________NEWEST VERSION________________:

"Control? Come in! Oh Christ, come in dammit! Hello?”

The man’s voice startled Tatiana. “Yes… this is Control. State your flight number.”

“Sojourner Seven Five, we’ve got a problem!”

“State your situation.”

“No time for that! The whole thing is coming apart! My name is Marcus Kaplan… tell my wife I’m sorry.”

Tatiana knew he would be dead in minutes, but she continued with protocol, “Please state your situation.”

“No time… just find Marianne Kaplan, in Philadelphia. Tell her that Marcus is sorry… Tell her that I love…” the line went dead.

Tatiana silently cursed the Manual while attempting to reconnect.

_____________ORIGINAL VERSION______________:

“Control? Come in Control! Oh Christ, someone? Come in, damn it! Hello!”
“Yes… this is Control. State your flight number.”
“Echo Six Five Three, we’ve got a real problem!”
“State your problem.”
“No time! The whole thing is coming apart! My name is Marcus Kaplan, from Philadelphia… tell my wife I’m sorry.”
“Echo Six Five Three, please state your situation.”
“No time! No time… just find Marianne Kaplan, in Philadelphia. Tell her that Marcus is sorry… Tell her I lo…”
The line went dead. Tatiana dialed the telecomm line back, but she got the dreaded recording, “The telecomm line you have dialed does not exist.” She picked up her land-line

[This message has been edited by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (edited March 23, 2007).]

Starting with dialog is durned near impossible. I have no idea what is going on. While 911 calls happen like your first 13 do, they don't make good reading.

Get me into a POV, probably Tatiana's - isn't that a kind og metal? Or a big boat?

What I need to know:

1) Where are they? i.e. modern day earth, future earth, past/ alternate history earth, Earthsea?
2) What is E653? A plane, space ship, boat, sled dog team?
3) what's Control?
4) Assuming "Control" is monitoring E653 by radar or something like it, wouldn't she know his location and that his blip just vanished from her screen?
5) who the heck did she call?

It's not bad. The dialog has the righ feel. Although his last line is very melodramatic and cliche. I could live with it though. I just need more information to care about Marcus and whatever Tatiana experiences when she goes looking for the wife.

Tatiana punched the number for Control into her comm unit, her fingers trembling. "Control? Come in, Control!" She looked out her rear window, and saw the evil robot monkeys shoving poodle fuzz clippings up her tailpipe. Any moment now and the whole thing would blow. "Oh Christ, someone? Come in, damn it! Hello!”

That is, intersperse with the dialog info about what's up, who's doing it, how she feels, etc.

On level of info: I do want to know enough of what's going on that I can follow the story. I get that Control is something like a 911 center, but I'm having trouble with wha'ts what.

And I'm confused. Is Tatiana pretending to be Marcus and telling Control that she loves Marcus' wife? Or is Marcus speaking? I can't tell. A little scene development would be greatly appreciated because I don't know who's speaking and who's there.

Other nit picks:

You have someone say, "We have a real problem!" As opposed to a fake problem? I'd cut the word real. Or cut it entirely and say, "The ship is falling apart!"

“Control? Come in Control! Oh Christ, someone? Come in damn it!"

The sound of the man’s voice startled Tatiana and she fumbled as she switched on her headset. “Yes… this is Control. State your flight number.”

“Echo Six Five Three, we’ve got a problem!”

“State your situation,” she said in a steady monotone. She already knew his problem- Echo Six Five Three was as good as dead. Tatiana had been a Control Operator for seven years and she knew last-words when she heard them.

“The whole thing is coming apart! Please... my name is Marcus Kaplan..."

"I do not understand, Echo Six Five Three please state your situation."

NIT:

quote:

---

She already knew his problem- Echo Six Five Three was as good as dead. Tatiana had been a Control Operator for seven years and she knew last-words when she heard them.

---

The "She already knew his problem" is bothering me because I expect the next line to tell me the specific problem - i.e. his engine fell off - enemy fighters were swarming his location but the "problem" is left vague. It make sense because she probably doesn't know exactly what's wrong but still. I would suggest cutting the "She already knew his problem" because it detracts from the strength of the other two lines. I might also reverse the order of the last two.

So it reads:

Tatiana had been a Control Operator for seven years and she knew last-words when she heard them. Six Five Three was as good as dead.

That tells me a lot about her, fits in the first 13 and is your hook.

quote:

---

The "She already knew his problem" is bothering me because I expect the next line to tell me the specific problem

---

quote:

---

“State your situation,” she said in a steady monotone.

---

IB, thank you as well for pointing that out. I had a paragraph in there earlier that said why she was acting that way, but I seem to have taken it out without even realizing how odd it made the lines!

I'm gonna re-write this again. I am excited to get the lines strong and stable.

When you go back to it, read it aloud first. Your voice may pick up what your eyes don't. At some point, you're going to have to make your own judgments.

The Echo Alpha Bravo stuff gets annoyingly cliche, but even I don't have an answer for that yet.

edit:
I just saw your new revision. Sometimes it is a mistake to follow a critic's advice. This critic included.

Your new scene completely loses that rush of panic it used to have. The lengthy tags and descriptive lines are unnecessary, they ruin the quick-choppy pace that made the piece work to begin with. Now it reads like a banal bit of would-be fiction I could find anywhere. Consider a reversion back to its previous version.

Personally, the benefits we gain, knowing our POV name right off, and the smallest breath of a glimpse of her personality (that's it really) is far inferior to the costs imposed by the "new" version. We lose the rush we felt with the brisk pace.

Edit: I meant "I didn't feel...that it slowed down the action too much for me to enjoy the story." Other critiques already suggested some changes to the second tag lines that I figured would make them shorter, anyway. I apologize for not being perfectly specific.

The hook is the situation, and the dialogue makes it pretty clear what is going on. I wasn't disoriented at all. Remember your first paragraph is free, you should definitely use the chance after the plane goes down to orient the reader more specifically. That is the natural place. Trust me.

I hate to be a bastard and disrespect matters of opinion, but this, "I didn't feel like Zero that it slowed down the action." is not an opinion, it's an incorrect statement. Be aware that by adding something you are gaining and losing. Be aware that changes have benefits in addition to costs. Here what you gain in perspective you lose in pace. That's basic arithmetic. You can't speed up the pace and establish the point of view in greater detail, they are mutually exclusive changes.

The compromise idea isn't bad. Think about it. It's your story. I still recommend you keep it and give us an orientation line just after that initial dialogue. Remember, first paragraph is free. And you already have a fast-paced hook. Why trade that away so quickly?

When critiquing, it's good to inform the author how the story effects you and possibly suggest changes. Yet the way you're coming across in your critiques appears to be putting several people on the defensive. Do you want your advice to be heard or just feel superior about how wonderful your advice is? If you want to be heard, you might tone down your language from 'do this' and 'that's wrong' to 'you might consider this,' 'I found this <funny or whatever>,' and 'I REALLY liked the other way better.' The decisions is, of course, yours.

What is most important for KStar to realize is that what he gains in clarity he loses in pace.

If he thinks more clarity is needed, then he'll pay for it directly from his pace because more words without pushing the story forward will slow it down. I like fast pace. Personally, I think it was just fine.

If he wants to establish more clarity it should be less than the second version, because that completely ruined an otherwise excellent pace.

The lovely thing about feedback is that it is all opinion. Zero is right in that the second version loses some of the immediacy. But there sometimes needs to be a concession to pacing to connect the reader to the scene.

Kstar, when you revise try to balance the sence of danger/pacing you had in the first version with the need to convey a setting.

I think you can do it by keeping most of the first tag on the second version and leaving out all or most of the second tag.

So (forgive the presumption). . . cutting the existing gets you to something like this . . .

quote:

---

"Come in Control! Oh Christ, someone? Come in damn it!"

The sound of the man’s voice startled Tatiana. “This is Control. State your flight number.”

“Echo Six Five Three, we’ve got a problem!”

“State your situation.” Tatiana knew last-words when she heard them. Echo Six Five Three was dead.

“It's coming apart! Please... my name is Marcus Kaplan..."

"I don't understand."

---

Unless Tatiana always speaks formally use the contractions. It will help with the pacing and read more naturally. Anyway, I hope there was something helpful in my rambling.

Also, for the record, I am a 'she'.

Try this version on for size:

“Control? Come in! Oh Christ, come in damn it! Hello?”

The sound of the man’s voice startled Tatiana. “Yes… this is Control. State your flight number.”

“Echo Six Five Three, we’ve got a problem!”

“State your situation.”

“No time for that! The whole thing is coming apart! My name is Marcus Kaplan… tell my wife I’m sorry.”

Tatiana knew he would be dead in minutes, and she knew exactly how she was supposed to handle this sort of call. “Please state your situation.”

These three words also establish absolutely nothing.(literally)

I believe, and I suppose given the other readers here, I could be mistaken, however, I am going to assume that everyone on earth will assume the dialogue will be "sound." If it was something counter-intuitive, like telepathy, then you'd have every justification in the world to say "the thought probing her mind startled her," or whatever.

Truth is you could say "The man's voice startled her." Losing nothing of the setting and improving the flow drastically. (Nobody will assume it wasn't the sound.)

Sorry to elaborate, but I am using this example to make a point.

Also I think "dammit" reads much better, and more correctly, then "damn it," which has a pause, and, well, I've never heard anyone say it like that before.

Reverting back to the original topic.
"The sound of the man's voice startled Tatia."

I honestly don't see what we're establishing here.
1. She/he is startled
2. The previous speaker was a man
3. The man made a sound, that was startling
4. The person being startled is Tatiana

I don't see these as vital clarifications. If anything here is important, it is number 4. Then possibly number 1. 2 and 3 aren't particularly vital to know immediately.

Remember, I like the piece. So I am going to be very detailed in my critique here, but I am not meaning to rip it apart. I like it enough to take the time to do this. Sorry, forgive me.

I think that "state your situation" sounds long-winded, boring, formal, dry, and apathetic. I'm not sure what else she should say. I'd probably have her say "Go ahead," or something that could be snapped out fast. Remember the longer her responses the more likely the person in the SOS situation will die before relaying critical information. I did some police dispatch training, and, I realize it's different, but trust me that something seems off in her response. But I'd let it fly as a reader.

"Echo Six Five Three" is better then alpha, echo, bravo, theta, it still hits me as cliche, but I have [over]used such terminology so I have no right to criticize this. But a more obscure greek letter might hit the spot. Perhaps Zeta. I dunno.

Oh, and I love this line,
“No time for that! The whole thing is coming apart! My name is Marcus Kaplan… tell my wife I’m sorry.”
I think the pacing is perfect, and what the charatcer says is both in character and completely believable.

However... I have trouble finding the relevence in this long-winded line. Tatiana knew he would be dead in minutes, and she knew exactly how she was supposed to handle this sort of call. “Please state your situation.”

We learn:
1. Tatiana accepts the situation as critical
2. Tatia knows how to handle the situation
Then Tatiana repeats exactly what she just said.

Two things stand out to me.
1. This is unnecessary. But if you want something then a sentence could convey the same ideas.
[I think both the fact that she is expert (since she has the job afterall) and the situation is critical (obvious in dialogue) are already established. I don't think we need a line to establish them.
2. You emphasize that Tiana knows exactly how to handle the situation, something we've already assumed. Except then Tatiana repeats exactly what she just said, with an added "please." What you're saying here is... that she needs to be more polite?

“No time… just find Marianne Kaplan, in Philadelphia. Tell her that Marcus is sorry… Tell her that I love…” he never got the chance to finish his sentence. The line went dead.
I like this... except for two thing. There is a switch from third to first person, possibly intentional. I don't particularly like it though. And I feel that "he never got chance..." and "the line went dead" together in context is melodramatic and even a bit redundant. This would read a lot better, I think, if you omit "he never got a chance..." line.

Watch this.
“No time… just find Marianne Kaplan, in Philadelphia. Tell her that Marcus is sorry… Tell her that he loves…” The line went dead.

Those are my thoughts. Take them or leave them.

Anyway.

I agree with him that the part you kept as the first tag doesn't really tell us much useful information. Since tags slow action down, try to make them really count. You can make the first tag short, show us that she's startled, and give us a sense of where she's located by changing:

quote:

---

The sound of the man’s voice startled Tatiana and she fumbled as she switched on her headset. “Yes… this is Control. State your flight number.”

---

to

quote:

---

Tatiana fumbled as she switched on her headset. “Yes… this is Control. State your flight number."

---

instead. Unlike Zero, I took:

quote:

---

Tatiana knew he would be dead in minutes, and she knew exactly how she was supposed to handle this sort of call. “Please state your situation.”

---

to mean that she wasn't supposed to answer Marcus' request but was supposed to remain formal and get information about his situation. Assuming that's right, I'd at least suggest changing the 'and' to a 'but.' Maybe a re-wording would make things clearer, like "...in minutes, but she knew how the regulations said she should handle this sort of call." You could even spice things up and say something like "Tatiana bit her lip. She knew how the regulations said she should handle this sort of call." The problem for you, of course, is that it can be done a thousand different ways. Only you know what fits the story and the pacing.

I didn't mind that Marcus went from referring to himself in third-person to in first-person. I thought it was realistic for the situation. Going Zero's route wouldn't bother me, though.

As Zero pointed out with "he never got the chance to finish his sentence. The line went dead.", sometimes less is more. The "..." makes it clear that Marcus never finished his sentence, so cutting the "he never got the chance to finish his sentence" and keeping "The line went dead" does have more impact for me.

I am really taking your advice to heart, while trying to maintain my own point of view about the whole thing.

Zero, I really appreciate the extra-detailed critique. I don't mind your nit-picks either. I think those same things were bothering me as well (the name & the cheesy line).

Debbie, I think you did get a clearer picture of what I was trying to communicate.

AND I am very entertained by your posts.

I feel pretty satisfied with this new version. It brings up some of the restraints she's working with. Is this a good idea? Or does it mess it up? Does the second tag still seem awkward?

_____________________________________
I almost put just 2 numbers on my own, but I keep trying to do relevant numbers. BUT, since no one except for me gets it (obviously) I will take that bit of advice.

NEW NAME:
_____________________________________

"Control? Come in! Oh Christ, come in dammit! Hello?”

The man’s voice startled Tatiana. “Yes… this is Control. State your flight number.”

“Sojourner Seven Five, we’ve got a problem!”

“State your situation.”

“No time for that! The whole thing is coming apart! My name is Marcus Kaplan… tell my wife I’m sorry.”

Tatiana knew he would be dead in minutes, but she continued with protocol, “Please state your situation.”

“No time… just find Marianne Kaplan, in Philadelphia. Tell her that Marcus is sorry… Tell her that I love…” the line went dead.

Tatiana silently cursed the Manual while attempting to reconnect.

[This message has been edited by KStar (edited March 30, 2007).]

JUST KIDDING

It's actually a lot better. A lot, a lot.

A few thoughts.
1. Use "Dammit" not "damn it," the latter looks ridiculously amateur.
2. I like the word Sojourner, maybe you could cut off one of the numbers?
3. try substitutuing knew with assumed, since she still doesn't really know what's going on.
4. nice job with the protocol line.
5. nice job with the "line went dead" line.
6. I don't know why she's cursing the manual, I immediately think she should be cursing the aituation, if anything. After all, the manual didn't shoot down this pilot.

I think I'll leave "knew" and the bit about the Manual. They do work with the story... and I like them.

I am now considering these 13 lines settled. If anyone has any objections please state them soon because I am going to get to work writing the rest of this story! And I will REFUSE to change it

quote:

---

"Control? Come in! Oh Christ, come in dammit! Hello?” The man’s voice startled Tatiana. [SO HIS VOICE SAID THE QUOTE IN THIS PARAGRAPH.]

“Yes… this is Control," TATIANA SAID. [YOU COULD ALSO SAY WHERE SHE IS.] "State your flight number.”

“Sojourner Seven Five, we’ve got a problem!”

“State your situation,” SHE SAID. [BORED? SOUNDS LIKE IT. ?!] [BETTER TO KEEP TELLING US WHO'S SAYING WHAT. WE'LL LOSE TRACK OF WHO'S SAYING WHAT UNLESS YOU KEEP REMINDING US.]

“No time for that! The whole thing is coming apart! My name is Marcus Kaplan… tell my wife I’m sorry.”

Tatiana knew he would be dead in minutes, but she continued with protocol[. NOT ,] “Please state your situation.” [She can't continue with the protocol "Please state..." You need a new sentence here IMJ.]

“No time… just find Marianne Kaplan, in Philadelphia. Tell her that Marcus is sorry… Tell her that I love…” [T]he line went dead. [The line can't go dead "no time..." New sentence.]

Tatiana silently cursed the Manual while attempting to reconnect.

---

This is pretty clear. I would like to know a little more about her reactions, and I think fear or worry would grip me more than annoyance, but it's still pretty good.

The thing about dialog needing sentences. These work.

Joe said, "Blah."

Joe scratched his ear. "Blah," he said.

Joe scratched his ear. "Blah."

But this doesn't work grammatically:

Joe scratched his ear, "Blah." It's because you can't scratch your ear "blah." You can't have two objects for "scratch" -- and whereas you can say "blah," you can't scratch "blah."

BTW I don't agree about "damn it." Although "dammit" is OK, it isn't actually wrong to spell it correctly!

Is there any way to use some sort of slang for the first "she knew he'd be toast..." and leave the second, which I agree has much impact the way it's written in the most recent draft.

And, FWIW, again the visual thing - damn it absolutely has a mental pause in it for me, it's two words. Dammit is all at once. One word. Almost one syllable when said as an expletive. The time I use damn it is in a phrase like damn it all to hell. One of my favs (along with for the love of all that is holy! - my kids get to hear that a lot.)

My guess is, if somebody drops the book on the first page because it feels like an "overdone" situation, they aren't likely to enjoy this genre of "crashing-plane-fiction," (or whatever), in the first place.

Dammit! Is faster, it's sharper, and the emphasis is on Damn, making its meaning concise and obvious.

I am picking up what everyone is putting down here. I'm going to not think about it for a couple of days and then I'll re-read it and change what I feel should be changed. I am afraid of over-doing it and ruining the natural human emotions & reactions that I could put in to it. If this 13 lines is enough to make someone want to read just a bit more, then I am very happy.

I agree with OSC on this one: Don't misspell the words for effect. If the scene is written with the necessary sense of urgency, the reader will read it it the way you intend them to.

quote:

---

Tatiana knew he would be dead in minutes, but she continued with protocol, “Please state your situation."

---

I suggest:
To Tatiana, the man sounded like he knew he was doomed. "What's happening out there?"

By rephrasing the stiff and repetitive formal jargon--"Please, state your situation."--you keep your sense of urgency, and give Tatiana some human warmth. And the word doomed eliminates the death redundancy.

quote:

---

"No time… just find Marianne Kaplan, in Philadelphia. Tell her that [Marcus is<---Tatiana already knows this is Marcus Kaplan from the last time he spoke. Wouldn't he say, "I am"] sorry… [If he continues with...] Tell her that I love…”[This should be the beginning of a sentence-->T]he line went dead.

Tatiana silently cursed [the Manual<---IMHO they should both be capitalized and in italics, or neither should be] while attempting to reconnect.

"Sojourner Seven Five[,<--stated number ends with a period. And, IMHO if you invert the five and seven it will further break up the monotony of "S"-words. Obviously, it changes the first letter in the next sentence "W]e’ve got a problem!”

---

quote:

---

I agree with OSC on this one: Don't misspell the words for effect. If the scene is written with the necessary sense of urgency, the reader will read it it the way you intend them to.

---

OK, well I happen to think you are pulling something completely out of its context. For one:

Dammit is not a misspelling. It's a form of contraction. Just like "de o" is contracted to "do" in Portugues.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dammit

Secondly, even if "dammit" was a misspelling, it is both commonly accepted in literature and the only proper way to say "dammit" without a pause in the middle. If you write "damn it," it will be read with a space in the middle. Because there is a space in the middle.

I don't care if OSC, God, or Ghandi says otherwise; it's a fact. Otherwise we'd have no use for spaces at all.

quote:

---

OK, well I happen to think you are pulling something completely out of its context.

---

I know that you--Zero--are set in your opinion. However, I did not take the OSC quote out of context. THAT is exactly what context it is in. He was referring to writing-out dialogue pronunciation. If "Dammit!" isn't a prime example, I don't know what is.

I just finished reading both Characters and Viewpoint and How to Write Science Fiction and Fantasy, so the referrence is still in my head.

quote:

---

For one:
Dammit is not a misspelling.

---

"Damn it!" isn't the proper spelling?

Really? So, all of Webster's Dictionaries--not to mention MS Word--are wrong, because you found a source that supports your opinion?

The point is moot.

I'm not arguing for KStar to use any particular spelling, I'm giving my opinion, and the supporting theory.

OSC was talking about misspelled words.
"Dammit" is a properly spelled word.
"Damn it," is a properly spelled phrase.

OSC's point, in this context, is irrelevant. This is because there are no misspelled words here. Simply a difference between a single word or a two-word phrase. As it happens, the single word flows better.

That aside, OSC is not an example of authority, he's an example of success. What works for him isn't guaranteed to work for others.

Stick with "dammit"

quote:

---

That aside, OSC is not an example of authority, he's an example of success.

---

And how are you and example of authority? Are you even an example of success?

I'm certainly not.

I think that OSC is and example of both. Not only is he a capable teacher on this subject, Reader's Digest bills How to Write Science Fiction and Fantasy as the "Award-winning referrence", not "passable advice from one possible example of success".

And, I know that he can only tell us his methods. Yet, his methods have made him a bestseller.

PS - I thank you for the 'excitable' compliment. That translates--in my mind--to "passionate", which I certainly am.

Writing is an art form. Each person develops their own style. There are some foundation-level guidelines, but nobody, truly, has authority over another author's work. Just the same as Polluck broke every "rule" in the painting world, he was still hailed as an artist. And by some a genius.

The thing that is seriously bothering me about you IB is that you draw a lot of false conclusions.

If I say "Dammit is not a misspelling" you choose to hear "damn it is a misspelling", when that isn't what I said at all. Or if I say "Card is not an example of authority" you assume I am saying "I am an example of authority" When, again, that is not what I said.

I would educate you that a square is a rectangle, always, but a rectangle is only sometimes a square. If I say dammit is an acceptable and legitimate spelling, that doesn't mean "damn it" is not, they aren't mutually exclusive.

I'm not suggesting that I have more authority than Card. (And I ask you to please read and then digest what I am saying before jumping to false interpretations.)

I am suggesting, however, that Card has no authority over KStar's writing. Neither do I, nor you. Therefore Card has no more authority than me, and you have no less than me.

I would also teach you that "authority" and "success" are irrelevant toward each other in the artistic world.

Newton has authority regarding the fundamental rules of calculus. They can't be changed. They aren't relative. They are fixed. Writing is far from an exact science. In fact, I dare say it isn't a science at all. Therefore nobody can have authority over anything but their own work.

The difference between OSC and myself is that he is a successfully published author. I am not. On an empyrical scale does that mean he has a greater grasp of this obscure concept of "authoring" than I do? (Meaning it is some fixed thing with unbreakable rules like newtonian physics?)The answer is no.

Be careful when drawing hastey conclusions. How many people buy someone's books is a completely separate measurement from how "good" an author is. (Else JK Rowling would be indisputably the best author in the entire world. Or perhaps the writers in the Bible.) Correlation present or not, you are measuring two different things. And, as another matter of fact, "goodness" in terms of authorship, cannot be empyrically measured.

I was pointing out, quite clearly, (I thought,) that "dammit" is a properly spelled word. It is also preferable in this setting. KStar can reject my conclusion based on preference. But she cannot dispute that it is a real word, and that it has different flow than "damn it."

She can't dispute that, and neither can you.

I just want to say, that I do know I could use the word either way. My first choice WAS "dammit" but MSWord didn't like that, and I am intimidated by red underlining. So, I chose "damn it". I have now changed it back. BUT who's to say I won't change it again????

Is the mystery just killing you????

And, you can choose whichever you want to. We just learned from our lecture on authority that just like only you can prevent forest fires, only you can decide which is the absolutely correct choice.

I just want a few things known.

1. Nobody can advise you to use "damn it" on the grounds that "dammit" is an illegitimate word. Dammit is a perfectly legitimate word.

2. "Dammit" and "Damn it" have different flow. Both are legitimate, but the former is faster and the latter has a slight pause. You decide which technique fits better into your prose.

3. In my arrogant opinion (IMAO), or rather, in my arrogant opinion which is usually completely valid and substantiated (IMAOWIUCVAS) you should use "dammit," it reads a lot better.

4. IB, I see your points, I think, we just weren't communicating well. I apologize, no hard feelings al'right mate?

PS the suspense is eating me up inside

"Damn it: Use instead of dammit, but like other profanity it should be avoided unless there is a compelling reason. See the obscenities, profanity, vulgarities entry."