*****
There was once a baby born on a Sunday, who turned out to be a strong breather even though she came four weeks early. Her mother, a woman who had given birth three times before, and three times given her children up for adoption, had never before noticed the breathing patterns of a very young infant. The first night home with the baby, she knelt at the foot of her bed, peering over the side of the port-a-crib, listening intently, listening more closely than she ever had to another human being. The baby slept on her back, per doctor’s instructions, holding her breath and releasing it in shudders.
The mother, listening to her four-day-old infant breathe irregularly, assumed something was not right, and could not lay back against her pillows. She stayed, crouched and cold, thinking of what to do.
The doctor who had delivered this child was at the hospital again, short on sleep, waiting for lab results and drinking a Dr. Pepper at 1am when his cell phone rang.
One thought I had was to wonder why, if the mother had never listened for her babies' breathing before, she was doing it now. I think this is just due to the way you set up her noticing this, but it did bother me. Maybe you could have her holding the child and she notices how different it is from her previous babies. It just seems odd that she's crouching in front of the cradle and listening for the baby's breathing when there was never any reason given why she would be doing so.
Finally, the bit about the doctor was a bit jolting for me... especially the bit about how he was drinking Dr. Pepper. Since we don't even know the mother's or the baby's name, and there has been very little detail up until this point, this little bit pulled me out of the story. I had a bit of a "so what?" reaction--why, if you're not giving me details that are more important, are you telling me about this random guy drinking Dr. Pepper?
Hope that helps.
[This message has been edited by AeroB1033 (edited February 13, 2005).]
Sarah didn't know what to do. April, asleep in her port-a-crib, was breathing [some description of what's wrong] ...
So now we're in the moment and know who our POV character is.
If you try to squeeze too much information into these first thirteen lines, the beginning will end up feeling over written. Or worse, over wrought.
Here are the things that catch my interest, so far:
*A (semi)miraculous birth. The mother has rejected her first three children, but she decides to keep this one—why? It might help to mention whether these three previous children came from three different fathers.
*The mother seems like she’s been rather irresponsible in the past, but now she’s trying to do the right thing. She must me suffering from a tremendous amount of guilt.
*The image of a young(?) and inexperienced mother worrying over her newborn child is very evocative.
Anyway, these are the things that pique my interest, so far. I think you could easily accentuate these things without too much trouble, or without making the beginning longer, either.
Anyway, if you’d like me to read the whole thing, send it on over.
My reaction to this text in publication would be that the mother is a totally unimportant character and that we're not supposed to consider her feelings at all. I'd also assume that the story first saw print in a literary journal rather than a competitive market.
Also, why is it important that the baby was born on a Sunday? Are you implying that babies born on a Sunday get less than adequate care at hospitals. What exactly is meant by "strong breather"? It almost sounds like you are stating it is a medical condition.
Newsbys, the infant in this story, though premature, was a strong breather, i.e. a healthy child. The "shuddering" breathing I described is actually a normal newborn pattern, though the mother didn't know that. By the way, this story was inspired by an interaction my husband (a family doctor) had with one of his patients.
Basically: Mother with rough history wants to keep her baby. Case worker wants to take child into state custody as soon as it is born. Doctor believes in mother and convinces state to give her a chance.
Point of all of this is to illustrate that you may have started the story in the wrong spot (in this case, too late) thus may not have provided needed info to the reader, or simply may have provided misleading info.
When I asked these questions, you gave me backstory as an answer, with the added info that your hubby is a doc, which I'm guessing means he can verify the medical info.
You won't get that chance with an editor.
Often when we (on Hatrack) ask specific questions we don't really want an answer, but rather just want to point out to you that the question was raised in our minds. This should be valuable info because it allows writers to gauge what the reader is thinking, and if it is in-line with the plan for the story. In other words is the reader being guided in the correct direction.
I see you have quoted some info on POV. This frag has some POV problems. In the info you quoted, you state that:
quote:
3rd person limited can be so sympathetic to the character that it is virtually a 1st person POV.
That is true, but misleading. This frag is not written in 3rd person limited. It is 3rd person Omni.
For instance, in 3rd person limited, a character knows their own name. Instead of “the mother”, it would be Jane Doe, or whatever the person’s name is. In this frag you go from floating above the scene looking down on the mom and baby to closer in on the mom, to skipping across town to the doctor drinking a DP. That is Omni. It is the world as a omnipresent god-like entity would see it. You, as the god-like Omni narrator are showing a lot of sympathy towards the mom, but that alone does not make it 3rd person limited.
To fix the POV problems, try exactly what that writing guide says. Write this frag again in 1st person. Then change the pronouns (to he, she, it, whatever) where necessary. I guarantee this frag will go in a whole new direction.
(edited for spelling, and to add a smiley)
[This message has been edited by NewsBys (edited February 15, 2005).]