posted
The Final Gate is in the fantasy subgenre of 'urban fantasy.' It utilizes many of the conventions of typical sword and sorcery fantasy, but is set in the modern day United States at the end of the second millennium. I originally intended for the novel to be completed by 1999, which is a good indicator of how long I have actually been working on it - approximately a decade at this point.
In its current state, the manuscript is approximately 270,000 words in length. If part 6 of the manuscript runs the same lengths as parts 1-5, then the entire work would run about 320,000 words or so. My ultimate hope is that an editor would be able to help me to divide the manuscript up into more 'digestible chunks,' because I recognize that no publisher would be willing to risk their resources on a manuscript of this length on a first time novelist.
Luckily, the structure of the story lends itself rather well to being internally divided, although I believe that the story is much stronger if read as a cohesive whole.
Basically, the novel is about the rebirth of magic in the world. It presumes that prior to the turn of the first millennium, magic both existed and was rather commonplace, but that its existence was so totally erased from reality that even mankind's memory of it became fractured and ultimately erased except in the form of folklore and fairy tales... all of which, it is revealed over the course of the novel, were in some way based in fact, though in many cases, the actual facts of the individual stories were horribly distorted in the translation.
The event that caused this massive distortion of mankind's collective psyche and of reality itself was a battle that occurred in a place called Haversham Pass in the year 999, during which the champions of evil joined together to destroy the champions of goodness. However, the spirits of the champions of goodness lingered on to attempt to rectify this tragedy.
Over the course of the next thousand years, the world would become more and more a reflection of the darkness of the victors at Haversham and less and less the place that it once had been. Though the spirits of the forces of good attempted to teach children in every generation that followed to assume the roles they had once fulfilled, the victors at Haversham were always there to brutally suppress these attempts before the new generation could fully come into their power.
Fast forward a thousand years. One of these groups, nearly a thousand years to the day, has managed to overcome the odds and position themselves to re-fight the battle at Haversham and perhaps bring magic and hope back to a world darked by the souls of evil that have dominated it for so long.
***
The novel unfolds in 6 parts...
Part 1 is partially an extensive introduction to each of the primary characters and partially a long 'set-up' establishing many of the conventions necessary for the readership to accept in order to fully understand the structure of the novel... such as the fact that the characters' memories of their own lives are often spotty and suspect, the fact that magic once existed, etc.
Part 2 relates the events that occur in New York City before the heroes gather to relate their stories to one another and introduces the villains of the piece.
Parts 3-5 are all extended flashbacks that relate how each of the first 3 gates were set. Part 3 takes place in Knoxville, Tennessee in 1978-79. Part 4 takes place in Cleveland, Ohio in 1986-87. Part five takes place in Norman, Oklahoma in 1992-93.
Part 6 returns the reader to 'present day' and relates the final battle between the characters and the villains and how the final gate is set.
Ultimately, I'd like to receive both feedback on the fragment and hopefully some requests to read earlier sections of the book so that I can receive some critiques on the work as a whole or in part.
The fragment you are about to read is from the prologue. The speaker is David Strohm, who is the lead character.
***
History has it all wrong.
For the last thousand years, we have all lived a lie. I wish I could describe to you everything that is wrong, but that is not possible. There is just too much… but sufficed to say that almost everything we believe about history before 999 AD is distorted. That much I know. That was the year of the Divergence.
And, yes, I understand that I am being a little vague. And probably a little unfair. So just take me at face value for a little while and give me a chance to convince you.
So… before anyone starts call our ancestors a bunch of liars, let me clarify something. They were not. Not really. They simply repeated what they believed to be true. And that is
***
Thank you for your time.
- Mike Thompson
[This message has been edited by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (edited September 27, 2006).]
posted
I think your narrator is a little defensive, but it's pretty smooth writing. Is it all in first person? It's hard to read action in first person. (particularly with characters who you say have unreliable memories.) As to the parts, to me it looks like you've got the storyline down, you just need to find the story in it. I'd say just put parts 2 and 6 together and see how much of the other parts are really needed. (those parts are your story, the others are just needed to understand the story.) If I don't care about the characters or events I will not sit through a 'long set-up' (if you are admitting to it being long that means it's longer than you think it is.) I really like the idea that evil took over the world 1000 years ago, and it should be fun to see your take on the fairy tales. I'd like to see 13 lines from the actual story.
Posts: 1895 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
That last paragraph could be shortened and still say the same thing:
So… before anyone starts call our ancestors a bunch of liars, let me clarify something. They repeated what they believed to be true. If you believe you are telling the truth, then you are not lying, even if what you claim is not real. Something happened in 999 AD that changed everything… everything in the world.
But I am still unsure. Were the ancestors mistaken even when they wrote their records, or were they right, and the Divergence in 999 made them no longer right?
[This message has been edited by wbriggs (edited September 28, 2006).]
posted
Good hook. It looks like you've got the whole thing mapped out. I'd certainly read on. It seems like the type of story I'd enjoy.
One minor typo though: "So… before anyone starts call our ancestors a bunch of liars, let me clarify something." the word "to" belongs between "starts" and "call."
For the last thousand years, we have all lived a lie.'
You had me hooked by the end of the first two sentences ^^
There's just something rebellious and exciting about disproving what we consider to be 'the truth', even if it's fictitiously done.
One suggestion... perhaps you could inject a sense of urgency into this prologue? Maybe he's not telling us everything because he doesn't have the TIME to (as opposed to there being too much info...that sounds like he's too lazy to tell us everything). Perhaps he's been poisoned, or a killer robot with a strange accent and political aspirations is coming for him. So he's telling the reader the truth through the book, in case he dies... so someone will know. That might make it more engaging.
posted
Thank you to everyone who has taken the time to reply. I appreciate you doing so.
Pyre Dynasty:
quote:If I don't care about the characters or events I will not sit through a 'long set-up' (if you are admitting to it being long that means it's longer than you think it is.)
Well, my initial response to that would be that if you don't care about the characters or events, then you are unlikely to sit through an entire reading of the book regardless of its structure. Whether it's structured in asymmetrical Tarantino-esque fashion like 'Reservoir Dogs' or 'Kill Bill,' or whether it's structured in wholly linear fashion like most stories are, if I fail as a writer to capture your interest, then you will not sit through an entire reading of my novel. I tend to think that very few people are entirely put off by how a story is structured and, by the same token, they are not enamored enough by unique structure to sit through something that is pedantic and boring.
To me, structure is a little like frosting letters on a cake. It can increase or detract from the overall appeal, but if the cake was made with sour milk and rotten eggs, people will gag when they take a bite, no matter how pretty or ugly it is.
Wbriggs:
quote:That last paragraph could be shortened and still say the same thing:
Heh, sometimes it seems like I spend 3/4ths of my editing time trying to reduce my natural propensity use 12 words when 4 words will suffice.
The prologue is actually a tougher nut than I thought it would be. David has to establish the situation quickly and he has to make the reader understand what is happening here, but he has to do it in such a way that I don't make it seem like that's necessarily what he's doing. I know I haven't been entirely successful in that regard, but rest assured that Part I has seen more extensive editing than any other part to date.
(Largely also because I wrote Part I many years ago when I wasn't as technically proficient a writer as I am now... not to say that I am entirely technically proficient now, just that I am more so at 36 than I was at 26.)
Tortoisefly:
quote:One minor typo though: "So… before anyone starts call our ancestors a bunch of liars, let me clarify something." the word "to" belongs between "starts" and "call."
Errr... ah... oops.
As I said... not entirely technically proficient yet.
::g::
David:
quote:One suggestion... perhaps you could inject a sense of urgency into this prologue? Maybe he's not telling us everything because he doesn't have the TIME to (as opposed to there being too much info...that sounds like he's too lazy to tell us everything).
Well, what I meant by that is that there are literally billions of details of history that are wrong and that to correct them all in the minds of the reader would be an undertaking that would require a lifetime. It's not worded exactly that way, but at the same time that I am trying to establish the situation, I am also trying to establish David's voice in the minds of the reader.
There are multiple POV shifts as the novel progresses. Tthe vast majority of it is what would be called 'Third Person Semi-Omniscient' in most literature classes or what I call 'King's Third Person Attitude Lean... meaning a shift in the tone or speaking style of the unnamed narrator that reflects the attitudes and point of view of the character that is currently the 'lead'. I attribute it to King, although there are many writers who utilize this technique, because he does this sort of thing all the time in many of his books. Quite simply, it means that if I have a character who is, say, more 'street' than the others, the narrator will start to adopt more 'street' mannerisms when dealing with the character's stream of consciousness.
It tends to sound more confusing and chaotic than it really turns out to be. Most of my reader's circle have never had a problem with the POV shifts in the manuscript, though of course, that's the whole point of widening the reader's circle... to discover where the inherent problems in the manuscript are. If more people seem to have problems with it than had thus far, it may turn out that I may have to change it at some point.
So back to what you were saying... as far as injecting urgency is concerned... there is a situation that I believe adds that within the prologue, simply not within the first thirteen lines of it. As David continues to speak, you learn that he has recently killed a woman and that he is in a medical ward awaiting an evaluation of his sanity for the purposes of his trial.
This revelation comes relatively quickly after what you've already read. I think thirteen lines is a bit quick to make that judgment for something that is novel length, though the people who run this site are absolutely correct in that thirteen lines may be all you get with many editors... many agents too for that matter... which is really what you're looking for.
As an aside, that's one of my peeves about the industry today. Many works that we consider to be classic, (such as Tolkien), would instantly fail the 'first thirteen lines' test.
posted
Suvantar, you are new, so I'll do you a kindness.
The correct response to any critique is either: "Thank you," or "Could you clarify what you meant when you said XXX?"
Long explanations like you just gave us often go unresponded to. As you may have noticed, it shuts the conversation right down.
New members often interpret negative feedback as being a sign that the First 13 Lines 1) don't give enough time to explain, 2) don't reveal enough about the plot or the premise, 3) the reader is missing the point.
In reality, the feedback is critiquing the following: 1) Is there a hook? Is there an interesting or unique premise that makes us want to read on? Is there a sense of tension or action happening? 2) Is it clear? We don't want a detailed plot. We just want what you DO have written to be easy to understand, not vague and confusing. 3)Does the writer get the point? That is, do you have your technical skills in place, ie: spelling, grammar, sentence structure, cohesive flow of thought?
The feedback you get in any critique is a chance to see if you are successfully making the bridge between the story in your head and the reader's comprehension. If not, then the responsibility lies with the writer to be more clear, not with the reader to be more astute.
This does clarify matters. Had I realized that this was a site that purported to be a discussion forum in which the people doing the discussing do not wish to discuss anything, I would not have bothered to post anything here.
The Fragments and Feedback forum is design for just that: fragments and the feedback readers choose to give. Its purpose is to provide writers with insight into how their writing is being perceived by other people - people who don't have the story in their head the way the writer does. For the F&F forum, the information Elan gave you is correct.
In the Discussions forums, you can ask questions and engage in all kinds of interesting discussions. I hope you won't let this one misunderstanding deter you from participating. Spending some time will help clarify how things run around here.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
