Prison fantasy. Not that kind. About 3 pages so far.
The man in cell 6 looked glum, same as he always had for fifteen years. Not that it was the same man, he changed every few months, but the warden was the same, and to him all the glum faces had become one. It had happened sometime after the first three and a half years, and definitely some time before the fifth, but to hell with it, Mickey Laurels didn’t care. He was just another witch in his seven walled cell with the thirteen latticelike bars bent to form just the right antimagic hex that kept witches from doing their dirty charmwork. Mickey would have never dared to stand unarmed before any of the thugs in Trent Maximum Security Prison, but here in Section 18, the Antimagus Wing, he’d have stood balls to balls with any of them and laughed
Posted by darklight (Member # 5213) on :
I'm a little confused to who's POV we're seeing this from. And is the 'man in cell 6' Mickey Laurels?
Actually, I'm a bit confused all round. First it seems like we're from the wardens POV, then Mickey's but I'm not sure if they are the same person or not.
I think you are trying to tell us much but just confusing us. If its about Mickey, let's see the world from his POV.
Also, 'what' had happened?
Posted by EP Kaplan (Member # 5688) on :
Mickey is the warden, he's approaching cell 6
Posted by darklight (Member # 5213) on :
A big problem is this:
quote:It had happened sometime after the first three and a half years, and definitely some time before the fifth, but to hell with it, Mickey Laurels didn’t care. He was just another witch in his seven walled cell with the thirteen latticelike bars bent to form just the right antimagic hex that kept witches from doing their dirty charmwork.
This makes it sound like Mickey is in the seven walled cell. I'm guessing you meant the other guy is in the seven walled cell?
edited to add: if you give the other guy a name, it might help to clear up the confusion.
[This message has been edited by darklight (edited July 04, 2007).]
Posted by EP Kaplan (Member # 5688) on :
You're absoultely right.
'All he saw was just another witch.'
Posted by JeffBarton (Member # 5693) on :
What I understand from this: The warden is assessing a new prisoner, but can't distinguish this one from so many in his past. The new prisoner is Mickey, a witch. Witches are kept in special antimagic cells. The second paragraph is inconsistent with the understanding I get from the first. If Mickey is the warden and he's afraid of convicted thugs in the maximum security prison, he wouldn't necessarily be afraid of suppressed witches. The last sentence implies the personality aspect of a bully where he can feel superior to inmates who aren't physically strong.
The misunderstanding may come from naming the MC so late, or from naming only one of the characters in the first paragraph. Perhaps dropping the name in closer to first mention of either the prisoner or the warden would clarify.
This start sets the fantasy genre and the place. A prison setting has plenty of possibilities for conflicts of many types (including 'that kind') but the first 13 don't start any of those. The hook depends entirely on the magical fantasy genre and prison setting.
Posted by nitewriter (Member # 3214) on :
If HE was "just another witch" - then is there any particular reason you have not called him a warlock instead of a witch?
Posted by TMan1969 (Member # 3552) on :
The title weakens your story before anyone reads it, IMHO. "Just Another Witch"...reads (almost) like "this is just another witch story with magic..blah..blah - The Witch of Section 18, or The Antimagus Conundrum...your story [is] interesting - but as yoou can tell, I have a bone to pick with the title...
Posted by debhoag (Member # 5493) on :
The witch of cellblock 18! or Warlock. it's got hook! Trent = king trent?
[This message has been edited by debhoag (edited July 04, 2007).]
Posted by EP Kaplan (Member # 5688) on :
Yeah, the title... I'm using witch like the n-bomb, the k-word, pick your favorite.
And most modern Wiccans would say there is a difference between witches an warlocks not covered by x/y chromosones.
Posted by debhoag (Member # 5493) on :
I would suggest that if you are using a fantasied world as the setting for your story, it might not have wiccans in it. If this is in the extremely long ago past of this planet, wiccan's might not yet exist. Drawing Down the Moon is a good resource book if y9ou want to do straight Wiccan-based mythos.
Posted by EP Kaplan (Member # 5688) on :
According to Richard Buckland... Warlock "From the Scottish waerloga, meaning traitor or oathbreaker warlock is a term that has been applied to a male witch but is never used by Witches themselves" He goes on to say that Warlock came to mean a rat, one who sold out his or her coveymates.
Thus our fine prisoner might turn warlock, he might be in because of one, but he is not yet worthy of the title.
[This message has been edited by EP Kaplan (edited July 05, 2007).]
Posted by debhoag (Member # 5493) on :
That's Buckland's ABCs? I'm not going to argue a point with anyone who has done as much research as you obviously have, but there is a common American usage which i do believe has started to depart from the original usage. And here, at least, the word "witch" does have gender connotations to the uninitiated (no pun intended - well, maybe a little one )
Posted by sleepn247 (Member # 5312) on :
Yeah, definitely needs work with establishing who is who. I initially thought the POV was the wardens. Then I thought Mickey was another prisoner (the one in the seven walled thing) and a witch. That got me real confused. I reread it after reading your comments, and it makes more sense now, but you have to make that clear from your narrative.
Though witches do have a gendered connotation, it didn't bug me to have it applied to a man. Of course if you're going for accuracy that depends on your setting.
Other than the pronoun confusion, I thought the first 13 were great.
or Warlock. it's got hook! Trent = king trent?
)