You critique my stuff: part 3

More good comments have come in, and I'm doing serious reconsideration of this novel's opening (my April 14 post; scroll down). There will be more to this series than anticipated. Now for some extensive notes from Chris. I've had to cut some because of limited space.

Opening thoughts: Good mix of dialogue, interior monologue, and straight narrative. Good sense of scene and behind-the-scenes (I can imagine I'm there). Some specifics:

"When the call came a week before their regular get-together, all the gravelly voice of the most powerful man on the planet had said was, "We got bidness." Meaning trouble…but what kind of trouble?"

Two things: I'd change the pronoun in the first sentence from "their" to "our" (it keeps the POV in Karl's court instead of omniscient). "The most powerful man on the planet" is clichéd if it refers to the president. The opener has more suspense if the phrase is eliminated.

Unfortunately, using "our" would put the narrative into first person, and I don't want to do that here. My thought was that trouble to a powerful man is more interesting than to an ordinary one. I'll think on this.

"The scent of the roses all around Karl Dengler tickles his nose and triggers a sneeze."

We need a time-shift tag here like (Now, six hours later…) to indicate the opening paragraph took place in Karl's mind.

Good comment.

"The President says, "Bless you."

"It's Karl's turn to laugh. "Well, you did get an animal that trip, though." He'll never forget the expression on Leo's face when they heard a strangled "moo" just before his target crashed to the ground."

I love it!

"President Leo Grant looks around as if he fears someone is listening. Which they aren't, which is why, Karl decides, they're in the Garden. Secret Service men are at the four points of the compass, but out of easy hearing range. Still, they make him nervous, not as if he's done something wrong, but as if he's going to. He fishes in a coat pocket and pulls out a mini Tootsie Roll, unwraps it, and pops it into his mouth. A rush of chocolate pleasure eases him. He wads the wrapper and drops it."

I'd put Karl's name in "Still they make [Karl] nervous…" I linked the president's "fears someone is listening" with "they make him nervous" and had to reread to make sure you hadn't switched POVs. Is the "as if he's going to" phrase supposed to make us mistrust Karl? If yes, keep it, otherwise give us an example of what Karl could do to make himself nervous (breach protocol and slap the president on the back, which the sec-serv guys could misinterpret as a hostile action, for instance).

"The President pauses by a rosebush covered with yellow-red blooms and snips away exhausted blossoms with a pair of small plant shears. He likes to declare that his visits to the Rose Garden are practice for his retirement. He scowls. 'The Allies are killin' me out West, Karl.'"

Is a president who's hoping for a second term going to even joke about retirement?

I'll have to consider the wording. He hasn't joked about that -- the text says he likes to do so, but he doesn't here. This is Kurt's knowledge of his friend.

"Ah-ha. 'They're hurting us, too.' True believers among Karl's National Rifle Association membership are holding fast, as rabid as ever, but the more it looks like Oregon's crazy way of getting rid of guns is working, the more the President loses the loyalty of rational gun owners and hunters. And that's costing votes.

That's one heck of a long sentence there. Is this too many open threads at once? Who are the Allies? What's Oregon's crazy gun control? If you don't already have a prologue, perhaps one of these could be introduced dramatically there. That would make for a more active opening and this leisurely pacing a break from the intensity. "Rational" doesn't sound like the way the NRA would characterize members who are leaving the organization.

I've broken up the sentence. You ask story questions that will be answered, but not immediately. I take this to mean that I'm raising questions a reader may want to know the answers to. As for "rational," perhaps when you learn the alternative to guns in Oregon you'll change your mind. And maybe I'll soften it.

"The President ambles on, heading for a living bouquet of red roses. "'The way the polls are going, I could lose at least one of the western states this time around. Maybe two.'"

This suggests gun-control is the single issue that could turn red states blue in the west - or that the coastal states have gone Republican and are switching back. Either way, it doesn't feel persuasive to me.

Good point. I've expanded this.

"At the red rosebush, the President stoops to prune away a dead stem. 'And it looks like a sure thing the Allies will elect Independents to the Senate and the House. Those people won't vote our way. Ever.'"

If the Allies/Independents are not ever going to vote Republican, how are they any different than Democrats? How are the Allies going to drain enough votes from the left and right to be viable in a statewide election offering something different from the left and right, but only and always delivering for the left? Why wouldn't the voters simply vote for the Democrat? Make sure you have your poly-sci down here (I'm not suggesting you don't; I don't know enough to know if you've made a reasonable proposition here or not).

Good point. I took this out.

"The President levels his gaze at Karl. 'I fear, Karl. I fear what will happen to this country in the hands of the opposition.'"

The more I see the words "president" and "Karl" together the more I think of Karl Rove. Is that intentional on your part? Does it produce an unintended result that works for you? If not, I'd avoid it. If so, change the "K" to a "C" to at least be halfway subtle.

Another good point. This was conceived before Bush was elected or Rove famous. I'm changing the name to "Kurt."

"The President drills him with a 'you idiot' look. He says, 'Get 'em with what? We've got no decent dirt on the Allies, and I can tell you we've dug. We don't have enough money to invade somewhere and stir things up, Iraq's stuck to our neck like a vampire bat, the economy's in the toilet and the deficit's about to flush it.'"

I like the "'you idiot' look" bit, but it makes me sympathize with Leo. Is that the reaction you want, given your synopsis?

Yes, to an extent. I believe antagonists should believe in what they do and have "human" sides.

"Invade somewhere" sounds like you're editorializing, esp. with Iraq mentioned in the next sentence. Everything that follows the word "dug" has nothing to do with "getting" the allies.

You're right.

"Karl doesn't have any answers to offer. Ever since the rest of the world turned its back on America, things have been a struggle. Who knew we needed them that much?"

That last sentence feels like editorializing, too.

Yeah. I got carried away. The whole paragraph is going away.

I'm not feeling the pressure of the opening. We have Republicans behaving like Republicans, which is about as exciting as Democrats behaving like Democrats. The president is worried about a second term; seems natural enough. We have a couple intriguing questions, but no suspense.

Interesting that you identified political parties though none have been mentioned. As for suspense, the chapter isn't over yet. And intriguing questions will do for me until you get to the chapter's end.

A few times you have Karl expressing thoughts from a left-leaning POV, so be careful of that. If you are left-leaning yourself, have a right-leaning friend review these things for you.

I didn't see them as "left-leaning." Could be a case of interpretation. Some could just be a man thinking the truth to himself. Nonetheless, I have reviewed it all and made some changes.

The question "would I keep reading?"

If I were a Democrat who wanted to read a story skewering W: I might. If I were a Republican and interpreted your synopsis the way I have: no.

Deciding on the basis of a synopsis rather than the narrative doesn't help much regarding editing the opening. On the other hand, maybe I've leaned too much to one side.

If I were in the middle (or a moderate of either party) looking for a good thriller: probably no, the opening's just not fast enough.

I've tightened the opening, but will continue to consider this.

If I were a centrist/moderate and it were a work of political intrigue instead of thriller (and Leo wasn't set up as a straw man): possibly.

Ordinarily I feel that comments on content (versus narrative) don't have a place in a critique. But here, because we are so politicized, I found Chris's input useful. I actually lean neither all left nor all right -- I'm a card-carrying Independent -- but I do have strong opinions on the issues and attitudes that this novel addresses, and Chris's reactions have let me know that I may have tipped my hand too much. The rewrite deals with that, I hope.

Thanks, Chris. More in the next post, maybe the next 2. Then I'll put up the whole chapter, revised. If there's more feedback, cool. Otherwise, I think I'll see what happens if I post chapter 2.

RR

Tip Jar: visitors have asked for a way to compensate me for my advice. It all helps.

Comments

[Chris Mikesell]

Gee, and here I've had my asbestos longjohns on since yesterday morning.

Glad some of my comments were helpful for you, Ray. You're right that a final read/don't-read decision would require more info; sorry if I got ahead of myself.

Looking forward to seeing your rewrite.

All the best,

- Chris