbled the persuasion game so badly, I’m convinced your story jumped off the edge of its own self-importance and landed face-first into irrelevance, unplanned, unknowing, and unthinkingly.

First, your synopsis. Technically, sure, it’s functional. You have the proper voice and at least know how to write, unlike some people in this thread. But functional doesn’t mean good. It reads like you scribbled it down five minutes before a deadline while half-playing Genshin Impact with one hand. The informal tone doesn't fit with the actual content of your story, creating this weird cognitive dissonance where I’m supposed to take an epic, dramatic isekai premise inside of the story afterwards seriously but feel like the author’s just shrugging their way through the pitch. And don’t even get me started on the ambiguity, the killer of epic, adventure orientated stories. You’ve written a synopsis that says a whole lot of nothing—just facts and zero pathos. Why? Why did you think being vague and informal would work in a genre that thrives on hooking readers from the first glance? You’re selling escapism, but your synopsis feels like it’s slumped over in a chair muttering, “Eh, it’s fine, just read it or don’t, whatever, I just want to bask in my own worldbuilding.”

Now, onto your prologue and first chapter. Oh boy, this is where you start swinging that big ol’ pathos hammer and proceed to smack yourself in the face with it. You’ve built your entire story on the pillar of emotional manipulation, sacrificing ethos and logos in the process. And sure, you managed to make that one pillar really big, but here’s the problem: when I find the sheer emotional overload exhausting rather than compelling, the entire story crumbles. You've essentially taken out the two load bearing pillars and put that sheer weight on the last one, which made a house crumble from the sides when someone accidentally removes a stone, and that one strong pillar didn't help a house owner to survive the unwitting demolition by own hands.

Why should I care about your MC? He spends the entire prologue and first chapter wallowing in misery and doing absolutely nothing. So called "depression" is not an excuse. Will this character, who stumbles from one overly described setting to another like a dazed NPC, really carry an interesting story? Spoiler alert: no. Your MC’s endless internal monologue and repetitive despair make him feel less like a protagonist and more like an emotional anchor dragging the narrative down. This is the point where I should’ve stopped reading. But, unfortunately for both of us, I didn’t. Rule of three chapters, and so, I soldiered on to Chapter 1.3.

And that’s where it hit me. Your writing reads like a JRPG gacha opening cutscene—except there’s no music, no compelling visuals, and no dazzling animations to carry the weight of the overblown descriptions. You’ve confused writing a webnovel with scripting a cutscene, and the result is something that fails spectacularly at both. Your imagery tries so hard to be awe-inspiring, but it just ends up bloated and tiresome because it's fucking text. You’re expecting me to feel wonder and amazement, but instead, I’m rolling my eyes and asking, “Okay, but when’s the story actually starting? When the MC goes shoot bad guys with new booba? When the horror tag will show it's ugly head?”

This is where I found the heart of the problem: ego. The sheer ego dripping from your writing. You don’t care about your reader; you care about showing off your worldbuilding, your prose, your precious self-inserted fantasies of escapism. And in doing so, you’ve sacrificed the one thing that actually makes storytelling meaningful: the connection between author and reader.

You want everything—pathos, grandeur, indulgent worldbuilding, wish fulfillment—but you’ve delivered nothing meaningful. Your story doesn’t persuade, It panders. It doesn’t hook me. It doesn't want to hook me. It drags me down into the mire of your self-importance though the puppet called Satou. And ultimately, it fails because you’ve forgotten that a story isn’t just written—it’s shared.

So, here’s my final note: stop writing for yourself and start writing for your reader. Otherwise, your world will stay beautiful and barren, and your story will be nothing more than a hollow world of what it could’ve been.
 

Jesse.S.Pierce

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 16, 2021
Messages
17
Points
58
stop writing for yourself and start writing for your reader
The moment I decided to share my story here, I’d already planned to not defend myself, no matter how harsh the feedback was. I shared Project Elyse partly because I wanted to see what happens, since I’ve only shared it once or twice with someone else; but the last sentence gave me a chuckle, so I’d like to make this clear, otherwise it’ll bother me.

The thing is, I wrote Project Elyse primarily for myself, which is something I mention in my AN. I’m guessing you skipped over that. If you want to rebut how this does not make my story any less shit, don’t. I don’t mean to be snarky. I understand how my story looks from an outsider’s eyes who does not share my own sentiment (what enchanted me flew over your head, and all you found were dead words) but I say this more so because this is as far as I’m going to defend myself. Moving on, I’ve actually had a question for you @Tempokai.

What does Aristotle’s appeals mean to you? I’ve seen you use it wantonly, but I’ve never understood it; or to be accurate, I haven't understand how you understand it. You clearly don’t use ethos, pathos, logos, in the full sense of their meaning. To me, they seem like a catchall term for verisimilitude / credibility, evocativeness, and—logos? I’m clueless as to what you could mean by logos. In Dao of Rhetoric you’ve shelved it off as logic, but logos only trivially means logic, and logic in the subject of storytelling how? Coherence? Like a gestalt?
 

Tempokai

Overworked One
Joined
Nov 16, 2021
Messages
1,026
Points
153
The thing is, I wrote Project Elyse primarily for myself, which is something I mention in my AN. I’m guessing you skipped over that. If you want to rebut how this does not make my story any less shit, don’t. I don’t mean to be snarky. I understand how my story looks from an outsider’s eyes who does not share my own sentiment (what enchanted me flew over your head, and all you found were dead words) but I say this more so because this is as far as I’m going to defend myself.


That's bad. This is how you stagnate as a storyteller. But you do you, I'm not your therapist to discourage from the potentially bad behaviour. I've rested my case (that webnovel doesn't connect with readers), and you proved it. While it’s fine to write for yourself, sharing that work publicly, to other people, changes the situation. The roast I did on the webnovel was about how the story works (or doesn’t) when shared with readers. If you truly only wrote this for yourself, why share it at all? Sharing inherently invites an audience, and with an audience comes the expectation of persuasion, whether you acknowledge this or not. The moment you decided to share your work publicly, to this thread, it became more than just “for myself.”

No one publishes a story "just to see what happens." There’s always a want, whether it’s feedback, validation, or even curiosity about how others perceive it. This "I’m not here to defend myself" is itself a defensive gesture, masquerading as an indifference to the roast.


(what enchanted me flew over your head, and all you found were dead words)


I'll focus on this statement in particular. What a fine way to discredit my opinion. Truly marvelous. This is you way of suggesting that I just didn’t get it, and that the failure is on me, not your story. As if I didn't sit here for three hours in span of two days dissecting why it failed to persuade for you to respond in that way. If the enchantment you felt didn’t translate to your audience (I guess it kinda did, with population being one, but I digress), that’s not on the audience—it’s a failure of storytelling. I repeat, "Creation is not enough. Persuasion is survival." What enchanted you stayed locked in your head because you didn’t bridge the gap between your personal vision and the reader’s experience (me, and maybe others). If you truly wanted to write only for youself, there would be no need to share it. By choosing to share, you implicitly invited others to interpret and evaluate it, which I did right now. Whatever.



What does Aristotle’s appeals mean to you? I’ve seen you use it wantonly, but I’ve never understood it; or to be accurate, I haven't understand how you understand it.


I've detailed it in my anti-guide. I'm using the 3B rhetoricists, Wayne Booth, Kenneth Burke, and the Lloyd Bitzer with Richard Vatz. If you are lazy (or unwilling) to read it, here's the TLDR:

Ethos is all about Credibility, Authenticity, Consistency of the author. Credibility is all about the inherent trust that writer will deliver upon on the promise. Authenticity is not just about content, it’s about tone of the writer, how he writes, does he give confidence that the story will remain engaging even in the lowest points of the story? Consistency is the unspoken pact with the reader that implicitly tells that the writer will keep the credibility and authenticity to the end.

Pathos is all about emotional manipulation. You, as the storyteller is one. You make emotions on the text, and the reader experiences through their own experiences. No reader is the same, but there's always universality in the emotions you want to make the reader to feel. But too much of it, like in your prologue and chapter 1 makes a reader manipulated to feel those emotions than being moved by themselves. The goal of pathos is to deliver emotion without sounding manipulative. It feeds off the Authenticity, keeping the whatever story you want to tell compelling, even if something in that story is unlikeable.

Logos is the tension between the "storytelling responding to reality" and "the storyteller deciding the 'how'". Even if the place is fantastical, it's the job of the storyteller to make that fantastical place feel realistic. It's the bind that connects the ethos and pathos into a narrative. It's mired in constraints, and the storyteller's job is to make as much boundary pushing without making it feel contrived, artificial, and cliche to the reader.

Rhetoric, aka the persuasion is the storytelling. There's good storytelling, and there's bad one. Even bad ones can have audience (like population: one), but that doesn't mean that you're a great genius by making a world that only you could enjoy. When you failed to persuade me, you failed to connect with me. Even your response is trying to burn that bridge down. This isn’t an issue of "what flew over my head"—it’s an issue of what your story failed to deliver.

If you cared how your story is percieved with critical thinking you would've not responded like that. In that sense, my critique deserves more consideration than a philosophical sidestep you've done, and I can simply can relegate you in my mind to "writers who only want pandering" cabinet.
 
Last edited:

Hsinat

Casting a 'Have a good day' spell on you!
Joined
Jan 26, 2025
Messages
130
Points
93
That's bad. This is how you stagnate as a storyteller. But you do you, I'm not your therapist to discourage from the potentially bad behaviour. I've rested my case (that webnovel doesn't connect with readers), and you proved it. While it’s fine to write for yourself, sharing that work publicly, to other people, changes the situation. The roast I did on the webnovel was about how the story works (or doesn’t) when shared with readers. If you truly only wrote this for yourself, why share it at all? Sharing inherently invites an audience, and with an audience comes the expectation of persuasion, whether you acknowledge this or not. The moment you decided to share your work publicly, to this thread, it became more than just “for myself.”

No one publishes a story "just to see what happens." There’s always a want, whether it’s feedback, validation, or even curiosity about how others perceive it. This "I’m not here to defend myself" is itself a defensive gesture, masquerading as an indifference to the roast.





I'll focus on this statement in particular. What a fine way to discredit my opinion. Truly marvelous. This is you way of suggesting that I just didn’t get it, and that the failure is on me, not your story. As if I didn't sit here for three hours in span of two days dissecting why it failed to persuade for you to respond in that way. If the enchantment you felt didn’t translate to your audience (I guess it kinda did, with population being one, but I digress), that’s not on the audience—it’s a failure of storytelling. I repeat, "Creation is not enough. Persuasion is survival." What enchanted you stayed locked in your head because you didn’t bridge the gap between your personal vision and the reader’s experience (me, and maybe others). If you truly wanted to write only for youself, there would be no need to share it. By choosing to share, you implicitly invited others to interpret and evaluate it, which I did right now. Whatever.






I've detailed it in my anti-guide. I'm using the 3B rhetoricists, Wayne Booth, Kenneth Burke, and the Lloyd Bitzer with Richard Vatz. If you are lazy (or unwilling) to read it, here's the TLDR:

Ethos is all about Credibility, Authenticity, Consistency of the author. Credibility is all about the inherent trust that writer will deliver upon on the promise. Authenticity is not just about content, it’s about tone of the writer, how he writes, does he give confidence that the story will remain engaging even in the lowest points of the story? Consistency is the unspoken pact with the reader that implicitly tells that the writer will keep the credibility and authenticity to the end.

Pathos is all about emotional manipulation. You, as the storyteller is one. You make emotions on the text, and the reader experiences through their own experiences. No reader is the same, but there's always universality in the emotions you want to make the reader to feel. But too much of it, like in your prologue and chapter 1 makes a reader manipulated to feel those emotions than being moved by themselves. The goal of pathos is to deliver emotion without sounding manipulative. It feeds off the Authenticity, keeping the whatever story you want to tell compelling, even if something in that story is unlikeable.

Logos is the tension between the "storytelling responding to reality" and "the storyteller deciding the 'how'". Even if the place is fantastical, it's the job of the storyteller to make that fantastical place feel realistic. It's the bind that connects the ethos and pathos into a narrative. It's mired in constraints, and the storyteller's job is to make as much boundary pushing without making it feel contrived, artificial, and cliche to the reader.

Rhetoric, aka the persuasion is the storytelling. There's good storytelling, and there's bad one. Even bad ones can have audience (like population: one), but that doesn't mean that you're a great genius by making a world that only you could enjoy. When you failed to persuade me, you failed to connect with me. Even your response is trying to burn that bridge down. This isn’t an issue of "what flew over my head"—it’s an issue of what your story failed to deliver.

If you cared how your story is percieved with critical thinking you would've not responded like that. In that sense, my critique deserves more consideration than a philosophical sidestep you've done, and I can simply can relegate you in my mind to "writers who only want pandering" cabinet.
You cooked better than my mum ever did to me.
 

Jesse.S.Pierce

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 16, 2021
Messages
17
Points
58
That's bad. This is how you stagnate as a storyteller. But you do you, I'm not your therapist to discourage from the potentially bad behaviour. I've rested my case (that webnovel doesn't connect with readers), and you proved it. While it’s fine to write for yourself, sharing that work publicly, to other people, changes the situation. The roast I did on the webnovel was about how the story works (or doesn’t) when shared with readers. If you truly only wrote this for yourself, why share it at all? Sharing inherently invites an audience, and with an audience comes the expectation of persuasion, whether you acknowledge this or not. The moment you decided to share your work publicly, to this thread, it became more than just “for myself.”

No one publishes a story "just to see what happens." There’s always a want, whether it’s feedback, validation, or even curiosity about how others perceive it. This "I’m not here to defend myself" is itself a defensive gesture, masquerading as an indifference to the roast.





I'll focus on this statement in particular. What a fine way to discredit my opinion. Truly marvelous. This is you way of suggesting that I just didn’t get it, and that the failure is on me, not your story. As if I didn't sit here for three hours in span of two days dissecting why it failed to persuade for you to respond in that way. If the enchantment you felt didn’t translate to your audience (I guess it kinda did, with population being one, but I digress), that’s not on the audience—it’s a failure of storytelling. I repeat, "Creation is not enough. Persuasion is survival." What enchanted you stayed locked in your head because you didn’t bridge the gap between your personal vision and the reader’s experience (me, and maybe others). If you truly wanted to write only for youself, there would be no need to share it. By choosing to share, you implicitly invited others to interpret and evaluate it, which I did right now. Whatever.






I've detailed it in my anti-guide. I'm using the 3B rhetoricists, Wayne Booth, Kenneth Burke, and the Lloyd Bitzer with Richard Vatz. If you are lazy (or unwilling) to read it, here's the TLDR:

Ethos is all about Credibility, Authenticity, Consistency of the author. Credibility is all about the inherent trust that writer will deliver upon on the promise. Authenticity is not just about content, it’s about tone of the writer, how he writes, does he give confidence that the story will remain engaging even in the lowest points of the story? Consistency is the unspoken pact with the reader that implicitly tells that the writer will keep the credibility and authenticity to the end.

Pathos is all about emotional manipulation. You, as the storyteller is one. You make emotions on the text, and the reader experiences through their own experiences. No reader is the same, but there's always universality in the emotions you want to make the reader to feel. But too much of it, like in your prologue and chapter 1 makes a reader manipulated to feel those emotions than being moved by themselves. The goal of pathos is to deliver emotion without sounding manipulative. It feeds off the Authenticity, keeping the whatever story you want to tell compelling, even if something in that story is unlikeable.

Logos is the tension between the "storytelling responding to reality" and "the storyteller deciding the 'how'". Even if the place is fantastical, it's the job of the storyteller to make that fantastical place feel realistic. It's the bind that connects the ethos and pathos into a narrative. It's mired in constraints, and the storyteller's job is to make as much boundary pushing without making it feel contrived, artificial, and cliche to the reader.

Rhetoric, aka the persuasion is the storytelling. There's good storytelling, and there's bad one. Even bad ones can have audience (like population: one), but that doesn't mean that you're a great genius by making a world that only you could enjoy. When you failed to persuade me, you failed to connect with me. Even your response is trying to burn that bridge down. This isn’t an issue of "what flew over my head"—it’s an issue of what your story failed to deliver.

If you cared how your story is percieved with critical thinking you would've not responded like that. In that sense, my critique deserves more consideration than a philosophical sidestep you've done, and I can simply can relegate you in my mind to "writers who only want pandering" cabinet.
You misunderstand. I’ve published my story primarily for myself, meaning readers are an afterthought, and the market a non-factor. I’ve shared it mostly to keep myself disciplined, and the chapter publish dates (‘scheduled week/month’) prove that, though I’ve mostly failed on that front. I’d like people to like my story, but it’s not my problem if they don’t.

I haven’t discredited your opinion, if that’s what you think. They’re helpful, but if we had disagreements I’ve chosen to not speak up. I’ve gotten into my fair share of arguments over storytelling and over my own stories, and anything beyond initial Feedback has seldom been fruitful and laborious, unless we do it through voice chat. I suppose ‘not going to defend myself’ is a defensive gesture, but seeing the steep hill I will have to climb for such little gain, I choose to keep quiet.

‘what enchanted me flew over your head, and all you found were dead words’ just means that. While you found the confessions of a whiny kid, I found kinship. Unlike you, I did not care about being convinced. I was already convinced. Does this mean that I haven’t bridged the gap between my personal vision and reader’s experience? In your case, yes.

And thanks for clarifying about your literary theory. I’ve already read through your Dao of Rhetoric & Worldbuilding when I asked. I just didn’t understand it. To clothe your literary theory as a story is clever, I guess, but it has made it twice the ordeal for me to sift through, and not in a good way. I personally have stopped reading writing guides long ago. Most of them induct you into a methodology, and you learn, if inadvertently, how to write a book; rather than how to do it. Students thereby get inducted into a world of institutionalized and professionalized writing now rendered merely technical, which leaves out so much to be desired. We come from two different worlds, but let me share you the philosophy I try to embody:

‘The fact is that however infuriatingly archaic and unfair it may be, enchantment favors the amateur: the person doing it mainly if not entirely for the love of doing it, without much thought of gain thereby. That pursuit, as Simon Leys says, ‘embodies an exquisite inexpertness beyond the reach of the professionals’ virtuosity.’

Its partly why I teach writing myself, but not in the same way as you, of course. I think a work of art has to arise out of necessity, as Rilke says, ‘from the inner necessity of a particular work itself to be done’. The artist is merely the medium through which something comes into being. ‘self-expression’ here not meaning the psychological / social need for ‘self-expression’, or to be ‘an artist’, or ‘success’. That is my only daemon.

Literary theories were once one of my interest, so I hope you don’t mind me sharing?
 
Last edited:

tobascoasako

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 15, 2022
Messages
65
Points
58
Failure Frame was just terrible... with awkward romance and generally terrible convenience. All the characters were very 2d cardboard cutouts... I think FF started off as a webnovel right on shousetsuka ni narou?
 

Tempokai

Overworked One
Joined
Nov 16, 2021
Messages
1,026
Points
153
You misunderstand. I’ve published my story primarily for myself, meaning readers are an afterthought, and the market a non-factor. I’ve shared it mostly to keep myself disciplined, and the chapter publish dates (‘scheduled week/month’) prove that, though I’ve mostly failed on that front. I’d like people to like my story, but it’s not my problem if they don’t.

I haven’t discredited your opinion, if that’s what you think. They’re helpful, but if we had disagreements I’ve chosen to not speak up. I’ve gotten into my fair share of arguments over storytelling and over my own stories, and anything beyond initial Feedback has seldom been fruitful and laborious, unless we do it through voice chat. I suppose ‘not going to defend myself’ is a defensive gesture, but seeing the steep hill I will have to climb for such little gain, I choose to keep quiet.

‘what enchanted me flew over your head, and all you found were dead words’ just means that. While you found the confessions of a whiny kid, I found kinship. Unlike you, I did not care about being convinced. I was already convinced. Does this mean that I haven’t bridged the gap between my personal vision and reader’s experience? In your case, yes.

And thanks for clarifying about your literary theory. I’ve already read through your Dao of Rhetoric & Worldbuilding when I asked. I just didn’t understand it. To clothe your literary theory as a story is clever, I guess, but it has made it twice the ordeal for me to sift through, and not in a good way. I personally have stopped reading writing guides long ago. Most of them induct you into a methodology, and you learn, if inadvertently, how to write a book; rather than how to do it. Students thereby get inducted into a world of institutionalized and professionalized writing now rendered merely technical, which leaves out so much to be desired. We come from two different worlds, but let me share you the philosophy I try to embody:

‘The fact is that however infuriatingly archaic and unfair it may be, enchantment favors the amateur: the person doing it mainly if not entirely for the love of doing it, without much thought of gain thereby. That pursuit, as Simon Leys says, ‘embodies an exquisite inexpertness beyond the reach of the professionals’ virtuosity.’

Its partly why I teach writing myself, but not in the same way as you, of course. I think a work of art has to arise out of necessity, as Rilke says, ‘from the inner necessity of a particular work itself to be done’. The artist is merely the medium through which something comes into being. ‘self-expression’ here not meaning the psychological / social need for ‘self-expression’, or to be ‘an artist’, or ‘success’. That is my only daemon.

Literary theories were once one of my interest, so I hope you don’t mind me sharing?

Ah, sweet ego. Always defensive, always thinking "I'm better than others" even when that notion gets roasted. You've completely derailed this thread, called “Webnovel Feedback Roasts For The Fearless” for a reason. The ego hates feedback (when it's "bad" for their "darling"), hates roasts (when target is ego itself), and hates being fearless (as it undermines "woe is me" master morality). What a fine specimen, drenched in defenses like a particularly slimy blob of excuses and arrogance.

"I’ve published my story primarily for myself, meaning readers are an afterthought..." isn't what it means, it's in reality "I want validation without accountability! I don't want to listen to things that I don't like hearing about unless it praises me for being a amateur genius!" Too bad that ego thought “Webnovel Feedback Roasts For The Fearless” was an ironic title for a feedback thread.

Once it got what it deserved, being called out in a dear darling of a creation called Project Elyse, the ego threw that feedback out of the window, thinking “I don’t want to argue because you’re too much effort, and frankly, I think I’m above it," while hiding the bruised wound that the roast had caused. That's not fearless. That's the definition of pathetic. Pathetic in trying to impose it's own sheer weight on the feedback, rendering it useless in what it was trying to do, help the author to become better.

When the ego closed the gaping hole, it started to justify it's existence to the hapless human it got attached to. "The person on the internet is wrong! He just doesn't understand you as a person! Quick, give him a reminder that I'm All Above Else, surely funny internet man will concede!", while hiding the points under the rug, utterly failing what roast was supposed to mean. A mirror. A honest, brutal mirror on what the webnovel does and doesn't have done right. “Webnovel Feedback Roasts For The Fearless” isn't the "Gentle Cuddle Feedback Validations For The Babies", and ego, completely ignoring the other authors that were laying broken down in that thread, straddling menacingly to the thread's Roastmaster, and slapping Roastmaster's face with the webnovel not meant for public consumption. What did the ego think it will do it in that context? Roastmaster conceding, saying "my bad, here's the validation you want without accountability?" Oh, poor, sweet ego. The victim (villain) of its own making.

Once that failed, the ego searched for a winning move. What the Roastmaster loves the most! Ah, Aristotle! Let's attack Roastmaster's understanding of it! Well, it failed. Quick! Deploy Rilke and his solipsism! Well, it failed too, as the Roastmaster does these roasts for fucking amateurs, hoping that they'll make their language games better.

When it failed, the ego had a final nuclear button it engaged. Saying to the Roastmaster that "your anti-guides suck in being linear and mainstream", completely unaware that it was called "anti-guide" for a reason. A ladder to climb, and to be discarded once reaching a higher understanding. A mirror to be held to understand your own storytelling habits. The ego tried to climb it, finding it "twice as ordeal", dropping off that ladder and refusing to climb it to the end afterwards, telling the unknowing human "his concepts are just pretentious drivel from the mainstream", missing on the irony that it was designed for those who truly wanted to understand how to think like a storyteller in your own terms, not by the book.

What's sad about this ego is the unwillingness to engage with the world earnestly. It doesn't want feedback, yet it craves for it. It doesn't want negativity, and yet it goes the mile to find a random bloke who will give exactly that, saying "rebuild the mess you've made". It says “thanks for the feedback, but I’m not listening," and it's just pitiful to watch. A modern Dostoevskyan Undeground Man, in real life.
 

Tempokai

Overworked One
Joined
Nov 16, 2021
Messages
1,026
Points
153
Hello. I thought I might reserve a slot, as I'm sure you have quite the list going at this point. I would appreciate your sharp insight/feedback on my story. The link is provided below.


https://www.scribblehub.com/series/1381743/the-vampire-overlord-and-his-witch/
I've read four chapters of your webnovel, and I have to ask—do you think deception is a viable marketing strategy? Your synopsis screams "Vampires! Death games! Tragedy! Romance!" and yet, when I actually read the thing, what do I get? Four goddamn chapters of a witch playing housemaid simulator while occasionally sighing while looking through essentially supernatural version of UV light like a tired janitor who’s seen too much. This isn't slow burn—this is no burn. A slow burn at least has a spark, but alas your story is a pile of damp log that hasn’t even been introduced to a proper heat source.

Oh, but the vampires will be there later, right? The death game is totally coming, just wait, just six more chapters—
No. That’s not how this works. That’s not storytelling in fast paced Webnovel Realm works. Readers are not here for your personal worldbuilding indulgence, they came for the goddamn vampire death game you sold them on the synopsis, not a slice-of-life magical housekeeping gig where the most intense conflict is whether or not MC will get enough money to afford rent, as if it will the highest concern when the future vampire gig happens, but whatever.

Worldbuilding is not an excuse for the early chapters' slow pacing. A world only matters if the reader gives a damn about the story unfolding inside it. What you’re doing is trapping the audience in a meticulously crafted dollhouse and refusing to actually start the damn game they came to play. Even in slow burns, like in slice-of-life urban fantasy stories, pacing exists. Yes, even in slow burns, the first few chapters matter.

Do you think it would be engaging if Superman did his actual job as a wage slave for six chapters, instead being, well, a Superman? Would anyone have stuck around if Harry Potter spent four chapters just sitting, trapped inside his mind, unraveling in his teenager's mind under the stairs before Hagrid showed up? Of course not. Alright, I lied, they do, but whatever, that's not the point. Just look at your webnovel. Four chapters deep, and the most "action" I've gotten to see is a witch using her powers to tie a creep’s shoelaces together on a bus. Oh, what a riveting supernatural thriller. I'm trully terrified.

With that, reader stats prove it. 50 views on Chapter 1 and 17 on Chapter 2. That’s bad, even if I include bots, someone who pressed "read" accidentally for "later", and your accidental clicks (you know that happens), the numbers don't lie.

Because of all of that, what I've wrote above, the ethos of your story—the trust that reader knows what you’re doing—is shattered before it even has a chance to establish itself. You know that readers aren’t idiots. They will see through the bait-and-switch immediately, go "ugh, not again," and simply close the webnovel to read something similar to this but better. And because your ethos is in ruins, you now need pathos and logos to work overtime to salvage the experience, too bad those two are the equivalent of minimum-wage grocery store clerks who have no intention of covering for their incompetent manager. Pathos is dead on arrival, because what emotions are even being stirred? "Oh no, another cleaning shift?" Or "oh no, my rent is due." You’ve written a supernatural thriller with the stakes of a mildly inconvenient Tuesday, and that's bad when synopsis promises gothic tragedy.

And logos? Sure, the story is internally consistent, but who cares? A well-organized library of tax documents is also internally consistent, but no one wants to read that either. You’re asking readers to patiently endure your slow burn setup instead of compelling them to keep going, to finally see that vampire who's probably has six-pack described with the same purple prose that first 4 chapters are crawling on. That’s a fatal mistake.

The worst part, the actual story (the vampires, the Blood Hunt, the reason anyone clicked on this) is buried somewhere around Chapter 6. Meaning anyone who starts from the beginning is suffering through five whole chapters of nothingburger before getting to the actual meat of the story. You’ve accidentally made your opening chapters feel as much of a chore to read as Caelyn’s actual cleaning shifts chores.

I can see only two ways to fix this disaster, first: Rebrand the story entirely. Slap a Slice-of-Life tag on this thing, rewrite the synopsis so that it accurately represents what’s inside, aka rebranding the meat for the right audience, and sell it properly even if it turns to the tragic romp of gothic horror. Because the current audience you’re trying to attract wants none of this.

And the second: Cut the first five chapters. Yes, all of them. Brutal? Yes. Necessary? Absolutely. You can sprinkle in any important details later, naturally, because you have the proper character already that's compelling enough to carry the damn story. That's the ugly truth I'm seeing and not hesitant to say it: A world is useless if the reader doesn’t care about it. Creation is not enough, persuasion is survival.
 

anonjohn20

Pen holding member
Joined
Mar 22, 2023
Messages
665
Points
108
I've read four chapters of your webnovel, and I have to ask—do you think deception is a viable marketing strategy? Your synopsis screams "Vampires! Death games! Tragedy! Romance!" and yet, when I actually read the thing, what do I get? Four goddamn chapters of a witch playing housemaid simulator while occasionally sighing while looking through essentially supernatural version of UV light like a tired janitor who’s seen too much. This isn't slow burn—this is no burn. A slow burn at least has a spark, but alas your story is a pile of damp log that hasn’t even been introduced to a proper heat source.

Oh, but the vampires will be there later, right? The death game is totally coming, just wait, just six more chapters—
No. That’s not how this works. That’s not storytelling in fast paced Webnovel Realm works. Readers are not here for your personal worldbuilding indulgence, they came for the goddamn vampire death game you sold them on the synopsis, not a slice-of-life magical housekeeping gig where the most intense conflict is whether or not MC will get enough money to afford rent, as if it will the highest concern when the future vampire gig happens, but whatever.

Worldbuilding is not an excuse for the early chapters' slow pacing. A world only matters if the reader gives a damn about the story unfolding inside it. What you’re doing is trapping the audience in a meticulously crafted dollhouse and refusing to actually start the damn game they came to play. Even in slow burns, like in slice-of-life urban fantasy stories, pacing exists. Yes, even in slow burns, the first few chapters matter.

Do you think it would be engaging if Superman did his actual job as a wage slave for six chapters, instead being, well, a Superman? Would anyone have stuck around if Harry Potter spent four chapters just sitting, trapped inside his mind, unraveling in his teenager's mind under the stairs before Hagrid showed up? Of course not. Alright, I lied, they do, but whatever, that's not the point. Just look at your webnovel. Four chapters deep, and the most "action" I've gotten to see is a witch using her powers to tie a creep’s shoelaces together on a bus. Oh, what a riveting supernatural thriller. I'm trully terrified.

With that, reader stats prove it. 50 views on Chapter 1 and 17 on Chapter 2. That’s bad, even if I include bots, someone who pressed "read" accidentally for "later", and your accidental clicks (you know that happens), the numbers don't lie.

Because of all of that, what I've wrote above, the ethos of your story—the trust that reader knows what you’re doing—is shattered before it even has a chance to establish itself. You know that readers aren’t idiots. They will see through the bait-and-switch immediately, go "ugh, not again," and simply close the webnovel to read something similar to this but better. And because your ethos is in ruins, you now need pathos and logos to work overtime to salvage the experience, too bad those two are the equivalent of minimum-wage grocery store clerks who have no intention of covering for their incompetent manager. Pathos is dead on arrival, because what emotions are even being stirred? "Oh no, another cleaning shift?" Or "oh no, my rent is due." You’ve written a supernatural thriller with the stakes of a mildly inconvenient Tuesday, and that's bad when synopsis promises gothic tragedy.

And logos? Sure, the story is internally consistent, but who cares? A well-organized library of tax documents is also internally consistent, but no one wants to read that either. You’re asking readers to patiently endure your slow burn setup instead of compelling them to keep going, to finally see that vampire who's probably has six-pack described with the same purple prose that first 4 chapters are crawling on. That’s a fatal mistake.

The worst part, the actual story (the vampires, the Blood Hunt, the reason anyone clicked on this) is buried somewhere around Chapter 6. Meaning anyone who starts from the beginning is suffering through five whole chapters of nothingburger before getting to the actual meat of the story. You’ve accidentally made your opening chapters feel as much of a chore to read as Caelyn’s actual cleaning shifts chores.

I can see only two ways to fix this disaster, first: Rebrand the story entirely. Slap a Slice-of-Life tag on this thing, rewrite the synopsis so that it accurately represents what’s inside, aka rebranding the meat for the right audience, and sell it properly even if it turns to the tragic romp of gothic horror. Because the current audience you’re trying to attract wants none of this.

And the second: Cut the first five chapters. Yes, all of them. Brutal? Yes. Necessary? Absolutely. You can sprinkle in any important details later, naturally, because you have the proper character already that's compelling enough to carry the damn story. That's the ugly truth I'm seeing and not hesitant to say it: A world is useless if the reader doesn’t care about it. Creation is not enough, persuasion is survival.
Every time I read one of these roasts, I'm tempted to intentionally write a bad story rather than attempt a good one simply to see Tempokai work her magic.
 

DiabolicalQuill

New member
Joined
Jan 2, 2025
Messages
9
Points
3
I've read four chapters of your webnovel, and I have to ask—do you think deception is a viable marketing strategy? Your synopsis screams "Vampires! Death games! Tragedy! Romance!" and yet, when I actually read the thing, what do I get? Four goddamn chapters of a witch playing housemaid simulator while occasionally sighing while looking through essentially supernatural version of UV light like a tired janitor who’s seen too much. This isn't slow burn—this is no burn. A slow burn at least has a spark, but alas your story is a pile of damp log that hasn’t even been introduced to a proper heat source.

Oh, but the vampires will be there later, right? The death game is totally coming, just wait, just six more chapters—
No. That’s not how this works. That’s not storytelling in fast paced Webnovel Realm works. Readers are not here for your personal worldbuilding indulgence, they came for the goddamn vampire death game you sold them on the synopsis, not a slice-of-life magical housekeeping gig where the most intense conflict is whether or not MC will get enough money to afford rent, as if it will the highest concern when the future vampire gig happens, but whatever.

Worldbuilding is not an excuse for the early chapters' slow pacing. A world only matters if the reader gives a damn about the story unfolding inside it. What you’re doing is trapping the audience in a meticulously crafted dollhouse and refusing to actually start the damn game they came to play. Even in slow burns, like in slice-of-life urban fantasy stories, pacing exists. Yes, even in slow burns, the first few chapters matter.

Do you think it would be engaging if Superman did his actual job as a wage slave for six chapters, instead being, well, a Superman? Would anyone have stuck around if Harry Potter spent four chapters just sitting, trapped inside his mind, unraveling in his teenager's mind under the stairs before Hagrid showed up? Of course not. Alright, I lied, they do, but whatever, that's not the point. Just look at your webnovel. Four chapters deep, and the most "action" I've gotten to see is a witch using her powers to tie a creep’s shoelaces together on a bus. Oh, what a riveting supernatural thriller. I'm trully terrified.

With that, reader stats prove it. 50 views on Chapter 1 and 17 on Chapter 2. That’s bad, even if I include bots, someone who pressed "read" accidentally for "later", and your accidental clicks (you know that happens), the numbers don't lie.

Because of all of that, what I've wrote above, the ethos of your story—the trust that reader knows what you’re doing—is shattered before it even has a chance to establish itself. You know that readers aren’t idiots. They will see through the bait-and-switch immediately, go "ugh, not again," and simply close the webnovel to read something similar to this but better. And because your ethos is in ruins, you now need pathos and logos to work overtime to salvage the experience, too bad those two are the equivalent of minimum-wage grocery store clerks who have no intention of covering for their incompetent manager. Pathos is dead on arrival, because what emotions are even being stirred? "Oh no, another cleaning shift?" Or "oh no, my rent is due." You’ve written a supernatural thriller with the stakes of a mildly inconvenient Tuesday, and that's bad when synopsis promises gothic tragedy.

And logos? Sure, the story is internally consistent, but who cares? A well-organized library of tax documents is also internally consistent, but no one wants to read that either. You’re asking readers to patiently endure your slow burn setup instead of compelling them to keep going, to finally see that vampire who's probably has six-pack described with the same purple prose that first 4 chapters are crawling on. That’s a fatal mistake.

The worst part, the actual story (the vampires, the Blood Hunt, the reason anyone clicked on this) is buried somewhere around Chapter 6. Meaning anyone who starts from the beginning is suffering through five whole chapters of nothingburger before getting to the actual meat of the story. You’ve accidentally made your opening chapters feel as much of a chore to read as Caelyn’s actual cleaning shifts chores.

I can see only two ways to fix this disaster, first: Rebrand the story entirely. Slap a Slice-of-Life tag on this thing, rewrite the synopsis so that it accurately represents what’s inside, aka rebranding the meat for the right audience, and sell it properly even if it turns to the tragic romp of gothic horror. Because the current audience you’re trying to attract wants none of this.

And the second: Cut the first five chapters. Yes, all of them. Brutal? Yes. Necessary? Absolutely. You can sprinkle in any important details later, naturally, because you have the proper character already that's compelling enough to carry the damn story. That's the ugly truth I'm seeing and not hesitant to say it: A world is useless if the reader doesn’t care about it. Creation is not enough, persuasion is survival.
Thank you. I think I knew that, but this was a good reality check. Appreciate the honest feedback.
 

CharlesEBrown

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2024
Messages
1,690
Points
113
I've read four chapters of your webnovel, and I have to ask—do you think deception is a viable marketing strategy? Your synopsis screams "Vampires! Death games! Tragedy! Romance!" and yet, when I actually read the thing, what do I get? Four goddamn chapters of a witch playing housemaid simulator while occasionally sighing while looking through essentially supernatural version of UV light like a tired janitor who’s seen too much. This isn't slow burn—this is no burn. A slow burn at least has a spark, but alas your story is a pile of damp log that hasn’t even been introduced to a proper heat source.

Oh, but the vampires will be there later, right? The death game is totally coming, just wait, just six more chapters—
For some reason, this description reminded me of a show on, I think it was Fox, a few years back (based on a novel) - they HINTED at vampires in the first episode but didn't show anything, just a weird conspiracy/fleeing across the country thing until the third episode...
Blanking on the title (but the vampires were a hive mind, there was a little girl who was linked to the hive mind, and a guy who created the vampires to cure his wife, only to wind up part of the hive himself - and never curing her IIRC).
Not really relevant, but if the show was true to the novel, I could see a review of it looking a good deal like this roast!
 
Top