Fun! You know what I liked most and why this surreal story works? No vagueness. Clear details, crisp action. And I’m left wanting some cake. Constructive suggestion? When he returns and his wife turns, and he’s like “oh baby” looking through his fingers? I don’t know what happens there. Is his wife holding a knife? Is his wife smiling seductively? The ending “you’ve been served” was clever and a great active way to reveal the premeditated status reversal of wife of cheated-upon to boss.
The moment you mentioned used to have more clarification, but I nixed it in revision. It used to read thusly:
_
I peer through my fingers, pressed over my face, and my heart leaps up out of my stomach. She’s not cake. She’s real.
“Oh baby,” I say, pulling her toward me and pressing my mouth to hers.
_
I took the "She's not cake. She's real." out because it felt too much like an observation that could be shown by the protagonist's actions. Also, I didn't want the protagonist to appear very observant. 😂 His fear while approaching her was about whether or not she WAS CAKE. So, when she turns around and speaks, he realizes she's not. The "Oh, Baby" into the kiss was meant to show his relief to find her... being not cake.
I appreciate you letting me know it wasn't clear, though. I removed a lot of narrator observations after the first couple of drafts so I could chisel down to the action. But anytime you remove a clarifier, there's the chance things will become less clear!
Thanks for reading and commenting, friend! I appreciate it. And you!
I hate hate hate negative descriptions, but here it’d prob work, a… “I reach for her and pause, my hand inches from her back, another deceptive delicacy? I touch her shirt. Cloth, not frosting. The warmth of her skin, firm beneath the fabric. Finally, something real. Something not cake.”
Very creative piece! Had to read it twice because I'm daft and I didn't quite understand all the action.
One simple suggestion that would increase clarity without feeling too on the nose: at the first mention of Jenna, say "my wife" or "my wife, Jenna." The story loses nothing, and the reader doesn't have to stop and try to figure out if Jenna is the Sweetie or the wife. In particular, I get really confused with names in stories, but I know this is a universal challenge. Another option would be to just never mention the wife's name. There's two women in his orbit: his wife, and his side piece.
Otherwise, I like the weirdness and the metaphors. In a potentially longer version of this story I think you could lean even harder into the magical cake-ism.
Hiya. And thank you for the feedback. :-) Your point re: Jenna is a good one.
My thinking was that by holding off on revealing that Sweetie and his wife aren't the same person, his douchebagginess could be more of a revelation. If I start the story letting you think Jenna IS "Sweetie" then it's... um... sweet. Until he says the dick line about not wanting to start a thing about the coffee with his "wife," because his side piece is waiting. But to your point, throwing in one name when there are no other names in the story probably wasn't necessary, but I'd have to consider how to maintain the false sense of sweetness at the onset, cuz I kinda like that shift on "page two."
Re: Magic cake-ism. In my brainstorming for this one I had cake everywhere. At one point there was a Free Little Library where the guy goes to pick up his burner phone to call his mistress, but all the books (and his phone) turn out to be cake. I also originally thought the story might lean more horror-y, with a moment at the end where he tries to stab his wife with a knife to make sure she ISN'T cake... and either she ISN'T... or the knife IS... I went in a lot of directions with it in my head before I sat down to write. And at that point I just let the magic cake-ism work itself out organically.
The "trip" action was tricky to narrate. I partly wanted it to trip you up, because it was... well... a trip. And I didn't want the narrator to sound too lucid during it - challenge of the first person POV there. But I appreciate your willingness to give it a second read. :-) And thank you for swinging in to comment.
And yes, "de-pants" offers a pleasantly succinct description of an action that really shouldn't take very long to execute and therefore shouldn't take very long to describe. Unlike this reply to your comment.
Nope. I wouldn't change a thing. It's a very provocatively descriptive piece. It occurs to me that much purposeful research had to have been skillfully and ably poured over and measured into nearly every sweet and salty sentence (or just good re-call). It made me forget cake was even mentioned.
I think it is very cool what you are doing. I teach creative writing part-time. The idea of writing fiction based on the prompt of a stock photo is inspired. But then there's the wackiness genius part, which is what you've got. Nicely done.
Fun! You know what I liked most and why this surreal story works? No vagueness. Clear details, crisp action. And I’m left wanting some cake. Constructive suggestion? When he returns and his wife turns, and he’s like “oh baby” looking through his fingers? I don’t know what happens there. Is his wife holding a knife? Is his wife smiling seductively? The ending “you’ve been served” was clever and a great active way to reveal the premeditated status reversal of wife of cheated-upon to boss.
Thanks, Wil. 💛
The moment you mentioned used to have more clarification, but I nixed it in revision. It used to read thusly:
_
I peer through my fingers, pressed over my face, and my heart leaps up out of my stomach. She’s not cake. She’s real.
“Oh baby,” I say, pulling her toward me and pressing my mouth to hers.
_
I took the "She's not cake. She's real." out because it felt too much like an observation that could be shown by the protagonist's actions. Also, I didn't want the protagonist to appear very observant. 😂 His fear while approaching her was about whether or not she WAS CAKE. So, when she turns around and speaks, he realizes she's not. The "Oh, Baby" into the kiss was meant to show his relief to find her... being not cake.
I appreciate you letting me know it wasn't clear, though. I removed a lot of narrator observations after the first couple of drafts so I could chisel down to the action. But anytime you remove a clarifier, there's the chance things will become less clear!
Thanks for reading and commenting, friend! I appreciate it. And you!
I hate hate hate negative descriptions, but here it’d prob work, a… “I reach for her and pause, my hand inches from her back, another deceptive delicacy? I touch her shirt. Cloth, not frosting. The warmth of her skin, firm beneath the fabric. Finally, something real. Something not cake.”
Oh, Wil. You've made my dolt of a narrator far too eloquent here. 😂
With that said, you have done a fine job of writing this moment in the "style" of Meg Oolders. Are you AI?
And is "Are you AI?" something people will eventually have to ask each other in dating/social situations? I think there's a story in here somewhere.
I laughed, I cried, I gagged and was strangely aroused? So many layers to this cake you baked.
Excellent!
I don't know anything about chakras but seems like I nailed at least four of them for you. 😂
I also may have to restack your comment, because it's awesome.
Restack away. I’m not ashamed.
I don’t even like cake and I was kind of aroused ...
Oh, I'm DEFINITELY restacking THIS.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha! My kind of guy.
Very creative piece! Had to read it twice because I'm daft and I didn't quite understand all the action.
One simple suggestion that would increase clarity without feeling too on the nose: at the first mention of Jenna, say "my wife" or "my wife, Jenna." The story loses nothing, and the reader doesn't have to stop and try to figure out if Jenna is the Sweetie or the wife. In particular, I get really confused with names in stories, but I know this is a universal challenge. Another option would be to just never mention the wife's name. There's two women in his orbit: his wife, and his side piece.
Otherwise, I like the weirdness and the metaphors. In a potentially longer version of this story I think you could lean even harder into the magical cake-ism.
Hiya. And thank you for the feedback. :-) Your point re: Jenna is a good one.
My thinking was that by holding off on revealing that Sweetie and his wife aren't the same person, his douchebagginess could be more of a revelation. If I start the story letting you think Jenna IS "Sweetie" then it's... um... sweet. Until he says the dick line about not wanting to start a thing about the coffee with his "wife," because his side piece is waiting. But to your point, throwing in one name when there are no other names in the story probably wasn't necessary, but I'd have to consider how to maintain the false sense of sweetness at the onset, cuz I kinda like that shift on "page two."
Re: Magic cake-ism. In my brainstorming for this one I had cake everywhere. At one point there was a Free Little Library where the guy goes to pick up his burner phone to call his mistress, but all the books (and his phone) turn out to be cake. I also originally thought the story might lean more horror-y, with a moment at the end where he tries to stab his wife with a knife to make sure she ISN'T cake... and either she ISN'T... or the knife IS... I went in a lot of directions with it in my head before I sat down to write. And at that point I just let the magic cake-ism work itself out organically.
The "trip" action was tricky to narrate. I partly wanted it to trip you up, because it was... well... a trip. And I didn't want the narrator to sound too lucid during it - challenge of the first person POV there. But I appreciate your willingness to give it a second read. :-) And thank you for swinging in to comment.
The narrator seems like an asshole from the start, and it's more than obvious he's not talking about his wife.
Okay.
🙂🥂
Yeah... I have no idea what you are taking, Thweetie, but whatever it is ... I WANT IN!
This was absolutely nuts. I would love to see Meg Oolders and Jimmy Doom sparring in the same room. Yowza!
I sort of want to create a short promotional video for that matchup, ala MMA/WWF. 😂
OOLDERS. DOOM. ONE PROMPT. TWO STORIES. NO GENRES BARRED. 💥
Would you referee? 😊
I will not only referee, I will provide the prompt, the cake, and a jar of small alien snakes. Can't wait. Match of the century!
Both “de-pant”ings are my favorite turn of phrase for the week. Excellent madness.
Nice!
And yes, "de-pants" offers a pleasantly succinct description of an action that really shouldn't take very long to execute and therefore shouldn't take very long to describe. Unlike this reply to your comment.
That was a buttery toasted sour dough crunchy chicken schnitzel sandwich with tangy mayo, crisp lettuce topped with oozy cheese. 🤤 No crumbs left.
Mmmm. Good comment. 🤤
Thank you. 😊
This was great! I love surreal stories like this.
Thank you, Jason!
Nope. I wouldn't change a thing. It's a very provocatively descriptive piece. It occurs to me that much purposeful research had to have been skillfully and ably poured over and measured into nearly every sweet and salty sentence (or just good re-call). It made me forget cake was even mentioned.
( heart and smile thingy )
Ah, my favorite kind of feedback sandwich. All bread. 💛
Thanks, Timothy. 🙂
So so fun! Whimsical. Loved this, Meg! What a nut!
Aw, thanks, D'Arcy. Glad you enjoyed the nuttiness. :-)
I think it is very cool what you are doing. I teach creative writing part-time. The idea of writing fiction based on the prompt of a stock photo is inspired. But then there's the wackiness genius part, which is what you've got. Nicely done.
💛