Please respond: a short fiction piece

[Shadowrun]

i liked the story

im not a grammar nit so i dont know the answer to my question but can you do
(parentheses) (back to back parentheses)

[fyodor]

Maybe it's just me but I have never considered opening a fortune cookie wrapper with my teeth. They are pretty easy to pull apart with your fingers. And yes, I'm talking about the plastic wrapping.

'hardened batter' doesn't work for my either. How about he just cracks it open?

No need to say his wife is eating Chinese food when you've already introduced the fortune cookie.

I was thinking the adverb "silently" was unnecessary, but perhaps it has some relation to the final paragraph.

I wouldn't use either of the parenthesi following the message. Keep it simple.
(and Shadowrun - I believe it's a choice - pick one)

Ok now the main thing. 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.

I guess you have 3 choices here.

1- dump the 2nd paragraph and change your intended message
2- revise the 2nd paragraph to make it more obvious
3- solicit more intelligent readers [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

btw I personally had no problem with "John Dere" but it might be because I have nephews who have had one.

[John Cole]

Yes: He thought (but only for a moment(disdaining any ordinary logic)). [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Of course, you can kick cats, too, but I wouldn't do it.

[John Cole]

Look at this sentence:

[ QUOTE ]
Jackson’s eyebrows raised and his eyes got a soft glow in them.

[/ QUOTE ]


How about: "his eyes glowed." Avoid "got" by all means. You can add the "softly" if you feel you need it.

One final note: Plastic wrappers on fortune cookies don't "conceal" them, at least not the ones I've seen.

[SoloAJ]

Firstly, thanks folks.

Note: I submitted this entirely unedited for the moment. It is the rough rough draft. I did this because I didn't want to start changing things before getting some options out of it. So I don't feel TOO bad that "it sucks" [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] That said, here are some responses.

Haha, I forgot that I left that "choice" thing in there when I copied and pasted the story. Clarification: Yes, it is a choose one or the other, and the parenthesis aren't going to be there. It would just be put in the story non-parenthetically.

I agree that the Chinese thing is a lame generalization and should just be a specific meal. Granted. Additionally, with the wife, what I was really going for was to set a scene where she is .just. finishing her meal (napkin on the plate). Any ideas for a better way to do this other than "last mouthful of soggy fried rice and put the napkin on her plate?"

John Deere tractor I put in because I'm sort of from John Deere land. Lots and lots of kids end up with small John Deere toy tractors. I figured a two word detail would be beneficial at this point to bring local readers in a little more. Does that change the perspective any?

Rothko, what puncuation are you dissatisfied with?

Fyodor, I don't open it with anything but fingers, but I know a couple people who, for whatever reason, do it with their teeth instead. Maybe it's an unnecessary detail.
-Silently was put in to relate to the deaf aspect, yes. I used it once at the beginning (the tractor) and once at the end (his nodding...this one I thought reinforced him being deaf....)

All, thanks for the responses thus far, and obviously hoping for more.

The idea was to have a subtle revelation with some punch. Not necessarily and "a-ha!" moment, but something to turn the tide a little bit. I figured after the first paragraph, the readers wouldn't suspect he was deaf at all. However, apparently the reader doesn't suspect that he is deaf at all after the 2nd one? [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] Haha.

Should I try and end the story on the revelation that he is deaf? I felt that the chronology of the scene didn't work very well doing that, hence the extra sentences following where he is happy knowing that his daughter is uttering words (unlike himself, etc.) Should I make it a blunt obvious fact that he is deaf? I figured between "loud enough for the room to hear" and her "signing" that the reader would pick it up when he is "confused." But since I wrote it, of course I think it's obvious.

More feedback please? I want to get something in that damn contest paper and this is the only one I've written thus far.

[SoloAJ]

[ QUOTE ]
Look at this sentence:

[ QUOTE ]
Jackson’s eyebrows raised and his eyes got a soft glow in them.

[/ QUOTE ]


How about: "his eyes glowed." Avoid "got" by all means. You can add the "softly" if you feel you need it.

One final note: Plastic wrappers on fortune cookies don't "conceal" them, at least not the ones I've seen.

[/ QUOTE ]

Both points duly noted. These and the hardened batter seem to be easy fixes given how much dislike there was. Fair enough.

[SoloAJ]

[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

I feel like the structure of the second sentence here doesn't easily convey to the reader that Jackson is confused by his wife's excitement. If that is true, maybe fixing the sentence will help readers to understand that he is deaf (ie. why is he confused here?...sort of prepping the reader to look for signs?)

Maybe?


Edit: Also, laugh out loud at my last four sentences being so bush-league. He,he,he,he. I rule.

[rothko]

[ QUOTE ]
You missed the punch on first read, didn't you rothko?... maybe it needs to be easier to catch...

[/ QUOTE ]

yes, i didn't notice the word "signed" and had no idea jackson is deaf. when john mentioned that i was like, "huh, he is? oh, right, but who cares? that's just dumb and distracting."

however, with closer consideration, i likey. it adds to the "fortune" and his reaction. at first, the reader thinks jackson smirks at the message, because he's not superstitious, but then we learn that it's the word "hear" that provides the catalyst.

it doesn't need to necessarily be clearer that he is deaf. it's not solo's fault that some of us missed the word "signed" and any other clues. with short pieces like this it's okay and often better if the reader has to go back and reread it.

[rothko]

[ QUOTE ]
Note: I submitted this entirely unedited for the moment. It is the rough rough draft. I did this because I didn't want to start changing things before getting some options out of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

that's not really a good idea. it's not our job to write this thing for you. struggle with it, get it to where you feel good about it and then ask for input. this is one of the reasons that i hate responding to these things, because usually the piece needs a complete rewrite.

[ QUOTE ]
I agree that the Chinese thing is a lame generalization and should just be a specific meal. Granted. Additionally, with the wife, what I was really going for was to set a scene where she is .just. finishing her meal (napkin on the plate). Any ideas for a better way to do this other than "last mouthful of soggy fried rice and put the napkin on her plate?"

[/ QUOTE ]

this is an example of what i am talking about. we've let you know that "Chinese food" is lame. you're the author, fix it.

[ QUOTE ]
John Deere tractor I put in because I'm sort of from John Deere land. Lots and lots of kids end up with small John Deere toy tractors. I figured a two word detail would be beneficial at this point to bring local readers in a little more. Does that change the perspective any?

[/ QUOTE ]

the use of "John Deere" isn't the problem, rather the four words together, "toy John Deere tractor". it's too much. if you really want the brand, nix "toy" or "tractor".

[ QUOTE ]
Rothko, what puncuation are you dissatisfied with?

[/ QUOTE ]

rewrite and then i'll get nitty.

[SoloAJ]

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.

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. So like the napkin/being done quandry, I will have to work on this during rewrite to convey more effectively what I mean.

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.