posted
The pups squirmed and yelped as they fell to the ground with a thump, smothered in the dark, still womb of the sack into which the litter of five had been thrust only moments before. The frantic cries of the just-weaned pups hushed to a whimper as sunlight and fresh air came streaming in from the now-open mouth of the sack. The top was held carefully upright, preventing the surging tumble of pups from reaching freedom. The light and warmth of day was shadowed suddenly by a large shape held above the opening by thick calloused hands. The rock was dropped abruptly into the sack of squirming puppies with total disregard for where it fell. A pup screamed, then fell silent as blood gushed from its head. The frightened cries of the other pups escalated as they were once again plunged into darkness in the close confines of the sack. Again they felt themselves lifted off the ground and carried. Very soon the smells and sounds of swift flowing water assailed their young senses. They knew they were close to water and several cried of thirst, little knowing they were soon to be plunged into the very water they sought to succor them.
Posts: 350 | Registered: Jul 2004
|
I got mental freeze just from the first sentence alone. Far too much is going on, and far too little is explained clearly.
Also, this should probably be split into more paragraphs. And finally, you start almost EVERY SINGLE SENTENCE the same exact way! (With the word "the.")
posted
I agree with Phanto, and would add that the first sentence is a run-on. Also, I don't know much about dogs, but if you were going to kill the litter, wouldn't you do it right after they were born? By the time they are weaned aren't they pretty big?
Posts: 116 | Registered: Jun 2004
|
posted
I'm agreeing with Phanto on this. You could use different descriptors for the different sentences. And this should be at least three paragraphs or so. But it's your story.
Using "the" too many times distracts from the whole story of some man that is too callous to own puppies, so he decides to drown them.
Overall, I think you're doing a fair job of describing the scene, but as has been said before it's all a bit rushed and overfull of adjectives and needs to be broken up. Try to use more description in fewer words. That sounds confusing, doesn't it. What I mean is, we all want you to give us more detail about what is happening, but we want it stated in fewer words than you might be inclined to give it in.
However, I'm certainly drawn in, anxious to find out what comes next.
I think the use of the puppies' POV is an interesting one and you do a good job of sticking to that. But I hope the whole story isn't going to rely on that POV. I would tire of it quickly.
I'm going to pick specifically at the last line. We heard the sound of water in the previous line, we're close to water, so you don't need to tell us that they knew it too. We can assume that. We also don't need to be told the obvious--that they are going to tossed into the river. Simply say:
posted
Thank you all for your feedback. This has certainly given me much to consider and to work on. I discovered, for instance, that I was not truly *reading* what I had written. Rather I was hearing the story that was in my head and not consciously seeing the words I had put upon the page. This will certainly prompt me to read my own words more closely.
To answer a few questions that were brought up, or address a few points:
If one planned to kill a litter right from the start, then yes, it would make the most sense to do so immediately. Why wait? In the next paragraph, though, the reader learns that an attempt was made to sell or give pups away and these are the "left overs".
As for POV, it begins with the pups, shifts for one paragraph to the man then back to the pups. Finally it becomes and remains that of the one pup that survives, for this is her story.
The market for this tale is probably Young Adult. I'm honestly not sure what genre to even call it! It is speculative fiction, to be sure, but certainly not sci-fi nor the classic idea of fantasy either. I've heard the phrase "interpretive lives of animals" before but my impression is that would be of mundane creatures given voice and living very natural lives. The characters in this story lead very un-natural lives, for animals.
Again, my thanks to all for the feedback. I shall see if I can put to it to good use and post my rewrite later!
posted
Okay, you probably want to focus your POV then. I mean, if you're going to do this book from the POV of the puppy. If not, then you can go ahead and put this scene in your background material folder, it shouldn't appear in the text.
Posts: 8322 | Registered: Aug 1999
|
posted
I hated it. I would have stopped reading as soon as rock killed first pup. Nothing to do with your writing, mind. Animal cruelty is just too much for me.
Posts: 1621 | Registered: Apr 2002
|
How then could I entice you to continue reading? That is the very theme which this tale tackles, and the heros are the dogs! If I could get you to keep reading you would probably like the story immensely. *g*
posted
If you want Rahl to continue reading, I'd recommend starting the story a bit after the being left in the sack... maybe an hour or so after... I think you only need hint at being abandoned...
I would also recommend finding other words to use other than "pups." Once or twice is okay in the same paragraph... any more than that is redundant.
Lastly, what kind of dogs are these? Labs? Rottweilers? Inquiring minds and all that...
posted
How about if it were slightly less graphic and none of the pups were harmed by the rock? They'd still be cast into the river but at least that spares the sensibilities of the most tender-hearted?
They are Border Collies. Their parents are described as "good working stock". These are the "extras" so the rancher has already kept the one or ones he wanted. Unfortunately, here in ranch country, this sort of thing really does happen. Often unwanted puppies are "disposed of" in even more cruel fashion. That, of course, is the source of my inspiration for this. That, and having had the privilege of owning some rather exceptional rescue animals.
And no, I am NOT an animal rights activist (HATE those people with a passion). But I do advocate animal welfare. =)
posted
I think you can maintain that scene w/ the rock and make it less graphic... I'm not an activist, but I love dogs. I don't want to read about blood gushing out of a bordie collie pup's head...
You could write it as: One screamed, then fell silent.
Just skip the blood part. We know what's happening.
Or if you must...
One pup screamed, then fell silent and a small patch of blood began to seep through the sack.
That's slight more tolerable.
However, if you truly want the "King-effect," then by all means describe the act of smashing a helpless, just-weaned puppy's head with a rock. I just think that starting off a story with that much graphic detail is risky...
On the other hand, I'm certainly intrigued. Beware of your POV, tho'... writing from a dog's perspective could be severely limiting. I would choose an omniscient POV, and maybe for certain scenes, switch to the dog's POV, when necessary.
posted
I have to say I'm with HSO on making the drowning background material and starting the story a short time afterward.
As far as taking this story from the dog's POV and the difficulties that might entail, consider (if you haven't already) taking a look at "The Plague Dogs" by Richard Adams.
If you insist sticking with it as-is, consider focusing the POV more on the surviving pup whose story this is.
posted
If you're having trouble really reading what you've written and being aware of the words instead of just the picture you already have in your head, try reading it out loud. I read every word I write out loud. Helps get an idea for the flow, and I think it might help specifically with some of the problems this paragraph has.
Posts: 1528 | Registered: Dec 2003
|
posted
Looking at what I've written on this story, I see that I could omit that first part entirely and the reader will still be fully aware of what is happening. Yes, the full paragraph that I had posted. I gather from what has been said elsewhere in this thread that it is better to suggest and let the reader infer than to pound the scene over his/her head.
I also gather that with my rather vivid descriptions I might at some point want to consider trying my hand at horror!! *g*
I do want to rewrite just a bit of the second paragraph, though, before posting it.
Thanks, all, and I shall endeavour to improve before posting again!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
