There's not a single dialog tag or beat to help me visualize this. Does one of them shake his (or her, I have no idea) head? Does the other have the gleam of enthusiasm in his eyes (I am assuming Bobby is male)?

I'm not sure if thats what your going for with this or not, but it can be done. However, you may be taking an even bigger risk by combining this sort of "stream of dialogue" opening with a story about an aspiring writer...I have actually personally seen a few sets of submission guidlines that mention antipathy for stories about writers or being a writer. Foolish, in my opinion, but not bad to know.

My main suggestion to try and compromise a bit would be to see if you can't work some hint of specualtiveness into it somewhere.

I am concerned that it could fall into a category of stories that twists a cliche with a hackneyed plot and the result is something terribly unpalatable.

There is really no way of knowing from an intro, so immediately my guard goes up as a reader. I would speculate that a flag would also be raised in the mind of an editor or slush reader, so a story needs to be razor sharp in order to have the opportunity to be heard.

There is little to go on here. Such extreme dialogue is like having only the caption bubbles in a comic book. In a format like that where dialoge stands alone without attributions or even character names relies on the illustration to anchor the scene. Standard prose such as short stories does not have illustrations to support the dialogue so therefore it needs attributions, characters and scene description to give us an image of what is happening.

I have seen straight dialogue be effective in an introduction, but there were a few elements that enabled this.
In dialogue the speakers gave clues about the events occuring around them. They used each others name, and without the "As You Know, Bob", they were able to inject some exposition. A very poor example,

"You are such a jerk, Bob"
"I really didn't mean to hurt your feelings, Tammy. Just that the shuttle is ready to launch, and I thought it would lighten the mood, ease the pain of all the goodbyes, if I played a little prank."
"Setting a rat loose on the surface of the moon without life support is more than a little prank, Bob. I think you need some help. I am going to suggest you take a psychiatric evaluation before we leave. I don't want to spend ten months in a tin can in the middle of space with a lunatic."

As I mentioned that is a lousy example but at least you get a sence of what is happening, to whom, where, and a glimpse of some tension.

The style does sort of remind me of a story entitled "Odd Jobs" by Josh Voght that appeared in issue 16 of IGMS, which was hugely sucessful and had a deep satirical element, but the context of this story doesn't immediately engage me in the same way.
I recomend balancing the dialogue with some action and scene setting. Hope this helps.

Let me make an objective observation to your two comments. Don't be offended, I mean no offense. You've commented on lack of tags, lack of scene setting, and that dialogue doesn't normally work by itself. Nit-picking the piece because it doesn't fit into your world of literary rules.

A critique is supposed to give the author direction, encouragement, and help in make their piece better? I guess that rule doesn't apply to everyone.

The other thing you're missing is this, writing is about creating an idea that moves the reader, it's an art form plain and simple. The reader doesn't care about tags or literary molds. They are interested in what moves them, and will they remember the story-line a week from now. And is it something they will reflect on in the weeks and years to come. They want memories, which is the same reason people go to the movies.

Each of us, writers that is, are all different. We have weaknesses and strengths, we portray on the canvas a story. Some people will like it and some won't. But, in essence, we can't judge each other. We're here to help each other, not to run down their work because it doesn't seem to measure up to your standard(s).

The story, Why Stories, is about just what we are talking about. It answers two questions, the purpose of stories, and why writers write stories. The entire article is dialogue. There's no scenes, it's just two people talking about why a writer would want to write. And that writing is about heart. It's not an exercise in grammar or punctuation. Those are items you'll perfect along the way.

So, your criticizism in tearing down my story is just not valid. Neither of you talked about the story that you could see, granting the briefness of the submission due to the limitation.

Note, the story doesn't need tags, it's just two people talking, one takes the pro side and the other the con side. I wish you could understand the whole story, it's really what writing and writers are all about. But, you're going to see this rebutal as being too strong, and you're going to get defensive. Just remember, you started attacking my story before I responded to your attack.

Now, you're going to say that your comments were not an attack of any kind, but that you were just trying to help a wannabe writer with his sad attempt at writing, that you actually felt sorry for me. When in actuality, you don't even know how your comments are hurting other writers on this site, and running away and off this site. You haven't a clue.

But don't despair, I did get something out of your comments. Two positive things among the twelve negative ones. So, it wasn't a total loss. For that, I thank you, Bob.

Go into the open discussion forum and read some of the recent posts...heck, here in fragments too. I'm more or less the last person here likely to try and impose literary rules on anyone. In fact, I've had many disagreements with folks here over my relative lack of regard for them.

Edit: Your post seems so much like other peoples impressions of my posts, especially when I first started here that I almost have to wonder...but I'm probably being paranoid..

FWIW, my comments were intended to help you see where the writing could bring me, as a reader, deeper into the story. I made no comment on the story overall, because there's no way I can know the story at this point.

Even dialog between only two people needs tags occasionally, so the reader doesn't get lost. Or, better yet, beats. Just a line that says that Jack (or Jill, as the case may be) sipped on his drink before answering or Bobby got up and paced in his excitement. That sort of thing. It both gives attribution to the dialog it accompanies and enriches the scene with some action and characterization.

And a bit of scene setting would help me as a reader, at least, visualize the story. It doesn't have to be a lot. Just tell me that they're riding on the subway during rush hour or sitting in a bar after work and I've got enough to go on.

quote:

---

Like it or not, one of the reasons for limiting to the first 13 is that's what will be on the first page of your properly-formatted manuscript. In theory (and at least some of the time in practice) that's how much room you've got to hook the reader of the slush pile and make him turn to the next page. Just like a slush reader, any critiquer here who felt sufficiently interested would likely offer to read the whole thing, if they have the time.

---

And even if you don't wish to see it that way, the simple fact is its all we're allowed to post here and posting more could endanger your first electronic rights, again, whether its sensible or no.

Just a little short statement to let you know to stay tuned for the comment I am about to make. I will likely be typing it up for a good while.

I will say now that all three of the comments so far were all encouraging and not harsh in any way. Merlion is one of the most supporting and open minded individuals here, and I can be harsh at times, but I am usually very encouraging here, and not once in my post did I say anything negative about your story at all.

“To be or not to be, that is the question!”
Mary suppressed a sigh. She could see it coming. He had that gleam in his eyes. Not another hare-brained scheme. Why did Bobby always wait until they were on the crowded Metro to start? There was literally no place for her to go. “No that’s Shakespeare," she said, hoping to change the subject.
“I know. But the question is: To be or not to be a writer?”
“You . . . a writer? I don’t think so.”
“And why not?” Bobby's eyebrows rose almost to his hairline.
“You can’t write! That’s why not.”
“I’m developing a new career. And what’s wrong with being a writer?”
Mary shook her head. “Bobby, Bobby, Bobby, your English is

As a reader, I like clarity. I would prefer tags every so often so that if I have to put the piece down for some reason, I can pick up where I left off without a lot of guessing over who is talking.

That was an attack? Are you kidding? They only gave their honest opinion. Where I come from those are called "critiques". Isn't that what we're all here for?

But I will say, some description would be nice. I'm stuck in a white room here. Actually, for some reason, I'm picturing two actors, out of costume, standing on a bare stage in an empty theater, their voices echoing off the far walls. Yeah, that probably is not the effect you're going for.

Secondly, those that have commented so far are, by far, some of the more open-minded around here. I would have loved to see Snapper or Babbler give this their reaming.

quote:

---

The two of you, commenting on my story, make the very point of the problem of 13 lines or 130 words. The intro is too short to be revalent to make comments or crits. Which can, in circumstances like this one, a dis-service to the piece because of the brevity.

---

quote:

---

Let me make an objective observation to your two comments. Don't be offended, I mean no offense. You've commented on lack of tags, lack of scene setting, and that dialogue doesn't normally work by itself. Nit-picking the piece because it doesn't fit into your world of literary rules.

---

It isn't our world of literary rules. It is the Literary rules that we try to adhere to so we can get published. That doesn't make them right in everycase. But the fact that three people seemed to agree on the same thing presents a pretty strong case to relook you stance on them.

quote:

---

A critique is supposed to give the author direction, encouragement, and help in make their piece better? I guess that rule doesn't apply to everyone.

---

I didn't really see any harsh opinions of this, just a few helpful suggestions.

Or maybe you meant when I said this:

quote:

---

To me, this could be one of two types of stories. Hopefully it is a type of story that cleverly blends a classic or well known premise and offers a creative and unique spin, whether it be satire or something along those lines.
I am concerned that it could fall into a category of stories that twists a cliche with a hackneyed plot and the result is something terribly unpalatable.

---

Notice that I didn't say that yours was either, I simply stated that I have seen two type and make sure you don't want to write the latter type.

quote:

---

The other thing you're missing is this, writing is about creating an idea that moves the reader, it's an art form plain and simple. The reader doesn't care about tags or literary molds. They are interested in what moves them, and will they remember the story-line a week from now. And is it something they will reflect on in the weeks and years to come. They want memories, which is the same reason people go to the movies.

---

Nobody is missing that point except maybe you. I can't speak for
Meridith, and I shouldn't for merlion, But I will in one case. Both Merlion and I read from a readers standpoint. Merlion is known for reading from that POV instead of adhering to "the Rules" I am above all else a reader. I read around a hundred novels a year, and three times that amount of short stories, so I do have an idea of what reading is all about. I can't say that this is something that will resonate and I will reflect upon weeks down the road, but then again I haven't read the entire story.

Again the fact that it didn't appeal to three readers shoul give you something to think about.

quote:

---

Each of us, writers that is, are all different. We have weaknesses and strengths, we portray on the canvas a story. Some people will like it and some won't. But, in essence, we can't judge each other. We're here to help each other, not to run down their work because it doesn't seem to measure up to your standard(s).

---

Again, nobody was running down your work. Or judging you for that matter.

quote:

---

The story, Why Stories, is about just what we are talking about. It answers two questions, the purpose of stories, and why writers write stories. The entire article is dialogue. There's no scenes, it's just two people talking about why a writer would want to write. And that writing is about heart. It's not an exercise in grammar or punctuation. Those are items you'll perfect along the way.

---

Please notice that I did point out a story that was written in much the same way, and I said it could possibly work, but I was just not that engaged by the intro, as I was in "Odd Jobs" which had a definate hook in the first few lines, which by the way is very important.

quote:

---

So, your criticizism in tearing down my story is just not valid. Neither of you talked about the story that you could see, granting the briefness of the submission due to the limitation.

---

It is pretty obvious to me that you are taking all this the wrong way. We didn't talk a bout the story we could see, because there was not much we could see in the intro, to which we all commented on. No one was tearing down your story, just offering you the little knowledge we here, as new writers have learned.

The primary reason why I am so offended is because, I think you fail to see that we are all here for the purpose of helping each other out. None of these comments made about your introduction are uncommon. If you had looked throught this forum before you posted you would have observed that fact. There have been far more harsh reviews given here. So either you noticed this and feel like the comments to you are harsher than most, or you didn't full understand the nature of this forum. Either way you are wasting my time, because, like everyone else here, I am here to help others advance in their craft and learns ways to advance my own.

I spend hours a day, critiqueing other peoples stories, first thirteen, posting helpful links, and inspirational messages. In fact, I spent an hour critiqueing your other essay you have posted, even though it was not speculative fiction, and you may remember that I did have alot of nice things to say about it. Or did you think that everything you do is perfectly genious and that you would only get your ego stroked by posting such genious here?

Now This, I admit is a harsh critique of your work. Still, I am not trying to attack you personally. You just can't come in here firing at people that have dedicated time to help you, offer you there opinions, and fruits of hours or hundreds of hours of thier time in learning and identifying these rules and ways to help you get published. You just can't do that.

I hope you stay around, because as I said I can see where this defense mechanism likely stems from, and this really is a great place to learn about tthis craft. Everyone here is great and sincerely helpful. Best of luck.

quote:

---

Note, the story doesn't need tags, it's just two people talking, one takes the pro side and the other the con side.

---

quote:

---

I wish you could understand the whole story,

---

quote:

---

you're going to see this rebutal as being too strong, and you're going to get defensive.

---

quote:

---

Just remember, you started attacking my story before I responded to your attack.

---

quote:

---

Now, you're going to say that your comments were not an attack of any kind, but that you were just trying to help a wannabe writer with his sad attempt at writing, that you actually felt sorry for me. When in actuality, you don't even know how your comments are hurting other writers on this site, and running away and off this site. You haven't a clue.

---

My, you are smart, or perhaps it is just that somewhere deep in the back of your mind, where your logic is still working you can see our rebuttals because you can see the flaws in your logic and the wholes in your argument.

quote:

---

But don't despair,

---

quote:

---

I did get something out of your comments. Two positive things among the twelve negative ones. So, it wasn't a total loss. For that, I thank you, Bob.

---

Please don't leave. We all put our writing up for criticism. We all know how you feel. It is tough.

I know from my interactions with the posters above that they are trying to help. In fact, I haven't met anyone here who is discouraging or intentionally cruel. This is a good community that tries to lift each other up.

Now the whole point of the first thirteen is to see if your beginning is engaging, if the reader wants to turn the page. It is not a judgment on the story as a whole.

All we can offer is our own personal opinions. But remember that we are all readers, so you are getting a sample of the reactions from your intended audience.

How you use the critique is up to you. It is your story and ultimately yours is the only opinion that really matters, but you can't fault people for giving their honest opinions.

Honestly, I don't find this beginning very engaging. Two floating heads talking about writing, there isn't anything that catches my interest. The rest of the story could be brilliant for all I know, but I wouldn't turn the page.

That is my honest opinion for this thirteen lines. I am not criticising the story as a whole or you as a writer just the first thirteen lines of this one particular story.

Sampson makes a good point of liking tags, but that may be more of personal preference, and that's ok, it's an objective comment.

But, I would ask, does it have to be that way. Without tags, is it not possible to write a great story? Or is the literary rules so ingrained that you can't possibly live without them. And, is anyone who chooses not to use them completely stupid? I thougth critting was supposed to help the author come up with an improved version of their piece. Instead I get, well that's not a very good way to structure a story, nobody has much success doing it that way. That's not help.

Think about it. Is it not possible to be successful using that kind of structure. Are you so arrogrant that you can't fathom anyone doing it in such a way? Critique is helpful, criticism is not. So, why don't we try to row the same boat in the same direction? Aren't we all basically unpublished authors trying to improve our skills by exposing each other to our works in hopes to improve them and eventually sell them?

Is this a click that only approves of its own? Can't someone submit a piece and get an objective response in the aire of concern for their fellow writer?

Now, answer this question honestly, in your heart, has anyone ever left this group because of the harseness of the critiques?

Critique, the object comment aimed at supporting and helping a fellow write improve their work. But for some, they've been here long enough that they get a pass at not conforming to the rules.

Where is fairnes, calling in the wind of by gone days?

Bob.

quote:

---

But, I would ask, does it have to be that way. Without tags, is it not possible to write a great story? Or is the literary rules so ingrained that you can't possibly live without them. And, is anyone who chooses not to use them completely stupid? I thougth critting was supposed to help the author come up with an improved version of their piece. Instead I get, well that's not a very good way to structure a story, nobody has much success doing it that way. That's not help.

---

I still think this was a good piece of advice that woul enable you to keep the dialogue set up in the same way it is and make it more effective.

quote:

---

I have seen straight dialogue be effective in an introduction, but there were a few elements that enabled this.
In dialogue the speakers gave clues about the events occuring around them. They used each others name, and without the "As You Know, Bob", they were able to inject some exposition. A very poor example,

---

I even offered an example in my original post.

quote:

---

But, I would ask, does it have to be that way. Without tags, is it not possible to write a great story? Or is the literary rules so ingrained that you can't possibly live without them. And, is anyone who chooses not to use them completely stupid? I thougth critting was supposed to help the author come up with an improved version of their piece. Instead I get, well that's not a very good way to structure a story, nobody has much success doing it that way. That's not help.

---

I mentioned a published story that did much of what you're doing here and also stated quite clearly that it can be done. BT mentioned one as well.

quote:

---

Now, answer this question honestly, in your heart, has anyone ever left this group because of the harseness of the critiques?

---

The critiques you have recieved here aren't harsh by really any sort of standard. As BT says, if/when you get critted by the likes of snapper, skadder, Inarticulate Babbler and arriki...then you will know what harshness is.

To answer your question, my issue with critiques here has been the tendency for some of them to be transformative...trying to change the work completely rather than crit it as what it is. That is why here I suggested that, if you don't wish to add more scene to the dialogue, instead try to inject a hint of your speculative element sooner (I'm assuming its speculative, its tagged as fantasy.)

That, I think is the issue BT and I in particular are having. The problems you speak of do come up here on Hatrack, but your complaining of recieving them from the very people that generally opose them.

I've gotten harsher critiques than anything here. They stung. But on reflection, I usually found a kernel of truth that I could use to improve my story. I've gotten some critiques that I've considered and then decided not to follow. If three people say the same thing, I start to think that maybe I'm just being stubborn (an occasional fault of mine).

No. You don't have to use dialog tags. You don't have to do anything you don't want to to your own story. You put it up for opinions and we offered them.

For the most part (there are a few exceptions), you won't get a critique or even a reason for a rejection when you submit a story for publication. Just the infamous "not right for us" form rejection. Friends and family won't be completely honest with you, usually no matter how you ask them to. We're trying to be. We're not experts here and don't claim to be. We're trying to tell you what we've learned and what our impressions are as readers. That's all. Take them or leave them. It's your story and only you know how you want it to be.

From Browne and King, SELF-EDITING FOR FICTION WRITERS:

quote:

---

Unless your dialogue consists entirely of one character talking to himself or herself, you will need to include speaker attributions so your readers know who is saying what.

---

But also:

quote:

---

If it's clear from the dialogue who is speaking--if two characters are bantering back and forth, for instance--you can dispense with speaker attributions altogether.

---

It's up to you to decide which makes the story more clear to your reader.

Welcome to Hatrack. I'm Phobos, named after the moon on which I was born. A human colony mind you. I am a Scorpio.

I don't know how long you have been writing, but it isn't something you can just step into and expect to succeed. When Steven King started out, he hammered this large nail into the wall of his bedroom. He wrote story after story, sending them out to magazines, hoping to be published. When each was rejected, he would take the rejection slip and push it onto the nail. Before he ever sold his first story, the nail was full of rejection slips. He kept writing because he couldn't not write. He loved it too much. He said that writing was "as sexy as skin against skin." And it is. It is my personal drug of choice.

I admit I am not a very good critic. I don't spend hours a day pouring over the mistakes of other writers, not because I don't care, but it just isn't in me. Apparently some are born to it. To each his own. But, if you notice, even critics hate to be criticized. It's only human.

Anne Rice has said, don't pay attention to the critics. Just keep writing and writing and writing. Even so, I'm sure she spent many years establishing a solid foundation on which to build her stories. I'm afraid it's just something that is inescapable.

Back to Steven King—I did mention elsewhere that I was into horror at one point in my life—Steven said that it is important for every writer to keep reading. He's been at this a long time, and he still needs that infusion of others' words to keep the juices flowing. Reading may be the best teacher available, and you will find it to be always gentle and kind. When I read, I try to pay attention to how the writer does it. Each writer will be a little different, some a lot different. After a while you'll begin to get a feel for the way this writing thing works. Sorry, if I'm telling you stuff you already know.

I assume everyone here wants to be published. I know that tchernabyelo has been published before. There may be others; if so, I'm not aware of it. Please keep that in mind. If we were already wildly successful writers, I'd venture to say that none of us would be hanging around this board. One thing is certain—each of us still has a lot to learn. That's okay. We all have to put in the time. It's easier if we love it anyway.

Twelve years ago I took a college writing class. When the professor returned my first story, she asked me if I'd been published. I told her no. She said I should try, then suggested I meet with the head of the English department, who had been published several times, to ask for advice. I didn't feel confident enough to attempt that, instead, I began my first novel. When I finished it, I started another. And another. I have written thousands of pages of fiction. Hours and hours learning a few things. If you've noticed, I still get new ones ripped every time I post a first thirteen. You haven't been openly mocked. And yet, I love it anyway. Writing is "my precious"—that and my chainsaw. YEAH! THAT'S RIGHT! I NAMED MY CHAINSAW! ANYBODY WANNA MAKE SOMETHING OF IT? I'm just kidding. I did name my chainsaw though.

So, there you have it. Writing makes you crazy. No, that's not right. Writing isn't easy, but it is worth it. If you love it enough.