I'm going to step in and defend Carol's story as written. It isn't perfect - no story on the archive is - but it's still an outstanding story. If the characters' emotions zig and zag, that's how real life is, folks. I don't feel today the same way I did a week ago, and I won't feel the same way a week from now. And neither does anyone else. There's nothing wrong with that, either. It just means that we're all human.
Without a DNA test, Clark and Lois don't know with absolute certainty that Christopher is Clark's son. They can be relatively sure because of the similarities in the two pregnancies, the resemblance between the two boys, and their strong resemblance to Clark, but they don't know for certain! The fragment from the next chapter is meant to beguile us, to entice us to read (not that many of us need such enticement!), to make us hungry for the whole story. Without any context, we don't know why Clark phrased his response to - say, we don't even know what prompted this statement, do we? Why don't we wait and find out?
Please don't think that I'm advocating a position whereby no one ever says anything bad about any writer or any story! I don't mean that at all. I can think of some otherwise excellent stories on these boards which had some problems which detracted from the whole. Should an author be told about such things? Yes. But I believe that such critiques should be respectful, gentle, and in most cases should be very private.
Carol has some good betas working with her on this tale, and any criticism aimed at her as a writer also splashes over on the betas. Surely they would have spotted such glaring errors and inconsistencies as some have claimed occur. Surely one or more of them would have yelled, "Hey, we got a plot hole the size of the St. Lawrence Seaway here! Got to fix it before it's posted!" What looks like a plot hole in the middle of a story is often a pivotal plot point when viewed from the end of the story.
It's perfectly acceptable to say, "You know, this story just doesn't grab me. It isn't my cup of tea (or coffee or soda pop or whatever)." I don't know of any author who wouldn't regret reading a comment like this, but at least it's a criticism of the story and not of the writer. It's a different matter when a reader tells an author (before the reader has read the entire work!) that the story in question requires a complete re-write. Not only is that a premature judgment, it's unfair to the author and to the readers who are enjoying it.
I recall a couple of years ago when an author produced a multi-part tale in a dramatically different style than is normally seen on these boards. It was daring, it was different, and it was effective. But not everyone liked it. However, all of the feedback posts I read were respectful of the author's daring attempt - except one person who quite vehemently insisted that the story - and the style in which it was presented - was complete dreck. This person even attacked other posters who were encouraging the author, and I do not believe that either of them remained around very long.
And I think that was a shame for them as well as for us. We lost the opportunity to appreciate that author's future work, and we lost the viewpoint of that feedback poster. Just as important, they lost us. And I think we're all the poorer for it.
Please don't think that I'm accusing anyone of attacking other feedback posters, because I'm not. And please don't think that I believe that anyone who doesn't think this story is the best thing written since "War and Peace" is an idiot. No piece of writing will please everyone. I am thinking of a particular story on the archives which has been complimented many times, praised many times, and the author has been lauded for this story many times. It often shows up in the Off-Topic folder under a "Favorites" thread or a "Recommended Reading" thread.
But I don't care for it. I just can't get into it. Is it bad writing? No, it's very well done. And I can see why so many others praise it so highly. It simply doesn't tickle my fancy. (And no, I will not list the title!)
This story is a bit different in that it is taking Clark and Lois from a non-canon meeting to whatever resolution we're headed for by alternating their subjective viewpoints, and in first person, too. That's very hard to do, and it can be confusing if the reader doesn't keep in mind that what we are reading at the moment is colored by the current emotional state of the character who is speaking. For example, if Lois were to accept Lana's assertion that Clark loves her and wants to stay married to her, if she were to couple it with all the little things Clark does for her and for the boys, and if she were to put all that together with his tenderness towards her despite her "wall of separation," then she probably wouldn't have wished Clark luck in getting back together with Lana.
But that was how she felt at that moment! And it's logical within the story line. Maybe you, dear reader, don't care for this story or for the groundswell of support it obviously has. What other current story has a support group for its addicts? None that I've seen, and there have been some dynamite stories posted on these boards over the past few years. I ask only that we all allow Carol to follow her story to the end.
Then we can bring out the brickbats and literary criticisms. Only then, dear FoLCs, will we have the coherent whole to review.
And I still pity the GE who gets to work up this beautiful monster for the archive.
