Doctor Cornelius was one of these few people who understood Adam’s true identity. Cornelius was a deeply religious man and had studied the Old Testament rigorously. He recalled the third chapter of Genesis now as he looked over his anaesthetised patient with the keen eye of a surgeon. He felt apprehensive about the procedure he was about to perform. If a success, he knew this would be a defining moment in history --a monumental scientific and religious breakthrough. Years of research and work in the field of behaviour correction surgery had finally led Cornelius here. God almighty let his work --he silently prayed to himself, although he really didn’t feel that it was necessary. He was positive that he had at last pinpointed the cause of human evil. He had identified the poison infected on mankind since the eating of the forbidden fruit.

The only possible way these work, in my opinion, is if the narrator is omniscient. And it doesn't feel like an omniscient narrator.

Since you don't seem to want a line by line on grammar and punctuation, I'll skip that. But know that there are sentences that need to be punctuated and others that are awkward.

If there's grammar problems I would like to know about them please. If you get the chance.

On the second paragraph, you're doing a lot of telling instead of showing me the scene. For example, you tell me that he's religious - but you also show it, sort of, by telling me that he's recalling Genesis. If you perhaps had him quoting that chapter of Genesis to himself, then you wouldn't have to tell me that he's religious - you'd be showing me.

"God also created good and evil [Comma here] and he infused the knowledge of both into a forbidden fruit tree in the Garden of Eden."

"Adam ate from the tree and ever since mankind has been poisoned with evil." [This sentence is awkward. Consider revising. At the very least, pop in a comma somewhere.]

"Doctor Cornelius was one of these few people who understood Adam’s true identity." [Okay, who are the others, then? Anyway, this could stand a bit of tightening. My preference would be: "Doctor Cornelius knew Adam's true identity."

"Cornelius was a deeply religious man and had studied the Old Testament rigorously." [consider using "devout" instead of deeply religious.]

"He recalled the third chapter of Genesis now as he looked over his anaesthetised patient with the keen eye of a surgeon." [Really awkward. First, we know he's a doctor. If you tell us his patient is under anesthesia, we'll assume he's about to operate. We don't need to know he has a keen eye of anything, really. We'll make the proper assumptions in the right setting. Trust us to do our jobs as readers. Second, consider revising the order of information, starting with "As he looked..."]

"He felt apprehensive about the procedure he was about to perform." [consider just saying: He felt apprehensive about the procedure... or about the impending procedure. Less words often say more.]

"Years of research and work in the field of behavioural correction surgery had finally led Cornelius here."

"God almighty let his work --he silently prayed to himself, although he really didn’t feel that it was necessary." [I have no idea what the first part before the em dash means, and then if he's a devout man, why wouldn't he feel prayer his necessary? This is out of character. Really, this line adds little and only hurts the story if included.]

"He had identified the poison infected on mankind since the eating of the forbidden fruit." [I think "infected" probably isn't the word you want. Read this sentence carefully. Perhaps "inflicted" or perhaps "the poison THAT HAD infected"

**

There you go.

[This message has been edited by HSO (edited April 06, 2005).]

Beth. I'm sorry about the first paragraph. But, I really think i'm going to keep it in for now. I'll see how it fits after i've finished the whole thing & make a proper decision then.

I know what you mean about showing / telling, but this is going to be a short story & I dont think I will have time for all that before the reader starts wanting some action. Again, when I've done more i'll see if I can shift a few things about. I like your idea of quoting genesis tho to try and show the religeous aspect rather than just say it. I'll try and get that sorted. I'm finding it hard right now to get the balance between show & tell. I'm a novice so probably experience will help. Thanks for pointing it out to me.

HSO. Cheers for the grammar critique. Also, there's something I wasn't sure about that I'd like to clarify further if that ok.

First, we know he's a doctor. If you tell us his patient is under anesthesia, we'll assume he's about to operate. We don't need to know he has a keen eye of anything, really. We'll make the proper assumptions in the right setting. Trust us to do our jobs as readers.

I'm not quite sure what you mean. The doctor is about to perform an operation so you've assumed correctly. The operation comes just after the first 13. The story really slips into a showing mode after i've had chance to set the scene.

The sentence that you couldnt fathom is because i've done a typo. It should say:
God almighty let this work

Also, in my word document this sentence is in italics. It didn't copy the style over to the post though.

Much appreciated.
ttfn

The problem with telling is that it's usually dull. Showing can lure the reader into the story in a way that telling never can.

Just like the Genesis thing - you can tell me that he's religious, or you can show me by having him take an action that's religious, like muttering a chapter from Genesis.

I find the first paragraph to be interesting. I actually did catch my attention because you don't normally get people trying to say that Adam and Satan are the same person. My biggest problem with the paragraph is that you make this outrageous claim and then kind of half explain it. Well, not even half. I have a sense that the full explnation is complicated and will not fit here, so I suggest saying less. Just kind of kick us in the gut that Adam and Lucifer are the same person and move on. I therefore humbly suggest cutting the last two sentences entirely. You don't tell us anything we don't already know and there is no real explanation there.

quote:

---

Doctor Cornelius was one of these few people who understood Adam’s true identity.

---

I thought this was a good transition. You open with a wide-view, introductory paragraph and then use this sentence to zoom in on Dr. Cornelius' POV. You will find that many people around here don't like the introductory paragraph and so long as your first sentence does not begin with the POV character's name and what he is doing at the open of the story you will get some people saying not to do it that way. I have always and will continue to disagree. That's not to say that some introductory paragraphs aren't utter crap, in which case I'll say so, but this is well within the scope of the "free paragraph.

quote:

---

Cornelius was a deeply religious man and had studied the Old Testament rigorously.

---

I must agree that there is no need to tell us this, unless you were going to explain how he "knew" about Adam. Since you didn't, and since the rest of the paragraph shows us this, I suggest cutting the sentence.

quote:

---

He recalled the third chapter of Genesis now as he looked over his anaesthetised patient with the keen eye of a surgeon.

---

This works. Now you're actually showing us some things and moving the story along. I wouldn't mind knowing what he saw in that third chapter of Gensis that I've missed, but if it does not fit into this paragraph I will understand and wait.

quote:

---

He felt apprehensive about the procedure he was about to perform.

---

This is another example of telling rather than showing, and illustrates a key mistake I have often made and try hard to correrct. You come right out and say he felt apprehensive. This does not make me feel or understand this apprehension. That comes from the understanding that this is a new procedure that perhaps this doctor has spent a good deal of his life working towards. This is important. If you give me the importance first, then you don't even have to say he's apprehensive. Maybe just show something like him perspiring and I'll pick right up on the cue. I would say he shakes a bit but a surgeon had best not shake while performing surgery.

quote:

---

If a success, he knew this would be a defining moment in history --a monumental scientific and religious breakthrough. Years of research and work in the field of behaviour correction surgery had finally led Cornelius here.

---

This is what makes me know he's nervous. I would suggest just cutting the previous offending sentence, but there's some flow issues you'd have to work out. And like I said, I wouldn't mind seeing him perspire a bit.

quote:

---

God almighty let this work --he silently prayed to himself, although he really didn’t feel that it was necessary.

---

Ohhhhh....God alimght, COMMA let this work, COMMA he silently prayed to himself. And in this case italics might not be so bad.

But then I think there's a problem: "although he really didn't feel that it was necessasry." really negates the apprehension you've been trying to create. If he's that cocky, then show us cocky. This completely fizzles out any sense of fear you had instilled thus far.

[/quote]He was positive that he had at last pinpointed the cause of human evil. He had identified the poison infected on mankind since the eating of the forbidden fruit.[/quote]

This is a serious hook. But there remains the problem of the previous sentence....if he's that positive, then he's cocky rather than apprehensive.

There is *some* cause to flag showing vs. telling in this passage. Hopefully I have been more specific and showed (no pun intended) you some teaks that might make this more powerful. As an overall reaction, I would say both that this grabs attention but that the biggest problem I see is the inconsistency in Dr. Cornelius' character. I know that a person can be both cocky and afraid deep down inside, but I have a feeling that's not really the point of this story so I'd choose one and make that the theme of something else.

I like the intro paragraph. It gives us something to think about as we read. It could stand to be tightened, but it isn't bad at all. Besides, it's only six sentences (fewer, if you tighten it as others have suggested). I'm willing to give you that much time before introducing a main character, even in a short story.

You say that he recalled the third chapter of Genesis, but you don't tell your readers (who are not likely to be able to go "oh, Genesis three, that's the one where such-and-such happens," nor are they likely to go pull out a Bible and look it up) what goes on in the third chapter of Genesis. Perhaps instead of just saying that he recalled it, you can have him start muttering, "Now the serpent was more crafty than any other wild animal... " Or, better yet, "See, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil..." (You're lucky that my Bible just happened to be sitting next to my computer and that I'm one of those freaks who'll pull it out and read it when you don't tell me specifically what you're saying.)