"Guess-the-Author" Analysis and Critiques

Author #2

Bayou Pierre, Louisiana Territory
January 10th, 1807

Aaron Burr was cheerful. Good cheer, he had found, was contagious. His men were happy, and so he was happy, despite all that could, and probably should, have worried him.

Rumors were flying that President Jefferson had caught on to his plan. Harman Blennerhassett, his co-conspirator, had had no word from his estates in days, and feared it had been seized by federal troops. Most ominously of all, General Gerris Wilkerson, military governor of Louisiana Territory and another conspirator, had not been where he had promised to be, with the promised force of arms. But these were merely trifles in Burr's mind. Rumors had been going on for months before, Blennerhassett was a worrywart, and Wilkerson had left word that he would meet Burr in New Orleans with the promised troops.

So, Aaron Burr and the 60 or so men he did have floated on merrily down the Mississippi, full of anticipation of what was to come. Burr pulled out a well-worn map of Orleans Territory and traced his finger along the remaining distance to travel. "Only 30 miles to New Orleans," he thought aloud, "and then I can seize the power that is due to me. An Empire, over the vast American west!" Burr sighed wistfully, leaning back and staring at the sky.

Burr's dreams of empire were interrupted by the staccato thudding of a horse's hooves on the road running by the riverbank. Diverting his eyes from the wispy clouds above, Burr saw that the rider of the approaching horse was Harman Blennerhassett. Burr waved and called out to him, "Harman, back already? Did you find the general?" Blennerhassett had been sent ahead of the main party to search for Gerris Wilkerson and arrange for a meeting place between the two forces.

Blennerhassett dismounted and approached Burr. The fear in the man's eyes was unnerving. "What's wrong?" inquired Burr.

"We're cooked, Aaron," the other responded, handing Burr a paper, which Burr saw to be a copy of the New Orleans Picayune. Puzzled, Burr glanced at the paper, and blanched when he read the headline.



Near panic, Burr quickly scanned the article. "They know we're here, Aaron. Jefferson's released a warrant for our arrest, and 275 federal troops are already on their way," Blennerhassett continued.

Aaron Burr threw the newspaper to the dirt in disgust. "There's no way they could know that much detail about the plan. Gerris must have betrayed us!" he fumed. Blennerhassett only nodded.

"I don't know about you, Harman, but I'm not going that easy. They robbed me of the vice presidency, they won't rob me of this!" Burr swung up onto Blennerhassett's horse and with a savage kick in the beast's side went galloping off to the south.

---

Washington, D.C.
September 1st, 1807

Thomas Jefferson, President of the United States of America, stared out over Washington in silence. It was almost time to go to the Capitol, to hear the verdict and sentencing of the trial of the young century. It had been a long, hard fight, even from the time Burr was dragged out of the Mississippi while trying to flee federal soldiers. It didn't help that John Marshall, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, disliked Jefferson so much...

As if reading his mind, a voice came from behind him. "You know, without me, Marshall probably would have declared what Burr did not to be an overt act of treason and let him off just to spite you." Jefferson turned to see Alexander Hamilton standing in his doorway, supported by a cane.

Hamilton had proved instrumental in the case against Burr. Even greater than Marshall's dislike for Jefferson was Hamilton's hatred of Burr, and the New York congressman was a walking reminder of Burr's past evils--or, rather, a limping one. Burr's duel with Hamilton now over three years hence had left the latter with a bullet in his leg and the need of a cane for support. Hamilton had been lucky--had the bullet hit a few inches higher... Hamilton was right. Jefferson probably would be facing Burr's acquittal today.

But Hamilton had lived, and when Burr was once more mentioned in a secessionist plot, Jefferson had sought the Federalist out. Hamilton, like Marshall, didn't think much of Jefferson, but the president had been able to convince him to add his own weight to the conviction of Burr. Marshall's professional respect for another stalwart of his own party would hopefully loosen the justice's interpretation of treason...

Hamilton and Jefferson rode together to the Capitol, where the Supreme Court would convene. Making their way in silence down to the basement room where the court met, the two men entered the Court chambers to find many already arrived to hear the verdict. Taking a seat next to Hamilton near the back of the room, Jefferson waited.

Some time later, just as scheduled, the justices of the Supreme Court ceremoniously entered the chamber, John Marshall presiding. The gaunt face of the Chief Justice peered out across the courtroom, settling on Burr and withering the conspirator with his gaze.

Finally, it was time. John Marshall banged his gavel and began to speak.

"It is the opinion of this, the Supreme Court of the United States of America, that the leading of an unauthorized body of armed troops, with intent to attack the United States or another power at peace with the United States, is as constitutionally defined an overt act of treason against this country. As such, the defendant Aaron Burr is found by this court to be guilty on the charge of treason, and has hereby forfeited his lands and property to the government of the United States. Furthermore, the defendant is hereby sentenced to death by hanging.

"May God have mercy on your soul."

Author #3

The Earl Rensford thought to himself that it had not been a very good idea. Not only had he been finally caught and arrested for treason, but drinking all that wine on the voyage across the Channel had left him with a pain in the head and very full bowels. Indeed, he had commented on this to his guard, Sir John Humfords, who had replied "You rich blokes can't have everything, now, can you? I worked up through the ranks, got shot in the leg, got captured, and barely escaped with a French wife, as opposed to a certain pompous fool who inherited his titles and what does he do to thank us for it?" Humfords spat. He also had a headache and a full bladder, for the same reasons. "Sleeps with a French whore and tells her all his secrets!" Rensford hung his head in shame. The French lady of the night had held a firm grip, but who listened to that excuse?

"Anyway, King George has accepted your request to listen to your appeal. Very fortunate you are, for my uncle is very close to the king, and I was able to promise that a good casket of wine would be delivered to him if he cut me this deal for you. Napoleon gives out very nice wine, doesn't he?" Humfords grinned, thinking of the rewards the earl had received from the Corsican Tyrant. Being still heavily hung over, he had difficulty remembering why he was hung over. "It is very fortunate for us all that Napoleon has met the same fate I think you will meet, my lord." Humfords laughed. The carriage had passed the worst streets of London, and he could laugh now that his leg was not... for a moment he thought that they were getting into another set of bad streets, but looking out the window at the fine buildings outside told him that they had arrived at the palace. "I am sorry, not for your sake, but mine, that we have such a poor driver, Rensford."

"It is hardly a problem, good sir." The earl, unlike the knight, knew what they had drunk the previous night. "You have been too kind in arranging this meeting." A walk of a few moments brought the two men into the presence of His Brittanic Majesty, George III. Sir John Humfords laughed the whole way. He enjoyed these things, especially when he felt sure that it would be a losing battle. They were brought into a small room, with the sort of paintings that a knight risen from his stature could appreciate, and very comfortable chairs, although not quite large enough to accomodate the rotund frame of our dear earl. The king was attended by a few men Humfords recognised as being members of the Cabinet, and by a strange man who looked like a doctor, whatever he might be doing there. The doctor was muttering something to the man in the blue coat, a man known to millions as a great Prime Minister, Lord Waterford. His greatness is now agreed by historians to be largely based on the popular paintings by John Trumbull, but that is how many people have attained greatness. At any rate, the Prime Minister sighed, and nodded. The king receive his glance, and turned to the two newcomers. "You are the Earl Wensford?" The earl bowed. "I would like to congratulate you on your exploits. If it weren't for people you, my dear man, we could hardly have beat the French, what what? It is truly amazing that one Englishman can beat fifty Frenchmen singlehandedly!"

The earl and the knight glanced at each other. This was unexpected. The doctor was ruffling though a box, indicating various bottles of many colours to the king's ministers. Earl Rensford began to speak, found he couldn't, and then that he could. "I... thank your majesty." He looked around, expecting something to pop up and smack him back down to what he had been anticipating. He bowed again. George nodded his head. "I am giving a banquest in your honour tonight. Of course, you will be attending." "Naturally." Rensford did not understand what was going on, but he could put up with it. Excellent French women and wine, an insignificant betrayal revealing locations of a few petty armies, and the war had been won anyway. He could handle being rewarded, indeed, maybe it was because he had betrayed the king! A fairly stupid king, it seemed. At the same time, Sir John Humfords was wondering if he should perhaps be leaving, quickly. He decided to pretend he was a servant and picked up a cloth the doctor had just discarded, wiped a tabletop, and made his way towards the door. He could hear the discussion behind him. The king had just mentioned that it was such a pity that this Napoleon person couldn't attend the banquet, but had to be sent to the seashore for his health, preferably in a southern climate, and the earl had just mentioned Humfords' name. "I could have done far more in your service, your majesty, if he had not insisted that I leave that part of France immediately. And on the voyage here, a large amount of wine which I was bringing to fill my cellar disappeared. I tell you, that man was almost certainly involved! How did he ever get into the Bath?"

---

Rensford sat in his bathtub. He had come to the firm conclusion that the French coast on the Meditterannean was one of the finest areas in the world. Quite unfortunate that he had needed to cut a section out of the wall to get this bathtub in, but it was easier than getting himself to a size where he could fit in a smaller one. Allowed for a window giving a very nice view of the hillside, also. It had been ten years ago that he had made his arrangements with Lord Waterford, a token fee in return for leaving within a week after the banquet. Yes, the coast suited him quite well, especially the bit with the caves that filled up during high tide. He had gone into them with Humfords, who had showed up one day fleeing his uncle, but Humfords had stayed in the caves longer longer. Rensford was beginning to wonder if he would ever return, when he heard a knock on the door. "Come in. Ah, yes, good Humfords, you found the octopus. Now, if you can it all of it you win the bet." Our dear Earl knew a bit more about aquatic life than our dear knight. Rensford preferred wine to this type of sea food.

I am mildly suprised that no one jumped in to write the fourth story. Well, the three that came in look good.

Author #1: Very nice take on the topic. I was sort of wondering how the accountant avoided getting caught up in the Enron thing, but I suppose if he got away he is much better than certain other people, both of the mafia and enron. I like the little lines about Ontario, New York. For some reason it feels like a New Yorker wrote this, and I believe that pjcrowe and Rensslaer both fall into that category. I think I will go with the latter.

Author #2: The thing I like most about this was the fact that Hamilton was still kicking around, both for the fact that I rather like him, and his line about the probable outcome of the case if he had died. At the beginnign I had been under the impression that Blennerhassett had disappeared or died along with his property, but that was cleared up.

Author #3: Fairly good. I notice that this seems to be taking place at about the same time as the previous. Looking at it, I would say the only problem is that perhaps you weren't entirely firm on the ending. I take it the uncle wants Humfords based on the wine incident? That line about fleeing his uncle could be firmed up.

All in all, three good stories. I am not yet prepared to guess either of the second two authors.

Author #1

I love how, when the time period for the assignment is "obvious", or if Coz suggests that maybe something won't work for "x" game, the authors try to avoid the obvious and pick something way out there! I think it adds to the creativity.

Very good, and amusing, dialogue. A bit rough at a few points, but relatively easy to follow. Good tension, to provide suspense. The humor in this tragic story is very... what's the word? Endearing? Umm.. It throws you off, but in a good way!

And, beyond amusing, the levels of absurdity added character... The cousin's neice's babysitter, the oxygen mask, the attack helicopter... I liked the Spock-like assistant.

This is an accomplished author. My first guess for this author is going to be Storey. This reminds me, somewhat, of his Cologne. His Cologne STORY, I mean! o

Second guess would be Lord Durham.

Author #2

Cooking's too good for him! :rofl:

Oh, a very interesting story, set in a period of history that is EUIIish, but only just!

Again, this is an accomplished author, and the story is well told and designed. The delusional Burr is believable, if a teency bit melodramatic, perhaps.

I love the "We're cooked, Aaron." bit!

An interesting twist, that Burr would be convicted because of Hamilton's survival, rather than set free.

I am going to guess FJ44 for the author... for no reason in particular.

I will have to come back for Author #3... And I may yet have more to say on #2.

And, finally, a word of encouragement for Coz1. Thanks, first off, for managing all this and making it possible! I do not believe people are losing interest. After all, you're normally getting a good range of authors and commentators. I think this is just one of those variable threads that will ebb and flow, but which will not wane. I'm sure it also has to do with the subjects -- some topics are harder than others, and liable to draw different people's interest. I have to say I've skipped some simply because I wouldn't know how to begin at approaching the subject. 'Course, that kind of challenge is probably the best thing for a learning author to tackle, so maybe my excuse is a copout! No, I have high hopes for this. It just needs us to advertise and spread the word, perhaps -- kind of like with the Victoria Cross polls.

Rensslaer

1) Not bad. I started off thinking we were in an older time period, until some of the modern euphemisms and terms started coming out. I could hear Edward G. Robinson in the Duke’s character, ”where’s your Messiah now, see?”, which was the highlight of the story for me. I confess I found it difficult to really grasp what was going on with the meeting and how the characters had reached that point. Maybe it was the mix of Mafioso and attack helicopters, hehe. Fun stuff.

2) I really enjoyed this alternate history. I was wondering if you were going to let Burr fulfill his conspiracy with Wilkinson until the newspaper appeared. Nice twist with Hamilton, I must say I didn’t expect it. It was awkward picturing Jefferson and Hamilton together and I was wondering just what price Hamilton gets for his help, or was his hatred of Burr sufficient to help out. Good story!

3) The period was good and I was very interested in the scene, but I struggled with some of the background. The few mentions of Napoleon got me curious as to what had happened to him, and where this story fit within the timeline. The King rewarding Rensford…I wasn’t sure if he was stupid as Rensford himself indicates or was there some secret cahootin’ going on. A good story, I wish it had been fleshed out more to answer some of my questions.

Good to see this is still going. I hope everything is up to full strength next month.

Author #1
I liked many things about this entry, but two in particular stand out. Firstly the combination of the intelligent goon bereft of common sense, and the more typical goon that is happily burdened by common sense but not too much intelligence. Secondly, the counting off of the options had a certain humour given the writing task itself.

The pace of the entry is quite snappy, there is not much time for general reflection, yet for all that it starts quite calm. The tension quickly ratches up however. I found the fluidity of the piece broken by the single line "No response" after another display of Vinnie's mathematical prowess, and by that the comic relief was just beginning to jar a little. Perhaps having Vinnie begin and then tail off of his own accord would have kept the interlude without quite so much disrupting the tension. Maybe a flat look from the Don? That is actually my main quibble. The end was quick, incongruous (a duck!), and inevitable. The nature of the last line perhaps something of a cliche, but funny all the same. All in all, I enjoyed it.

Author #2
A two-part entry. The first part has a clear sense to it, a progression from bliss to bedlam, or from a summer's day to a summer's storm. Self-contained, and sets the scene. However, given the limitations of space the second half suffers.

In the second half there are three great potential characters: Jefferson, Hamilton, and Marshall (four if one includes defendant Aaron Burr). There is, I think, just too much explanation for those few hundred words to bear. There is also a lack of any tension, really any progression. Hamilton's first words ensure that Marshall's ruling is nothing but a foregone conclusion. The whole second-part leaves me feeling therefore unfulfilled in some way.

The first part I did enjoy very much, and is well-realised. The second-part has greater potential, but which (I think because of space concerns) it cannot attain. The overall idea is great fun though, and I wonder if the writer either is or was inspired by Rensslaer and his Colorado AAR in which Hamilton also survives and there is plotting of various sorts.

Author #3
I loved the interpretation of the event. Sort of turning it on its head, in a way. There was a lot of humour here, alot of unseriousness. But I do have a few criticisms.

I did find the phrasing of the initial paragraph a little tortuous, and it did make the rest of the entry harder work than it needed to be. Firstly I think it could have done with being broken up into smaller sentences. Smaller sentences are easier to understand. They are also snappier, an advantage in shorter stories like these. I am also at a loss why you use the pluperfect tense so much (he had commented, he had replied). Again there is a heaviness there that I think is unnecessary - except when he is referring the grip of the French lady of the night where it fits right in. Avoiding the passive voice would also have helped, as again there is a weighiness to it that is detrimental to the piece as a whole. Not that these things don't have their place, but a short story doesn't (to me at any rate) seem the place for them.

On a more minor note your phrasing was sometimes a little awkward, which again jars and detracts from the whole. Things like "Very fortunate you are" when You are very fortunate is fine. I wonder if you are trying to create a Georgian feel to the language with such contractions?

I do realise in this somewhat detailed critique that English might very well be a second or third language for you, given the nature of this forum. Despite my going on I did rather enjoy the entry, quite apart from the wonderful inversion of the event.

I thought George III was intelligently protrayed, and it turns out our Earl can be quite vicious. I am not entirely sure why, after the Earl played his trick, Humfords has any particular reason to stay with the Earl, but that is by the by. In things like this many details must be left answered. My only criticism of the end paragraph is that is feels a little like an afterthought, almost unnecessary. I don't really have a great deal to add there.

Author #3

A very subtle piece. I enjoyed the subtle humor, and I sensed that there was more humor there which perhaps I did not understand.

The conversational style -- not rigid, seeming to grab whatever considerations were needed at the moment -- was different from what I'm used to, but worked fine (that is to say, it COULD have gone badly, but you handled it well).

I get the impression that this is a scene plucked out of a larger work of fiction. The story was well told, and I get the feeling I would like to know a great deal more. It intrigues me in that I feel strongly there is more to be known, and I am interested enough to see what it is.

For that reason, I'm not sure if it would have been better with more explanation of the background, or if it is better the way it is! I will have to think on this.

I gathered the confusing passages about George III were intentional -- reflective of his quirkiness and insanity. Quite fine.

Good job!

Rensslaer

Author #1

This was a funny story in a screwed way. The part of the Geneva Convention was unexpected yet very amusing and the end was hilarious. The dialogues worked well and I was immediately hooked on the story. Well done!

Author #2

I found this story to be very well written. The topic was very interesting too. The second part felt a bit “out of the blue”. Kind of sad that the short format of this exercise does not allow a longer format. The first part really had me hooked and this was written by a very good writer.

Author #3

Some parts of this story left me a bit confused. I found it to be a bit difficult to follow the events and the context. Nevertheless some parts were quite amusing. With some more polishing work I am sure this can actually develop into a good story.

Author #1
I enjoy reading a story that takes the subject and turns it in an unexpected direction. Using the mob as the background is an imaginative and entertaining way to write about coz’s topic. A minor point is as stnylan pointed out the “No response’” doesn’t work because ‘stating’ an action in the middle of all this dialogue is jarring to the narrative. Over all a fun read, well done.

Author #2
The only criticism I have is that the first half of the story has all the action and the second half feels like a summation rather than a contiuation of the story. I'm not sure this is a fair criticism it may be that maybe I’m looking for fireworks in the courtroom? I don’t look at this as a major problem just something for the author to thing about.

Author #3
I also enjoy this story but have a few complaints. I’ve reread it and still don’t understand why Humford arranged this meeting with the king for Rensford? Especially after Humford said:

“Indeed, he had commented on this to his guard, Sir John Humfords, who had replied "You rich blokes can't have everything, now, can you? I worked up through the ranks, got shot in the leg, got captured, and barely escaped with a French wife, as opposed to a certain pompous fool who inherited his titles and what does he do to thank us for it?" Humfords spat. "Sleeps with a French whore and tells her all his secrets!" Rensford hung his head in shame.”

It doesn’t sound like Humford likes or respects Rensford so why is he arranging the meeting? I see that his uncle is getting some wine for allowing the audience but I’m still scratching my head on what's in it for Humford. His uncle's appreciation for the wine? If so this should be stated or at least hinted at. However it's always possible I missed something.

I did enjoy the turn around with Humford deciding that it would be a good thing to slip out of the room when the king starts praising Rensford. However I found the ending puzzling? Why does Humford end up going to Rensford when they didn't seem to get along and when last we saw Rensford was accusing Humford of stealing his wine? And what was the bet between Rensford and Humford and why is it in the story?

Joe

Author 1 - excellently crafted and funny in a dry, morbid sort of way. The interplay of threats and violence with almost Mel-Brooksian humor gives this a very theatrical - dare I say cinematic? - feel.

He's a good shot with that cane, too. Duck!

Author 2 - well written. Could perhaps use some editing and tightening. I question the use of so many different characters and, what is it, three points of view, in one installment? If re-written you might intensify the build-up to the verdict by concentrating on one character.

Author 3 - I suspect there are some language issues here. Perhaps also the original idea didn't quite stretch and the ending had to be improvised? Whatever the reason, the last two paragraphs need a rewrite for clarification so that we can understand who did what to whom, and why.

For some reason, I thought this had been posted longer. Only one week.

Still plenty of time for others to speak up! Always great to hear more feedback and constructive criticism.

This thread is one of those that is fun for author and reader alike.

Rensslaer

I'll be posting the author's names this evening when I get home from work, so there is still time to get your critique in. Once the names have been revealed, that leaves a week for responses to feedback and discussion before we move into March.

And feel free to offer suggestions for topics if you have any in mind. It's not always easy to come up with something entertaining that has not been done before, especially a topic able to grab all the games.

And let's announce our authors. They are:

* * *

AUTHOR #1: CatKnight

• Recommended Reading:

Resurrection: Rebirth of the United States EUII

A Distant Mirror EUII (MES)

* * *

AUTHOR #2: Morpheus506

• Recommended Reading:

Rule Bretagnia: A Breton AAR EU

Reader Request AAR: Bavaria Victoria

* * *

AUTHOR #3: J. Passepartout

• Recommended Reading:

Timid Timurids? The Post-Lenkh Years; or I was a teenage dictator (Bronze OscAAR Winner for Funniest AAR presented in May 2003) EUII

The Golden Pig and the Concrete Porker:A Rather Silly Tale EUII

* * *

A huge thank you to all of our writers! Hopefully next time we will have the full compliment of four. And I'd also like to thank J. Passepartout, Rensslaer, Mettermrck, stnylan, Judge, Storey and Director for passing on your thoughts and comments. You folks are always here to support this project and I think the writers will certainly join me in that thank you. Great work everyone!

The floor is now open for the authors to respond to feedback and further discussion of the pieces. We'll be back with another installment come the 1st of March, so watch for it.

First, coz: Thanks for doing this! I know it's a little disheartening we didn't get three authors this time out, but tis only a bump in the road. Or people didn't realize you could substitute the mob for nobility.

J. Passepartout: Thanks for your comments! I was in a very ... cavalier state of mind when I wrote this. (Obviously) I didn't put much thought in how his son escaped the Enron scandal. I'm glad you picked up on the bit about Ontario, New York. I enjoyed that part!

Rensslaer: You're right, the dialogue (and overall writing) was rough in points. I didn't give this a proper edit before I submitted. (It was eleventh hour, and as I told J. Passepartout I was feeling rather cavalier at the moment.) The 'absurdity' was partly my frame of mind, and partly to make it clear that anyone who took the post seriously better think again.

Plus, I always wanted an attack helicopter...


Mettermrck: I didn't know the name, but I'm sure you're right: I had a vague impression of a character from the film noir era who ended far too many sentences with 'see' and thus was born Duke. Any confusion I put up to my lack of editting.

It's otherwise obvious they were talking about figure skating.

stnylan: Vinnie (the intelligent goon) was the best part for me. I loved him! Of course, I had to dig out my calculator for half his answers, but he contrasted with Rico so well. I'll have to bring him back some day.

You're right about the fluidity of the conversation and we'll talk about that below. As for the last line being cliche....stynlan! The whole bloody thing was a cliche! Well, except for the attack helicopter!

Judge: 'Funny in a screwed way.' I can live with that! I actually had to look up the Geneva Conventions for Vinnie's lines in that part. Of course, Vinnie should have known they didn't apply to this situation, but eh: I thought it was funny!

Storey: Regarding the 'no response.' What I wanted to convey there was Vinnie didn't realize he was being called upon. As stynlan said: He's very bright, but his common sense just isn't there and he didn't pick up the hint that Don Paulo wanted an answer. I suppose what I could have written was:

...Don Paulo looked at Vinnie expectantly.

"Whut?"

"Nothing!" (etc.)


Director: Cinematic huh? Hmm...given the drek that's out there these days I don't know whether to be happy with that or not. Thanks!

Thanks to all the reviewers.

J. Passepartout: Yes, I agree, that was the weakest point of the...

Mettermrck: I wanted it to be a little bit unclear how Napoleon was defeated, since I wanted to concentrate on the scene at hand, but the rest of your points are valid.

stnylan: One of a few people who thought I was foreign. No problem, see response to Judge.

Rensslaer: I would err of having handled the humour you didn't understand poorly, but I am perhaps hard on myself.

Storey: Your critiqueing has to do, more than you have realised, with the ending. I had intended to answer that all in the end, but for the rest you will have to see my response to Judge.

Director: You seem to have the same, or a similar, critique that I used for my fake review of my story. See Judge.

Judge: I am using you as having collapsed essentially all the things in need of revision in my story. Your comment about needing more polish is precisely what I needed. What happened as I wrote this story, was I applied to write it, and then after taking my college schedule into account, I realised I had less time than I thought. Three of the days I had to write were the three most class-filled days I have, and I don't really like to use the library computers for writing these things. I wish I had more time to edit, and I didn't really manage to make it as long as I would have liked. Also, I was flippflopping between wanting to make it funny, and wanting to make it serious. I was especially going to make it more clear that Humfords' uncle was very angry about not getting the wine, and its successful delivery would have more than enough reward for Humfords. So, there are my excuses. Thank you all.

Catknight, would you be thinking of Jimmy Cagney?

Edward G Robinson was another noted actor in the era of gangster movies.

'Top of the world, Ma!'

Morpheus, I was rather reserved in my comments, as I understood that many might suspect me as the author of this tale, and I didn't want to ruin the false trail!

I actually thought you did very, VERY well in relating this story about this historical event as it MIGHT have been! You obviously did some intense research into what has to be one of the more interesting episodes of American history. And I think you carried it off very well!

In fact, I am VERY impressed at your writing skill, based on this first part!

It's a complicated story, all in all... You somehow managed to tell an incredible amount of detail in the very short (for what you covered) first section of your story. I do think the second part was a little less concise and interesting, if only because the outcome seemed obvious from the start. However, I also think that, considering your success in the first part, time and reflection might reveal a way you could have improved upon the second section to make it equal the first!

In any case, since Morpheus has/may have piqued you folks' curiousity about this interesting little historical plot, I thought I might take the opportunity to invite you all over to see the beginning (on hiatus, but definitely due to be continued!) of my own AAR, Castles in the Sky, which takes this very selfsame point of history and turns it into a full-blown AAR!


Oh, and btw Morpheus... I have been very curious whether you had read any of my AAR or not, previous to choosing this scene. If not, it is very cool that we happened to hit on the same plot for an AAR story! Also, if not, come on over and see!

Rensslaer

Director:

Possibly. The name Jimmy Cagney definitely rings a bell, but I can't swear to anything. I haven't see any of those gangster type movies in a very long time, and I was never good with actor's names. I can't even picture the man. When I was writing for Duke, I had the faintest memory of the actor's voice, so I obviously saw something at some point. For some reason I want to associate this with Humphrey Bogart, but I don't think it was him. The voices are definitely similar though.

And now I'm free to give my own critiques! I didn't want to this time because I felt so false a few months ago when I 'critiqued' my own story. Let's see here:

Morpheus: I liked this story a lot. Like Renns said, you have a talent and you obviously did a lot of study on the topic. Also like Renns said, I thought it was him and he'd ripped a piece out of his Colorado AAR.

Unfortunately I agree that the end feels like a summary. I think this would have done very well as a much larger piece, or even an AAR in its own right. The jump from Burr vowing to fight on to the trial was rather jarring. It would have been interesting to see Jefferson, Hamilton and Marshall developed at length as well.

A very good effort though, in a time period that's not always well defined. Well done!


J. Passepartout: Like some of the others I couldn't quite wrap my head around this. It's clear from the opening paragraph that Humfords despises what Rensford has done. It's not at all clear why Humfords is helping him. Is he a co conspirator lucky enough not to get caught? (I haven't fully read your explanation yet, so it's probable you already answered all this.) When Humfords mentions that he hopes Rensford meets the same fate as Napoleon, it again appears clear he doesn't like the man. And what was so special about what they drank that night?

During the meeting with the king Rensford clearly betrays Humfords, accusing him of getting him out of France too soon and stealing his wine. Why is Humfords with him ten years later? Fleeing his uncle makes sense only if the king denounced him. Having done so, he went to his enemy's house?

Perhaps this was also due to the nature of the post. I think this story would improve with length...we need to know a lot more about Humfords and Rensford, and how they interact to figure out what's going on.

Yeah, see if my explanation helps. Otherwise, tell me my explanation makes no sense to that I can explain more.

Anyway, I had guessed Rensslaer for one of them, reasoning that it was a New Yorker, but now I notice he is from Colorodo. Easy enough mistake to make. I am not French but my username might one to believe that.