My gun is only ten inches long, from the external power connector on the back to the tip of the lens at the front. It's just a piece of plastics, metals, and composites. It's not even one of the new smart guns they're rigging the exoskeletons with these days (frankly, I'm not quite sure why they bother putting people in those exos anymore -- the suit and weapons are smarter than your average chemical engineer).
My gun, though, you just point, pull the trigger, and whatever is on the other end gets a hole burnt in it. It was really meant to take down a hydra (slug weapons, at least the ones you can carry around, aren't much good on them), but it works just fine on people.
[This message has been edited by Minister (edited October 26, 2004).]
This opening isn't doing it for me. I can't take it seriously. I don't know who this person is. There's nobody to care about or root for. I don't know where we are, so I am not anchored in a place or a context.
Also, the gun is described so vaguely that I don't belive it exists. I hesitate to say that, because even if you rewrote it and described the gun in loving, almost sexual detail, I think there may be a better way to start the story.
[This message has been edited by Magic Beans (edited October 26, 2004).]
I can't say that I'm ever going to be particularly fond of first-person openings. That said, you do manage to introduce a fair amount of material about the milieu of the story, reveal a bit about the character, and even suggest the direction of the narrative in this opening, so it doesn't horrify me.
I'll read the rest to make sure.
I'm also hugely against two parentheticals so early in the story. Since you're using first person, you can probably replace them with an emdash -- your audience is more used to seeing them, and they're a bit more conventional these days.
I'd like to read it, but I'm behind on crits. May I be a round 2 reader?
MB, I'm working on a drastic re-write of the opening, taking a completely different approach. I'm having trouble fitting it to the story and character, though. I'll post it when I'm done, and maybe you'll let me know if it's something you would be more likely to read.
Survivor, the rest will soon be in the (e)mail. The first person is an experiment, trying to broaden my writing horizons beyond third person past; if there is something about my usage or style that is awkward or incorrect, I'd love to get your take on it (as well as any particular suggestions about a snazzier opening).
Rahl22, you should have seen how many parenthesis were in this story before my last round of editing! That said, I still need to find better ways of working exlanation and commentary into the narrative. Part of that whole first person thing.
Mary, just let me know when you are ready. I'd be delighted to have your feedback at any point in the process.
[This message has been edited by Minister (edited October 27, 2004).]
But then, I'm the sort of person that reads non-fiction that reads as follows.
quote:
Manufactured by the C-More Systems Company, the XM-26 accessory is an awe-inspiring weapon to look at. When mounted on an M4A1 carbine, the XM-26 makes you wonder if C-More Systems Company's favorite movie happens to be Aliens. You may recall one of the final scenes in that movie where Ripley (Sigourney Weaver) goes in a last ditch effort to find Newt (Carrie Henn) - the little girl taken by the slimy suckers. To protect herself, Ripley takes a rifle/shotgun combo weapon with her, similar in design to the XM-26. Not only did Ripley end up finding Newt, she laid down the smack-down on those acid-spewing critters. Think she could have done that without the shotgun capability of her gun? We think not.If it worked for Ripley, it can work for our military.
Sorry, I've been looking for a chance to quote that ever since I read it
I'll read either version, though. Pick one and send it to me.
Beth, I've sent the story. You're getting the updated version, but most of the material from the original is still in the story. Thanks for looking at it.