My Photo

Sites to See

February 2012

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29      
Blog powered by TypePad

.

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    « On rewriting another’s prose | Main | Flogometer for Elana: would you keep reading? »

    TrackBack

    TrackBack URL for this entry:
    http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83453034869e200e553ca42cf8834

    Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Flogometer for Bill: would you keep reading?:

    Comments

    Scott Marlowe

    It's a compelling opening, no doubt. The writing itself seemed to only lack some polish. I think you hit it with some good suggestions. As long as subsequent scenes keep things moving along this piece has a lot of potential.

    Kamila Miller

    I would have read onward, but only just barely because it is so description heavy during an action scene. The characters may not be doing anything just then, but the fire is doing stuff and this is a time when, as a reader, I want to find out what's going to happen in a timely fashion.

    The description that's there is fabulous, though as Ray noted, it's a little overwritten in places.

    I liked all the questions that came with the narrative. How did this fire get started? Who are these people and why are they fighting? I think I'd have a nice, rich setting to look forward to.

    Wendy

    This is not my usual genre, though I do occasionally dip a toe. I wasn't tempted here, primarily because these opening lines didn't give me anyone or anything to care about. Experiential narrative would definitely help, as Ray mentioned.

    I agree with the overwriting and the excessive use of adjective, and would suggest that the second word, "fragile" ought to be dispensed with. We know that glass is fragile, and the word itself adds nothing to the onomatopoeic feel of "pop and crinkle of glass", which I really liked (though I might describe the glass as either "exploding" or "shattering").

    In the second sentence, I believe it ought to say "Fires spat" (rather than "spit"), to be consistent with the past tense narrative.

    The brief interaction between Bran and his opponent in battle was good, though, and I wanted more of that.

    Jon

    I'd read on.

    Agreed that a little pruning might be in order. As an over-writer myself, I didn't really notice much of it until it was pointed out, though.

    >>
    The fragile pop and crinkle of glass burst from the last intact windows. Fires spit in dead-end corners, waved from [broken windows] and roared through houses [knocked on their sides in the middle of streets]1. Manic, dancing shadows bumped and shoved like drunken revelers. Smoke drifted over the stumps of once proud buildings, coating lungs and burning eyes.
    >>

    1. Just used windows breaking in the last sentence. Might want something else.

    2. One wonders how this comes to pass. Buildings don't usually fall intact, do they? "Knocked" might be the wrong word, too. Or not.

    >"Come find out," replied the flat voice on the other side.

    Of what? I get your John-Woo-Like reference with a party on either side of a wall, heaving for breath and such, but it's not in the text.

    >>
    Bran [almost smiled.]1 Then [his eyes found]2 his last three men, splayed against the crumbling and blackened inner wall of the gutted Morrin Guild Hall, [flotsam left by a filthy tide]3. Ragged and grim, they sat among the broken stones and smoking timbers, catching their breath and [counting their minutes]4.
    >>

    1. Seems off to almost smile, particularly since he's suffered deaths. One of the things I loved about Firefly was the levity they brought into combat... but that only lasts as long as it's the other guy getting killed, I'd think.

    2. A bit wordy?

    3. Extend the allusion or ditch it. The prevailing image in the previous paragraph was fire and smoke; introducing water into it muddies the coherence.

    4. Liked this.

    >>
    The bodies of the Skyrran patrol [at their feet]1 [mixed]2 with the dancing shadows. Each body bore the triangular pauldron of the Council army, but it was the moon-white eyes staring blindly from the Skyrrans' pitch black faces which proved their allegiance.
    >>

    1. If the patrol's at their feet, why's the bad guy on the other side of the wall?

    2. Bodies don't mix with anything, being distressingly non-liquid. They might be masked or shaded or shadowed or hidden by shadows... but not mixed. Also, dancing shadows--good to tie in the first paragraph, but as written it didn't quite work for me for some reason.


    Made miscellaneous edits and deletions to streamline and for clarity. Discard as appropriate :o)

    There's a bunch of nitpicks here, but they're nitpicks. Overall, this was a solid opener. Nice work!

    bill blais

    Thanks Ray, and everyone else for your comments.

    The point about experiential description is obviously well made (now, anyway; why can't I see these things beforehand?), along with the various comments about tightening. It's also interesting to see the different reactions to the same passages (like 'his back to the bricks'). Clearly, there's no right answer as we all read differently, but I often struggle with how much to tell and how much to leave out.

    Again, though, thanks to everyone for the help, and for the positive feedback, too.

    Verify your Comment

    Previewing your Comment

    This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

    Working...
    Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
    Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

    The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

    As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

    Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

    Working...

    Post a comment