If you have a weakness, it’s punctuation. For example, none of the commas in the second sentence is needed. On the other hand, you’ve omitted periods from the end of the first paragraph and from “Of course General, as always”.
I don’t know why you capitalized the word “Barbarians”; it isn’t a proper noun. The second last sentence in the piece is a fragment.
I can’t pin down an applicable period in time for this piece. Perhaps that’s intentional. However, “barbarian” suggests Greek or middle to late Roman times, “liege” suggests the feudal system in the early part of the last millenium, and “general” suggests the latter half of the last millenium.
The piece could be tightened up a bit, saving some space to further describe your protagonist’s state of mind. “Our enemy, ruthless invaders, Godless heathens – Barbarians” could be simply “the barbarian invaders” without affecting the piece significantly. Rodney’s name doesn’t need to be mentioned twice: omit the first reference. That kind of thing.
Oh, how I’ve missed, you, August, and you’re – Edit-orials
You really should do this sort of thing more often. And especially to my work! If you don’t mind, I certainly won’t. – I need some good-ol-fashioned critique!
We all do.
Thought: ‘…commas in the second sentence are needed.’ (‘is’ just sounds wrong)
Thought I think you meant “your” rather than “you’re”! There is an internet maxim that is something to the effect that one stands an increased chance of committing a grammatical error if one is criticizing someone else’s grammar. ;-)
My punctuation was sloppy. Thanks for the feedback. General is not at all reserved for post 1500s, it dates back to Roman times. Also, liege can be a term between any vassal and their lord. I was hoping for some commentary on the character and setting.
Of course you were hoping for that, Drake – not all this tiresome nit-picking over grammar and punctuation (he said, with breathtaking hypocrisy). Although, for the record, you’re still missing a full stop after Barbarians (which could be a proper noun, if this is how the group in question refer to themselves). And fragments are legitimate, and effective, if used carefully.
I guess the historical details are vague enough to allow the reader to choose a preferred setting and time: I’d go for Romans vs Vandals C5th, but that’s just personal taste. The theme of the weary general, weighed down by responsibility and craving a moment of solitude before battle is familiar, and well done here. Character-wise, there’s not too much to say as there isn’t a great deal to go on; no doubt the rather sketchy characters of the General and his aide could / will be given more colour in a sequel.
this segment as an introduction to a character I have been working on for about 20 years, is a bit slow going. Punctuation fixed – I hope!
Also, you could consider a fantasy setting, which somehow went over all your heads ;)
The conflict is set up carefully and concretely – The Godless invaders vs. the Righteous Defenders – pretty standard fare if you ask me, but workable.
The character of the Field General is interesting to me, a man consumed by the throngs of those he is responsible for, and those he is responsible to. It is a character study worth developing. He seeks solitude to cleanse his mind and soul before a battle he will not physically engage.
@Drake: Well, I did suggest that my inability to identify a specific time period might have been intentional on your part, so that’s my out. I used to read science fiction and fantasy once upon a time (so to speak) but I’ve virtually stopped. Historical fiction is what I read when I want to read fiction so I tend to see things in that light.
I think you’re right about ‘godless invaders vs. righteous defenders’ being somewhat standard fare, and I’ll add that life is never as black and white as we might wish it to be. Invaders have very real and non-trivial motivations and righteousness is not always a virtue.