posted
So, I've had various little snippets of ideas popping into my head the past several days and a couple of them kept leading to a story start involving a glowing envelope. I'm working on edits of existing stories right now so I don't even know when I will pick a story to go with this opening, but it seemed pretty decent and I felt like posting it.
Opening the front door to take out the garbage, Ryan looked down and saw an envelope lying on the doorstep. It was made of a weirdly textured paper in a sort of grey-blue color and glowed with a soft light of the same shade.
Ryan turned toward the inside of the house. “Honey, there’s a glowing envelope on our doorstep!” He yelled.
“By ‘honey’ I assume you mean me, under the circumstances,” Emrys said, appearing behind Ryan with his usual unsettling rapidity.
“Well, yeah. I mean, me and Kyle are learning but you’re the undisputed expert on random glowing stuff,” Ryan said, bending down to look more closely at the envelope. “Look, it even has your name on it, it says ‘Lord Emrys” in pretty sparkly letters.”
Version 2
As Ryan went to take out the garbage, a weird glow, like twilight, attracted his attention. On the doorstep lay the source of the light, a letter-sized envelope made of weirdly textured paper.
Some might find that strange, but since Ryan was learning magic from a dimension-hopping master wizard who was also one of his boyfriends, he was only mildly intrigued. Probably just some help-request from one of Em's offworld friends.
“Honey, there’s a glowing envelope on our doorstep!” Ryan yelled over his shoulder.
Emrys appeared behind him with his usual nifty-creepy speed.
“I’m guessing I’m the honey you’re calling for, under the circumstances?”
quote:Opening the front door to take out the garbage, Ryan looked down and saw an envelope lying on the doorstep.
Reads like a report, because...well, you're reporting—explaining what you visualize happening, to the reader. But fair if fair. It's Ryan's story, and his problem. Why not let him live it as a participant—the protagonist, not someone you're talking about? In his viewpoint, it might be something like: - - - - Garbage bag in hand, Ryan stopped, frowning. Centered on the doorstep lay what appeared to be a standard sized envelope. It should have been hard to see in the dark but this envelope was glowing softly in blue-gray tones, lighting the step to announce its presence.
A response of "Holy crap, what's..." He shook his head, frown deepening. "What in the hell is that thing?" was the best he could come up with, as he reached back into the kitchen to lay the garbage bag aside. - - - - The why: First. Since which door he's at is irrelevant, I left it out in the opening.
And since we tell the reader that it's lying on the step, and everyone knows the step is below his feet, must we explain that to see it one looks down? No.
And why tell the reader he saw it. Why not have him notice it and react as a person would, to get you offstage?
Next: does he first notice that it's an envelope, and then notice that it's glowing? No. So since he will see both at the same time, I present it as he perceives it, not as items on a list.
Because the term envelope can mean many things, I quantified it, size-wise, as he would: First he notices it, then realizes that light is coming from the envelope.
I quantified the amount of light being emitted, so the reader won't think it's hot, or about to explode, and also to meaningfully set the scene as he perceives it.
My point is that as long as you're on stage talking to the reader about what can be seen, instead of what he's focused on, there will be no emotional content.
quote:Ryan turned toward the inside of the house. “Honey, there’s a glowing envelope on our doorstep!” He yelled.
So, your protagonist opens the door to discover a glowing envelope. And in response he don't speculate on what may be in it, why it's glowing, or how it got there? He just treats it as an everyday occurrence? Would you? Will a reader accept his lack of reaction as real from him if they would react?
My point is that we are not in the protagonist's viewpoint. Real people react to what they see, and analyze it, before they act. By simply following the script, and acting without any kind of personal reaction that the reader is aware of, you present the protagonist as a shadow puppet, not as a living, thinking, being.
Focusing on the visual, and the progression of events strips out the emotional content. But in the end, readers come to us to be made to worry on behalf of their avatar, and to share what they feel, not to read a chronicle of events.
o keep your reader happy, focus on what matters to the protagonist, not to you. You're not, after all, either in the story or on the scene.
Posts: 263 | Registered: Dec 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
An individual and an interruption to routine.
The envelope is a "Bear at the Door" worthy of complication and timely developed for the purpose. No cue to a conflict's stakes at risk yet, though the leisure attention lavished for the envelope's suddenness is on an artful pathway.
The language is a drawback, of a plain and over-sentimental, trivial social pleasantries mannerism. The language is also on the nondefinite and nonfinite side of incisive: trivial present progressive participle -ing verbs, nonspecific and vague descriptions, maid and butler dialogue, and automaton actions of a remote controller of drones.
One standout grammar error: "'pretty[,] sparkly letters.'" If "pretty" is an intensifier of "sparkly letters," maybe stet, let it stand. If "pretty" is part of a compound modifier, comma wanted. The latter is indicated due to the confused syntax as is. The comma equates to "and," //pretty and sparkly letters.// Otherwise, maybe a different word for an intensifier: //very sparkly letters.// The "pretty" intensifier used in the preamble shows the confusion of the term: "pretty decent."
A craft consideration, dialogue and thought attribution tags want soonest practical placement for best artful practice. And comma missed and chaotic emphasis syntax. The as-is sentence trails off rather than increases force (auxesis). Here:
“'By "honey[,]" I assume you mean me, under the circumstances,' Emrys said, appearing behind Ryan with his usual unsettling rapidity."
//“By ‘honey,'" Emrys said, _appearing_ behind Ryan with his usual _unsettling_ rapidity, "under the circumstances, I assume you mean me."//
Adjusted below for nondefinite and nonfinite -ing omissions demonstration, mindful a de copia, of abundance, exercise would try dozens or hundreds of other variants for one of best dramatic effect and develop therefrom a craft skill for less experiment beforehand and more up-front and incisive second-nature, intuitive composition from the outset.
Note the sequence of the example places tension setup, tension relief delay, and partial tension relief in train and builds force, though subtle and of a natural chronology sequence. The natural and deft location for an attribution tag is after a first natural pause transpires, after an otherwise normal place for a punctuation mark, after a comma, that is. Cite quote marks removed for clarity and read and comprehend ease (too formal a scholastic method anyway, that is, for prose). An "assume" mistake: presume. And of course, skewed somewhat ("shamage," shaman-mage portmanteau invention for a further nonroutine idiosyncrasy feature) so as not to usurp creative ownership:
//"By honey," Emrys said, he came up from behind at the shamage's usual eerie speed, "under the circumstances, I presume you mean me."//
Two more punctuation mistakes, and an uncapped mistake, one cite close quote mistake:
"Well, yeah. I mean, me and Kyle are learning[,] but you’re the undisputed expert on random glowing stuff," Ryan said, bending down to look more closely at the envelope. "Look, it even has your name on it[.] [I]t says 'Lord Emrys['] in pretty[,] sparkly letters.”
Though a routine interruption complication set up at the outset is of merit, in medias res of the finest craft facility, that is, rather than a banal routine portrayal beforehand, I would not read further as an engaged reader due to the trivial language and low tensile and robotic drama.
quote:Originally posted by Jay Greenstein: [QUOTE]Why not let him live it as a participant—the protagonist, not someone you're talking about?
I don't think it's Ryan's story. Doesn't it seem like this story is better from a detached third person? Aren't the interactions and what they do enough?
quote:Originally posted by Jay Greenstein: [QUOTE] In his viewpoint, it might be something like: - - - - Garbage bag in hand, Ryan stopped, frowning. Centered on the doorstep lay what appeared to be a standard sized envelope. It should have been hard to see in the dark but this envelope was glowing softly in blue-gray tones, lighting the step to announce its presence.
A response of "Holy crap, what's..." He shook his head, frown deepening. "What in the hell is that thing?" was the best he could come up with, as he reached back into the kitchen to lay the garbage bag aside.
My impression is this can be what I called "detouring". You are doing all great things to make this moment haves more emotional impact. But it's the start of the book, and the more interesting hook in the scene is probably what's inside the envelope. There doesn't need to be a rush to get there, but you are suggesting a somewhat long detour.
It's author's choice, but it needs to be a thoughtful choice.
Posts: 407 | Registered: Apr 2018
| IP: Logged |
quote:There doesn't need to be a rush to get there, but you are suggesting a somewhat long detour.
Forgetting that what I provided was an example of placing the reader into the story, as against reading a dispassionate list of events, the whole idea of fiction is to take the trip, and enjoy every minute of it, not reach the destination.
Posts: 263 | Registered: Dec 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
Second version rearranges content and expands or contracts some content, though is still or is more impersonal and emotionless than the first version. Prose wants personal and emotional expression; scholastic essays want impersonal and emotionless reports.
Posts: 6037 | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Grumpy old guy: And yet, immediate, direct immersion can so easily destroy a moment. Writer's choice, as always.
Phil.
Too close! said of a portion of workshop submissions, one in ten or so, means too close narrative distance too soon. Ernest Hemingway favored and advised quiet starts that built incremental tension and dramatic movement to an unsustainable, timely peak. Tension entrainment from the outset regardless anyway, title included. The structure's graph accords Aristotle's sole causation focus, more or less an inclined line segment: started above the 0 origin somewhat and inclined upward thereafter to the outcome end.
Since Gustav Freytag and Realism's emergence mid nineteenth century, tension influence emphasis overtook causation's to present-day more or less each equal emphasis. And my further contribution, antagonism emphasis catches up anymore, want-problem motivators, that is, strong traces of which are extant throughout the opus and anymore developed across the arts, "What's my motivation?" said by actors since the realization of the "in-character actor" prototype circa late nineteenth century Russian, British, U.S., Italian, German, and French theater innovations, and adopted to prose in quick succession. Prose now, give a protagonist, all agonists, for that matter, wants and problems with which to contest, and prevent their early, easy satisfactions.
Prose wants timely and soon Antagonism development as much as or more than Causation and Tension. ACT, act up, act out, act dramatically, antagonally, causally, tensionally on the sacred prose page! From start to end -- for that is a prime prose function, for personal and emotional appeals, moral satire subtext appeals, includes event anecdote, day-in-a-life, slice-of-life vignette, and character sketch "snapshots," so to speak.
No reason a quiet start cannot equal to a robust start's appeals, at least in terms of outset portents and promises of a robust dramatic movement to timely unfold. Even a robust start may attain unsustainable, later peaks, through a roller-coaster-like movement. What, a few words of starter track portent and promise, a ratcheted climb to a steep peak, followed by a sharp plunge, and several minutes or more of up, down, banked, and sideways crests, slope inclines, and trough joys, horrors, momentary quiet breath catches, and thrills!? (ACT movement.)
Yet old and young alike enjoy sedate and sentimental, slow, flat-track tram-train rides, too, so long as the scenery, amenities, company, and circumstances delight and journey from outset to a satisfactory outcome destination conclusion (Aristotle's causal movement).
quote:Originally posted by Jay Greenstein: the whole idea of fiction is to take the trip, and enjoy every minute of it, not reach the destination.
I think the point of a joke is to enjoy the punchline, not the whole thing. I will take the exact same attitude into an awesome moment, and good writers are sometimes just setting something up.
I think there's a profound issue here. For example, your "A Chance Encounter" begins with an encounter. You could have started there, but you started with the main character in a snowstorm. Then there is wonderful contrast, among other things, to the elegant woman suddenly appearing. In terms of art, it's nice.
But do you tell the scene for maximum emotional impact? I mean, do you want me to FEEL like I'm in a snowstorm? I'm not sure what that means, but I felt that all last weekend, and I didn't enjoy it then.
So you would think about what you need to make the chance encounter as good as possible.
And the profound question is is these are the same thing. Or if they are slightly different ways of writing.
But the non-profound is an author spending the first page of a book on something that has almost no effect on the opening scene. I think that happens in Gone, by Kellerman. It's what should make a scene good, it just doesn't work there.
Posts: 407 | Registered: Apr 2018
| IP: Logged |
posted
Real-life snowstorm sensations and experiences fit into a narrative if apt to the intended objective correlative (intangible emotion) per T.S. Eliot and "psychical distance" per Edward Bullough (narrative distance). Both are emotion-based appeals. Plus, aptness and fitness includes Freytag's emotional cluster of tension aspect, two or more congruent, opposite emotions and added emotional suspense and curiosity appeals.
Bullough's example is of a thick fog at sea, a perilous situation for many seafarers, yet the danger thrill and beauty of the fog is an uncommon delight, as well spans objective correlative and tension functions. Been there, done that, and then some, thick fog at sea while aboard a tiny ship myself.
One or another emotion best practice, in time, wins out from the several, like, say, the discomforts of a wintry event, yet pleasures, too, or the delights of a school break and wintry pastimes, yet displeasures, too, or the warm solace of a fireside window view of the quiet snow blanket outdoors, yet unpleasantry, too. Whatever, someway pleasant, some way unpleasant, someway unequivocal eventually, hence, dramatic, emotional, and antagonal, causal, tensional movements.
Posts: 6037 | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, basically the main criticisms here boil down to not enough emotion, but I've established, in the second version, that he knows magic himself and is sleeping with a powerful mage who has regular contact with folks from other worlds, so beyond the mild intrigued mentioned, I'm not sure how emotional he'd be getting or what other kind of emotion he'd really be having in this situation.
The main point here is introducing the characters and the situation (the envelope).
Although it is a little unusual for the magic parts to actually just show up like this, physically, in their world-still not enough to shock him, but perhaps I should make some small mention of it.
posted
Part of the lackluster drama of the as is fragment is due to craft and grammar shortfalls, expression and appeal, hence, follow.
For example, a narrator filter, summary and explanation tell, (craft):
"Ryan looked down"
For example, roller coaster tense shift sequence and a lie-lay mistake (grammar):
"_Opening_ the front door _to take out_ the garbage, Ryan _looked down_ and _saw_ an envelope _*lying*_ on the doorstep."
Present progressive, infinitive, simple past, simple past, present progressive tense sequence; things lay (present), laying (progressive), laid (past); persons lie (present), lying (progressive), lay (past), lain (perfect). Things are done to, to lay; persons do, to lie.
Multiple and helter-skelter tense shifts weaken expression force appeal (auxesis) and weaken main ideas' emphases, as do numerous trivial -ing and -ly words, trivial adjectives, adverbs, prepositions, conjunctions, and passive and static grammar voices. Lie-lay mistakes are bases for quick submission declines, part due to the mistakes in their own lights signal convenience habits, part due to those signal overall grammar shortfalls throughout a work are too numerous to want editorial efforts. The fragment contains several more grammar, craft, expression, and appeal shortfalls as well.
Posts: 6037 | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:So, basically the main criticisms here boil down to not enough emotion
It's not the protagonist's emotion that's missing, it's what will evoke empathetic emotion in your reader.
Tell me that your protagonist is angry with someone and I'll shrug. But if you make me angry with them, for the same reason the protagonist is, I won't be saying, "Interesting...tell me more." I'll be anxious to see how my avatar handles him, and shouting advice as to what to do next. And if you've done your job well, so far as me knowing what resources, needs, and abilities the protagonist can bring to bear, I'll be shouting for the protagonist to do what you're about to have him/her do, and therefore, be emotionally invested in what happens as a result of it. In other words, I have reason to want to turn the pages.
Remember, we "hear" or notice things before the protagonist does. So our response comes before theirs. If we're not on the same page as the protagonist, by knowing the situation as they do, our advice won't relate to what they do/say, making them far less interesting.
Posts: 263 | Registered: Dec 2016
| IP: Logged |
Thank you for your post, but there are two problems. One, you don't answer or even address the questions I asked and implied in my last post...and, you're grammatical analysis rant thingy is about the first version, not the second, current version (not that I particularly want a grammatical analysis rant thingy about the second one, I was asking for clarification about specific things.)
Posts: 226 | Registered: Oct 2018
| IP: Logged |
posted
Grammar is as much an emotion influence potential as craft, expression, and appeal are. For me, inept grammar looms largest, first, and most shortfall.
Few, if any, of your fragments let me read past the grammar. Nor do several hundred-word comprehensive descriptive craft analyses work for you, either. First sentence, second version, same content and context, different words and arrangement, same craft and grammar shortfalls, plus added ones, so a few comments about the first sentence, first version shortfalls of what doesn't work for me that the next and other fragment versions repeat.
In good conscience, I cannot answer your specific concerns, as no responses of mine to yours foster productive workshop discussions.
quote: In good conscience, I cannot answer your specific concerns, as no responses of mine to yours foster productive workshop discussions.
Oh sweet merciful Goddess help me. You realize there are two big glaring problems with this statement. One, you know very well it isn't true, as there have been plenty of times you've popped in and made interesting or useful suggestions on my bits, such as the "Elf King's Tune" thread-and that one without me even having to badger you out of your discourse paladin's code or whatever.
Two, if it is true, why in the name of contradictory claims did you respond to my last post in the first place?
And even more so, why with an unrealistic (for the most part, the first version was hammered out quickly and does have a couple of errors in actual-use grammar) grammar analysis that you knew I wouldn't want, and completely ignoring my questions which you knew I would then ask be answered.
Come on now. We've been interacting on here for years, and you're intelligent and observant. you know my ways. If you don't want to interact based on that...don't. But don't waste both our time with games and pretense. I have plenty of frustrations and conundrums in my life already.
Posts: 226 | Registered: Oct 2018
| IP: Logged |
quote: Tell me that your protagonist is angry with someone and I'll shrug. But if you make me angry with them, for the same reason the protagonist is, I won't be saying, "Interesting...tell me more." I'll be anxious to see how my avatar handles him, and shouting advice as to what to do next. And if you've done your job well, so far as me knowing what resources, needs, and abilities the protagonist can bring to bear, I'll be shouting for the protagonist to do what you're about to have him/her do, and therefore, be emotionally invested in what happens as a result of it. In other words, I have reason to want to turn the pages.
I get that you don't like the style/mode that I write in and that's totally fine (although I would point out I know of at least one pro editor, the guy from BCS, whose name escapes me, who specifically does want to be told directly what the MC is feeling) but my last post was referring to this part of your first post:
quote: So, your protagonist opens the door to discover a glowing envelope. And in response he don't speculate on what may be in it, why it's glowing, or how it got there? He just treats it as an everyday occurrence? Would you? Will a reader accept his lack of reaction as real from him if they would react?
In the second version, the emotion he's feeling is made clear (not expressed how you think it should be, I understand, but presented unequivocally nonetheless) and background information that is intended to, and hopefully does, more or less explain (or whatever word you want to use) why he doesn't have the reactions/feel the emotions you mention here (he's already seen weirder things than a glowing envelope.)
So that's why I ask, what other emotion, given this information, aught he to be feeling?
Or is my suspicion correct that everything that's been said here about lack of emotion is really about how it's being put forth, not it's absence. Both are completely valid criticisms, but should I decide I agreed they'd need to be dealt with in different ways.
Whichever of the two above points are the case, I need a little clarification to know what I want to do.
Posts: 226 | Registered: Oct 2018
| IP: Logged |
quote:Oh sweet merciful Goddess help me. You realize there are two big glaring problems with this statement.
Okay, you're not talking about the story the writing, or the advice given, you're trying to engage the ones giving you the advice in an emotional discussion about the discussion. And that's neither the purpose of this forum, the site, nor a discussion that will yield improved writing skill on your part.
You post your excerpts. The nearly universal response is that they don't work because your approach is to report/explain the plot events and backstory to the reader instead of involving them, emotionally.
Your response is to dismiss the advice for one reason or other. Here, you claim that I "don't like the style/mode that I write in." Forget that I owned a manuscript critiquing service and talk about structure,not plot. Forget that the views I express are those you'll hear in any workshop or conference, hear in any course on commercial fiction writing, and read in any book on writing fiction. Instead of dismissing the advice you get, you should be trying to figure out why the writing didn't do its job and captivate the people who said it doesn't work, and thereby make your writing more accessible.
That's your right of course. But given that there has been zero change in approach you use, story-to-story, you're obviously not reading up on fiction-writing technique, so whatever you post in the future will see the same response: that you're telling when you should be showing.
So...since you don't see a need to change your approach, other than arguing for argument's sake, what's your goal in posting?
Posts: 263 | Registered: Dec 2016
| IP: Logged |
posted
If MerlionEmrys' fragments contained a tenth the emotion, sarcasm, irony, harshness, and contentious drama of his defenses of his fragments, responses to responses, and his critiques of critiques, the fragments would be further along in appeal enhancement directions. Or as a general proverb from prose workshop culture asserts: Save It for the prose page. Make the scene on the prose page, not in the real-world, alpha setting life.
quote:“Honey, there’s a glowing envelope on our doorstep!” Ryan yelled over his shoulder.
I didn't expect "honey". So it was a surprise, or whatever it should be called, and I like those in my reading. I would keep reading anyway, but that made me more enthused about keeping reading.
That also tells me a lot, in the somewhat-vague way that action can. I liked how you "showed" the calmness with him yelling over his shoulder.
I also liked "nifty-creepy". It's creative. It's evocative. I gain confidence that you as a writer can make characters interesting by how you describe them. (The off-beat punctuation choice also worked well.)
Thinking about it -- it shows your style of "sarcasm". (Or maybe it's contentious drama? For me as a reader, I would get tired of everyone being happy. Do you mix these throughout the story? Is that standard nowadays in the super-hero genre? I would enjoy the contrast, you seem good at both happy and snarky.
It was subtle, but if Ryan thinks Emrys would know who he's talking about, why doesn't Emrys? I'm guessing that, for the relationship you want to portray, that Emrys would know. So that bothered me.
Posts: 407 | Registered: Apr 2018
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jay Greenstein: Okay, you're not talking about the story the writing, or the advice given, you're trying to engage the ones giving you the advice in an emotional discussion about the discussion. And that's neither the purpose of this forum, the site, nor a discussion that will yield improved writing skill on your part.
I agree with Jay Greenstein.
Your outburst, MerlionEmrys, toward extrinsic was uncalled for.
If you can't respond to feedback on your work with the words, "Thank you," then perhaps what is offered here is not what you need.
Writers are not supposed to argue with the feedback given them in this forum. If you disagree with what is said, that's fine, but you should still thank people for the time and effort they have put into giving you that feedback.
Arguing about the feedback neither improves your work nor does it encourage further feedback.
Thank you.
Posts: 8826 | Registered: A Long Time Ago!
| IP: Logged |
posted
I asked a question, and then got annoyed when I was given a reiteration of already-posted stuff instead of an answer to the question (of course there is no obligation to answer, but as I said, I would have preferred no response to a post that re-iterated stuff and ignored the specifically asked question.)
I'm not sure where that is arguing with the feedback, and I know I have at least one thank you in this thread...but okay.
I DID get emotional, but I've tried for ages to establish and maintain a rapport with extrinsic-even defended him to others, on and off site-and every time I feel it might be possible, I get hit with stuff that, to me, constitutes near-outbursts-just passive aggressive ones.
None of this has anything to do with arguing with feedback or defending my work, it has to do with acknowledging we're all human beings, showing respect and trying to form relationships. I see the people here as people, not just posters on a forum or writing colleagues, with all the good and bad and emotion that goes with it-but I guess that is a mistake on my part.
But that's okay, I'm not going to do it anymore and I think you might be right-with our current very limited number of posters, what is on offer as far as first 13 critiques, at the moment, isn't generally anything very helpful to me. I may just start posting reader-request fragments or synopses instead, as that's really what I prefer anyway.
Thank you everyone for all the feedback in this thread. I apologize for being an emotional person. Anyone who feels I have transgressed against the etiquette of feedback exchange is welcome not to give me anymore. That's not sarcasm or a dig or bitterness, just a statement.
Posts: 226 | Registered: Oct 2018
| IP: Logged |
I love the idea of a glowing envelope. It is an evocative image, and there are so many directions you could go with it. In terms of its initial location, I actually preferred the dumpster. You are, of course, the expert on your characters, so please forgive me if everything I am about to say is incorrect, but if they are a bunch of zany wizards, the dumpster provides a lot more eccentric options for its origin, its delivery, and for the person sending it. Again, that's just my opinion, so take it with a grain of salt.
In terms of clarity, if this is at the beginning of a story, I would prefer the line about them being wizards in training being a part of the intro as it is in the second version. In the first, it was unclear what the relationships between the characters were, and I was a bit confused (which can be quite useful in a story, so again, your preference).
I like the way the wizard said the honey line in the first version better than the second. The line that caught me up in the first was the one where the protagonist actually announces that there is a glowing envelope on the doorstep. It may totally fit the world you've crafted, but when I read it, it seemed a little stilted. I even tried saying it aloud, and it doesn't sound right to announce it that way. If I saw something weird on the doorstep, something I wasn't sure I should handle myself, I don't think I would necessarily say what it was - especially if it was sort of strange. Instead, I think I would say something like "Hey, honey, could you come here for a second?" Or maybe even go back into the house and ask for his/her help. Of course, there's always the option that the protagonist just picks up the letter and takes it inside wherein the wizard is aghast that they have touched it at all.
I hope this hasn't been too rambly and has been useful to you in some way. Great idea, and I look forward to reading more of the story!
posted
I like the 2nd version better. The glowing envelope motive in any case is excellent, it makes the readers curious, eager to continue.
For me, the sentence "Some might find that strange, but since Ryan was learning magic..." is too much explanation for a second sentence. Perhaps less would be more here, we could find this out more gradually. Also, it reminds me of the opening page of Harry Potter (which is a great book, but it may not be your intention to be similar...).
Posts: 3 | Registered: Aug 2019
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
