Earthwyrms (YA) hopefully no longer embarrassingly poor opening scene, 1200 words

[Danny McG]

Thanks for the comments so far, everyone. All noted for later thinking.



In fact it's done by the forum software. They're not censored in my text at all.

****ing hell!

 

[thaddeus6th]

With the caveat that YA isn't my thing, I'll give this a brutalising. I mean, a look. Ahem. *sharpens claws*

Adam hunkered in the long grass by the chain-link fence, peering into the stark light and shadows of the machinery compound.
- maybe change to 'the contrasting light and shadows'?

All was still in the breathless May night, only the faint drone of the town’s ring-road breaking the silence.
- I'd make the second clause it's own sentence. Bit slower, and fits with the sentiment conveyed.

Three of the earthmoving machines were in near-darkness, missed by the uneven spread of the security light.
- maybe hyphenate 'earthmoving'?

The gunshot wire-snap jumped Adam with panic, but he clamped down the urge to run for safety.
- reorder or reword, perhaps, as having 'gunshot' made me think, at first, a gunshot had occurred. I like the sound comparison so you could just make it 'The wire snapped loud as a gunshot' etc.

— there was no reason the tree would mean anything to him. He must really want to get into Jezz’s pants.
- works, but might read better as 'Jezz's pants, on the other hand...'

The air stank of diesel and grease.
- like the olfactory description of a mechanical cocktail.

‘One, that’s it?’
- axe 'one'. Small point, but it's unnecessary and the more laconic the question the stronger the implication it's wrong.

And stopped.
- like the very short sentence.

‘Urban myth, according to this.’
- hmm. This is a bugger to raise, but it's a really odd time to check this.

 

[HareBrain]

- hmm. This is a bugger to raise, but it's a really odd time to check this.

You mean it's odd that Rick should check this at that precise time?

 

[The Big Peat]

The question: I can't recall where, but recently someone (@Toby Frost maybe?) said one good way of starting a story was to show the MC doing whatever they're best at. I can see the sense in that, but here I've almost done the opposite. Is that a mistake?

Nothing like utter failure to show a person's best and worst. I often talk about this, and I happily use Harry Potter being stuffed under a staircase as a good example when there's no positive wow-action there - it is the best of his personality though.

What you have here is something of a failure on the kids' parts, and that gets right to their personalities, and I think that sounds very workable. I'm not sure the personalities come through as sharply as I'd like, but they do so more than in previous editions.

I also think that their immediate goal - sabotage the dig - could be made more obvious and a bigger deal earlier. I think I get curious about their intentions when they climb through the fence; that could be a good time for some quick exposition.

 

[thaddeus6th]

HareBrain, precisely.

That said, I read some excellent writing advice (on a Mark Crilley comic-drawing video, slightly oddly) to the effect that coincidences and suchlike are forgiven at the start or as part of the premise of a story (a radioactive spider bite springs to mind) but not later on.

 

[HareBrain]

That said, I read some excellent writing advice (on a Mark Crilley comic-drawing video, slightly oddly) to the effect that coincidences and suchlike are forgiven at the start or as part of the premise of a story (a radioactive spider bite springs to mind) but not later on.

I'd agree with him, especially as part of the premise. But I think there are also tropes you can also get away with at any point, like someone eavesdropping on a conversation just when the speakers are about to say something relevant.

But I thought you were talking less about coincidence etc and more whether he would Google it when there was still apparent danger about. Or have I got that wrong?

 

[thaddeus6th]

I can believe the Googling, the timing is what I was raising.

 

[HareBrain]

Argh. Something popped into my head yesterday which should have popped in a LOT sooner. I'm not sure if it's a problem or not, and would be grateful for anyone's views.

What are Adam and Jezz hoping to get out of this? They're angry that a new road is going to destroy a tree that's been a big part of their lives for years (and is almost sacred to them), but realistically, nobbling a few JCBs isn't going to stop that. The best that can happen is that it might delay things for a bit.

Does it matter that it won't, or does their age and lack of other options make their decision seem realistic? I guess if they also brought along spray-cans to write protest messages on the vehicles or portacabins etc, it might make them seem less half-arsed?

No one else has ever raised this, but that doesn't mean it's not an issue.

 

[The Big Peat]

Argh. Something popped into my head yesterday which should have popped in a LOT sooner. I'm not sure if it's a problem or not, and would be grateful for anyone's views.

What are Adam and Jezz hoping to get out of this? They're angry that a new road is going to destroy a tree that's been a big part of their lives for years (and is almost sacred to them), but realistically, nobbling a few JCBs isn't going to stop that. The best that can happen is that it might delay things for a bit.

Does it matter that it won't, or does their age and lack of other options make their decision seem realistic? I guess if they also brought along spray-cans to write protest messages on the vehicles or portacabins etc, it might make them seem less half-arsed?

No one else has ever raised this, but that doesn't mean it's not an issue.

I feel like a different version of this question is "Is there a market for YA fiction where the teenage protagonists are clearly clueless at the start of the story?"

 

[Cat's Cradle]

I like this version a lot, HB. There's more energy in this beginning, and I like the dialogue better, I think. I agree that it's no problem you're showing them fail, at the start. There's drama in failure, and they're trying, which is more than a lot of people ever do.

Maybe that's part of the answer to your post just above. I'd feel it perhaps a bit too much, and a bit unlikely, if, in the first few pages and in the midst of their highly stressful act of vandalism, there was too much backstory given as to why they were there doing what they were doing. The kids would understand why they were there, and telling us would just seem like 'telling'; the deeper motivations for their actions can come later. They're trying, which maybe is enough to show, at the start.

I would think that the action of sidelining a few pieces of heavy construction equipment would seem sufficient enough result for kids new to aggressive disobedience. Could it be mentioned in an aside that if this is successful, it may be just the first act of a planned series of acts, toward their goal of saving Doaky? I also like the thought of the spray cans...the kids could verbally practice the various anti-establishment tags they might leave on the equipment or buildings, with Rick going for a goofy, funny one (perhaps this could be before they start cutting the fencing, when the newbs are too nervous to actually start, and are delaying the point of no return by gabbling on about slogans). I thought, BTW, that Rick's line of dialogue that ended the excerpt was very funny. It was a great place to cut the piece.

Final thought about this: 'The gunshot wire-snap...'. I like this, but just another option...I've heard laser pistol/rifle firing-sounds from movies or TV shows that sound sort of like the noise a piece of taut wire makes when it's cut. Anyway, a good start, IMO. Best of luck with the book, CC

 

[Brian G Turner]

realistically, nobbling a few JCBs isn't going to stop that

I wouldn't think that occurs to them - they'll just be looking to be seen to be active, rather than chase the dull papertrail of pragmatism. I didn't have a problem with that at all, as it reflects modern activism.

 

[thaddeus6th]

I think that's fine. A temporary delay is still a delay and if the price of cutting down the tree is excessive they might modify the plans.

 

[Cat's Cradle]

Possible protest tag: Doaky Lives! (Maybe one of them has read Tolkien, and would understand the tag's relevance as a counterculture slogan.)

 

[The Big Peat]

Actually, on second thoughts, I think it arguably works very well. The group optimist (Jezz?) can see it in terms of 'Build It And They Will Come'; if one person starts taking action, it'll spur others into coming forwards. She's not hoping to win the battle here and there, she's hoping to publicise a cause (maybe sugar in the tanks is the wrong way to go there; maybe graffiti would be the better option; maybe I'm wrong though). The group brute can see it as a case of "Down with pragmatism" - he's standing for what he believes in a fit of passion, and he believes that for the brave,a nything is possible.

And our group conformist is there because everyone else is

There's other possible identities and motivations here. But in an age of Gesture Politics, where the impossible becomes reality every six months, I think there's a range of sensible motivations here.

 

[Hugh]

Argh. Something popped into my head yesterday which should have popped in a LOT sooner. I'm not sure if it's a problem or not, and would be grateful for anyone's views.

What are Adam and Jezz hoping to get out of this? They're angry that a new road is going to destroy a tree that's been a big part of their lives for years (and is almost sacred to them), but realistically, nobbling a few JCBs isn't going to stop that. The best that can happen is that it might delay things for a bit.

Does it matter that it won't, or does their age and lack of other options make their decision seem realistic? I guess if they also brought along spray-cans to write protest messages on the vehicles or portacabins etc, it might make them seem less half-arsed?

No one else has ever raised this, but that doesn't mean it's not an issue.

Not being up on the wider picture, I'd assumed one of the following:
(1) Jezz is the dominant figure, and the others just follow her lead
(2) They might not be that bright and are more instinctive in their actions rather than thinking things through
(3) The present situation is critical: the felling of the tree is imminent and anything that will delay this is urgent, even if just by a day or two.
(4) Jezz and co are already caught up mystically with the tree in ways of which they are not aware

 

[HareBrain]

Thanks for the input, everyone. That has reassured me.

I feel like a different version of this question is "Is there a market for YA fiction where the teenage protagonists are clearly clueless at the start of the story?"

Cluelessness is aspirational these days, didn't you know? (Or is that just me?)

Maybe one of them has read Tolkien, and would understand the tag's relevance as a counterculture slogan.

I'm not sure any of them were students on an American campus in the sixties!

(I think I only know what you were referring to from something in a Tolkien bio.)

 

[The Judge]

It didn't worry me. Plenty of people only think in the short-term, including well-meaning activists, and I'd have thought teenagers would be more susceptible to this than more mature adults unless they're all great chess players, thinking four or five moves ahead. The immediate goal is to do something, to register protest, to gain publicity, to act. After all, one might think that that chaining oneself to railings is going to achieve very little, but suffragettes did it and it's still popular today.

And this crippling of the machines is symbolic, as well as perhaps being just be the first in a series of planned activities, which you could refer to in passing at the very end of this scene eg "What now then?" "Plan B." But before they can talk about plan B in another scene, big things start happening. I wouldn't add anything much more to this scene by way of exposition, and certainly not to the beginning, because you need to keep it moving.

 

[Plucky Novice]

I enjoyed this much more than last time. I stayed with the story nearly the whole way through, just pulled out a bit by two lines.

The one about a Hollywood lead and the other was the wire cutting jump. (Sorry for poor refs, on my phone).

I don't know why but I found the premise acceptable this time, perhaps the additional touches on the tree helped.

If I were to suggest an area to work on it would be the three strangers element. I found this a bit flat and distant. I'd prefer it to be more vivid. Not easy with your pov though. Perhaps it could be enhanced with a greater sense of time passing.

I'm reading on now, whereas in the earlier version I may not have.

Tick vg.

 

[HareBrain]

he one about a Hollywood lead and the other was the wire cutting jump.

Both changed now. Thanks!

I met an agent at a publishing event this evening who said she wanted to see it, so fingers crossed!

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Both changed now. Thanks!

I met an agent at a publishing event this evening who said she wanted to see it, so fingers crossed!

Hooray!