posted
Hi I am taking a break this morning and decided to post something I am toying with. Loosely based on real events.
First draft, grammatical errors and typos to be expected. Looking for comments as this for an opening ie style, hook, and clarity.
***
Senator Holmes threw the papers across the desk. His face flushed purple with rage. “This will set back consumer protection five years! We just can’t do that,” he shouted.
Senate Majority Leader Mitchell smiled ignoring the papers. “Look here, it’s simple. The country is heading into the greatest depression in American history. I could give a good G—D---ed less about consumer protection. I am concerned about my money. This bankruptcy reform is vital to the future health of the American banking systems. Without the bank’s money you, me, or anyone else here in Washington can kiss their asses goodbye.”
“I know that- but the people who voted-“
“Don’t mean a hill of beans,” Mitchell interrupted. “The way bankruptcy works now is that when you file the debt is wiped clean. In this coming financial crisis we can’t allow those debts to simply be erased. We are going to get our money. Period.”
“They won’t stand for it!”
“Who the general public? You’re a fool Holmes. Nobody will even notice. Even if they do, they wouldn’t dare to cross the president on this.”
Clarity: mostly ok. I'm not sure whose office we're in. I had to go back and read Mitchell's argument to understand it. I didn't believe that the public wouldn't dare cross the President, at the end. But I got most of it pretty well.
Hook: not hooked. It's a political debate, and I want something personal; I want to know the personal relationship between the Senators; and when that's there, I still won't care much about the bankruptcy bill, but I'll understand it's needed for the plot. Also, I'm skeptical of such ideology-driven Senators, so careless of saying things that could be political suicide -- they could exist, but I'd expect more CYA.
[This message has been edited by wbriggs (edited April 25, 2005).]
“Who the general public? You’re a fool Holmes. Nobody will even notice. Even if they do, they wouldn’t dare to cross the president on this.” - Who is "they"? It seems to be referring back to the general public, but it wouldn't make sense to say that the general public wouldn't dare cross the president.
As a hook - It doesn't quite get me. Somehow it doesn't quite feel "real", and nothing here hints at something in the characters that I might care about.
posted
A corrected version. I know politics is boring but...
***
Senator Holmes' face flushed purple with rage as he threw the papers across the Senate Majority Leader's desk. “This will set back consumer protection five hundred years! Why not setup debtor's prisons? This bill will mean you owe the bank for life even if you go bankrupt,” he shouted.
Senate Majority Leader Mitchell smiled ignoring the papers. “Look here, it’s simple. The country is heading into the greatest depression in American history. I could give a good G—d D---ed less about consumer protection. I am concerned about my money. This bankruptcy reform is vital to the future health of the American banking systems. Without the bank’s money you, me, or anyone else here in Washington can kiss their asses goodbye.”
“I know that- but the people who voted-“
“Don’t mean a hill of beans,” Mitchell interrupted. “The way bankruptcy works now is that when you file the debt is wiped clean. In this coming financial crisis we can’t allow those debts to simply be erased. We are going to get our money. Period.”
“They won’t stand for it!”
“Who the general public? Congress? You’re a fool Holmes. Nobody will even notice. Even if they do, no politician would dare to cross the president on this.”
"But that's serfdom! You talking about making men nothing more than serfs! Slaves for the landholders! Don't you care Mitchell?"
Yeah, and ditto on the plausibility/melodramatics comments. Senators save the theatrics for the floor, and the "hard-ball" is always sugar coated. The dialogue you've got here is right out of a cheesy movie.
And even on the Senate floor, nobody talks about setting back consumer protection five hundred years. Nor would they say five years. Appropriate hyperbole is something like "fifty years", no matter what the truth happens to be.
posted
It is a very interesting conversation, well to those of us who find political intrigue...intriguing. I could definately see this turning into a political thriller, is that what you had in mind? Especially before the great depression very interesting era. But I agree about the melodrama in this exerpt. Also there was little change in tone. It seemed to get louder and higher but that was about all - if you can get what I mean. Perhaps shift the camera angle slightly and get a diffferent view point. li
Posts: 112 | Registered: Apr 2005
|
posted
I know. The truth is far more less dramatic.
I was trying to picture how this bill could have possibly been advocated.
The thing about this is that everything but the names of the senators is true.
Congress did pass a bill revising chapter 7 bankruptcy two weeks ago, eliminating debt writeoff and assett protection beyond 100k. So that no matter if you go bankrupt you will still carry the debt. The bill has been signed by the president. When one republican senator was questioned about it he responded "It would be political suicide to stand against the president's desire in this matter." A democratic spokesperson responded by saying "This sets back consumer protection 500 years to the time of British Debtor's prisons"
I tried to imagine a believable dialogue about how this bill worked behind the scenes-so this was my attempt. I really thought about developing this but I don't think I will- because Survivor is right.
Who would believe a politician who actually believed in something. That would really be fantasy.
[This message has been edited by JBSkaggs (edited April 25, 2005).]
posted
tricky. but so interesting Why would you do that to anyone? I guess so that you get to make lots of money...and no one can ever back out of giving you lots of money. So you can not only destroy someone's business but crush the very life out of them. What is interesting is that you said this was passed two weeks ago by yon Bush? Wasn't he bankrupt or the businesses he was associated with early in his life went bankrupt? So power over people, power to put them personally and professionally in your debt forever. Serfdom then and also the client / patron relationship the old Romans had where everyone owed something to everyone else? A return to old style feudalism. interesting... So it's all about money and greed, hmmm almost like real life. Hmmm in fact taken from real life. Hmmm ever see/read that John Grisham film/book the pelican brief. I really like politics - it's what I read instead of horror. Pilger is great for this, also Foucault. So you need a character outside of this conversation whose life is in some way going to be affected by this conversation. Perhaps divided loyalties? Cool Such and interesting thing politics. Still your hook does need a revamp. li
[This message has been edited by limo (edited April 25, 2005).]
You establish he's a Senator in the first word. Do not say "Senate" again on the same page. If you refer to Mitchell as Majority Leader the reader won't think he's a Cub Scout Den Majority Leader. And thereafter if you refer to Holmes and Mitchell they won't think you mean Sherlock Holmes and Billy Mitchell, they'll know who you mean. Adding the titles is hand holding -- suitable for juvey and perhaps young adult fiction, but not a mainstream novel.
posted
I have decided to change the story to go from a middle class professional's POV.
Here is the opening to the Prologue. ***
It was the engineers, the estimators, project managers, technicians, and the programmers who began to feel it first. The world had moved own. Prices had soared and things were shiny and new. But for these professionals their salaries had not changed. Opportunities had shriveled. Twenty years before they were solid middle class. Men in control of the fortune and their lives. Now they watched with growing helplessness as they became obsolete. A ceiling had formed in the night- invisible and as solid as a tomb’s marble lid. These proud men, this educated elite who made things work found themselves floundering against this ceiling. Their pay would not rise. Their jobs withered.
The financial wind blew across the nation. This wind carried the grains of credit and dust of debt. A man could not move with out kicking a cloud of debt into the air. Sometimes whole cities were eclipsed by massive plumes of this debt. And always the vultures of banking and the great international corporations swept down from their lofty glass and steel perches to snatch a still trembling mouse of a man.
posted
Ummm. Much less engaging. Start with a character, maybe? A present conflict instead of a general one? I don't know. What do other folks think?
Posts: 1041 | Registered: Aug 2004
|
posted
WBriggs- The main character is an engineer thru no fault of his ends up jobless then he and his family end up homeless. The story follows their movements from seattle down into oregon and finally joing an underground network to survive.
He has no idea why this has happened. Thus the Prologue which is from a historian's perspective commenting on the causes of this tragedy to him and many like him.
posted
Nice idea to change the protagonist. An everyman trodden down by the system - does he make a break or does he crumble in the face of the inevitable. Are you going to exaggerate the real world - create a caricature?
Maybe make the start more personal, because in our 5 second consumer culture we want the buzz now baby. The beautiful stylings of the 1900-60's don't work for us children of the computer age. Oh but don't you wish they did - I like Steinberg. li
This story will closely follow true experiences of similar people. Of course I will exaggerate for the purpose of impact.
This story has been eating at me for years ever since I worked with the homeless and watched these people transform. Oddly enough the educated were no better off than the illiterate. On the other hand this story scares me too. I have never been strong at literary fiction. My talents lie in weird stuff. But oh well.
Would you like to read the whole prologue about a page or so?
posted
I like the everyman slapped with (apparently) random disaster. My suggestion, take or leave of course: Write it with the prolog . . . and then consider how well the same story would work omitting the prolog. I omit a lot of explanation, and I think it improves the story.
Posts: 2830 | Registered: Dec 2004
|
posted
Ironically, I've just been thinking the last few days that there are great novels waiting to happen based on life on the streets. I edited (and wrote much of the content) for the newsletter "These Homeless Times" for about 3 years.
I suggest an opening along these lines:
"Everyone thinks they are immune. Everyone thinks 'It can't happen to me.' That's what XXX thought. After all, engineers make good money. But everyone is only a couple of paychecks away from disaster."
The point I'm trying to make is to cut through the "them out there" and make it personal and make it real. My experience in writing my newsletter was that we had to cut through the denial to get an emotional reaction. If you frame the experience in such a way that people think, "My golly, this could happen to me, too!" you'll get them engaged. Uncomfortable, but engaged.
Heh... if you want them to make it thru to the end of the book, don't be as descriptive as Jonathan Kozal about it... (He's the author of "Rachel and Her Children.")
To me, the most horrific aspect of King's THE SHINING was that I could see parts of myself and how I dealt with my own temper in the father and the way he handled his temper in the book. I hope I have since learned to deal with my temper in better ways than he did, but at the time I read the book, he was uncomfortably familiar.
posted
I'd be interested to read the prologue. I'm really interested in this idea. If you want to send it along would love to have a look. li p.s. Anything that makes us look at the worst parts of ourselves is always going to be rather frightening. Sometimes, when I have read a good book or seen a good movie (e.g. House of Mirth) I wander round for hours / days feeling like the character with whom I had connected.
That's what's great about fiction, it pops you out of your shell and makes you look at yourself from another angle. Knowing that somewhere out in the great wild world someone (even if fictional) is having this same issue makes (I think) you feel less alone and gives you glimpses of your past or future. I guess that's why people like forums as well.
[This message has been edited by limo (edited April 26, 2005).]
[This message has been edited by limo (edited April 26, 2005).]
Look, I've been homeless for years, and sure, my level of formal education hasn't ever really entered into the equation. Of course, I'm not an everyman, and the system can't exactly tread on me without suffering some painful consequences. So maybe I don't have the right perspective to be the one to say this.
Write this as fiction. Forget about basing it "on real events". I'm tired of people who don't seem to understand that there are (or should be) certain legal differences between non-fiction and fiction. Don't be one of them.
You'll liberate yourself and write a much better story once you throw away the "but this really happened" crutch. It didn't really happen. That's my simple answer to all "non-fiction" written by humans. Crazy? Yes. But it works.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
