Please respond: a short fiction piece

[rothko]

[ QUOTE ]
Rothko,

The reason I submitted it for feedback prior to the rewrite and edit is because I overlooked some of the obvious stuff (like the Chinese food generalization). I might have noticed it during rewriting, but after reading it over a few times before posting it, I hadn't seen it. So there is something incredibly helpful about posting it now and then reposting it after I get some of the obvious feedback and rewriting it.

[/ QUOTE ]

of course, it's helpful for you. the point is that you shouldn't really bring a "rough-rough draft" to us, as our help should be limited.

[ QUOTE ]
And thanks for the clarification about the John Deere thing. I understand what you're saying, and actually agree...though I worry the effect is lost by removing a word.

[/ QUOTE ]

the language should be smooth. you don't lose anything that you don't want to by making it flow better.

[ QUOTE ]
Re grammar: For real? I tend to do all right with grammar and I'm surprised there is enough in there that it isn't a quick mention. I see a couple errors in what is posted above, but whatever. I'll fix those and then when I repose the rewrite we can have a discussion on prescriptive and descriptive if I'm lucky.

[/ QUOTE ]

no, no, you were actually quite fine in this department, which is refreshing. often, people post stuff that doesn't even seem proofread.

[SoloAJ]

While this has served me greatly, Rothko is right about doing more close editing before submitting it. I guess my main problem is that I wanted to see what was appealing as it was and what wasn't.

What matters to me and what might get me as one of the "contest winners" vary. That all said, I'll repost a final-ish draft once I get done with it in a day or two.

Thanks for the advice so far guys.

[writername]

I think the twist is very clever. I'm feeling perplexed as to how to critique such ultrashort fiction, but the fact that this blurb extracted a smirk from me is certainly a good thing.

One line that has been bothering me:

"As he did this, Emily suddenly garbled out “dada” loud enough for the entire room to hear."

After this line, we learn Jackson is deaf and hence make the conclusion that despite Emily being so loud the "entire room" could hear, in fact Jackson did not hear. I'm not sure how I feel about this. Despite third party narration, we assume in a generality as such that everyone in the room heard the cry.

Being that it is from Jackson's POV, is Emily really silently playing with her toy, is Jackson really silently nodding... or is this all just allusion to the fact that he is deaf?

[SoloAJ]

[ QUOTE ]

Being that it is from Jackson's POV, is Emily really silently playing with her toy, is Jackson really silently nodding... or is this all just allusion to the fact that he is deaf?

[/ QUOTE ]

The latter...at least that was my hope. Lots of allusions toward the fact. Not that she or he was making noises and he just couldn't hear, but rather...just playing on the "theme" of silence. (I say theme somewhat lightly, as it is flash fiction).

I agree about the "everyone heard it" confusion. I spent a lot of time toying with that line and trying to think if there was a better way to take that segment of the story. There is definitely a conflict between the 3rd person narrative focusing on Jackson vs. Jackson's perspective.

In the end, I decided that it was going to stay roughly what it is right now. Like I said, for me, and ideally for my audience, the compelling aspect of this story is the rereadability.

In fact, I have decided that when I have people read this, my first judge of 'did I succeed with MY goal?' is if they immediately want to reread the story. For me and my goals, the intriguing part is how rich the story is with those aforementioned allusions and the realization that the story's opening changes meaning entirely once you realize that Jackson is deaf.

So, for that reason, I think that if the person is compelled to reread it and find the little nuances I added, then I feel like I have succeeded.

I realize that the story is not entirely polished and some have qualms with certain aspects (and I have edited it a fair amount at this point, I'll post in a day or two, as said)...I really like the piece right now. I find an incredible richness to the text, considering its length. And I know that the works of other authors that I like, a lot of times relies on MY recognitiion of richness. Whether or not it is really there, doesn't matter. And in the end, that is my hope here....that my readers find richness in it...maybe it won't have been intended, but IF their enjoyment matches my hopes...all the better.

[Dane S]

I agree with what others have said about spicing up/smoothing out the language a bit, and want to throw in my vote for ending it with this sentence:

"His wife quickly signed to him “She just said her first word! Dada!” "

And perhaps make it more abrupt if you can swing it.

[SoloAJ]

More abrupt in what manner? Having the closing revelation be that he was deaf and ending it there?

The two worries I have with your recommended ending spot are such: (1) The prompt for the contest is about a fortune cookie. The current ending really involves the fortune cookie in the story. (2) It loses some of its sappiness that I think some people (not most) would attach to a little bit. The idea that the deaf man is getting such great pride from his baby's first words that it reminds his wife of the birth. Shrug.

I know this needs more refining, but I'm getting there dangit!

[SoloAJ]

Oh, and I'm a senior English major, fwiw. Beat: Only taking one creative writing class in my two years in the major. That is why I generally do very well with grammar and such, but poorer in conveying the ideas that I'm trying to get across.

Most of the time that I try to convey a point, it comes out like it is from a scholarly paper. Bleh.

[Dane S]

That's a good point about the sappiness actually. You have to consider your audience. To me what's interesting about this is the "he's deaf" trick, and the last few lines are pointless. But little old ladies reading it in a newspaper might be looking for something a lot different than me, so yeah go with your judgment on that.

[SoloAJ]

Dane, I do agree with you that it might make the deaf aspect more powerful. I truly do. As this thread evidenced, and from outside readers, only about half the people are even getting that he is deaf without being told. So maybe ending the piece with "She signed to him, blah blah" would make it more emphatic. But even then, if I take out the sappiness I would probably have to add something to make it more obvious he is deaf.

Something about the piece is making it really hit or miss about whether the reader sees the deaf part. And yeah, let's face it, that is the crux of the story. If you read this without realizing he is deaf (and then rereading) then the story is incredibly mediocre. There is nothing worthwhile to be found in it, in my opinion, without the deaf aspect.

So I really do see your point. But I do like the idea of a wider audience appeal as well. Most Loungers probably aren't going to read this and enjoy the sap. But there are tons of ladies, like you said, that might end up thinking it is a great story just because of that or something.

All in all, it is decisions like this...that I asked for counsel from the Loungers. I know these are ultimatley my decisions, but I want to get readers' opinions before I go with my final decision that I send into the contest.

Variance: Seriously, if the contest judges read this and don't pick up on the deaf part, there is no way in hell this gets published. Zero chance. I mean odds are it won't even if they do, but at least there would be a chance. Haha.

[katyseagull]

[ QUOTE ]
Like rothko, and I suppose the person who first made the recommendation to you, I too entirely missed the fact he was deaf on first read. I actually read 'signed' as 'signaled' and paid no attention. I thus thought the 2nd paragraph totally detracted from the story.



[/ QUOTE ]

Same here. When I first read your story I read "signed" as "signaled" and missed the fact that he was deaf which makes the story not quite as profound [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

I have two problems with this piece.

First, you are being almost too descriptive with the actions of the characters. Description is nice in stories, but when so many sentences in a paragraph describe a series of actions (especially personal body movements) it feels awkward to me.

"Jackson, still smirking, looked up and saw that his wife was excited. Confused, his smirk dropped, eyebrows lowered, and his head tilted to the right."

A little description is good but too much and it starts to sound forced.

Second, to me the story seems to be from the point of view of Jackson. So when the reader learns that Emily garbles out "Dada!" loud enough for everyone to hear, it's understandable we assume that Jackson has heard it. So then we go into the second paragraph and we are under the assumption he heard it so we naturally interpret the wife "signing" as her merely signaling. You have led your reader to think this by confusing the POV, imo.