I only want comments on the first thirteen for now.

quote:

---

The sunset shone off the snow, dabbing hints of colour on the black slate houses. The night would be cold, the girl knew. She could sense it by the way the day sucked out the last bits of warmth from the village.
Clio trod on. She had been born here. She didn't whimper and stamp her feet like a minister. Her hands didn't turn blue if she took off her gloves and if she fell in the lake it would hurt, but her heart wouldn't stop. She and the cold had an arrangement. She respected it, and the cold didn't own her.
She spotted the godprints when she was almost home. They looked small; the god they belonged to wouldn't yield much meat but it should be easy to catch for a trained thirteen-year-old. She was tempted. She hadn't eaten godmeat in months, not since the ministers came to town and shut down the Swindler's market.

---

Ok, I'm concerned about the first paragraph. I don't usually go on semi-poetic binges until I've established the situation and the characters, but here it makes sense, specially since the girl's arrangement with the cold is fundamental to the plot.

On Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Little-Gods-David-L-Hoof/dp/0978660692/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-6931691-1243942?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1186932134&sr=8-1

quote:

---

The sunset shone off the snow, dabbing hints of colour on the black slate houses. The night would be cold, the girl knew. She could sense it by the way the day sucked out the last bits of warmth from the village.

---

I don't feel like it would hurt to give us the girls name here.

quote:

---

Clio trod on. She had been born here. She didn't whimper and stamp her feet like a minister. Her hands didn't turn blue if she took off her gloves and if she fell in the lake it would hurt, but her heart wouldn't stop. She and the cold had an arrangement. She respected it, and the cold didn't own her.

---

I had some concerns with this paragraph. First, because it's all in a single paragraph, I thought that being born here was the cause for her ability to endure cold. I wasn't sure if that was the case, though.

I grew up in Alaska, and I'm more comfortable in the cold than those from the lower forty-eight, but I'm certainly not immune. I'm assuming this is something more.

Finally, I wasn't sure why a minister in particular would be prone to whimper and stamp feet, though I suspect this will become clear later.

quote:

---

She spotted the godprints when she was almost home. They looked small; the god they belonged to wouldn't yield much meat but it should be easy to catch for a trained thirteen-year-old. She was tempted. She hadn't eaten godmeat in months, not since the ministers came to town and shut down the Swindler's market.

---

Godprints and godmeat sound interesting. Catching and (I presume) eating a god is a good hook for me. I don't feel any conflict yet, since the protagonist believes it would be easy to do. If you were to cast some doubt on that confidence, it might be even stronger.

Clio doesn't emerge much as a character, yet. The paragraph about respecting the cold but not being owned by her was the only hint we had at that.

You came to Hatrack and posted something where the MC was called "she" in the first paragraph? Really?

Seriously, though, I don't think you'd lose anything by saying, "The night would be cold, Clio knew. She..."

Your sentences are choppy, giving me a sense of impatience that seems odd -- the thoughts that these choppy sentences carry seem to meander. It's like her thoughts are wandering around anxiously, or like she's trying to convince herself of something that she already knows.

The voice is very good.

The "god" references that refer to creatures always strike me as odd. I get a sense of a pre-Christian culture like the Roman, with their lares and penates, or something outside Earth culture altogether. I assume that's what you want. "Eating the god" is a common mythological theme, but having them as creatures being actually edible (rather than symbolically so) is unusual.

I'd keep reading, mostly for the voice and the otherworldliness.

I find that often my stories start off a bit awkward, and then I get into the flow. When I go back and rewrite, I often change or even drop the first paragraph. It was just a device for getting me started.

I wouldn't drop anything in your first 13, but I do have a few suggestions to smooth things out a little. I hope you don't mind.

The sunset shone off the snow, dabbing hints of colour on the black slate houses. -> The snow reflected the sunset, dabbing the black slate houses with hints of colour.

The night would be cold, the girl knew. She could sense it by the way the day sucked out the last bits of warmth from the village. -> The night would be cold, Clio knew. The dying day sucked the last bits of warmth from her fingers and toes.

I agree with using Clio's name..."Clio knew the night would be cold."

I'm curious about the choppy phrases you mentioned, Oliver (and someone else, can't remember, not going back to check). I got that impression when I was rereading but couldn't quite put my finger down on the problem.

Damn, all the good titles are taken.

It's mostly the second paragraph that feels choppy. You start with two very short sentences:

"Clio trod on."
"She had been born here."

...that are structured with a bare bones "[pro]noun verb-form modifier". ("Modifier" might be the wrong word, but whatever.)

That sets the tone for the rest of the paragraph. There's not an adjective or adverb in the paragraph except "blue", which is an object (the color her hands didn't turn) rather than a modifier (as it would be in "her hands were blue" or "her blue hands"). There aren't any subordinate clauses or other hypergrammatical loquacitous complexifiers (little help, Mr. Writing Person?), either.

Even the most complex sentence is really the same as the others, just strung together and punctuated differently: "Her hands didn't turn blue" if "she took her gloves off" and if "she fell in the lake" "it would hurt", but "her heart wouldn't stop."

Now, sentences always have structure, and most bits of language look a lot like other bits of language. I'm not suggesting that you overanalyze (as I've just done) and make things too complex or experimental. But consider the difference between this:

quote:

---

Jarvis sat still. He had been born here. He didn't complain or arch his eyebrows like the other butlers. His hands didn't chap from the soap, and if he slipped with a knife it would hurt, but he wouldn't bleed. He and the kitchen had an arrangement. He respected the kitchen, and it didn't own him.

---

...and this:

quote:

---

Jarvis sat still. He had been born here, among the dour frowns and arched eyebrows of the other butlers. His hands didn't chap from the soap, nor bleed at the slip of a knife -- although a cut would still hurt. He and the kitchen had an arrangement: he respected it, and it didn't own him.

---

(I hope that's different enough from your original that the rewrite doesn't interfere with your own attempt.)

This is still spare -- I use few adjectives and no adverbs -- but the sentence structure is much more varied, and I think it's less choppy than the original. If you don't like the effect you got from your original, then you might experiment with things along these lines.

I like the story, specially the god-hunting (are this gods a kind of gnomes? I like that!)

On the other hand, maybe you shoud tell us something more about the ministers as you introduced them. I can guess they will be important somehow... other way just delay it for future paragraphs.

Sorry about the title, it was good

Anyway, I agree with Rick (or is it mister Norwood?) about first paragraph. It's just the beginning and often drops of the final text.

About grammar I'll say nothing as long as you are quite better with it than me, although I recognize Oliver's advice is good enough

I don't mind the shortness of the sentences in the second paragraph - it says something about the character. I do feel you give us too much to process all at once. Clearly ministers mean something besides the normal definition in your story. Also, it seems Clio and everyone in this place have some sort of immunity to cold. This is a lot to understand, and if you fleshed it out a little it might ease up the confusion.

However, if it means taking the lines about eating gods out of your first paragraph don't bother.

quote:

---

I don't mind the shortness of the sentences in the second paragraph

---

That's an interesting question, and it brought something to mind. If a world existed where only "magical creatures" like little gnomes could do magic, the humans might consider them gods. They can do things no human can duplicate or explain, so the humans start to wonder what else those little creatures can do to the world? It's reasonable they might be thought of as "little gods."

Of course, if those gods were found to be killable and also delicious... well, that's quite a fun concept I think. (Or if the eater gained some power from them ...)

That's what I like about this opening. I see a lot of potential and I want to know which way the author is going.

I almost didn't respond to you, because I don't want to seem defensive, but I want to make sure that my critiques are being taken as I intend. And now I'll stop cluttering up the place with metadiscussion.

Is it any better?

Clio spotted the godprints when she was almost home. The tracks looked small; the god they belonged to wouldn't yield much meat but it should be easy to catch for a trained twelve-year-old. She hadn't eaten godmeat in months, not since the ministers came to town and shut down the Swindler's market, and she was sorely tempted.

If you need a reader, send it my way ... please!

My comments below are just nits. I think the story is fine as is, so these are just thoughts.

quote:

---

Clio spotted the godprints when she was almost home. The tracks looked small; nice use of a semicolon the god they belonged to wouldn't yield much meat I would put a comma here--two independent clauses usually have one between them, as I recall but it should be easy to catch for a trained twelve-year-old.

---

To be honest, I would break the paragraphs here. The rest of this could work as one paragraph. I say this because it puts the desire and the conflict in the same paragraph.

"for a trained twelve-year-old." This phrase kind of made me stumble. I realize you're trying to throw in the age, which is fine. If you can find a smoother way, go for it. Otherwise, I doubt it will hurt anything.

quote:

---

She hadn't eaten godmeat in months, not since the ministers came to town and shut down the Swindler's market, and she was sorely tempted.

Yet, she hesitated. The ministers hadn't burned anyone this time, but she didn't want to be the first. Her mother had taught her better than to test her luck with ministers. If she chased a god and it escaped and denounced them, they'd all be dead. She and Mother and Old Beth too, if she was at the cottage when the ministers came.

---

If burned is burned-alive, you may want to clarify that. Since we're seeing a twelve-year-old hunt a god, it's really hard to tell what some things might mean.

I like the style. It's tight and efficient. The idea is still a strong one. Good job!