[PLEASE READ FIRST POST] Post the First Three Sentences of your Novel

[mrsmig]

One of the immutable laws of the universe seems to be that the losers all congregate in certain places, no matter where you go. The junkies, the hookers, the pimps, the thieves, the street dealers, the down and out alcoholics, the drag queens, the failed bankers and jilted housewives, the defrocked priests and disbarred attorneys – all the downtrodden masses, miscreants, losers and misfits gravitate towards the same sorts of places, even in different locales.

Now whether this is truly a natural law or rather some unwritten agreement among the participants is still unknown.

This is a variant on the "Pride & Prejudice" style of opening ("It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife.”), but IMO it goes on too long without coming to any sort of point, or even expanding on the original statement.

I have to wonder why you've added "drag queens" to the list of losers. I know a lot of drag queens. Drag is an art form. It takes a great deal of work, love and money to create a drag character. I was already disliking your narrator's superior tone; including drag artists in the mix of "failures" was a deal breaker. I wouldn't read on.

 

[neandermagnon]

One of the immutable laws of the universe seems to be that the losers all congregate in certain places, no matter where you go. The junkies, the hookers, the pimps, the thieves, the street dealers, the down and out alcoholics, the drag queens, the failed bankers and jilted housewives, the defrocked priests and disbarred attorneys – all the downtrodden masses, miscreants, losers and misfits gravitate towards the same sorts of places, even in different locales.

Now whether this is truly a natural law or rather some unwritten agreement among the participants is still unknown.

I also got kicked out of the narrative at "drag queens". As mentioned already, drag is a well-respected art form and there are many wealthy and successful drag artists - drag queens definitely don't belong in the list. But also due to someone close to me being trans (and many people not knowing the difference between being trans, being a drag queen, etc, so lumping them all in the same category and hating on them), I have to deal with transphobia on a daily basis (not directly as I'm not trans but it still takes its toll) so I really don't want to have to deal with negative attitudes towards trans and/or non-gender conforming people in a fiction book that I'm meant to be reading for fun. I'll move on to something else.

Granted someone who's trans might end up being forced to live in the poorest part of town among people with criminal tendencies due to the sheer amount of prejudice and exclusion they're faced with, but this doesn't start out like it's going to be a sensitive portrayal.

Also, "jilted housewives"? Housewife is a word that's rapidly going out of fashion so this comes across like a very worn-out stereotype. And that's before we get onto the issue of social attitudes towards single mothers and divorced women.

The unwritten law is that people who face prejudice and exclusion hang out where they feel safest (which can be relative if they're not fully safe anywhere), or where they are not excluded. I realise this is a far more serious answer than the reader is supposed to be looking for at this point, but you're dealing with issues that affect real people's lives and their loved ones lives.

So I wouldn't read on.

 

[mikepellegrini]

Thanks for responding.

The folks I was hanging out with in the period when I wrote this were almost all heavy into drugs and living on the street. That includes attorneys, people who had worked in finance, a chiropractor and other professionals, housewives picking up extra money hooking (to finance their crack habits).

And it includes drag queens as well (of whom, many were also all heavy into crack - it was the drug of choice, back then). I was friends with a couple of them - they were nice people (within the limits of the environment. Overall, that particular world was pretty dangerous).

What I gave was a factual list categorizing the different people who inhabited that particular environment at that moment in time (mid-90's). It's a long-ass 50 word sentence. But I like it as I wrote it; it has a nice rhythm. And it's historically accurate.

How come no one bitched about the inclusion of defrocked priests and alcoholics? Or lawyers? Attorneys need a JD and to pass the Bar exam but no one balked at my lumping them in. They make bundles of money and are very well educated. Some of them are even nice human beings.

I'm in agreement that transforming into a drag queen can be a "high art."

But take my word for it: the drag queens living in the world I based this story on were indeed down and outers. My writing was in no way aimed at minimizing the general population of drag queens or their accomplishments any more than I was trying to denigrate the 10-15 good attorneys existent in the world.

I can't do politically correct, changing history as I observed it, to conform with whatever today's flavor of PC is. People are way, way too sensitive.

And that's coming from a liberal democrat who voted for Bernie in 16 and would have voted for him again in 20 if he'd got the nomination (I'm happy with Biden and what he's doing, but politically I'm more in line with AOC).

But knee-jerk liberals make me nuts.

 

[neandermagnon]

I gave you an honest reaction to the opening of your book. If I'd lied then that would be absolutely no use to anyone - I'm not into blowing smoke up anyone's arse.

My honest opinion is that your opening came across like someone taking a cheap shot at a bunch of vulnerable people for comedy. It's at the start of the book so there's no other context to mitigate that impression.

I'm not trying to be "PC" - I'm not trying to be anything. I'm just trying to stay sane while I also try to fight against a very organised and pernicious campaign of transphobia - of which a former favourite author of mine is a very vocal supporter of - that directly impacts a loved one's life, and therefore my life too. I see the damage that's being done on a daily basis. Am I over sensitive? Yeah, I probably am by many people's split-second appraisals, but in my daily life I have developed a very thick skin to deal with constant real life transphobia. So when it comes to what books to read for fun, hell if I'm going to read anything that smacks of the very attitudes that I'm constantly fighting against in my daily life. The book goes back on the shelf and I go look for another one. And if someone asks me why, I'll tell them the truth. But in reality, the writer's not in the bookshop to ask why so I silently put the book back and silently move on to another one.

 

[writing17]

Hello! Interesting thread I guess I'm going to try to give it a go:

How are you going to spend your time before you’re hitting one hundred?
A question came to me when Judy and I had cauliflower rice that she cooked for dinner. She said, “I wanna do something I’ve never done before.

 

[neandermagnon]

Hello! Interesting thread I guess I'm going to try to give it a go:

How are you going to spend your time before you’re hitting one hundred?
A question came to me when Judy and I had cauliflower rice that she cooked for dinner. She said, “I wanna do something I’ve never done before.

This has got me interested and I'd probably read on. I'm not mad keen on the floating question (it's not clear if Judy asked the main character the question, or if it just popped into the MC's head, but that might be clear in the next few sentences) but it's not enough to stop me from reading on. I'd read on to find out what the character's going to do that they've never done before.

 

[writing17]

This has got me interested and I'd probably read on. I'm not mad keen on the floating question (it's not clear if Judy asked the main character the question, or if it just popped into the MC's head, but that might be clear in the next few sentences) but it's not enough to stop me from reading on. I'd read on to find out what the character's going to do that they've never done before.

Thank you for your kind feedback, neandermagnon!
Unfortunately, those first three sentences were in my head at the time and I couldnt seem to find much better vocabularies to enrich the sentences. The main character is the narrator, where she meets Judy in her life journey.

 

[kinokonoronin]

How come no one bitched about the inclusion of defrocked priests and alcoholics? Or lawyers?

Hey, Mike! Going to try to honestly answer this for you:

In the first sentence, you establish that you're talking about losers. For anyone concerned with the disenfranchised, this is a red flag because the term lacks any sense of compassion. Language has power. Words have connotations. The word loser isn't factual; it's a loaded pejorative.

Then you go on to break the so-called losers into categories. Note how you use language to differentiate them. A number of them are defined by their substance abuse and/or the illegality of their daily lives: junkies, hookers, pimps, alcoholics, etc. The fact that no one complained about this group is incidental: only two people had responded, and if you had another hundred opinions I'd bet a silver dollar someone would have taken offense. Many people regard substance abuse as an illness, and so describing these people with a pejorative is sure to be upsetting to that audience. As for thieves and street dealers, some of us grew up with folks whose material conditions drove them to such endeavors. Even though we may not approve, some will take exception to this as well (though that group might be rather small).

Drag queens... we'll come back to why drag queens stands out at the end.

After drag queens, you mention four occupations. But note how each of these occupations comes with a qualifying adjective. Failed bankers, jilted housewives, defrocked priests, disbarred attorneys. Their "loser-ness" is tied to characteristics beyond their occupations. For the priests and lawyers in particular, which you ask about, it should be no great mystery why these didn't upset people, since you indicate they lost their careers in disgrace somehow. The same may be true of the banker. But the housewife seems to just be someone abandoned by a spouse, and I have to agree it sounds like you're punching down when you include abandoned wives in the same group as pimps with no further qualifications. Operatively, "sounds like". I and everyone else here understand that you may have had life experience that you're drawing from. But all we have are your words, and on first impression they feel judgmental and compassionless. When it comes to reader attrition, you usually only get that first impression.

As for drag queens, you don't even offer a qualifier as to why they're in this group you've deemed losers. As written, you've effectively called all drag queens losers. It may not have been your intention, but it's the most straightforward and reasonable interpretation of the text.

The long sentence does have a sort of rhythm to it. I like how it feels, from a prose-aesthetic standpoint. I don't know if that's worth its length, since you can achieve rhythm with shorter sentences, but that's for you to decide. We're all just here giving honest feedback. The beauty is that you get to choose whether or not you incorporate that feedback, and how. I don't feel totally comfortable with the tone. But I'd probably read two or three more paragraphs before making a decision. I'm not strongly hooked by this, but I am morbidly curious.

 

[mrsmig]

Thanks for responding.

The folks I was hanging out with in the period when I wrote this were almost all heavy into drugs and living on the street. That includes attorneys, people who had worked in finance, a chiropractor and other professionals, housewives picking up extra money hooking (to finance their crack habits).

And it includes drag queens as well (of whom, many were also all heavy into crack - it was the drug of choice, back then). I was friends with a couple of them - they were nice people (within the limits of the environment. Overall, that particular world was pretty dangerous).

What I gave was a factual list categorizing the different people who inhabited that particular environment at that moment in time (mid-90's). It's a long-ass 50 word sentence. But I like it as I wrote it; it has a nice rhythm. And it's historically accurate.

How come no one bitched about the inclusion of defrocked priests and alcoholics? Or lawyers? Attorneys need a JD and to pass the Bar exam but no one balked at my lumping them in. They make bundles of money and are very well educated. Some of them are even nice human beings.

I'm in agreement that transforming into a drag queen can be a "high art."

But take my word for it: the drag queens living in the world I based this story on were indeed down and outers. My writing was in no way aimed at minimizing the general population of drag queens or their accomplishments any more than I was trying to denigrate the 10-15 good attorneys existent in the world.

I can't do politically correct, changing history as I observed it, to conform with whatever today's flavor of PC is. People are way, way too sensitive.

And that's coming from a liberal democrat who voted for Bernie in 16 and would have voted for him again in 20 if he'd got the nomination (I'm happy with Biden and what he's doing, but politically I'm more in line with AOC).

But knee-jerk liberals make me nuts.

I'm not a knee-jerk liberal. I'm a moderate humanitarian blue-domer naturalist.

You posted for feedback and you got some - and I'm sorry, but your reaction was a knee-jerk.

My main issue was that your opening went on too long without really expanding on your opening statement or coming to a point that would move the story forward. It also didn't put us in a time or place so that your list of "failures" had some context - i.e. your mid-90s wherever-it-is setting.

Look at your opening again. You described your lawyers as "disbarred." You described your priests as "defrocked," your bankers as "failed," your housewives as "jilted," your alcoholics as "down and out." Your drag queens had no such qualifying adjectives. That made it read as if they were the dregs of the earth simply because they were drag queens. Had you said "crackhead drag queens," that would have made a difference.

 

[mikepellegrini]

Thanks again, all, for the feedback.

I was listing a group of losers. And you're right, drag queens and jilted housewives don't fit in. So to be consistent, they do need qualifiers. I made a couple corrections, below, in red.

I'm an alcoholic and an addict, clean and sober since the mid-90s, so I can speak with authority on that subject. I don't believe I've offended anyone. As a group, we're pretty broad-minded, and not very thin-skinned.

You might be interested to know that one of the main supporting characters is trans - the female lead's best friend, and I portray her in a very favorable light.

The book is a black comedy about a down and out taxi company; an update of Steinbeck's Sweet Thursday. I'd never written anything third person before, so the book was an exercise for me, in learning that style. I was consciously trying to emulate his voice. I had the start of Cannery Row in mind when I wrote the start of my book. No, I ain't Steinbeck. But I would certainly aspire to be, someday.

Here are a few more lines (with corrections), so you can see where I was going with this:

"One of the immutable laws of the universe seems to be that the losers all congregate in certain places, no matter where you go. The junkies, the hookers, the pimps, the thieves, the street dealers, the down and out alcoholics, the crackhead drag queens, the failed bankers and meth-fiend housewives, the defrocked priests and disbarred attorneys – all the downtrodden masses, miscreants, losers and misfits gravitate towards the same sorts of places, even in different locales.

Now whether this is truly a natural law or rather some unwritten agreement among the participants is still unknown. But either way, the results are much the same in nearly every instance.

Not surprisingly, Tacoma in Washington State is no exception to this law.

A bustling metropolis of nearly 220,000 people thirty miles to the south of Seattle, the City of Destiny, as the town fathers are proud to boast, is one of the largest container shipping ports in North America.

And like Every City USA, the class segregation exists and is promulgated in Tacoma at an instinctual level – the junkies intuitively know to gather down near the Rescue Mission, the homeless feel secure sleeping in the doorways of the businesses surrounding the Greyhound Depot, the hookers stealthily ply their trade on the streets over near the train station, and the other misfits, miscreants and losers that defy all efforts at categorization drive taxi for BlackTop Cab."

It's been a few years since I did any editing on this. I guess I'll have to take another look.

 

[mrsmig]

Since this is the "Post the First Three Sentences of Your Novel" thread, we can't comment on this expanded version of your opener. (Because Rules.) You'll need to take it over to one of the "Hook Me In Your First 200 Words" threads if you'd like more crit.

 

[kinokonoronin]

Hello! Interesting thread I guess I'm going to try to give it a go:

How are you going to spend your time before you’re hitting one hundred?
A question came to me when Judy and I had cauliflower rice that she cooked for dinner. She said, “I wanna do something I’ve never done before.

I really don't know how to interpret the floating question. Is it part of an internal dialogue? Is the reader being asked to contemplate this? Did the POV character literally ask this out loud? Is Judy's comment a response to this question? It's unclear and feels disjointed from the following sentence, which seems to reference it, but I think you'd have a stronger start by saving the question for after you introduce the character. Or simply putting it in quotes to clarify that it was asked aloud.

The final sentence is strong and intriguing, and it leaves me curious as to what Judy has in mind.

 

[neandermagnon]

Thanks again, all, for the feedback.

I was listing a group of losers. And you're right, drag queens and jilted housewives don't fit in. So to be consistent, they do need qualifiers. I made a couple corrections, below, in red.

I'm an alcoholic and an addict, clean and sober since the mid-90s, so I can speak with authority on that subject. I don't believe I've offended anyone. As a group, we're pretty broad-minded, and not very thin-skinned.

Thank you for changing the wording of those things as it makes a substantial difference.

The word "offended" is thrown around far too much. It's not dropping the book and "OMG that's so offensive!" (cue fainting and/or right wing stereotypes of SJWs, snowflakes et al), it's an eye roll and thinking "oh, here we go again, I ain't got time for this shit, bye Felicia" - book goes back on the shelf and no more mental energy given to it. Given that sole purpose of this thread is to let writers know if their opening lines are working, there is no justification for me to pretend that I wouldn't have had that reaction (the latter one, lol) had I picked up a book in the bookshop. I might even have laughed sarcastically, shook my head and gone "pffft!" Maybe on emotive issues, advice will always come across like a lecture or sermon, and always be taken harshly, due to the nature of the topic. I'm glad you took it seriously though because the world needs more people who listen.

ETA: this is hard to explain because some types of content can be very harmful to marginalised people, and that type of content justifies being called "offensive" (or stronger words). There's no clear line between the two though, and careless wording early on in a book is often a red flag to much more problematic things later on, and people who are directly affected by the issue don't usually have the time and mental energy to read on and find out.

Putting qualifiers in makes a massive difference. "crackhead drag queens" - that's completely different. That stops it coming across to me like you are taking casual swipes at non-gender conforming people (and possibly not knowing the difference between trans people and drag queens). Because it's no longer about them being non-gender conforming, it's about them being crackheads. Same with meth fiend housewives. (Although personally I still think the word housewife is outdated, but that's just a stylistic thing now that you've added the qualifier.) If I get time I'll come back later and do a more thorough critique on the first three sentences of the new sentences you posted.

 

[neandermagnon]

Thank you for your kind feedback, neandermagnon!
Unfortunately, those first three sentences were in my head at the time and I couldnt seem to find much better vocabularies to enrich the sentences. The main character is the narrator, where she meets Judy in her life journey.

The issue with the first line isn't about the vocabulary - your word choices are fine. It's that it's just sitting there on its own without any indication of who said or thought it. This can be off-putting I don't know what to visualise. Like words just floating in the air. If you start the second sentence with something like "Judy asked me this..." or "These words popped into my head..." then it would be much clearer. Alternatively you could put the question in speech marks and add a dialogue tag (e.g. "said Judy") If it's spoken out loud.

 

[frimble3]

I come back after months and find y'all moved.

If only you could foresee what the future would hold! Welcome back, again.

 

[writing17]

The issue with the first line isn't about the vocabulary - your word choices are fine. It's that it's just sitting there on its own without any indication of who said or thought it. This can be off-putting I don't know what to visualise. Like words just floating in the air. If you start the second sentence with something like "Judy asked me this..." or "These words popped into my head..." then it would be much clearer. Alternatively you could put the question in speech marks and add a dialogue tag (e.g. "said Judy") If it's spoken out loud.

Noted! Thank you for the feedback, neandermagnon

 

[neandermagnon]

"One of the immutable laws of the universe seems to be that the losers all congregate in certain places, no matter where you go. The junkies, the hookers, the pimps, the thieves, the street dealers, the down and out alcoholics, the crackhead drag queens, the failed bankers and meth-fiend housewives, the defrocked priests and disbarred attorneys – all the downtrodden masses, miscreants, losers and misfits gravitate towards the same sorts of places, even in different locales.

Now whether this is truly a natural law or rather some unwritten agreement among the participants is still unknown. But either way, the results are much the same in nearly every instance.

*inserts fresh eyes* lol

Just doing the first three sentences of this, per the rules. As mentioned previously, the words you highlighted in red have made a huge difference.

It's not fully working for me as an opening. The mention of universe makes me wonder if this is going to involve more than just people from Earth, but then the examples stay very much on this planet, so I'm guessing no Star Wars style alien bars in the wrong end of a town in another galaxy. That's not a problem, although you might want to consider dropping "of the universe" because it might also flow a little better without it. Although it's a long sentence, it flows pretty well and the longness didn't bother me, so on that basis, it's not too long.

The second line isn't factually correct, but works in a comic voice such as Douglas Adams or Terry Pratchett (in this case with a large serving of Jane Austen from the first sentence). I'm not sure if this is the tone you're going for or if you were aiming more at a gritty reality kind of tone. I like the inclusion of "nearly" in the third line as I'm not a fan of blanket statements.

I'd probably read on for a bit to see where it's going.

 

[Amerigo]

I may as well go first, as I have the least to lose. Sharpen your claws, or practice your manners, on this:

Linna woke to the smell of smoke and the feel of fire. Not the trained, practical fires she knew, but a maddened blaze intent on destruction.
Then, the pounding on her door and the shouting "Come out witch and work your magic!"

I promise not to get upset or argumentative.

You've got my attention!
I agree about the commas and would also point out that "witch" is being used as a proper noun and should therefore be capitalized.
In real life, people don't wake to the smell of smoke (sadly), but feeling the flames would definitely get the job done.
"Then" what? Did the fire wake her or did the pounding and shouting? How about, "Then she heard the pounding..."
And lastly, there should be a comma after "shouting".
ETA: I could be wrong about some or all of this. I'm no expert. I thought about it more, and perhaps "witch" wouldn't be capitalized if it was used as an insult rather than a title. Like saying, "Come on out, stupid!" vs "Return to your seat, Counselor."

 

[Amerigo]

Amerigo bolted awake at the sound of an invasion force bursting into his bedroom. The assailants quickly flanked his bed, seized his arms, and fired an onslaught of demands and inquiries at him.
He thought, "Oh, no! Now what?"

 

[Kat M]

Amerigo bolted awake at the sound of an invasion force bursting into his bedroom. [[OK, we have a wake-up opening here BUT the invasion force cancels it out.]] The assailants quickly flanked his bed, seized his arms, and fired an onslaught of demands and inquiries at him. [[I want to know more about the specifics of this.]]
He thought, "Oh, no! Now what?" [[Aaaaand here's where you lose me. I'm all set up to hear more about the demands and inquiries and now I'm getting some obvious thoughts ("oh no, now what") preceded by filter language ("he thought").]]

Hey! I see you're new to the boards. Welcome!

Realistically, I'd keep reading for a few paragraphs to see where we were going with this, because something intriguing is happening right at the start. But from the first three sentences alone, I'm not quite drawn in to the story. Who's invading? What are they demanding? Why is this a problem for Amerigo? It's fine if you're holding back some of this information to create intrigue, but I'd like some more hints so I have an idea of where this is going to go.

Corollary to this, you have a lot of telling vs. showing going on in the latter two sentences, and not in a way that works for me. You might be able to fix some of the above by having us hear the demands and inquiries as Amerigo does, rather than summarizing them. (e.g. "Did you steal the Castafiore emerald?" "Admit it! You're the Magpie!" or whatever), and making Amerigo's reaction more specific. (e.g. "They're on to me" or "What the flipping h are they talking about?" etc.)

 

[Amerigo]

Thanks for your response, @Kat M.
It is meant to be a misleading action opening for the sake of humor (I hope). The next lines reveal the content of the demands and inquires and who the "assailants" are.

 

[neandermagnon]

Amerigo bolted awake at the sound of an invasion force bursting into his bedroom. The assailants quickly flanked his bed, seized his arms, and fired an onslaught of demands and inquiries at him.
He thought, "Oh, no! Now what?"

Overall, I like this, especially the 3rd line. It suggests to me that the MC's no stranger to this kind of trouble. I'd read on to find out what's going on.

I think "invasion force" isn't specific enough. At this point it could be anything from the Roman Army to aliens. Any world, any time period. A small detail - maybe just an extra word - providing a hint at the time, place and who he's up against could add a lot to this.

Also, the onslaught of demands and enquiries - it might be more engaging to write these out as part of the scene, BUT if you are going for him having just woken up and not mentally processing the initial demands and enquiries, that could work too. I presume it moves into direct speech and we get to know what their demands and enquiries are in a moment. I'd read on to find this out in any case.

 

[Amerigo]

After reading other crits, I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the fact that this story starts with a waking scene. I am thinking of a re-write. Do you all think it would be any better to have him spin around in his office chair at the sound of the invasion force entering his office?

 

[Kat M]

In this case, a waking scene works (for me, at any rate).

Usually the problem with waking scenes is they start too early, take too long to get into the action, and tell us nothing interesting. ("Amerigo woke up. He stretched and yawned. He did not want to leave the soft bedsheets. Finally, however, he got up and looked in the mirror. A midsized fellow looked back at him with *insert painfully boring description*. Hmmmm, I could really go for some coffee, he thought to himself. The coffee was kept in the kitchen in a red container that read 'Folger's Dark Roast' . . .)

You don't do any of that. One minute he's asleep and the next minute he's getting barraged with questions. So what works better for your story? What's more likely to happen? The invading force catching him in bed or in his office chair?

 

[Amerigo]

In this case, a waking scene works (for me, at any rate).

Usually the problem with waking scenes is they start too early, take too long to get into the action, and tell us nothing interesting. ("Amerigo woke up. He stretched and yawned. He did not want to leave the soft bedsheets. Finally, however, he got up and looked in the mirror. A midsized fellow looked back at him with *insert painfully boring description*. Hmmmm, I could really go for some coffee, he thought to himself. The coffee was kept in the kitchen in a red container that read 'Folger's Dark Roast' . . .)

You don't do any of that. One minute he's asleep and the next minute he's getting barraged with questions. So what works better for your story? What's more likely to happen? The invading force catching him in bed or in his office chair?

There is a bit of the boring stuff in the next few lines (sure wish I could post them here), but not much. It's really not a very fast-paced, action-packed story at all.
BTW, your opening is hilariously dull! I think I'll go buy some Folger's though. lol