# My Money => My Mouth



## ScottyDM (Feb 10, 2009)

*My Money => My Mouth (critique request)*

I've been offering so much advice to others, and yet how many have seen anything I've written? So it's about time.

*Beach Tour*

This was the story I submitted to the anthrofiction contest back in summer 2005, when Nadan (Nathan Ryan) was managing the contest, which he called The Watching Stone AnthroFiction Contest. The theme was beaches and/or the sea.

Of course this is a rewrite.

Feel free to comment on or critique this story. I have a very thick skin.

Scotty


----------



## ScottyDM (Feb 17, 2009)

I did get one critique via private message on the FA website. We went back and forth a bit until I understood what he was telling me. He had an excellent point.

*As written Beach Tour has a major and a minor storytelling flaw* (I also noticed I forgot to italicize bit of internal monologue). But it's the storytelling flaws that are the killers: First, *Beach Tour lacks conflict.* There's a little conflict on the periphery but none in the main plot.

I created the character of Dr. Cherie Avant back in '05 and used her as the heroine in a high-conflict novella. I had realized I had a problem with writing conflict and so I created this story specifically to try to overcome that problem. So poor Dr. Avant goes undercover and allows herself to be captured by group of terrorists. They hold her captive, don't allow her any clothing, treat her like an object (the leader thinks of her as his personal good luck charm), she lives under the constant fear of discovery, one of the terrorists beats her and rapes her, and during the FBI raid the leader pulls a gun on her and she must fight for her life.

After all that I felt sorry for her and so in this story (takes place about 11 months after the end of the novella) I put her in this little no-conflict story. I fail. *Let that be a lesson to us all: If you're so close to a particular character that you can't be "mean" to them, then get a different character.*


*The other storytelling issue is the poorly defined story promise.*

I hadn't even heard of the concept that every story has a promise until a few months ago, but it makes a lot of sense. Every successful story has a clearly defined promise and it delivers on that promise. *A story's promise answers the question: What is the emotional payoff for the reader?*

You need to read all the way through _Beach Tour_ to discover that its promise is probably "wish fulfillment". Now if the reader is in a "wish fulfillment" sort of mood, then _Beach Tour_ should seem pretty fantastic as written, but everyone else might be left thinking, "Ehh, what was the point?"

So I need to think of what Beach Tour's promise really is, then state that as close to the first paragraph as possible. By stating the promise up front I create an expectation in the reader. Then I need to make sure the rest of the story delivers on that promise.

To fix the conflict and promise issues will require a major rewrite. I've started that rewrite. This is my new opening:





> â€œAnthrocon!â€
> 
> The shrill voice of Tylerâ€™s ex-wife was like a physical assault. He yanked the cellphone from his ear. He shouldnâ€™t have mentioned where he was.
> 
> ...


Hmmm, not quite sure how to properly punctuate a split sentence to be able to insert a paragraph. Any ideas?

I'll let y'all know how the rewrite is coming along.

Scotty


----------



## TakeWalker (Feb 17, 2009)

I do believe the word you're looking for is "premise", good sir. :V


----------



## foozzzball (Feb 18, 2009)

All stories have a promise, too - the premise is more generally philosophical, the promise is a sort of newer concept I'm not totally sure I agree with but it's useful for understanding the psychology of reading.

Basically as a reader starts reading they start to form assumptions about the ending. This isn't so much Chekhovs Gun as it is... Good advertising. The concept is you go, here are the cards on the table, fast as possible, and you kind of gradually pick them back up and resolve them. You do not go, 'Once upon a time John and James went off to play football in the park with a duck pond', laying out a 'good times in the park kid's story' type card, and then lay out 'They saw a van filled with delicious candies. The van-man said, won't you please step in?' since that's taking that card you just laid down and breaking the promise it implied. At least as I understand the technique? My example is probably counter-productive.


Also - I think that might lead to a very different flavour for the whole thing, Scotty. Might indeed.


----------



## ScottyDM (Feb 18, 2009)

TakeWalker said:


> I do believe the word you're looking for is "premise", good sir. :V


"A Story is a Promise." But hey, premise is a pretty close concept.

Foozzzball is pretty close. The way I understand it is that you have some emotional anchor that the story revolves around. Also, it's good to give the reader a clue as to what your emotional anchor is as soon as possible so they don't form some weird ideas about your story and become confused when a different reality unfolds about half-way through. But IMO the most important use of the emotional anchor is so the author keeps the it in mind while writing. On his site Johnson has a little essay about why _The DaVinci Code_ book worked and why _The DaVinci Code_ movie was confusing. It seems the screenwriters changed the promise and the end, but kept the middle. So nothing quite fit.

Since studying Johnson, I've found some really cool examples of book openings, or even titles, where the promise of the book is hinted at or even stated. I need to learn how to do that myself. The earlier example is probably my best effort so far.



foozzzball said:


> Also - I think that might lead to a very different flavour for the whole thing, Scotty. Might indeed.


I hope so. Well, the project is on the back burner until Thursday night. I'm attempting Poetigress' Thursday Prompt this week. Then I have a "thing" early Thursday night. I am such a freak I spent four days doing research for the prompt. :roll: 

I should probably change my icon to that of a sick puppy.

S-


----------



## kitreshawn (Feb 18, 2009)

The proper way to punctuate split sentences depends on how you split them.

If the interruption is sudden, or if you want to imply the original talker never stopped speaking, then use a dash:



> â€œWhat kind of freak thinks heâ€™s some damned animal? You need therapy-â€
> 
> What I need is understanding.
> 
> â€œ-not hanging out with a bunch of weirdos and furverts. You sicko! Catch an STD yet? â€˜Cause donâ€™t come crawling back to me when you do!â€



This seems to be what you want right there.

If someone trails off use the ellipse (...) when they stop talking then start a new sentence normally when they begin speaking once more.

You can also take the step of putting the interruption where a standard period would end one of sentences in the dialogue.

The above two are best for if you want a nice casual pacing.  The first one with the dash is best for a more abrupt action or faster paced scene.


----------



## TakeWalker (Feb 18, 2009)

ScottyDM said:


> "A Story is a Promise."



That's a new one by me.


----------



## foozzzball (Feb 18, 2009)

Yeah, I'm not a big fan of the writing guides and essays on writing, but, well. I'm in the process of writing one, so hypocrisy is a real good flavour with any meal! But, well. It's a useful term for a nebulous concept, and you must name the demon before you may slay it.

Good luck with the prompt and rewrites, Scotty.


----------



## ScottyDM (Feb 18, 2009)

kitreshawn said:


> The proper way to punctuate split sentences depends on how you split them.
> 
> If the interruption is sudden, or if you want to imply the original talker never stopped speaking, then use a dash:


Cool. That meshes with Browne and King. Although you've triggered a pet peeve of mine--a hyphen is _not_ the same as an em-dash. Since it's a pain to type an em-dash character use two hyphens.

But thanks.



TakeWalker said:


> That's a new one by me.


It's a fascinating concept and it makes sense. He's got a couple of vids on YouTube on the subject: a six minute and a 30 minute. His channel name is OregonWritersSpeak, or something like that.



foozzzball said:


> Yeah, I'm not a big fan of the writing guides and essays on writing, but, well. I'm in the process of writing one, so hypocrisy is a real good flavour with any meal! But, well.


I've done a few little ones. I've been meaning to redo my guide on POV (point of view) and have recently run into: a different take on the subject and a useful mini essay.

The different take is in Browne and King's book _Self-Editing for Fiction Writers_. I'd read it before but didn't quite realize their interesting shift in terminology. IMO all third-person styles are omniscient by definition because the narrator is typically the author and the author had _better_ be all-knowing or the story will suffer. However Browne and King define omniscient as when the narrator describes something that no character could ever know. They use the example of a sump pump that's pulling ground water out from under the pilings of a historic building.

So then that leaves first person, third person limited (one character's POV), third person unlimited (several characters' POV), third person objective (no character's POV), third person omniscient (as per B&K), and second person (pretty much useless).

That mini essay was by Randy Ingermanson in one of his recent e-mags where he rails against third person unlimited. His argument was more reasoned and logical than mine.

So write away!

Scotty


----------



## foozzzball (Feb 18, 2009)

Second person (although this is tricky), you can divide first person into first person omniescent - where the narrator is engaged in events from afar and has 'perspective' on them that was not possible in the moment, first person... temporal, if I'm coining new words, where the narrator's in the thick of it, first person unrelated, where you use a first person narrator who's not related to the events being described...

You can pick and mix with these things, really. Third person limited is gaining a lot of traction, it seems.


----------



## ScottyDM (Feb 22, 2009)

foozzzball said:


> Second person (although this is tricky), you can divide first person into first person omniescent - where the narrator is engaged in events from afar and has 'perspective' on them that was not possible in the moment, first person... temporal, if I'm coining new words, where the narrator's in the thick of it, first person unrelated, where you use a first person narrator who's not related to the events being described...


That's an interesting approach that's not done very often, but it's not second person. It's sort of third person (because the narrator is not taking part in the story), but with a narrator who is a real character and not simply the invisible agent of the author. Such a narrator could slip into the story in some scenes. Sort of like one of those old Cecil B. DeMille movies where the gods on Mount Olympus watch the action and comment on it, then throw in a bit of help or hindrance to the hero as fits their whim.

*True second person makes the reader the main character.* This is _the_ way to write one of those Choose You Own Adventureâ„¢ books. For example, from _The Enchanted Kingdom_, page 18:


> You're not sure whether or not you believe in Aunt Grace's Fair Folk, but there's one way to find out for sure. If you hide in the bushes outside the door and watch all night, you'll see whether any Little People come to drink the milk.
> 
> As if she can read your mind, Aunt Grace says, "Now, don't you be worrying about them. Our family's been leaving gifts out for them since before your granddad was born, and they've never done us any harm."
> 
> It doesn't matter what she said, you've got to find out the truth. If her mother saw them at those stones you found, maybe you should go back there.


Of course "you" is the reader. The reader is the main character of the story. Now in this type of branching story the reader has many choices and they are partly in control (the choices are limited). So the story is acceptable to enough readers that this type of book is able to sell as a commercial product.

Second person can also be used in a non-branching story, but it's hard to _not_ offend the reader _and_ have an entertaining read. Also, characterization is impossible because the reader is the character and you can't change who the reader is. So a feeling that the author is trying to dictate who they are and what sort of choices they make pretty much limits the length of such a story. Here's a little example I just now made up:


> You take a long drag on your clove cigarette and look the Siamese tom up and down, appreciating his lean muscular form and six-pack abs.
> 
> "Soapy massage, 30 dolla American," he says. "Happy ending, 20 dolla extra."
> 
> You could use a bath after that beating you took from the Tong gang, and a happy ending is just what you crave. You take a final drag on the cigarette and flick the butt into the rainy night. "Yea, sure. Let's do it."


If your readers don't smoke, or if they do smoke but think clove cigarettes are for pussies, or if they don't like gay sex, or if they don't like cats, or do like cats but can't stand Siamese cats, or if they are female and not curious about "becoming" male for the duration of the story--then they will only read so much of this before they get disgusted and quit.

Anyway, that's second person. And why I said it was nearly useless as a fiction style.



foozzzball said:


> You can pick and mix with these things, really. Third person limited is gaining a lot of traction, it seems.


I _love_ limited POV, whether it's first person (which _must_ be limited to the POV character) or third person limited. And I hate most examples of third person _un_limited because they are so darn confusing--and it's far too easy for noobs to screw up third person unlimited. And even if you've been writing since 1997, if you're still screwing up third person unlimited you're a noob.

When handled expertly, _un_limited is still not as easy to read as a limited POV. For example I find Jane Austen (early 19th century) and Ian McEwan (early 21st century) hard to plow through. But then I read for the story and head hopping obscures the story. It also bleeds off the tension that the author has worked so hard to develop.


*As far as picking and mixing... yes!*

You can use first person in one scene, then switch to one of the third person styles for the next scene. You can even swap first person POV characters between scenes or chapters if you clearly identify who's head you've just popped into within the first sentence--since the narrator won't do it (the narrator will say you've popped into the head of "I" :roll: ). 

*In all forms of third person there's an important concept called narrative distance.* I like to think of it as camera position. That is, where is your narrator (the camera the reader views the scene through) sitting? Is it thirty feet back from your group of characters? Is it hovering over the shoulder of your POV character? Is it inside the head of your POV character and looking out through her eyes?

*With third person you can slide the camera around during the scene.* Jumping is seldom good, but a gradual slide can be very effective. In fact you can drop so deeply into a character's being that the narration almost reads like first person--but without the "I" of first person. That is, the character's thoughts become the narrator's thoughts and the italics of internal monologue are not used.

You can also slide from one POV character to another within a scene if you do it properly. For example start with the girl, then slide out of her head and do about a page (or more) of third person objective (no one's POV), and finally slide into the head of the boy. Technically, that's third person unlimited, but it doesn't suck as hard as most attempts at third person unlimited. Suckage is further reduced if you are only shallowly in your character's POV (on their shoulder) rather than deep into their psyche.

Anyway, in the words of singer/songwriter Harry Nilsson's character the Pointed Man (1:29), *"A point in every direction is the same as no point at all."* So don't write pointless stories!



I finished that little prompt story a couple of days ago and uploaded it Saturday morning. See _Bone Wars_. Now I can get back to hacking apart _Beach Tour_ and stitching the bloody hunks back together. :twisted: 

Scotty


----------



## ScottyDM (Mar 21, 2009)

*Back to the topic (new post for March)*

Just checking in with a status report.


I've been working on the rewrite in fits and starts. Some of my distractions include working on my novel and finishing, editing, and reediting a new story. The real slowdown is that I've gotten bogged down in the details of the first scene.

I want to show the reader Tyler's issues with his ex (and women in general) and I want to show that Cherie shares those issues. These are two individuals who are quite unlike nearly everyone else on the planet. Tyler may have the body of a human, but what is in his heart and head is _not_ human. Cherie is a 6-foot 2 bipedal tool-using white rat with a PhD, so she not only thinks and feels different, she looks it too.

I'm using dialog to reveal their issues and frustrations. The problem is that their dialog is all tangled up with beats--character actions used to punctuate dialog. And the environment--that is, the fact that they are at the hotel's bar guzzling cocktails until they can barely stand up straight. In scene they each drink 4 cocktails, but with the added dialog I was wondering if I should add another cocktail each. And I was wondering if 4 each was adequate to get them drunk enough to toddle off up to Tyler's room then promptly pass out. However, they are both lightweights at drinking cocktails, so maybe 4 each is enough.

See, too many ding-dang details getting in the way of the all-important dialog. :-x 

So I've broken off a special version of that first scene and stripped out everything that doesn't look like Tyler/Cherie dialog (including the speech tags). In a few places I put in very brief notes about what's happening when it's relevant to the dialog. That is, if it modifies the dialog. For example: {Cherie spots 2 fursuiters} (and in red even).

The result is 14 pages reduced to 4. :shock: :shock: :shock: 

Example: The first 3 3/4 pages, until Tyler speaks his first words to Cherie, are reduced to: {Tylerâ€™s call from his ex; reminder of dance later; he decides to spend evening at bar; talks to Lin; sees Cherie}


I'm hopeful this new approach will yield some decent results.

Scotty


----------

