Cayden could still feel the cold seat through his pants. When his dad first bought the Ford Expedition Cayden complained about how the seats were always cold in the winter. Why couldn’t it have regular cloth seats like their Suburban used to have? And in the summer the seats were always hot. Especially after shopping at Walmart, where there was never any shade to park in. But Cayden didn’t complain about the seats anymore. It never did any good- just made Dad ornery. And the drive to Grandma Peterson’s house was too long for Dad to be ornery this soon. So Cayden didn’t say anything about the cold seats. They’d get warm soon enough anyway.
By the time they were on the freeway Cayden had gone over his plan three times. It was a good plan and it would work- even

quote:

---

And the drive to Grandma Peterson’s house was too long for Dad to be ornery this soon. So Cayden didn’t say anything about the cold seats.

---

I used the "And" at the beginning of that sentence to help create a narrative voice that is sympathetic to the main character's voice. That is, the narrator is more or less narrating in synch with how the character speaks, or would speak if he were telling the story himself.

One problem I run into when doing this is that I don't maintain the "sympathetic" narrative voice throughout the story because I don't think it's appropriate. But I'm worried that moving in and out of the sympathetic narrative voice might be offputting, or, worse, confusing.

Then again, what I'm referring to as "sympathetic narrative voice" isn't all that different than what some people call "deep penetration", and I recall reading in OSC'c writing lessons that it's perfect fine, necessary in fact, to move in and out of deep penetration.

What do you think of all that?

[This message has been edited by Tim Young (edited January 13, 2009).]

[This message has been edited by Tim Young (edited January 13, 2009).]

This is because the first sentence is a sentence of action -- meaning something is happening in the moment -- we have a character, he's doing something, feeling the cold; no, he's *still* feeling the cold, which leads us to think that actual physical presence of the cold has past, and now he's doing something else.

[[Cayden could still feel the cold seat of the Ford Expedition through his pants. He resisted the inclination to rub his hindquarters. Shouldn't do that -- not in front of Grandma Peterson, anyway.

"Did you have a nice trip, dear?" she said.

"Sure," he lied.

He looked out the window. Outside, the truck cast a huge dark shadow on her flower pots. Cayden hated that thing -- he hated those seats. When his dad blah blah blah blah blah]]

That's an example of how I was expecting something to follow the first sentence that would give it some perspective.

Okay, we know he's no longer experiencing the cold -- so what is he doing now? Intermix that with his thoughts about the Expedition and his Dad. Or cut the first sentence. Would be my advice.

Cayden still feels the cold seat through his pants because it hasn't warmed up yet. Unlike the fabric seats that were in the Suburban his family used to own, the leather seats in the new Expedition feel a lot colder in the winter, and they don't warm up as quickly.

I understand that the sentence in question doesn't help describe any specific event, but I think it helps to show that Cayden spends his time and energy thinking pessimistic (or at least unproductive) thoughts about the world around him.

[This message has been edited by Tim Young (edited January 13, 2009).]

[This message has been edited by Tim Young (edited January 13, 2009).]

Just because you've explained it to me doesn't mean you're communicating, within the story, what you mean to communicate. Presumably readers picking up the story in a book or a magazine won't have the benefit of you responding and clarifying the things they didn't understand.

quote:

---

Gan,

I used the "And" at the beginning of that sentence to help create a narrative voice that is sympathetic to the main character's voice. That is, the narrator is more or less narrating in synch with how the character speaks, or would speak if he were telling the story himself.

One problem I run into when doing this is that I don't maintain the "sympathetic" narrative voice throughout the story because I don't think it's appropriate. But I'm worried that moving in and out of the sympathetic narrative voice might be offputting, or, worse, confusing.

Then again, what I'm referring to as "sympathetic narrative voice" isn't all that different than what some people call "deep penetration", and I recall reading in OSC'c writing lessons that it's perfect fine, necessary in fact, to move in and out of deep penetration.

What do you think of all that?

---

On one hand, I understand why you did it. On the other, however, it just confused me. I think that you should, to extent of clarity, keep in the sympathetic narrative voice. It could just be me that was put off by the sentence, but if others had to reread it as well, I would definitely say cut it out. Deep penetration, or sympathetic narrative voice, is awesome. But it can only be done to a certain extent. If the story is explained too much like a child, then it will read very slow, and painfully.

Hopefully that clears up the question at hand.

I would definitely read the entire thing if I had time, because it does hook me in. However, in doing so, I would procrastinate my own writing even further. Though if in a few days you still need more to read it, I'll be more than happy to.

On another note, upon reading it closer, I do understand what Troy is saying. When I read that sentence, in my mind I think that the event of "cold seat" has passed, and he is now thinking back upon it.

[This message has been edited by Gan (edited January 13, 2009).]

Gan, I'm afraid you're going to be annoyed with me because, after a quick look at the whole story, I noticed that I started a lot of sentences with "And". I'm reluctant to go through and change them all because I really feel like they're useful. Then again, you didn't suggest changing all of them. (Of course, you didn't read all of them...) It's just the one that you said tripped you up.

Anyway, take a look at this revised 13 and let me know if you guys think I improved it.

V1
Cayden could still feel the cold seat through his pants. When his dad first bought the Ford Expedition Cayden complained about how the seats were always cold in the winter. Why couldn’t it have regular cloth seats like their Suburban used to have? And in the summer the seats were always hot. Especially after shopping at Walmart, where there was never any shade to park in. But Cayden didn’t complain about the seats anymore. It never did any good- just made Dad ornery. And the drive to Grandma Peterson’s house was too long for Dad to be ornery this soon. So Cayden didn’t say anything about the cold seats. They’d get warm soon enough anyway.

By the time they were on the freeway Cayden had gone over his plan three times. It was a good plan and it would work- even

V2
By the time they were on the freeway Cayden had gone over his plan three times. It was a good plan and it would work- even better than his April fools joke when he tricked Mom into thinking that McKenzie had gotten detention. And he couldn’t wait to see what everyone did when he told them what he had done. They’d finally realize how dumb they all were for getting so excited about Grandma’s chocolates.

His seat hadn’t gotten warm yet. When his dad first bought the Ford Expedition Cayden complained a lot about how the seats were always cold in the winter. Why couldn’t it have regular cloth seats like their Suburban used to have? And in the summer the seats were always hot. Especially after shopping at Walmart, where there was never any shade to park in. But Cayden

[This message has been edited by Tim Young (edited January 14, 2009).]

Two things struck me about reading both versions. The first thing is that Cayden comes across very strongly in the 1st 13 as an unsympathetic protagonist. I could probably follow a pessimistic young boy (it could actually be quite funny), but he seems like a jerk. Stories with unlikeable protagonists can work, but it's much harder to do.

Secondly, I'd worry that you're going to artificially withhold what the plan is beyond the point where we (as part of Cayden's POV) should know about it. It's fine at this stage, but I'd watch that you're not trying to artificially build tension.

As an aside, the use of "And" brings me out of the narrative as well. It's the things that he's preoccupied with that establishes Cayden's character for me. The language *apart* from the use of "and" to start a sentence isn't especially idiosyncratic, so it seems like bad rhythm rather than being intrinsic to the POV's thought process.

I do think you've made your point about the car seats within the 1st three sentences of the second paragraph. That establishes his nature...everything after that is largely redundant.

regards,

Nick

I like the new version a lot more, I feel more 'thrown in' to the story, if that makes any sense.

What I am concerned about is whether the events that take place in between the beginning of the story and the end of the story are worth reading.

I've had two people (non-hatrackers) whose opinion's I value read this story. One said she thought the story flowed well without getting bogged down with unnecessary information. The other said there was a thing or two that could be removed. But I'd like to know what the folks here think.

I've worried about Cayden being an unsympathetic protagonist. I wanted to make him seem like a normal kid. The thing is, most of the boys his age that I've known in real life often have a churlish side, and that's the part of him that brings this story into existence. So I needed to show that while still showing that he's a pretty decent kid.

So, getting to the point- If I make this little tweak does he seem less unsympathetic?

Old:
By the time they were on the freeway Cayden had gone over his plan three times. It was a good plan and it would work- even better than his April fools joke when he tricked Mom into thinking that McKenzie had gotten detention. And he couldn’t wait to see what everyone did when he told them what he had done. They’d finally realize how dumb they all were for getting so excited about Grandma’s chocolates.

The sticking point for me is still the last line; it's hard to be sympathetic for a character that is contemptuous of his family and his grandmother (i.e. he clearly thinks he's much smarter than them). I'd prefer it if he was simply blind to the feelings of others and plays the practical joke because he thinks it will be hilarious (or something like that; I can live with a churlish child protag because kids are immature, but arrogant and superior is hard to overcome in a protag).

I can't read this for a week. I'm happy to tackle it after then.

Regards,

Nick

Here's another thought. You may want to think about starting out with this sentence:

"By the time they were on the freeway Cayden had gone over his plan three times. It was a good plan and it would work- even"

Thanks for the suggestions. Did you see what I posted on 01/14/09? I think that more or less jives with what you're saying. I think I like my second version (the one that agrees with your suggestion) better than my original, for the reasons already noted- it hooks better and flows better.

Send it through. I'm a nasty reviewer.