Give your opinion, please?

---

I'm still wrestling with how to present my novel, We the Enemy. Below are a new cover design and back cover blurb. How about taking a look and telling me what you think about whether or not it would get a reader to look at the first page?

Thanks. There's a multiple-choice poll below, but comments are especially helpful, so please leave one if you have an opinion.

Not long from today . . .

Devastated by the killing of his wife and little girl, Jake Black lives an emotionless existence, abandoning his Secret Service career to become a cold-blooded mercenary. When the president, desperate for gun-owner votes, decides to take down the leader of a movement to eliminate guns in Oregon, Jake is his weapon.

Jewel Washington, a single mother, struggles to protect her little girl from drugs and violence in the projects of Chicago—and is losing the fight. The first time she encounters Jake he saves her from rape. The second, she sends him to a hellhole prison. The third time changes their lives.

The man in Jake’s crosshairs offers hope for better lives for Jewel and her daughter. Once in Oregon, a good life seems to be theirs—and then a murderous attack threatens to destroy the movement and the promise it brings.

Its survival lies with the man sent to stop it. Jake has a chance to restore his life—if he can care again.

Comments

[fairyhedgehog]

All the elements of a good story are there but I had to read through twice to put it together. I think it might be better to cut some of the details to make it flow more easily.

I liked The first time she encounters Jake he saves her from rape. The second, she sends him to a hellhole prison. The third time changes their lives.

(I didn't know what "the projects of Chicago" meant but I think that's because I'm British.)

[glj]

Ray, the cover is pretty decent, but I am not terribly intrigued by it. It does have visual draw and would probably get me to look at the back cover, so for me it does its job.

The blurb reads pretty well. It presents conflicts that are intriguing. I like the idea of Jake having to decide whether to do the job, or put himself in jeopardy to save others.

What could be stronger is the WHY of Jake helping Jewel. It is clear from the blurb that they have interacted, but I wanted just a little hint more of why Jake would risk his career and maybe his safety to help Jewel. Is he in love with her? Does she remind him of his dead wife in some way? I want a taste of the emotional force that could compel Jake to take the harder path. It would need to be something special, and that something special could be very compelling to the reader and would add to the hook, IMO.

The blurb says Jewel causes Jake to be sent to prison. Hmmm. I don't get the feeling that this fits in. Is it here just to show that Jake has reason to really hate Jewel, and has to overcome that emotional obstacle, too? This puts me farther away from what I discussed above.

"When the president, desperate for gun-owner votes, decides to take down the leader of a movement to eliminate guns in Oregon, Jake is his weapon." The wording "leader of a movement to eliminate guns" seems awkward and too lengthy. Can you say this in a better way? Maybe "decides to take down a prominent (why Oregon?) anti-gun crusader" or something similar.

"The first time she encounters Jake(,) he saves her from (being raped)."

"The man in Jake’s crosshairs offers hope for better lives for Jewel and her daughter." Seems like a remote and disconnected danger. Gun control in Oregon helps inner-city kids in Chicago? Hmmm. Plus, gun control is an abstract benefit, so how will we know it helps Jewel?

"Once in Oregon, a good life seems to be theirs" Does Jewel move to Oregon? Not sure you need to be so specific about locale.

"Its survival lies with the man sent to stop it." I'm having a problem with "Its". Do you mean Jewel and daughter's prospects for a good life? Or gun control? But survival of a law will not excite readers, so I assume you mean Jewel/daugher or the gun-control advocate.

"Jake has a chance to restore his life—if he can care again." Nice windup.

[Heather]

I said no on the cover just to be honest even though I don't really feel qualified to judge it. I don't like political books (that probably makes me irresponsible). The red, white, and blue, as well as the title made me think this was going to be a book with an agenda to bash the current administration or something. I wouldn't even have picked it up in a bookstore, just for that reason.

If I had picked it up, I'm not sure I would have understood what is going on enough to buy it. I know, from reading other things you've written, that it's got an interesting premise, but I'm not sure enough of it comes through here.

glj has said a few things I agree with. I like the line "The first time she encounters Jake he saves her from rape. The second, she sends him to a hellhole prison. The third time changes their lives" in and of itself because it's kind of edgy and hints at some ironic situations. But like glj said, there's not enough there to make me wonder about it; it feels a little too jumpy--three drastically different meetings with very little information about them. Also, him saving Jewel and then her sending him to prison makes me really hate her right off the bat. Am I supposed to hate her before I even start reading?

The sentence "When the president... weapon," tripped me up. I had to read it a couple of times. I also don't really get "The man in Jake’s crosshairs offers hope for better lives for Jewel and her daughter." All the way from Oregon? I have no idea why it would or how we even start to get there. Also that sentence read awkward to me (too many "for" phrases... what about just "offers Jewel and her daughter hope for the future"?)

I'm assuming that the its in "Its survival" refers to the movement. But I had to read it a couple of times to be sure (it might be the second use of "it" in the same sentence that trips me).

I sort of like glj's suggestion to not mention Oregon. Is it important that we know "Oregon" before starting the book? I think not having it would eliminate some of my confusion as to how someone in Oregon manages to help Jewel and the sudden locale shift of her being there in the third paragraph.

I also like the last line very much.

I feel like this comment probably hasn't been very helpful. Sorry.

[Greg]

I agree with most all the comments above. But the cover and title “We the Enemy” in red, white and blue, combined with what seems to be at least some degree of anti-gun sentiment, has me rather troubled. Frankly, I’m a retired Naval Officer, a Vietnam Vet, a gun-owner, and a hunter. And I am NOT the enemy.

Ray, I think somewhere up front you need to define the “We” in “We the Enemy.” One thing’s for certain, I’m not going to be picking up a book if I think I’m the target, rather than the target audience, if you know what I mean.

Just a personal observation.

[John K]

Interesting commentary. I think Oregon may be important, being a good mix of outdoors-loving gun owners and urbanites that don't think the 2nd amendment had semi-automatics in mind. But, I'm just speculating based on a blurb.

The blurb itself has a lot going on. I'm guessing it's a fairly complex story, hard to capture in a few graphs. I'm having a devil of a time writing a query myself, and the back cover is more or less a query letter.

The title is excellent, the cover art is good. Titles are meant to draw interest, which it does. Good titles often have dual meanings (mine does), I'm guessing this does too. Jake sees himself as the enemy perhaps, along with the larger plot.

The last line to me was clear...referring to the movement.

[Tony DiMeo]

Ray

I liked the cover blurb and although it's not usually my kind of story, the blurb was enough to draw me in and make me want to check it out.

This part didn't quite sit right with me:

'The first time she encounters Jake he saves her from rape. The second, she sends him to a hellhole prison. The third time changes their lives.'

Really the last line struck a dissonant chord. I can't put my finger on why, exactly.
Aren't attempted rape and being sent to a hellhole prison also life changing events?

Something is off about it. Why does the third time yield different results?

The cover itself didn't grab me, but like I said, the jacket copy did.

Random thought occurred while reading the blurb. Maybe the cover should sport a wrinkled American flag with a picture of Jewel and her daughter holding hands transposed over it, as seen through the crosshairs of an assassins rifle.

- just a thought.

[Q of D]

No way would I pick up the book based on the cover. "We" the enemy? I smell an agenda. No thanks.

And frankly, Ray, for all that you're an editor, this blurb is a mess.

Here's a line by line but truthfully I recommend you scrap the whole thing.

Devastated by the killing of his wife and little girl, Jake Black lives an emotionless existence,

THE SECOND CLAUSE IS A BETTER HOOK AND WOULD MAKE A BETTER SENTENCE ALL BY ITSELF. (MANY OF YOUR SENTENCES ARE CONVOLUTED.)

abandoning his Secret Service career to become a cold-blooded mercenary.

ALREADY A SENSE OF PASSIVE WRITING. TOO MANY ING VERBS PLUS ADJECTIVES.

When the president, desperate for gun-owner votes, decides to take down the leader of a movement to eliminate guns in Oregon, Jake is his weapon.

SO WORDY. THE PRESIDENT WANTS TO USE JAKE TO TAKE DOWN GUN OWNERS. THERE.

Jewel Washington, a single mother, struggles to protect her little girl from drugs and violence in the projects of Chicago—and is losing the fight.

SO WE ARE JERKED FROM JAKE TO THE PRESIDENT TO JEWEL AND THEN THE VERBS DON'T MATCH - 'STRUGGLES' AND 'IS LOSING'. EITHER 'IS STRUGGLING' OR 'LOSES'. CONSISTENCY AND SIMPLICITY DO COUNT. AND STILL A LOT OF EXTRA WORDS - SINGLE, LITTLE. A BLURB IS NO PLACE FOR FAT.

The first time she encounters Jake he saves her from rape. The second, she sends him to a hellhole prison. The third time changes their lives.

A LOT OF READERS LIKED THIS. NOTICE THE SHORTER SENTENCES AND PUNCHINESS.

The man in Jake’s crosshairs offers hope for better lives for Jewel and her daughter.

OH, YOU MEAN "THE LEADER OF A MOVEMENT TO ELIMINATE GUNS IN OREGON"? MAYBE HE SHOULD HAVE A NAME, IT WOULD BE EASIER ON THE READER IF NOTHING ELSE. AND IT'S VAGUE REGARDING EXACTLY WHAT OR HOW HE OFFERS THIS NEFARIOUS HOPE.

Once in Oregon, a good life seems to be theirs—

WHOSE?

and then a murderous attack threatens to destroy the movement and the promise it brings.

WOW. AN ATTACK THREATENS...A MOVEMENT - A PROMISE - OBVIOUSLY I DON'T GET IT, I BETTER JUST PUT THIS ONE DOWN AND LOOK FOR SOMETHING LESS CONFUSING.

Its survival lies with the man sent to stop it. Jake has a chance to restore his life—if he can care again.

THE LAST SENTENCE, WHILE NOT OVERLY WORDY, SOUNDS A HOLLOW NOTE - AS IF SOME HUGE MOVEMENT AND PROMISE AREN'T ENOUGH, HERE'S POOR OLD JAKE WITH A CHANCE TO CARE. IT JUST FEELS LIKE AN AFTERTHOUGHT.

[Heather]

To be fair, I think most writers are quicker to catch mistakes in things other people have written than they are at catching mistakes in their own writing. Many of the mistakes I corrected writers on at this blog, I'm sure I just made in my own draft. That's why we should all ask for peer evaluation. Having issues in his own draft doesn't make Ray a bad editor, nor does being an editor mean that Ray will always have a perfect draft.

Also, some of your edits, Q, change the meaning of the original statements and might not be the best solution to the issue in construction.

[Greg]

Allow me, if you will, to clarify what I said above. I have no objection to a story with an agenda. We all have agendas, and it’s a free country. Frankly, the story sounds quite interesting to me – Jake Black sounds like my kind of people. However, if there is an agenda I’d like to know up front what that agenda is, because I’d be very unhappy with a bait and switch. So, I’d just like to see a little more clarity on the back cover. I’d like to have a bit clearer sense of where we’re headed.

[Ray Rhamey]

Q of D. I would never critique another writer's work by starting with "it's a mess." To do so would show a complete lack of empathy for the work a writer puts into a difficult task, or consideration for the person behind the writing.

In addition, perhaps you weren't aware of the fact that on the Internet and in emails USING ALL CAPS is the equivalent of YELLING.

So you start off your "critique" by dissing my effort and then yell at me.

Do you treat everybody that way?

Next time I ask for opinions on some of my writing, I wouldn't be unhappy if you happened to miss that post.