“What Remains in 1989”

By: Finally_Home

Reviewer: St-renaissance.

1-Title: The title is definitely promising, it bespeaks of the possibility of employing several narratives (stream of consciousness). It’s definitely original and unique, usually inserting dates/locations promises an ambience which not only is decorative to the plot but also feeds into the development of it.

Rating: 10/10.

2-Description: I see the description and understand its purpose; mystery and suspense definitely shine through it. However, there are few displacements of punctuation marks that have deluded the meaning of the plot a bit, I’ll try to fix it and you’re free to change it or keep it.

“Myungsoo, Naeun, Howon, and Ryosuke, four best friends, who have known each other since childhood, are thrown into chaos when one of them dies. Accident or not? If not, then who killed Ryosuke and why? One by one, the remaining three must play their part in this tragedy and face their own guilt. In the end, who knows what will become of their friendship?” It’s of an appropriate length, very wisely constructed and definitely keeps the reader anticipating what’s next. The style is contemporary; questions, quotes, and interference of different narrative points are all considered new to the literary scene. I think it’s just perfect.

Rating: 10/10.

3-Plot: The beginning is very interesting; outward inspection of environmental scenery, background information, and a steady introduction to the main character. You’ve used the third person narrative which is the safest, most common narrative in literature. However, you didn’t let that steal away the main character’s ability to engage in inner and interactional dialogues, which is a significant point in the process of plot development. The story engages the reader in a mysterious journey that heavily relies on two elements: Memory and detailed description. Let’s talk about your style of writing in the following points: Speech correctness, speech clearness, and speech effectiveness.

Speech correctness has been delivered throughout, I haven’t been able to spot a single error and since your story is set in a modern era, there are no limitations when it comes to language and discourse. However, during the beginning of your story, you’ve used too many literary devices right off the bat, back-to-back similes are frowned upon in literature. Take things slowly and allow the reader to absorb the scene or environment, this will eventually help your audience fill in the gaps themselves regarding obvious imagery. Such imagery (visual) is seen in natural bodies like the sun, moon, or even temperatures. The main function in using simile is to bring out similarities between two objects which seem unlikely or divergent in appearance or function. Yet, nearly all of the similes used in your story are blatant and lack depth or imagery. ‘Gold like the sun’, ‘bright as the moon’ or ‘brown as chocolate’-which has been used twice already- are some of the similes you’ve used repeatedly despite lacking a further literary function. Literary devices are not supportive of taking the initiative in literary prose, but you don’t actually have to abide by the rules, it’s your story.

As for speech clearness, I’d say the audience can perfectly understand the point and even the hidden meaning behind certain eleme