Recently I developed enough problems with this world that my wife Katya insisted I go to the doctor with her. On the dreaded day I took a pill to help me go, but it didn't work as quickly as usual. When Katya shouted at me to get in the car I got angry and called her a "jerk" because saying, "if you don't stop it I'm going to have a bad trip," seemed too complex. She won though, and we went. In short the doctor suggested that all the symptoms: waking up at night feeling sick, weight gain, stomach pain, tiredness, fear of being alone in the car, fear of going to church, and the fear of going to work could all be caused by something that could be fixed with Klonopin, Prozac and therapy. We never got around to Petrov, my rational explanation for wanting to cheer when all matter melts.
Draft #2
An Ironman poster and photos of the doctor in the event decorated the exam room. In the picture of him on the finishers' podium did his eyes say, "I must be crazy for doing this"? I looked at him now from my position against the farthest wall of the examination room. "Do you have strange dreams?" asked the doctor. "Yes, sometimes violent things happen that I don't want to watch," I said. "Do you have religious dreams?" he asked. How did he know to ask that. "Sure, once a week. I guess. Is that so strange? Don't you?" I asked. I thought about last night when a severe storm wind had punctured a stained glass window in the chapel.
Draft #1
Katya said I'd be alright, and hearing those words from a third party gave me courage to do impossible things, so I asked two more times during the car trip to the doctor, a car trip over very bouncy surface streets that I analyzed with my extra sensitive stomach. We made it seemingly in time. I left a urine sample when I used the bathroom. They'd have one if they needed it, but I forgot to tell anyone about it. The nurse let us into a waiting room where Katya and I chilled and began looking at the iron man posters and a photo of our doctor standing on the finisher podium. "When does a doctor have time to train," asked Katya. "Well, the nurses answer the phones," I said and added, "Plus last time I came he was really late."
posted
Overall, it feels rushed, like a writing assignment given in class with only ten or so minutes to complete. The opening lines are all summarized backstory, two aspects of prose that's sure to disengage readers: summary and backstory. There's also almost a stream-of-conscious feel to the writing which I think is a result of the fact that this literally feels like a first draft where a second look hasn't been given.
And for a flash fiction piece, I think you're taking a bit too long to get to the point of the story. Right now, I'm unsure what the narrative is about.
Posts: 1216 | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
Having proudly attended the births of all four of my children, a story from a woman's perspective of a birth isn't for me a great hook, but I am intrigued by the suggestion that this is a lesbian couple, and the posters on the doctor's wall, which seem to me surreal.
A couple of details made me lose immersion with a mental "huh?":
Referring to Katya as a third party seemed rather abstract for what I guessed is a close relationship. and what did narrator ask two more times? Do women forget their urine samples in such circumstances? I seem to recall having had strict instructions not to lose it in my four experiences.
I suspect the "stomach" reference is misleading - "belly" perhaps?
And, in the waiting room why did Katya giggle? I didn't think narrator had said anything giggleworthy, sorry.
I'd ask for something stronger to hook me. I have a feeling this is a story about birthing in a world somehow different from ours; if it is, a hint to what's different, and what's special about this birth that makes it a story, would help draw me in
Posts: 1796 | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thank you, your feedback is heartwarming. Do people in my predicament usually post 13 improved lines? Do they post them tonight or work on them for a week?
Posts: 27 | Registered: Nov 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
You can post them any time you like, mithridates. Usually by editing your first post and putting the improved lines under your original post.
I found I was able to follow the flow fairly well. I assume the 'two more times' asked question was if the expectant mother would be alright. I could be wrong. I, personally, have forgotten to alert nurses to urine samples so I found that to be totally believable. I found nervous laughter to be the reason for the giggling to the alluded times a Doctor would have time to train. The characters seem to have a very close relationship. All in all, I liked the writing style, but as Tale Spinner pointed out, it needs a stronger hook to draw me in. Keep up the good work.
Posts: 195 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
This fragment details backstory summaries about travel and a visit to a doctor's office. Intrepretations the visit is a prenatal well-being check are insider awareness; that purpose is implied though not accessible for outsiders.
A dramatic complication's introduction is first and foremost what a "hook" is. Not much drama to speak of from a prenatal well-being check. No sense of urgency, minimal emotional upset, and an ongoing routine that shows no instant signal the routine will be interrupted, except, of course, the expected interruption from the delivery.
Dramatic complication is personal wants and problems wanting satisfaction; a problem causes a want, a want causes a problem, or a want or problem entails an inherent problem or want, respectively.
The viewpoint agonist expresses implied wants and problems of prenatal anxiety and to do "impossible things." Impossible things is too generic a want to engage readers' curiosity by that "hook." A degree of empathy appeals to readers who are in the know about the natal nature of the doctor visit.
The opening is a visitation shape. The viewpoint agonist and Katya visit a doctor's office. Visitation shapes' complications arise from wants and problems caused from and by the visitation. I see no complication in that regard.
The action, such as it is, is summarized lecture, though expressed in first-person narration. First person's strength is personal, subjective portrayal of causal events that relate to a moral human condition crisis struggle. The women noting the doctor is an Ironman finisher suggests pride-humility is a possible moral crisis. Note, the Ironman triathlon contest is capitalized and one word: grammar glitch.
The events of the drive to the doctor's office are reported blandly, awkwardly, and in a summary manner from off the stage, moment, place, situation, and persons where and when they take place. Likewise, the bathroom visit is off stage, etc. An awkward part of the former is the diction choice "analyzed." The word would work if the analysis were personally detailed as to what the analysis personally means and a subjective conclusion given. Or another word used, like measured or similar.
The scenes of the drive and the bathroom visit are rushed through in single sentences that skimp on their "telling details," how they influence and are influenced by the action, events, settings, characters, and, most importantly, relate to a dramatic complication's moral crisis struggle -- a thematic central idea.
What's this micro fiction about? Not the external action: the internal action, which is a personal moral crisis struggle. Motherhood? Interpersonal relationships? Or is this an anecdote? Which nonetheless appeal when they entail a moral human condition crisis struggle. A hint, inaccessible, lays within the scene developed in the waiting room. The doctor's hobby is athletic activities: pride-humility. Katya is a demanding caretaker, a codependent, implied by her demanding nature. Implied, the viewpoint agonist is an enabler, also a codependent. Personal pride is an inherent complication of codependency.
Moral crisis from codependency? Sloth-diligence? Sloth of an enabler; diligence of a caretaker. Codependent caretakers are not unconditional caregivers --the ideal interdependent interpersonal relationship.
One of these vice-virtue clashes: wrath-patience, greed-charity, gluttony-temperance, pride-humility, sloth-diligence, envy-kindness, lust-chastity. Five hundred words is a sparse real estate for one vice-virtue clash, let alone more than one. One is essential, though, and introduced soonest rather than later. Otherwise, the external, tangible, superficial action can only be shallow, lackluster, and unappealing. And the external and internal actions must be congruent.
I don't have a clue about either the external nor the internal action (dramatic complication) of this micro fiction. Thirteen lines "hooks" when both are introduced.
Because visitation is the most pronounced feature of the fragment, and a birth is itself a visitation, I project a problem and want related to visitation. Unwanted visitors? That's a problem sufficient for five hundred words. The problem of substance, to me, is the implications of an expected birth's visitation. How did conception take place in the first place? Is that a problem caused by a want?
Several other grammar glitches: "The nurse let us into a waiting room[,] where Katya and I chilled . . ." Comma indicated due to the dependent clause started with conjunction "where" is nonrestrictive.
"'When does a doctor have time to train[?]' asked Katya." Dialogue questions are punctuated with question marks.
"'Plus[,] last time I came he was really late.'" Prefatory dependent words, phrases, or clauses, no matter whether restrictive or nonrestrictive, are comma separated from main clauses.
Restrictive means a dependent term or terms' content is essential to the meaning of a main clause. Nonrestrictive means nonessential to the meaning of a main clause. Nonrestrictive dependent terms can be left out and a main clause's meaning not change.
Discretionary grammar glitches:
"began looking" is an unnecessary present participle verb and unnecessary tense shift from the simple-past main tense of the fragment.
"finisher podium" is not an attributive case; rather, the case is possessive. An apostrophe mark and a plural noun are warranted: //finishers' podium//. The plural possessive case implies the photo's setting situation, such that readers more easily and closely visualize the photo's content.
". . . put a smile in place of that _demanding_ expression she'd worn while _demanding_ I get in the car earlier." "demanding" is artlessly repeated. Another, stronger term is warranted for either instance. The rhetorical scheme of repetition, substitution, and amplification guides artful, appealing repetition.
The preposition-object phrase "in the car earlier" implies two clashing meanings: spoken at an earlier time or Katya insisting the viewpoint agonist get into the car sooner than she did. The meaning is vague.
"alright" is considered by many readers a vulgar spelling, meaning common, everyday, disturbingly informal writing. The word's contracted spelling is in dictionaries and usage references, generally disparaged. Such uses are artful when they serve an additional rhetorical function; for example, they characterize a character's basic nature, behavior, or personality. That word's unconventional spelling signals less than sophisticated literacy. I immediatley thought the viewpoint agonist is not terribly educated, though then was confused by later sophisticated diction.
One strength that stands out for me is the deeply internal nature of the summarized drive and bathroom visit and later indirect discourse of what Katya said earlier. The voice's narrative distance is close, even though by default first person is naturally close. First person is easily under-distanced and, consequently, alienating. The distance for me is suitably close and an appeal of note.
For those above, prior enumerated reasons, I would not read on. I need at least an accessible hint or cue of dramatic complication and moral crisis struggle introduced by a start fragment to read on. I see none.
posted
Posting to make this post yellow again. I'm concerned draft 2 takes some of the life out of draft 1, but at least it's more clear.
Posts: 27 | Registered: Nov 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's not bad, though it sounds more like a diary excerpt than a prose piece. If that's what you're going for, then groovy, as long as you have an audience in mind for that kind of writing.
To make it sound less like a diary and more like a fictional piece, though, you can do more with your character POV. For example:
quote: I could look at the doctor or the Ironman poster on the opposite side of the examination room.
The way this is written, it sounds like the narrator is talking to someone, telling them what they could do, and then in the next sentence, why. Putting us more in the narrator's POV, though, would have him looking back and forth from poster to poster (as, he must have already seen both since he knows what's on each one).
Just out of curiosity, why did you not space the dialog into their own paragraphs? Jumbled as they are makes the prose look messy and read confusingly.
Posts: 1216 | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote: Just out of curiosity, why did you not space the dialog into their own paragraphs? Jumbled as they are makes the prose look messy and read confusingly.
posted
I'm unsure what 13 lines means, either, but your draft #2 looks like it's too long.
quote:An Ironman poster and photos of the doctor in the event decorated the exam room.
Going back to the diary feel of the writing, I can't help but feel that you, the writer, were sitting down in an office somewhere where there was an Ironman poster. And I think this because at the moment I can't imagine why it's even here, and it doesn't seem to be connected to anything. And though it *could* have further meaning in the rest of the story, I think that because the narrative doesn't bother to even detail *what* Ironman poster is being referenced (the character has spanned comics, graphic novels, cartoons, animes, movies), I can't picture anything specifically, and so can't fathom the significance it seems to hold with the central character.
Because of the 13 line limit, we seldom discuss dialog on Hatrack except to say that it's usually not a good idea to have it in story openings. Readers tend to need some type of grounding first, descriptions of where they are and who is actually in the scene. None of your characters have the least bit amount of definition, so your opening feels like disembodied voices speaking about something that I have no particular reason to care about.
Draft #1 was stronger because it did a better job of grounding me in the narrative.
Posts: 1216 | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thirteen lines ends for the second draft at "window in the chapel."
The second draft is closer distanced, an artful method, from more reality sensation depiction, some visual though mostly aural from the dialogue. A fully realized scene entails several proportioned sensations as well as emotional, descriptive, antagonal, causal, and tensional action, and conversation -- thought or speech: description, action, sensation, emotion, and conversation. A dialogue-heavy scene misses ACT's influences, misses sensation proprotioning, and emotional influences.
Posts: 6037 | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree thyat the second version loses some of the life of the first version. The second lacks the MC's anxieties about the impending birth, the sense of urgency, and while the wife Katya is mentioned, she comes as a surpprise in a scene which only seems to involve two characters. if the story is about birth to a lesbian couple, as it seemed to be in the first version, I would suggest focusing on that in the opening; the doctor's questions about dreams set a different expectation for the story in this reader's mind - and would they not get annoyed with him and direct his attention to the imminent baby?
Hope this helps, Pat
Posts: 1796 | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The third draft is better than the first two -- I have a clear picture in my head and understand that there are two people in the scene. I would turn the page.
Posts: 6 | Registered: Jan 2015
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
