The Review Club Forum Discussion for Bill's War on E..

This is a place to respond to reviews and for further discussion on Bill's War on Error (Scenes 6 & 7)

Dear Jeffrey,

Your glowing review instills in me confidence going forward.

I have been especially worried about the dialogue between Gust and John. I rewrote it almost entirely, as I knew it didn't produce everything I needed reader to take away from the scene.

Quote:


Only you can answer this regarding your work. As I work, I am mainly interested in getting out the story I have planned as clearly and in the most entertaining fashion possible. I have thought about the reader in the planning, and the story includes nothing I do not want to say. By the time of the writing the completion of the "battle plan" is all that's left. Of course, once the battle (between my conception of what should be and what appears on the page) is engaged, it takes its course and in so doing all sorts of unscripted stuff arises that make the work a surprise every time; this is where the entertaining lines most often appear, in the thick of battle. Then comes the cleanup of the battlefield, the prettying of the ground won, and the pursuit of further ground.

As to the flat father, he is a spearcarrier who has completed his work. I can imagine alluding to him once toward the end, but you will never see him again in this book. A novel has many characters, but few major characters. Whereas in short form, nearly every character introduced plays some major role. I wouldn't want this father to play any major roll. He makes me feel dirty and queezy in the stomach, but he gave you exactly the idea about Celia I was aiming for and I'm so happy it was clear!

Dear A.C.,

An excellent review. Nearly every point you mention is useful to me.

As to Celia's dad: In Scene #4 I began drawing the distinction between her biological father, which this slimy one is, and her Titanic father. I will be looking to make this distinction more clear when I write draft 3.

By the way, if anyone is interested, these two scenes make up pages 31-44 of the present manuscript, each page running about 310 words.

I'm glad to hear you say you particularly like Celia. She is very important to me, and job one for a major character is to make her sympathetic, so that the reader will invest himself in her life.

I had bet my wife one or more reviewers would mention the pinkie and ear thing, and you have made me a winner with only two reviews in. [I can almost hear Jeffrey asking what I have won!]

A.C., I had a situation where the first thing that came to mind was the girl slaps the b*****d. That has been used perhaps a trillion times throughout literature. I merely tried to think of something infrequently seen [standard practice is "list three possibilities" then pick the most entertaining and least expected by the reader]. I thought this was a bit silly, but then I said, "but this is ficiton; people want to see something they've never seen." So I left it in. I find that those things you first think you should cut are often the very things you need to leave in. I grow more convinced of this as I hear feedback (which I largely wrote without for four years)

Thanks again for your careful review.

Bill w

Dear Julie,

Thanks for your review.

As to the SUV and the time period; in scene 4 there was a line mentioning "back when people still gathered to watch movies on a big screen." There have been a few other pointers to a future world.

as to characterizing Delores, she was a one line walkon, there to characterize Celia and her family.

As to the last line, and the few just before it, there is no indication at all that Gust intends to sleep. The hook of the last line is its implication that Gust is about to act right now, as "John would never see the young cook again."

As to POV, I am going to begin a new thread and see if anyone is willing to discuss it. I am amazed you think that the narrator of a close 3rd POV story is the POV character. This simply isn't true, and my thread will, if necessary, show instance after instance why and how it isn't true.

But you apparently speak of the following as a POV break: Meanwhile, John sat sucking on a hand rolled cigarette that gave off about the most pleasing aroma Gust had yet been able to detect with this nose. John noticed Gust's interest and held out the smoke. "Want some?" You seem to think Gust cannot know that another person "notices." But in reality we notice people doing all sorts of things. STill, this doesn't matter because the POV character is NOT THE NARRATOR.

as to "the show, explain, explain type of writing," I think we have far different reading lists. I've been enjoying big novels for decades, and they are all very similar to mine, in that they tell a story, while slowing down now and again to characterize through dialogue; but in all of them nearly without exception dialogue takes up a minority of words. My list includes Gone With the Wind; Absolute Power by David Baldacci; The Demon Princes by Jack Vance; The Far Side of the World by Patrick O'brian; the list is endless, and in none of these 3rd person books can one get the remotest idea that the storyteller is the POV character. And in every one they commit what you would call POV breaks.

I can see where you might believe this if you only wrote 1st person, where by definition the "I" is the narrator. Or if you onlly read short stories, where there is little time to use all the tools available to author.

And speaking of tools, the "cliffhanger" is but one tool, and it is a mistake to use one tool over and over again for the same purpose. In fact, if author has confidence reader is with him, there is no need to use that single device at the end of every single break, as you imply. It is OK to have confidence in your reader sometimes.

Bill:

I am not denying the fact you have lines that state this is a future world. I am merely stating my view of the world in terms of the writing. That like everything else in my review is personal opinion, just as your response and your ideas surrounding POV.

I don't want to go through each point you so clearly disagree with. We are writers and each have a difference of opinion on what improves a story. Therefore, you don't want a cliffhanger, and you don't care to stay in POV and you want lots of description. That's fine. If you�re right, your book will sell. And good for you.

My comments on the other hand are points of contention that make this a not as good a read as I would like. Therefore, you can ignore them and continue on, or take a deeper look at the reasons behind them. I don't care if you don't want to end a chapter on a cliffhanger. Your choice. Your book.

Now anyone can find examples of bad POV. Of writers that break the rules. Now the question becomes are these writers� unpublished ones looking for a first break? I mean I'm assuming you'd tell me dialogue needs tags, but there are many a great writers who ignore that, and write lines of dialogue without tagging a single one. And good for them. The thing is, if you really want to sell this book you need to follow the marketplace standards. Sorry but that's the way it is. If you want to have a 3rd POV narrator that is omniscient. Fine, again, your choice. But the question becomes why is that break important? Why does switching into John's POV matter in the least to the story? A POV switch needs to have a reason. It needs to provide something, otherwise it is meaningless.

Now, I'm sure you will have many an arguments in response. But before you start typing remember this, it is your story. Take what you want from what I said and leave the rest. My review was not meant to start an argument about POV or market standards or cliffhangers. It was meant to give you some advice about problems I foresee.

Julie

Dear Rob,

Thanks for your thorough review. I end with two questions I hope you'll answer.

In my Draft 3 of scenes 4 and 5 I will undoubtedly have an opportunity to foreshadow the sexual abuse. This might take as little as one well-placed line, and the abruptness here did weigh on my mind. Good insight.

I'm really glad you liked the long paragraph concerning theme. I was a bit worried about it and you have provided me relief.

As to the conversation with Gust and John, I have struggled over it, to where what you read is a much improved version from the first, which I practically rewrote in full. I see I still have some work to do, and I am not surprised. I take it your asking for it to be more ridiculous is a plea that it be more humorous. I would ask if you found the dialogue at all humorous, or more tedious than humorous?

If you read the next scene you will see that this leads to quite a lot, I think. The question is whether, having finished this slower scene, you would still feel compelled to read on, even if just on the strength of the style or out of trust in the author?

Thanks much,

Bill

Dear Loekie,

Thanks for the full treatment. And I like your happy tiger image.

You touch on one issue nobody else has, but which I have known is out there: Gust is the only Titan ever to make it to Earth in his original skin. He is the only shapeshifter in the book. All other Titan invaders come through a human womb, and only 2 pages before the beginning of scene 6 did I first use the term human-appearing Titan. In my Draft 3 of scenes 4 & 5, I will need to move this explanation up front (this doesn't presently occur for about 30 more pages). Thus Celia has never appeared as more than an 18 year old girl. I have much work to do in this regard.

Yes, I wondered about use of "God" myself; was thinking more of my readers belief systems in writing that; Celia is stupid in many ways, wise in others. What sort of spiritual ideas her biological parents have instilled in her is more backstory; likely the answer should be none.

I agree I need to justify the molestation by foreshadowing this, and here is more material for 4 & 5 rewrite. Another reviewer pointed this up as well.

Almost everything Gust knows about the world he has picked up watching 12 years of TV; he had nothing else to do in his hideout at the Canadian farm (I think you missed scenes 1 and 2); therefore he has seen it all, but experienced none of it (I termed it "a three dimensional world spat out in two dimensions [TV]).

Also in first 2 scenes: Ulf was 6 when he led his family in breaking Gust out of prison. Ulf came from Haven through the womb of his mother Agneese, unique in that he popped out of her with a commplete memory of his long stay in Haven. Havenites and Titans are different sorts of beings but live in close proximity. Ulf, an exceptional Havenite, learned Asuran, despite the fact the language is considered by Titans a state secret. (you are pointing up all those things I need to figure how to reveal earlier than they are revealed. Order of info release is a huge problem.

The John Lennon glasses and such are not Gust's, but the narrator's vision. The two are not the same when it comes to exposition. And of course we are on slightly post-contemporary Earth, so use of English to name things is unavoidable. The storyteller is not an alien, and therefore has all the knowledge he needs to tell the story.

All in all you've hit on some of my most pressing worries. In worldbuilding, I have a great deal of backstory to get out and it all seems to need to come out now, at once. Choosing what reader needs to know in what order is the most difficult part of sci-fantasy, I think. So much more difficult than operating in an entirely real world setting that doesn't need intro to all these new ideas.

Finally the early part of the book is going to need to reveal more basic ideas earlier than I'd hoped. I consciously went minimalist on this, but I am coming to see I have dribbled some important info out too slowly. Your review has touched on some really big issues, and I thank you.

www

Rob,

I have just been reading about ACTION and NARRATION. This sentence popped out after reading your review:

"Any portion of the novel that is written in action that seems to drag or to slow down the story should be transposed into narration."

I ask for your opinion: Do you think that the scene becomes so slow that it should be compressed into narration rather than dramatized in action? Or is there enough here to rate the full-blown scene?

thanks

Quote:


No, I think you're on to an important chance to expose Gust's character using the vehicle of John to play with that. I needs to remain as an action scene. I think the problem is we feel the anxiety Gust has here, but the humour is a bit too dry. It needs to be oozing through this scene, so we get a better feel for Gust's discomfort in human form and with human custom. If you compress it into narrative, you'll do the scene but lose the chance to develop character here. It's ok to push a bit here because we know Gust is not human. I would think of ackward discussions with foreigners as a jumping point to get the miscommunication down.

Quote:


I suspected sexual abuse issues, which can be dropped in with a single line.

With the theme paragraph, I thought that was perfectly placed in a pause segment where Gust is thinking to himself while waiting for a ride. The setting of fog gave it enough atmosphere to permit the reflection. Nicely carried.

Rob,

You've really clarified what I need to do to find the fullness of the humor. Thanks much.

I understand Gust has learned about Earth through 12 years of TV. That is obvious from the first two chapters. I didn't forget. But personally, I do not like a narrator's voice intruding. It pulls me out of the story. But that is just me.

Now that have mentioned about the Titans, it makes sense. My point in the review is some hints are needed. The first few chapters are critical in pulling in the reader, that is why I am rough on the first few chapters. Ask Julie or Kim. ::suprised:: If I think the various thoughts, questions, nitpicks, etc. so might an average reader. And editor when you submit the book. And I expect the same for my stuff. The only reason Tangled Threads is still in major revision is because the beginning still isn't working.

And as always, take what you will from my reviews. Each review here is coloured by the reviewers likes and dislikes.

Dear CC,

I am most worried about story, so am happy for your concentrated effort there.

I had already decided to do a complete remake of scenes 4 and 5, and with the others' input on 6 much similar to your own I know I will need a complete rethink of the presentation of the antagonists in the early going. These were the flailings of my first conceptions of the antagonists, and in light of the rest of the book, I know what I need to bring forward here, and from the group I now think I know how to proceed. As much as anything I think 6 was an over the top attempt to overcompenstate for the lack of action in 4 and 5. These were written about a year ago, and i just prettied them up a little for the group showing. Since writing deep into the book I now know better who Celia is, and you're right that the violence of 6 is not necessary.

Scene 7: I'm glad to hear from you and others that I have made John a character worth caring about. Actually, the last line implies John will never see the young cook again. But Gust's forms need frequent changing. To reveal a secret that will become clear in the next two scenes, I knew when I introduced him that John would be Gust's sidekick for the rest of the book. I wrote my first book not understanding the usefulness of sidekicks, and went into this book determined to use one or more. I guess a tease is good if it turns out the way the reader wants it. You make me feel I've accomplished all I could hope for John's introduction.

Glad you like my glaciers. Environment and aggression are two major themes.

As to POV, I hope you read posts #7432 and 7433 in the POV string. I never meant this to create a conflict. I truly want to understand. I have modeled my handling of POV mostly after my favorite novels, and so have been much confused by assertions that what I have seen all my life is unacceptable.

You might notice my research proves that first person, and third person utilizing a single protagonist viewpoint, both are required to do exactly as you and Julie practice. However, I do see that, in case of your third, when you are not filtering your narrator through the attitudes and senses of Amanda (that is, when it is cool and objective), it is said your narrator can speak of things Amanda doesn't know; I'll have to see whether you are using this flexibility or not, now that I am becoming more aware of the finer aspects of POV (at least insofar as the sources in the abovementioned posts are illuminating).

Thanks much,

Bill w

Quote:


Bill,

I think the basic content of 6 is OK, but I think the presentation is over the top. I think you've seen that though, and have ideas on how to tone it down, so I won't harp on it. I do see the compensation factor at play there - it's literally a 180 from scenes 4 and 5. Pay attention to those cues in yourself - they may be your best indicator that a scene is either too slow or too fast or that the balance of tension is off.

I'm glad to hear that John sticks around. There's too much care and effort put into that scene for him not to - like I mention in my review, it would be an unfair tease to the reader for him to be a bit player and could create some disillusionment and hostility in the reader if you take him away. Could break that trust that's necessary in early chapters. So its good to hear that you don't have that problem.

As for POV - its not a conflict. You just seem very set on how you want to handle it. I find POV breaks distracting whether in submissions to the site or in published works. I just read a work that did very well but flitted all over the place in terms of POV, within scenes, and I hated it. It wasn't what you'd call literary, and I think you MUST think in terms of the literary market given the tone and style of your work. Literary demands a much more careful control of POV. Also, be wary of writing books. Those who can't write, teach.... I think my problem with your POV shifts isn't that they show things the POV character hasn't noticed, but that he COULDN'T notice, like the thoughts and emotions of another character or events occurring miles and miles away. It breaks the illusion for me. But, again, I'm generally done with this argument. I doubt we're ever going to entirely agree.

-cc

Oh, here cc and I agree. Oh my gosh!

As I have pointed out and cc, the POV needs to be consistent. If the story is being told by a narrator, then we must always have the narrator's POV. If it is one of the character's POV, you need to stay in that POV.

For me it is critical because reading is going into someone else's world, even fiction. I want to be caught up the mood, scenery, etc. But when a voice from above comes in, it yanks me out of the world. Every time I am pulled out of the world, it takes time and energy to get back into that world. After a while, being yanked out too many times, I give up and put the book down. I feel the same way about films. Just recently I tried to watch Sinbad (the animated film). But with lines like "it's time for sushi", I could not get into that world and stopped watching.

But as always, this is a personal preference. I'll get off my soap box now :-)

Quote:


Armageddon is at hand.

-cc

Be afraid, be very afraid! ::suprised::

But seriously, I think, in the end, the POV debate comes down to a personal taste. Some people don't mind a narrator coming in every so often to add something to the narrative. Some people, like me and cc, are more sticklers about it.

I don't think there is a hard rule on this. I suppose the key is: consistence. If the narrator pops up during Gurt's scenes, the narrator should also come in during Celia's scenes. And it should be obvious to the reader at the same time. So we know it isn't the character thinking this or saying that. That may shut-up nitpickers like me.

Then again, nyah :-)

Dear Loekie,

Perhaps this will help. Your opening line, "There was an orderly exit as the Cabinet left the room," is an example of narration that has not been attributed to any character viewpoint. This is the narrator about which I speak when I say the narrator is not always the viewpoint character.

And I have a puzzle for you. The following is the ending of a scene from a very famous book, in which Gaal is the rotating third POV character. He is at an airport:

Gaal looked up and began walking. There were hundreds creeping across the vast floor, following their individual trails, sifting and straining themselves through intersection points to arrive at their respective destinations.

His own trail ended. A man in glaring blue and yellow uniform, shining and new in unstainable plasto-textile, reached for his two bags.

"Direct line to the Luxor," he said.

The man who followed Gaal head that. He also heard Gaal say, "Fine," and watched him enter the blunt-nosed vehicle.

THE LAST LINE shows a man Gaal is not aware of following Gaal, thus creating much story tension. This is clearly out of the view of Gaal, and yet it serves an important function, and Asimov does this, as do virtually all authors of rotating third person novels I have read (and this should be important to those like yourself, who are writing a book with alternating third person POVs).

My question is, would you do this? If not, then how else might we show that our POV character is being followed when he doesn't know it?

Well, Bill I would have to read a bit more, to see how much the piece is from Gaals POV and how much is the narrator. A couple of paragraphs does not give me a complete feel on how the author is presenting POV.

As I said in my previous post, the key is consistency and how the narrator is used. And you are right about my opening line, it comes off as a narrator speaking, not Medyr. That is one thing I am actively working on because the original draft had too many POV shifts, causing confusion. For the author. I started to lose track who is was speaking. And so would have the reader. A line here and there may be needed, as you point out, to create tension. But if over used, it feels like an intrusion.

So I understand there is a need, at times, to bring in the omniscient voice, in some pieces. In small doses. Therefore I would love to read more of the puzzle and then give my opinion. Once I see how the author handles the POV shifts, then my argument may be moot for this discussion. Also then I will see your point in a better context. And maybe even cc might agree. That is a scary thought. Another sign of the Apocalypse?

I up for the challenge :-)

Dear Kim,

Thanks for your review.

I likely will be rethinking scenes 4-6, the whole intro of my antagonists, based on what I now know. These were the opening flailings of first draft, but now that I am nearly finished with the book I know Celia and Eli much better, and so a big rewrite in Draft 3 will take place with their opening.

I'm still not sure I'm set on the landslide. I just invented that, and can change it again easily. Hopefully I'll think of some better way yet to get them into this. If I keep it, I've been camping in mud, and I think by not mentioning it in next scene it will simply not be an issue. What worries me is getting the vehicle out. I might have to explain the terrain more. One reviewer thought they went down when they left the road, not up.

As to: "All that glitters is not gold." John broke into a belly laugh at that. "There's more to it than color. Can't we discuss something else?"

I reallize I am relying here on the reader knowing how to read dialogue. I suppose I should bust this up into tiny pieces digestible by those who do not know. I will have to see how many of these are in the whole text as I go. Not too many, I think. I'm not sure I shouldn't have a little faith in the reader's skill at reading now and then. You understood it, and so I would think would most others who would even read this far into this book. I might leave this in just to see if an agent/editor tells me to change it.

Thanks again, Kim.

bill vij