annoying at best, annoying & a little sad if you've already figured it out.
Rock-a-bye baby, on the treetop.
When the wind blows the cradle will rock.
When the bough breaks the cradle will fall
and down will come baby, cradle and all.
A mysteriously-named Event is about to happen ("Today was the day Jimmy would have to report for The Procedure"), but the nature of the Event isn't revealed until the end of the story, when it turns out to involve death or other unpleasantness. (Several classic sf stories use this approach, which is one reason we're tired of seeing it. Another reason is that we can usually guess the twist well ahead of time, which makes the mysteriousness annoying.)
So I was the only one who (a) thought there wouldn't be any reveal, and (b) was okay with that?
I strongly disliked this story. In my opinion, 100% of the tension is derived from information deliberately withheld from the listener/reader. This is not drama, it is a narrative trick; by the end I felt cheated. It's akin a movie composed solely of everyone shouting "Oh no! The thing is coming!" The characters know what it is, they can see it, but it's hidden from the viewer.
In a story structured this way, the big "payoff" is the final moment of revelation unto the reader not unto the character. The most dangerous thing about playing this game is that if the payoff is not impressive enough to the reader, the story can fall flat. For me, the revelation at the end was utterly insufficient to justify the literary "blue balls."
If you really didn't already suspect a zombie situation after about one minute and weren't expecting the father to mash the baby after minute five and were hoping for resounding confirmation: "AND IT WAS ZOMBIES!" then yes, I think you would be disappointed. Personally, the reality of the situation was completely secondary. It could be zombies, baby plague, mutant Martian spores--whatever.
...Or why clutter it with inconsequential details?
Sometimes stories aren't about surprising you.
the zombie baby was a new angle (for me) that added a lot to it. I guess the option was open that the reanimated dead were not violent, but in the context of previous zombie stories, the image of the toothless baby biting on its mother's breast was truly horrific.
I think this technique is particularly problematic in that someone who *doesn't* read genre fiction at all would read this story and go, "Um... I have no idea what happened,"
the zombie baby was a new angle (for me) that added a lot to it. I guess the option was open that the reanimated dead were not violent, but in the context of previous zombie stories, the image of the toothless baby biting on its mother's breast was truly horrific.
Well, even if the undead were violent, how much damage could a toothless baby zombie do? I think the crying might have been the best it could do.
So were adults becoming zombies, too, or just babies?
This makes me wonder why the mother (forgot her name - Emma?) thought committing suicide was going to solve any problems...
This makes me wonder why the mother (forgot her name - Emma?) thought committing suicide was going to solve any problems...
I'm pretty sure that her state of mind was not such that she was interested in either solving problems, nor rationally evaluating what would be effective at solving problems.
This makes me wonder why the mother (forgot her name - Emma?) thought committing suicide was going to solve any problems...
I'm pretty sure that her state of mind was not such that she was interested in either solving problems, nor rationally evaluating what would be effective at solving problems.
exactly. Most suicides are particularly rational. In any case, if the fall squishes her enough, maybe there won't be anything to come back to.