Mostly I'm looking for comments on style. What about the style do you like, and what do you hate? How can it be tightened?

***

Elder Rubus was swept into the moon's spell along with the girl, so he knew more of it later. More than the hunter Panax, who didn't see her step out of the eastern forest, and didn't watch her follow the moon into Tidalmont.

Your first line makes no sense to me. I don't know what it means to be "swept into the moon's spell" but I can wait to find out about that (provided the explanation comes in the next handful of sentences.) However, the addendum of "so he knew more of it later" turns this sentence from a hook into something unintelligible. My reaction is: Huh?? What is the "it" he knew more of? No one knows. Be clear or it makes no sense. I suggest you put a period after the word "spell" and tie his knowing in with the next sentence, instead... it seems to relate better. The need to clarify what that MEANS is still critical, however.

Your quick switch from Elder Rubus's POV into Panax's POV is jarring. Pick a POV and stick with it for the entire scene.

What do you mean that Panax was "trapped in the stag's eyes?" That doesn't make sense on a lot of levels. First of all, I'm assuming this is a fantasy story. When you toss in narrative that hints at magic, you have to be clear whether it IS magic or not. Is the stag conjuring some kind of spell? Why would someone who apparently has SOME hunting experience feeling hypnotized by a stag? Unless he's a young, impressionable boy who's never before committed Bambicide, it makes no sense why he should be "trapped" by the stag's gaze.

How can someone impale a shadow? Unless you are Peter Pan, shadows have no true substance and cannot be impaled. If this is a magical element you have to do a little world building for us first. You are jumping out of the gate with fantastical elements that come across as nonsense because you have not yet laid out how magic works in your world.

Keep in mind your reader comes to you with a preconceived mindset of how the laws of physics, and magic, work. Before you can use your unique twist on how magic operates in your world, you have to introduce us to it and let us in on what the rules are.

Why are you unhappy with it draft after draft? Is it just a stylistic problem? Or do plot and character give you trouble, too?

I do have a question for Elan: Can you pinpoint why this struck you as third person POV and not omniscient? I've had readers see it both ways, most have gotten the omniscient voice I intended, but I've missed for some people. I'd like to know where I failed, so I can fix it.

As for my unhappiness, I wrote the first chapter as a sort of relaxation exercise 10 years ago, when I got my first word processor. About 5 years ago, I found the print-out and added another 5 chapters, still not sure where the story was going. In the last two years, I've finished the rest of the story. These first 6 chapters that are just eluding me, because my writing has changed so much.

I actually picked up the phrase years ago watching a movie called Return of the Seacaucus 7." It was a low budget, independent 1980 movie that inspired the movie "The Big Chill."

My memory of that line was that a character hit and killed a deer with his car, and got arrested for poaching. He is stuck in in a jail cell with some big, bad, ugly dudes who look like they eat little skinny college students for lunch. One of them asked what he was in for, and the character replies: "Bambicide."

quote:

---

Elder Rubus was swept into the moon's spell along with the girl, so he knew more of it later. More than the hunter Panax, who didn't see her step out of the eastern forest, and didn't watch her follow the moon into Tidalmont.

---

I didn't do any detailed analysis. In short, that first paragraph was gosh-darned confusing, and frankly I can't isolate any sort of pattern out of it because it jumps around. It was an initial impression. You start with Elder Rubus, you talk about him knowing "it," whatever "it" is, and my assumption with the following sentence is that perhaps it was a revealing of his thoughts, like: "I knew more about it than Panax did because he didn't see her step out of the forest, he didn't watch her follow the moon." That's how I read it.

Then the next paragraph jumps to talk about Panax. For the omni to work for me, you have to take a step back and not try to get into the character's "knowing", or their thoughts...

I'm sorry, but I had real trouble understanding what you were going for here. I read it three or four times at least.

POV: I perceived a free omniscient first paragraph and then 3rd-person limited with Panax's POV starting in the second paragraph.

In fact, I'd suggest that even if that's not what you intended, that's what you wrote: the 2nd paragraph started strongly with Panax's POV, naming him firmly as the subject (the second word) of your first sentence, and giving his precise perceptions of the moon's reflection. After that, there's nothing that's identifiably from someone else's POV, or anything that Panax couldn't know. If you want omniscience, you need to be omniscient.

Sorry to be pedantic about it. Maybe it would help if you told us about the rest of the story. Who are the main characters? What is the relationship between Elder Rubus, Panax, and the girl? Why doesn't the girl have a name? What happens to them? Why is this the opening? What was the other opening? Revisions are approaching infinity, therefore there must be something that makes you care for this story -- so what is it, and what does it have to do with the three characters (maybe four, if the stag is important) that you've introduced to us so far?

Are you looking for readers for the whole thing, so they can help you with the first six chapters? Or do you want to fight through this, just getting advice on the stuff you don't like right now?

I'm going to duck and flee now, because if someone suggested I do that with a novel, I'd club them over the head like a baby seal. (In keeping with the hunting motif)

I have another question, though, about this POV stuff. Yes, I name Panax as the subject, but I have to say his name, no matter what POV I'm working from. (I think Survivor was trying to help, but his meaning eludes me.) The second paragraph, to me, flagrantly violates third person POV (i.e. "he felt..." and "...fell from his stand in surprise..." and he wouldn't call himself "...the hunter..."), but several comments here indicate that it isn't, well, omniscient enough. Can you provide an example, just one sentence, to illustrate what you mean?

It wasn't just that he was the subject of the sentence; it's that everything in the paragraph could have been from his POV. It's distant, but it's 3rd-person limited.

I don't really understand what's going on here, so I hope these suggestions don't sound too crazy in context.

1. Shift from Panax's POV to the Stag's in the first two sentences.

-----
Instead, Panax watched the moon's reflection shift through the eyes of a twelve-point stag. The stag sensed him from across the field and captured him with its eyes, making him fail over an over again to notch an arrow.
-----

2. Say something in a way that Panax wouldn't. I know you mentioned "the hunter", but I don't think that was strong enough. "But hunter became victim" here plays that role. (I also added "himself" to "he felt trapped" -- I'm not sure why, but that seems to add a little distance.)

-----
Instead, Panax watched the moon's reflection shift through the eyes of a twelve-point stag. But hunter became victim; he felt himself trapped in the stag's eyes, trying over and again to notch an arrow.
-----

3. You could combine the two:

-----
Instead, Panax watched the moon's reflection shift through the eyes of a twelve-point stag. But hunter became victim; the stag sensed him from across the field and captured him with its eyes.
-----

quote:

---

The second paragraph, to me, flagrantly violates third person POV (i.e. "he felt..." and "...fell from his stand in surprise..." and he wouldn't call himself "...the hunter..."), but several comments here indicate that it isn't, well, omniscient enough.

---

Maybe we're all too used to reading stuff that _unsuccessfully_ tries to be 3rd-person limited. That's why "the hunter" doesn't strike me as clearly being omniscient -- lots of people writing in 3rd-person limited will use multiple names for the same character, even if he wouldn't think of himself that way.

I agree with the POV shift as being jarring, my suggestion would perhaps be to start from Elder Rubus's perspective. Have him describe what it was like to be caught in the moon's spell, maybe even seeing the girl and then Panax's arrow pegging her shadow to the ground later, to the rest of their group.

I had no trouble with that imagery, BTW, this is a fantasy, and I kinda liked the originality of it, yes sort of like Peter Pan, but since we are only seeing such a small bit of it, I am not ready to make that distinction. I also liked the way the scene seemed to flow from the forest along with whatever spell the stag, or something else, may have been casting.

You said this is not ready for a longer crit, but possibly maybe what your first chapter needs is a fresh set of eyes and I would not mind volunteering to read a bit of a larger work.

Consider sending it my way.

Thanks.

I guess this is a fragment of your initial idea, I ma often guilty of doing this. I say the sentence in my mind, write it out and because I thought it, I assume I finished it correctly. This opening line, made me say "more of what?". Maybe describe the moon's spell effects and why they were swept in it. I explainig the hows and whys would do alot for the beginning.