Tuesdays with Story

Tuesdays with Story
April 19, 2022

The first word . . .

In selecting the starting point and ending point for your story, it will help “if you will remember the following facts about readers:

1. They are fascinated and threatened by significant change;
2. They want the story to start with such a change;
3. They want to have a story question to worry about;
4. They want the story question answered in the story ending;
5. They will quickly lose patience with everything but material that relates to the story question.”

– Jack M. Bickham, Scene and Structure, p. 7 (1993).

Tuesday evening April 19, 2022

Six TWS writers came together over Zoom and in person this week to review the works-in-progress of four of their colleagues and offer insights and critiques. Here is a summary of what was said:

— Mike Austin (“Roger”) … “Roger” was very well received. I had concerns that it might be too depressing, but that didn’t seem to be a problem. Some areas that could use fleshing out were the things that have alienated his family from him, such as his affair and his mocking of his son’s religion. I also should clarify Angie’s comment about not being able to afford an emergency room. (And along those lines, it occurred to me that if Angie had a job at the university, she’d have insurance. So I might have to give her a different job.) There was a little brawling, though no bloodshed, thanks to Zoom, about whether the structure could be changed so that the story begins with Roger waking in the waiting room, contemplating the events leading up to his being there, or if it should remain linear. I did find the idea of beginning in the waiting room appealing. Hm. Thanks to everyone for your comments and suggestions.  

— Dan Culhane (A Grand Thing To Be An Afternoon, Ch. 2) Dan submitted chapter 2 in which we are introduced to Nellie, Oren, and Jacob and start to see the world of MY026. Dan received some very helpful feedback on the mechanics of the chapter, including on the opening description of the scene and the purpose of certain section breaks. A universal agreement against the use of parenthesis was duly noted. The piece succeeds in introducing characters that are engaging and get people to care about their relationships. However, the narration needs some attention in places to avoid the voice of the narrator sneaking into Nellie’s internal dialogue. All very helpful feedback and much appreciated.

— Amber Boudreau (Second Act, Ch. 1-3) … Amber read from the third chapter of her sequel to Second Nature, tentatively titled Second Act. Jamie thought Amber should wait to disclose the requirement of the main character to be a member of a pack in able to perform until later when she could really highlight it. Jack thought the second chapter was especially accessible and thought maybe the story could start there. Larry didn’t have a problem with where the story started and suggested maybe even beginning it a little earlier when the main character is still in wolf form before the change.

— Larry Sommers (Three poems) … Only one, “Fragments,” received comments. Jack felt the order of the elements needed to be arranged to build up to the jarring violence that now begins the poem. Jaime felt the stanza about the owl swooping down on prey needed to be more visceral, less distanced.  Thanks, all.

Who’s up next . . . 

For May 3, we currently have three writers on deck:

• Jaime Nelson Noven (NYAA?)
• Amber Boudreau (Second Act)
• Bob Kralapp (??)

NOTE: inquiries to John, Amit, Kashmira, and Paul asking if they want to present on may 3 are outstanding. Larry may also jump in.

Our editor . . .

Mike Austin will be the editor for the May issues of Writer’s Mail. He would appreciate your news and any other items of interest that would serve. Please email Mike if you have some such material and he’ll include it in the next issue.

**Fifth Tuesday Writing Challenge**

May 2022 has a fifth Tuesday, and at Tuesday night’s meeting we decided to add a competitive element to our usual Fifth Tuesday Writing Challenge. So, there will be an entry fee, a judge, and a prize!

The writing prompt will be established at our next meeting, May 3. So be thinking about that. You will be asked to write up to 500 words from that prompt, no holds barred.

The differences are:

1. A firm deadline of Tuesday, May 17, for submitting your pieces, so our Distinguished Outside Judge will have time to read and consider them.
2. Entry fee of ten dollars, to be held by an as-yet-unnamed Kitty Holder.
3. Your entry will be submitted to the judge with your name stripped off.
4. The judge will attend our Fifth Tuesday gathering on May 31, will give us the benefit of his or her perspective, and will name the winner, based on the judge’s perception of literary merit or promise.
5. The Prize: The winner may send the judge a sample of current work, up to 10,000 words, for evaluation and feedback. The judge’s response to the winner’s work will be given in the course of a leisurely lunch or dinner at a mutually convenient time and place, with cost of the meal covered by the entry fees. The winner is free to pump the judge for any useful information or tips on any aspect of writing or marketing.
6. The winner will pass on any useful ideas and feedback received when we next meet following the winner’s meal with the judge. 
7. Distant members may submit. If they win, it is hoped they will come to Madison and dine with the judge in the not-too-distant future.

The identity of our Distinguished Outside Judge will be revealed soon.

Please plan to throw your hat in the ring. We need at least five or six entries to make this a worthwhile endeavor.

The last word . . .

“It is only about things that do not interest one that one can give a really unbiased opinion, which is no doubt the reason why an unbiased opinion is always absolutely valueless.”

–Oscar Wilde, “The Critic as Artist” (1890), in Oscar Wilde, Plays, Prose Writings, and Poems 1, 50 (1930).