Critique #133 — Beth Bernobich
Kevin Andrew Murphy June 10th, 2007
Years ago, during his mathematical studies–studies broken off, or discarded, he no longer knew which–Adrian Dee had proposed certain theories involving time and its equations. The modern scholars were wrong, he declared, when they talked about measuring time in discrete units. The ancient philosopher mages had touched closer to the truth when they described time as a continuous ether, its flow rising and falling like a river’s current.
Ah, but I was wrong, too, he thought. Time was like sunlight pouring in all directions, susceptible to windowpanes and prisms and mirrors, or even a child’s hand.
An automobile horn bleated in the streets below, penetrating the quiet study where Dee sat with Doctor Lusk. Off in one corner, a grandfather clock ticked away the seconds–its muffled rhythm a counterpoint to Lusk, who spoke in hushed tones about trauma and its effect upon memory. It was an old topic–one they had often discussed over the past year.
There is a lot of info dump up front. No one has done anything or said anything. They’re just sitting there thinking as we get a sense of place and backstory. The concept intrigues me, but I want more story.
Hi,
I can only really comment as a reader, as I am new to writing myself.
I am not sure if modern scholars (of which I am not one!) would say that they think (which is surely what you mean) of time as being in discrete units. Sure, we measure time this way but most people know a ’second’ doesn’t really exist it just describes a period of perceived time. I like the poetry of the paragraph…but your argument fails, because on one hand you talk of measuring time and on the other of describing time. Different things.
Also “…..he declared,..” should be (I think) “…he had declared,..”
Still, the whole thing had a nice feel and I would read on.
Adam
Adam, I think she’s referring to Planck time as the discrete unit of time.
Hello,
I like the rhythm - there’s a nice, quiet flow to the writing, which seems reflective of what the character is thinking about. I’m a bit puzzled by the word-choice in the first line; ‘broken off’ with reference to the studies can mean the same as ‘discarded,’ so if you’re trying to make a distinction as to whether they were cut off by other events or deliberately ended by the student himself, then I think you need to find a better word to make this clear, or the intrigue of why in either case is diluted.
All the talk about time makes me think of Prince of Persia (if you’ve ever played that game) and the Prince’s opening monologue - ‘time is an ocean in a storm,’ is one of his lines. I like that you’re trying to get across the complexities of time, but given that each recitation, while different, is also a metaphor for the same thing, perhaps your description here could be shortened or refined.
I like the last paragraph: this is where it all starts to come together. The only other comment is a minor technical nitpick, which I’m not even sure is legitimate in a wider sense so much as my own preference, which is to put a space after you use a hyphen (if not before as well) to break up the text visually; otherwise, two different words look like they’re a single hyphenated word/concept.
Overall, I enjoyed your writing style, and would read on.
Ivy, Adam, Philippa: Thank you very much for reading and commenting. I appreciate it!
(Oh, and for Adam & Philippa — I had posted critiques on your stories, but they seem to have disappeared. If you are still looking for feedback, I could try again.)
I keep debating what you mean by this. At this point, I’m guessing that you mean he can’t remember if he broke the studies off himself or if the teacher kicked him out. However, when I first read this, I thought you meant that the whole class was canceled pre-maturely for some reason and possibly that the college/university then discontinued/discarded mathematical classes from the course catalog. Or that the class was canceled vs. he quit. Both of these explanations aren’t important to the subsequent information, so I now guess that it’s the first explanation. It would be nice if you cleared this point up or dropped it from the first 13.
I also wondered at his attempt to pit measuring time vs. describing time against each other as though only one could be right. But maybe I’m missing something. In any case, I’m not interested in theories about time, so I just got confused by each new description of time and sidetracked by trying to figure out what you meant. Without immediate examples of what you meant (which I’m not recommending you add!), I could think of a number of different ways each theory/example might be played out. Frankly, I’d prefer that you dropped the vague theory lecture and just showed us how this worked.
Then you finally gave us some current action–I perked up!–only to immediately start another lecture on something discussed long ago. At this point, I have the feeling that the whole story is a disguised treaty on the nature of time and tune out. Others may very well be interested in this, but it’s not a topic or story-style that I’m interested in.
I’m going to disagree with Debbie and Philippa. It seemed clear that he isn’t sure if he’d chosen to break off his studies or was forced to do so.
What I love about this opening is the skill: the first graph is an intellectual conundrum, the second graph just takes off, sweeping me into breathtaking visual image. And the third gradually paints in more sensory details, depositing us at exactly the right moment into the story. We know it’s going to be about time; we don’t know how or why, but there’s a faintly sinister note up there in the broken-off studies. It’s a page turner for me.
I liked the thoughtfulness of this opening — I’d always rather be hooked into a story by ideas rather than action.
I’m guessing that you’re intentionally putting past and present into close proximity, given the theme so far. That said, it seemed a bit unnecessarily vague and muddled…partly, as Adam commented, because of the mix of verb tenses, partly because the details don’t always quite match up. We don’t actually learn what Dee’s ideas had been, for instance, before he says “but I was wrong, too” — only that some other people had been “closer to the truth” than most modern scholars. And to have Dee comment on time as unbroken and going in all directions, yet then have him notice as the clock “ticked away the seconds” — a view of time that is both directional and segmented — felt odd and mismatched.
Regarding the line “continuous ether, its flow rising and falling like a river’s current,” does the flow rise and fall, or is it the strength of the flow, of the pull, that does so?
I’m with the other folks here as being confused by the “broken off, or discarded” interjection — I guessed that he was saying he wasn’t sure if he might one day return to those studies (broken off) or if he had abandoned them (discarded) but wasn’t sure.
I do think you’re on to something good here, it’s just a matter of polishing the details so that they won’t trip up your readers.
I’m with Sherwood on this, and thank her for her masterful analysis of why each paragraph works exactly as it should and how it all sets up an intriguing page turner. About the only comment I’d add is that the specific mention of “philosopher mages” in the first graph works both as foreshadowing and set-up for magic of a very “arcane arts and sciences” sort, to later make its appearance in what is otherwise a science fiction trope, the time travel story.
This sample is the best example I’ve seen yet in all 130+ submissions of not whether a particular reader will turn the page–and this reader certainly would–but whether an editor would turn the page. After all, even if a particular editor doesn’t care for theoretical time travel stories and also knows that some readers don’t either, he knows that some readers do, and moreover, this is a masterful handling of one and the rest of the story promises to be at least as good. And at the beginning and end of the day, that’s what editors are wanting to buy: good stories.
I also had a definite prose-envy reaction to the second graph. Beautiful imagery, Beth.
More. More. And please tell us when and where you sell it.
Kevin, *blush*
I’m delighted to report that I have just sold the story to PS Publishing. (Those guys are *fast* with responses–the whole process took a day, if that.)
I want to thank everyone–Ivy, Debbie, Adam, MattD, Sherwood, Philippa, and you, Kevin–for your feedback. Your comments helped me not just with this story, but with my writing in general. Y’all are great!
Wow, that is fast, Beth– congrats.
Looking forward to seeing more of your stuff in the future, and also the appearance of the rest of this story.
Congratulations, Beth!
I should note that I’m a very hands-on learner and talk about theories just makes my eyes glaze over, so I’m not exactly your target audience in that respect.
Getting such praise from Kevin is hard to do, so congratulations on that as well! 
Well, I don’t know if it’s that hard, but I will note that the last time I cried “More! More!” here at Deep Genre, that was critique #30, Sharon Mock, who I’ve met since at a convention in San Diego. And she announced that she’d placed her story at Clarke’s World:
http://www.clarkesworld.com/magazine/mock_02_07.html
If anyone wants to throw some congratulations her way as well, her topic though archived is still unlocked:
http://www.deepgenre.com/wordpress/damon-knight/critique-30/
I’m going to need to make up some glyph to put next to the accepted/published stories. I’m thinking a quill pen.
Well done!
Thanks, everyone! I’m absolutely jazzed by the sale–and still reeling from how fast it happened.
Kevin, I’m immersed in novel writing these days (pirates!), but yes, I will definitely post more 13-liners in the future. (Even if I’m not posting, I lurk here a lot.)
Beth,
Congratulations…if you are as happy as I am envious, well, your cup must runneth over.
Adam