Critique #162 — Seaboe Emm #2
Kevin Andrew Murphy August 31st, 2007
Inga woke in the midst of a rain of books. She yanked
the sheet over her head and burrowed under the pillows
in search of protection. Glass from the imploding
window peppered the bed. Beneath the crash of the
chiming clock falling in the living room and the
repeated thud of bricks on the roof there was a deep,
almost subsonic, rumble. The bed began to jitter
across the floor, allowing more books to fall as the
bookcase at her head tilted away from the wall. The
whole house shook and it went on for what seemed
minutes.
“Let it be an earthquake,” she prayed, rigid with
anxiety. “Please, let it just be an earthquake.”
Three weeks earlier, a massive earthquake was just
about the worst natural disaster Inga could’ve
imagined. Then Mt. St. Helens exploded and the roc
emerged from the gaping crater.
This is quote good. The only suggestion I’d make is to show Inga taking cover a little more into the action. Maybe swap the third and second sentences, give more of a sense of action? The rain of books isn’t enough to show the cataclysm and so I don’t understand the “burrowing” as well as I do a sentence later.
Otherwise, quite interesting. I’d definitely like to read more.
J
“Please let it be just an earthquake.”
Bingo. That’s your money line, right there. (and I think you could safely cut “rigid with anxiety” – I think we get that)
Cut the last paragraph and reveal what could be worse than a big earthquake through the story as it continues to unfold.
Also – I think your first paragraph can be cleaned up a bit; forex, JB’s suggestion about swapping lines 2 and 3 is a good one. (that is, yes, start with the first paragraph, because it does set up the second so well)
Onthe whole, not bad. Only a few points:
I’d replace ‘jitter’ with ‘judder’ – you’ve just been talking about deep, semi-subsonic sounds, but then you use a word that’s very high-pitched and squeaky (say ‘jit’ and ‘jud’ out loud, and you’ll see the difference).
Ditto Kate, scrap the last paragraph. People who are – at the very least – trying to keep themselves safe in an earthquake do not have time to think about what happened three weeks ago. Thus, neither does the reader. I also agree with JB on swapping those lines. How original of me :p.
Otherwise, I’d read on. Hope this helped
.
I agree that this would be better if sentence #2 and #3 where switched. I also agree with Kate that you should cut the last paragraph and just show what really happened as the story unfolds. You already have us hooked with the situation and wondering what’s happening. At least in my case, being told the cause in the first 13 lines rather breaks the tension and my desire to read on.
If she’s burrowed under her pillow, how does she see the bookcase tilt away from the wall?
Hope this helped.
I’m with Kate and Daniel on the last paragraph. Otherwise, brilliant, brilliant, brilliant.
I liked it. I agree that the last paragraph revealed a bit too baldly the nature of the
cataclasm that is worse than an earthquake. You could junk that last paragraph as
suggested, or at least pare down the revelations in it (”…then Mount St. Helens
exploded – and something had emerged.”)
Anyway, I thought it had a pretty rousing start.
Sorry I’m so late replying–I’ve been on vacation without internet access since this went up.
While I haven’t written out the changes, I’ve been making some changes to this beginning–one of which is to dump the third paragraph.
Thank you all for the thoughts.
Seaboe
The only thing that leapt out at me was the name Inga, because that is the name of a princess in some of Frank Baum’s works.
I would seriously consider changing that name.
Len