Post by dizzyjam on Jan 9, 2009 20:30:10 GMT -5
Seraphim, as I said, there's a lot of great stuff you pointed out here. Instead of replying to each as I intended, I realized that would just take time away from my writing, so I'll just assimilate what I see as good advice and hope I get it right. If you see anything else, go ahead and mention it. You've been on target most of the time, so I'll listen to you. Thanks for your help. I appreciate it.
Let me deal first with the things I think have improved:
Improvements:
Condensing and paying attention to word choice significantly strengthened this part of the scene.
Solid descriptive point. Good believable specificity.
Good detail, gives insight into the character. With regard to word choice though I think "aside" might work better than "off". People and dandruff are brushed off; things more substantial than dandruff and less substantial than people tend to be brushed aside when brushed at all.
This paricope is significantly improved. You've avoided overusing key word and paced them better. You still have a some weak verbs though not overused per se. The end of the paragraph is a little bit confusing. It is because your "camera" switched from the restuarant to the bookstore and then suddenly you are adding an initially ambiguous detail that applies only to the restuarant whiile the reader is still back at the locked bookstore doors startled by the smell of enchilladas coming through the keyhole. Might I suggest a small edit something like this:
"He decided to walk since the strip was right next-door and he had been driving all day. The strip had a little lunch place at one end, a few shops including a Christian bookstore, and the Mexican restaurant at the other end. The bookstore was closed, and would open again tomorrow at 9:30. But even before he had finished reading its hours of operation he could smell the distant aroma of sizzling onions, and knew he was headed to the right place.
Good telling detail. Crisp bills suggest they are newly acquired from bank or atm and given other info about the MC's finances perhaps suggests a carefully tended finite resouce.
Work Still Needed:
Clunky Sentences:
It seems to me "there" ought to be supported by the name of his destination, or certainly more specific. If he "knew" he was almost there what is added by "based on the directions he received". Is the receipt of those directions specifically going to play an important role later in the story...and I don't mean the person who game them or the situation in which he received them, but rather the actual receiving of directions? If the actual receipt of the directions plays little or no role, then what is gained to mention it. Cannot it be assumed the driver knows where he wants to go and thus his backstory directions add nothing to the story and should be removed. If the gun on the mantle is not going to be used then there's no point in having it on the mantle. As a writer you are directing the readers inner eye and ear, he looks where you point...if you point at the mundane and trivial too often to no significant purpose you soon won't have a reader.
Did the red light come up or did he come to a red light? Why "come up," does it have sufficient force and explicit or implicit detail to justify its existance. Why say he braked "to stop," are there other reasons to brake at a red light?
Is "setting" the best word for what you want to convey? Is his head detachable so that it may be set down?
Is there an expectation that a man inspecting his clothing will suddenly discover that he has mistakenly worn his shirt over his jacket instead of "underneath" it where it belongs? If not, then what is gained by saying the obvious about how the shirt is worn in relation to the jacket?
Remember my earlier post about weak repetition? Do you "doubt" it? As a codicile let me also say a cautionary word about "Tom Swifties". Adverbial descriptions of a verb are a certain species of "explainery". It is better if possible to write in such a way...to chose the extact details of scene and speech so that one's dialogue does not require "ly" elaborations. Tom Swift was an old youth SF series (Tom Swift and the Electronic Rifle, etc.) It depended heavily on adverbial and other similar descriptive excesses often in the form of a light pun (see: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Swifties). Yours isn't quite that egregious, but it is stumbling close to that territory.
See comment above about adverbial labeling. The dialogue in situ as a rule (not always in my book) should carry this sensibility without the need to label it. The particular exception I make for this rule are questions of aurality....the aural texture/tone of the piece. If it reads better, more naturally aloud with it in I leave it in. If it makes no significant difference or does damage I leave it out.
A seemingly pointless derriere shot. It could be significant but none of the words are sufficiently specific or nuanced to convey it if so. Why specify that he "walked"? Could a more telling word than "walk" that means "walk" have been used instead? How did he walk, like a young man, like a tired man, like a happy man, like someone deep in thought? Why "down the hall", why not "to his room"? Such instances of weak word choices are wasted developmental opportunities.
Euphony:
I will limit myself to one example of a jarring loss of euphony:
The problem here is that the natural cadence of each word doesn't fit a natural sentence cadence. Read the sentence out loud and listen to it you will hear the problem. Current structure has the phrase ending on a spondee mid sentence. The language doesn't flow. You were probably attracted to the alliteration between "curved" and cane" and if curved were you only modifier describing the cane it might work. "Wooden" is the more specific and more important modifier of "cane" and it should not be sperated from it. Rather it should be modifed by curved" so that we see what kind of wooden cane. There is a strong euphonic difference between "curved wooden cane" and "wooden curved cane". By placing the "wooden" next to "cane" the nasals ("Ns") resonate with each other, which music is diminished if "curved" is interposed which also tends to throw off the beat of the sentence. If you shift "curved" the beat of the phrase progresses as Anapest -- iamb -- dactyl. As it is it reads Anapest -- Spondee -- Spondee...which if I may risk a pun is a bit "wooden".
To risk riffing on the Phantom of the Opera as a final "note" I would advise you to "listen to the music"...if not of the night, then certainly to that which you write. Dickens always read aloud what he wrote during his edits. What sounded good to his ear stayed in, what jarred his ear he reworked or eliminated. Many aspiring writers forget the aurality of their work and write only for the eye. In my jugement, such as it is, this is a serious weakness.
Well I suppose that is sufficient blood in the water, and a bandaide or two.
Improvements:
“Here you go.” He handed her his ID and credit card then watched her brow scrunch up while comparing the number on the screen in front of her to the card. She punched a few buttons and a printout clacks out. She ripped it off.
“If you could sign here please.” She marked an “X” where she wanted his signature and put the pen on top of the paper on the counter.
“If you could sign here please.” She marked an “X” where she wanted his signature and put the pen on top of the paper on the counter.
Condensing and paying attention to word choice significantly strengthened this part of the scene.
Solid descriptive point. Good believable specificity.
Good detail, gives insight into the character. With regard to word choice though I think "aside" might work better than "off". People and dandruff are brushed off; things more substantial than dandruff and less substantial than people tend to be brushed aside when brushed at all.
This paricope is significantly improved. You've avoided overusing key word and paced them better. You still have a some weak verbs though not overused per se. The end of the paragraph is a little bit confusing. It is because your "camera" switched from the restuarant to the bookstore and then suddenly you are adding an initially ambiguous detail that applies only to the restuarant whiile the reader is still back at the locked bookstore doors startled by the smell of enchilladas coming through the keyhole. Might I suggest a small edit something like this:
"He decided to walk since the strip was right next-door and he had been driving all day. The strip had a little lunch place at one end, a few shops including a Christian bookstore, and the Mexican restaurant at the other end. The bookstore was closed, and would open again tomorrow at 9:30. But even before he had finished reading its hours of operation he could smell the distant aroma of sizzling onions, and knew he was headed to the right place.
Good telling detail. Crisp bills suggest they are newly acquired from bank or atm and given other info about the MC's finances perhaps suggests a carefully tended finite resouce.
Work Still Needed:
Clunky Sentences:
It seems to me "there" ought to be supported by the name of his destination, or certainly more specific. If he "knew" he was almost there what is added by "based on the directions he received". Is the receipt of those directions specifically going to play an important role later in the story...and I don't mean the person who game them or the situation in which he received them, but rather the actual receiving of directions? If the actual receipt of the directions plays little or no role, then what is gained to mention it. Cannot it be assumed the driver knows where he wants to go and thus his backstory directions add nothing to the story and should be removed. If the gun on the mantle is not going to be used then there's no point in having it on the mantle. As a writer you are directing the readers inner eye and ear, he looks where you point...if you point at the mundane and trivial too often to no significant purpose you soon won't have a reader.
Did the red light come up or did he come to a red light? Why "come up," does it have sufficient force and explicit or implicit detail to justify its existance. Why say he braked "to stop," are there other reasons to brake at a red light?
Is "setting" the best word for what you want to convey? Is his head detachable so that it may be set down?
Is there an expectation that a man inspecting his clothing will suddenly discover that he has mistakenly worn his shirt over his jacket instead of "underneath" it where it belongs? If not, then what is gained by saying the obvious about how the shirt is worn in relation to the jacket?
Remember my earlier post about weak repetition? Do you "doubt" it? As a codicile let me also say a cautionary word about "Tom Swifties". Adverbial descriptions of a verb are a certain species of "explainery". It is better if possible to write in such a way...to chose the extact details of scene and speech so that one's dialogue does not require "ly" elaborations. Tom Swift was an old youth SF series (Tom Swift and the Electronic Rifle, etc.) It depended heavily on adverbial and other similar descriptive excesses often in the form of a light pun (see: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Swifties). Yours isn't quite that egregious, but it is stumbling close to that territory.
See comment above about adverbial labeling. The dialogue in situ as a rule (not always in my book) should carry this sensibility without the need to label it. The particular exception I make for this rule are questions of aurality....the aural texture/tone of the piece. If it reads better, more naturally aloud with it in I leave it in. If it makes no significant difference or does damage I leave it out.
A seemingly pointless derriere shot. It could be significant but none of the words are sufficiently specific or nuanced to convey it if so. Why specify that he "walked"? Could a more telling word than "walk" that means "walk" have been used instead? How did he walk, like a young man, like a tired man, like a happy man, like someone deep in thought? Why "down the hall", why not "to his room"? Such instances of weak word choices are wasted developmental opportunities.
Euphony:
I will limit myself to one example of a jarring loss of euphony:
Leaning on his wooden curved cane
The problem here is that the natural cadence of each word doesn't fit a natural sentence cadence. Read the sentence out loud and listen to it you will hear the problem. Current structure has the phrase ending on a spondee mid sentence. The language doesn't flow. You were probably attracted to the alliteration between "curved" and cane" and if curved were you only modifier describing the cane it might work. "Wooden" is the more specific and more important modifier of "cane" and it should not be sperated from it. Rather it should be modifed by curved" so that we see what kind of wooden cane. There is a strong euphonic difference between "curved wooden cane" and "wooden curved cane". By placing the "wooden" next to "cane" the nasals ("Ns") resonate with each other, which music is diminished if "curved" is interposed which also tends to throw off the beat of the sentence. If you shift "curved" the beat of the phrase progresses as Anapest -- iamb -- dactyl. As it is it reads Anapest -- Spondee -- Spondee...which if I may risk a pun is a bit "wooden".
To risk riffing on the Phantom of the Opera as a final "note" I would advise you to "listen to the music"...if not of the night, then certainly to that which you write. Dickens always read aloud what he wrote during his edits. What sounded good to his ear stayed in, what jarred his ear he reworked or eliminated. Many aspiring writers forget the aurality of their work and write only for the eye. In my jugement, such as it is, this is a serious weakness.
Well I suppose that is sufficient blood in the water, and a bandaide or two.
