posted
Linnea was responsible for doing the laundry. The water had just started singing in the washing machine, when her landlady appeared. "What are you doing with that Blue Star?" Mrs. Thelma Bingham almost raised her voice. "I am putting it in the washing machine," Linnea answered. "Where did you get that thing?" Thelma continued, grabbing the Blue Star out of its orbit of wet towels. "Your neighbors gave it to me." "Oh, they didn't have enough courage to give it to me face-to-face," said Thelma. She dropped the irridescent five-pointed thermoplastic star into a nest of dryer lint in the trash-can. "But they said that it will make our clothes cleaner. And it’s environmentally friendly. You can cut the amount of detergent in half," Linnea recited. Exhausted with disgust, Thelma shuffled to her chair. "Scams pollute the earth."
Posts: 21 | Registered: Sep 2019
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay, this appears to be a posting by a troll, not an honest attempt at writing. If you follow the link in their profile the page that comes up is a copy of one labeled, Homeimprovement.com (a real website).
The supposed profession of the poster is "professor." But no way in hell would a "professor." not be aware that a new speaker requires a new paragraph—or write this. A check of the troll's supposed website shows it's registered to "Moniker Privacy Services." In other words, the troll doesn't want to be traced.
In fact, if you search on the name of the person supposedly holding our "professor's" account, Cynthia Leah Hallen, it belongs to a real person, an associate professor of linguistics at BYU. I've notified her of this impersonation
In short, the poster is a phony. The post, obviously, was written in hopes of prodding people here into dancing for them. Fortunately, the troll's not all that skilled at being one.
In short: Madam Moderator, your help is required to lock the account, and retain the post should the real professor care to view it (I've sent her the link).
[ September 30, 2019, 11:39 PM: Message edited by: Jay Greenstein ]
Posts: 263 | Registered: Dec 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jay Greenstein, I happen to know this so-called "troll" and I can tell you that you are mistaken. Thank you for your concern, however.
Challenge, just so you know, we don't count the spaces between paragraphs when we count the 13 lines, but if you choose not to create new paragraphs for the 13 lines, that's okay.
I'm glad you have enjoyed the Workshop so far. I looked at the website in your profile and there is an extra http:// in there that may contribute to a problem with the link (I attempted to edit it and the Hatrack software has now removed it - sorry!).
Maybe the Hatrack software's glitchiness is responsible for the incorrect website appearing when you followed the link, Jay?
Posts: 8826 | Registered: A Long Time Ago!
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am so glad you don't live under a bridge, Challenge.
Added later:
Everyone tries to game the 13 lines; if I can squeeze in a great climax I'll get good critiques.
The 13 lines isn't about reaching a dramatic climax. It's about focusing your attention on what should be most important to a writer; engaging with your readers and holding on to that as tightly as you can.
Phil.
[ October 02, 2019, 03:12 AM: Message edited by: Grumpy old guy ]
Posts: 1937 | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think you need to add paragraphing. It's hard to read.
quote:Linnea was responsible for doing the laundry.
No one stops reading here. But, nothing is happening yet. This is not a goofy start to intrigue me. Is it a topic sentence?
I am not sure why it's important that she's responsible for doing that laundry. If it is, I think you need to clarify whose laundry she is responsible for, right? Of course she's responsible for her own, right? She also does it for her husband? Isn't it enough that she's doing her laundry?
I mean, we all like different things, even in starts. But I think yours is slower than what I usually see. I think I see where you are going, but you need to bring that out.
King said (in another context) that writers should be bold.
quote: "Why are you putting that silly blue-star in my washing machine?"
Linnea jumped at her landlady's accusing voice. "The neighbors gave it to me. It'll make our clothes cleaner. And it’s environmentally friendly. You can cut the amount of detergent in half."
I'm starting the scene-clock, because I like that. I'm implying a lot of the things you stopped to tell me. And I'm trying to bring out your hook.
Welcome to Hatrack, I have liked your comments. Jay tends to have the same reaction as me, though he will say it differently.
Posts: 407 | Registered: Apr 2018
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, if Kathleen vouches for you, that's good, and I'm glad to see you fixed the link. Your gaming the thirteen lines, combined with the nonfunctional link, and the disparity between your official profile and the one here was misleading.
Correcting the post to a more readable fashion may help identify the problems that need to be addressed:
quote:Linnea was responsible for doing the laundry. The water had just started singing in the washing machine, when her landlady appeared.
"What are you doing with that Blue Star?" Mrs. Thelma Bingham almost raised her voice.
"I am putting it in the washing machine," Linnea answered.
"Where did you get that thing?" Thelma continued, grabbing the Blue Star out of its orbit of wet towels.
"Your neighbors gave it to me."
"Oh, they didn't have enough courage to give it to me face-to-face," said Thelma. She dropped the irridescent five-pointed thermoplastic star into a nest of dryer lint in the trash-can.
"But they said that it will make our clothes cleaner. And it’s environmentally friendly. You can cut the amount of detergent in half," Linnea recited.
Exhausted with disgust, Thelma shuffled to her chair. "Scams pollute the earth."
The first thing that hits me is that you're trying too hard to be literary. A washing machine with singing water? I've been hearing them run since washing machines had wringers, and I've yet to hear the water do anything but slosh. That, and "orbit of wet towels" seem self-consciously "literary," and call attention to themselves, rather than working in service to the story.
Next, as Emma noted, above, given that we don't yet know where we are in time and space, what's going on, or whose skin we wear, why does it matter to the scene, or the reader, at this point, that she's responsible for the laundry of unknown people? Would the story change were she one of three people who did it, or that it's her laundry in the machine? Given that it's her use of the "blue star" that's in question, whose laundry is is would seem to be irrelevant.
Part of the problem is that because you know the story, intimately, you'll forget to include things that are obvious to you, but for which the reader needs context. In addition, you're thinking cinematically, and telling the reader what's happening on the screen you see in your mind, and explaining what you feel the reader needs. But that places you on stage alone, talking about the story when the reader expects to be made to live it, as her, and in real time. Look at the opening as a reader, who knows only what your words suggest to them:
quote:Linnea was responsible for doing the laundry.
This is irrelevant. She's doing laundry and the landlady enters. That's story, as is the landlady noticing the star. It's story because it's happening. But the opening line is history, not story, and gives the reader no context to make sense of what happens next, so all it does is slow the narrrative.
quote:The water had just started singing in the washing machine, when her landlady appeared.
This is data, given by a dispassionate external voice, not the landlady. In the words of Mark Twain: “Don't say the old lady screamed. Bring her on and let her scream.” In this case, why not something like: - - - - From behind, a voice, filled with disgust said, "What in the hell did you just put into my washing machine?" She turned to find her landlady, hands on hips and mouth twisted. - - - - That tells the reader the same thing, but as our protagonist views it, without destroying all sense of reality by having you appear among the actors.
quote:Mrs. Thelma Bingham almost raised her voice.
If she almost raised it then she didn't raise it. I imagine there are literally millions of things she didn't do. Why mention this one?
My point is that because you're telling the reader a story in narration, and the viewpoint is yours, not Linnea's, you're going to have this kind of problem appear. Were you presenting Linnea's viewpoint, though, you'd never say that she almost raised her voice because Linnea wouldn't hear her tone change. And...
quote:"I am putting it in the washing machine," Linnea answered
Several points: First, she's not "putting it into the machine, it's already in, because the landlady reaches in to take it out. Again, in her viewpoint you'd notice this and state it more accurately.
Next: Linnea is working at the machine, and has not moved away. But somehow, in the next line, the landlady seems to have pushed our protagonist out of the way and is reaching into a running washing machine. And the protagonist doesn't react? If someone did that to me, or even reached into the machine I'm using, the discussion wouldn't be about using a laundry aid, it would be about my reaction to her assaulting me. But since you're dictation the character's behavior based on the needs of the plot, rather than the protagonist's perceptions and reactions, you will do things like this and not notice you're doing it.
In short: it's not a matter of how well you're writing, or your talent and potential as a writer. It's that you're using the writing skills you own in service of the story you're telling. But you're missing some critical information.
Think back to your grade-school days. Did any of your teachers explain the difference in approach between fiction and nonfiction? Did they tell you that you were assigned endless reports and essays, whose goal is to inform, to ready you for employment? How about the structure of a scene on the page? Did they mention the huge differences between working in a medium where the audience can see all the detail in the scene in an eyeblink's time and one in which everything you mention is described serially, one item at a time?
The answer for me was that like most people, I left school believing that writing is writing, and that since I learned to write, and the profession is called Fiction-Writer, there's some connection between the name of the skill and the profession. And like everyone else, I forgot that all professions are learned in addition to the general skills of the Three R's we're given in school. And so, like pretty much everyone else, I used my schooldays skill-set and wrote six novels before I learned that fiction, with the goal of giving the reader an emotional, rather than an informational, experience needs to be writen in an emotion-based and character-centric way.
There's certainly no reason you can't master the skills needed, but you do have to acquire them. Since the day you and everyone you know began to read, your books of choice have been professionally written and prepared. The structure of the scenes in them, and the techniques used, are what you expect to see when you pick up a story and begin to read. Given that, doesn't it make sense to devote a bit of time, and perhaps a few coins acquiring the skills the pros take for granted?
The library's fiction-writing section is filled with the views of pros in publishing, writing, and teaching, and well worth the time to acquaint yourself with them. You may not always agree with their viewpoints, but you'll know that those views work for them.
I'm immodest enough to suggest that you might find some of the articles in my WordPress writing blog helpful in understanding the issues involved (site rules say I can't link to them here. As for a good source of information on the nuts-and-bolts issues of constructing a scene that sings to the reader, these days I'm recommending, James Scott Bell's, Elements of Fiction Writing.
I know this is a lot to take in at once. But my goal wasn't to discourage you, or tell you how to write, other than give you reason to dig into the field. But before we can change, we need to know why we must, which is why I went into so much detail.
Here's the thing to remember: you're not telling the reader a story. You're not making them know the protagonist and their life. You're making the reader feel, and care about what's happening in the moment the protagonist calls now. And in the words of E. L. Doctorow: “Good writing is supposed to evoke sensation in the reader, not the fact that it’s raining, but the feeling of being rained upon.”
This, I'm afraid, is a lot ,longer than I intended. But after having misunderstood your original post so badly, I took the time to, hopefully, make myself clear, in apology.
Hang in there, and keep on writing. It keeps us off the streets at night.
Posts: 263 | Registered: Dec 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thank you all for the comments. I normally write verse, so prose is my second language, whether fiction or non-fiction.
Posts: 21 | Registered: Sep 2019
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
