|
March 2006
The Writer's Quest, part 3
In last month's column, I wrote about having my first submission for the class ready to hand out. This month, my second submission is already in the hands of my instructor and classmates. While I felt some trepidation about what the class might think of chapters 1 through 3, I received some valuable feedback and have since revised the first 13 chapters, incorporating some of the comments and suggestions from the first batch of critiques.
Some of it I should have been mindful of all along, such as paring down the adjectives. In the early drafts it can seem helpful to tell the reader how something is said or done, such as "She smiled playfully" or "He said sullenly". The revision effort, though, should work towards making those extra words unnecessary. The scene or the dialog should imply the playful or the sullen manner. While my first reaction was to think that adjectives are a useful implement in my writing toolbox, I had to admit that it makes sense to use a tool properly. Scratch a lot of adjectives from the latest revision.
I had several requests to add more depth to Cynthia and Lonnie. As I considered that suggestion, I realized I'd made the two villains identical in many ways. Both were mercenary in their approach, and ready to stab the other in the back the moment they deemed it necessary. I wrote them to be unlikable right from the start, and while that is convenient for drawing the lines, it's not always realistic. Lonnie is still the accomplice and is still no more faithful in his relationship with Cynthia than he was before, but now his character is more discriminating and personable. He's less polarized and now displays many good traits along with his mistakes. This doesn't change his overall role in the story; in fact, it makes his reaction to what happens to him all the more logical instead. Would I have revisited the portrayals of Cynthia and Lonnie without the critique feedback? Maybe, but the impetus of the suggestion made it happen much sooner and most likely better.
Likewise the suggestion to replace some of the narrative with dialog; let the interaction between two characters show the story rather than the narrator tell what happened. The paragraph I quoted last month, describing Cynthia's encounter with the deputy, is gone. In its place is the conversation between her and the deputy, with the focus remaining on her. Not incidentally, it's also less polarized and liable to leave the reader wondering if she's really guilty of the crime, or if Josh imagined it.
Chapters 12 and 13 are in the hands of the class right now, and if I felt a bit nervous as I waited for their opinions on the first three chapters, it was nothing compared to the trepidation I feel now. In these two chapters, Marta really begins to open up to Josh, and I find that the vulnerability I want conveyed in her questions is very much what I feel as I consider them. It's not just the middle of the manuscript; it's the heart of the story.
I've not only invited a classroom of people into my world; I've exposed the heart of that world to them and invited them to dissect it.
|