This is topic Untitled, Standard Fiction, 18,000/ ~60,000 words at present. in forum Fragments and Feedback for Books at Hatrack River Writers Workshop.
*EDIT* new 1st 13 from a different perspective. More show, less tell. Updated: ---- “Are you listening to me, Simon?” Mrs. Hubbard asked. I’d stopped listening somewhere after the part where she explained the merits of homeschooling children over the indoctrination of the evil public school system. I’d heard this one before anyway. “I’ll never understand why your mother lets the two of you stay there!” Mrs. Hubbard continued, focusing her attention on me. It wasn’t the first time she’d derailed our Sunday School lesson to make an example of me and Sarah, and it certainly wouldn't be the last. I should have known better than to say anything, but I felt like I had a valid point to make. “We— We’re just at school, Mrs. Hubbard,” I said. “We’re not being bad kids. W—” I stuttered as I tried to draw more words
This is neither SciFi, Fantasy, or any other subgenre that I usually find myself within, but just good, ol' fiction. And if that's not kosher, feel free to remove this post.
It is coming along as a sort of "Coming of Age" story, so its intended audience is 14-18 years, though so far my test readers have reacted positively, emotionally, and to the prologue and first chapter, well-into their 30's.
It's a retrospective, first-person, something I'm not familiar with writing or reading, but that's how it came out. Grammar is far from perfect. (I feel like I say that a lot)
I'm curious as to what the first 13 lines feel like to you all.
Ahem... ----
It was interesting, being the only publicly-schooled kid who was regularly seen at church, though I brought Fred with me as often as his father’s condition would let him. My absence from the weekly homeschool co-op that the other kids attended was certainly noticed and never forgotten by Pastor Hubbard’s wife, which then trickled down the chain to the deacons, and finally to my mother. She never did do anything about it. I was left in Montabella High School, with the heathens and the lying, evolutionist teachers, either to be a light to the world or because Mom truly needed to see me fail so she’d have a reason to crush my dreams. Evidently they had learned their lesson with me and kept my little sister out of it, preferring to homeschool her instead.
----
[ March 27, 2019, 11:01 AM: Message edited by: Mecopitch ]
Posted by WarrenB (Member # 10927) on :
A reaction only, not an analysis:
The fragment started to interest me from the final sentence of the first paragraph on, i.e. "I was left in Montabella High..." I was amused by the "light to the world" image, and by your references to heathens and lying evolutionists (which I'm reading as irony). And made curious about the storyteller's relationship with his mother (and about her character -- I've always appreciated wicked witches; they do move stories along!). This sentence also led me to wonder about your character's foreshadowed role as a 'savior' of some kind. In short, by it, I'm interested.
The final sentence also offers hints about what they (family? church?) learned from this experiment in public schooling -- which obviously met with mixed reviews... Lots of humor and pathos potential there for younger or older audiences.
Only after reading these final two sentences, did I become even slightly invested in what was happening with Fred, Pastor Hubbard and his wife, etc. Overall, on first reading, the first three sentences confused me, or simply didn't grab me. What does "interesting" mean in this context? Who's Fred, who's his father, why should I care? Which 'she' failed to act (I'm guessing that was mom, but there's some pronoun ambiguity)? etc.
From the content so far, Irving's "A Prayer for Owen Meany" sprang to mind as -- maybe -- inhabiting adjacent story-space... Am I way off-base with that? If not, then I would have questions about how strongly this story is differentiated from that one (though perhaps the different target market is enough?).
In terms of construction, I would be more motivated to read on, if the fragment began with sentences 4 and 5. There's traction there and some hooks which might intrigue. The complexity of church society could be unpacked as we go along... and once we're with your central character/narrator.
Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
My vote goes for getting rid of the first sentence. The second sentence seems to me to be a much better start.
Posted by Mecopitch (Member # 10173) on :
Thank you, Warren! Reactions are more than welcome!
I was unfamiliar with A Prayer for Owen Meany but having briefly checked it out now, I can tell you it has similar themes in that it is critical of religion, touches on social issues, etc. But that is about all they have in common Unless the writeup I found was incorrect.
I guess the notion of being the only one publicly schooled kid being an "interesting" experience would be made known to the reader without explicitly saying so. I could eliminate that first sentence altogether.
Maybe starting with the Mother never making good on her threats to pull him form public school? Immediately setting up a conflict between the mother and narrator? I love when I'm hooked by the first line... I'm just not great at it :-) My favorite being, "Ryan was nearly killed twice in half an hour." - Patriot Games. It sets up the entire universe, and you know what to expect for Jack Ryan for the next 20 years.
Posted by Mecopitch (Member # 10173) on :
Thanks KDB! Maybe then I could expand "She never did do anything about it." Into something like, "Mom never made good on her threats to pull me from Montabella High."
Posted by EmmaSohan (Member # 10917) on :
To me, this is not a style I would expect to see in a modern book. Which seems like a cruel thing to say, but there you have it.
You wrote: "It was interesting, being the only publicly-schooled kid who was regularly seen at church," I expect something more like:
quote:I was the only publicly-schooled kid regularly seen at church.
That hints at conflict, or a problem, or a tension.
You change topic to Fred, then to Fred's father, all in the same sentence. The next sentence explains that there is a home-school co-op, that he doesn't attend, that people noticed, and finally (I think) that he didn't tell his mother he was going to public school.
(Alternate start: I didn't tell my mother when I stopped going to the church school.)
So, you are giving me information, which could add up to an interesting story. But you're dumping it on me, instead of creating tension, contrast, building, and I still don't have a list of what writers actually do when they create a scene. I want to say you are supposed to tell me a story, as opposed to giving me the information in your head.
Good luck. I like the premise.
Posted by Mecopitch (Member # 10173) on :
Hm. Out of curiosity, where did you get that he hasn't told his mother about leaving church school? The last few lines say, albeit implicitly, that his mother left him in Montabella High School.
I'm working on a revised 1st 13. Stay tuned.
Posted by Mecopitch (Member # 10173) on :
There is a revised opening at the original post.
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
Division, revision, adjustment considerations? Or is the first-person agonist hypoliterate due to public school or home school shortfalls?
My absence from the weekly [homeschool](home school) co-op was [certainly] noted and never forgotten by Pastor Hubbard's family[; the](. The) [resulting] vitriol [eventually] meandered [its way down](along) a cascade of disappointment(,) through every level(each branch) of church leadership, [eventually] stopped [with](at) [my mother] (Mom). [Mom](She) never followed through on [her](the) [clearly] empty threat[s] [of removing](to remove) me from Montabella High School[,](.) [so]I was left to the terrors of [the] public school[ system], with the [lying](lies)[,](and) [evolutionist](evolution) teachers, [either] to be a light to the world or [just because] Mom wanted [so badly] to see me fail,(--) so [that she'd](her malice toward the secular world would) be vindicated[ in her malice toward the secular world].
Also, this defuses somewhat the perpendicular pronoun "I, me, my, mine" self-promoted subject reader alienation of the first word, first sentence, first clause:
//Pastor Hubbard and family noted and never forgave my absence from the weekly home school co-op.//
I could not read further as an engaged reader.
[ January 11, 2019, 04:23 AM: Message edited by: extrinsic ]
Posted by Mecopitch (Member # 10173) on :
Thanks Ex! This is your most helpful response to any of my fragments, yet.
It seems I've fallen into a sort of adverb trap. Even after reading On Writing... Shameful.
Any and all feedback is welcome at all times. It's no secret that are many people on this forum with far better grammar and vocabulary than me. (Than I?)
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
Objective case "me" or subjective case pronoun "I"? Or possessive case? Objective there means part of a sentence object phrase; subjective, sentence subject phrase.
Hard to distinguish. "It's no secret that are many people on this forum with far better grammar and vocabulary than me. (Than I?)"
//_I_ keep no secret that my vocabulary and grammar are less than many people of this forum's far better aptitudes.// Subjective case.
//No secret that many people on this forum have far better grammar and vocabulary than _me_.// Objective case.
//No secret that many people on this forum have far better grammar and vocabulary than _mine_.// Possessive and objective case, sentence object position.
//No secret _my_ grammar and vocabulary are less than many people on this forum's far better skills.// Possessive and subjective case, sentence subject position.
//_My_ limited grammar and vocabulary skills are less than many writers' far better aptitudes on this forum is no secret.// Possessive and subjective case, sentence subject position. ---- I attended assorted church schools, private schools, Sunday, Bible, and CCD schools, public schools, numerous and diverse and each grounds for abuses and bullies about one the other and all at once, no formal home school co-op attendance, though have tutored home schoolers and had been home tutored some until the eventual GED rental folks could no longer keep up with whatever school or me -- about sixth grade.
[ January 11, 2019, 04:24 AM: Message edited by: extrinsic ]
Posted by EmmaSohan (Member # 10917) on :
Yes, this new version resolves my main issues. To me, it now reads like a reasonable start, like I would find in a book. It's interesting to me, and I keep reading.
There are probably small issues, that you will probably fix yourself. For example, I think you want "reaching" instead of "stopped".
Another small point, but vitriol worked really well for me, for creating issues I want to read about.
Posted by Mecopitch (Member # 10173) on :
The next thing I'm working on the opening is demonstrating that it wasn't just one absence, but that the narrator had never been a part of the Co Op, because he wasn't a home schooled kid.
Events that happen at the Co-op without him effect the story later on.
I think I agree that either stopping or reaching would work better than stopped. I thought about using "finding repose" but repose feels too positive for the surrounding sentence.
Posted by Grumpy old guy (Member # 9922) on :
I much prefer the first fragment. The stream of consciousness seems so much clearer. I am reminded of the opening of Catcher in the Rye and Holden Caufield's complaints about his family and life. It's almost a combination of cherished love and loathing.
I really don't know if I'd read on or not; depends on my mood. I know this is of absolutely no use to you. Sorry.
Phil.
[ January 13, 2019, 06:04 AM: Message edited by: Grumpy old guy ]
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
Either-or, neither fragment engages me. Consider the fragments' mannerisms are voiceover paraphrases that tell circumstances in a summary fashion. Though first person, the narrator blocks the view of the action. Get out of the way! Once upon a time, that discourse method was common, all but exclusive. Visual entertainment media changed that. Prose wants a greater proportion of verbatim expression, actual visual and aural sensations portrayed on screen in scene, due to movies and television.
Each clause or so of each fragment wants a scene. Direct discourse, verbatim expression of circumstances that matter in the here and now. An absence from the co-op in and of itself is a challenge to portray, a proverb demonstrates: absence of proof does not disprove absence. A scene would show the narrator-agonist confronted (antagonized), maybe by one of Father Hubbard's peer age children, for non-attendance at the co-op. Not one overlong run-on sentence summary, several paragraphs of verbatim and dramatic sensory details at least.
Where is the scene? Who is in the scene? When, and what, why, and how?
The fragments summarize -- paraphrase -- three scenes: Mother and Father Hubbard and offspring's contempt for non-attendance, Mom's empty threat to transfer him from the public school to the co-op, and the public school lies and evolution instruction. The non-attendance confrontation scene could lead into a school scene to a Mom scene. Maybe the school scene first, confrontational, so that time conflates, then a Hubbard confrontation on the way home to a Mom confrontation scene?
Hubbard? Really? Okay, like the nursery rhyme? A smart subconscious plant? A children's nonsense rhyme popular for diction and syntax and social instruction.
Where's the scene(s)?
Posted by WarrenB (Member # 10927) on :
I don't find the discourse method a turn-off in an introduction -- more nostalgic. Provided there are more 'verbatim expression'/viscerally realised scenes later in the text (quite soon, I hope), some straight narration upfront is fine by me... Especially if the narrating consciousness hints at interesting complications (church vs. secular world, saviour motif at a public school, etc.) and intriguing characters (vindictive mother, the pastor and his wife, the narrator himself) down the line. I assume this is setting up the meat of the book and naming central characters.
I agree with Phil though: while I didn't think it 'started' until a few sentences in, I preferred the first version. The addition of 'vitriol', the cascade metaphor, 'malice' and 'secular' take me out of the flow (and away from who I thought the character was), rather than injecting color/movement/valuable info. Lower level vocab might be more appropriate in the beginning anyway -- given your mooted market?
I assumed Hubbard was a nursery rhyme reference, and wondered what it foreshadowed about the pastor and his wife.
In general, I'm interested in learning how this story unfolds. If you're looking for another reader -- not a close editorial reading, but comment on the whole -- and are not in a major rush -- I'd be happy to read your draft. (Engaging with a longer work would be good for me too, since I'm trying to embark on a novel for the first time -- which is more than a bit daunting.)
Posted by Jay Greenstein (Member # 10615) on :
#1
quote:It was interesting, being the only publicly-schooled kid who was regularly seen at church, though I brought Fred with me as often as his father’s condition would let him.
For you, who begins reading with the knowledge of who we are, where we are in time and space, and what’s going on, this makes perfect sense. To a reader? Look at what they’ve learned after reading this:
Someone unknown, of an unknown social class, age, background, and location so far as era or country (or even planet, I suppose) finds it interesting, in some unknown way, that he or she is the only one who didn’t go to some sort of undefined private school. Why is it interesting? You don’t say. In addition, someone named Fred, who has an unknown connection to the speaker, came to this unknown denomination’s church when his father’s unknown condition didn’t interfere. That might be once a year, three times a week, or anything between.
Forgetting that the reader has context for nothing that was presented, it’s not story, it’s an info-dump of backstory the reader has not been made to want. My personal view is that here is where the rejection slip would come out of the drawer.
The rest of #1 is just as cryptic. You talk about unknown people for unknown reasons, as if the reader both knows who you mean, and cares that what you allude to happens.
Some advice: On entering any scene the reader needs to quickly know where they are, what’s going on, and whose skin they wear. They would also benefit from knowing what the protagonist’s immediate goal is, so they can recognize when something occurs that will interfere with it. Without that, they have no context to make your words meaningful. The reader should be treading a self-guiding trail that provides the context needed to make sense of what’s being read, as-it’s-being-read, or before. And hopefully, they’re given that context in a way that’s more enrichment to necessary lines than exposition. Readers hate reading reports and info-dumps.
#2
quote: My absence from the weekly homeschool co-op was certainly noted and never forgotten by Pastor Hubbard's family; the resulting vitriol eventually meandered its way down a cascade of disappointment through every level of church leadership, eventually stopped with my mother.
Several comments:
First, I see no reason the reader must rush from sentence one to sentence two, to make what was said meaningful. So the semi-colon seems unnecessary.
Next, Why do I care that the family of someone named Pastor Hubbard is upset that this unknown speaker doesn’t attend the weekly homeschool co-op meetings, for unknown reasons? Hell, I don’t know what a “weekly homeschool co-op” is, or what people do there.
What’s killing you, here, is that you’ve not taken into account that you cannot talk to the reader in the same way you would in person, if for no other reason than that the emotion in your voice does not make it to the page, any more then your intent for how the reader should take your words. Never forget that the reader has only what the words suggest to them, based on what has gone before and what the words, and punctuation suggest based on their background, not yours.
In recording the words you would use in telling the story in person you end up leaving important parts of the story—parts the reader needs in order to have context—in your head, unmentioned, because they seem obvious to you. But you cheat. You know all the backstory, the situation, and the characters before you read the first line. So to you it makes perfect sense. Only by viewing the situation as the protagonist who is living the story in real-time, and taking into account what matters to them in that slice of time they call, “now,” will you know what the reader needs to know, to have the protagonist as their avatar. Instead of explaining the story to the reader as a dispassionate outside observer, recounting things that once happened, place the reader into the protagonist’s moment of now. Make them know what matters in the scene, not the report on the scene. In other words, make it live, moment-by-moment as it does for us in life. That doesn’t mean present tense, it means presenting the protagonist’s viewpoint.
Remember, while you can tell us how Pastor Hubbard speaks a line of dialog, or how the protagonist does, you cannot make the reader know how the narrator speaks their lines, which is why Sol Stein observed: “In sum, if you want to improve your chances of publication, keep your story visible on stage and yourself mum.”
So open your story with story, not history. Don’t tell the reader that undefined people said undefined things because of undefined actions. If it matters, take Mark Twain’s advice to heart: “Don't say the old lady screamed. Bring her on and let her scream.”
Want us to know people are spreading stories that get back to Mom? Open with Mom confronting our protagonist about it. The fact that it happens is detail. How the protagonist responds is story. Fair is fair. Your protagonist is the star of the show. It’s their story, not yours. So let the character live his/her own life as we watch, instead of talking about what happened. Make the reader feel as if it's happening to them, as they read. We aren't reading to learn what happened, after all. We're reading for entertainment. And that takes a very different approach from informing the reader on the historical chronicle of events.
I say this a lot, I’m afraid, but here’s the deal: Writing fiction for the printed page requires a very different approach from telling the same story in person, or on the screen or stage, because our medium is so different. It precludes some things and mandates others. And if we’re not aware of that… If we don’t know the elements, for example, of what a publisher views as a well written scene, can we write one with any assurance that the one we submit the work to will lean back in their chair and say, “Hmmm…tell me more.”? No, we can’t.
Bear in mind that nothing I said about the lines you posted relates to your talent or potential as a writer. What I’m reacting to is matters of craft and presentation—the learned part of our profession. So if you’ve not dug into the specialized knowledge and tricks of the trade, some time spent digging it out would be a wise investment of time.
Sorry my news isn’t better, but…I through you would want to know.
Hang in there, and keep on writing. It keeps us off the streets at night.
Posted by Mecopitch (Member # 10173) on :
I know this might sound absurd, but I hadn't even thought of Old Mother Hubbard while writing. I chose "Hubbard" as a last name because it sounded sufficiently stuffy for the type of family I was trying to portray.
I have a tendency to ignore the literature I know while I'm writing. There's no real correlation, even be accident.
Phil - I definitely agree. If you can imagine a combination of The Catcher in the Rye, The Perks of Being a Wallflower, and an antithetical version of Donald Miller's Blue like Jazz, this is what I feel I'm writing, thought not on purpose. The narrator is essentially looking back and providing commentary for his life's DVD Extras.
Side note, I could not stand Catcher in the Rye when I read it way back in 10th grade, I found Caufield to be a deplorable protagonist. I get it now.
Warren - Nostalgic is sort of what I was going for. Later on in the story, there are references to the time period in which this takes place, and the three people who have read my first chapter have both told me they love where they think it's going, identify with the narrator, and have told me to finish it.
Between their reactions and the good criticism I've received on this forum, it's safe to say that I have to finish. If you want to sent me a private message, I could send you some other portions. I'm not entirely comfortable sharing my entire work with "strangers" yet, but I'd be happy to have someone read through parts of this.
I'm also finding out that novels are incredibly daunting. This started out as an exercise. Now I'm at 24,000 words... 1/3 through my outline and first draft. Oops.
Ex - The discourse within the fragment reflects scenes that play out later. I guess I feel the tension created initially by the lack of respect he receives from the church's leadership, and the apparent abuses from his mother in the first few lines set up the attitude for the rest of the story.
The reader might expect to see injustice after injustice at the hands of both the narrators church and family. Or perhaps they'd expect a sort of coup against the leadership of his church, teaching them the true meaning of Christianity, etc.
I think the tension that sets in later in the story may better emphasize the scenes you're expecting at the beginning. It could be that my story should start with more impact, I'll see if there is a more organic way to make it happen than straight up narration.
Posted by WarrenB (Member # 10927) on :
Sure - will send you an email.
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
The texture what and why at the least do a constant of back story starts that thought and memory filtered narration wants, that is, upsets emotional equilibrium. Shy though, or altogether absent, when and where the introspection recollection context and how texture transpire. Who context given.
Does the narrator reflect at a library desk before a 1940 Underwood manual typewriter? In jail with pencil and paper? Locked down in a church basement with a laptop? On a beach with a smartphone? On a playground with an audio recorder? At home with an outdated desktop console? Spoken aloud to a transcriber or a direct address to implied readers or "real" campfire listeners?
Setting and milieu time, place, and situation context anchors develop characterization, too, and provide readers a stage set within which to construct a relatable and familiar, if exotic, scene in the mind's eye, so that thought expressions come from other than a mindless, headless, disembodied void. I default by default to a bathtub setting, stuck in a bathtub and contemplates the navel. Bathtub stuck equates to Henry James' goldfish in a fishbowl representation of human consciousness, viewable though inaccessible.
[ January 14, 2019, 04:43 AM: Message edited by: extrinsic ]
Posted by Mecopitch (Member # 10173) on :
There is an updated first 13 in the original post. Hoping it reads better but still gives you a taste fo the narrator's personality.
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
The third version contains an event and several characters, one, the first-person narrator-viewpoint agonist; however, the fragment contains no setting detail. Show's reality imitation wants dramatic, influential setting details.
Home school and a Sunday school setting wants a judicious description of the place at least, and before a first dialogue line uttered from a disembodied mind.
My experiences with both home school and Sunday schools indicate a "punk" type setting admixture meld of polished refinements and crude make-dos with available materials and indoor and outdoor places. Some of the Sunday schools, though, were pure polished academic refinements. Fourteen years of church schools of variant "financial' wherewithal, and glimpses all along of church settings for tertiary education.
The fragments indicate a home school superiority and supremacy; therefore, ideally, the situation best practice shows facets of supremacy and inferiority, the "punk" quality. High school-age Sunday schools, in my experience, were often in otherwise adult meeting and conference rooms, small library study rooms, or banquet halls and such, maybe a gymnasium or cafeteria, once a barroom, rarely, if ever, an age-appropriate dedicated classroom space. Regardless, a true show describes some such space's congruent opposite supremacy-inferiority irony details that reflect the dramatic situation of supremacy run afoul and express strong attitude about same. Thus, a narrator-agonist's personality develops therefrom.
Due to the third fragment is all dialogue and thought discourse, no influential and relevant physical-sensory detail, I would not read further as an engaged reader.
Posted by Mecopitch (Member # 10173) on :
Ex - What if I preface the initial dialogue with something like this?
Mrs. Hubbard sucked the life out of every room she entered. This room within church was already stuffy enough, with its puke-green carpet and lack of windows. It didn’t need her help.
Does this help establish the mood or am I getting too descriptive?
Posted by EmmaSohan (Member # 10917) on :
I am a fan of starting with something happening, so I liked
Are you listening to me, Simon?”
(It has more power without the dialogue tag, and you want power here. If you mention her name in the next sentence, that works.)
What you have can go second, or be put in somewhere. You are good at creating mood and character.
Another small thing. One of your versions had "I wasn’t, but I neither was I about to admit it." But if you took out that sentence, it seemed to be implied or could be easily implied by what came next.
Or that's just my style. Again, intriguing start.
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
Mecopitch posted: "Mrs. Hubbard sucked the life out of every room she entered. This room within church was already stuffy enough, with its puke-green carpet and lack of windows. It didn’t need her help."
Adds strong attitude and setup for the dialogue, less so dramatic sensory-physical description, plus, if up front by itself, inaptly stages expression modes by blocked segments.
"Mood" is more so a grammar principle for prose than an emotional state of being: indicative, imperative, and subjunctive grammar moods. Tenor is a more apt term for emotional texture, the ideal term, especially per attitude and tone.
Consider more and judicious sensory-physical descriptions which also entail attitude, and leavened among the dialogue and thought discourses. Label the church room, from which, if wanted, aptly dramatic sensory-physical details might arise, say an obligatory employee break room, part kitchenette, microwave and coffee maker, a small fridge, hand sink, mandatory Department of Labor Employees' Rights posters, several small Formica tables jammed together, mismatched chairs, and a general junk and stuff catchall of abandoned items "management" stores there and which trespass upon worker privacy boundaries. Not all of that, one heightened-attitude detail that characterizes the whole and fits the attitude on point.
Likewise, a physical detail about Mrs. Hubbard, say, she's a Clairol hair dye rhubarb blonde, big hair done up in a '60s do? Rhubarb blonde? Greenish-hued strawberry blonde, from heavy hairspray lacquer.
Same for the other classmates, some sensory detail with attitude that describes and compasses the whole: lemming chatter, chipmunk, squirrel, lambs, an aural sensation maybe, nonetheless a physical detail that expresses the group are witless sycophant followers of Mrs. Hubbard. Or similar other variant.
Much to consider, yet the consideration is leaven sensory detail among the speech and thought blocks, so they're complete micro-segment sequences that move forward rather than block-built paint-by-numbers still-life portraits. Lavish leisure attention to details that matter, or develop those so that they do dramatically matter.
Demonstration from what's given:
//Mrs. Hubbard sucked the life out of any room. “Are you listening to me, Simon?” she said. This room within [the] church was stuffy enough. Puke-green carpet and lack of windows [an apt sensory-physical detail and attitude] -- it didn’t need her help.
//[here, occasion for a room description or classmate detail and attitude, that shows-implies Simon looks away from Hubbard, ignores her diatribe] I’d stopped listening when she glorified home school grace over public school evil. This sermon I'd heard before anyway.// And so on.
The "sucked [the] life" saying is often and easily cliché, though a Simon thought and situation and age appropriate characterization, apropos. Consider "the" omission, though, for strength and freshness innovation of the saying. Likewise, "puke-green" is age apropos and further amplifies Simon's character development.
Say?:
//Purgatory church's break room didn't need her help.// Note a negation statement is an irony type, for prose and often in real life: litotes, which intends a positive opposite meaning, and apt for strong sarcasm, though stronger and clearer expression and force than that is a plus-plus. Another word substituted for "help" is an occasion for force increase and strength clarification of the sarcasm. Piety? Kindness? Charity? Or similar other ironic-sarcastic commentary word?
Reconsider any "it" instance (its, it's, too). Here, "It didn’t need" references a vague subject antecedent, common shortfall of the pitiful and overworked pronoun. More so, the rhetoric principle of substance for strongest expression is repetition, substitution, amplification sequences that increase force movement (auxesis). "It" sentence subject substituted for the room in the church decreases force, all but deflates force movement altogether. Also, reconsider any pronoun, for that matter; several "this" repeated in short succession is a tip-off for inapt diction and maybe syntax shortfalls, plus occasion missed for force movement considerations.
Though the above are advanced prose craft skills and may consume more word count than the fragment as is, albeit, wants less wordiness and which occasions, therefore, more robust words and sentences in the same word count, the net effect is stronger expression craft that intimates and promises a read will be worth the while, while moves toward a pendent dynamic event, and with what's already given's potentials, sets up timely reader engagement from force and deft craft movement from the outset.
[ March 27, 2019, 06:07 AM: Message edited by: extrinsic ]
Posted by Jay Greenstein (Member # 10615) on :
quote:“Are you listening to me, Simon?” Mrs. Hubbard asked.
One of the problems with dialog as the opening is that the reader has no idea of what emotion to place in the voice as they read. And after we read with the wrong tone we learn that the speaker is a woman, of unknown age, in an unknown situation, inflected as a result of an unknown mood. Her words could be quizzical. They could be angry. How can the reader take them as you intend, when we’re in no one’s viewpoint?
quote:I’d stopped listening somewhere after the part where she explained the merits of homeschooling children over the indoctrination of the evil public school system.
So, who are we? Where are we? What’s going on? Lacking that, what can this mean to me? You know. Mrs. Hubbard Knows. Shouldn’t the protagonist’s avatar, the one you wrote this for, know, too?
I know you said you were showing more, but this is all telling. Look at the presentation. This is not the protagonist reacting to what was said. It’s the narrator explaining. Does it really matter if it’s the author explaining or the author pretending to have once been the one in that room with the lady? No, because telling is telling. Story happens, and does so in real-time, not overview.
The majority of this is the narrator explaining.
But suppose you’d presented something like: - - - - - - The smack of a ruler striking my desktop brought my attention back to the room, and on Mrs. Hubbard.
“Are you listening, Simon?” she snapped. I resisted the urge to call her an idiot. Of course I wasn’t listening to her latest attempt to talk Sarah and I into leaving a school system that taught things like evolution. Stop spending my days in school with my friends to please her?
That wasn’t going to happen, but I had to respond, so I said, “… - - - - - - Not your story or your characters, or even especially good writing. But look at the difference in approach. Instead of a narrator explaining, the character is living the scene in real-time, driven by his perception of the events. And at all times, the reader has context. Look at the sequence:
1. The ruler gives us context for the teacher’s opening line, At the same time it gives us context for her having used the ruler. We’ve placed them into some sort of a classroom, with our protagonist being inattentive and reprimanded for it.
2. The motivation, above, drives the protagonist to react. In this case, with the impulse to insult her, which he stifles. That’s character development. And the question he was asked gives him a reason to reflect on why he was inattentive, giving us some important plot-points, without having an external narrator come on stage to explain.
3. Having reflected on what the teacher was trying to do—which tells us what’s going on—he reacts, and rejects the idea of leaving, not because of a love of evolution, but for reasons that matter to him, personally. But that decided, he has a problem, in that he must respond to the teacher’s question. So…
4. In response to that motivation he begins his reply.
Note that each point above, represents him perceiving, thinking, and acting, in real time, which gives the reader a feeling that time is passing. That can’t happen with a narrator explaining things in an external, dispassionate voice.
Hope this helps.
Posted by Grumpy old guy (Member # 9922) on :
I am not engaged as a reader. A simple, straightforward statement, isn’t it, but what do I mean by it? There is nothing within this new fragment that excites my imagination: little or no development of setting or character. There is nothing within the fragment which arouses my curiosity: lack of development of the situation and character(s) (including possible conflict). There is nothing within the fragment which arouses my sympathy or empathy: lack of character development, and possible situation development.
Why would I bother to read on? All I have are empty words and observations spoken (and thought) by empty characters about something undisclosed--but not yet developed.
At least the first version, despite its poor execution, made some attempt to begin development of character, setting and situation. Not that you need to develop all of them, or even two of them at the same time; just so long as you begin the development of one of them in such a manner that a reader (not you) might find it interesting. Let me reiterate: it must be interesting for an unnamed and unknown reader; what you find interesting is irrelevant. Unless, of course, you are writing the story for yourself. In that case, write whatever you want; you only need please a readership of one.
I also have a whole lot of questions concerning why you chose to start your story here and why in this manner. Did you give serious thought to where you might start the story, and how, or did you just start writing from this point because that’s how you imagined it? I can guess at the answer, but it would be nice to be wrong.
Hope this is useful in some manner.
Phil.
Posted by Mecopitch (Member # 10173) on :
Would it be best to start somewhere else and use these particular events as backstory to be touched on later? There are similar experiences throughout the Simon's history that are similar in nature to this.
Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
Try it.
Write up some of the similar experiences and see if one might work better for what you are trying to do than the others.
Something to consider is that you don't have to write the first draft in the order in which the final book will be read.
They don't necessarily film movie scenes in the order in which they are shown in the movie.
Try writing the part of the story that you care the most about. Then write the part that you care about most when that first part is drafted.
Don't be afraid to skip around in a first draft. You can put the scenes all together in your rewrite.
Posted by Jay Greenstein (Member # 10615) on :
quote: Would it be best to start somewhere else and use these particular events as backstory to be touched on later?
Depends on the situation and the inciting incident.
Remember, we're not following the protagonist with a camera, or a notebook, and recording their lives. We presenting the essence of conversation, and scenes in which every line either sets the scene, meaningfully develops character, or moves the plot.
So, take the inciting incident, and back up far enough that when it happens we'll know what the protagonist looks at as normal, and have an empathetic bond with them. The incident will serve to disrupt the protagonist's short-term scene-goal (or direct the protagonist to the events that will bring the inciting incident). That will introduce tension.
Done that way, when the incident occurs the reader will react as the protagonist does, and feel the same way.
Posted by Grumpy old guy (Member # 9922) on :
I hate it when I’m right--sometimes. Here’s the question you need to be able to answer: “When (or where, or how) did the story start?” Obviously you have no idea of that at this point in time, or you would have stated there. This isn’t uncommon and can be fixed. However, the problem is writers persist with an inappropriate beginning because they are fixated on their initial vision of the story. Bad starts, and inappropriate ones too, deserve to be tossed out with the used bathwater.
My advice at this point in time: Write the story. Don’t worry about finding the right place to start, just start it. Once you get to the end you will have a better idea of where the story actually started. And, as for the back-story stuff, forget about it for the moment; it isn’t needed. Just write the story.
Hope this helps.
Phil.
I thought I would just add this: Character back-story is for the writer, not the readers. It bores most people to tears; just tell the story, the past will attend to itself.
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
The start as is entails the apt dramatic event of a contention between Mrs. Hubbard and Simon. That's a problem-motivation antagonism, implies a want on both's parts. That's complication complete enough for thirteen lines. Complication may imply a conflict, too. For the start, the conflict stakes risked are Hubbard's acceptance and rejection of Simon. The complication and conflict are given and done artful and complete enough, inferable enough.
A consideration, though, is how those present. First-person occasions a by default close narrative distance. Narrative distance is the degree of separation between a narrator's external perspective and a viewpoint persona's insider perspective. The three versions emphasize a remote to middle distance outsider narrator perspective more than close insider viewpoint persona experience, and of a rigid summary and explanation control rather than a vivid and loose cannon on a gun deck.
A told introduction scene, this one or another, is artless drama, irrespective of this one or any other. Show is the wanted though shortfall feature in any case. Show includes insider descriptive event, setting, and character details, as well as drama's Antagonism (complication forces), Causation (conflict forces), and Tension (emotional attitude forces), ACT.
Hubbard berates Simon and he's in full control of the situation? Ought he be if Hubbard victimizes him? Ought Simon be emotional, subject to emotional outbursts? Or he's a wicked Sunday school villain who torments Hubbard? Show which, or both, for Simon is as human frail as Hubbard. If he does control his emotions, internally, he ought roil, not utterly ignore Hubbard. He can believe he's in control yet ought exhibit, at least internally, if not externally a degree, that he's anything but in full control.
Also, while the full scene unfolds toward an inevitable surprise end, Simon's control degree should slip further off center. Simon fixed in her sights, Hubbard could further goad and prod him into full control loss (antagonize); meantime, Simon, too, goads and prods Hubbard, less deftly than Hubbard. Simon could serendipitously mess up backward and "win" the duel, realized later, after he leaves, maybe storms away in a huff and consoles himself that he won a few wounded points. Or end the session Simon cowed by Hubbard and defeated. Thirteen lines is insufficient space for the full scene. Ample enough space for a setup.
The gist of the above is "Make a scene," the social connotations of that saying as well as prose's denotations; that is, Hubbard and Simon ACT the villains of a highly contentious and mutually humiliating public spectacle. They are contestants in single combat on a field of battle, the duel one of hurtful words spoken and thought, maybe gestures, and Simon's perspective shown through his perceptions of the setting as much as of Hubbard and others who witness their duel.
What object in the church room most symbolizes Simon's fluid emotional status? Where do his eyes turn when he ignores Hubbard? Her eyes are of a predator's unwavered focus on Simon, ready for the kill.
Does Simon slip away before the duel fully erupts? More power to him for being the "nobler" person. Before his exit, though, Simon ought realize Hubbard will not let him free. Soon or late she will exact a pound of flesh. That's a scene-end criteria: a revelation, a reversal, or both transpire.
If Simon intends escape, then the doorway of the windowless room is his unintentional focus. Or an indifferent and forgotten drab poster print of, say, a Nature landscape, that evokes for Simon some favorite and peaceful outdoor place, the print one taken perhaps from the Bible. Christ's temptation in the desert? Moses at the Red Sea? Saul on the road to Damascus? Jesus and the fish and loaves? One of those also shows the larger setting and milieu of Simon's whole world, a Nevada desert city, a Milwaukee lakeside community, a Midwest farm town, an urban sprawl, a festive celebration carnival, ad infinitum, somewhere outdoors?
A first awareness Hubbard goads Simon into an emotional state and won't let Simon away easily could fit in thirteen lines, though not of necessity, only shown that a word duel is afoot and gonna get loose and hot, that Simon does wish to avoid, yet cannot help himself but weigh in, too long tormented by a dearth of a thousand slights. Shown, not summarized and explained in a forced rush and as soon defused by Simon's tight emotional control. Make a scene, sensational spectacles of yourselves, please, Simon and Hubbard. The scene is natural and probable, if not necessary, both dramatically and as far as Simon realizes and is concerned, for Hubbard will not let him get away unscathed.
Though, as the Hatrack consensus agrees, "Write on" anyway, leave the start's full realization for revisions later; meantime, expand story craft skills from completion of the whole, such that the start will then be ready for adjustments therefrom. (Write on! is our moderator Ms. Dalton Woodbury's catch phrase, as mine is May you realize the whirlwind! taken from the Bible, Hosea 8:7. As our Meredith's is, paraphrased, Writing is not a sprint, it's a marathon.)
[ April 03, 2019, 01:33 PM: Message edited by: extrinsic ]
Posted by Mecopitch (Member # 10173) on :
I usually avoid backstory when I can for that reason exactly. I'm around 60k at the moment in draft "2.5" and this scene does pale in comparison to a few others toward the beginning of its arc.
The eventual conflict is less with Mrs. Hubbard or any one person in particular and more the struggle of having your feet in both worlds, Secular and Sacred. Internal struggle that manifests in his actions and thoughts, and the anxiety that comes along with it.
I've considered combining Mrs. Hubbard and Simon's mother, as they are similar enough and it must be more of a struggle to deal with your own mother as an educational, spiritual and familial superior. Any actions he'd take would have far deeper consequences for sure. This would of course change the dialogue here, but with a better starting point, this scene might not exist.
Thanks for giving me all of this!
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
Fully realized complication-conflict entails tangibles and intangibles. For example, Hubbard is a tangible nemesis of Simon's, and he hers though wishes to avoid contention.
A foot in secular and sacred realms and attendant complication-conflict is the tangible's congruent intangible. If the latter were told outright, is superliminal, that is artless and unappealing.
If the former shows the latter, and all of the action, too, includes an outcome of both tangible and intangible complication-conflict satisfaction, that is sublime appeal and the liminal-to-subliminal degrees function of subtext.
A foot in two realms, metaphysical (sacred, spiritual) and mundane (secular [no way dull]), is a sublime complication-conflict and sublime what a narrative is truly about kernel focus. Ostensibly, too, Simon contends with secular nemesis forces that attempt his apostasy, and both metaphysical and mundane nemeses shown as ignoble. Nemeses, agonists, are contenders for a goal, destination, object, etc., only one contender may win or accomplish. Simon's spiritual and moral human being. Simon is himself a nemesis of the two sides' agendas. Three contenders? Exquisite!
[ April 04, 2019, 03:06 PM: Message edited by: extrinsic ]
Posted by Princesisto (Member # 11113) on :
For what it's worth, since everyone else is having a go, I really like the word-picture of the woman sucking the life out of everything, rather than the "Listen to me!" dialogue.
That word-picture caught my attention and made me say aloud, "Oy! What's all this about?"
But I wouldn't carry on in that paragraph describing the room. That sort of lost the lot.
You've got my attention. Now, tell me what happened.
The problem as I go on is that the main point you seem to want to make is that the main character is in a religious community where he/she is the only one going to a State school. But that is not really the point, is it? That is not a story, unless you want to write an essay about State vs. private schools.
I think there must be some sort of crisis later on. I think you should stick it right into this first paragraph. It will keep my attention and let me carry on to find out how it is resolved.
Posted by Mecopitch (Member # 10173) on :
Princesisto, The main conflict isn't between public and homeschooling, but the level of control exercised against him from all sides and how that affects him throughout his later teens and early adulthood.
If I had to identify a Big Bad it'd be indoctrination, personified by both his anxieties and his mother, (or Mrs. Hubbard, but I'm almost certain I've written her into a back seat, combining the traits into one character, his mother. They're essentially the same person anyway)
I have a few alternate starting points that I've put together, but so far I feel this is still the strongest.