by Dale Jane Henparty
no loving wife, no cheating, no extra marital sex, no marriage
why is this in loving wives?
one star
Most obviously, this is mislabled in Loving Wives. I understand that's where you want to move the characters, but this vignette doesn't feature any kind of marital action.
Even if it were labled correctly it would still be a miss for me. The dialogue is stilted and Hazel is unbelievably forward, coming off more as an experienced streetwalker than a naive but curious teenage girl. There's little flirtation or teasing shown, and what is shown doesn't exactly sell. It's just a little buildup and then a quick and dirty payoff. The time period is attractive, but if Hazel's kids will be involved as the title implies, it will take place roughly 20 years into the future. She'll have more experience and a whole different set of relationships and motivation by the time your core story begins. Therefore, this story reads as a prequel, "how my mom became addicted to sex," not a setup for the larger story you want to deliver.
If you can make the '60's interesting with step parents and kids rather than the '40's with young adults, and you can get the buildup right, it would be a good story. As it is, what it shows isn't even close to what it purports to advertise and that makes it a no-go for me.
Nope. The author is NOT an ExperiencedStoryteller!
I cannot answer that question, except to say, I wondered where the story was going when I tagged it.
This story is in Loving Wives because the lovely lady who owns this site allowed it to be placed here you halfwit.
Clipped writing style. Unlikable characters. Far too little information. This was more like an opening paragraph than a story.
1 star
I'm not sure that this even qualifies as a story, but I'm not able to say what it is. Mr Experienced, did you know what it was when you wrote it.
It seems I had a major kablooey in my transfer of the last two pieces. My apologies to all for wasting your time. Additional apologies to the staff. This is not a reflection of laxness, or error on their part, but a mistake on text retrieval on my part.