I’m enjoying this story immensely. I like the college-aged characters. I like the mystery. I like the supernatural element. I like the humor. I like the Shakespeare motif.
And I dig the banter between the brothers (and Jack). And while I’m not sure if the way the ghost-talk is notated in the best way (I don’t know what the best way is), it’s certainly working. It could be easy to get lost in their conversations with Jack, but you’ve made it all pretty easy to follow.
In response to your question about how the Shakespeare/Hamlet insertion is working, I think it’s working well. I like it. And I like that the story (if just partially) is framing itself around that play. Perhaps remind me, though, how did Jack get those specific books? Didn't Fi compare a list of his required reading against a list of what he'd already read (obtained illicitly from the librarian)? Is it just coincidence that her brothers wanted Jack to read Shakespeare? Or did they guide their sister’s hand somehow? And do we know which?
Also, and this is just a thought that’s come to me as I’m typing: What would it be like if you formatted Jack’s conversations with the brothers like a Shakespearean play (or a play, in general)? That certainly isn’t necessary—because, as I’ve already noted—their communication is pretty clear. But it might make it clearer, plus it complements the motif nicely. But maybe it would end up seeming too artificial then; I don’t know. Maybe something to play around with—maybe not. Either way, consider adding more action (in prose or in stage direction) to the scenes. I realize that’s difficult, because Jack’s in a hospital bed, and you do bring a nurse in at some point so he can interact with another human (and have him wonder if she senses he might be losing his mind), but otherwise this chapter is mostly dialogue, and a little more sensory information might be helpful. Even just the antiseptic smell of the room or an occasionally flickering fluorescent light—a few things to connect us to the moment beyond Jack’s (and the brothers’) thoughts and words.
To answer your other question, it’s not obvious to me why Drew killed Doug. But, it’s clear that Doug was the (only) intended victim, and I’m intrigued and want to read more (even if I don’t know why). The information seems to be coming in at an appropriate trickle. You rule out a few possibilities (insecurity about academic/professional performance, for one, given that Drew’s the smarter, more accomplished young adult). I suspect jealousy—perhaps something to have to do with Fi, but perhaps that’s too obvious?—or a motive connected to the brothers’/Fi’s family business. I don’t know. But my point is I’m okay with not knowing (and maybe even prefer it) at this point.
One final note about the formatting. If you decide to keep this formatting, just make sure it’s consistently administered. It is, for the most part, but I got caught up on “Brian and Alex can’t stop laughing” being italicized. I don’t know if this is “wrong,” but it is a little confusing, because to that point, I think, only Brian’s and Alex’s words are italicized (for the most part). Does that make sense? If the italics are what clarify their words, then leave Jack’s thoughts (even Jack’s thoughts or observations about the brothers) non-italicized.
I absolutely can’t wait to read more! Thank you for sharing this, Carolyn!
Hi Riley - "Brian and Alex can't stop laughing" shouldn't be italicized. That's a mistake. Thanks for pointing it out. And thanks for letting me know what you know and don't know at this point - I won't clarify anything, because I want to hear what others have to say.
Inserting Hamlet definitely wasn’t clumsy. It was, in fact, quite well done. I wouldn’t say it was artificial either. When I first read it I certainly wasn’t put off by it. I could see some readers asking why the ghosts didn’t just come out and say what they wanted to tell Jack. The ghosts do say it’s because Jack hadn’t wanted to listen to them, but at this point he is listening to them. Reading Hamlet does give Jack a revelation that he didn’t get from his own contemplations and it, “hits him in the gut.” I did still wonder what could be done to make the insertion of Hamlet a must. What if Jack, rather than being apathetic about Hamlet, loves all things Shakespeare and often goes to the master’s works to find insight or inspiration. The ghosts would know that and that is why they send Jack to Hamlet, hoping it will help him connect the dots better because his brain is already wired to expect Shakespeare to give him answers. Or maybe it is one of the ghosts that is a Shakespeare fanatic and expects everyone to gain as much from Shakespeare as he does. A little more character development could eliminate any question about whether or not the insertion of Hamlet is contrived.
I haven’t read lots of thrillers so I can’t compare the pacing of this piece to other works. I will say that I’m glad you got Jack talking to the ghosts as early as p. 54. In earlier installments I found myself wishing Jack would hurry up and just talk to the dang ghosts. Holding that anticipation out like a carrot kept up the tension, but by the time you have Jack talking back to the wee ghousties, it’s time.
I don’t remember previous instalments perfectly, but at this point I have not been able to connect the dots well enough to know why Doug was Drew’s victim. This early on you want the reader to be wondering, right? I agree with Riley’s comments on the subject.
I like that Drew is way smart. He seems to think he is not just smart but the smartest person around. I always like to see a smug arrogant jackass who really is the smartest person around get his comeuppance. It would be cool if there could be some kind of dueling between Drew and Jack as the story progresses. Maybe a sort of fact finding and discovery of truths by Jack countered by Doug obscuring truths and misdirecting.
I still love the ghosts and the humor. I never knew murder could be so much fun!
Carolyn, I continue to be delighted with the fun and intelligent humor in this supernatural thriller. The fun you are having writing this comes through the page and makes this just feel like a unique voice within a genre full of cookie cutter stories.
My prevailing theory as to why Drew kills Doug is based off of your hints and the Hamlet parallels. He intended to kill the brothers and Doug so the way for him to inherit/get in on the McCloud family fortune would be paved. He wants to marry Fiona just as Claudius married the queen and became the new king. Whether this is where things are going or not, I'm sure there will be plenty of surprises along the way. You are obviously at least aware of this parallel, so I'm sure you'll have a blast playing with our expectations - and/or putting all kinds of fun twists on this classic plot.
I think it would be cool for Jack to become more and more aware that he is inside a real-life Hamlet and aware of who all the characters are. And then watch what he does as he guesses what is coming and refuses/accepts his role.
I also think it would be entertaining to see the ghost brothers be a bit unreliable in the stuff they tell Jack and set him up for. I'm enjoying this immensely Carolyn and can't wait for the next chapter!
What a read! Engaging voice, engaging POV—that first person is limited to one character’s POV serves both a) the thread that Brian and Alex are communicating with Jack—both reader and Jack have to wonder if Jack has a mental disorder or if Jack’s really hearing their voices from beyond the grave; b) the story’s genre, which is ghost story/thriller. Much of the thrill of a thriller comes, I think, from the main character not knowing the truth, having to discover the truth, and having to transform in order to earn the truth and triumph.
I also love the blending of story elements here—Shakespeare, thriller, ghost, upper YA or maybe even “new adult,” etc. I love it when a good storyteller starts cooking with appealing ingredients I’ve never seen tossed together!
To me, it isn’t obvious yet why Drew would have killed Doug. As Riley points out, possible motives are being crossed out. Dave’s theory seems plausible, yet I’m far from certain yet. The info is trickling in, but with promise and payoff. So I’m compelled to read onward!
Much of what happens in this section is interior and/or dialogue, and I was wondering if there may be ways to keep Jack moving through the setting/responsive to the setting so that our senses are stimulated and so that we get a sense of place and movement/dynamism. For example, maybe he has a special place where he reads Shakespeare—maybe by a window or on a chair or couch?
Also, maybe the scene in which he talks with the detective could be grounded more in a specific setting, and the setting details might reflect/contrast with the emotional events of the scene or even increase tension? Maybe he’d go outside to make that call, or maybe there’s a phone that he has to use. Perhaps another character might serve as “annoyance”—maybe a character he doesn’t want catching him talking to a detective.
Another way to get us into a different setting might be if Alex and Brian could sort of share their memories of the car crash with Jack—to have him experience their memories the way they do. That way, Jack could experience the memories, and because his senses would be stimulated, so would ours. Such a device would also allow us to experience what Alex and Brian experienced (or at least what they remember experiencing—the ways their memories coincide and differ could be pretty compelling) without changing POV. Alex and Brian’s thought-dialogue could perhaps even work in conjunction with these shared memories (like voiceover, I guess). Of course, allowing Alex and Brian to share their memories with Jack might change the rules of the story world and so may have ripple effects on other aspects of the story.
Among the things I love about WriteFu: a) watching how each WriteFu writer employs their originality to create a story that no one else on Earth could have written; b) witnessing how WriteFu writers explore their stories and develop them; and c) having the opportunity to be a part of and to watch the processes these stories go through. I’m definitely feeling these things, now, Carolyn, as I reflect on To Kill or Not To Kill. Thank you for sharing your work, and write on!
Wow, Dave, you're seeing parallels to Hamlet that I didn't even see - I love that! And Andy, there's no particular reason that the conversation with the detective should take place by phone. It could certainly take place in person, which would build in a change of setting, and more opportunities for Jack to wonder if he's interacting normally or if the "cliff is crumbling beneath his feet."
Alan, thanks for pointing out that Jack has to have a reason to want to read Shakespeare - and I know how to give him one. It's actually already there, in what I wrote; I just need to pump it up some.
I may actually bring ALL the ghosts in Shakespeare into the plot - there are ghosts in Hamlet, Macbeth, Julius Caesar and Richard III. Since most of Shakespeare's plays are based on actual historical events, theoretically those ghosts would be REAL ghosts, out there in the ether. I'm toying with the idea of Brian and Alex questing off into the ether to bring all those ghosts back into Jack's head for a posthumous confab. Would give Jack quite a headache. I imagine him sneezing out a tiny tankard and the remains of a minuscule drumstick, the detritus of a ghostly frat party. And the ancient, creaky ghosts not wanting to leave, because Jack's head is so light and airy, with all mod cons. Can they be convinced to relocate to Drew's mind and drive him mad, so that Jack may be spared the ordeal of killing Drew? It's the best Brian and Alex have to offer.... Oh, I like this - and I just thought it up! I LOVE Write Fu!
I only have a few remarks that have not been shared already by Andy, Alan, Dave & Riley. I really like the relationship of a stage play and classic literature. This could lead a lot of hesitant readers to learn more about Hamlet, Macbeth, etc. The stage setting works very well especially with ghosts hovering in the wings. I agree with Andy that more description of place will keep the reader glued to the page. What does the hospital look like, smell like, taste like? What happens at the crime scene?
I think a Hercule Poirot will show up, disguised as one of your characters and use his magnificent observation skills to solve the crime that seems to have been committed. Poirot is known to work well with ghosts. And of course, who better to offer suggestions to the police than a Holmesian aficionado. That could be Jack or one of the ghosts who offers great observations of physical evidence and deductions that lead to the capture of the suspected killer or leads down an alley that only you know about.
So, that is it for now. How far are you? Sounds like you have all the elements at your fingertips.
Great work by you Carolyn and great support and commentaries from the Team.
Carolyn,
ReplyDeleteI’m enjoying this story immensely. I like the college-aged characters. I like the mystery. I like the supernatural element. I like the humor. I like the Shakespeare motif.
And I dig the banter between the brothers (and Jack). And while I’m not sure if the way the ghost-talk is notated in the best way (I don’t know what the best way is), it’s certainly working. It could be easy to get lost in their conversations with Jack, but you’ve made it all pretty easy to follow.
In response to your question about how the Shakespeare/Hamlet insertion is working, I think it’s working well. I like it. And I like that the story (if just partially) is framing itself around that play. Perhaps remind me, though, how did Jack get those specific books? Didn't Fi compare a list of his required reading against a list of what he'd already read (obtained illicitly from the librarian)? Is it just coincidence that her brothers wanted Jack to read Shakespeare? Or did they guide their sister’s hand somehow? And do we know which?
Also, and this is just a thought that’s come to me as I’m typing: What would it be like if you formatted Jack’s conversations with the brothers like a Shakespearean play (or a play, in general)? That certainly isn’t necessary—because, as I’ve already noted—their communication is pretty clear. But it might make it clearer, plus it complements the motif nicely. But maybe it would end up seeming too artificial then; I don’t know. Maybe something to play around with—maybe not. Either way, consider adding more action (in prose or in stage direction) to the scenes. I realize that’s difficult, because Jack’s in a hospital bed, and you do bring a nurse in at some point so he can interact with another human (and have him wonder if she senses he might be losing his mind), but otherwise this chapter is mostly dialogue, and a little more sensory information might be helpful. Even just the antiseptic smell of the room or an occasionally flickering fluorescent light—a few things to connect us to the moment beyond Jack’s (and the brothers’) thoughts and words.
To answer your other question, it’s not obvious to me why Drew killed Doug. But, it’s clear that Doug was the (only) intended victim, and I’m intrigued and want to read more (even if I don’t know why). The information seems to be coming in at an appropriate trickle. You rule out a few possibilities (insecurity about academic/professional performance, for one, given that Drew’s the smarter, more accomplished young adult). I suspect jealousy—perhaps something to have to do with Fi, but perhaps that’s too obvious?—or a motive connected to the brothers’/Fi’s family business. I don’t know. But my point is I’m okay with not knowing (and maybe even prefer it) at this point.
One final note about the formatting. If you decide to keep this formatting, just make sure it’s consistently administered. It is, for the most part, but I got caught up on “Brian and Alex can’t stop laughing” being italicized. I don’t know if this is “wrong,” but it is a little confusing, because to that point, I think, only Brian’s and Alex’s words are italicized (for the most part). Does that make sense? If the italics are what clarify their words, then leave Jack’s thoughts (even Jack’s thoughts or observations about the brothers) non-italicized.
I absolutely can’t wait to read more! Thank you for sharing this, Carolyn!
Riley
Hi Riley - "Brian and Alex can't stop laughing" shouldn't be italicized. That's a mistake. Thanks for pointing it out. And thanks for letting me know what you know and don't know at this point - I won't clarify anything, because I want to hear what others have to say.
DeleteCarolyn
Inserting Hamlet definitely wasn’t clumsy. It was, in fact, quite well done. I wouldn’t say it was artificial either. When I first read it I certainly wasn’t put off by it. I could see some readers asking why the ghosts didn’t just come out and say what they wanted to tell Jack. The ghosts do say it’s because Jack hadn’t wanted to listen to them, but at this point he is listening to them. Reading Hamlet does give Jack a revelation that he didn’t get from his own contemplations and it, “hits him in the gut.” I did still wonder what could be done to make the insertion of Hamlet a must. What if Jack, rather than being apathetic about Hamlet, loves all things Shakespeare and often goes to the master’s works to find insight or inspiration. The ghosts would know that and that is why they send Jack to Hamlet, hoping it will help him connect the dots better because his brain is already wired to expect Shakespeare to give him answers. Or maybe it is one of the ghosts that is a Shakespeare fanatic and expects everyone to gain as much from Shakespeare as he does. A little more character development could eliminate any question about whether or not the insertion of Hamlet is contrived.
ReplyDeleteI haven’t read lots of thrillers so I can’t compare the pacing of this piece to other works. I will say that I’m glad you got Jack talking to the ghosts as early as p. 54. In earlier installments I found myself wishing Jack would hurry up and just talk to the dang ghosts. Holding that anticipation out like a carrot kept up the tension, but by the time you have Jack talking back to the wee ghousties, it’s time.
I don’t remember previous instalments perfectly, but at this point I have not been able to connect the dots well enough to know why Doug was Drew’s victim. This early on you want the reader to be wondering, right? I agree with Riley’s comments on the subject.
I like that Drew is way smart. He seems to think he is not just smart but the smartest person around. I always like to see a smug arrogant jackass who really is the smartest person around get his comeuppance. It would be cool if there could be some kind of dueling between Drew and Jack as the story progresses. Maybe a sort of fact finding and discovery of truths by Jack countered by Doug obscuring truths and misdirecting.
I still love the ghosts and the humor. I never knew murder could be so much fun!
Alan
Carolyn, I continue to be delighted with the fun and intelligent humor in this supernatural thriller. The fun you are having writing this comes through the page and makes this just feel like a unique voice within a genre full of cookie cutter stories.
ReplyDeleteMy prevailing theory as to why Drew kills Doug is based off of your hints and the Hamlet parallels. He intended to kill the brothers and Doug so the way for him to inherit/get in on the McCloud family fortune would be paved. He wants to marry Fiona just as Claudius married the queen and became the new king. Whether this is where things are going or not, I'm sure there will be plenty of surprises along the way. You are obviously at least aware of this parallel, so I'm sure you'll have a blast playing with our expectations - and/or putting all kinds of fun twists on this classic plot.
I think it would be cool for Jack to become more and more aware that he is inside a real-life Hamlet and aware of who all the characters are. And then watch what he does as he guesses what is coming and refuses/accepts his role.
I also think it would be entertaining to see the ghost brothers be a bit unreliable in the stuff they tell Jack and set him up for. I'm enjoying this immensely Carolyn and can't wait for the next chapter!
ReplyDeleteCarolyn,
What a read! Engaging voice, engaging POV—that first person is limited to one character’s POV serves both a) the thread that Brian and Alex are communicating with Jack—both reader and Jack have to wonder if Jack has a mental disorder or if Jack’s really hearing their voices from beyond the grave; b) the story’s genre, which is ghost story/thriller. Much of the thrill of a thriller comes, I think, from the main character not knowing the truth, having to discover the truth, and having to transform in order to earn the truth and triumph.
I also love the blending of story elements here—Shakespeare, thriller, ghost, upper YA or maybe even “new adult,” etc. I love it when a good storyteller starts cooking with appealing ingredients I’ve never seen tossed together!
To me, it isn’t obvious yet why Drew would have killed Doug. As Riley points out, possible motives are being crossed out. Dave’s theory seems plausible, yet I’m far from certain yet. The info is trickling in, but with promise and payoff. So I’m compelled to read onward!
Much of what happens in this section is interior and/or dialogue, and I was wondering if there may be ways to keep Jack moving through the setting/responsive to the setting so that our senses are stimulated and so that we get a sense of place and movement/dynamism. For example, maybe he has a special place where he reads Shakespeare—maybe by a window or on a chair or couch?
Also, maybe the scene in which he talks with the detective could be grounded more in a specific setting, and the setting details might reflect/contrast with the emotional events of the scene or even increase tension? Maybe he’d go outside to make that call, or maybe there’s a phone that he has to use. Perhaps another character might serve as “annoyance”—maybe a character he doesn’t want catching him talking to a detective.
Another way to get us into a different setting might be if Alex and Brian could sort of share their memories of the car crash with Jack—to have him experience their memories the way they do. That way, Jack could experience the memories, and because his senses would be stimulated, so would ours. Such a device would also allow us to experience what Alex and Brian experienced (or at least what they remember experiencing—the ways their memories coincide and differ could be pretty compelling) without changing POV. Alex and Brian’s thought-dialogue could perhaps even work in conjunction with these shared memories (like voiceover, I guess). Of course, allowing Alex and Brian to share their memories with Jack might change the rules of the story world and so may have ripple effects on other aspects of the story.
Among the things I love about WriteFu: a) watching how each WriteFu writer employs their originality to create a story that no one else on Earth could have written; b) witnessing how WriteFu writers explore their stories and develop them; and c) having the opportunity to be a part of and to watch the processes these stories go through. I’m definitely feeling these things, now, Carolyn, as I reflect on To Kill or Not To Kill. Thank you for sharing your work, and write on!
--Andy
Wow, Dave, you're seeing parallels to Hamlet that I didn't even see - I love that! And Andy, there's no particular reason that the conversation with the detective should take place by phone. It could certainly take place in person, which would build in a change of setting, and more opportunities for Jack to wonder if he's interacting normally or if the "cliff is crumbling beneath his feet."
ReplyDeleteAlan, thanks for pointing out that Jack has to have a reason to want to read Shakespeare - and I know how to give him one. It's actually already there, in what I wrote; I just need to pump it up some.
I may actually bring ALL the ghosts in Shakespeare into the plot - there are ghosts in Hamlet, Macbeth, Julius Caesar and Richard III. Since most of Shakespeare's plays are based on actual historical events, theoretically those ghosts would be REAL ghosts, out there in the ether. I'm toying with the idea of Brian and Alex questing off into the ether to bring all those ghosts back into Jack's head for a posthumous confab. Would give Jack quite a headache. I imagine him sneezing out a tiny tankard and the remains of a minuscule drumstick, the detritus of a ghostly frat party. And the ancient, creaky ghosts not wanting to leave, because Jack's head is so light and airy, with all mod cons. Can they be convinced to relocate to Drew's mind and drive him mad, so that Jack may be spared the ordeal of killing Drew? It's the best Brian and Alex have to offer.... Oh, I like this - and I just thought it up! I LOVE Write Fu!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteCarolyn,
ReplyDeleteI only have a few remarks that have not been shared already by Andy, Alan, Dave & Riley. I really like the relationship of a stage play and classic literature. This could lead a lot of hesitant readers to learn more about Hamlet, Macbeth, etc. The stage setting works very well especially with ghosts hovering in the wings. I agree with Andy that more description of place will keep the reader glued to the page. What does the hospital look like, smell like, taste like? What happens at the crime scene?
I think a Hercule Poirot will show up, disguised as one of your characters and use his magnificent observation skills to solve the crime that seems to have been committed. Poirot is known to work well with ghosts. And of course, who better to offer suggestions to the police than a Holmesian aficionado. That could be Jack or one of the ghosts who offers great observations of physical evidence and deductions that lead to the capture of the suspected killer or leads down an alley that only you know about.
So, that is it for now. How far are you? Sounds like you have all the elements at your fingertips.
Great work by you Carolyn and great support and commentaries from the Team.