|
Ian Shlasko wrote: If you feel like Morgan Freeman narrating a movie, you're probably on the right track 
Just on the off-chance that people here haven't seen this, clickity[^].
The United States invariably does the right thing, after having exhausted every other alternative. -Winston Churchill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. -Oscar Wilde
Wow, even the French showed a little more spine than that before they got their sh*t pushed in.[^] -Colin Mullikin
|
|
|
|
|
Can't view that at work, but I think I know which one it is... The one that's basically doing Chuck Norris jokes for him, right? Friend showed that to me a few days ago, so yeah, that was in my head when I posted
|
|
|
|
|
Yep, that's the one. Things like, "Every time Morgan Freeman cries, it rains... in heaven." 
The United States invariably does the right thing, after having exhausted every other alternative. -Winston Churchill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. -Oscar Wilde
Wow, even the French showed a little more spine than that before they got their sh*t pushed in.[^] -Colin Mullikin
|
|
|
|
|
Seriously, the butler did it? 
|
|
|
|
|
Really? You had to give it up??
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with the others comments about pronouns. Personally I find them to be a distasteful part of the English language, though not completely without use. Their misuse and overuse can often lead to confusion, which is the part I find the most frustrating. I much prefer that subjects be referred to in exact terms, when necessary to distinguish who/what/where is being talked about.
The others have already commented on your potential overuse of pronouns (which I concur with,) so I don't have anything to add there. You may however want to consider potential misuse of pronouns. I'm not current with the rules of English language writing, but I was always taught that a pronoun was to refer to the most recently mentioned regular noun (John always parked far away when he went to the store.)
This reason is why your last sentence confuses me, and leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
He got back in his car and pulled away,...
So far so good, 'He' is presumably the same guy that has been doing things for several paragraphs, and who appears to be the only person in the scene.
...wondering what this Japanese guy had done to deserve a visit from him.
Given the context, 'him' doesn't refer to the 'Japanese guy' (people cannot visit themselves,) so must refer to the same character that 'He' referred to earlier in the sentence. Your usage of 'him' may indeed be correct, if that's what you intended, but I'm confused as to why this character wouldn't know why this Japanese man was getting a visit from 'him'. Is this character a hit-man of sorts? I'm not getting that from the rest of the text. Is this something covered earlier in the novel?
Personally, I'd change the wording to make it more clear, but it's entirely possible I'm the only one not understanding the sentence. Either way, best of luck with your novel!
|
|
|
|
|
When I was in school... the rule was to write out any number* less than a hundred. I would say that using numerals for Bible references (certainly), decimals and fractions, and numbers that a character is reading should be fine -- "There are three steps up to number 3 Main Street." "One of the five women wore Chanel No. 5." Otherwise, I find numerals in prose very jarring (kids these days...).
* We only had integers back then after all.
Other than that, I think there's a "quite" that is meant to be a "quiet".
And the things I write are not Lounge-safe.
modified 4-Aug-15 21:03pm.
|
|
|
|
|
You can prevent the use of pronouns at the start of sentences somewhat by replacing
"He then turned off the phone"
with
"Turning off the phone, he ..."
or better
"turning off the phone, The Priest ..."
The rhythm is spoiled somewhat by using 'and' to string actions together where a comma seems more natural.
"20 minutes later he exited the 40 onto St. Joseph’s Drive and pulled into the parking lot of the Archdiocese of Santa Fe Catholic Center, parked and went inside."
vs
"Twenty minutes later he exited the 40 onto St. Joseph's Drive, pulled into the parking lot of the Archdiocese of Santa Fe Catholic Center, parked and went inside."
"... room for personal or educational study. It was well lit, quite, and out of the way – all good reasons for he used it for his purposes"
I think that should be a semi-colon not a full stop.
"He didn’t expect there to be more, as there never was."
vs
"He didn’t expect there to be more. There never was. "
The second (although grammatically incorrect) has greater impact.
If this is the opening of the book, I feel the 'reveal' that this is no ordinary priest is made far to early; keep the reader puzzling as to why a priest would be acting suspiciously like this - then reveal later.
Rather than stating facts (like "the priest was a nickname" (incidentally, "the Priest" should really be in quotes there) it can be better to 'vocalise' information; have him thinking about the time he was given the nickname, or have it brought up in conversation at a later date.
Just my 2c.
I'm not brave enough to post any of my writings 
PooperPig - Coming Soon
|
|
|
|
|
This is utterly trivial compared to the comments from the others but what first leapt out at me was the typo "It was well lit, quite, and out of the way ". Presumably you meant 'quiet'.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with much of what the previous posters say about readability. It might help to get someone to read it back to you. A good way is for them to record their reading so that your influence is minimised. Then listen to it when you can really concentrate on what they are saying. Obviously this is a big commitment from whoever you get to read it back, so alternatively record yourself reading it and listen later, maybe after you have written some more and are less familiar with your earlier prose. Another alternative is to use some text to speech software. There are some free online but they have quite small limits: Try http://text-to-speech.imtranslator.net/
One very useful aspect of text-to-speech is that it follows the punctuation; so when it sounds odd, it might indicate that you've missed out a crucial comma/stop/new paragraph - or added one too many.
Someone mentioned earlier that the effect was "staccato". If this is intentional that's fine but beware - quirky prose style requires that the rest is good and hopefully very good - otherwise it will just appear stilted and badly constructed. If in doubt go for mainstream style and construction - keep it safe, get it right, learn, improve and THEN experiment.
I noticed some strange constructions too:
"dropping the burn phone into his neighbor’s trash" - What exactly IS a burn phone?
"He maintained his faith and biblical studies while in the Army" Is there such a thing as "faith and bible studies"?
"and lit both on fire" - Just sounds weird.
There is only one rule in grammar: 1) There are no rules in grammar.
Note: There are however guidelines for each particular variety of language. These guidelines vary wildly and can often be ignored. If it sounds OK to you and your audience then it is OK.
|
|
|
|
|
I found http://www.fromtexttospeech.com/ which will give you an mp3; it coped with all the text you posted. Try Paul (US English) or British English Peter. Some sound better than others but it will give you an idea of "flow".
Eats roots, shoots and leaves - Eats, roots, shoots, and leaves.
|
|
|
|
|
Sc3pt1c4l wrote: What exactly IS a burn phone?
I think he means burner phone, which is a disposable pre-paid phone.
|
|
|
|
|
Yep, I think you are right. Might need a glossary then 
My burner is a safe cell and to another it's heat.
My booty is my stash and to another it's just - a bit of flash.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm guessing this snippet opens your first chapter. If so, I like the concept -- it's a great grabber.
In my opinion, this passage is a good first draft, but it's rough. Spend time wrestling over every line. Every detail counts. Think each one through. For example "It was well lit" was one of the "good reasons" to use the study room. But he doesn't look at the envelope until he goes out to the car. So that detail was unnecessary. Other details to reconsider:
* Don't know what a burn phone is. Thought it was a typo of some kind.
* The sentence starting "20 minutes later" is too long. Kind of a run-on. Break it up.
* The sentence starting "It was well lit..." has a few typos and needs to be re-written. ("all good reasons for he used it..." -- huh?)
* How did he know which of the "old gilded bibles" to choose? Was it marked?
* Took 10 minutes to memorize an address? And he's done this before, has he?
* He set a fire on a public street? And he doesn't want to be noticed?
But my bigger observation is that you're way too eager to reveal the back story. The fact that he's not a priest, the source of his nickname, the stuff with the CIA -- that should all come out WAY later. Eek out those details bit by bit; keep the reader wondering (not *confused*, but just "in the dark"). Those paragraphs sound like explanations to the publisher. Plus, they interrupt the narrative. Keep the action going. THAT'S what is compelling. His motivations should be a mystery until deep into a subsequent chapter.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, first of all, just a little typo that you missed:
"It was well lit, quite, and out of the way"
Other than that, I think you could use a more personal and detailed point of view for the main character. You have some good visual description, but don't forget the other senses! Try describing the tactile feel of things (the smooth, polished wood of the pews?), the scents in the air (candles?), the sounds ("quiet" says something, the soft murmur of private prayers says more). These kinds of things can really ground the reader and help them feel like they are experiencing the world through the eyes of the protagonist.
Keep in mind that this sort of writing isn't journalism, keep the exposition to a minimum, you aren't just telling a story you are building a world. For instance, instead of explaining his military background, how about a flashback to those days showing how he got his nickname? Don't be afraid to devote a whole chapter to that kind of thing. The general rule is show don't tell, the reader wants to experience the story not just be told what happens.
Good luck with your virtual murder
modified 5-Aug-15 11:34am.
|
|
|
|
|
It certainly applies here. You could also take note of his preference for economy. Once we've seen the protagonist entering the parking lot we really don't need to be told that he parked. If he did something unusual like speeding round the lot on only two wheels then by all means tell us that but parking .. well, duh. And if the exact road he turned off is of no significance to the story at a later point, who cares? Similarly we can cope without being told that he opened a door to go into a room unless there's something about the door of note (it's locked, it's smeared with blood, it's got no handle, whatever).
Although I wouldn't advocate going to the present tense necessarily you should certainly modify your use of what Greek scholars would call the aorist; the absolute, single event, past. It is that which gives it the staccato feel which others have commented on. Use the imperfect and participles to give the sense of continuing action.
Here's my very quick rewrite of the first part as a guide to what I'm trying to say. You'll notice that I've cut out a lot of extraneous detail and a few logical errors (there's nothing about being well lit that makes the reading room ideal for him surely?) to keep the story moving. But even then I wouldn't be content to say this was the finished article. I'd expect to do at least one (and probably more) rewrite before I'd even consider letting an editor see it.
The burner phone in the Priest's hand buzzed with a new message as soon as he turned it on. It read ...
"As Elijah was taken to Heaven so we shall be. Praise be to God. 2 Kings 2:11"
Deleting the message and shutting down the power, he flipped the phone and removed the SIM card before flushing it down the toilet. The phone he would dispose of later in some stranger's trash.
Twenty minutes later he was pulling into the parking lot of the Archdiocese of Santa Fe Catholic Center, a typical brick church with thick mahogany doors and a steeple, a rectory, and the Bible study facility to which he was headed. In the reading room, sleepy quiet and out of the way (ideal for his purposes), he passed by the few people reading or working on laptops barely noticed. Amongst the collection of gilded Bibles and study guides against the back wall he selected a large King James and slipped out a plain envelope from the pages of 2 Kings 2. After hiding it in his coat and pausing long enough to deflect any suspicion he returned to his car.
|
|
|
|
|
Wow. Excellent advice. Thank you
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
|
|
|
|
|
Good point about economy of words, and the best way to do this is with compression. Packing a lot of meaning into a few words adds a lot of power and punch to the prose. Consider this opening sentence from William Gibson's Neuromancer:
"The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel."
In one short sentence, Gibson sets the scene, tone, and theme. We know we are in a port city, the weather is dreary and grim, and we get a strong sense of technological angst.
A lesser writer might have spent paragraphs describing that opening scene. Gibson did it in fifteen words and then immediately jumped into the dialog and action. That's very powerful, and doesn't give the reader a chance to lose interest.
Good editing is the art of removing words, not adding them. When you've done away with the unimportant stuff and have nothing left you can take out, that's when you're done. As the apocryphal quote goes, "I'd have written a shorter letter if I'd had the time."
|
|
|
|
|
You misspelled "quiet" as "quite". Sorry, my OCD acting up.
It's too long, with not enough motion. Why do I need all this info here and now. You could have established his "priest" persona more rapidly. All the detail just slows down the pace. Maybe at this point, you require the pace to be slow and methodical, but I don't sense that. Try saying all the same stuff in half the words. Concentrate on the scene, for versimilitude, or concentrate on the character's experiences. What does he think on entering the church. How does it affect him. Does it bring back memories? This will help you elucidate his past, which I assume you need to do, without requiring so much overt recitation of fact.
Don't spend too many words getting the geeky stuff right. Why not remove the battery and keep the phone? Why not leave the thing turned on and drop it in a dumpster (oops, that's Dumpster)? Why not toss it into the bay? The particular way he disposed of the phone either directly furthers the plot (like the police find it and run fingerprints), or it's irrelevant, in which case why waste words on it ("...disposed of the burner phone...". Too many words is a bigger problem for authors than not enough words. Don't worry, you'll fill your allotment of pages.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin Marois wrote: It was well lit, quite, and out of the way – all good reasons for he used it for his purposes.
I like it but one thing jarred me, I think you meant quiet not quite.
Have a good one.
|
|
|
|
|
But you have no objection to "all good reasons for he used it for ..."?
|
|
|
|
|
Message Closed
modified 18-Aug-15 15:39pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe you could post some of your writings?
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
|
|
|
|
|
Message Closed
modified 22-Sep-15 15:34pm.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
