posted
This is a SF short about a man sentenced to serve in a criminal military unit and how he learns to control his violent tendencies.
Some men keep violence in their pocket, while others embrace violence in their heart. Those who do not understand the difference condemned both as men of evil. Fortunately for them, this mass characterization is only half right or else they would be consumed. Some of us stand ready to defend the peaceful against true evil. We are the rough men that keep them safe at night. We are the Fallen. # “Matcom Alexindor, you stand charged with the crime of accidental homicide. How do you plead?”
Alone in the center of the courtroom with his head bowed, the man answered in a strong voice, “Guilty, your Honor.”
posted
Though I like the first paragraph summary, I'd save it for the proposal. Just throw us into the court room and let us see what's going on there, it makes a good hook. And I noticed that your POV isn't clear by those first two sentences in the courtroom. Make sure we know whose head we're in right away.
Posts: 811 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I second pixydust on the POV thing. At first, I assumed I was hearing the omniscient narrator introducing the story. But towards the end of the paragraph I learned I was actually hearing the POV character directly. The problem is that you shift POV in mid-paragraph. First you start out referring to the violent men from the outside, then you switch to referring to them from the inside as 'we'. Pick one POV. And tell us up front who is speaking/thinking.
In the last sentence, now that we know his name, use it instead of 'the man' (but be sure to use the form of name that he uses when referring to himself, since we're in his POV).
"Those who do not understand the difference condemned both as men of evil."
This sentenced confused me for a minute. Grammatically, 'those' in this context refers to the people in one of the two categories you mention immediately before. You intended 'those' to mean everybody else outside the two categories. This problem persists with 'them' and 'they' in the following sentence, because of the mis-attribution. Can you rephrase it so that the pronouns will be properly attributed?
The words "this mass characterization" are awkward.
On the idea level, I like it and am hooked. I'd love to read more.
posted
Let me clarify something now that I should have mentioned in the first place. The first part is a preamble and the # is suppose to represent a break. The story starts in the courtroom with the sentencing and is a 3rd person POV. Following a second break, the story picks up in the 1st person and stays there for the rest of the time.
This is the rest of the courtroom scene.
“Matcom Alexindor, you stand charged with the crime of accidental homicide. How do you plead?”
Alone in the center of the courtroom with his head bowed, the man answered in a strong voice, “Guilty, your Honor.”
“For your crime, you are sentenced to serve in the Federal Penal Legion until the time it is safe for you to return to society. Do you have any questions for the court?”
“No, your Honor.”
Still with a bowed head, the man shuffled over to the solitary guard and waited to be taken away.
Behind the protective shield, the judge finalized the proceedings and transmits the hearing for public review.
posted
I think you may be starting the story too early. Every time you switch modes (3P->1P; philosophical discussion to action) there's a cost in that it's harder for readers, and I don't see that you're getting a big bang for your buck by showing the first paragraph or the courtroom scene. You could just summarize it: "I was sentenced to ___ for murder."
Posts: 2830 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Regardless of the break you indicated, the first paragraph (everything before your break) contains two POVs. This has to be addressed.
Posts: 470 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yep, it has We and They and they both include the same people.
Seriously, lose the whole paragraph, preamble or whatever. Start the story in the courtroom. You have a good hook with the courtroom scene. The preamble, by its very existance, just muddles it and separates us from the story.
posted
I'd start with the courtroom scene, describe what the mood is in the courtroom and how the MC feels as he is on trial.
Like the others have said, I'd drop the whole first paragraph or you can use it in dialogue or something like that to let the reader know what happens to violent men like the MC.
posted
I like the concept, but what you have isn't working for me. I agree with the idea of starting in the courtroom.
Posts: 266 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Something that bothers me with sci-fi on this site is that I'm forced to make a belief decision about the names of things.
Honestly, where did you get Federal Penal Legion? I'm not saying it won't work, I'm just saying that its waaay too early for me to be able to suspend my disbelief in such a name. It feels so forced and introductory. It doesn't flow. Maybe a chapter heading might help, or something that we're not seeing in this context.
But, I feel this way a lot when I read here. It seems that we sit down and think, 'Oh, here's a cool name, I'll use it', but we don't think about the weight it places on the belief system of the reader (i.e., the reader doesn't believe it).
posted
Personally, I wasn’t bothered by your open (with the exception of the slight change to keep within a single-head).
Its like Mr Card says, “the first paragraph is free.” And I agree with that ideology. I like it, but I'm not a very good editor, and I am also not a publisher.
The question you need to decide is will it sell? Especially if the editor/publishers are only going to read the first page to decide if they will continue or not.
posted
First let me say thank you for the feed back. When I did a quick rewrite, the Fedral Penal Legion is just a filler. I needed something more offical for the court scene since I expanded it but for the most part the criminals/soldiers are refered to as the Fallen.
I went ahead and moved everything to the 1st pov.
“Matcom Alexindor, you stand charged with the crime of accidental homicide. How do you plead?”
I stood in the middle of the almost empty courtroom, with my head bowed. In the strongest voice I found within me, my reply committed me to my future, “Guilty, your Honor.”
“For your crime, you are sentenced to serve in the Federal Penal Legion until the time it is safe for you to return to society. Do you have any questions for the court?”
“No, your Honor.”
As I kept my head down, I shuffled over to the solitary guard and waited to be taken away. My life was to be spared and I was to be turned in to a tool to protect those I hurt.
The last line seems a little too unsupported to me but that 13 line cut off.
[This message has been edited by Winship (edited November 22, 2005).]
posted
BTW, the original first paragraph sounds like an introductory voice-over to a TV series.
Which might work fine in that context, but can be lost in the short story, unless you're going to do a whole series of "Fallen" stories about this Federal Penal Legion (a kind of Dirty Dozen/Suicide Squad?). Which the concept lends itself to quite nicely.
quote:Why tell how he feels when the story is suppose to show how he feels about his actions (at least that is what Iam attempting to do)?
(use UBB code, not HTML)
Because you are in first person.
If the narrator knows why he is doing something, we should know why as he does it. When using first person, you don't really have the same license to withhold pending further exposition when the relevant time to know is now.
You shouldn't only show us how he feels. You should tell us. If you just show us through his actions, you create a distance between the reader and the character. What you want to do is create an empathy for the character.
Also there is no tag or attribution to "Guilty, Your Honor." So, it should be preceeded by a period to seperate it from the previous sentence.
Give us a little more of the judges reaction, not just his words. Surely the MC thinks there is some disgust or contempt in the judges words or was the judge aloof, not really caring?
Printer-friendly view of this topic
