Jami's edits

Everyone's made such great comments already in this edit exercise, and Jami's made a few great changes, so I don't have much to add (except this is a great exercise for writing groups!). Also, notice how each of us might see something different to fix. Hmm. It takes a village to revise a paragraph?

My thoughts:

She cringed at his perfectly innocent question. Before he noticed, she quickly faked another yawn and covered her face with her hands. Sharing the reasons she’d stared at the ceiling for hours last night would only add to her guilt. It was bad enough that she’d dreamed about her ex-boyfriend, Daniel. Add in his command that had burrowed into her thoughts – ‘Come to me’ – and it would sound downright horrible. Instead, she offered, “Uh huh.”

Okay, I'm one of those who has to sleep 10 hours or I yawn the whole next day, so I'm not clear why she had to fake a yawn if she hadn't slept well. But beyond that=
Before he noticed, she quickly faked another yawn and covered her face with her hands.

Can you clarify with some transitional word? I mean, is she faking the yawn SO she can cover her face then? Why are those two actions together? See if you can make the connection more than they happen about the same time.

Sharing the reasons she’d stared at the ceiling for hours last night would only add to her guilt.

Sharing with whom? I'm saying that because, though of course the reader will know that from earlier paragraphs, you might want to have a bit of emphasis. It's not just sharing, but sharing WITH HIM. We all know that as soon as he's gone, she's going to be on the phone with her best friend. "You would never believe what I dreamed last night!" She won't mind sharing with her... it's the current bf she doesn't want to share with. So think about putting his name after-- Sharing with Joe the reasons....

It was bad enough that she’d dreamed about her ex-boyfriend, Daniel.
Don't use a comma with a "name appositive" like Daniel there. An appositive is a word or phrase that explains more about a noun, and generally, yes, you set it off before and after with a comma (no comma at end of sentence, of course)-- I went to Chicago, my favorite US city, to visit Theresa. You don't use a comma usually with a name or a one-word appositive (her coach Joe Parcells/ the color purple). So:
It was bad enough that she’d dreamed about her ex-boyfriend Daniel.

Add in his command that had burrowed into her thoughts – ‘Come to me’ – and it would sound downright horrible.
I'd put "Come to me" in italics, to distinguish it from the real dialogue that follows. As it's not vocalized (it's in a dream), I think we can get away with italicizing as we would thoughts.

Whenever you use "it," think about what "it" refers back to. There isn't a clear antecedent there, so I wonder if you can recast that? I can't actually come up with an alternative, but put your mind to it and see what you come up with. That's two sentences in this paragraph I've ended with a preposition. Don't follow my bad example. :)

Instead, she offered, “Uh huh.”

Instead of what? See, where that's placed suggests that "instead of doing A, she did B"-- it's what we call a "sentence adverb" which modifies the whole sentence or clause, rather than a verb (as adverbs usually do). "Additionally, I will sing The National Anthem" is an example of a sentence adverb-- It's not "I in addition to dancing will sing," right? When you put an adverb at the start of the sentence, removed from the verb, usually you're saying it's a sentence adverb. Okay. What I'm getting at is I think you want it to be, uh, the direct object (that is, not a modifier at all, but a noun). Okay, that all sounds weird, but understand, some words can be different parts of speech depending on where you put them, and depending on the role they're playing in the sentence. So words like this have to be placed especially carefully. In this case, I think you mean "instead" as "instead of that other thing she could be saying"-- that is, a noun phrase that is the object of "offered". So "She offered instead" might be more correct.

Finally, this is a long leadup to an uninteresting line of dialogue. But maybe that's what you want? It's sort of funny, really, that "uh-huh" is all she can manage.

But that come to me is so sexy, and it's sort of buried in the middle of the paragraph. Is it important, like is she going to have to go and find Daniel? If so, I'd really suggest =that= line is what the paragraph is about, not about the heroine saying, "Uh-huh." I guess you might want to assess what's important in this paragraph, and make the last line in the paragraph reflect that important aspect somehow. How could you do that? Well, now really, I might be entirely wrong about come to me being important-- I'm easy to seduce, obviously-- but if in fact that's important, try putting it at the end and go back and build the paragraph towards that.
Just an example of rearranging:
She cringed at his perfectly innocent question. Before he noticed, she quickly faked another yawn and covered her face with her hands. Sharing the reasons she’d stared at the ceiling for hours last night would only add to her guilt. So she offered, “Uh huh.” It was bad enough that she’d dreamed about her ex-boyfriend, Daniel. Add in his command that had burrowed into her thoughts – ‘Come to me’.

Okay, obviously it needs some work. But think about what you want to lead to, and if it's not that "come to me," ignore me. :)

Just everyone keep in mind -- a paragraph is a unit of meaning. It has some purpose beyond just grouping sentences together. When the paragraph ends, the reader should have advanced to some additional understanding-- maybe not a radical advance, but an increment. That this is a paragraph, that these actions and events and reactions are grouped together adds some meaning. And where you end the paragraph adds meaning too-- you're saying, "This is what all this has been leading up to." (Another ending preposition! Arrgh!) There's a dramatic pause in there, just by the line ending and the white space of the next paragraph's indentation. So when you end the paragraph, you're identifying what's important, what the reader should pay attention to. (Eeek. Another one. You can tell I'm tired. I can't figure out how to fix those.)

You can reverse this to bury a clue, btw. If you hide the clue in plain sight in the middle of the paragraph, the reader can't say you tried to trick her.

I think also you can manipulate this expectation for comic effect, by ending as Jami does on something anticlimactic.

Alicia

Your turn!!! To edit!

Jami G generously donated a paragraph so that YOU GUYS could have a chance to edit. (Lucky you. :) So how about making suggestions in the comments, and when you all are done, I'll try too.

Jami said:

Here's one paragraph near the beginning of my WIP, but not the opening. Setup: Her husband, trying to figure out why POV character didn't sleep well the previous night, just asked if she's okay.

Faking another yawn, she covered her face with her hands to hide her cringe. Did she need more guilt by sharing the reasons she’d stared at the ceiling for hours last night? Just because of a stupid dream about her ex-boyfriend, Daniel, and his command for her to ‘Come to me’? Um, no… Instead, she offered, “Uh huh.”

I chose this selection for two main reasons. 1) It has an unintended sentence fragment (i.e. the "Just because" phrase is not a fragment for stylistic reasons), but due to the voice of the character, I can't figure out another way to word it. 2) That same sentence fragment clues the reader into essential backstory that plays into the end of the chapter (the Inciting Incident) and I want to make sure this paragraph is clear.

Thanks for this opportunity!
Jami G.


So let's have a few brave souls who will make helpful suggestions on how to clarify, improve, tighten, revise, etc., this selection!

Just put your suggestions in comments for this post.
Alicia

Leona line edit

Leona:

She heard Daniel-Jirel’s repeated no’s as he looked at Jenna’s face. She could also feel the guilt rolling off of him in waves. He rolled her partially over, holding his breath as he turned her to check for more wounds.
The body was cold; telling him there was no chance to save the baby that rounded Jenna’s body. He held back his despair by looking around to see if he could find clues as to who had done such a despicable thing. He was afraid he knew but hoped he was wrong. He was fairly certain the damage to her face had been done by an optical resonator crystal laser.

Am I right to assume that the optical whatsit means this is set in the future? Heck, what do I know-- maybe that already exists. But it makes me think this is the near-future.
She heard Daniel-Jirel’s repeated no’s as he looked at Jenna’s face.

I don't know who "she" is-- presumably you identify that in the paragraph immediately above. You're right to use the pronoun. You don't want a name is this line when there are two others.

repeated no’s
This is one of those quandaries I'd write around. See, an apostrophe-s usually means a possessive, which this is not. An S with no apostrophe of course usually means a plural, which this is (more than one no). There really isn't an easy way to pluralize words like "no" or dates like the 60s, though we're going much more for the simple S these days (see, the Royal Society for the Preservation of Apostrophes is having an effect :). Trouble is, it makes "nos" almost unrecognizable as "the plural of no", and adding -es (as we sometimes but not always do after an O ending) results in "noes," which looks like a misspelling of "nose".

So rather than try to figure out what would be 1) correct, and 2) easy understandable, I'd re-cast the sentence. :) You know, also, if it's something he's saying and she's hearing, I'd prefer it in dialogue anyway. It's more visually interesting that way, and adds the sharpness of authenticity where a narrative summary wouldn't. So try something like--
She heard him whisper, "No, no, no," as he looked at Jenna’s face.


She could also feel the guilt rolling off of him in waves.
"off of him" can be trimmed to "off him" and then you don't give the reader that momentary "huh?" of the two similar words next to each other.

You have "also feel" like she's been feeling before, but in the sentence before, she was hearing. So She could feel is just fine.

Whoever "she" is-- she's not giving a very interesting perspective, and I wonder why you decided to put this paragraph in her viewpoint, especially when the NEXT paragraph is in his viewpoint. What's interesting about her POV? She's kind of just narrating what's happening, and there's no reason that can't be done in his POV (so there's no shift).

Maybe she's an empath, and she can literally feel the guilt coming off him? But notice that first, you don't need to be an empath to pick up another person's guilt, and second, she has no reaction. If the guilt is rolling off him, if it's strong emotion, wouldn't she react? Maybe step back, or put her hands up to ward off the feeling?

That's the real problem-- "She" isn't really here at all. She's just a narrator, a camera recording what's going on. Where's her emotion? What does this all mean to her? Does she have some connection to these two people? Does she care what's happened? Daniel feels guilt-- what does she feel? Triumph? Horror? Jealousy?

Now you might not want to get into her emotions, but if you're going to use her just as a narrator, make her a better narrator. What's it feel like to be there? Can you subtly insert some setting detail? You might have done this in the paragraph before, but if she is narrating, she notices what as this is happening? Do Daniel's words echo in the still night? Or do they get lost in the cacophony of the traffic in the nearby street? Does he fall on his knees on the wet pavement next to the body, or squat down in the mud, or move carefully across the marble floor to her side? Does "she" see all this in the glow of the streetlamp or the glare of the sun?

You don't need all the senses engaged here, just the ones that "feel" most to her. She's the POV character, our eyes and ears on the scene, so what can she tell us that puts us right there? This might take more words, of course.

He rolled her partially over, holding his breath as he turned her to check for more wounds.

Who is "her"? Two women in the scene. He rolled Jenna? He rolled "the body"? (That will signal, of course, that Jenna is dead- no longer Jenna, but "the body", and you might not want to signal that yet.)

This line isn't in her perspective, or rather, it could be just as easily in his, in the next paragraph. Think about why you put this paragraph in "her" POV. What effect did you mean to create for the reader? If "she" can't give us a more interesting perspective, I'd say put the whole passage in Daniel's POV. He has what "she" doesn't-- a stake in the event, an emotional reaction, a specific task to perform (checking the body).

I truly don't mean that single POV is the only way to go. However, it should probably be the default because it's easier for the writer and the reader. Use another POV when it can provide something important, a new approach, an interesting perspective, a glimpse of character through her perception. You can do that here in the first paragraph-- she's got to care, if not about Jenna than about Daniel, right? So be in her. What emotion is she feeling as Daniel falls to his knees on the wet pavement (or the marble floor or whatever)? You don't have to explain it all, but KNOW it. Know what she's feeling, what her emotional filter is, and let that infuse the word choice and sentence design.

Let's say, for example, that she was the one who murdered Jenna. Well, that's interesting. So she sees Daniel drop to his knees (or whatever) and what does she feel? If she loves Daniel, if Jenna was a rival, she might initially feel triumphant that her rival is dead, and then, when she feels Daniel's pain, she might feel a sort of uncomprehending anger, and realize that even if Jenna is dead, the jealousy is not.

Or maybe she's Jenna's sister. Or maybe she's Daniel's mother. What's her role here? What's her emotion? Even if she's a sociopath, she'd feel something, even if it's the absence of feeling.
She felt nothing but mild interest as Daniel turned the body over. How intriguing, those waves of guilt coming off him. She wondered what it felt like, to feel guilt.
Just an example-- her lack of emotion is an emotional response.

The body was cold; telling him there was no chance to save the baby that rounded Jenna’s body.
Now we're in his POV, and we know that because you have a mind-term (telling him-- that is, we know we're in his mind).

Here’s a website with all sorts of information about punctuation.
The semicolon should be a comma. Semicolons separate two independent clauses (can be a complete sentence on its own), and what you have here is one independent clause:
The body was cold
and a participial phrase, albeit a long one:
telling him there was no chance to save the baby that rounded Jenna’s body.

Notice that the clause there is a lot shorter than the modifying participle, and that the participle modifies not a noun (body?) but the whole clause-- what told him? The coldness of the body. So you might think of simplifying the clause into a noun so the participle can become the predicate. I'm not saying that's a good idea-- I tend to like short clauses with long modifiers, just because I'm difficult, and I sometimes like that rhythm. But just try it out. Remember: One of the glories of the English language is its near-infinite variety of sentence constructions. So experiment. Here's how it would look:
The body's chill told him there was no chance to save the baby that rounded Jenna’s body.
The benefit there is that the most important information isn't buried so much.

Also think about action here. Does he reach out and touch her still belly? What would his hand do? What would his body do? What would he do?
One interesting trick is to show emotion through body action, especially nearly involuntary body action. Strong emotion shows itself in body action. The emotion that leads a man to touch a woman's dead body is a different emotion than the emotion that would make him back away. The reader will know the emotion by "seeing" the action.

He held back his despair by looking around to see if he could find clues as to who had done such a despicable thing. He was afraid he knew but hoped he was wrong.

See, you're using words instead of action to show the emotion. Try using action. The words are fine too, but if you can SHOW in action, you might not have to TELL in words. Keep in mind that you're in his head, and he's not necessarily going to think those words. Maybe he will. Just try and act it out in your own body; act the emotion, and then narrate what the emotion would make him do. You actually already have that-- his despair is shown by him looking around. Now here's how it might be in a sort of deep POV, which I don't think you are doing, but here's an example:

Clues. There had to be some clues. He looked around the body-- anywhere but at the body-- for the clue that would tell him who had done this. He already knew. But maybe he was wrong. He hoped he was wrong.

Now watch the shiniest words. "Despicable" holds the unfortunate echo of Daffy Duck's lisp, so it's probably the wrong word no matter what. But I just deleted a "terrible" from something I wrote -- "It was a terrible thing to say." What's wrong with that? (Okay, it's a cliche, and "thing" is seldom a good option. Besides those.) Words like "terrible" and "despicable" draw too much attention to themselves, when the attention should be on -- on what was said, on what was done. A murder is a despicable act-- we don't need to be told that. If what my guy just said was terrible, the reader probably noticed without having to be told. You don't want the reader to be irritated: "Yeah, yeah, I noticed."

He was fairly certain the damage to her face had been done by an optical resonator crystal laser.

Come on, come on. We're not babies. We can stand it. Show us her face. What lets him think it's been done by a whatever?

Also watch your wiggle-words. "Fairly certain" implies a calibration of certainty that we can't interpret. It's precision without meaning. How about "He thought" or "The damage looked like it had been done with..."

"Fairly" calls way too much attention to itself, and it's not even a shiny word.

And remember that he's got a body and it can move. What can he do to her face to tell him what did the damage?
With a gentle finger, he touched the scorch mark under her lower lip. That sort of damage could have been done with...

He steeled himself and spread his hand over her forehead. The gel there used to be her skin.

etc.

So try writing this more in the body of the POV character. Try showing emotion in the action. If that doesn't work, you can always go back to the words. But try it and see if you can FEEL it more, and show it more.
Alicia

Rachel line edits

Rachel Lorber said... Thank you so much. This is a paragraph I've been having a lot of difficulty with.

Fog drenched the bridge in luminous light. The white mist rose from the choppy blue water below to float around the red steel of the Golden Gate Bridge, where it lingered to catch the lamplight. I stared out the window in awe, trying to see the city beyond the fog. I could only make out the dark outlines of skyscrapers and apartments, taller than anything I’d ever seen before, taller even then the Iron Tower.

We've had a run of first-persons. :) It's such an interesting viewpoint, isn't it?
Fog drenched the bridge in luminous light. The white mist rose from the choppy blue water below to float around the red steel of the Golden Gate Bridge, where it lingered to catch the lamplight.
Okay, you seem to be starting with the results-- the fog is drenching the bridge, and then you go back down to the water. See what I mean? It's a pretty image, but it's a little backwards. The fog starts up from the water, so think about moving that first line later.

I stared out the window in awe, trying to see the city beyond the fog.
Now wait. The narrator is inside? I'm sure you set that up in the paragraph before this, but I have to say, it jounced me. The first two lines are outside, and suddenly we're inside.
"in awe"-- that's one of those, um, gosh-golly-gee-whiz terms that kind of contrast with the rather discreet terminology before. Is there a less gushy term?

I could only make out the dark outlines of skyscrapers and apartments, taller than anything I’d ever seen before, taller even then the Iron Tower.
Well, as you know, "only" is a word that can be put anywhere in a sentence, and so you want to make sure it's placed right. It sounds good where it is, but actually, it belongs before "the dark"--
I could make out only the dark outlines
the dark outlines of skyscrapers and apartments,
Skyscrapers and apartments aren't in the same category. I'd get rid of "apartments," which aren't buildings, but parts of buildings.
taller even then the Iron Tower.
THAN the Iron Tower. Here's a great link, which helps you find homophones: Commonly Misused Words.

Again, get tough with yourself as you revise. Imagine every problem the reader might have.
Alicia

Mystery Robin edits

This is for a YA suspense. These four lines come after Oliver, the POV character hears the song Lili Marlene sung to the girl he’s with.

I felt overwhelmed -- emotionally, experientially. I didn’t know what to do next, so I just looked at her face. It was the perfect song for her, I realized. She did have a sweet, haunting sort of face -- a face for shadows, for standing under lamp posts and casting spells with her eyes, spells that could follow a man across an ocean, or across a dream.


I felt overwhelmed -- emotionally, experientially.
I know what "experiential" means, but don't know what it means here. I like the alliteration, though, and that might be enough. I'm easy to seduce. :) However, consider whether your diction is right for YA. I don't think we should ever condescend to younger readers-- CS Lewis didn't, and neither did JK Rowling-- but just make sure that you're not selling out clarity for euphony. I of course have no problem with that-- I can't imagine a better bargain-- but just keep that in mind. :)
I didn’t know what to do next, so I just looked at her face.
Okay. I kind of think you're wasting an opportunity here to say something, but it's an okay placekeeper. I'd like to challenge you to make that more meaningful or more beautiful, but it's a bit nothingish.

It was the perfect song for her, I realized.
What is "it"? I'd rather have even "This" as it implies more urgency.
Also, I'm far out of the YA market, and I barely remember the song Lili Marlene, since it hasn't been all that big since, oh, WWI. So, again, consider your audience and how much you need to explain to them. I wouldn't know what this means in relation to the song or her, for that matter.
She did have a sweet, haunting sort of face -- a face for shadows, for standing under lamp posts and casting spells with her eyes, spells that could follow a man across an ocean, or across a dream.
Can you connect this with the song? Maybe "a Lili Marlene sort of face"? I also keep hearing:
"She had a sweet"-- "did have" makes it sound like he's contradicting something someone else has said. "Yes, listen. She did have...."
The word "sweet" doesn't really connect with the face for shadows, etc.
a face for shadows, for standing under lamp

And very nice, but faces don't stand. They shine or glow or hide, maybe, but they don't stand.

spells that could follow a man across an ocean, or across a dream.

I like it-- but would a "man" be in a YA novel?

So mostly my question would be-- are you writing for your audience? Now if I were a YA editor, I'd know if the voice was right. I do like the voice. So let's just say, assuming the YA angle is right, I would just challenge you to hone this. It's good, but it could be better.
I didn’t know what to do next, so I just looked at her face.
I just have to say, you can make this beautiful. I hear an echo of one of my fave poems, from After the Storm by Derek Wolcott:
I try to forget what happiness was,
and when that don't work, I study the stars.

Ana edits

ana said...

I had a paragraph in the mix, but I found a different line I would like to go over. It is one heck of a long sentence.

He attended the University on a football scholarship. when he realized that he didn’t intend to make a living as a wanna-be football player for the rest of his life, he changed his program from under water basket weaving to the MBA program, and started a successful business in computer consulting.

He attended the University on a football scholarship.

Hmm. In the US, we generally don't capitalize "university" except when it's part of the title (like Bradley University). Now some universities have pretensions that they are THE university and probably do insist on capitalizing it, but that's the sort of red flag -- stray capitalization-- that comes off as old-fashioned. The trend is towards less and less capping at this point. So unless you have a reason for capping it, I'd lc it.
I do understand that there are other English-speaking countries, where they also have universities and a game they quaintly call "football," and at least Britain tends to be more profligate with capital letters. So go with the style of the publishers you want to approach. (Ducking to avoid brickbats from all those "football" hooligans. Hey, what's with those towels, huh?)

when he realized that he didn’t intend to make a living as a wanna-be football player for the rest of his life,

There's a period before this, so here you SHOULD use a capital letter. :)

The first thing to do when you work on simplifying a sentence is to find the verbals-- verbs, verb forms, gerunds (-ing words used as nouns, like "living" there). See if you can limit those, because when they are the actual sentence action (the predicate), they tend to distract. So notice the verbal words:
when he realized that he didn’t intend to make a living as a wanna-be football player for the rest of his life,

The one that is the most cluttering is probably "didn't intend to"-- couldn't? After all, making a living is seldom just a matter of intent. If you really mean that his problem was that he didn't intend, keep it, but just make sure, as it does kind of distract. (But if it's the precise term you want, go with it-- truth always trumps. Well, the sort of truth we have in fiction, anyway.)

Now get ruthless with the rest of that-- what's a "wanna-be football player"? How could he making a living as a wannabe? Either you're a pro football player, or you don't make a living at it. A wanna-be wouldn't make a living. What is it he realized? Possibilities:
When he realized he'd never make a living as a football player....
When he realized he couldn't make the pros as a football player....
When he realized he was only a wanna-be and would never make it as a pro football player....

Thing is, if he would get into the pros, of course he'd make a very good living, so it's not clear whether it's his inability or his lack of desire keeping him from making a living as a football player.

Also "the rest of your life," well, there are few professions LESS likely to be for the rest of your life than pro football (because of the casualty rate). So "the rest of his life" suggested to me that you're saying he couldn't make it in the pros and figured that out early and thought he should prepare for something else? Think through what you mean there, because what you mean isn't clear, and you want it clear.
he changed his program from under water basket weaving to the MBA program, and started a successful business in computer consulting.

This gives that humorous cast to the sentence (basket-weaving). Comedy often has longer sentences. Just pointing that out-- length itself often adds to humor.

Now I teach in a university, and there are several points I'd query right here. Again, other English-speaking countries will have their own terminology (term vs. semester, form vs. grade), so use the terms used in the country of your characters and/or country of your publisher. Anyway, here's what I would flag for a query:
he changed his program
In the US, that would be "his major".

from under water basket weaving
I think this is probably where the humor is. Universities don't actually grant degrees in that. :) Athletes do, however, often major in Phys Ed or Communications, because these majors are supposed to be easy (they aren't actually, in my experience).

Also again, this is dependent in part on the country, but "underwater" is one word in the US, and "basket-weaving" would be hyphenated. The longer the compound term has been in the language, the more likely it will be a single word.

to the MBA program,
The MBA program is a graduate program (also notice you repeated "program," which wouldn't be a problem if you have "major" to start), and the vast, vast majority of those on athletic scholarships are undergraduates. (Vinnie Testeverde, I remember, actually graduated in three years and did play his final year while taking graduate courses, but that is beyond unusual.) So is he an undergraduate (just say "business program" then-- same department, just for undergraduates)?

and started a successful business in computer consulting.
When? When he was still in college? If it's when he got OUT that he started a consulting firm, say, "Later he started" or "After graduation, he started". I think maybe you're trying to cover too much time in a sentence.

Also, while of course, a business major could start a computer consulting business, that's more an "IT" or "CS" vocation. Business majors who know a lot about computers tend to move to IT, where the job prospects are better.

I'm sure this is just a paragraph of quick background on him, but it's easy to get it right and shut up nitpickers like me. :)

Most important for me would be to get the football scholarship thing right. If he stops playing football, he'd lose his scholarship, so you might make that clearer, what he actually does. Of course, this probably isn't a major aspect of the story, so you might not to get too elaborate-- but make sure what you have is accurate. It's hard, also, with comedy, because absolute accuracy might get in the way of funniness. Always a tradeoff-- see what you can do to accomplish both! Easier said than done. :)
Alicia

Marie edits

Marie-

“You didn’t even come to his funeral,” I whispered, my voice breaking as I remembered, “I needed you there Tommy, I needed you.”
“Don’t you make me feel guilty Hunter,” Tommy muttered, “I can’t take any more guilt.” I flinched away from the harshness in his voice. His glinting eyes, which had been as soft as gray velvet a moment ago, transformed so fast that it made it me uneasy.

This is first-person, and we haven't had many of those!

“You didn’t even come to his funeral,” I whispered, my voice breaking as I remembered, “I needed you there Tommy, I needed you.”

Let's work on the punctuation first. I have to get past that in order to see anything else. :)
“You didn’t even come to his funeral,” I whispered, my voice breaking as I remembered,

Correctly punctuating dialogue is very important as a sign to the editor or agent that you pay attention to details. So let's get that right. First, you have two sentences of dialogue that you're connecting with a quote tag. Now the quote tag goes with one or the other sentence, not both. As long as they're in the same paragraph, the reader will know that they are both spoken by the same person, the one identified in the quote tag. So think of the first speech unit and the quote tag as a sentence, with a period at the end, not a comma. (You'd use a comma if the second part of speech was the end of the first speech sentence, like: "You'd use a comma," she said, "if the second part was a continuation of the sentence.")
So:
“You didn’t even come to his funeral,” I whispered, my voice breaking as I remembered. “I needed you there Tommy, I needed you.”

Also, "Tommy" is set off, before and after, with commas:
“I needed you there, Tommy, I needed you.”

Parentheticals like a name are set off before and after with commas.

Okay. Now that I have the punctuation fixed, I can read. :) Really, it's a curse. But it's an EDITOR'S curse. If you want the editor to be able to read the words and sentences and paragraphs and pages, you have to have the punctuation right. And when you stop getting it right, the editor might stop reading. So fix it ALL THE WAY THROUGH. Do not give the editor a moment to think, "You know, she didn't take the time to fix the punctuation. She thinks I've got more time than she does. She's wrong. Form rejection."

“You didn’t even come to his funeral,” I whispered, my voice breaking as I remembered. “I needed you there, Tommy, I needed you.”

The only problem I have NOW is "as I remembered". As I remembered what? I do know what you mean-- as I remembered that Tommy didn't come to the funeral. But think about adding as I remembered ... what? His absence? That rainy day and the muddy gravesite? Put it in, and then take it out if it doesn't work.
“I needed you there, Tommy, I needed you.”

I kind of felt like you needed some amplification there at the end: I really needed you?

“Don’t you make me feel guilty Hunter,” Tommy muttered, “I can’t take any more guilt.” I flinched away from the harshness in his voice. His glinting eyes, which had been as soft as gray velvet a moment ago, transformed so fast that it made it me uneasy.

"Hunter". Parenthetical (direct address name). Comma. Please. This is one of those automatic commas-- no discretion at all. You really, really, really can do this. When you are using a name in a direct address (addressing the owner of the name), set the name off with commas. Really. You can do this. Incorporate this simple rule, and never, ever violate it again. It won't hurt you at all. Really.

And again, if you are interrupting speech with a quote tag, go back and check. If both parts are full sentences, the quote tag is followed by a period. So-- and you actually don't have to send me chocolate for this, but remember, if you're that grateful, I like the expensive stuff--
“Don’t you make me feel guilty, Hunter,” Tommy muttered. “I can’t take any more guilt.”

Your dialogue is good. Your punctuation should be impeccable so that the editor can see the goodness of your dialogue.

“Don’t you make me feel guilty, Hunter,” Tommy muttered. “I can’t take any more guilt.” I flinched away from the harshness in his voice. His glinting eyes, which had been as soft as gray velvet a moment ago, transformed so fast that it made it me uneasy.

Now when do I go for short paragraphs? Dialogue. All the dialogue, action, whatever of one speaker should be in one paragraph. BREAK the paragraph when that's done. So the "I flinched" should be in a new paragraph. It's about "I", not Tommy:

“Don’t you make me feel guilty, Hunter,” Tommy muttered. “I can’t take any more guilt.”

I flinched away from the harshness in his voice. His glinting eyes, which had been as soft as gray velvet a moment ago, transformed so fast that it made it me uneasy.

Much better. Last cavil-- what's "it"? It made it me uneasy? First IT isn't clear, because "it" can't refer to "eyes" (plural), and probably not "velvet," so ... I know, I know. You mean that "it" is the "transformation." But "transformation" isn't in the sentence. "Transformed" is. You might be thinking, "But the reader will understand." Yeah, maybe. And the editor will understand this: "I'm going to have to fix that. That isn't one of those easy fixes. What if there are lots of 'its' in this book? What if half of them don't have the right antecedent? My head is already starting to hurt."

Here's what I suggest. YOU fix that, and spare the editor the trouble. (Oh, and proof-- that second 'it' is a typo.)

transformed so fast I was uneasy.
? You can do better than I did, I'm sure. It's late and my brain is slow. But you can do it. Just be conscious -- in revision, not in drafting-- of every word.
Alicia

Jordan edits

Jordan said:
set up: Molly's priest was murdered at the church three weeks ago. Father O'Leary, the new priest (*wink*wink* if you remember log line #1), has just arrived and Molly is showing him from the church to the rectory. (Side note: Originally from Dublin, Molly immigrated to Chicago with her family five years ago.)

The four sentences:
How must the buildings that were so familiar she hardly noticed them look to Father O'Leary? Three years ago, she compared the Gothic chapel, its stone facade flanked by blazing maples in a carpet of lawn, to her parents' church in city center. At the time, St. Adelaide seemed a suburban oasis; three weeks ago she was disabused of that notion.

"I'm sure it'll get to feelin' like home soon enough," she murmured.
---

How must the buildings that were so familiar she hardly noticed them look to Father O'Leary?

The construction was hard for me to follow. What's your sentence kernel-- buildings look to Father O'Leary? See how far the subject is separated from the predicate? When you want to simplify, go for the verbs and clauses. Right away, I'd identify the "she hardly noticed them" as the confusion-- it's a clause in the middle of the main clause? How to simplify? Reduce a clause to a phrase? Try:
How must the buildings that were so familiar to her look to Father O'Leary?
You could also get rid of "that were"--
How must the buildings so familiar to her look to Father O'Leary?

I still don't immediately understand what you mean, but the construction isn't as tongue-twisting.
Three years ago, she compared the Gothic chapel, its stone facade flanked by blazing maples in a carpet of lawn, to her parents' church in city center.
Do we need to know anything three years ago? I'm confused about what you want me to understand here. You've set up that this church looks familiar to her, but she's wondering what Fr. O will think of it. That's very much set in the now. Why go back three years to a different situation? How about let her show the church now to him or look over it now? I'm not sure what you're accomplishing going back three years, AND bringing in another church-- I can't get any sense of this church or what Fr. O is supposed to be seeing or how the church will look to him. As far as topic sentences go, this one ("How" sentence) doesn't seem to match the paragraph.

I would suggest trying out a sentence or two set in the NOW, with her and Fr. O looking at the church. What does she draw his attention to? What does she want him to notice and not notice?

At the time, St. Adelaide seemed a suburban oasis; three weeks ago she was disabused of that notion.

I'm assuming St A's is the church they're in right now and not the one in the city center? (We always called the Chicago city center the Loop or Downtown... but then of course, she's from Dublin, and maybe they refer to the center as the city center. :) Anyway, see the problem with introducing this other city church-- it confuses. Two churches. Which is St. A's? Yes, you probably have already mentioned St. A's as the church Right Now, but this got a little scattered... esp. when you bring in "three weeks ago". That's the third separate time period in a paragraph. What do you NEED? You are probably meaning to contrast the St. Adelaide of pre-murder and the St. Adelaide of the post-murder. That's actually complicated enough without bringing in the distant past.

I like the idea of the murder changing her sense of the place-- but don't make your reader work so hard to figure out what you're getting at. Try writing it plainly first, to make sure you're getting it across, then embellish. But really, I think you're trying to do too much for one paragraph. This might not have bothered me in two paragraphs or three, if you took your time and really explored what was happening Right Now in p. 1, then the distant past in p.2, and the disabusing in p. 3. If that's too attenuated, see what's important to keep and make sure everything is clear.

"I'm sure it'll get to feelin' like home soon enough," she murmured.

Now is she saying this to herself or to Fr. O? If it's to Fr. O, see, that's why you need him more in the paragraph, looking around at the church, nodding as she points something out. We don't have any sense that it doesn't feel at home to him, because the paragraph has all been about her. Consider at least having her see him glance around before she murmurs, and add "to him", because you can murmur to yourself too. Try something like:

She saw his curious glance at (something). "I'm sure it'll get to feelin' like home soon enough," she murmured to him.

Be thinking of a paragraph as a unit of meaning. The meaning should extend from the first sentence somehow, and everything in the paragraph should contribute to something. It's sometimes hard to make everything unified-- but if you like both parts, just consider two paragraphs. If it's worth stating (the question about Fr. O), it's worth developing or exemplifying or showing. And if her memory of before is worth exploring, it might be better in a "past" paragraph of its own.

I know I'm always saying, "Take it slow." But don't try to compress too much.

I love Chicago settings, and mysteries centered on a Catholic parish? Yum. (Memories of a Catholic girlhood, not that I ever would dare to -- even now-- imagine the murder of a priest or nun!!!!! I was easily intimidated.)

Alicia

Kathleen edits

Kathleen-
Thanks for asking us to do this! You've almost got to mine on both lists! Here's mine again, slightly re-worked: (No, it's not an opening, though it is in my first scene. She's just watched a dragon materialize over a man who is lying in the street.)

Gianna pulled her cloak around herself more tightly and rubbed her eyes. Casualties were nothing new in Jarentho, but dragons that seemed to shimmer in the cold winter air were another matter completely. They no longer existed, except in fairy tales she could barely remember. True, this one's scales glistened with iridescent colors, just as those in the stories, but that didn't mean anything. Besides, people were walking through its body as though it didn't exist.

I like dragons.

Gianna pulled her cloak around herself more tightly and rubbed her eyes.

Don't work too hard to have her move. The pulling the cloak around her probably adds nothing (it's not an action connected to what just happened), and serves only to hide the actual meaningful action of her rubbing her eyes (expressing disbelief at what she just saw). Also, those actions are kind of in conflict. Act the motions out! Sounds dumb, but really, if you act those motions out, you'd get that they shouldn't be in the same sentence. If you gather your cloak around you, your hands are on the cloak and aren't immediately available to rub your eyes. Yes, you could take your hands off your cloak and apply them to your eyes, but really, if gathering the cloak doesn't add anything, why have it in there? Not all sentences have to be longer. Try this:
Gianna rubbed her eyes.

Now if you want the pulling the cloak around her to show that it's cold, that's good-- but not here. Here she has just seen a dead body and a dragon. If she's feeling the cold, she's probably not paying enough attention to the main event.

Watch out for relatively meaningless motions. If he's pushing his hand through his hair or she's smoothing her skirt and -- be honest here-- your only real purpose here is to use an action as a quote tag or as a "stutter" to break up the description or introspection, well, see if you can find an action that is more relevant to the moment we're in.

Casualties were nothing new in Jarentho, but dragons that seemed to shimmer in the cold winter air were another matter completely.
Good info here, but maybe too much for one sentence-- the info is getting lost. What I'd suggest is starting with two sentences and then combine them if that's better. A couple thoughts-- you're working with a "sight" motif here-- she saw the dragon, she rubs at her eyes, she sees it shimmer. So make the casualties a "sight" too. I'd suggest getting more visual there, but also more detailed. "Casualties" is a military term and deliberately distancing-- you use "casualty" to hide the reality of death and injury. You don't really need to distance here, do you? So think about a more vivid word, like "bodies". And elaborate. Remember, I'm saying to try a full sentence. Bodies were not an uncommon sight on Jarentho streets? Go with the sight motif-- don't lose your unifier.

... but dragons that seemed to shimmer in the cold winter air were another matter completely.
"seemed to shimmer"-- come on. Shimmering is a visual phenomenon. If it "seemed to shimmer," it shimmered. Watch the wimp out words.

They no longer existed, except in fairy tales she could barely remember.
"Dragons" is a keyword, and a come-on word-- don't feel you can't repeat it. You should repeat it here. That "she could barely remember"-- well, it feels sort of shoved in there. Whether she remembers them or not, she knows dragons are only in fairy tales. You got the important part in here-- that they did once exist. :)

Dragons no longer existed, except in fairy tales.
If you want to tell more about the fairy tales, good-- but modify fairy tales, like "fairy tales she'd heard as a child" or "fairy tales that frightened (place name) children." Or "fairy tales from the very dawn of history."

True, this one's scales glistened with iridescent colors, just as those in the stories, but that didn't mean anything. Besides, people were walking through its body as though it didn't exist.

Is it still there? I thought it had vanished and she was remembering. Don't know why I thought that. You might have (first line) she rubs her eyes, but it's still there.

True, this one's scales glistened with iridescent colors, just as those in the stories, but that didn't mean anything.
Well, actually, THAT doesn't mean anything. What do you mean? What does it mean or not mean?
The "just as" phrase is a bit clunky. Maybe try an adjective before "iridescent"? glistened with the same iridescent colors?
I'd suggest just going with the people walking through it. What you probably mean is that she's the only one who sees it, and besides, it's not solid, right?
So maybe--
True, this one's scales glistened with the same iridescent colors, but people were walking through its body as though it didn't exist.

I never like "people", but passers-by is clunkier. :) Pedestrians?

Now if the dragon is hovering over the body, are people also walking through the body? Are they just stepping over it? Is it just the dragon that can't be seen, or the body too?

Alicia

Sylvia edits

Sylvia--

[His father] had discovered it on the rocky beach of one of the far islands and immediately proclaimed it the perfect gift for his queen. It took over a dozen men to bring back to the Sithein and when she saw it, she declared that it was the perfect chair, declining even the thinnest pillow. A thick double layer of wool was wrapped around her waist and then pulled around the back and over her shoulder to tuck in at her waist. She claimed it was to ward off the cold damp of the Sithein but Tyrae suspected it was to cushion herself from the hard stone of her "perfect" seat.

Watch all the "its". What is "it"-- a stone? A chair? A stone chair? Something else? A very large conch shell (well, why not? It was found on a beach :)?
[His father] had discovered (NOUN) on the rocky beach of one of the far islands and immediately proclaimed it the perfect gift for his queen.

Do you need "immediately?" "Proclaimed" is a big strong verb. You already have three modifiers in the sentence. Remember that you don't need to make every sentence bristle. :)

It took over a dozen men to bring back to the Sithein and when she saw it, she declared that it was the perfect chair, declining even the thinnest pillow.

Now if you use a noun in the first sentence, you can use it instead of one of the "its" here. The first "it" is that non-descriptive universal it, but the rest presumably refer to the chair (or whatever). Let's just see if we can get rid of that first "it"-- sometimes that's more trouble, but we'll see:

A dozen men were needed to bring the stone back to the Sithein and when she saw it, she declared that THIS (gets rid of another it) was the perfect chair, declining even the thinnest pillow.

"she?" His mother? The queen? Repetition of important nouns is not a terrible thing. Too many "its" is worse. :)

was the perfect chair, declining even the thinnest pillow.

Oh, those participles. Now what does "declining" modify? Chair? It (or this)? Oh! She!!! That's kind of a few nouns back. Try putting the modifier close to the noun it modifies or rewrite:
and when she saw it, she declined even the thinnest pillow, declaring that THIS (gets rid of another it) was the perfect chair.

That also ends the sentence on the more important word-- the chair, not the non-existent pillow.

A thick double layer of wool was wrapped around her waist and then pulled around the back and over her shoulder to tuck in at her waist.

Is there a reason you went passive here? There are reasons for using the passive voice, mostly to hide the actual subject ("This bill must have been lost, as it was not paid"). But your default should always be active voice-- use passive only when you decide it's better in this context. (There are reasons to use passive, and one is simply that in some sentences, it allows for a structure that you want for some reason... but I don't think that's true here-- maybe it is?)
Here's how that sentence would be in active voice:
She had to wrap a thick double layer of wool around her waist and pull it around the back and over her shoulder to tuck in at her waist.
Is that better? Or does it lose something going active?

She claimed it was to ward off the cold damp of the Sithein but Tyrae suspected it was to cushion herself from the hard stone of her "perfect" seat.

Another "it", and this presumably refers to the wrapping up, not the chair? Try "this" instead.

Also, you have two complete independent clauses there, so there should be a comma before the conjunction (but).

I don't know about the quote marks around "perfect". Why not let the irony be there without too much fingerpointing? Like:
She claimed this was to ward off the cold damp of the Sithein, but Tyrae suspected it was to cushion herself from the hard stone of her perfect seat.

So-- watch the pronouns there-- "it" can refer to almost anything. So:
She claimed this was to ward off the cold damp of the Sithein, but Tyrae suspected she wanted to cushion herself from the hard stone of her perfect seat.

What do you think?
Alicia

Line editing -- if I haven't gotten to yours--

If you posted a short passage for line editing (please no new ones-- I'm way behind on everything :) and I haven't gotten to it, and you still-- after reading the others-- want me to look at it, please post here. Rules:
4 sentences
Best if not the first 4 sentences, but if you post your book opening, I'm going to evaluate it as non-opening, just a line-edit.
Understand that this is YOUR job-- I seriously doubt I delve this far in when I edit. That is, if you expect an editor to do this for your whole book, you'll be disappointed. There is not world enough and time. You can do it, however. I'm just giving an example.

Repost here, please.

Leona, I have yours, so you don't need to repost.

Alicia

John Harper-- edits

John:
Adrian Deep hated being planetside, but you couldn’t fly the fringe without cargo.
The barkeep slid the unbranded beer forward. “Enjoy.”
The beer looked black. Bland and bitter, but cold and wet. He took another sip and studied the patrons of the port tavern. Men sung out of tune to a scratchy three-dee unit. Laughter roared from the rear booths. A game of poker broke into a fight, and just as quickly died down.
Deep grimaced. People. Jobs would be so much easier if he didn’t have to actually meet clients.


Must say once more. This is not a critique of an opening, just how I'd edit a few lines. Everyone okay with that? This is just an exercise about editing, not selling, etc.
Adrian Deep hated being planetside, but you couldn’t fly the fringe without cargo.

Okay. Alien terms, but understandable. "Fly the fringe"-- I'd just experiment and make sure that's exactly what you want-- fly TO the fringe, fly ACROSS the fringe-- make sure it's not better with a preposition. I don't know, but that word might provide a bit more info.
The barkeep slid the unbranded beer forward. “Enjoy.”
Suddenly we're in a pub? Need some reference to that in the first sentence, I think. What does getting cargo have to do with his being in this bar? I can think of a few things-- like he's arranged to meet someone there-- but maybe actually say so? Like
couldn’t fly the fringe without cargo, and he could arrange a cargo here in this dive.
Or whatever-- I don't know, but I really don't like just jamming from line 1 to suddenly having a barkeep in there. Can you, in a word or two, establish setting before bringing in the second character? It won't take much-- just a quick reference to meeting a customer in this bar. Then the barkeep slid the beer forward, etc.

The beer looked black. Bland and bitter, but cold and wet. He took another sip and studied the patrons of the port tavern.

Okay. Minor point only-- "sip" seems sort of poncey. That's all. :) Also if you mention that this is the port tavern (as I hope you will) before the barkeep line, say something more here-- don't just repeat. Expand. Maybe "the crowded tavern" or "the dirty tavern" if you use "port" earlier.

Men sung out of tune to a scratchy three-dee unit. Laughter roared from the rear booths. A game of poker broke into a fight, and just as quickly died down.

This is okay. Just a list, nothing about him, but it's an okay list. Maybe if you had him lean back against the bar before he does the survey, something more active and physical on his part, also keeping the focus on him. That might individualize the list a little, filtering this through him, but also giving us an idea of how he thinks (because we'll get that this is what he sees and thinks as he sees).
A game of poker broke into a fight, and just as quickly died down.

What quickly died down? Notice that you have ONE SUBJECT for both predicates, and that is the "game of poker". If you want to make clear that the fight is what's dying down, say so: A fight broke out in a game of poker, and just as quickly died down.
or
A game of poker broke into a fight, and just as quickly the ruckus (or other synonym for "fight," or just repeat "fight" -- that might give nice rhythm) died down.

Deep grimaced. People. Jobs would be so much easier if he didn’t have to actually meet clients.

Okay, this doesn't really connect. First, there's nothing about the list that shows real contempt for people-- they're singing and laughing and, yeah, there's a fight, but it quickly peters out. Can you make the list more contemptuous? What does Adrian hate about people? Show that. If he hates laughter and singing, use more nasty terms, I don't know, cackling and caterwauling? Maybe too intense, but how would he say it, if he is looking at this scene and feeling scorn?
Jobs would be so much easier if he didn’t have to actually meet clients.

This would connect better if you had something about client before, like him looking around for the client and seeing the guys singing, laughing, etc. It doesn't take much to set up for these connections, but if you don't put them in there, the reader might find the paragraph a little bumpy.

Or has he come here not to meet clients but to market to these patrons? If he's actually here to GET clients, "meet" isn't a good word, as it has the meaning (which I thought you were doing) of meeting a pre-existing client, rather than getting new clients.

So see if you can connect Adrian closer to the bar-- clarify his purpose, his attitude?
Alicia

Jeanne's edit

Jeanne--
set up: she's looking at her reflection in the mirror and she is covered in blood, but only in the reflection

It dripped from her hair, weighing it down until it resembled a weeping willow. There was a jagged crimson line separating her head from her body. Blood trickled down from it forming red rivulets that merged with the innumerable cuts marring the porcelain perfection of her body. Some were long thick gashes created by hands hyped on the adrenaline of battle. Some where thin straight lines crafted with surgical precision. Some were symbols whose meanings had long since been lost.


It dripped from her hair, weighing it down until it resembled a weeping willow.

I thnk your difficult task here is to make clear (without being too obvious) that she's looking in a mirror, and the mirror image is different than reality. So let's be in her. She's looking in the mirror and sees blood. (You might have this already, but carry it through.)

You might have done this purposefully, or maybe you're just resonating to the centrality of the mirror motif in amplifying and contradicting the notion of identity and self. The "looking in the mirror" exercise is used, you know, to test consciousness-- that is, when does a baby realize that it's her image in the mirror-- it's not another real baby? (It's very amusing to do this with a cat-- he'll try to get behind the mirror to get at the other cat. Of course, being a cat, once he realizes he can't figure this out, he ignores the mirror in his lordly fashion.) The reversal of the image is also important. How long before we automatically scrub the smudge off our right cheek when we see the smudge on the left cheek in the mirror?

Anyway, as soon as we incorporate the idea that this is a reflection of us, we react by taking in the information about us. So if she's seeing her own image there, what's the first thing she's going to do? I think she's going to put her hand to her head, to make sure that it's not really bleeding. Then she might look at her hand-- no blood. Then back at the mirror, and then she would catalog the rest of what she sees.
It dripped from her hair, weighing it down until it resembled a weeping willow.

Watch your "it"-- use the noun when you can-- you've got three "its" here, and two of them are about hair, I presume, and one about blood. Use the noun:

The blood dripped from her hair, weighing it down until it resembled a weeping willow.

That "until it resembled" feels more clunky and "written" than the rest of the passage. How about:
The blood dripped from her hair, weighing it down like a weeping willow.
or till her head looked like a weeping willow? A bloody weeping willow? A willow is green, so you might say "red weeping willow" so we don't get the wrong idea!
There was a jagged crimson line separating her head from her body.

Where was the line? Across her throat? Again, she might touch her throat (and does her hand in the reflection go to its neck too?) and look at her hand again. Be in her body, and see through her eyes. What does her body do? She's not just a seeing machine-- her body is going to move instinctively.
Blood trickled down from it forming red rivulets that merged with the innumerable cuts marring the porcelain perfection of her body.

If she's naked, say it-- of her naked body.
Some were long thick gashes created by hands hyped on the adrenaline of battle.
Some what? Some of the cuts? Don't worry about being too long here-- length will help, I think, because you want this to be important.
Now "hands hyped on the adrenaline of battle"-- does she know that? Is she the one observing that? It seems sort of omniscient.

Some where thin straight lines crafted with surgical precision.
Proofread. :)

Some were symbols whose meanings had long since been lost.

Are you in her viewpoint? If so, does she know the meanings had been lost, or does she just not know what they mean?

I would suggest ending with something that is hers-- her thought or her movement. Don't lose her here. Now you might be going for something different-- maybe this is a common experience for her, to look in the mirror and see the future, maybe? No matter what, though. I think the sight of blood on your head and slashes in your body would be primal enough that it would be really hard not to react somehow. If she doesn't respond, make some point of that, that she's clinical, maybe?

Great idea!
Alicia

Anon edits-- Main character's name is Beulah

Beulah buttoned her spring jacket and clutched her lunch bag in her hand as she surveyed the schoolyard. Both Effie and Nell and were absent and Minnie was inside working on math. Beulah hoped that she would see someone sitting by herself, but all the other girls had tight knots of friends gathered around them. The largest group gathered around Winifred Waldfogel, and even some of the boys stood close by her.

Great names there. But too many of them for the top of a scene. Each will take attention away from the reader getting to know the main character. What's important? It's lunchtime. Beulah is alone. We don't need to know why she's alone. What we need to know is how it makes her feel. So Get rid of Effie et al. Mention them later, as needed.
Beulah buttoned her spring jacket and clutched her lunch bag in her hand as she surveyed the schoolyard.
This does a good job of identifying the character and providing enough info that we know the situation: School. Lunch. Spring.

You don't need "in her hand." You only need to add more to "clutch" if the whatever is being clutched in something other than her hand (her teeth, for example).

Now to make the buttoning of the jacket more important (so it doesn't just seem like a way to get action in there), think about adding something that hints at why she's buttoning. Like if it's early spring and still chilly, maybe she buttons it "tight" or "up to the neck" or she buttons "every button."

Blocking is important here because you have two actions that require hands. You can clutch using only one hand, but it's hard to button using only one hand. It can be done, but more likely you'd put down whatever is in your hand and button using both hands and then pick up the whatever again.

That might be more description than you want for a relatively unimportant action. So think about a substitute action that accomplishes the same sort of thing, but without hands. Maybe, if you want to show that it's cold, she can "hunch her shoulders against the wind" or stick her free hand in her pocket or use that hand to pull up her hood.

Beulah hoped that she would see someone sitting by herself, but all the other girls had tight knots of friends gathered around them.

Hmm. This is okay, but I wonder if you can make it more active, not just a sort of static hope, but something that shows this in motion? You're designing the scene, so you can do almost anything. :) I'm thinking of something like Beulah seeing a classmate sitting alone and starting over there, but before she can get there, a knot of girls emerges from the school and heads to gather around the bench.

The largest group gathered around Winifred Waldfogel, and even some of the boys stood close by her.

Again, this is fine, and I love the name. But think about putting Beulah in motion. She starts towards the one bench, where there's only one girl, but then the other girls beat her there. She turns (she does need somewhere to sit to eat lunch!), and is looking right at Winifred and sees that the group around her is even larger.

I like that "even some of the boys" because it tells me subtly that this isn't high school yet because it's unusual for boys to be hanging around girls, and it's a testament to Winifred's attractiveness that they're hanging around.

Just think about showing Beulah's hope and disappointment in action. It's not a big deal; the emotion is really what matters. And actually, if this is for children, especially middle-grade or lower, you might want to state the emotion out (Beulah hoped) as the younger reader might not be experienced enough to interpret the action as "hope and disappointment".

Alicia

Splatter edit

Splatter:

The old man had been whispering to Cammie all day. He’d started at dawn. The field, illuminated by the frosted gold of the sun’s rising, was just becoming visible at her fingertips when she felt a slow hum building. It was like crickets singing, so familiar she barely noticed – and she certainly didn’t say anything. After all, this was the first spring Cammie was old enough to help with the planting, and she was doing her best to seem grown-up. Mother always said to stop making things up, to stop being so childish, and she hated it when Cammie talked about the sounds she heard. So Cammie ignored the lazy song in the back of her skull and half-walked, half-bounced, tossing fistful of seeds that disappeared in the dusky morning. She tried her hardest to throw them just like her Mother, who produced such a pretty fan-shape with each casual toss. But the hum became a buzz and the buzz a whine, and then he was there, his breath against her ear and his words only half heard, as though a wind caught at his whispers and pulled them away.


I like the motif of whispering.

Notice that you go from a very specific moment-- this dawn, these whispers-- to a general time, not even "today" but "this spring". I think you're trying to cram too much into the first paragraph. You know, really, all you need to do is make it interesting enough that the reader goes on to the next paragraph--- you don't have to shove all the backstory in there. :)

So take it slow. Think of what the central idea of this paragraph is-- the old man. Whispering. This dawn. Not other people. Not other whispers. Not other times. NOW. If you want to talk about something else, start a new paragraph. You lost me as soon as you went from the specific to the general, from "right now" to "back then." There's a time for "back then," but it's not in this paragraph. So let's cut off all the non-whisper/non-now stuff and concentrate on the moment:

The old man had been whispering to Cammie all day. He’d started at dawn. The field, illuminated by the frosted gold of the sun’s rising, was just becoming visible at her fingertips when she felt a slow hum building. It was like crickets singing, so familiar she barely noticed – and she certainly didn’t say anything.

See how you're making "right now" be retrospective? "The old man HAD BEEN whispering"-- past-perfect (had) tense is often a sign of retrospective narration. There is a place for retrospection, sure, but is it here? You're kind of telling the reader, "The interesting stuff has already happened, and I'm going to start after that." You don't want to tell the reader that. :)

Make this moment a special moment. It might be when the whispering starts, or it might be when the whispering suddenly stops, or it might be when she reacts to it or realizes what it was-- I don't know. But NOW is important, isn't it? You're starting NOW because it's important, right? So where does NOW start?

Let's say it's when the whispering starts.

The old man started whispering to Cammie at dawn.

Immediate, right there.
The field, illuminated by the frosted gold of the sun’s rising, was just becoming visible at her fingertips when she felt a slow hum building. It was like crickets singing, so familiar she barely noticed – and she certainly didn’t say anything.

Notice you have several sonic events here-- the whispering, the hum, the crickets. The latter two are apparently what the whispering is like. But we don't know what the whispering is, and the hum and crickets references don't help, because they don't sound like each other, and they don't actually sound much like whispering. Oddly enough, the best metaphors are often unrelated to the object being compared-- because if they're related, we can't really get the metaphor. We're thinking, "But a hum doesn't sound like a cricket. Cricket songs are high-pitched."

I'm not sure which the whispering is like, but I'd choose one of those and go with that. A whisper that is like a low hum would be low-pitched, throbby, seductive, sleepy. A whisper that is like a cricket song would seem to me to be high-pitched, scratchy, exciting, anxious. Which is more like this old man's whisper? I can't get much of an emotional sense of this because those two comparisons each take me in a different direction. Be aware of the signals you're sending, and send the ones you want the reader to get. :)

The field, illuminated by the frosted gold of the sun’s rising, was just becoming visible at her fingertips

I like the sound of this but had to read it a couple times before I figured out what you meant was at her fingertips. Why fingertips? She's planting? Okay, but you know, this is visual, and it might be messing with the coherence. Can she SEE the old man? Or just hear him? Think about sticking with the aural perception for a few lines, and then switch to the visual, but connect it with action. For example, if I heard someone whispering at me, I'd turn and look. There's your visual cue. She turns and looks for the source of the whispering, and the dark is lightening and the sun rising-- if you want to make this immediate, let her provide the cues for what is perceived and what isn't.

Also -- minor point-- you might slip in some adjective before "field"-- the strawberry field, the cornfield? Just to give us a bit more info.

I'm not clear on whether there really is an old man or if she's imagining him. If he's not there in physical form, how does she know he's old? What quality in his voice or what he says makes her think that?

You don't have to address all this at once, goodness knows, but just be aware that the reader will be asking, and that's a good thing. :) But what is he saying? Can she tell?
What is her emotional reaction? Is she scared or not?
It was like crickets singing, so familiar she barely noticed – and she certainly didn’t say anything.
"She barely noticed..." way to diminish the importance. :) At first she barely noticed? I can believe that-- there's this sound, and it's not too intrusive (a whisper, not a shout), but as time goes on and it doesn't shut up, then she notices?

and she certainly didn’t say anything.

This is intriguing, because it suggests that she might be ashamed or worried or something-- that if others knew she was hearing it, they'd disapprove somehow. It also indicates that she thinks no one else hears it.

As a matter of fact, in a town north of me there's something called "The Hum." (Google Kokomo Hum.) Some people in town heard this constant hum, and it made them sick, and other residents couldn't hear it and thought the hearers were crazy. (There actually was a hum-- two big industrial fans.)
It's a great idea for individualizing her right off. She's the one the old man whispers to, or she's the only one who hears him whisper.

But you might say WHO she doesn't say anything to-- her mother? Everyone?

You're setting up a kind of cool motif of sound/silence (motifs are often opposite pairs)-- she hears, but she can't speak about it.

Alicia

Steven, line editing

Steven Brant said...

Alternative history? Just guessing. My brother Chris used to read Harry Turtledove's alternative histories. That's about all I know about it. I do remember reading one where the south won the Civil War, and the author was a lot more hopeful than I was (having grown up in Virginia, where the war ended in 2008, when it voted for an African-American president!). But what a great subject, and let's face it, if you want to write FICTION about an important historical event, you need to go beyond the fact. So you won't get me carping that he was killed at night and so couldn't look out the window, etc. FICTION means, as Archibald MacLeish said about poetry, "not true."

The killer strode purposefully toward the President, knife raised high.

The President remained unaware, staring out the window into the oppressively hot DC night. His back was exposed, unprotected. My sister and I were immobile, too startled to react. I tried to shout a warning, at least give the President a chance, at least give the President a chance, but the words were stuck in my throat.

Why is he staring out at the night?

This is presumably NOT taking place at Ford's Theatre, where L was actually attacked, so see if you can sneak in some information, like "...staring out the White House window into...."

Can you sneak in a sense of where the narrator and sister are? "Immobile behind the couch" or "immobile in the doorway..." or?
at least give the President a chance, but the words were stuck in my throat.

At least give him a chance to what? Work on finding ways to slide in MORE. Here's the difference between narrative and reality-- in narrative, you can slip in more information with little words. :)

Also there is no reason to stick all that in one sentence. Conclusion, ending, results-- those are more emphatic in a single sentence at the end of the paragraph. Start thinking about sentence design and paragraph design as ways of letting the reader what goes with what. That's all about meaning too-- sentences and paragraphs. Don't assume that words and phrases are the real containers of meaning. Readers are sophisticated thinkers-- accept that, and assume they get meaning from what you put together in sentences, and what you put together in paragraphs. If you want the reader to know this is important ON ITS OWN, put it in a sentence of its own, and you'll be signalling: "Pay attention. This is important." So:
at least give the President a chance. But the words were stuck in my throat.

You don't need "were" there-- I'd decide on the basis of (you guessed it) rhythm. You can always vary rhythm by adding "nothing" words that don't really affect the meaning. This is the great skill that comes from writing bad but rhymed/metered poetry. No one who has ever written a bunch of sonnets will ever wonder what the rhythm of a sentence needs. :)

Helps to read Shakespeare and Frost aloud.
How did it come down to this, two kids trying to prevent this murder – a century and a half before their own time?
This is a nice first-personish way of quickly summarizing the situation.

I'd just suggest --
before OUR own time?

... makes it more personal. Those kids are "us", right?
Carin was between the assassin and his goal. He pushed her roughly out of the way with his left hand. She grunted as she spun around.
Opportunity to slide in setting info. Keep a watch for these, like:
Carin was between the assassin and his goal, there in the balcony seats... or there by the desk.. or?

In the beginning, the reader needs to have some sense of where we are, so slide in whatever info you can without being too obvious. This might be something you revise in. I tend to write in layers:
Dialogue
Action
Setting
Other

When you do your final draft, add in anything you think the reader needs (often only a word here and there). Then do another final draft and make sure everything is needed!
I saw her go down, saw the President still lost in thought, and before I could think about it, I was on the move. I jumped up on the President’s enormous bed, took two bouncing steps across it, and threw myself at the assassin. I grabbed him about the neck and upraised arm.
Okay, we're in his bedroom. The Lincoln bedroom! So... slide in info when you can with a word or two:
Where does she go down?
Is the president in his bed?
Block your action here. It sounds like she's on the other side of the bed from the assassin, but wasn't she/he just next to her sister?

I am really bad with action, but I try to compensate by story-boarding (with stick figures, natch) the movement. Where is "I"? Where is everyone else in the room? Make sure you know where everyone in the scene is positioned, because here, it sounds like "I" is bounding across the bed from the other side. It would probably take only a word or two to make clear where "I" is.
He glared ferociously at me and pushed me roughly back onto the bed.

Now how would you write this differently if "he" was on the bed too, and how would you write it if "he" was somewhere else in the room?

I am totally clueless about anything visual, so I truly can't imagine your action. That doesn't mean you should spell it out-- probably most readers are more visual than I am. But make sure YOU know where everyone is and what the action means. If "he" is on the floor beside the bed, he's going to reach UP to get to "I", right? Or "I" am going to fling myself from the bed and--- you're in first-person. What happens? Does "I" descend (as "I" would if "he" were beside on the floor) or not (if "he" were also on the bed)? And is Lincoln on the bed, or leaning on the window frame, or?

Block your action, and then decide what you need to tell the reader.
The President had heard the commotion behind him, and he turned back from the window. Even in the dim candlelight, his famous profile was unmistakable – the beard, the height, the gangly arms, everything but the stovepipe hat.

Past perfect-- "had heard"-- is problematic in several ways. If the Pres can turn in real time, no past perfect, better. Understand that the reader is going to cut you a little slack here, because we all know how hard it is to narrate simultaneous action. So if the president hears and turns in real time, that's good. If it's an instant before or after, the reader probably won't care.

The President heard the commotion behind him, and turned back from the window. Even in the dim candlelight, his famous profile was unmistakable – the beard, the height, the gangly arms, everything but the stovepipe hat.

Here's where you can sneak in a tiny bit more info about the narrator. How does he/she know what the Pres looks like? If you have:
his famous profile was unmistakable from the one in my history textbook – the beard, the height, the gangly arms, everything but the stovepipe hat.
the reader will instantly know that this is a schoolkid, right?
his famous profile was unmistakable from the portrait on Wikipedia – the beard, the height, the gangly arms, everything but the stovepipe hat.
...then we can assume that "I" is probably an adult.
The man aimed his knife at President Lincoln’s neck.

You call him "assassin" before, and I wonder if it might work to keep that? I'm assuming this is more complicated than just JW Booth getting an earlier chance, so you don't want to say "Booth".

Interesting opening. I am really interested in the "meta" aspects of alternate history, how much you rely on the reader's knowledge of what "really" happen (and notice I put "really" in quotes, like it's not really real ), and what you decide is "canon"-- what you aren't allowed to change, like the Pres's temperament or the year of assasssination?

(Later-- I actually hate one-sentence paragraphs, so I'd combine some of these. Assume no editor is going to allow a series of short paragraphs-- how would you re-paragraph this?)

A

lapetus line editing.

Lapetus posted:
A bulge of earth in the distance raced towards her at jet speed. As it passed, the ground ripped upwards, throwing Dawn into the air, almost 15 meters high. The earth threw off the top layers of soil, flinging buried pipes and wires as well as huge chunks of asphalt and concrete into the air. Dawn sailed over the soil, reminded of documentaries where tons of dynamite blew away a wall of material. The earth exploded in every direction. Dawn crashed onto a soft pile of debris and ducked from rain of high-flung rocks and bricks. A couple blocks away, Charlotte’s jewel, the HLSCO HQ building, the huge elegant structure almost a kilometer high, crumpled into itself, imploding in a huge cloud of dust and noise. Dawn spotted her own apartment complex, presumably with her Aunt Rose inside, settling down to the ground in a plume of debris.

"Bulge" seems to me still attached to the earth, not a projectile. Not sure if anyone else felt that way! Or do you mean it was still attached? You know, a line of description might clear this up-- however, it's possible only I didn't get it.

Good frenetic feel here, right for an action scene.

As it passed, the ground ripped upwards, throwing Dawn into the air, almost 15 meters high. The earth threw off the top layers of soil, flinging buried pipes and wires as well as huge chunks of asphalt and concrete into the air.

Maybe earlier say where we are? See if you can sneak it in-- like the bulge of earth ran past a highrise (we're in a city) or a silo (we're in the country).

Notice that you've buried the experience of the POV character, in the middle of a line. How close are you to her own feelings? If you're in deep POV, or any kind of personal POV, you'll want to tell how it feels to be flung that way. If you're in omniscient, however, you want to concentrate on the overall scene-- but seeing a person flung into the air might be worth describing. Are her arms flailing, etc?

Dawn sailed over the soil, reminded of documentaries where tons of dynamite blew away a wall of material.
Uh, this doesn't seem to be a real person. She's sailing through the air, and a bulge of earth is pursuing her, and she's thinking about documentaries? Come on. Be in her. Close your eyes and imagine that you are her, and you are there on earth and suddenly you're flung into the air, and there is NOTHING you can do, but you try to do it anyway-- grab at the air, reach down for the earth, anything that can stop your flight. Be in her, and tell us what it feels like, and what you're thinking as you sail through the air to probable death.
If you want to talk about documentaries, you need to be in omniscient POV, I think.
Then again, maybe she's a lot cooler under pressure than I am!

The earth exploded in every direction. Dawn crashed onto a soft pile of debris and ducked from rain of high-flung rocks and bricks.
How does it feel to crash? Can she scramble up, look wildly around, and then duck?

A couple blocks away, Charlotte’s jewel, the HLSCO HQ building, the huge elegant structure almost a kilometer high, crumpled into itself, imploding in a huge cloud of dust and noise.
I like that "almost a kilometer high", and I can really see it "crumpling".
Maybe too many short elements there? The punctuation is right, but so many short elements might be kind of choppy, and the main purpose of the sentence might be lost. Maybe if you get rid of "Charlotte's jewel"? and end the sentence thus:
crumpled into itself and imploded in a cloud of dust and noise.

See what you think--

Dawn spotted her own apartment complex, presumably with her Aunt Rose inside, settling down to the ground in a plume of debris.
I'd delete that "presumably" right away, as it bleeds out all your credibility. Come on, this is a novel. You're in charge. Aunt Ruth is there, as far as Dawn knows.

I live in the Midwest, and we have tornadoes that will mow down a town and then delicately take one car and set it down undented a mile away. So I envision that apartment complex landing intact and just causing a big dustbomb as it lands. What do you mean? Is the apartment complex destroyed? Tell us.

Also, Dawn is not just a camera. What's going on with her? Is she crouched behind a broken shard of concrete, watching helplessly as her home hurtles by and crashes into the cornfield/desert/parking lot?

See that? I don't know where we are-- the verdant farmland, the desert, the suburbs. "Ground" can be on the moon, for all I know. You did mention Charlotte, presumably the North Carolina city and not the girl I went to high school with. But you know, I'm from Virginia, just north of there, and I still want to know-- are those buildings crashing into the mountains? the mall? a lake?

Look for non-informative words. "Ground" says less than "dirt" even. Sneak in info whenever you can without calling too much attention to it. You can almost always replace a generic word like "ground" with something more interesting, like "the North Carolina clay," or "the desert sand," or "the mall parking lot."

Challenge yourself. Find every generic word and see if you can specific it up. :)

Alicia

Gwen editing

Gwen:

His eyes skimmed the specs, and he began to talk to the system. At first it turned him away. He was reminded of many swift rebuttals from women he'd propositioned. But then, with persistence, it began to change for him, open to him. Authorization? It asked. And he gave it. It was dummy authorization. Why fight the authorization by hacking passwords like some amateur when you could make her show all those hidden files that contain the password programming algorithms? He changed the password and walked in like he'd been here fifty times before. The glass case unfolded like a flower, and he stood up, staring at it. “I knew you'd come to me,” he grinned, putting his hand on the device. It burned his hand.
---
His eyes skimmed the specs, and he began to talk to the system.

Why are those in the same sentence? I don't mean to be confrontational, rather I think "and" implies we know the connection between him skimming the specs and then talking to the system. And maybe we do if we've read everything up to this point. But think about whether he just talked "while/as" he skimmed the specs-- that is, simultaneous actions-- or if there was more of a causal relationship, which I'm getting from the current line, not sure why-- what he saw in the specs told him somehow that he should talk to the system.

At first it turned him away. He was reminded of many swift rebuttals from women he'd propositioned.
These two seem like they should be more connected, maybe in the same sentence. (Also "it" made me go back and re-read-- what's "it"?) Or maybe you need to say HOW the system turned him down? It didn't respond? The cursor blinked contemptuously? You're presenting the system actually in conversation with him, so show that.

Also, "rebuttal" usually means "refutation," not "refusal." And rebuttals aren't like to be swift, because you have to counter-argue the points. So go with "refusals" or "rejections" maybe?

But then, with persistence, it began to change for him, open to him.

You're summarizing here, and I think this is likely the very point where you should get detailed. Presumably this is an important scene, as he seems to be breaking in somewhere. And he's using talents, right? That contrasts nicely with his self-deprecation. So take it slower. Show him working . SEVERAL PARAGRAPHS. If you make it fun, it will work.

For example, you're setting up that he's kind of seducing the system. So play with that. Use seduction words to set up what he's doing-- "flirting" with the system, "complimenting" it, "admiring" it, etc. You probably only need a couple of those, but that will expand the theme you've set up and make this more fun.
Not in love with the "change for him, open for him". Double predicates sound like you can't actually make up your mind. At least they're a little different, and the "open for him" expands the seduction motif ("change for him" doesn't-- see if you can do that subtly-- trust him?). However, notice that you are jumping the gun here. You are stating the results before the action, I think. (The false authorization, I mean.) If you mean that the system asking for the authorization is the first sign of opening, say so somehow. Like After a few more totally sincere compliments, he got to first base. "Authorization?" she asked.

with persistence, it
Have to point out-- this is a dangling modifier. It isn't being persistent-- HE is.
with persistence, he made it change for him...


Authorization? It asked. And he gave it. It was dummy authorization. Why fight the authorization by hacking passwords like some amateur when you could make her show all those hidden files that contain the password programming algorithms?
You have the system as "her" here, and "it" before-- choose one. "Her" goes better with the flirtation motif.

Authorization? it asked.
Lower-case the "i"-- even with the question mark rather than a comma, the "it asked" is still a quote tag and must be connected to the quote, not in a separate sentence.

See, the whole dummy authorization thing is going to confuse most of us (well, at least me). If you take this slower, show what he's doing, explain it, the reader will understand-- as long as you make it fun. (Is he stroking the system with his lies? Fondling it? Flattering it with sweet-nothing authorizations?)

He changed the password and walked in like he'd been here fifty times before. The glass case unfolded like a flower, and he stood up, staring at it. “I knew you'd come to me,” he grinned, putting his hand on the device. It burned his hand.

Okay, here's the culmination. Again, take it slower. Enjoy it. She "surrendered" to him, maybe. I like the unfolding like a flower because that is, of course, a common metaphor for a woman's, um, succumbing to temptation. Good! But I didn't know before that there was a glass case. "She" presumably is not the glass case but the security system? I don't know-- probably you mention that he's standing before a glass case. See, if you took this slower, you could have him seeing his reflection in the glass, etc. Work with what you have, but have fun with it.

And what is "the device/it"? "It" has been the system.

The burning is nice, but you might end with something that connects to the whole seduction motif. Just an example-- "It burned his hand, just like he always knew love would." Or whatever.

You want to know what voice is? THIS is voice. This is finding the fun, the excitement, in a passage, and using your word choice and your approach and your scene design to explore. You want to give the reader the most interesting and entertaining experience of this passage. THAT is your voice-- your way of seeing and presenting the story. You have something clever here, something that shows your playfulness and your irreverent attitude. (VOICE!!!) Use it, but use it well. Explore that motif of seduction. Use it to shape the interaction here, to present your own understanding of what's going on here. Yeah, you might overdo, but you know what? You can always cut it back in revision. Have confidence in your own ability to know what's too much. But a little excess here will mean you'll have a better idea of what works and what's excessive.

And I have to say, the seduction motif is perfect for this situation and character. First, the character-- it's first-person, so you want the narrative to reflect what's unique about the narrator. And he's apparently a felon. So he might be a bit excessive anyway! He's not going to be really conventional and stiff, right? And he's enjoying himself, breaking this system. Give him time to have some fun.

Also the back-and-forth of the situation exactly replicates sex and seduction, doesn't it? You felt that analogy. It's right. Have fun with it. You already are, I can tell ("opened like a flower" :). So take it through the whole passage. Make it a whole passage. I'd even think about doing it more or less in real-time-- that is, if it took him 10 minutes, take 10 paragraphs. You can always cut back if you think you've gone too far.

Notice what you do well, and do it well. :) You are having fun here, and being a little naughty. Well, that'll be fun to the readers too. We can be seduced just like the security system!

And if you take your time, you can get in all the info, like "security system" and "touchpad" and "glass case" and .... The more you put in, the more we'll be able to visualize the scene.

And you can always cut back. Keep that in mind. (Don't forget that step!) Let yourself go at first, and then you can get all analytical after. Try-- oh, two-three pages here. Too much, but that will give you a lot of great lines to choose among.
Alicia