Hatrack River Writers Workshop   
my profile login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Writers Workshop » Forums » Fragments and Feedback for Short Works » Bingo Night at St. Stephen's (M-1500 w first section)

   
Author Topic: Bingo Night at St. Stephen's (M-1500 w first section)
MiggsEye
Member
Member # 10400

 - posted      Profile for MiggsEye   Email MiggsEye         Edit/Delete Post 
Hello to all at Hatrack. This is my first post. I will make myself known in the forums and earn my keep.

Up till now in the short life of my fiction-writing hobby, I've cut my teeth on shorter flash fiction pieces. This is my first attempt at a longer piece. I expect it to be approx. 8,000-10,000 words. I have it outlined. I'd term this an 'American Cozy Mystery', though a bit darker than the typical fare. It's also not a Whodunnit, or a Whydunnit, but more like a DidSheOrDidn'tShedunnit.

Here goes:
_____________________________________________________________________

The warm-sweet smell of peanut butter cookies baking in the oven permeated the kitchen. Bernice Johnson sat at a blue Formica table, one hand fumbling in a small bowl filled with peanut slivers, the other held a phone pressed against her ear. She nodded and gabbed into the mouthpiece. "I know, Mabel. Doris has been very lucky over the last few weeks."

"You know, I’ve kept a tally?" said Mabel.

Bernice reckoned Mabel had a bit too much free time on her hands, but feigned interest anyway. "Really? You have?"

“Mmhuh. Been keeping track of it in a little notebook I bought at the Big Y, 'bout a month ago. Now, where is that little shi...?" Mabel's phone clunked and the sounds of rummaging echoed back through the phone receiver.
____________________________________________________________________

I'm open to feedback starting with knowing whether it's a good start from your POV as the reader. Would you'd like to read more?

Any feed back on the 13 lines is welcome.

If anyone is interested in reading more, I have the first 1500 more or less completed (the first section of the short story). Just pop over your email and I'll send it over. Looking forward to participating in this forum. I enjoy the other one I belong to as well at MyWirtersCircle.com

Cheers and Thanks,
Brendan aka MiggsEye

[ March 31, 2015, 01:54 PM: Message edited by: Kathleen Dalton Woodbury ]

Posts: 15 | Registered: Mar 2015  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Denevius
Member
Member # 9682

 - posted      Profile for Denevius   Email Denevius         Edit/Delete Post 
Two people talking on a phone about a vague subject isn't going to do much to pull your reader in. I'm left with one question and one suggestion. First, why is there a question mark after the word 'tally'? Is that a typo?

And secondly, as is often the case, this story feels like it begins later. You might want to try an opening from further down in the page, if not page 2 altogether.

Posts: 1216 | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Grumpy old guy
Member
Member # 9922

 - posted      Profile for Grumpy old guy   Email Grumpy old guy         Edit/Delete Post 
As written, this fragment has a very long narrative distance and is wholly writer's tell. The POV is a long, third person omnipotent one and, as Denevius pointed out, nothing is happening.

Story openings are times of introduction, in my opinion. The opening scene should try and introduce some vital, yet engaging, and even quirky, element of character, dramatic want, or complication. Give me a reason to want to care about your main character or the problem they have. A secondary task is alerting the reader to genre and milieu (setting).

While the prose is easy reading, it doesn't show me anything of character or looming plot.

Phil.

Posts: 1937 | Registered: Sep 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
extrinsic
Member
Member # 8019

 - posted      Profile for extrinsic   Email extrinsic         Edit/Delete Post 
Bernice and Mabel "gab" on phones about Doris. Mabel is a "busybody," the "informant" type for the cozy mystery form. Mabel "tallied" Doris's lucky events and passes that gossip to Bernice, who is presumably the cozy detective.

A few grammar glitches set me out of the narrative as do a few craft considerations. A grammar one, the comma here is a stray: "'You know[,] I've kept a tally?'" "You know" used as an interjection is separated by commas from main clauses, not when used for an interrogatory and part of a main clause.

Craft-wise, the narrative point of view is of a narrator's perceptions. Cozy mysteries vary how narrative point of view is managed, sometimes cozily close to a viewpoint character's perception, sometimes cozied up to a narrator. I favor the former.

However, an after-the-fact objective journalism-type report given by a narrator is the overall preferred cozy mystery narrative point of view method. The method is an overtly matter-of-fact depiction of events reported -- gossiped -- to the narrator-reporter with a covert, strong emotional attitude toward events. William Faulkner's "A Rose for Emily" is a precursor-prototype cozy mystery.

Cozy mysteries typically involve a serious crime mystery. Presumably, Doris's lucky streak is a result of crime, perhaps theft or fraud. The crime suspicion or crime itself needs early if not immediate introduction as the puzzle complication wanting solution, resolution, or satisfaction. The sentence "'You know I've kept a tally?'" to me is an insertion point for the criminal-like luck Doris has.

The sensory details of the fragment include olfactory, tactile, aural, and visual and implied gustatory depictions. The scene is vivid and cozy, a strength that stands out for me. Shortfalls for me, that the action starts too slow, sensory details are still-life like, lacking, in my estimation, dramatic movement, which comes from emotional antagonism. Personal emotional feeling is the sixth and most crucial sense of narrative expression. Again, insertion points are mention of Doris's luck and Mabel's tally of their events, though, for cozy detective and viewpoint persona Bernice, her emotional reactions to events and reported gossip are essential. Oh my, gracious me! You don't mean Doris cheats?

Also, for dramatic development through the sensory details, some need best be off expectation, like Bernice smells the cookies in the oven have scorched. She never burns her cookies! She's upset that Doris might be a cheat. And so on.

How dark can a cozy mystery be? The conventions are offstage murders -- any violence offstage -- offstage sex, offstage profanity, offstage scandal, perhaps another crime offstage, though each implied. Also, cozy mysteries are courteous manners; the larger narrative form is the novel of manners or short story: novel in the Italian sense to mean fiction of any length. Edgy dark would imply one of the central characters might be foul mouthed. Mabel, for example. And likewise, she secondhand -- gossips -- describes offstage events, like violence, sex, other crimes, and other scandalous events. Say Doris's husband enjoyably cross dresses in public, at costume parties or other socially appropriate events and exclusively such that his dress is the talk of the town, gossip-like that Mabel reports to Bernice. Cozy, dark, and edgy.

Three scene development features of note for cozy mysteries, well, most narrative forms, if not all, are vividness, liveliness, and urgency. This opening fragment manages the first fully, the latter two not at all. Mabel is, to me, the character to impress upon Bernice, and through her impress readers, the liveliness and urgency features. And that to me is from Doris's activities. Maybe, for example, Mabel is concerned Doris has gotten into trouble and, if no one acts now or soon, she will be in over her head and resort to yet worse crime. Or, for "did she or didn't she done it," Mabel is concerned someone dark and mysterious set Doris up to take the fall for his or her crimes. There, Bernice is compelled to lively act urgently to save her and Mabel's friend Doris in the nick of time. Cozy.

Church bingo is notorious for embezzlement. The title somewhat artfully implies such a crime, ongoing, that Doris wins a statistically disproportionate number of bingo games that Mabel tallies. Exquisite gossip convention, I might add. Busybody biddies take bingo seriously. A common source of bingo fraud is mismanaged scratch-off side lotteries. Any bingo mischief requires co-conspirators, by the way. Could someone who organizes the games be feeding Doris wins to cover up her or his scratch-off and bingo embezzlement? I might suggest consider adding a modifier to the title to further imply a crime, say, //Bingo Night Spoils at St. Stephen's.//

Great promise for a cozy mystery story -- more dramatic development I feel is warranted overall for the title and the fragment.

[ March 31, 2015, 09:19 AM: Message edited by: extrinsic ]

Posts: 6037 | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Denevius
Member
Member # 9682

 - posted      Profile for Denevius   Email Denevius         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
A few grammar glitches set me out of the narrative as do a few craft considerations. A grammar one, the comma here is a stray: "'You know[,] I've kept a tally?'" "You know" used as an interjection is separated by commas from main clauses, not when used for an interrogatory and part of a main clause.
Ah, I get it now. I thought it read more like a statement, "Y'know, I've kept a tally." But it's actually more a confirmation of a fact, "You know I've kept a tally?"
Posts: 1216 | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
extrinsic
Member
Member # 8019

 - posted      Profile for extrinsic   Email extrinsic         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Denevius:
quote:
A few grammar glitches set me out of the narrative as do a few craft considerations. A grammar one, the comma here is a stray: "'You know[,] I've kept a tally?'" "You know" used as an interjection is separated by commas from main clauses, not when used for an interrogatory and part of a main clause.
Ah, I get it now. I thought it read more like a statement, "Y'know, I've kept a tally." But it's actually more a confirmation of a fact, "You know I've kept a tally?"
A noteworthy illustration of how grammar informs craft, expression, and appeal, all together, for a symphonic synergy.
Posts: 6037 | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MiggsEye
Member
Member # 10400

 - posted      Profile for MiggsEye   Email MiggsEye         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Denevius:
Two people talking on a phone about a vague subject isn't going to do much to pull your reader in. I'm left with one question and one suggestion. First, why is there a question mark after the word 'tally'? Is that a typo?

And secondly, as is often the case, this story feels like it begins later. You might want to try an opening from further down in the page, if not page 2 altogether.

Thank you, Denevius. Starting the story later in the flow of events is something I'll consider. For me the moment where the story starts, where the moment of change is, happens when Mabel shares with Bernice that she's been keeping a tally of their mutual friend Doris's curious winning streak. Then all hell breaks lose, so to speak.

The rest of the first 1500 word section I've completed goes as follows: Mabel and Bernice's suspicions grow; Bernice has trouble thinking of her friend, Doris, as a thief; Bernice's concludes that it must have been — just had to have been — blind luck that Doris was winning; Bernice plays with Mabel's suspicions, suggesting they murder Doris themselves in order to increase their chances of winning; they have a laugh over the absurdity of it; Bernice rushes off the phone to retrieve her cookies from the oven (I liked extrinsic's suggestion to have then burn rather than come out perfect); Then Bernice considers her own wins and losses, recalls all this business about Doris, and decides to bake some more things for tonight — including something special for Doris.

So the mysteries become: Is or isn't Doris cheating? And, following an incident where Doris is rushed off to the hospital from Bingo (having suffered from anaphylactic shock, presumably from a peanut allergy), did or didn't Bernice poison Doris?

Being set against a backdrop of Catholic church and BINGO busy bodies, I'm developing a theme about forgiveness vs. justice that i may thread through it.

So, I'm not so sure its a traditional "cozy" mystery as such.

Thanks again, Denevius, for taking the time to read.

Cheers, MiggsEye

Posts: 15 | Registered: Mar 2015  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MiggsEye
Member
Member # 10400

 - posted      Profile for MiggsEye   Email MiggsEye         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Grumpy old guy:
As written, this fragment has a very long narrative distance and is wholly writer's tell. The POV is a long, third person omnipotent one and, as Denevius pointed out, nothing is happening.

Story openings are times of introduction, in my opinion. The opening scene should try and introduce some vital, yet engaging, and even quirky, element of character, dramatic want, or complication. Give me a reason to want to care about your main character or the problem they have. A secondary task is alerting the reader to genre and milieu (setting).

While the prose is easy reading, it doesn't show me anything of character or looming plot.

Phil.

Thank you Grumpy Old Guy for your read and comments. I hear what you're saying. Answers to what you are looking for over occur beyond the 13th line in the current version. I'll consider a rewrite to engage the reader more in these first lines though, as the comment is shared with others.

Thank you again for taking the time to read.

Cheers,
MiggsEye.

Posts: 15 | Registered: Mar 2015  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Denevius
Member
Member # 9682

 - posted      Profile for Denevius   Email Denevius         Edit/Delete Post 
Hello MiggsEye, I don't normally ask this, but are you a little older?

I ask this because bingo is generally something we think of senior citizens playing at church functions. And this isn't an inherent problem with the story, because my follow up question is, "Who's your intended audience?"

I can definitely see this story as you've described it selling to a relatively benign magazine geared towards older people, probably church-going retired suburbanites, who will get a kick out of a whodunit that they can relate to. That's one thing you have to be careful about in workshop environments. People who aren't your intended audience are responding with suggestions on how to change your story.

Older people may very well have the patience for this slow beginning where two old gals are gossiping on the phone while peanut butter cookies are baking in the oven. Personally, I would never read past this opening as is, but I can imagine my mom going a bit further as the mystery unfolds.

But if your story is geared towards a younger audience, anyone under 50, I think you're going to have a problem with how you've described your story. Cheating, and then poison, is kind of boring considering all of the craziness you see on CSI and Law & Order and all of the other mystery shows saturating television now.

If someone isn't cutting someone else up into little pieces, grinding up their bones, and then sprinkling it on peanut butter cookies to be served at the next bingo meet, I think you're gonna have a problem maintaining interest from younger readers.

Posts: 1216 | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MiggsEye
Member
Member # 10400

 - posted      Profile for MiggsEye   Email MiggsEye         Edit/Delete Post 
Brilliant critique, Extrinsic. Thank you.

Additional comments below in ———— DASHES————

quote:
Originally posted by extrinsic:
Bernice and Mabel "gab" on phones about Doris. Mabel is a "busybody," the "informant" type for the cozy mystery form. Mabel "tallied" Doris's lucky events and passes that gossip to Bernice, who is presumably the cozy detective.

——————This is true. Reading more the reader will see there is another mystery implicating that Bernice may have poisoned Doris. Bernice either finds out or knows the truth of both.——————

A few grammar glitches set me out of the narrative as do a few craft considerations. A grammar one, the comma here is a stray: "'You know[,] I've kept a tally?'" "You know" used as an interjection is separated by commas from main clauses, not when used for an interrogatory and part of a main clause.

—————Thank you for clarifying that.—————

Craft-wise, the narrative point of view is of a narrator's perceptions. Cozy mysteries vary how narrative point of view is managed, sometimes cozily close to a viewpoint character's perception, sometimes cozied up to a narrator. I favor the former.

—————Because of the doUble mystery, one involving Bernice herself, I felt a 3rd person POV with interior proximity to the MC was the appropriate way for this story. However, it may not be a traditional 'cozy' story. But it one were to equate it to one, perhaps the POV of The Murder of Roger Ackroyd, where the narrator turns out to be the murderer might be close — although I'm not sure if that was written in 1st person or not, or at least in places like the reveal at the end. —————

However, an after-the-fact objective journalism-type report given by a narrator is the overall preferred cozy mystery narrative point of view method. The method is an overtly matter-of-fact depiction of events reported -- gossiped -- to the narrator-reporter with a covert, strong emotional attitude toward events. William Faulkner's "A Rose for Emily" is a precursor-prototype cozy mystery.

——————Thank you. I guess if I am going to write what I say is a "cozy" mystery, I should know the conventions, at least enough to know if I'm breaking them so I can do so consciously.——————

Cozy mysteries typically involve a serious crime mystery. Presumably, Doris's lucky streak is a result of crime, perhaps theft or fraud. The crime suspicion or crime itself needs early if not immediate introduction as the puzzle complication wanting solution, resolution, or satisfaction. The sentence "'You know I've kept a tally?'" to me is an insertion point for the criminal-like luck Doris has.

———————You are right. There is another implication that begins, at the end of the chapter, involving the MC——————

The sensory details of the fragment include olfactory, tactile, aural, and visual and implied gustatory depictions. The scene is vivid and cozy, a strength that stands out for me.

——————Thank you—————

Shortfalls for me, that the action starts too slow, sensory details are still-life like, lacking, in my estimation, dramatic movement, which comes from emotional antagonism. Personal emotional feeling is the sixth and most crucial sense of narrative expression. Again, insertion points are mention of Doris's luck and Mabel's tally of their events, though, for cozy detective and viewpoint persona Bernice, her emotional reactions to events and reported gossip are essential. Oh my, gracious me! You don't mean Doris cheats?

——————Perhaps you would see evidence of these beyond the 13 lines. I'd love to hear your critique extended if you'd be willing. I'm enjoying this very detailed look at my blind spots——————

Also, for dramatic development through the sensory details, some need best be off expectation, like Bernice smells the cookies in the oven have scorched. She never burns her cookies! She's upset that Doris might be a cheat. And so on.

——————I love this. The current version has them turning out perfect. I love the idea of her burning them, which just hooks in the fact that everything changes here. The real inciting event for Bernice may be her burning the cookies following these revelations.———————

How dark can a cozy mystery be? The conventions are offstage murders -- any violence offstage -- offstage sex, offstage profanity, offstage scandal, perhaps another crime offstage, though each implied. Also, cozy mysteries are courteous manners; the larger narrative form is the novel of manners or short story: novel in the Italian sense to mean fiction of any length. Edgy dark would imply one of the central characters might be foul mouthed. Mabel, for example. And likewise, she secondhand -- gossips -- describes offstage events, like violence, sex, other crimes, and other scandalous events. Say Doris's husband enjoyably cross dresses in public, at costume parties or other socially appropriate events and exclusively such that his dress is the talk of the town, gossip-like that Mabel reports to Bernice. Cozy, dark, and edgy.

——————My plan was not terribly dark. No profanity. No sex... well maybe (a little fantasy as the women all seem to lust over Harry. But this is treated with humor too.) I meant darker in human motivations and the struggle between forgiveness vs. justice that a seemingly pious Catholic woman might struggle over.——————

Three scene development features of note for cozy mysteries, well, most narrative forms, if not all, are vividness, liveliness, and urgency. This opening fragment manages the first fully, the latter two not at all. Mabel is, to me, the character to impress upon Bernice, and through her impress readers, the liveliness and urgency features. And that to me is from Doris's activities. Maybe, for example, Mabel is concerned Doris has gotten into trouble and, if no one acts now or soon, she will be in over her head and resort to yet worse crime. Or, for "did she or didn't she done it," Mabel is concerned someone dark and mysterious set Doris up to take the fall for his or her crimes. There, Bernice is compelled to lively act urgently to save her and Mabel's friend Doris in the nick of time. Cozy.

——————Brilliant additions of depth. I can begin to see where I can take this. Thank you.——————

Church bingo is notorious for embezzlement. The title somewhat artfully implies such a crime, ongoing, that Doris wins a statistically disproportionate number of bingo games that Mabel tallies. Exquisite gossip convention, I might add. Busybody biddies take bingo seriously. A common source of bingo fraud is mismanaged scratch-off side lotteries. Any bingo mischief requires co-conspirators, by the way. Could someone who organizes the games be feeding Doris wins to cover up her or his scratch-off and bingo embezzlement? I might suggest consider adding a modifier to the title to further imply a crime, say, //Bingo Night Spoils at St. Stephen's.//

—————I'm in the midst of researching more of this kind of BINGO background. I was not aware of this side of the embezzlement scheme. This could help me in my depth. The larger implications are the Harry, the handsome handyman by day and BINGO caller (and possible lothario) by-night, might be running this whole thing and has hooked their friend Doris (either willingly or unwillingly) into the scheme.———————

Great promise for a cozy mystery story -- more dramatic development I feel is warranted overall for the title and the fragment.

Thank you. Brilliant critique with an abundance of constructive insight. Thank you so much. Is the story interest you enough to read further I would enjoy and appreciate your additional insight.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
Cheers,
MiggsEye

Posts: 15 | Registered: Mar 2015  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MiggsEye
Member
Member # 10400

 - posted      Profile for MiggsEye   Email MiggsEye         Edit/Delete Post 
Thank you Denevius. Comments noted inline below between ————— dashes——————

quote:
Originally posted by Denevius:
Hello MiggsEye, I don't normally ask this, but are you a little older?

———— I'm in the mid-life, years. Been around senior citizens and their activities, so the influence has perhaps worn off. ———

I ask this because bingo is generally something we think of senior citizens playing at church functions. And this isn't an inherent problem with the story, because my follow up question is, "Who's your intended audience?"

————— Good question. At first, it was me and my posterity — actually finishing a complete story would have been enough accomplishment for me to be satisfied. But audience considerations are real if I intend on doing something with it. I see enough humor in it that people other than seniors may enjoy some of it's laughs. There's a core of light heartedness in it with a tinge of contrast in regards to character motivations and the forgiveness vs. justice struggle and them (this is meant to be subtle). It's not Christian per se or meant to transmit a message. Now, I don't imagine teen readers getting into this. I can see an audience who enjoys humor. Maybe a mystery audience, if it is developed. It could be literary perhaps, if it was developed that way, as that's where things sometime end up that don't strictly fall into a categories. But yes, seniors and those around them may find it worth a read. ——————————

I can definitely see this story as you've described it selling to a relatively benign magazine geared towards older people, probably church-going retired suburbanites, who will get a kick out of a whodunit that they can relate to. That's one thing you have to be careful about in workshop environments. People who aren't your intended audience are responding with suggestions on how to change your story.

———— Point taken. Thank you. —————

Older people may very well have the patience for this slow beginning where two old gals are gossiping on the phone while peanut butter cookies are baking in the oven. Personally, I would never read past this opening as is, but I can imagine my mom going a bit further as the mystery unfolds.

———— I still may consider revving up the pace at the beginning a bit. ————

But if your story is geared towards a younger audience, anyone under 50, I think you're going to have a problem with how you've described your story. Cheating, and then poison, is kind of boring considering all of the craziness you see on CSI and Law & Order and all of the other mystery shows saturating television now.

————— Point taken ——————

If someone isn't cutting someone else up into little pieces, grinding up their bones, and then sprinkling it on peanut butter cookies to be served at the next bingo meet, I think you're gonna have a problem maintaining interest from younger readers.

————— Perhaps I should add a dash of the macabre? Sounds promising—————


Thank you, Denevius, for your generous critiquing and consideration.

Cheers,
MiggsEye

Posts: 15 | Registered: Mar 2015  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
extrinsic
Member
Member # 8019

 - posted      Profile for extrinsic   Email extrinsic         Edit/Delete Post 
MiggsEye,

As is, I wouldn't read on. As an editor, I would take a light touch approach first, a heavier hand as the action forms up. The light approach at first is so that an editor doesn't impose her or his creative vision onto a writer's. I have a clear view of the story, though, and best wait and see how the opening shapes up before I consider reading and responding to the whole. That way, a writer learns for the self's benefit without difficulties arising from misunderstandings, seeming contradictions, and eagerness to please.

The contradiction consideration, that is common from how strengths and shortfalls are easily often inextricably intertwined. A default is a writer's solution may excise a strength along with a shortfall. For that reason, best practice waits for developments to make their way onto the page.

The main shortfalls for me are lack of dramatic development and focus. Strength-wise, as noted above, the possibilities for the story to me orient around Bernice as the "objective" character, the "cozy" detective; Mabel as gossip informant, the "influence" character, and Doris as perhaps unwitting suspect, the "subjective" character.

A story best needs clearly defined, focused character roles, protagonist: character most involved, most complicated by events and wants and problems wanting satisfaction, and most transformed by events. For me, that's Bernice. An objective character is a lens through which a narrative is reflected, viewed, as it were.

Mabel as influence character, also known as a foil, propels the events, influences events, though is less or not at all transformed by events. Though Bernice might encourage Mabel to change her gossipy ways, frustratingly unsuccessfully, which also propels Bernice's transformation: maturation growth.

Doris as subjective character is the observed character, the subject of Bernice's "objective" lens and, though transformed by events, is less so than an objective character: a protagonist, or in this case, perhaps only transformed externally, as in found innocent, and otherwise not internally transformed, as in maturation growth. Doris, for example, ends up exonerated, though otherwise unchanged.

This means to me the narrative is a specimen shape. Doris is the specimen. Specimen narratives reveal as much if not more about an objective character's personality and behavior as a subjective character and influence character. That is a specimen narrative's appeal.

Harry as an unattainable love interest-villain is delicious, kind of a Petrachan inversion of eros and lust vice opposed by chastity virtue. Also, that Bernice's central moral crisis pivots upon forgiveness and justice is cozy and inspired. Consider the moral vice of wrath -- justice or rush to judgment -- and wrath's opposite moral virtue of patience as forgiveness, perhaps slanted such that patience causes problems, those vice-virtue clashes as central to the moral crisis pivots and the intangible though most appealing underlaying dramatic action.

That Bernice might have poisoned Doris is a promising motif, a sideline though, to what I see as the main plot motif of Doris's possible crime and conspiracy. That poison motif makes for greater depth of complication; that is, it is a problem that impedes Bernice's solution of the puzzle. The additional, perhaps, moral crises that that might entail are worth the candle. However, that and its moral crises expands the story. Now I begin to see that these above considerations justify an 8,000 to 10,000 word narrative, if not longer. That's a concern worth consideration.

Also, if Bernice intentionally poisons Doris, she would know she did the dastardly deed and be conscious of that and her "did or didn't done it" spoiled or artlessly, and annoyingly to readers, withheld. "The Murder of Roger Ackroyd" plays with the convention of withholding information known to a viewpoint persona, effectively, I feel. That narrative is uniquely and appealingly one of a kind in that regard. Bernice could have unintentionally poisoned Doris, though, and Bernice question her motives played out as nonconscious and misplaced wrath toward Doris.

I can see this, more refined, published by Readers Digest or inspirational oriented digests that market to religious readers.

Edited to add: Also consider a different food allergen. Peanuts are a default and familiar motif for crime drama, maybe trite. An exotic allergen could still appeal to readers with nut allergies and their family and acquaintances, leave doubt open about Bernice's intentions, appeal from exoticness, and artfully, originally, freshly misdirect nut-allergy reader concerns that Doris would not touch a peanut butter cookie. Say Doris is not allergic to most nuts, legumes and conventional tree nuts. She's an avid peanut butter cookie lover. She is severely allergic to and easily avoids pine allergens (a setting detail, this place is far enough away from pine forests Doris isn't overly concerned): pine nut slivers with which Bernice garnishes the peanut butter cookies, that look like peanut slivers.

[ March 31, 2015, 06:28 PM: Message edited by: extrinsic ]

Posts: 6037 | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Grumpy old guy
Member
Member # 9922

 - posted      Profile for Grumpy old guy   Email Grumpy old guy         Edit/Delete Post 
This just goes to show the depth of my own ignorance. I know absolutely nothing about the American Cozy Mystery genre, bingo, or bingo biddies penchant for gossip and conspiracy theories.

So, I wouldn't have picked up this story anyway. That said, I would consider extrinsic's suggestion to have the smell of burning peanut butter cookies interrupt the telephone conversation. A small dramatic complication to highlight character and looming crisis as well as developing the author's voice; give the reader a reason to keep reading because the author's writing style lures them in.

Phil.

[ March 31, 2015, 04:54 PM: Message edited by: Grumpy old guy ]

Posts: 1937 | Registered: Sep 2012  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MiggsEye
Member
Member # 10400

 - posted      Profile for MiggsEye   Email MiggsEye         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Grumpy old guy:
This just goes to show the depth of my own ignorance. I know absolutely nothing about the American Cozy Mystery genre, bingo, or bingo biddies penchant for gossip and conspiracy theories.

So, I wouldn't have picked up this story anyway. That said, I would consider extrinsic's suggestion to have the smell of burning peanut butter cookies interrupt the telephone conversation. A small dramatic complication to highlight character and looming crisis as well as developing the author's voice; give the reader a reason to keep reading because the author's writing style lures them in.

Phil.

I plead ignorance too. But its not stopping me from trying. It's a fun playground to figure out. thanks for your insights.

Cheers,
MiggsEye

Posts: 15 | Registered: Mar 2015  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MiggsEye
Member
Member # 10400

 - posted      Profile for MiggsEye   Email MiggsEye         Edit/Delete Post 
Extrinsic... I messed up some edits on my response to your last post. Here it is all below. Comments shown ##### thusly#####

quote:
Originally posted by MiggsEye:
quote:
Originally posted by extrinsic:
MiggsEye,

As is, I wouldn't read on. As an editor, I would take a light touch approach first, a heavier hand as the action forms up. The light approach at first is so that an editor doesn't impose her or his creative vision onto a writer's. I have a clear view of the story, though, and best wait and see how the opening shapes up before I consider reading and responding to the whole. That way, a writer learns for the self's benefit without difficulties arising from misunderstandings, seeming contradictions, and eagerness to please.

##### Point well taken #####

The contradiction consideration, that is common from how strengths and shortfalls are easily often inextricably intertwined. A default is a writer's solution may excise a strength along with a shortfall. For that reason, best practice waits for developments to make their way onto the page.

##### Good point. Got it. #####

The main shortfalls for me are lack of dramatic development and focus. #### Got it. ##### Strength-wise, as noted above, the possibilities for the story to me orient around Bernice as the "objective" character, the "cozy" detective; Mabel as gossip informant, the "influence" character, and Doris as perhaps unwitting suspect, the "subjective" character.

##### Your mention of "influence character" has me wondering if you are familiar with Dramatica story theory. This story was originally structured using it. Though the characters role categories are different than your suggestions below (which I like, by the way). Currently, I have Bernice as Main Character (Protagonist, more or less), Doris as Influence character (Antagonist, more or less), and Mabel as Sidekick (more or less). The "more or less" is due to the beauty of Dramatica, being that you can create complex characters that do not fit the stereotypical character roles. #####

A story best needs clearly defined, focused character roles, protagonist: character most involved, most complicated by events and wants and problems wanting satisfaction, and most transformed by events. For me, that's Bernice. An objective character is a lens through which a narrative is reflected, viewed, as it were. ##### Bingo #####

Mabel as influence character, also known as a foil, propels the events, influences events, though is less or not at all transformed by events. Though Bernice might encourage Mabel to change her gossipy ways, frustratingly unsuccessfully, which also propels Bernice's transformation: maturation growth. ##### I like this suggestion. i had here more as a Sidekick role. #####

Doris as subjective character is the observed character, the subject of Bernice's "objective" lens and, though transformed by events, is less so than an objective character: a protagonist, or in this case, perhaps only transformed externally, as in found innocent, and otherwise not internally transformed, as in maturation growth. Doris, for example, ends up exonerated, though otherwise unchanged.

##### Currently I have Doris as the Influence Character (but I like your suggestion of giving that role to Mabel and may consider it). As the story develops, Bernice discovers evidence that confirms that Doris is cheating, but also finds evidence as to what has driven her to that.#####

This means to me the narrative is a specimen shape. Doris is the specimen. Specimen narratives reveal as much if not more about an objective character's personality and behavior as a subjective character and influence character. That is a specimen narrative's appeal. ##### Bingo. This is the direction I was taking it.######

Harry as an unattainable love interest-villain is delicious, kind of a Petrachan inversion of eros and lust vice opposed by chastity virtue. Also, that Bernice's central moral crisis pivots upon forgiveness and justice is cozy and inspired. Consider the moral vice of wrath -- justice or rush to judgment -- and wrath's opposite moral virtue of patience as forgiveness, perhaps slanted such that patience causes problems, those vice-virtue clashes as central to the moral crisis pivots and the intangible though most appealing underlaying dramatic action. #####Bingo!######

That Bernice might have poisoned Doris is a promising motif, a sideline though, to what I see as the main plot motif of Doris's possible crime and conspiracy. ##### Interesting. I had them more connected, giving Bernice's "poisoning" of Doris a purpose that intertwines with Doris's "cheating". In the end, Doris is saved from her cheating scandal through the events of Bernice's "poisoning" of her. Bernice (along with readers) is the one most aware of all the events and how they add up. The suspicion that Bernice poisons Doris is left up in the air until the end. We do find out that Bernice in a moment of weakness, did attempt to poison the dough for the pie she made Doris, fully aware of Doris's peanut allergy. We also find that Doris (the glutton that she is and despite her own knowledge of her peanut allergy) couldn't rest Bernice's cookies and may have just nibbled on one, thus causing her own allergic reaction. So either or both may be the culprits, and its left undetermined who of the two (or was it cumulative?) in fact poisoned Doris. Yet its clear that Bernice's intent was to stop Doris by harming her. It looms at the end of the story, though Bernice believes in God's certain and limitless forgiveness and clears her conscience (as she always does) by reciting an Act of Contrition: "Oh my God, I am heartily sorry for having offended thee, and I detest all my sins....: In the end, the reader gets to play God and either clear or not.

There's more layered in there. Bernice searching for an EPI pin in Doris's purse and finding in there evidence explaining why Doris needs the money. Bernice saves Doris from certain scandal and financial ruin, and wins a TV to boot! ######.

That poison motif makes for greater depth of complication; that is, it is a problem that impedes Bernice's solution of the puzzle. The additional, perhaps, moral crises that that might entail are worth the candle. However, that and its moral crises expands the story. Now I begin to see that these above considerations justify an 8,000 to 10,000 word narrative, if not longer. That's a concern worth consideration. #### Bingo #####

Also, if Bernice intentionally poisons Doris, she would know she did the dastardly deed and be conscious of that and her "did or didn't done it" spoiled or artlessly, and annoyingly to readers, withheld. "The Murder of Roger Ackroyd" plays with the convention of withholding information known to a viewpoint persona, effectively, I feel. #### I know I run the risk of annoying readers by withholding an internal fact that would be know to the narrator all along. Perhaps there is an aspect of denial or suppression? An I can't think about that know. I can only hope that I can withhold it effectively and artfully and suspense-fully######. That narrative is uniquely and appealingly one of a kind in that regard. ###### I wouldn't want to rehash Christie's device there. Need to find my own, rather this story's way, to weave it artfully and enjoyably for the reader. ###### Bernice could have unintentionally poisoned Doris, though, and Bernice question her motives played out as unconscious and misplaced wrath toward Doris. ##### I originally considered unintentional poisoning. Currently I have her doing it consciously, but denying it, even to herself, until the end when she recounts two events earlier in the day that prove Doris's cheating and witness Bernice dousing her hands in peanut butter before she needs the dough for the pie (Doris's favorite) she bakes for Doris.######

I can see this, more refined, published by Readers Digest or inspirational oriented digests that market to religious readers. ##### I could imagine it appealing to religious readers. But I hope to make it appealing to readers beyond just religious types, who are interested in human motivations for doing dastardly things to ones friends they love. And letting oneself off the hook for it.######

Edited to add: Also consider a different food allergen. Peanuts are a default and familiar motif for crime drama, maybe trite. An exotic allergen could still appeal to readers with nut allergies and their family and acquaintances, leave doubt open about Bernice's intentions, appeal from exoticness, and artfully, originally, freshly misdirect nut-allergy reader concerns that Doris would not touch a peanut butter cookie. Say Doris is not allergic to most nuts, legumes and conventional tree nuts. She's an avid peanut butter cookie lover. She is severely allergic to and easily avoids pine allergens (a setting detail, this place is far enough away from pine forests Doris isn't overly concerned): pine nut slivers with which Bernice garnishes the peanut butter cookies, that look like peanut slivers. ##### Clever! Thank you. I will develop. I was playing with the peanuts being a red-herring. Though Bernice's frustration after they burned and the whole new of Doris cheating (pulls the evidence she finds when Bernice's dog overturns Doris's bag and identical, preprinted BINGO cards are discovered by Bernice) sets Bernice off. I currently have Bernice intentionally poisoning the pie dough with peanut butter ladden on her hands as she kneads. So many possibilities.#####


P.S. I find it intriguing how Bernice believes in the certainty and limitless of God's forgiveness, and can justify a dastardly thing, knowing she will be forgiven as long as she confesses and acts contrite. It's a bit psychopathic. This is why I think this is darker than a typical cozy mystery. One the outside its about manners and and mayehm such. But on the inside (of Bernice's head) there is some grand manipulation happening.

[ April 01, 2015, 10:44 AM: Message edited by: MiggsEye ]

Posts: 15 | Registered: Mar 2015  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
extrinsic
Member
Member # 8019

 - posted      Profile for extrinsic   Email extrinsic         Edit/Delete Post 
A few thoughts after reviewing the above:

If Doris is known to have cheated early on and only proof and contrition wanting for the end, the end is telegraphed. That is a simple plot shape, not simplistic per se; dramatic turns are minor and tension is low because the outcome is a foregone conclusion. Complex plots hold doubt open until timely satisfied.

A complex plot involves major turns caused by revelations and vice versa. These are the "twists" readers delight in: Profound revelations cause profound reversals, or reversals cause revelations: the major turns and twists.

Doubt of outcome is a considerable appeal feature. If Doris is suspected of cheating and evidence found she may cheat and evidence found she may not cheat, outcome of that thread remains in doubt until an unequivocal and irrevocable preponderance of evidence adds up one way or the other, ideally, near the end.

This is also where clear and focused character roles contribute, empathy foremost for a protagonist-main character; that is, Bernice could nobly refuse to believe Doris cheats at first. Mabel rushes to judgment and influences Bernice to consider the likelihood. Further, because Bernice poisons Doris is on the table, Mabel is ideally positioned to place the blame on Bernice. Mabel's blame assignment causes a rift between her and Bernice, such that then proving or disproving Doris's crime and Bernice's poisoning of Doris falls entirely on Bernice; Mabel withholds further assistance. Bernice remains self-involved and central to all the action.

I might add, Doris's anaphylactic shock could send her to the hospital into a coma. Doris left her EpiPens at home, say because -- always a cause first of any act -- she was rushed by being held up to meet with a co-conspirator who demanded she decrease her cut and was flustered, if complicit. If not complicit, because Doris was confronted by an accusation from, say Mabel, or the parish monsignor, or the actual conspirator covering his or her tracks and threatening to expose Doris.

Say Doris gives her misrepresented excuse for tardiness to Mabel and Mabel shares that with Bernice. The excuse is a clue for later, given before it's relevant and overlooked because it was irrelevant at the time it was given. That's an artful, natural, and necessary misdirection using a timely though previous revelation. That is a foreshadowed event that develops great significance timely later.

Tension builds from what readers know beforehand though a pivotal character may not. Doris's excuse might be suspicious to Mabel because Doris does protest too much. The truth of the matter is hidden behind an elaborate and fictitious report.

Anyway, Doris's hospitalization takes her off the table too; she's not available to Bernice for interview or direct accusation such that Bernice can gauge her reaction, and so forth, nor available for police investigation. Only Mabel's rushed-to-judgment suspicions prevail for at least half the narrative.

If Bernice is swayed by finding bingo sheets and evidence of desperate financial need in Doris's purse, they best be equivocal evidence at first in either case, so that doubt remains open as long as practical. Why does Doris need money? How much, too? Again, causes are crucial and best equivocal at first as evidence. No need to answer why, how, and so on: or for who, when, where, and what for this discussion, though as artfully raised questions artfully delayed in answering within the narrative.

If Bernice at first refuses Mabel's accusations, she too becomes caught up by a rush to judgment when she uncovers damning though equivocal evidence. That sequence is logical -- plot holes arise when causality is missed or sequentially reversed or mixed up --; that is, Mabel raises suspicion, Bernice refuses to believe, Doris tips her hand -- say Bernice notices Doris at the bingo hall surreptitiously take bingo sheets from her purse to play. Innocent enough if they are leftovers from a previous night, equivocal, in other words. Rules prohibit using bingo sheets not sold at the time of the event. Though that sets off alarms for Bernice and her rush to judgment.

Mabel, Doris, and Bernice attend the traumatic bingo night. Bernice organizes the bake sale that accompanies the event. Mabel asks Bernice about the items Bernice contributed. Something-something that Mabel reminds Bernice Doris is severely allergic to. Bernice is distracted by Mabel filling her ear with more juicy gossip about the community's people and forgets to warn Doris.

Oh my! Did Bernice or didn't she intentionally poison Doris? Mabel believes Bernice intentionally did. Bernice admits, to herself only, she might have let her rush to judgment get the better of her better judgment, though vehemently denies to Mabel intent to harm Doris; a guilty act -- mens rea, the other of the four circumstantial evidences of criminal intent: motive, means, and opportunity. And in that way readers are left to wonder if Bernice intentionally or unintentionally poisoned Doris, doubt of outcome left open, in other words.

Bernice conscious of Doris's allergy beforehand still fits, too, for when Bernice prepares the toxic-to-Doris food. She recalls Mabel told her of Doris's allergy. At the moment, Bernice wonders if Doris might react severely to just a little something-something and if she could then be the hero to rush in and save Doris from certain death. Oh my! Wonders only, and promises herself she intends to warn Doris and forgets.

So Doris goes into shock. Bernice explores Doris's purse for an EpiPen, finds none, is drawn to other equivocal evidence of cheating. The games are afoot.

By the way, churches anymore are particular about bake sale items to be consumed on premises, usually only single-serving, somewhat dry and neat items: cookies, cupcakes, brownies, lemon squares, danish, muffins, scones, etc.

Pie might be sold at a bake sale purposed and packaged for take-home. Pie is usually too messy for on-premises service: paper plates and plastic flatware costs and fill trash bins and stained carpets and trip-and-fall risks for hard floors. Just a consideration, because Doris eating an allergen is contingent upon that happening at the bingo game.

I am familiar with the Dramatica theory. A useful if derivative theory, not as diluted as many. The theory uses different labels for dramatic theory concepts, somewhat updated to contemporary sensibilities, somewhat obfuscated by sophisticated diction, somewhat rearranged for a new view of ancient expression traditions, that have been around and codified since at least as far back as Plato, certainly Aristotle.

One not given before is antagonism's role, which is a core of my personal dramatic theory and beliefs. Though Aristotle and, later, Freytag scratch at the edges of the idea, as do many narrative theories . . . Antagonism drives and is driven by causation and tension. Also, a serrendipitous coincidence is that the three Cartesian axes' acronym is ACT. The Dramatica theory also scratches at the edges of the idea, though none as far as I know firmly grasp antagonism's pivotal role.

[ April 01, 2015, 07:54 PM: Message edited by: extrinsic ]

Posts: 6037 | Registered: Jun 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MiggsEye
Member
Member # 10400

 - posted      Profile for MiggsEye   Email MiggsEye         Edit/Delete Post 
Thank you extrinsic. I meant to send a thank you reply before. Thought I did, but realize I did not. (Work deadlines have overwhelmed my ability to participate the last week.).

Your detailed criticism has left me thoroughly edified, tickled and flattered that I have your ear with this story. Thank you for your interest and attention to detail. All of your points will be considered as this is developed.

Posts: 15 | Registered: Mar 2015  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

   Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2