|
|
|
|
|
Seraphima Too
Author: Eve Adorer
|
| |
(Added on Sep 26, 2006)
(This month 30886 readers) (Total 41634 readers) |
| |
The original story ‘Seraphima’ concluded where and when Seraphima had arrived in Ntobi City, the capital of Senabre, a former British colony in southern Africa. When and where her story continues, experience and maturity have added to the manifest manifold charms of the exquisite negress…. Now read on…. |
| Ratings and Reviews: |
| Number
of Ratings: 3 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
| 0% |
33% |
0% |
0% |
0% |
0% |
0% |
0% |
0% |
67% |
|
Weighed
Average (?):  (7/10) |
Average
Rating:  (7.5/10) |
Highest
Rating:  (10/10) |
Lowest
Rating:  (2/10) |
|
|
|
|
| Reviewer:
JimmyJump
(Edit) |
Rating: |
Oct 10, 2006 |
| |
(October 6th) Blimey, I somehow overlooked this follow-up (and the addittions to the first Seraphima as well)... Seems I came just in time to spot the dying embers of a little controversy...
Me, as far as rating Eve Adorer's prose is concerned, I am everything BUT objective. I can no longer be objective because I became too much of an afficionado over time, which makes it hard to take a step backwards and look at Eve's Stories from an objectivity fit distance.
I consequently hand-out ten points (without a joker), simply because I like Adorer's style and bending of the grammar rules.
As I stated before in some of my reviews of other Adorer stories, it sometimes is a wee bit hard to keep concentrated while reading, because of the eye-wrecking, brainwave-bending aliterations and develishly plotted rollercoaster sentences. But that doesn't take away the fact that, to yours truly, everything Eve Adorer writes, is sheer, phantasmagorical, mystifying poetry...
Of course there are Adorer stories I like less than others. For example, I am less fond of Seraphima's adventures than of those of, let's say, Katrina in "Katrina's Taming", or Melody in "Melody Smith's Schooldays". But the latter stories should have gotten at least 15/10, so Seraphima still gets 10/10...
Objective? No longer, I'm afraid... But consequent I am.
Thanks again, Eve Adorer, for a most excellent delivery.
Oh, and to C_Lakewood: I wish you a lot of itch, and very short arms...
JJ
(October 10th) Addendum: re-read the whole kaboodle (before today's updates) and must say that I like the story better the second time around... Maybe I wasn't in the right mood the first time. Anywayz, I'm gonna re-re-read it, now that there's some new alterations. Who knows, I might like the story even more...
JJ (10/10)
|
|
|
|
|
| Reviewer:
C_Lakewood
(Edit) |
Rating: |
Sep 27, 2006 |
| |
People should take my rating cautiously, for I
didn't really get very far into the story. I
was initially put off by the stilted and often
meaningless verbiage, the clumsy theatricality,
the forced and generally preposterous artiness.
I had to stop reading when I came to the 6 feet
long pubic hair. It might have gotten better
after that, but wild horses couldn't drag me
back to find out. (2/10)
|
| |
- Replied by:
Rabbit1
(Edit) (Oct 1, 2006)
- this is a message from the author ---
My Dear Lakewood
I am deeply moved by the honesty in your remark that your criticism is leavened by the fact you could not be bothered to read past the first page of my story before condemning it outright.
I have taken the trouble to read some of your other comments on other stories on this site. From that tedious duty I realise that by responding to your miserable miserly effort here, I may be giving underserved credence to your unwarranted assumption you have any worth whatsoever as an observer on the written word.
Would you please point out the one story of yours you hold in the highest regard. I promise not to be bothered to read more than two paragraphs without dumping on it from a great height.
Stick to your own story writing and be glad your critics are more generous with your efforts than you are with those of others.
By the way, you should also get yourself an education in the use of English. By “6 feet long” I assume you mean “6 foot long”. Elsewhere you condemn another author for using 8” which means 8-inch, dunderhead.
Kindest regards….
EA
- Replied by:
Rabbit1
(Edit) (Oct 1, 2006)
- my only comment to this is ---if you are not going to take the time to read the entire story --why take the time to trash it ----just move on to another story ---seems like wild horses can drag you to trash a story
- Replied by:
JimmyJump
(Edit) (Oct 8, 2006)
- I have read some of your stories, C_Lakewood, and I must say that the ones I read are not that bad. They are not good either, I'm afraid.
You seem to have a decent grasp of the English language, but to my dismay, you don't take a real advantage of that grasp and often wander off into mediocrity.
You also seem to have a fair knowledge of the goings-on inside the human mind, yet a lot of the characters you bring to the fore in your stories lack dimension and are a wee bit flat.
Most of the plots in your stories I've read, remind me of the day when I tried to make a nice soufflé, after I downed 2 bottles of Southern Comfort: a disaster worthy of the explosion of the Krakatoa was the result, leaving an echoeing emptiness right there where the peak should be. In some cases (Umberto Eco's "Foucault’s Pendulum" springs to mind) it works, but not with you...
As a result, your work compares to that of Eve Adorer like the spotty-stripey dabblings of those three Chimps compare to the works of Renoir, Manet or other Rubens'... the former are nice to look at for a second or two and are fodder for a couple of minutes of idle chatting, while the latter are marvels of style, innovation and craftmanship and are food for discussions that run for years.
May I also warn you, that a little caution is in order, regarding this reply, as I didn't get far into your repertoire, because I was initially put of by the clumsy attempts at literary ambitions, the rather poor verbiage and the general lack of artiness and raffinement...
I'm outta here... got a masterpiece to finish...
JJ
- Replied by:
C_Lakewood
(Edit) (Apr 12, 2007)
- Pardon me. I'm sorry to add to the size of this
already lengthy page. I do feel, however, that
I ought to reply to one of the overwrought
allegations. Eve Adorer (through Rabbit1) wrote:
"By the way, you should also get yourself an
education in the use of English...you condemn
another author for using 8” which means 8-inch,
dunderhead."
If you check my review of "The Interview" by
Kevin Goodman, you'll find that I was pointing
out that a spell-check should be reinforced by a
human proof-reader, and I used "8" heals" as an
example. ("Heals" of course should be "heels,"
but a spell-check wouldn't know that.) This is
not to say that it would necessarily have been
spotted. (I proofed one of my own stories 7 or
8 times and still missed "souls of her feet."
Fortunately somebody else noticed it.) But it
does help.
For the record, I have no problem with typing "
to mean inches.
I won't comment further, except to add that I
don't think ad hominem attacks are appropriate
for these review pages.
- Replied by:
Eve Adorer
(Edit) (Apr 13, 2007)
- PRE-SCRIPT – RE C_LAKEWOODS 12/04/07 INPUT IMMEDIATELY ABOVE
I apologise for the error over the proof reading issue. Only when I looked a second time did I spot it was ‘heal’. I would have corrected my mistake, but that response from me, was, as C_Lakewood kindly acknowledges, posted indirectly.
I also apologise for the element of childish personal abuse (i.e. ‘dunderhead’). I was just a tad infuriated at the time….
I stand by everything else.
EA
ORIGINAL SCRIPT...
Now I can add directly, I will add as follows:-
My Dear Lakewood
Do you not even realise that you fail the first duty of any critic worthy of the title, in that you are not in the least objective?
Objectionable, is another matter. You seem to think you dwell on some Olympian mount from which your shafts of insight put the sun in shade.
You are not objective, but you have an objective. The implication behind all your story reviews is boringly predictably self-evident. Nobody writes as well as Lakewood; so everybody must write just like Lakewood, or else expect to incur Lakewood’s total condemnation.
You might like to recall, once in a while, that you are self-appointed. No doubt you think you have therefore been appointed by the person best placed to judge the best person to appoint. If so, a little more self-reflection and a little less self-regard would do you the power of good.
I realise it condemns me utterly, but I have to confess I have never read any of your stories. And, what is more, I probably never will.
I am sure they are models of impeccable writing. The wonder to me therefore, is that, before now, I have never heard of you. Did you use a pseudonym when you collected that Nobel for literature?
Like many others on this site, some of whom even, as you seem to see it, ‘dare to be foreigners’ and not have English as their first language, I write strictly for fun.
Is it really asking too much for, no doubt, clever witty wonderfully warm people like you, to be just a little kind?
Writing may come easily to you, but some authors have to struggle, and your crude condemnations are unnecessarily cruel, as I would have hoped you would have realised without it needing to be said.
I am not asking in respect of myself. Pouring vitriol on the likes of your reviews is a great pleasure to me, and I am grateful for the enjoyment you are providing me right here and now. I confess I would rather you kept off my lawns, but, if you come back for more, don’t be surprised if you get both barrels of my metaphorical shotgun up your most fundamental funnel...
Have a nice day!
EA
|
|
|
|
|
| Reviewer:
Rabbit1
(Edit) |
Rating: |
Sep 27, 2006 |
| |
A super continuation of one of my favorite series
Please keep them coming (10/10)
|
|
|
About 