Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    « 1434 Fridays, Part 5 | Main | Sketches: Ellie »

    02/13/2013

    TrackBack

    TrackBack URL for this entry:
    http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a013487299913970c017ee87823f9970d

    Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Sketches: Jack:

    Comments

    Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

    Michael Mock

    I don't know; if that was the opening of a book, I'd at least keep reading to see how you set up the central conflict. It's a fairly setup for a certain kind of story, and it meets one of the first big criteria for writing well: establishing characters who are flawed but still sympathetic.

    Michael Mock

    Sorry, that's meant to say "It's a fairly succinct setup for a certain kind of story..."

    Geds

    I filled in the blank, no worries. Although I used "standard," not "succinct."

    And I think that's part of the problem I have looking back. It feels too boiler-plate. I mean, that's Jack's backstory and it will be Jack's backstory even if I re-imagine the book (I'd say "re-write" but, y'know...) a hundred times. It's kinda hacky, I guess. And a little too "tell, don't show." And I can't imagine using the phrase "A succession of clingly bitches used him through high school and college, always taking and rarely giving back." I mean, srsly. Actually, that entire paragraph bugs me, compositionally speaking.

    That said, I was arrogant enough at the time to think the final line was one of the most insightful things I'd ever written. I still think so today.

    Brian M

    Yeah, the "clingy bitches line" stood out rather baldly and completely fell flat to me, too. It somewhat contradicts the tone which establishes my "reading" of the fundamental "character" of the boy which you had created.

    But what do I know. Not a writer at all!

    Geds

    Actually, knowing that it stood out and was wrong was really all that you needed to know for that one. It was totally against the established tone and because of that it colored the rest of the paragraph. Take that line out and most of the rest of the paragraph still works just fine. I'd still re-work it because it ends up feeling clunky no matter what, but that one sentence takes something that kinda works and throws it completely out the window.

    Also, you bring up one of those things that really of annoys me about people who respond to criticism. It happens with music more, but I see it all over. It's the whole, "You can't criticize [this thing I did/like] because you probably can't do it better." You don't have to be a musician to understand when someone is writing crap lyrics or singing off key. You don't have to be a film director to know when someone made a bad movie.

    I muffed that line. You saw it and it took you out of the moment. That's really all that matters and it's a legitimate criticism. Now, with something like that there might be a reason it happened, such as the author attempting to set up an unreliable narrator or a character who's hiding a secret momentarily slipping into their true character. In something like that the words, "I meant to do that and maybe you just missed it," become valid. But this is two pages in and I haven't established the necessary trust to justify pulling that.

    Either way, that's a long way around saying that, no, you're right to criticize and the only skill set needed is the ability to read and process. Because, really, seeing and and hearing others point it out and accepting that will only make me a better and more perceptive writer. Nothing wrong with that in my book.

    Janet

    I think the reason the "bitches" paragraph took me out of the moment was because I heard it in the voice of an ex boyfriend who begged me to stay when I tried to let him go. He didn't seem to understand that he was never going to be happy with me, because I wasn't the girl he imagined me to be. I tried to be, for a while, until I realized it was too far for me to change. I could never help him to understand that, and so he was very bitter.

    All this is unfortunate, because a second reading shows me that I should be able to empathize with Jack. He probably has a good deal in common with my husband, who I adore. Jack was a clingy guy who dated clingy girls, and I was once a clingy girl who dated clingy guys. But I was also the cold bitch who would break it off as the sensible alternative to a decade of unhappy matrimony followed by divorce and child custody battles, until I found the man I could be with for a lifetime.

    Having once or twice been the "bitch", I have trouble empathizing with a character who so dismisses every girl who may have made an honest effort at loving him. When I reach the end of that passage, I find myself re-living arguments that I long ago laid to rest. It resurrects the demons of a past self. It starts to feel unpleasantly personal. As a result, I see Jack not as a sensitive man who was used by insincere lovers, but as an oversensitive man unable to understand the motivations of women who loved him, and wanted to ease his pain, but found they couldn't.

    If a book introduced this subject so baldly, and before the author had established my trust of his storytelling, I would probably cut my losses and read no further. I might receive it better if Jack revealed these attitudes in dialogue, or in some other way that let me know the storyteller has a broader view. Then I could be interested to watch Jack grow as a character, since it seems implied from this introduction that a romantic interest will eventually be revealed.

    The comments to this entry are closed.

    Blog powered by TypePad
    Member since 09/2010