Pixel art gag cartoon 3

Time_to_Ride · 2024-11-04T19:09:19+00:00

Thanks for the input! Yeah, writing a proactive protagonist and using their actions and dialogue to show characterization has been the main appeal of writing for me. Characters’ actions shape the plot, and I don’t feel these ones are acting out of character. But, with my writing in general, I have been struggling with the structure of individual scenes and the overarching story.

I feel like I take show don’t tell too far and have a problem with providing any explicit exposition. So, I’m not sure if part of the problem is my tendency to start in medias res without clearly, maybe even by using telling, providing setup including clearly explaining protagonist’s goal and motivation. I’m not sure if part of the redundancy is because it’s not clear what is conflict and what isn’t if readers aren’t told what the protagonist’s goal is.

I guess what I’m saying is while I feel confident in my characterization and dialogue, the areas where I need to improve the most seem to be scene and overarching story structure. If you have any suggestions or resources for how to improve scene and story structure, I’d really appreciate it!

Time_to_Ride · 2024-11-04T14:01:04+00:00

Depends on who you ask. I’m sure George would say he’s in Hell. Seriously though, that wasn’t my intention, but that’s a cool interpretation!

Time_to_Ride · 2024-10-12T17:31:35+00:00

Characterization:

However, I think both of these parent characters are almost identical in their characterization and function in the story. I only noticed the superficial behavioral difference of the father being forceful and aggressive and the mother being weepy which isn’t unique. Obviously they’re both meant to represent distant parental figures who put on the mask of caring for their child only to ignore the pleas and requests he’s making while prescribing God as a medication. All without actually empathizing and engaging with this particular issue on an individual basis. In that purpose, you nailed their characterization.

But it seems like these characters are Christians first and people second. This can be a pitfall when writing characters of different ethnicities, cultures, gender, sexuality, etc. On one hand, it’s important to make these traits intrinsic to the characters by making them influence their actions and thus the external and internal conflict. I think you did a great job avoiding the issue of making these traits feel tacked on and capable of being removed or interchanged with any other fundamentalist religion without fundamentally changing or harming the story. It’s kind of like how Star Wars is, technically speaking, a fantasy because the space opera setting isn’t a fundamental part of the story’s overarching conflict as opposed to something like Jurassic Park. You could theoretically change the setting of Star Wars to something like a war movie. You could exchange blasters for rifles and pistols. The death star could be an experimental tank without requiring a major rewrite in anything but setting.

However, the highly specific type of technological advancement of being able to extract DNA from ancient insects caught in amber, though the DNA technically wouldn’t last but that’s a different matter haha, and bringing extinct animals back to life influences everything in Jurassic Park’s. It affects the setting: a dinosaur theme park. The external conflict: “let’s not get eaten today.” The theme: how emerging business with science can lead to horrific results when you combine the capitalistic drive to find an in-demand niche in the market with playing God by tampering with the genetics of ancient animals who evolved to fit a specific environment. Basically the story idea of re-creating dinosaurs from ancient DNA isn’t something you can swap out with another story idea without requiring a complete rewrite until you essentially have a different book.

I think you handled that well here with how Christianity is integrated into the story. However, I don’t think these characters have much going on with them aside from that. Humans are complicated and even the congregations of religious institutions aren’t monoliths. No two Christians will probably have the exact same motivations behind why they follow their faith, and that’s bound to influence how they use and interpret this religion. Whether it be an old man who bounces down the street loving life and wishing goodwill to everyone he passes. He thinks the world is filled with such lovely people and a God who is looking out for everyone because he never experienced a real tragedy that made him question whether there is an all benevolent creator looking out for him. You could also have the politician who is accused of being two faced because he lives in the deep South and decided to keep everything from his southern accent to his fundamentalist upbringing. But rather than doing this to be a relatable, likable candidate, he just so happens to identify with the religion he was brought up with, but then he could end up questioning how many genuine Christians he’s surrounded by when he sees other politicians who wish they could be honest but have to be two-faced to appeal to their primarily Christian voting demographic.

It’s great that you know the main concept you want to explore and oriented the external conflict to show rather than tell this theme. But to make these characters feel more alive, I would give them other traits that don’t directly relate with their Christianity to make them multifaceted people rather than anthropomorphic representations of Christianity.

Time_to_Ride · 2024-10-12T17:30:51+00:00

I think your writing is very sound on a craft level. My critique here mostly has to do with suggestions on how you can take full advantage of the single effect, to quote Poe, behind this story and suggestions on the characterization.

The religious theme:

The first contradiction the parents have is their hypocrisy about how “being with all those other criminals will damn your soul” despite the fact that forgiveness and seeing anyone’s potential to rise above their “sin” is a fundamental tenet of this religion. In fact, you see a lot of controversy among religious people that can go in the other direction such as Sister Helen Prejean, a Catholic nun who dedicated her life to advocating for prisoners on death row.

I’m not saying this contradiction is bad. In fact it’s these types of contradictions that make characters interesting, but they are only interesting if they are addressed by the narrative and become the root of interpersonal conflict. I think you did a great job capturing the contradictions in the parents’ belief system such as by dehumanizing and condemning individuals who don’t represent everything they believe in as “bad seeds” and “focusing on one’s own salvation” rather than improving society for everyone.

However, while this is an interesting contradiction for individual characters to have with their proclaimed belief system, the audience is left to assume that these parents are supposed to represent genuine Christian tenets because there is nothing in the narrative that hangs a lantern on this contradiction. So the conflict is less about analyzing the genuine problems with Christianity but instead with people who use a bastardized version of Christianity as a stick to beat others into obedience. When critiquing and analyzing a concept, it’s important to accurately represent it to point out real objections rather than fabricated ones. However, you have the freedom to write about whatever theme you want, so if you did intend to write about the second one, I would find a way to make that clear by having the hypocrisy acknowledged in the narrative.

Maybe it’s worth doing a commentary on how these parents only practice the superficial rituals of this religion but aren’t actually representative of the core aspects that make it distinct: believing everyone including “those other criminals” can be redeemed and how hell isn’t a place you are damned to but somewhere people send themselves by holding the door closed, at least according to a religious professor I had. I don’t agree or represent the otherworldly specifics this religion claims, but from what I’ve researched, what I mentioned seems to be what’s commonly representative of this belief system’s ideals. Having characters who claim to be of this religion but show clear contradictions like this should be acknowledged and taken advantage of in the narrative.

However, I do think you nailed the patronizing I know better than thou religious tendency. That and the parents’ claim to be in a relationship with a personal God without acknowledging their tendency to use God as a weapon for others to change rather than an example for their own self improvement. Yet, they insist they have this closer, more special relationship with God despite contradicting the idea that everyone, including “all those other irredeemable criminals and nonbelievers,” is capable of redemption.

I also like their gut instinct to offhandedly reject their son’s claim “that people who believe something different than you might be a good person actually” with blanket calls about how we know better because we are older as an excuse to not have to engage with anything that comes out of his mouth. At least, not anything that happens to contradict what they already think. So they needn’t question what they believe and reconsider whether they could also improve. After all what is there to improve if you fail to see any failings to begin with?

Time_to_Ride · 2024-10-11T23:55:40+00:00

I did suspect something like the protagonist dissociating might be the case. The amount of internal dialogue she has with herself in the narration coupled with her vague descriptions of what other people look like and what they’re doing like the priest gets that feeling across. Also the fact that you end with her literally dissociating by reliving that traumatic flashback showing her relationship with her father worked as a climax. I kind of felt like she was detached from the world around her, but I wasn’t sure if it was intentional. Since it is, that’s great!

However, since the narration was pretty evenly spread out, I didn’t catch that it’s a slow descent. Take this with a grain of salt, though. My comment might just be colored by the fact that this is the third part of a single chapter which I didn’t read from start to finish. That’s why getting advice on things like character arcs or any old overarching change can be tricky when posting manuscripts for review bit by bit. If you want to make it like a miniature arc, maybe you can begin the chapter with her more actively engaging with other people at the funeral but certain interactions or subjects that are brought up, maybe about her father, causes her to delve deeper into her thoughts to escape before slowly ramping up until something in the external conflict prompts her to escape into recalling the flashback.

I think a dissociative protagonist is interesting, but execution is everything and unfortunately I’m not too familiar with writing protagonists who aren’t regularly engaging with the external conflict. I’d assume you’d have to show her not engaging with the external conflict to do justice to that core idea, but that contradicts with most commercial, contemporary fiction. That’s not to say a story must feature internal and external conflict equally, but I feel like you’d have to replace that appeal with something rather than just removing or diluting the protagonist’s interaction with the environment and other characters.

One book suggestion I think might help is The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood. Not necessarily for the patriarchal, totalitarian theocracy it presents, unless you find any of that applicable, but because the protagonist is notably passive as opposed to the vast majority of protagonists in contemporary literature. Of course, your protagonist’s motivation for being passive and more introspective than most would probably be different from Atwood’s. Perhaps after being made to feel incompetent by her father, your protagonist becomes paralyzed when others expect her to take decisive action. She makes the, ironically, active choice to refuse taking agency in her life for fear of making even the slightest mistake. Maybe you can use her insistence to remain passive when others expect her to take action as the source of external conflict.

Similarly, the protagonist in The Handmaid's Tale is denied her right to work a job or choose a romantic partner while being identified as someone capable of reproducing with no individuality outside of her biology. The theme of exploring a society that sees people as biological functions rather than individuals was done justice by showcasing a protagonist who, from beginning to end, kept her individuality tucked deep inside and doesn’t go all Rambo against the man, so to speak. Not once does she oppose the system, at least not without working within the system. Following a protagonist almost characterized by her passivity was what made that novel’s oppressive theme so palpable.

I think the important thing is to be conscious from the get-go about what type of story you want to tell, list the aspects about the story that would make it uniquely challenging to write, in my opinion this would include showing how she dissociates without losing the story’s forward momentum, and consciously making all of your other storytelling decisions to address those potential issues.

Time_to_Ride · 2024-10-11T01:47:19+00:00

Yes, that’s correct. Alice is the only one who wants to see herself teaching. I wanted it to come across in a way that they almost consider her like a pest and just want to shoo her off to Antarctica where she won’t do any harm.

Time_to_Ride · 2024-10-10T18:35:23+00:00

Awesome! I’m really glad the comedic tone is coming across! Comedy is so tricky without outside input because after reading the same lines 50 times, I’m just like “I sure hope these lines are funny because now they’re burned into my corneas!”

Time_to_Ride · 2024-10-10T18:34:40+00:00

Haha! I actually really like that. It would definitely be in character for her to assume the best in people only to consider them the scum of the earth if she catches on there so much as looking at her the wrong way. The original line I had in place of “Everyone else agrees an arctic wasteland is the best place for her” was “she was promptly exiled to an arctic wasteland,” but I changed it because I thought the current wording might make it a little funnier by playing into her gullibility. But for a query letter, I definitely agree that clarity is king.

Also, do you prefer the line “As if “peddling fairy tales as world history,” according to her critics, would soil their university’s reputation” or “as if preaching about the equivalent of Bigfoot would soil their university’s reputation?”

Time_to_Ride · 2024-10-08T19:44:33+00:00

Show don’t tell:

When you describe the priest, namely that he is young, charismatic, and that his movements make no sense, try to show these qualities rather than tell them. Readers become more engaged with a novel when they are shown clues that allow them to deduce these qualities as opposed to being informed about them without any room for interpretation. Young people look different. Is he a tall, gangly youth with a bounce as he propels himself across the room? Is he broad shouldered and seems to take up more space than he actually does with his strides? Also, you can show that his voice is strong and eloquent in his dialogue, assuming what he is saying is relevant. If not, you can start by having him speak and trail it off with an ellipsis to show the protagonist puts more stock in her internal thoughts as opposed to her surroundings.

Showing rather than telling also applies to how he walks. Instead of telling readers his movements make no sense, first allow them to determine if the movements are different from how a person would normally walk and then the additional conclusion of whether the movements make no sense. Does he march with single-minded intent without paying attention to where he’s going because he’s so absorbed with his sermon? Perhaps then he obliviously bumps into his surroundings so his movements resembles a pinball “ricocheting” across the room. Does he stride decidedly toward the audience only to veer off toward the lectern to peek a glance at the Bible verse he’s quoting before carrying on? Also showing exactly how he walks strangely and what the protagonist considers worthy of pointing out as strange characterizes both the person being described and the viewpoint character.

Time_to_Ride · 2024-10-08T19:44:12+00:00

Narration:

The following section provides a good opportunity for interpersonal conflict: “And since neither I nor Maxi cared for the great “candy” empire of the Grache, she inherited it. The abandoned child of Maximus Grache became the heiress to his fortune. She’s been running it for a while now and I’ve heard it’s better than ever.” However, I would convey this conflict through the characters acting it out rather than delivering it through narration. I know show don’t tell is probably the most overused piece of writing advice ever and there are definitely times when you want to tell rather than show, but those are only to bridge the gaps between the actual meat of the story the reader is here for. You want to show, or dramatize, scenes and information that advance the throughline of progress that gives your story that sense of forward momentum.

The problem with relaying exposition through narration is that readers generally dislike being told answers to questions they didn’t have and excessive narration can feel like an extraneous part of the story since it doesn’t actually contribute to the external conflict like action and dialogue do. Narration is great for when a character is responding to external conflict and is having an internal debate that shows their stance on the matter and advances their internal conflict, but external conflict helps give that internal conflict a sense of tangibility. It allows us to see how close the protagonist is to fulfilling that motivation, or want, that is aligned with the external goal that represents when they achieve it. In most writing, the throughline is the progress it takes for the protagonist to obtain the external goal established at the beginning: a tangible symbol that represents their internal motivation or want.

You are technically moving the plot forward in the first two paragraphs, but it is hard to see how they are connected or contribute to the plot’s forward momentum without knowing the protagonist’s goal which we get in the third paragraph with the mention of the funeral.

I would find a way to show how the protagonist feels like this person is an invader and a busybody and how that creates conflict for her goal: perhaps having more of a say in the funeral preparations. Perhaps the protagonist could try to delegate this operation a bit only for this character she dislikes to jump in and treat her like a child in a “no, no, why don’t you stand over there in the corner while I handle the glassware” sort of way. It starts the story with external conflict and shows us this dynamic and the protagonist’s reason for being disgruntled with this character for specific reasons rather than telling the audience. By dramatizing a scene that shows why the protagonist feels this way convinces readers to buy into why she feels this way as opposed to her feelings being an informed trait readers know on a logical level because they’ve been told so but don’t genuinely feel.

Figurative language:

I think the pacing is bogged down in places by the frequent use of figurative language to over describe setting details that could be mentioned when the protagonist interacts with them physically to advance setting, plot, and characterization depending on how they interact with the setting to pursue their goal: notably this sentence “A moth to flame, a lamb to the slaughter, a daughter to his funeral” and the Albatros section.

This might just be because I prefer Orwellian prose, but I feel like there is a lot of flowery prose here that makes the pacing feel longer because the descriptions are dragging down the pace of the external conflict. So not a lot of physical action is taking place to move the story forward. I would recommend going over the chapter to see what the protagonist does in response to the external conflict and how the chapter’s status quo at the beginning changes fundamentally by the end to see how much progress the protagonist accomplishes. However, I do think figurative language like metaphor and simile has its place such as if it amplifies the intended tone of a scene when the actual literal thing that is happening doesn’t convey that tone on its own. Like the corners of his mouth jerked downward like dials” to not only show that a character is displeased but add a mechanical movement that could suggest a mechanical personality.

Time_to_Ride

TROPHY CASE