posted
This is my first attmept at this. Any help is gratefully accepted, and I would be particularly interested in opinions on the complete piece if anyone has the time.
“It’s gonna pass.” Laura looked up from her cereal and across the table at Maria. She spoke, but the cereal turned the words to mush. She swallowed heavily and tried again. “Says who?” Maria put her orange juice down, and handed the tablet reader across the table. “USA Today and Gallup. Oh, and the network’s down.” Laura wiped her hands with her napkin, then took the tablet. “Then how do you know what Gallup says?”
posted
Kind of cryptic, I think. I mean, there's so many things that we don't know, it's almost overwhelming.
First of all: what is "it" and why should we care what "it" is? I'm assuming that "it" is a major plot point.
Second:
quote: She spoke, but the cereal turned the words to mush.
Okay, I see where you're going with this, but I had to read this sentence twice before I got it. Usually, you know, it's the cereal that turns to mush. That's probably intentional, but it's kind of awkward.
Third: the bit about the network being down was good, but it seemed a little awkward to me. It was a bit of an abrupt change between "USA Today and Gallup" and "the network's down."
If you want me to read it, I will, but it might be a couple of weeks before I get it back to you.
It is hard for anyone to assist when you only post 5 lines or so. Try posting up to about 13 and see if you don't get more helpful replies. Perhaps in the next few lines we'll see who the POV character is, for example.
posted
No problem with this, really, but you haven't gotten started yet. Like Mike said, you can post up to 13 lines. Let's have a little more.
Not only would I like to know who the POV character is, I'd like to get a clear grasp of the conflict, but I feel like you were moments away from hitting us with it so I wasn't too worried.
You know, that was 13 lines in STMF . I hadn't realized how little translated. Try this:
“It’s gonna pass.” Laura looked up from her cereal and across the table at Maria. She spoke, but the cereal turned the words to mush. She swallowed heavily and tried again. “Says who?” Maria put her orange juice down, and handed the tablet reader across the table. “USA Today and Gallup. Oh, and the network’s down.” Laura wiped her hands with her napkin, then took the tablet. “Then how do you know what Gallup says?” But the USA Today front page was on the tablet, complete with the trademark spinning globe in the right-hand corner, above the headlines. “ Because it just went down – the morning news comes across about six.” Laura grunted around another mouthful of cereal, eyes on the tablet. Everyone knew the secession amendment had the votes in the House and the Senate. The only question was whether or not the votes existed in the states. And everyone knew that the votes were there in almost three quarters of the states. Almost. The legislature of Tennessee had put it to a referendum, and now the paper was predicting that the referendum would pass. Lincoln was about to lose; secession was about to become legal in the United States of America.
Laura tapped the tablet, trying to get to the Memphis paper. But the network was indeed down. Laura stood up, straightened her skirt, and handed the tablet back to her partner. “It’s not going to pass.” Marie just snorted, her usual reaction when she thought Laura was being stupid. “And even if it does, they just can’t up and leave.” She turned and walked across the apartment into the office, heels clicking on the wooden floor. She reached under the desk and tapped the RESET button on the network hub. The cat, sprawled on the computer monitor, spared her one eye worth of contempt.
[This message has been edited by kcr (edited March 05, 2005).]
posted
My initial reactions: * interest, in the secession in modern times, the thing about Lincoln being alive today, and in using the net exclusively for newspapers * a little disbelief in Laura's and Maria's interest. Most people I know would just turn to the funny paper, or sports, or something. Who are they? Political types? College students? They both sound adult; do they live in the same house, and why? It wouldn't take many words to clear this up for me.
posted
All right, first of all it was clear to me that Laura was the POV even from the first post. That said, I was not particularly engaged in her POV, it was light, touching the surface only, but it was there. Basically I saw what she saw but did not feel what she felt.
Second, in this case the dialogue opening did not work for me. IMHO, dialogue openings only work when the line of dialogue is something outrageous. (I don't know how to put it, exactly, but I know it when I see it, and I don't see it often.) In this case, saying "It's gonna pass." is commonplace. I started thinking about a bad breakup I went through and nodding, yeah, these things pass. Or else the death of someone close. Yeah, it's hard for a while but these things pass.
Just after that you have a sentence that reads, "She spoke, but the cereal turned the words to mush." I didn't know who the "she" was at first (because you had mentioned two women in the previous sentence) and I didn't quite buy the image of the cereal turning her words to mush. I'm wondering if it's even a necessary image?
Then, all of a sudden, we're talking about USA Today and Gallup. It jolted me, because up to that point I still had it in my mind that Laura was going through a bad breakup or someone died. Now, we're getting political and I have no idea what you're talking about. I started to feel complete and utter confusion.
The next paragraph is strange as well. I get a sense that Laura doesn't trust Maria. If this is true, it would be an interesting conflict, but it is not clear and I mostly feel more confused than ever about what is going on.
The last paragraph is the first one to pique my interest. Now we're seeing a dramatic potential conflict, although I'm not clear on what Laura's role or interest in it is. Also, I find myself wondering what the gallup poll says and why Laura is so convinced that it's wrong. The gallup polls usually do a good job of saying what "everyone" thinks.
One other note, you say Laura is Mari's partner. What kind of partner do you mean? Buiness partner? Lover?
"Just after that you have a sentance that reads, "She spoke, but the cereal turned the words to mush." I didn't know who the "she" was at first (because you had mentioned two women in the previous sentence) and I didn't quite buy the image of the cereal turning her words to mush. I'm wondering if it's even a necessary image? "
Well, probably not -- but I liked it I was hoping to convey a bit of impulsivness about Laura, and some idea of agitation -- she didn't even wait to swallow before talking. Guess I missed. As for the "she confusion", I thought that the fact the two sentances were in the same paragraph would establish the she. Would using Laura's name make that clearer?
"Then, all of a sudden, we're talking about USA Today and Gallup. It jolted me, because up to that point I still had it in my mind that Laura was going through a bad breakup or someone died. Now, we're getting political and I have no idea what you're talking about. I started to feel complete and utter confusion."
That is disturbing. I wasn't shooting for confusion. I wanted to avoid a "As you now Bob" kinda conversation, and establish a bit of the dynamic between the two of them. Hence, I shot for some level of commonplace in the language. There is actually quite a bit more to this scene, both in terms of the external events that affect the plot and the internal dynamics of their relationship. But it seems as if you think that the piece is taking too long to establish any of that and is instead confusing. I know you don't like dialogue as an opening, but if I stay with the dialague, would changing "Its gonna pass" to "The amendemt is gonna pass" or "Succession is gonna pass." work better?
"The next paragraph is strange as well. I get a sense that Laura doesn't trust Maria. If this is true, it would be an interesting conflict, but it is not clear and I mostly feel more confused than ever about what is going on."
I was actually going for a that, to a certain degree. Laura and Marie are on different sides (not opposite, mind you, just different) on the matter, and so they don;t entirely trust each other's perceptions. but they have been together as a couple for a few years, and like all such relationships, they have a deep well of built up trust. So I didn't want to be too stark about the matter, becasue its not that stark in their heads, and it might even be something they aren't conscious of. Obviously, though, I seemd to have stepped over the line between "subtle" and "confusing"
"One other note, you say Laura is Mari's partner. What kind of partner do you mean? Buiness partner? Lover?"
They are a couple.
Thanks for the help, Christine -- I appreciate it.
This is very interesting. Laura's POV could be established more clearly. For example:
quote:Marie just snorted, her usual reaction when she thought Laura was being stupid.
This sentence seems to come from Marie's thoughts. That's a no-no if we're in Laura's POV.
Also--and I know this is odd--at first I thought Marie and the cat might be the same person. I obviously misread it, but it could be because in one paragraph we have Laura and Marie talking over a computer then Laura moves to another computer. It's probably just me, but the idea of a housecat drinking orange juice, arguing politics, and being "partnered" to a human woman is very intriguing.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
. I hadn't realized how little translated. Try this:
I wanted to avoid a "As you now Bob" kinda conversation, and establish a bit of the dynamic between the two of them. Hence, I shot for some level of commonplace in the language. There is actually quite a bit more to this scene, both in terms of the external events that affect the plot and the internal dynamics of their relationship. But it seems as if you think that the piece is taking too long to establish any of that and is instead confusing. I know you don't like dialogue as an opening, but if I stay with the dialague, would changing "Its gonna pass" to "The amendemt is gonna pass" or "Succession is gonna pass." work better?
