posted
I'm looking for critiques on the first 13 lines and on the whole thing. I revised it to make the opening more attention-grabbing rather than the info dump I've gotten into the habit of doing. Did it work? ------- Covered with dirt, sweat, and the blood of his fallen comrades, a valiant Allied soldier crawls into a Nazi base. His mission is simple: find Hitler and kill him. He slips past Nazi soldiers, a shadow hidden among shadows. He knows that if he is seen before his mission is complete, all will be ruined, so he suppresses an overpowering urge to blast the brains out of every SS scumbag he sees and continues toward the center of the compound, toward their leader. He edges toward a door open a crack. He sees the familiar face with it's small, dark mustache, spittle flying from its lips as it yells in German. He withdraws his gun, and is just about to pull the trigger... “... when some SS scumbag spots me,
Posts: 37 | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
Probably the first issue to consider is whether you really need to use the present tense. It is a slight risk; there are a few readers who just won’t be able to get into present tense, no matter how well written. Given the presumed subject material (story of derring-do), the breathless feel that present tense gives might actually work here, but it is a risk.
I was a bit thrown by the bit “…when some SS scumbag spots me”. Is this a typo in rewriting the POV of the story?
Another issue to consider is whether you want to name your protag first up. Is there a reason why he’s nameless at this stage? If not, it’s always nice to have a name and someone to identify with.
I think the actions of the soldier clearly establish that he’s valiant, so there’s a small tell that is redundant.
I think it’s clear that if he is seen, his mission is ruined, so I’d suggest this section be tweaked. Basically I feel as if the tension of the scene will be clearly understood from your opening line.
Finally, is this an alternate history story or is there a different speculative element? From the 1st 13, I’d expect it to be an alternative history story which will obviously influence where you submit it. If there is a more speculative element, you might want to consider working it into the hook a bit more.
posted
No, I guess I didn't really need to have it in present tense. ---- Covered with dirt, sweat, and the blood of his fallen comrades, Allied soldier Benjamin Williams crawled into a Nazi base. His mission was simple: find Hitler and kill him. He slipped past Nazi soldiers, a shadow hidden among shadows. He suppressed an overpowering urge to blast the brains out of every SS scumbag he saw, knowing that, if he did, all would be ruined. Slowly, carefully he continued toward the center of the compound, toward their leader. He edged toward a door open a crack. He saw the familiar face with it's small, dark mustache. Spittle flew from its lips as it yelled in German. He withdrew his gun, and was just about to pull the trigger... “... when some SS scumbag spotted me, and I had to fight
Oops, I guess I missed a verb the first time.
[This message has been edited by alittleofeverything (edited August 12, 2008).]
quote:He withdrew his gun, and was just about to pull the trigger... “... when some SS scumbag spotted me, and I had to fight
I believe Nick T was referring to your POV (point of view) - you're changing from third person (he) to first person (me). You're also changing verb tense throughout (something with which I struggle at times).
I'm not sure if it would be something that would interest me - I'm not hooked yet.
posted
The sudden shift in POV is intentional. On the next page, you find out that the opening is an old vet's war story. I'm trying to show it from the narrator's imagination as he listens to Old Ben tell it. From what you've seen, do you think it's too drastic of a shift?
Posts: 37 | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
For such a short story, I don't think shifting POV like this is worthwhile. I think that a slush reader would probably have the same reaction that most of us had and think that you simply didn't read your work properly after re-editing it. For a busy slush-reader, that might be enough to throw your work away without reading the rest of it and realising what you're doing.
Regardless of whether the story is read to the end or not, I'm not sure it's a device that works in a short story. It works in movies because there are usually good visual cues to tell the viewer exactly what is happening. Here, I found it pulled me out of the story. I'd probably get back on track pretty quickly, but it might be fatal. Is it worth taking that risk?
I felt a lot better reading it in 3rd person past, it's just that little bit more familiar and comforting.
Regards,
Nick
[This message has been edited by Nick T (edited August 12, 2008).]
posted
Most of the story is in 1st person past. Perhaps I could rewrite the opening to quote Old Ben as he tells it. It might be more interesting, and I think I could better capture the gross exaggeration and outright lies that I'm going for.
Posts: 37 | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Um, first timer so bear with me. Anything I say, grain of salt, mileage may vary, etc. I agree with Nick T., and the sudden POV change does throw one for a loop for a second. Perhaps you can still use 1st person, but just using the following:
"So there I was, covered with dirt, sweat, and the blood..."
It lets us know it's a story being told, and clues us in that the narrator may give us possible exaggerations/lies.
I quite liked the sudden POV shift because we cut suddenly from setting the scene into the character's head, with the same jolt he must have felt when the SS man spotted him.
To be honest, I also liked the immediacy of the present tense, because we seemed to drop straight into the action (that someone crawled isn't for me somehow as grabbing as someone crawling right now). It's true we're told it's a harder tense for new writers to handle successfully but that does not mean we should never try.
I had more of a problem imagining how he made himself a "shadow amongst shadows". Surely an allied soldier covered with dirt, sweat and blood would be easy to spot amongst SS officers in their smart uniforms?
Some nits: do professional soldiers really think of the enemy as "scumbags"? It seems to me more of a newspaper journalist's description than a soldier's. When it's possessive, it's "its", not "it's", so "with its small". But why not just, "He saw Hitler ..." I always thought of Hitler as more precise, more clean, than one who would project spittle. And I think one would draw a gun, not withdraw it.
I suppose the biggest question, though, is--is there still a market for stories of the second world war? If this is an alterative history, I think there needs to be some kind of hint of it in the first 13. Without such, I doubt I'd read on, because I believe that in real life, if there was such a plot, it failed.
Hope this helps, Pat
[This message has been edited by TaleSpinner (edited August 16, 2008).]
Printer-friendly view of this topic
