[Edited to add: I have another version of the opening farther down the discussion, but I'm leaving this one for reference.]

---

Sophie knelt inside the giant puppet because that was the only good position to make the repair in. It stank. She never noticed the months of sweat impregnating the foam and fabric when she was performing, but the odor was overwhelming now.

The control bar had come loose from the upper jaw, and there wasn't time to do a full repair before the evening show so she was macgyvering it with buttloads of baling wire. One of the techies--maybe George--said her name, but it sounded like he'd forgotten she was in the puppet. Sophie ignored him and wrapped the wire around the bar, trying to use sheer volume to hold the two pieces together. When it felt secure she opened the jaw to test.

George yelped as the giant puppet moved. "Holy crap! I forgot you were here."

Sophie grinned as the other techs laughed at him. There were days when she loved her job.

One of the techs said, "Go tell that detective she's back here."

---

Questions
Okay, I'm curious about general impressions but also these things.

1) The techies, at this point, don't reappear in the story so I wanted to minimize them, but in a real theater Sophie would know them all by name. Does anyone think it's a problem that I don't name them?

2) I am torn between saying that she's doing a revival of Little Shop of Horrors and leaving the puppet more vague, or creating a fictional show. The show itself is just part of mileau and doesn't play an active role in the plot. The fact that she is a puppeteer and can do repairs, does.

3) I don't think I used any jargon, but...well, I'm a puppeteer so all the words look normal to me. Anything you didn't understand? (By the way, this is my first real story with a puppeteer as a main character.)

4) The first SF reference turns up six lines after this. Is that soon enough, or do I need to slide it into the first thirteen?

[edited to delete the POV stumble Kolona pointed out]

[This message has been edited by MaryRobinette (edited July 06, 2005).]

I was immediately drawn in because of Sophie's unique occupation. But I was quickly thrown out with "Sophie grinned, inside the puppet, as the other techs laughed at him." It seems like a POV stumble. We are already with Sophie 'inside the puppet,' so reminding us, to me, read as author intrusion. Maybe adding something like, 'as she heard the other techs laugh at him.'

If Sophie knows all the techs, and they're not important enough to name for the sake of the story, I wouldn't have a problem, but why not have George give the detective line? She's already recognized his voice.

The Little Shop of Horrors might set up expectations of a sort.

Jargon? I don't think so.

Ok to the quesitons... the techies don't seem important to me and so long as they're not individually relevant to the plot they don't need to be. The SF element could be inserted earlier (see above remark). The jargon of a puppeteer didn't phase me as much as the length of time spent describing the repair.

Also, the idea is that Sophie is a skilled puppet repairer, but what you have her doing - wrapping a big coil of wire round a component - doesn't seem to be particularly clever. Maybe if she connected somethign to something else, looped a couple of times round the thingummy between the hoojah and the doohickey (you can tell I'm a real expert on giant puppets), and thus linked the grommet to the trunnion, we'd be more impressed by her ability. As it is, it just seems like a botch job that anyone could try.

Also, for non-theatre types, the word "techie" may have different connotations than those you intend. After all, I'd expect the person fixing the puppet to be a "techie", in a manner of speaking.

2) I don't think you need to mention Little Shop. If the reader figures it out then they will feel smart because they figured it out. It's kind of a bonus.

3) Nope, didn't see any jargon, but I agree that techie might be confusing. How about "stagehand"?

2) Not naming the show didn't bother me. Might be a nice touch of detail.

3) I had no jargon problems.

---

Simone knelt inside the giant man-eating plant because that was the only way to reach the puppet’s broken control. It stank. She never noticed the months of sweat impregnating the foam and fabric when she was performing, but the odor was overwhelming now.

The control bar had come loose from the upper jaw during the matinee. There wasn't enough time for a polycarbonate repair before the evening show so she was macgyvering it with buttloads of baling wire. One of the theater’s techies--maybe George--said her name, but it sounded like he'd forgotten she was in the puppet. Simone ignored him and wrapped the wire around the bar again. Quick fixes were utter crap.

She opened the jaw to test it.

As the giant puppet moved, George yelped, "Holy crap! I forgot you were here."

Simone grinned as the other techs laughed at him. There were days when she loved her job even though it lacked the glamour of her days in Tri-V.

George said, "I’ll go tell that detective she's back here."

The first line is weird enough to get my attention, but also explained quickly. Then the detective line hooks me again.

Question:
Who is George talking to in the last sentence? It struck me as a little odd because I think he is supposed to be talking to Simone but says-

quote:

---

"I’ll go tell that detective she's back here."

---

Which makes me wonder - Why doesn't he just say something like, "Hey Simone, there's some detective looking for you."

Edited to say - I read it again, and I guess he is saying it for the benefit of the other techies. Never mind.

If a lot of the target audience really doesn't get it, then change it, sure. But I think that the "buttloads of baling wire" make it clear both what she's doing and how she regards this sort of activity compared to an actual repair job.

I felt like "techies" to refer to technical crew could be a bit of jargon...but then, I'm coming at it from the perspective of an SF reader. "Stage techs" would work better for me than "theater techies", but that's because techies is a diminuative term, and the character is a performer even though she's currently doing repairs (in fact, that she does her own repairs just makes it that much more fraught).

The new sentance "There were days when...her days in Tri-V." has a bit of a problem. There is an important distinction between the two usages of "days" here that could get lost in transmission pretty easily. Also, "Tri-V" is a bit of a florescent signpost. I'll recuse myself on the question of whether "crap" is overused

To give it more of a future feel, try thinking of some potential futuristic inventions that would really make a difference to puppeteering. I know that the more technically advanced puppets already make use of video feeds so the puppeteers can see what they're doing, and even cameras that let them see what the puppet would be "seeing". Special cooling suits and servo-assisting methods exist too. All of these things could eventually be commonplace for puppets. Maybe the reason she would never notice the smell when she was performing would be because then she would be wearing a headset with an assisted air supply (that's the first thing I'd demand for a live performance, you can reshoot if someone faints during a filming, but that sort of thing isn't so trivial in front of a live audience).

It's okay if whatshername remembers what puppeteering was like for the smaller troupes/outfits ten years ago or whatever.

The techies are fine. (In Oz, you have 'crew' like chippies--carpenters, sparkies--electricians, and techies--lights/sound but it is what they call each other, when Simone uses the phrase, to me anyway, she comes across as 'management' trying to be one-of-the-boys instead of calling them 'technical crew' and emphasising the difference.)

I don't think the Little Shop of Horrors reference should be included unless it has particular significance to the plot. It would be sad to have something referential like, 'I ought to be a dentist' or 'feed me seymour' crop-up and interfere with an otherwise perfectly good story.

The 'buttloads' is clearly cultural jargon, designed to include some demographic for some reason. In my opinion it is unpleasant. Is it used to include or 'target' a particular group? Or is it supposed to be part of the characters internal dialogue? 'Macguyvering' had no meaning to me and when I realised what you meant I instantly thought it was present-day, ie it works AGAINST the sci-fi theme.

I think you should let the sci-fi references come up naturally, for instance when she goes to see the detective. The polycarbonate thing and the TRi-V references seem 'plonked-in'

On a note other than in response to your questions:

Why was George back there if he had forgotten she was there? Was he asking a techie where she was? When he says, I tell the detective she's out there. who is he talking to? Shouldn't it be: 'There's a detective out there who wants to talk to you.' or something like that. Why is he not responding to her normally?

Edit: I see that last dialogue bit, and the Macguyver thing is already covered.

hoptoad, when you said, "I also preferred the sweat references too," that's the one line I didn't touch. It's amazing what context will do.

Polycarbonate isn't sci-fi jargon, but it is builder jargon. Tri-V, I'll grant, but it does turn up later in the story...must think on it.

Don't worry about the chuckling. We were chuckling through the whole thing...

2) That last line still strikes me as clunky. Whereas it does give a good hook, I'd recommend getting the information that a detective is looking for her across some other way. I agree with the "Umm, Simone?" approach.

3) I've never been called a stagehand (except in programs), and I've been working in theaters all over the place since I was in fourth grade. It's been "techie" all the way, and that's how I think of myself. I'm not saying my experience is the defining one; just putting in my opinion.

4) Science fiction doesn't HAVE to be futuristic.

This looks like a fun story, Mary! Let me know when it's done!

Survivor wrote:

quote:

---

But now I'm suggesting more than will fit into your opening, aren't I?

---

On a side note, which I'm just not going to address in the story, but it's a fun tangent. Most of the things you mentioned are available at the current technology levels but are only used for film and television because of weight. For stage, you cut every possible piece of weight because you can't stop when the puppet gets heavy. I've had people try to give me cooling suits (they make them for walk-around mascots) but the bulk and extra weight aren't worth the cooling effect. I just drink lots and lots of fluids and let my body's cooling system do it's thing. These might become more lighter and smaller, but the laws of supply and demand suggest that there's never going to be a big market so they would probably always be pricey.

There is also a certain amount of machismo that kicks in with puppeteers. I think it has to do with over-compensating for the fact that we play with dolls for a living.

Now I'm curious, you said, "even cameras that let them see what the puppet would be "seeing"" Who's doing this? It's practically useless information and easier to achieve with scrim. Or do you mean the ones that paint in the green screen background as you work?

heh heh heh

I wish there was an evil grin emoticon.

As for technological advances, miniaturization is one factor, and it doesn't depend on having a large market of puppeteers. Eventually you'll be able to get (usable, not like today's crap) VR headsets off the shelf. Same for breathing equipment, cooling suits, etc. Believe me, being able to design a puppet without worrying about killing the operator will let you do all kinds of things you never even thought of before (because you naturally shy from thinking of horrible ways to kill puppeteers, unlike me ).

Okay, so you've probably seen (or even used) a few puppets that seemed designed by sadistic puppeteer haters.

I think that the techies don't need names because as you said you want them to be there and then gone... I don't think you need to make the reference to shop of horrors.. and the jargon sounds good to me.

I really liked the way you described the inside of the puppet... how it stank but the stink was not noticable when performing... It is like that when we are using our tools of our profession we do not notice things about them because we are concentrating on our work. The buttloads of wire painted a picture in my mind but, the macgiver comment would be lost to any reader who had not seen the television show. I think that the SF line coming in in the next 6 lines is alright if the next 5 lines read as quickly as the first 13. It was interesting and I wondered about the detective and what news they would bring...

It sounds good to me.

2) Is the Little Shop of Horror's puppet - Audrey II, I would assume - integral to the story? As in, does it have to be that character, or at least identifiable as a giant, man-eating plant? If not, I would say leave it vague.

3) I couldn't pick up on any jargon. Even "technie" sounds fine to me, personally.

And one of the things that draws me in is the background into the world of puppetry. I am willing to accept the references to the technical jargon. I would be disappointed if I ever learned that none of it is real, but given your background I trust you are writing what you know.

I tend to agree about the Shop of Horrors reference - if it was integral to the story I'd say leave it, but it pulls me out of the story a little. If you make UP a play then I don't drop out of the story to think things like, "Boy, that was a funny movie, and I really liked Steve Martin in it... but Jack Nicholson was good in the original too...."