Today, we’ll continue analyzing short sections of scenes posted here as comments by my loyal blog readers.
Here is a segment posted by Katie:
Karel barely letting the door swing shut before turning on him. “What is with you? First you treat me like some empty-headed dolt only good for a kitchen, then you try to ruin the deal with the only guide we have available!”
“The man is an arrogant pig!”
“Who cares? Of course he’s arrogant – he’s the best guide in the area! He’s willing to take us to Paravel at the swing of an ax, knowing his earltan is after you, and you’re complaining because he’s confident about his work? You’re the one who’s too arrogant. You’re willing to throw our lives away for one condescending remark?”
The question stung. “You’re willing to risk your own country to prove you’re my equal. Why do you think I was trying to lead the conversation? If he thought this was all my idea, he’d be less curious about your motives. I was trying to protect your identity!”
She stared at him, her breathing slowing as her anger cooled. He realized he could feel her breath on his lips, which meant she was far too close to him, but he didn’t want to look away, watching her eyes fade from rage to confusion to embarrassment.
She looked down and leaned back, away from him. “I’m sorry.”
Randy sez: This snippet is dialogue, which makes it easy to sort out the Motivations and the Reactions. The Reactions are whatever our viewpoint characters says (in this case, the unnamed man in the scene). The Motivations are everything else (in this case, whatever Karel says).
Since I need a name for the viewpoint character and I don’t have it, I’m going to call him “Joe” here.
There is a lot of conflict in this scene. Karel is very angry as we begin this section and gives “Joe” a double-barreled blast of invective. This first paragraph is a Motivation.
“Joe” responds with a short sentence which is a Reaction: “The man is an arrogant pig!” I’m wondering what he’s feeling here, and this might be a good place to show the reader. However, it’s not required.
Karel continues with another 5-sentence blast at “Joe.” This is a new Motivation. She’s still talking pretty harshly, and I think it would be good to break this up a little. 5 sentences is actually quite a lot in a dialogue. An action tag, or a description of her face or something here would give us some visuals so we can see this scene better. Remember that dialogue is most auditory, so it’s helpful to insert some visual cues.
The fourth paragraph is again a Reaction, and here we have a bit of emotive response. “The question stung.” That’s good and I think it might help to tell even a little more about what “Joe” is feeling here. In the rest of “Joe’s” Reaction, we have another 4 sentences of speech. Again, I think an action tag or some other visual would be very helpful in giving us more balance.
The fifth paragraph is worth looking at in detail:
She stared at him, her breathing slowing as her anger cooled. He realized he could feel her breath on his lips, which meant she was far too close to him, but he didn’t want to look away, watching her eyes fade from rage to confusion to embarrassment.
This is actually Narrative Summary. It “tells” what happens over a few minutes (that word “as” is a tipoff), rather than “showing” us what happens second by second. In my view, it would be stronger to stretch this out a bit and show it in MRUs, rather than using Narrative Summary. In a highly emotive scene like this, you don’t want to summarize anything–you want to show it and squeeze all the juice out of it that you can.
A little sports analogy here might be appropriate. In football, the really important plays are shown again in slow motion, so you can see every little detail. (And I wish they’d show the boring plays in fast-forward, to get past them.) But the pacing would feel completely wrong if they switched instantly from slow motion to fast-forward and then switched back to fast-forward, all in one play.
MRUs are like showing the play in slow-motion. Every little detail is shown. Narrative Summary is like fast-forward, and you use it when not much is happening. When you transition mid-scene from MRUs to Narrative Summary and then back to MRUs, you are changing the pace abruptly twice on your reader. I don’t think you want to do that.
The sixth paragraph is a new Motivation:
She looked down and leaned back, away from him. “I’m sorry.”
So paragraphs 1 through 4 are “showing,” paragraph 5 is “telling,” and paragraph 6 is “showing” again. I’d like to see them all “showing.”
This sounds like a great story Katie. Is the storyworld medieval England? Ever since reading “Pillars of the Earth”. I enjoy stories about earles, knights and men-at-arms.
Here is my sophomoric attempt to improve paragraph 5:
She stared at him, her breathing slowing.
She is too close to me. But it’s good to smell her breath and even better to watch her eyes fading from rage to confusion to embarrassment.
PS. Yes Sylvia. I know. 🙂
Looking at paragraph 5, I wonder if you, Randy, identify it as narrative summary because it is not written in as deep a POV as it could be. To be honest with you, this is where I find myself a little shaky in understanding MRU’s. Daan’s reworking seems to apply a deeper POV and therefore turning it into an MRU – is that correct? versus using words like “He realized”. Or is there something else I’m missing.
I understand “as her anger cooled” is telling and leaving “her breath slowed” would be showing. Could you add another description, like “The red in her face faded” to clarify the cooling of her anger? Or is it necessary.
My question is: can you keep some telling to slow the action down for the reader to catch their breath before you fling them forward into something else? Kind of like a rollar coaster eeking it’s way to the top of the hill. You know it’s going down when it gets there, and the anticpation of that, even though the coaster is moving slowly, is thrilling.
Katie,
I agree with Randy about the action tags, especially after “Joe’s” first remark in this segment. Since we haven’t read anything earlier in this story, he’s faceless. I’d like to see him or his physical reaction/movement.
In the next graph, an action tag could be added following, “and you’re complaining because he’s confident about his work?” Maybe this could be where Karel moves in closer.
The “question stung” graph could be used for “Joe” to take a step closer. This way, they’re not just suddenly in each other’s space.
In the next graph, I’m put off by the “ings” (something I first heard from Randy at a writer’s conference): “She stared at him, her breathing slowing as her anger cooled. He realized he could feel her breath on his lips, which meant she was far too close to him, but he didn’t want to look away, watching her eyes fade from rage to confusion to embarrassment.” Sometimes there’s no way around the “ings” (gerunds), and they can be used to slow things down. But I’m curious about how this graph would read without them, though you may want to keep “breathing” as it is. Also, does Joe realize he feels her breath, or does he simply feel it?
Thanks for allowing us to learn through your posting. And of course, now I want to know what happens!
DC
Hey Daan, it’s O.K. to break rules occasionally. Most of us roll through a STOP sign once in awhile when no one is coming.
Dwight V. Swain, in his book, Techniques of the Selling Writer, (University of Oklahoma, 1965) says: “After you find your feeling, rules come in handy . . . help you to figure out the best way to capture in words whatever it is that so excites you. But the feeling itself must always remain dominant. Though rules may shape your story, you yourself must shape the rules.”
So we don’t break rules — any rules — carelessly or indiscriminately. We may break them once in awhile with intent — knowing that this is the best way.
Everyone knows that it is wrong to break someone else’s window. However, if we see their house is on fire and someone is desperately trying to get out, we feel justified in breaking their window and saving the person’s life. We’ll even be applauded for it.
I’m only objecting to too many “ands” and “buts” at the beginning of sentences. We tend to get careless once we break a rule — and it works for us.
Let’s break rules only if the sentence reads better that way. Then break it gladly — with intent.
Thanks for all the suggestions! Here’s my first rewrite (giving “Joe” his real name). It’s from a fantasy novel, but this area of the world has a Black Woods of Germany feel, so medieval England is not far off, Daan.
Karel barely let the door swing shut before turning on him. “What is with you? First you treat me like some empty-headed dolt only good for a kitchen, then you try to ruin the deal with the only guide we have available!”
“The man is an arrogant pig!”
“Who cares? Of course he’s arrogant – he’s the best guide in the area! He’s willing to take us to Paravel at the swing of an ax, knowing his earltan is after you, and you’re complaining because he’s confident about his work?” She stabbed her hands on the table between them. “You’re the one who’s too arrogant. You’re willing to throw our lives away for one condescending remark?”
The question stung. “You’re willing to risk your own country to prove you’re my equal. Why do you think I was trying to lead the conversation?” He bent forward and lowered his voice. “If he thought this was all my idea, he’d be less curious about your motives. I was trying to protect your identity!”
She stared at him, her breath choppy.
Tahir felt her breath on his lips, which meant she was far too close to him. He couldn’t look away. He didn’t want to.
The rage in her eyes faded to confusion. Pink dusted her cheeks. She looked down and leaned back, away from him. “I’m sorry.”
The “far too close to him” seems a bit like a motivation, but since she isn’t moving, he’s just noticing her closeness, I placed it as a reaction. Is this correct?
It seems to be that the first sentence of Paragraph 5 below is inside her and the rest is inside him. Mid-paragraph, the POV switches.
She stared at him, her breathing slowing as her anger cooled. He realized he could feel her breath on his lips, which meant she was far too close to him, but he didn’t want to look away, watching her eyes fade from rage to confusion to embarrassment.
Much improved, Katie.
I’d feel more sure-footed if the first two sentences read:
Karel barely let the door swing shut before turning on him.
“What is with you, Tahir?…” That would identify the POV quickly.
Also the word “dolt” seems masculine to me. What about a more feminine, still condescending word – dairymaid, scullery maid, – because you do have her refer to the kitchen.
I like the hint at her identity. Methinks she’s the princess of the castle, not the maid. And from her “choppy” breath on down to the end of the piece, it’s so much livelier.
Good work.
“as her anger cooled,” is telling, not because of the word “as,” but because it is vague.
You can show by using the word “as.”
What happens when someone’s anger cools? Her face relaxes. The pinch between her forehead smooths. The crows feet by her eyes smooth. Her lips go from pursed to full again. Perhaps her jaw drops a bit, leaving her lips parted. Her shoulders drop, relaxed. She stops fidgeting with her fingers.
Now you can show her anger cooling, and you can use the word as.
As she breathed out slowly, her shoulders dropped and relaxed. She stopped fidgeting with her shirt, and then the pinch of skin between her brows smoothed out. When lastly her jaw relaxed and her lips parted, her warm breath touched John’s face.
This meant she was far too close to him, but he didn’t care to look away. Her lovely feature, something he never truly noticed before, captivated him.
Confusion flooded her eyes, and then her cheeks blushed. She looked down, leaning away from him, and said, “I’m sorry.”