Hatrack River Writers Workshop: Big Powwow excerpt

This is topic Big Powwow excerpt in forum Fragments and Feedback for Short Works at Hatrack River Writers Workshop.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.hatrack.com/ubb/writers/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=11;t=002136

Posted by wbriggs (Member # 2267) on :

I would like feedback on a section, some 1K words, SF. It's scene 2 from a novel (but scene 1 is with a different character).

Background: we're in an Indian tribe. A modern US city is about to appear nearby, via time travel, but MC doesn't know that yet.

LH denizens, I posted this there as well.

quote:
Seven years back, Flies with Hawks lost his wife, Smiling Lady, to a fever. She left him with two grown daughters and one eight-year-old girl.
The other ladies of the village, especially Bear Grease Woman, the healer, had to take over caring for and raising his little girl. To a degree, the other men had to take over being father to her, as well, because Flies with Hawks fell apart. He couldn't bring himself to get up and hunt and work, even if it meant he would starve.
He'd decided long ago to enjoy life as much as he could, without worrying, without regret. But how could he enjoy anything without Smiling Lady? He went over every time he'd neglected her, or said an unkind word, and hated himself for it.

[This message has been edited by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (edited August 12, 2006).]

[This message has been edited by wbriggs (edited August 12, 2006).]

Posted by Marva (Member # 3171) on :

I'm lousy at these crits because I'm such an easy-to-please reader, but...

The word "ladies" didn't strike me as the right word. Women would be fine.

You use the phrase "took over" twice in that paragraph. Unless you did it deliberately for some effect, I'd mix it up some.

In the last paragraph, I didn't like "just hated himself". I'd leave out the just. It sounds so valley girl to me.

As the introduction to a second part, it's hard to tell. Can I assume the first part establishes the tribal society and the timeframe (unless fantasy). What I'm saying is that we're talking about a real Indian tribe, we'd need to know if this was mid-19th Century or a 21st Century look at Indians on a reservation. Because of the names, I'm assuming the former. If the context wasn't explained in Part 1, then we need a bit more here (maybe).

So what if it's depressing? It's either part of the plot or not. You're establishing the mindset of Flies with Hawks, which I assume will have some bearing on the appearance of the modern city.

[This message has been edited by Marva (edited August 12, 2006).]

Posted by gsemones (Member # 2362) on :

It is not too depressing. Pain and strife are part of what draws a reader in and emotionally attaches them to a story. Lois McMaster Bujold often say something along these lines: given this character and their disposition, what is the worst possible thing I can do to them.

As a matter of fact, if you moved the first sentence of paragraph 3 to a new first paragraph and explained how Flies with Hawks had been carefree until he fell deeply in love with Smiling Lady, and then loses her, would increase the pain even more, and probably make me feel for him more.

The point of view here keeps some distance (for me) from Flies with Hawks pain also. If that is you intention (since you were concerned it was too depressing), then fine. If you want me to feel his pain more, you may need to shift closer into his character. My first reading felt that this was a Third Person Omni view, but on second reading I'm not sure. It could be a first person reporting facts, or a Third Person Omni limited to some character's view, perhaps even Flies with Hawks'. It's hard to tell with an excerpt from a novel length work.

I like the overall premise, by the way.

Guerry

Posted by Dead_Poet (Member # 3542) on :

I had to read the first sentence twice to realize that flies with hawks was a person, but that's because I wasn't paying close attention. I like the hated himself part, but Marva's right. it would sound better without just. it's a filler word.

Also, what are his grown daughters doing? do they help raise his daughter? I'm sure they do something later, it's just a question that came up.

[This message has been edited by Dead_Poet (edited August 12, 2006).]

Posted by wbriggs (Member # 2267) on :

[This message has been edited by wbriggs (edited August 12, 2006).]

Posted by pixydust (Member # 2311) on :

I went ahead and posted my thoughts at LH.

Posted by Survivor (Member # 213) on :

Plot summary.

Posted by Elan (Member # 2442) on :

I'm curious as to what time period your story is set in. Knowing that would affect my feedback. You say "a modern US city is about to appear nearby, via time travel" which tells me the MC does NOT live in a modern setting.

If that is the case, then I would have to agree the word "ladies" seems a little out of place; I think the word "women" would be more appropriate given the setting. And the phrase "because Flies with Hawks fell apart" sounds far too modern for my ears. I think the phrase "fall apart" is too modernistic. Even though it doesn't go against the technology level like some metaphors, still, the phrase is a little too common in modern day slang for it to feel like it fits here.

I would be willing to read if you don't mind waiting another week or two... I'm slammed this week and I have company coming. You can email to: buce at charter.net

Posted by Loretta (Member # 3639) on :

I'll start by saying I like the concept you described for the novel. The excerpt does jog my interest -- it seems like something's about to change for Flies With Hawks, and I'd be interested to know how that shakes out. I agree with the others who've mentioned changing 'ladies' to 'women'. I'd add that Smiling Lady's name distracted me. Toward the end, the words "went over" also distracted me. This may be only personal preference but I think 'remembered' or even re-lived' would read easier.
(This is my first try at feedback, on this site. I hope it's useful.)

Posted by Charli (Member # 3699) on :

This may seem silly, but you used the word "daughters" when mentioning the two older ones, but used the word "girl" when mentioning the third. For a brief bit, I thought the youngest was not his daughter.

Why separate the grown daughters from the youngest in this way?

Charli