StarDestroyer.Net BBS

[/color][/u][/b]

Alright... sarah wakes up, masturbates, and sticks her hand up her ass.

What's next?

Edit: That is to say, there's really nothing here. If that's your ENTIRE short story, then you've achieved 'mysterious internal narrative'. If there's more, post it.

CaptainChewbacca wrote:Alright... sarah wakes up, masturbates, and sticks her hand up her ass.

Actually... All that was before she woke up.

What's next?

We'll get there.

Edit: That is to say, there's really nothing here. If that's your ENTIRE short story, then you've achieved 'mysterious internal narrative'. If there's more, post it.

This is the prologue. I'm working on Act I as we speak. I just wanted to get something posted for now.

I like the sense of mystery you're breeding, but I personally would stick more conjunctions in here. The only real problem I can find here is that most of your prologue is meaningless babble. The way you phrase all of it is what lends that mystery to it, but there's really no point, and that becomes evident on the second or third read-through.

What I find helps me to keep whatever I'm writing on track is to think, what do I want to introduce in this chapter or passage or whatnot, and devise a plot structure that leads to that introduction. I then fill in the little details. It's sorta like building the framework of a skyscraper, then putting in all the random crap that makes it worthwhile to build.

Am I making sense?

Oh, right. Almost forgot one other thing. It's standard practice to put dialogue from two different people in different paragraphs. So a conversation would run something like this:

"Hi, avianmosquito."

"Hi, Caiaphas. You suck."

"I know."

If you really want to get into serious writing, I suggest the Hatrack River forums. Just google Orson Scott Card; it's linked to his website. The people there are very helpful to anyone asking for it.

Hope this helps.

Caiaphas wrote:I like the sense of mystery you're breeding, but I personally would stick more conjunctions in here. The only real problem I can find here is that most of your prologue is meaningless babble. The way you phrase all of it is what lends that mystery to it, but there's really no point, and that becomes evident on the second or third read-through.

I opened with a dream, although since it was a real memory, it's more of a flashback. The point was really to establish a difference in style between her flasback narration and her present narration so the reader could distinguish better. As for the topic of the dream, it was a good place to start, in fact, it was the only place to start.

What I find helps me to keep whatever I'm writing on track is to think, what do I want to introduce in this chapter or passage or whatnot, and devise a plot structure that leads to that introduction. I then fill in the little details. It's sorta like building the framework of a skyscraper, then putting in all the random crap that makes it worthwhile to build.

I'm laying traintracks, you start at the beginning, build to the end. Her flashbacks will tell her life's story, leading up to the present. The plot structure is thought out, but maybe a dream/flashback of the womb needs a little more revision than I afforded it. Only one person read it before it was posted, and that was the child hanging around my neck.

Am I making sense?

So far, yes. Can't say that about the rest.

Oh, right. Almost forgot one other thing. It's standard practice to put dialogue from two different people in different paragraphs. So a conversation would run something like this:

"Hi, avianmosquito."

"Hi, Caiaphas. You suck."

"I know."

"Just making sure."

Really? Most of the authors I read (JRR Tolkein and Tom Clancy are good examples) don't do that. I've never done that. In my own personal opinion I think it takes up too much space.

If you really want to get into serious writing, I suggest the Hatrack River forums. Just google Orson Scott Card; it's linked to his website. The people there are very helpful to anyone asking for it.

Hope this helps.

Maybe, but I'm content here for now.

Really? Most of the authors I read (JRR Tolkein and Tom Clancy are good examples) don't do that. I've never done that. In my own personal opinion I think it takes up too much space.

I'm holding Clancey and Tolkien books in my hands, they do that. Its also propper writing. This is the internet, please, take an extra line to avoid having your dialogue make eyes bleed.

CaptainChewbacca wrote:

Really? Most of the authors I read (JRR Tolkein and Tom Clancy are good examples) don't do that. I've never done that. In my own personal opinion I think it takes up too much space.

I'm holding Clancey and Tolkien books in my hands, they do that. Its also propper writing. This is the internet, please, take an extra line to avoid having your dialogue make eyes bleed.

I have "The Two Towers" in my hand right now, and "Rainbow Six" on my shelf. If they do, I've yet to see it.

Somehow it manages to be mysterious without being interesting.

You've set up a good mystery but you've not given the reader a reason to care, you've not really given the story some kind of draw.

Right now your prologue contributes nothing that I can see to the plot. The main reasons you'll want a prologue is a way to start the story twice or introduce a plot element that will become important later. Since it does neither, sit down and ask yourself if you really need the prologue or can afford to lose it.

Take Batman for example. How would you write his story out beginning with the prologue? His parents death would be ideal as a prologue, with the first chapter segueing to a time slightly before he decides to become Batman.

His parents death works well as a prologue. It's dramatic, it generates interest, it draws you in and it communicates a salient point. As a first chapter it wouldn't work, it would be too much of a break with subsequent chapters and jarring to have that sudden change of time being part of the main narrative.

I don't know what story you're trying to tell or the plot points you're trying to communicate, but here's how I'd rework your prologue into something a little more interesting.

I'll provide only the barebones plot points so as not to intrude too much on your work.

Character wakes up
Character is in darkness
Character explores self
Character gets violently wrenched out of the darkness
Character is experimented on
Character hears clinical voices
Character faints due to blinding pain

The last three points are invented by me. It's usually a bad idea to change time when still in the prologue. Stick to the same frame of time at all costs. I made things a bit interesting by having the character brutally experimented on in a clinical way. This establishes drama and mystery. Character faints due to the blinding pain. This leaves the reader wondering "Why was the character experimented on?" "What were the clinical voices talking about?" "Did the character survive?" and most importantly "Why is this happening?"

The problem with the way the prologue ends is, from what I can tell, it changes timeframe from flashback to present day, which should only happen when you switch from Prologue narrative to Main narrative, otherwise it reads somewhat like Deus Ex Machina.

The most we get from the dialogue and final lines are that there are cadavers in the street, it's going to rain and 'something' is happening.

Good with the mystery, bad with the interest. Why should we care? Make the reader care, make the reader feel something and I guarantee you'll be on the right track.

As a final point, I will agree with the others in this thread, dialogue from different characters must occur on separate lines. It's one of those cardinal rules you'll want to follow if you want anything of yours read, ever.

Your Last paragraph + return key.

avianmosquito wrote:
I was on the roof of the building I had found the night before. I was cold, but I was used to it. Waking up slowly, I stood and took a look around for Alex. She was at the edge of the roof.

“Morning Sarah. Sleep well?”

“Not really.” She seemed worried, I was going to ask her why, but she spoke before I could.

They seem restless today.” I looked down at the cadavres in the streets, then up at the sky. It was overcast as usual.

“It’s probably just going to rain.” Sarah sighed. “No, I don’t think that’s it. Something is happening.”

“Of course, but what?”

That is what it should look like.

Also Randomly opened my copy of Two Towers to Page 252

Tolkien wrote: 'It must have irked Boromir to run from Orks,' he said, 'or even from the fell thing you name, the Balrog - even though he was the last to leave'

'He was the last,' said Frodo, 'but Aragon was forced to lead us. He alone knew the way after Gandalf's Fall. But had there not been lesser folk to care for, I do not think either he or Boromir would have fled.'

Maybe, it would have been better for had fallen there with Mithrandir,' Said Faramir, 'and had not gone to the fate that awaited above the falls of Rauros.'

In each case, the new speaker is indicated by a new paragraph. The only difference between what I've typed and what's in the book is the difference between indented paragraphs and block ones.

Anyone who has the power, please fix the typo in the subject.

Rozor One wrote:Character wakes up
Character is in darkness
Character explores self
Character gets violently wrenched out of the darkness
Character is experimented on
Character hears clinical voices
Character faints due to blinding pain

Not really. It's more like:
Character becomes aware of herself
Character explores her surroundings&herself
Character gets violently wrenched out of darkness (Cesarian section)
Character wakes up and shakes off her dream/flashback

The most we get from the dialogue and final lines are that there are cadavers in the street, it's going to rain and 'something' is happening.

1. Cadavres. Please, use proper spelling, not american spelling, on this word.
2. It "might" rain.
3. I wrote this to lead up directly to the start of Act I.
4. It makes more sense in context. The first words of Act I are: 'As far as I could see, it was a normal day. Assuming by normal you mean "like the one before it, and likely the one after it." By any other definition, you could hardly call it normal.' This means the prologue might serve better as part of Act I.

As a final point, I will agree with the others in this thread, dialogue from different characters must occur on separate lines. It's one of those cardinal rules you'll want to follow if you want anything of yours read, ever.

I correct that kind of stuff in my revisions, this is a rough draft. It'll be taken care of.

1. Cadavres. Please, use proper spelling, not american spelling, on this word.

Sorry, skeeter, but 90% of the people on this board are Americans. Get used to American spellings or post somewhere else.

Not really. It's more like:
Character becomes aware of herself
Character explores her surroundings&herself
Character gets violently wrenched out of darkness (Cesarian section)
Character wakes up and shakes off her dream/flashback

That may be what you INTENDED it to read as, but that's not what you accomplished. If it makes sense/is better in context, post it in context, because right now I agree with Razor's interpretation of this fragment.

CaptainChewbacca wrote:Sorry, skeeter, but 90% of the people on this board are Americans. Get used to American spellings or post somewhere else.

There's a point to this. (And it's more than just this taking place in London.) That's why I specified "on this word" instead of just in general.
By the way, I'm an american as well, but I still use proper spelling.

Not really. It's more like:
Character becomes aware of herself
Character explores her surroundings&herself
Character gets violently wrenched out of darkness (Cesarian section)
Character wakes up and shakes off her dream/flashback

That may be what you INTENDED it to read as, but that's not what you accomplished. If it makes sense/is better in context, post it in context, because right now I agree with Razor's interpretation of this fragment.

I would of thought this would be more obvious, particularly at the point where she actually messes with her umbilical cord.

1. Cadaver is the correct Australian (British English) spelling of the word Cadaver. There is no such word as "Cadavre" except as a misspelling of the word "Cadaver"

Proof: The Cambridge English Dictionary Does Not Agree With You

2. "Might" rain or "Will" rain. Irrelevant. It does not change the fact that your last paragraph serves no purpose.

3 & 4: If this leads into "Act 1" then it does not belong in the Prologue. Put it in Act 1 and cut it down to what is necessary. As I said earlier, the Prologue serves as a device to start your story twice and affords you the opportunity to introduce an important plot element early into the story without breaking narrative flow. Check my example with Batman provided above.

From the course of your narrative it was impossible to tell that it was a Cesarian Section from the point of view of the one being born. In fact, on the first run through it was impossible for me to tell that you seem to be telling the story from the point of view of an unborn child. How does your character recall being born at all? It's especially egregious given that you describe the unborn child deriving what I can only assume was sexual pleasure from fondling parts of it's own anatomy before puberty let alone before when consciousness should rightfully exist.

I can see how it works now, but you've essentially had to give me a cut and dry explanation. The story does not make the point of view clear. When I read it on my first read through I thought "Human clone in a a vat" or "Mind wiped criminal in a containment shell", generally situations where you'd find a newly awakened consciousness in a fully adult body.

My advice: Cut the sexual allusions and the "Probing" of various bodily orifices. Children and sex do not mix. Ever. A dream sequence is bad in general for a prologue. Your prologue needs to have a link to the main story, not be a flashback dream sequence non-sequitur.

But you don't have to take my word for it. Here's a fairly good resource you can check out if you feel like it.

Again, if this is just the lead into "Act 1" then it's not a prologue and should not be used as such.

Razor One wrote:1. Cadaver is the correct Australian (British English) spelling of the word Cadaver. There is no such word as "Cadavre" except as a misspelling of the word "Cadaver"

Proof: The Cambridge English Dictionary Does Not Agree With You

I'm using the french spelling for this word, but it doesn't really matter.

2. "Might" rain or "Will" rain. Irrelevant. It does not change the fact that your last paragraph serves no purpose.

The paragraph is to introduce the disturbance in such a way that the reader can see that this disturbance is not "normal" in the context of the story without me having to explicitely say so.

3 & 4: If this leads into "Act 1" then it does not belong in the Prologue. Put it in Act 1 and cut it down to what is necessary. As I said earlier, the Prologue serves as a device to start your story twice and affords you the opportunity to introduce an important plot element early into the story without breaking narrative flow. Check my example with Batman provided above.

Doing so. Might cut down the dream a bit.

From the course of your narrative it was impossible to tell that it was a Cesarian Section from the point of view of the one being born. In fact, on the first run through it was impossible for me to tell that you seem to be telling the story from the point of view of an unborn child. How does your character recall being born at all? It's especially egregious given that you describe the unborn child deriving what I can only assume was sexual pleasure from fondling parts of it's own anatomy before puberty let alone before when consciousness should rightfully exist.

Maybe I should mention the knife? That should make it more clear.
As far as recollection, dreams take bits of unconscious memory and sew them together with fabrication, in fact, that's all dreams are. Her exploration of the womb, unimpeded motion during this time, and masterbation could be fabrication based on her current mindset. (The character doesn't know, therefore I don't either.) As far as deriving pleasure from it, as long as your nerve endings work, you should get pleasure from it. It doesn't matter if it is before or after puberty, or children wouldn't masturbate. (No matter how much I, more particularly I as a parent, want to deny it, they do.)

Children and sex do not mix. Ever.

Tell that to my kids, please. My son has been expelled for looking up a girl's skirt, (kaero no ka wa kaeru) my elder daughter just had a child of her own, (What the fuck?) and the little one is looking to follow their example.

avianmosquito wrote: I would of thought this would be more obvious, particularly at the point where she actually messes with her umbilical cord.

I actually read this as being chained to the wall. The fact that this was an infant in the womb was completely lost on me.

CaptainChewbacca wrote:

avianmosquito wrote: I would of thought this would be more obvious, particularly at the point where she actually messes with her umbilical cord.

I actually read this as being chained to the wall. The fact that this was an infant in the womb was completely lost on me.

I'm quessing you're not a parent? That might explain why this seems obvious to me but not you. Maybe if I refer to it specifically as a "cord" or specify its fleshy nature? Or both?

avianmosquito wrote:I'm quessing you're not a parent? That might explain why this seems obvious to me but not you. Maybe if I refer to it specifically as a "cord" or specify its fleshy nature? Or both?

Both might do the trick, but its just a very, very odd bit of writing. Also, if you have to keep harping on 'I'm a parent/you're not a parent' then put a notation in your thread title so all us non-parents can stay away from your poorly-written, obtuse fiction.

Its got masturbation, imprisonment, and dreams of freedom. Putting that in the context of an unborn child is just bizzarre bordering on the obscene.

CaptainChewbacca wrote:Both might do the trick, but its just a very, very odd bit of writing. Also, if you have to keep harping on 'I'm a parent/you're not a parent' then put a notation in your thread title so all us non-parents can stay away from your poorly-written, obtuse fiction.

I'm just trying to get a better view. I had children too early to remember my time before parenthood well enough to look at something from that mindset, so I have a hard time trying to interpret things the same way as you.

Its got masturbation, imprisonment, and dreams of freedom. Putting that in the context of an unborn child is just bizzarre bordering on the obscene.

1. Human nature and possibly false. She's dreaming, her memories might not all be geniune. Like the fact she had so much freedom of movement in the womb. In reality she wouldn't be able to reach around to her back so easily because the wall of the uterus would be in the way.
2. How would you feel about being in a space so small you couldn't stretch your legs without hitting a wall?
3. Being confined, sitting upside down, for such a long period of time, this is a small wonder. Especially considering this dream might be using her current mindset, not the actual mindset of her infancy. Comfort or no, doing nothing all day and being stuck inverted in the fetal position (it's called that for a reason) is not a particularly attractive concept.
4. Bizzare? The entire concept is bizzare, with or without her actions. Never the less, it fits the fact that this is a very bizzare person we are dealing with. Someone bizzare enough to dream about being an unborn child and retain her current mindset is already bizzare enough to be considered "bordering on the obscene." Her personality is this bizzare from the beginning to the end, but that's the idea. If she wasn't off, she wouldn't be interesting.

CaptainChewbacca wrote:

avianmosquito wrote:I'm quessing you're not a parent? That might explain why this seems obvious to me but not you. Maybe if I refer to it specifically as a "cord" or specify its fleshy nature? Or both?

Both might do the trick, but its just a very, very odd bit of writing. Also, if you have to keep harping on 'I'm a parent/you're not a parent' then put a notation in your thread title so all us non-parents can stay away from your poorly-written, obtuse fiction.

Its got masturbation, imprisonment, and dreams of freedom. Putting that in the context of an unborn child is just bizzarre bordering on the obscene.

As a PARENT I have to agree with Chewie on this. I read the prologue and thought "Oh, she's in a Matrix vat or a clone or something", and while the mystery was there, I couldn't care less about the character - cadavres be damned.

When I read that you intended this to be a flashback to the womb it made me feel ill to think of a fetus masturbating in-utero. Memories from the womb are one thing, but giving a fetus adult attributes is really, really confusing. If you absolutely HAVE to have this scene, you may need to frame it as a memory from the womb, something like "Sarah opened her eyes and cursed silently, knowing that though she had dreamed this room hundreds of times she would still have to follow its course before the night was done."

Honestly, Skeeter- if you continue to write about masturbating fetuses (and if it's not critical to the story, don't have the fetus masturbate! have it play with its toes!) I may just mail you a box of the vomit you inspire. I have a 3-year old girl and a 1 year-old boy, and aside from my son's tendency to grab for his penis when we change him (no nerve-shattering shudders or ecstacy, it's just interesting to him) I've never seen either of my children fondle themselves, caress their parts, or try to stick ANYTHING in their rectums. This scene may actually make people stop reading the book altogether.

You keep saying 'it makes sense in the context'. We don't have that. Right now you've got a sexualized infant fantasy with NOTHING ELSE. If you want to somehow validate what you've written, write more because this is some freaky crap that makes me want to never read anything you've written ever again.

People will tolerate a LOT of strange things from internet fiction (Gor anyone?) but you've got a fetus performing sex acts and you're trying to convince us its intellectual art.

Make it make sense or stop writing.

avianmosquito wrote:1. Cadavres. Please, use proper spelling, not american spelling, on this word.

Citation needed.

As far as I know it's only spelled "cadavre" in French, not in British English... and in case you weren't aware, the correct spelling of a word in French is not always the correct spelling of an English word that means the same thing.

That's assuming, of course, that you learned French before English and are honestly mistaken on this point; I'm feeling charitable today.

Kodiak wrote:As a PARENT I have to agree with Chewie on this. I read the prologue and thought "Oh, she's in a Matrix vat or a clone or something", and while the mystery was there, I couldn't care less about the character - cadavres be damned.

When I read that you intended this to be a flashback to the womb it made me feel ill to think of a fetus masturbating in-utero.

According to ultra-sound, it happens. (Both of my older children as evidence) I think they just don't realise when they're being watched. And, again, it might not be a genuine memory. (Dreams bear resemblence to memory, but are always somewhat different.)

Memories from the womb are one thing, but giving a fetus adult attributes is really, really confusing.

She's dreaming, nothing is more confusing or fucked up than the things that go on in our heads while we sleep. I should make that more clear. Maybe "I opened my eyes. I was on the roof of the building I had found the night before. Slowly waking up, I shook off the fear left over from my dream, and took a look around for Alex."

If you absolutely HAVE to have this scene, you may need to frame it as a memory from the womb, something like "Sarah opened her eyes and cursed silently, knowing that though she had dreamed this room hundreds of times she would still have to follow its course before the night was done."

Since you don't realize you're dreaming until you wake up, this isn't possible.

(and if it's not critical to the story, don't have the fetus masturbate! have it play with its toes!)

Do you really think she can reach her toes? She can't bend her body, I've already greatly exaggerated her range of motion when she found the unreachable part of her back. Don't worry, it's been edited out, this way people will be less likely yo assume she's an adult.

I have a 3-year old girl and a 1 year-old boy, and aside from my son's tendency to grab for his penis when we change him (no nerve-shattering shudders or ecstacy, it's just interesting to him) I've never seen either of my children fondle themselves, caress their parts, or try to stick ANYTHING in their rectums.

As far as these go, you've about the experience I did at this point. The only difference is that I saw ultrasound pictures of my children masturbating in the womb. (Although I doubt they did it for any reason but curiosity.) Until my son was 5, I never actually witnessed it, (probably because I didn't particularly want to) and even then it was because I had walked into his room unanounced and he didn't realise I was there. (When he did, he looked like he wanted to jump out the window.) Thankfully from then on I remembered to knock.

As far as my daughters, the elder one has a child of her own (never mind the fact that she's even younger than her mother was) so I'm pretty sure she's well past that point, and the younger one freely admits it. (I wish she could tell me some time I care about it. Never, for example.)

As far as rectums are concerned, it's commonly avoided on all costs simply because it hurts. They might try it once, and never touch it again because it hurt the first time.

Simon_Jester wrote:

avianmosquito wrote:1. Cadavres. Please, use proper spelling, not american spelling, on this word.

Citation needed.

As far as I know it's only spelled "cadavre" in French, not in British English... and in case you weren't aware, the correct spelling of a word in French is not always the correct spelling of an English word that means the same thing.

That's assuming, of course, that you learned French before English and are honestly mistaken on this point; I'm feeling charitable today.

Simon, I chose the french spelling over the english spelling for an unimportant IU reason. Spoiler

CaptainChewbacca wrote:You keep saying 'it makes sense in the context'. We don't have that.

I can't give you an unfinished product, unless you want it one act at a time.

mayabird wrote:Fixed the spelling in the title

Thank you mayabird.