posted
I'm working on this for the weekly submittal challenge, but since it doesn't look like anyone is participating in that, I thought I'd get some feedback on my first 13. I don't usually put so many "!'s" in a dialogue, but they end right after this part.
The words were hurled back and forth across the room with a combination of flailing desperation and deadly precision. They were projected without thought but with the intent to penetrate the soul. Sam braced herself at the small table in their kitchen, while Carl, pacing the living room floor of their apartment, performed a violent rant.
“I am sick of this!” he shouted. “I’m sick of this crappy apartment! I’m sick of you! I’m sick of my whole freakin’ life!”
“Then why don’t you just leave?” Sam shouted back, tears streaming down the sides of her cheeks.
“The hell I will! You get out! You’re the one that killed our son!”
[This message has been edited by philocinemas (edited August 19, 2008).]
THANKS FOR THE FEEDBACK EVERYONE! WIP - If anyone would like to read it when I finish the first draft, let me know. First revision:
The words were hurled back and forth across the room, some in flailing desperation and others with deadly precision – daggers, intended to pierce the soul. Sam braced herself at the small table in their kitchen, while Carl, pacing the living room floor of their apartment, ranted violently.
“I am sick of this!” he shouted. “I’m sick of this crappy apartment! I’m sick this sham of a marriage! I’m sick of you!”
“Then why don’t you just leave?” Sam reeled back, her voice cracking and tears streaming down her cheeks.
“The hell I will! You get out! You’re the one that killed our son!”
“How can you say that?” She gasped between sobs. “You already know I blame myself. How can you be so cruel to me?”
[This message has been edited by philocinemas (edited August 20, 2008).]
[This message has been edited by philocinemas (edited August 20, 2008).]
posted
I liked the writing and your opening achieves the effect sought. This is clearly a miserable situation. I wonder if there is some way to begin it, with a flashback, for example, that gives some hope for relief. I worry some will not want to dive into this, otherwise. If it only gets worse, then, yikes! (There is a large audience who loves misery of course, and you may have them pegged; I don't happen to grok them or know hope to walk that tightrope, so my opinion is suspicious.)
A few of ideas:
...with the intent to penetrate the soul: yes, and to injure?
...performed a violent rant: ranted violently?
...tears streaming down the sides of her cheeks: I started to suggest 'down both her cheeks' thinking that 'sides of her cheeks' implied both cheeks had (plural) sides, but 'side of her cheeks' sounds worse. Dang English (language).
posted
There's a passive structure to the opening paragraph that's utterly at odds with the drama that's actually occurring. Now tehre may be a good reason for that disconnect, but nothing withn this first 13 shows me what that reason is, so as an editor, I'd have some significant concerns.
Think about your word use. What does "the sides of her cheeks" add that "her cheeks" doesn't achieve? All words in your story should have apurpose, and while that purpose may be deilcate and subtle and creating gradations and nuances in meaning, I'm not convinced that "the sides of" adds anything - indeed, where else but her cheeks would her tears go?
I'm not hooked. Obviously a dramatic and bad thing has happened, but the "you killd our son" isn't precise enough for me to feel hooked - I don;t know if we're talking abortion, murder, a tragic accident for which blame is unfairly being apportioned, etc etc etc.
posted
Hey philocinemas . Overall, it's a nice opening, just a couple of thoughts as I was reading:
With your opening two lines, I'd choose one of 'combination of flailing and precision' and 'thoughtless but with intent' [I'm paraphrasing] and scrap the other, merging those first two sentences. I'd also consider deleting the word 'flailing' - it's already semi-implied by 'hurled', and doesn't really add anything. For example:
'The words were hurled back and forth across the room: a combination of desperation and deadly precision, intended to [penetrate the soul]' - that kind of thing. It's not a great exmaple, but I think if you could merge the first two sentences, it'd make for a more engaging opening line.
Incidentally, 'penetrate the soul'... it's a bit flowery. If you could find a single word, I think that'd work better. Actually, you could probably get away with just 'penetrate'.
'performed a violent rant' - agree with WouldBe on changing to 'ranted violently', thought I'd find another description altogether. 'Rant' smacks of 'tantrum' to me (not to mention that you're violating the age-old 'show, don't tell' rule).
'down the sides of her cheeks' - agree with tchernabyelo on 'down her cheeks'.
'“Then why don’t you just leave?” Sam shouted back' - something about 'shouted' is bothering me. It doesn't seem to convey any emotion. Not sure why, could be just me.
Otherwise, I'd read on - personally, I think that 'You’re the one that killed our son!' is a really strong hook. That said, I think WouldBe makes a good point about the dangers of putting people off with a miserable opening scene. But then, it didn't put me off, so it's a calculated risk I guess.
Hope this helped, Daniel.
[This message has been edited by bluephoenix (edited August 19, 2008).]
posted
I love the title. That in and of itself might keep me reading for a page or so. I'm not so drawn in by the story yet, however. The opening paragraph felt overly dry and there's nothing in it, or in the scene below, that feels particularly fresh or specific to the people involved. The dialogue feels pretty canned, even though it's emotive. I assume this is going to be omniscient; if not, perhaps you might ground us in one or the other POV right away. In this case, being grounded in POV is going to make a huge difference for me because of that last line. How it's perceived, what happens next, and how people think of it is going to be the thing that probably hooks me more than the argument itself.
Posts: 2185 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks for the input everyone, I feel you've really helped me make this better! I've made the changes up at the top. Please continue to comment at will. I definitely like the opening better - thanks bluephoenix. Some of my syntax is better too - thanks Wouldbe and those who agreed with Wouldbe.
"You’re the one that killed our son!” - "that" is on purpose - character is so angry that he won't refer to her as a "who."
annepin, I can't put it in 1st person due to an event that happens later - unless I do a Treasure Island switcharoo, which is the only part of TI that I don't like.
posted
I'm not suggesting first person. Rather, I'm suggesting 3rd person limited, meaning the story is presented from their perspective, and we know only what the main character knows, and have insight into the MC's emotions, perspectives, etc. It's still written in 3rd person (he, she, it, they) rather than 1st (I, we)
Posts: 2185 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
. Overall, it's a nice opening, just a couple of thoughts as I was reading:
