Here are the first 13 lines of my first novel, which I completed about a year ago (first draft), and finally cleaned up enough to be resepctable (final or near final draft). While I welcome anyone brave enough to venture into the full novel, the first chapter is what I'd like critiqued. I am satisfied with it, but I've never been happy with it. The book weighs in at a little over 121,000 words.

The 13 lines:

Jan was a handsome boy, and had the carefree innocence and confidence of youth that comes from knowing too little of the world. Lean and tan, his youthful face carried none of the care or worry that the faces of older men bore, and while he knew of the dangers in the world, he did not give them the thought or contemplation that they deserved. Whether the sin of ignorance was his or that of his parents was a small matter. In a world where the boundaries of living were defined by sunrise and sunset, where starlight was synonymous with death, he should have been more cautious; more so because he was almost sixteen, and his First Night was less than a month away.

Summary:

The world was created by God, who after creating it sent his Virtues into the world. The virtues are the faces of God, and they were sent to teach men the virtues of God; love, compassion, etc.

When men first meet the Virtues they mistake them for gods and try to worship them. Most of the Virtues refuse this worship, but one of them doesn't. This is Malasephus. He actively seeks the worship of men, and through treachery and deceit he brings about the destruction of a race of beings called the Elan. With the destruction of the Elan and the fact that men decide to worship Malesephus, the other Virtues turn their back on the world and leave men to worship the God they've chosen.

Malasephus becomes the god of the world, but for his treachery he is bound to the Sepinal mountains, where his influence will be small, and few men will be led astray by him.

Malasephus however manages to escape, in spirit at least, and fill the world with his dark essence. This Darkness takes up the bodies of the dead, giving Malasephus a vessel for his soul to venture out in the world.

3,000 years later Malasephus is the undisputed god of the world, and his vesels roam the night drawn to the lives of men in order to kill them and swell their ranks. In nearly every quarter of the world men worship Malasephus as a god, and with the ability to send his spirit out into the bodies of the dead he is bound in name only.

This is the world into which the main character is born. The light of day burns the Darkness out of the bodies of the dead, who are known as nohetka. But at night the darkness takes their flesh up again and sends them out to hunt men.

Consequently men work the fields by day, but hide behind rune warded walls of towns and villages at night. Only in the ritual passage of a boy to man, the rite of First Night, do people stay the night outside the walls of their villages.

When Jan is heading home one day from some business he did for his father in a nearby village, he unwisely stops early in the afternoon to take a nap. But his nap stretches out longer than he intended, and he wakes up just as the sun is setting. He has no time to make it home to his own village.

Forced to spend the night in a tree out of the reach of the mindless but deadly nohetka, Jan descends the next morning having survived his First Night. He is now a man.

He finishes the journy home to his village, only to find it destroyed, and his family dead. Alone, Jan sets out on a quest to avenge the deaths of his people by hunting and destroying the servants of Malasephus, whether they are the dead or the living, but the Virtues have returned and they have marked him for a greater destiny, one that will forever change him and the world.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This isn't the whole synopsis, but it gets it going.

Thanks to everyone in advance for taking a look.

Jon Goff

Almost every sentence is basted with redundancies:

Carefreee innocence is knowing too little of the world.

A youthful face lacks what older men's faces bear.
...carried none of the care or worry is repeating carefree innocence from the first sentence. As such, he obviously doesn't give the dangers of the world the thought/contemplation [best to choose one] that they deserve.

If his was the sin of ignorance, would he know it?

But...

quote:

---

In a world where the boundaries of living were defined by sunrise and sunset, where starlight was synonymous with death, he should have been more cautious; more so because he was almost sixteen, and his First Night was less than a month away.

---

...is very long and cluttered.

It can easily be simplified:
Everyone knew the starlight brought death, and his First Night was less than a month away.

Give us less redundancies and clutter. Check your Point of View. Show us what Jan thinks of, not what he doesn't.

[This message has been edited by InarticulateBabbler (edited March 22, 2007).]

You have something of a hook here: In a world where the boundaries of living were defined by sunrise and sunset, where starlight was synonymous with death, he should have been more cautious; more so because he was almost sixteen, and his First Night was less than a month away.

I get the feeling that your world is in perpetual daytime. That sounds interesting. I would rather have that introduced more boldly than the way it is here. The mentioning of sunrise, sunset, and starlight makes me think maybe I'm wrong. Maybe they have normal days but lock up tight at night and sit around the hearth. I don't know.

This is minor complaint about the last sentence, but from your summary, it doesn't sound like being 16 is all that dangerous. With the way it's worded now, it seems like that's just how old he is, but the wording gives it as much importance as this First Night. I think the last sentence could be tightened up by scratching out his age info and slipping it in somewhere else. Unless turning 16 is when he has his First Night like a rite of passage for 16 year old boys.

Here's the best summary I can give.

The world was created by God, who after creating it sent his Virtues into the world. The virtues are the faces of God, and they were sent to teach men the virtues of God; love, compassion, etc.

When men first meet the Virtues they mistake them for gods and try to worship them. Most of the Virtues refuse this worship, but one of them doesn't. This is Malasephus. He actively seeks the worship of men, and through treachery and deceit he brings about the destruction of a race of beings called the Elan. With the destruction of the Elan and the fact that men decide to worship Malesephus, the other Virtues turn their back on the world and leave men to worship the God they've chosen.

Malasephus becomes the god of the world, but for his treachery he is bound to the Sepinal mountains, where his influence will be small, and few men will be led astray by him.

Malasephus however manages to escape, in spirit at least, and fill the world with his dark essence. This Darkness takes up the bodies of the dead, giving Malasephus a vessel for his soul to venture out in the world.

3,000 years later Malasephus is the undisputed god of the world, and his vesels roam the night drawn to the lives of men in order to kill them and swell their ranks. In nearly every quarter of the world men worship Malasephus as a god, and with the ability to send his spirit out into the bodies of the dead he is bound in name only.

This is the world into which the main character is born. The light of day burns the Darkness out of the bodies of the dead, who are known as nohetka. But at night the darkness takes their flesh up again and sends them out to hunt men.

Consequently men work the fields by day, but hide behind rune warded walls of towns and villages at night. Only in the ritual passage of a boy to man, the rite of First Night, do people stay the night outside the walls of their villages.

When Jan is heading home one day from some business he did for his father in a nearby village, he unwisely stops early in the afternoon to take a nap. But his nap stretches out longer than he intended, and he wakes up just as the sun is setting. He has no time to make it home to his own village.

Forced to spend the night in a tree out of the reach of the mindless but deadly nohetka, Jan descends the next morning having survived his First Night. He is now a man.

He finishes the journy home to his village, only to find it destroyed, and his family dead. Alone, Jan sets out on a quest to avenge the deaths of his people by hunting and destroying the servants of Malasephus, whether they are the dead or the living, but the Virtues have returned and they have marked him for a greater destiny, one that will forever change him and the world.

----------------------------------------------------------------

That will take you up to about the third chapter in the book. Summarizing the whole thing has been difficult for me, but this is a world I've been developing for the better part of ten years, so it has a pretty deep background mythos as a foundation.

Thanks for taking a look

Jon

The problem is you are missing both.

You are full Omni POV. Did you want to be?

You spend too much time telling me what Jan isn't. Show me what he is. Most of what you tell me isn't important right now. You could cut this, without losing anything, to:

In a world where the boundaries of living were defined by sunrise and sunset and where starlight was synonymous with death, Jan should have been more cautious. His First Night, the ceremony that made him a man , was less than a month away which made him irrisistable to the Evil King's zombies that ruled the earth when the sun slept. Each night they killed whatever they found to add more slaves to the King's army.

Of course, the italics are probably wrong, but hopefully you get the idea.

I think you could drop the whole beginning and just start where the action happens. I presume the things that go bump in the night are about to bump into Jan. I'll learn about them and his world as he tries to survive. Don't spoon feed me. Tell me a story.

I suspect you could probably cut the word count significantly with a ruthless editing session. Looking at your last entry, you might be able to lose most of the first 3 chapers too.

Maybe it's because I don't think the world is that bad of a place, but that kind of pessimism is a turn off for me, in people and in books.

I have already started formulating ideas on how to stream line this intro and strip all the redundant stuff out, making for a better read. I'm probably going to go back to the original, which had the main character waking from a nightmare. I departed from it because I thought the whole nightmare a bit of a cliche.

Upon reflection, I realize that I was trying to set as much background in the first few sentences as I could, establishing a world that is dangerous to the living, but in trying to build that sense of peril I repeat things an awful lot.

This is a fantasy world, not ours, and it is a dark world where evil has ruled unopposed for nearly 3,000 years. I'm speaking in 3rd person omniscient, and the character is a 16 year old boy who is, in fact rather naive. If the book is not to your taste, that's fine, but I'm not looking for feedback based upon personal tastes in literary styles. No offense.

Jon

Thanks. The hook factor has always been weak, I agree. I think maybe I'm trying too hard to set the stage all in the first chapter instead of revealing it throughout the course of the story. Thanks for your feedback.

The sun moved, edging its way toward the horizon. Its light threw bloody hues across the sleeping boy as long fingers of shadow crawled across his skin. They twisted about his limbs and neck, brushed at his cheek, and slipped beneath his closed lids to steal into his dreams. Fear clamored dimly in the background, and filled his dream with a sense of horror that lurked all around him, unseen but palpable.
He woke with a start and the dream ran skittering away like a frightened animal. The sky was a burnt umber that faded to black in the east, filled with blood red clouds. Jan watched in despair as the sun buried itself in the western horizon.

What do you think... better?

[This message has been edited by jongoff (edited March 23, 2007).]

You are trying too hard in this 13. Don't beat me over the head with the foreshadowing.

You also repeat -

blood/bloody - 2
fear words - 6 (probably more since skittered, crawled, dispair etc carry the same sense in the context you use them)

The problem is your MC got caught out late and knows he's in trouble. If you don't want to use a cut version of the first post, start later.

Start with him running from the dark, trying to get someplace safe, worried that every crack of a branch is the evil zombie (sorry, but I've used "evil robot monkey" too much today) robot monkey (couldn't stop myself). Show me that he's afraid and what he's afraid of. He can curse himself out for napping but get me to the story where the stakes matter. Then I'll follow along on the journey.

quote:

---

I'm probably going to go back to the original, which had the main character waking from a nightmare. I departed from it because I thought the whole nightmare a bit of a cliche.

---

If you feel it's a cliche, it damn-near guarantees that we will.

Trim the redundancies and continue establishing a world that is dangerous to the living.

Also I recommend that you focus on what Jan sees and feels. I'll be more drawn toward sympathy, if I can relate to him.

Maybe you should consider starting at a point further along in the story:

If you are going to switch to this, IMHO, you should start this scene with:

Jan watched in despair as the sun buried itself in the western horizon.

I'm in agreement with kings_falcon:

quote:

---

You are trying too hard in this 13

---

As for the reason, it can be explained as simply as:

"What were you doing out there, all alone?" asked Kayla.

My initial thought was "why do I care who Jan is, or what he looks like, or why he's alone at night?" There's nothing there that tells the reader why he's important, and its more descriptive of him, then him trying to explain who he is, if that makes sense. I only got interested when you mentioned First Night.

That made me want to turn the page, but I might have already stopped reading because Jan seems kind of...uninteresting. Maybe jazz it up a bit, add a bit of dialogue or action, less description, to initially grab the reader.

Synopsis: you lost me in paragraph 2, thinking, this is a synopsis -- shouldn't I know what the story's about? Shouldn't I be hooked?

I think you can boil this all down to a few sentences.

In the world of X, no one dares go outside town walls at night, because that's when the dead rise up and hunt living men. When Jan, an evil robot monkey hunter, is caught outside at night...

That is, you've got a lot of summary that just isn't crucial to understanding the story. I don't need to know the history of the evil god right now, for example.

One thing I *don't* get from the synopsis that I do need to know: why was the village destroyed? Presumably that's pretty unusual! Maybe that's the starting point:

When Jan's village is destroyed by the dead in a freak attack...

I liked the summary way better than just the first thirteen. I WANT to read this book. I am hooked. Everyone is so focused on redundancies here that they aren't even paying attention to the story itself. I've been reading a lot recently, and frankly the repetition in your story isn't nearly as bad as it is in Robert Jordan's, Terry Brooks', or Robert Goodkind's books. Your synopsis sounds like a typical cover synopsis. I like it.

I don't know anyone that picks up a novel, reads just the first thirteen lines and then pickes it up and throws it away based on that tiny bit of writing. They might do so with the synopsis on the front or back cover, but not with the first thirteen lines of the first page. I can see how it works that way with a short story, but not with a 120,000+ word novel.

There seems to be a common demand for perfection here that at time seems impossible to fulfil. From what I've seen in F&F, a lot of the readers want something closer to a synopsis than the beginning of a book, and that is not how you want to start a book. There are times that the comments made are very helpful, but more often there seems to be too much focus on nit-picky details, and not enough on the story itself. If all readers were that picky, I know of a large number of authors that would never had made it to print.

But that's just my two cents.

Maybe he doesn't need to survive a night out if it is causing you a plausibility problem. Couldn't he get caught up in what he was doing in the other town and stay there because he realizes he doesn't have time to get home? You'll still have the survivor guilt and maybe smooth out the problems with the opening. Would that work for the rest of the story?

I liked the original first 13 better than the second version. It could work with some polish to bring the hook out. I just wanted more detail. If you look at the comments you've gotten, most people are saying the same thing as I just did.

No preaching. I promise.

Both of your openings really do nothing for me. The first one just tells me that your MC is this perfect hero who exudes every antonym of the word evil. However, I find this all to be incredibly implausible as no sixteen year old can act this manner, unless you want us to not to take him seriously. As for the second opening, it is a combo-cliche of a sky description and the MC waking up. Trash it. I would find some way to salvage the first opening, especially that last sentence (except explain out First Night because it is annoying to see words capitalized and not know why. And that is not a way to create suspense.)

Heroes, by definition are not ordinary. If they were we would never be impressed by heroism. As far as a sixteen year old not being believable in the role of a hero (I assume that this is what Mystic finds unbelievable, but I'm not sure as the specifics were not mentioned in the critique); I have a couple things to say on that.

Harry Potter (granted, it's a children's series but it has proven immensely popular for all age groups).

Ender's Game. The protagonist is 12 or 13, and the brain child of our own well honored host here at Hatrack, Mr. Orson Scott Card.

I also want to defend the honor of adolescents. Many are immature but I have had the distinct privilege of knowing several remarkable young men over the course of my life. One young man saved the life of a dying man in 1983. We were at a party when the grandfather of the girl whose birthday it was had a heart attack. This young man, whom I am proud to call a friend, rushed over and administered CPR, saving the victim's life. My friend was sixteen when he performed this heroic act. So when you tell me that no sixteen year old would act in this fashion, I beg to differ. There are many fine young men and women who are a credit to their generation.

Third: We live in a very privileged society where our children are afforded the luxury of taking two decades (or more in some instances) to grow up. For most of the world, and through most of history a boy becomes a man by his fifteenth or sixteenth year. It was not uncommon two hundred years ago for a boy of 16 or 17 to be raising a family.

I say all of this because while it is important to make a hero believable, it is also important as a writer to realize that we have a tremendous amount of license to do what we want in our stories.

History is full of exceptional individuals who accomplished heroic deeds:

•Anne Frank
•Tanya Savicheva - A contemporary of Anne Frank
•Wilfred Benitez - Worlds youngest World boxing champion
•Joan of Arc - Do I really need to expand on her?
•The six heroes of the battle of Chapultepec - six teens who were ordered to fallback, but instead chose to stay at their posts and give their lives for their fellows.
•The hundreds of young men who lied about their age in world war two in order to enlist and fight for the freedom of their country.

The point is this, the existence of heroic teens is not only plausible, it's a historic fact.

Mystic is correct in this regard. If you're going to tell a story, you have to make it believable. If you don't, then you've failed the reader.

Lastly, and this to Mystic and other critics who are trying to infer the entire story from a very short submission: You inferred a tremendous amount from a synopsis of the first 3 chapters of a 45 chapter, 120,000 word novel and the first 13 lines of the first chapter. All of your inferences were mistaken. While I appreciate the time you took, it was the thirteen lines I both wanted and needed feedback on. I got a little of that, and I appreciate it, but you spent the majority of the critique making assumptions about the story and then offering advice on assumptions based upon your inferences, and not the actual story.

This seems common, at least from the critiques I've received. Granted, I did post a very brief and truncated synopsis in order that the thirteen lines could be read in context, but it isn't the synopsis that we're critiquing here.

While I appreciate the time it took, it would have been more useful to me if you'd gone into more detail about the first 13 lines. Why didn't they work for you? What about the main character causes the emotional response to him that you felt? Why do you believe that the description of the hero "exudes every antonym of the word evil?"

What do you find implausible about the manner in which the sixteen year old acts?

I won't respond to your critique of the synopsis because I didn't ask for a critique of that. I would like to know in detail what about the first 13 lines bothers you. I too am not happy with them, so anything you can give me in that regard would be appreciated.

Again, thank you for your time.

Jon

[This message has been edited by jongoff (edited April 22, 2007).]

I've generally found the critiques on Hatrack to be unhelpful. They tend to be vague and ambiguous, not really constructive. I have had good, insightful criticisms and to those who have given me good critiques (and by that I mean useful and not necessarily praising in nature), I thank you.

I have had second thoughts about continuing my participation with Hatrack for this reason. In short I need critiques that offer insight to where I've failed as a writer, where I've left the reader stranded and confused.

I don't need feedback based on speculation of what I'm trying to accomplish, especially when that feedback is based upon so little information as is provided in these posts.

Am I alone in this, or have others found the same to be true of the criticisms they've received?

As for the critiques that are full of speculation, even those can be useful. I actually like people to tell me what they think is coming next based on what I tell them so that I can tell when my writing isn't clearly conveying the information that I meant it to. If that information isn't helpful to you, though, just tell us.

The following is not meant as a criticism of you but is an attempt to help you get more useful feedback.

It is possible that you haven't clearly communicated what you need from people and that is part of the problem. True, sometimes people don't pay attention to what you ask for, but most people here will try to give you the type of feedback that you request. If everyone is giving wrong feedback, then maybe all you need to do is re-state your request for feedback in a different way.

By including the synopsis of the story when a 'real' reader wouldn't have that information, I think some people believed you wanted feedback on the whole idea and not just the first 13 lines. By posting an expanded synopsis, you probably confirmed that idea. This is your thread, so you need to control it. Tell people 'thanks, but you didn't what feedback on that' rather than feed them more material when that's not what you wanted critiqued. Also, unless you say that you're ONLY looking for readers offline, people will tell you what they think is wrong with the first 13 or story idea that is preventing them from requesting that first chapter.

After reading your post I went back and found some good critiques. I think because the replies don't come all at once it's jarring to get a critique that makes no sense.

I hesitated to post my last two comments because they sound "whiney." It isn't that I have hurt feelings over the critiques I've gotten.

More than anything else the 13 line restraint chafes. When I get a critique that says, "You haven't told me enough about the world/character/back story/etc." it becomes frustrating. 13 lines are about 125 words, and that's not a lot to tell much of anything.

I'm also frustrated when a critique tries to give me publishing advice that is clearly bad. When someone says, "...to get it published you need to: (1) be able to summarize the entire thing in a sentence; and (2) have a perfectly clear and beautiful first 13 lines." I wince. This is the exact opposite of what's true.

Publishers aren't going to decide to publish you on a one sentence summary and 13 lines that sizzle. They want at least the first couple of chapters and a synopsis of the remaining story. Anyone who has read even a handful of writer's guidelines knows this.

It's this kind of woeful ignorance peppered throughout the critiques that makes me wonder about the value of the critiques. If you're going to make a declarative statement at least know your facts!

It wouldn't be so bad, but I've seen this kind of wrong advice in other posts. Look, I've never published a fiction piece and all though I've not made the effort to seriously write fiction in over a decade, I've spent the better half of the last ten years writing in the technical field. I've published numerous articles in different venues, and had a regular column on computers from 1997 - 1999. I've written guest editorials for the local newspaper, and I've taught an online writing class for two years. I'm no novice to the business. Fiction is definitely a different animal than technical writing, but I find it hard to believe that the business model between the two is that different.

And while it is easier to sell non fiction technical pieces (in my experience), editors are editors and they're not going to make a decision to buy based on a sketchy proposal. When I pitch an idea for a column or a regular feature I have to include a tremendous amount of information, and I have to include writing samples, why I think the feature or column will appeal to their readers, etc. An editor is interested in acquiring copy that he or she can turn around and sell.

In truth, writing fiction is considerably harder than writing non fiction. And to be honest, writing a critique isn't always a walk in the park. I do appreciate those who have taken the time to offer their opinion, but please if you're going to write a critique then be specific about what is difficult to understand.

If I offended anyone, well that wasn't my intent, but if we're all serious about helping improve one another's writing we have to be willing to give feedback that is useful. Let me suggest that if you can't clearly express why a story isn't working for you, you lack the skills to communicate your own stories.

Finally, I concluded sometime ago that writers have enormous egos! We have the audacity to not only write but the arrogance to assume people will want to read it. Too many of us stop there, and fail to actually make it worth reading and then when someone doesn't like it we have the temerity to actually be offended. It's a wonder any of us manage to have social lives at all!

To the above charges, I plead guilty. Again, though I may sometimes become frustrated, know that I do appreciate anyone who takes the time to read and comment on what I've written.

[This message has been edited by jongoff (edited April 22, 2007).]

quote:

---

I'm also frustrated when a critique tries to give me publishing advice that is clearly bad. When someone says, "...to get it published you need to: (1) be able to summarize the entire thing in a sentence; and (2) have a perfectly clear and beautiful first 13 lines." I wince. This is the exact opposite of what's true.

Publishers aren't going to decide to publish you on a one sentence summary and 13 lines that sizzle. They want at least the first couple of chapters and a synopsis of the remaining story. Anyone who has read even a handful of writer's guidelines knows this.

---

Agents, editors and publishers do decide what to take on from a new author from the first few lines - check Ms. Snark's blog, Agent X's or Evil Editors'. Sure, some agents are more generous but still you only have a page. If there are problems within the first 13, they are going to assume that those problems are throughout. The business model between fiction and non-fiction is that different.

I liked the idea for your story. I think your MC could be plausible and down right heroic in the end.

Yes, the 13 line restriction chafes, but it is there for a reason.

No, what they lack is the ability to identify what’s wrong. That’s a separate skill from writing ability. For example, a person who naturally does something well often can’t communicate to another person how to do that exact same thing. It’s also possible that the person could figure it out, but he isn’t willing to take the time. Or, perhaps, they did state it clearly--for me or someone else--but you don’t quite communicate in the same fashion and so missed the point. That happens. And, yes, it is possible that they can’t communicate well. But it's not valid to assume that from the start.

Also, I don't think that writers are arrogant or have enormous egos. Some people are that way in any field, so why single out writers and peg every one of them this way? Most writers want to write because they enjoy telling stories. It’s a side benefit if people want to read those stories. I’d agree it's arrogant to assume that because I want to be a writer that it automatically means someone will be willing to read or buy my work. It would be arrogant to think my writing is so perfect and my story so unique that it’s obvious that people should praise it and that a publisher will buy it. But just because a person writes, it doesn’t automatically mean that they think their writing is perfect and should be read.

I’ve also heard people say that writers are arrogant in that they want to be paid for their work. Is a painter or a baker or a potter or a masseuse arrogant because they want to be paid for their work? Shouldn’t they be paid if they are good at their craft and someone wants their goods or services? People want to read or hear or watch stories, so why is it arrogant to want to be good enough at your craft to be paid for it?

Basically, these charges just don't make sense to me. *shrug*

On another note:
I, too, am published in non-fiction (educational), but I realized from previous instruction that writing fiction was a whole other game. I set about learning these new rules before I got started. I never assume that I know it all. True, you probably have more writing experience than most people here, but I'd suggest that you ask people WHY they make such 'wrong' statements rather than just assume that they are wrong. You might end up right...or you might just learn something. After all, we do have published fiction writers here. If you can't stand a few newbies making wrong statements, then maybe this isn't the forum for you. I don't know. The only forum/online critique group that I know of that probably gives more consistant good advice and good critiques is Online Writing Workshop (http://sff.onlinewritingworkshop.com/). They have more published writers there, from what I hear, but you have to pay for the service so I've never tried it.