Okay - so what would you add to give it that extra story hook?
The reader cannot read your intentions - only your words. Your words in this thread missed the point of what I was trying to teach, and provided an example that was convoluted, used inappropriate imagery (and thus undermined any emotional impact you were trying to create), and, worst of all, did not accomplish the illustration you were attempting to provide.
I've now been in front of a university classroom teaching writing for 5 years. Before that, I mentored my share of writers. When you are attempting to illustrate a mechanism, you have to use simple constructions to do so, in which the mechanism is stripped bare. There's only one time where I try to get clever, and that's when illustrating the dangers of trying to be too clever (quite literally, I tell my students that "Exploring the potential of three-dimensional space-time while efficiently exchanging oxygen and carbon dioxide" sounds intelligent right up until you realize what it says is "Occupying space and breathing").
Look, if there's a writing technique that you've refined and want to expound upon, then this forum is the place to do so. But if you do, make sure your examples are straightforward and illustrate what you are trying to say with clarity, and don't EVER drop into somebody else's lesson and try to torpedo it. (Seriously, how the hell would you feel if somebody went and did that to you?)
I'm just the student, here. 
"You may call me Ishmael, for that name will keep both of us out of trouble."
Very good!
Now I'm wondering what the speaker's name is, what the trouble is, and just who the hell this guy is in the first place.
The only refinement I'd suggest is that "for that name" is a bit of an old fashioned construction, and not the way people really speak in conversation. Instead, you might want to use "You may call me Ismael -- that name will keep both of us out of trouble."
Thank you! I chose that wording to remain somewhat consistent with the age of the original story. If I were writing in a contemporary setting, I suppose I'd (eventually) edit it to "You may call me Ismael. That name will keep both of us out of trouble." But then it's 2 sentences instead of just the 1st one. 
He's a university professor of writing. I think they DO lecture to get educational material across. At lease they did when I was in college. 
You've said some interesting stuff here, but I don't think it's helpful to tell people not to 'torpedo' your lesson. You've been teaching for 5 years; surely you've had some students who try to pick apart your arguments. Do you accuse them of trying to 'torpedo your lesson' as well? Or do you trust that they're here to learn?
If you're presenting yourself as a teacher in this thread, then everyone who comes here is your student. They're not 'dropping into someone else's lesson' like some rando barging into your classroom to argue with you. This is their lesson too.
I am a sessional instructor in a 4th year professional prep course, teaching engineering students writing and disaster analysis. There are three types of lessons I do:
- Lectures, in which I stand and talk, and then field questions at the end.
- Workshops, in which the students bring in their assignments, get into groups and edit each other's work, and the TA and I work the room to sort out any questions or problems that might crop up before anything gets handed in and marked.
- Seminars (in the disaster analysis section), in which I ask questions and the students do most of the talking, with me occasionally adding something here and there.
Never once have I had a student stand up and declare that the basics of what I was teaching was wrong or not of value in the first place. I've fielded plenty of questions that amounted to "but what about this," and if the student had a point, I always conceded it (an air of infallibility makes for bad teaching, and one should never be afraid to admit when one is wrong, or doesn't know the answer to a question). I've had plenty of students argue that a mistake was made in their assignment during my office hours (in fact, I encourage students to do it - I want them to know how to argue the merits, and I enjoy being able to raise a student's mark). But what happened here wasn't anything like what I have seen in my classroom - it was somebody saying "everybody should disregard this and do my thing instead." There is a big difference.
Or, at the risk of coming across as unlikable or unapproachable (and if I come across this way, I apologize), let me put it this way: if everybody who comes here into this thread is my student, then this thread, by extension, is also my classroom. If I would not tolerate a type of conduct in my classroom, why should I give it a pass here?
Maybe it's a difference in field, but I've certainly asked stuff like "why don't people just disregard this and do this other thing instead" in university classrooms, and have never been told that it's intolerable conduct.
I guess I just don't see the line between "but what about this" and "why don't people just disregard this and do this other thing instead" and "everybody should disregard this and do my thing instead", except perhaps in tone. And as someone who has had trouble reading tone in the past and faced harsh accusations of bad faith (not from university professors) as a result, I'm ... not a huge fan of rules that discriminate based on tone ...
I personally don't mind a 'teachery' approach, but I feel like people on more casual internet forums like this one also tend to like being equals and not put much regard towards credentials, so you can expect people to approach you with a challenging stance and not playing the role of a respectful student the way you may be used to :]
EDIT: Replying to your reply here instead of tagging you in a new comment because you were having a bad day so I guess I should probably not drag this on and let the thread get back on topic 
Gotcha, that's definitely specific enough for me to work with :] I have seen people get in arms over something like "why don't people just disregard this and do this other thing instead" though, because they interpreted it as a rhetorical question, which is basically a statement in disguise. So I guess in those situations I'll just clarify it was intended to be a genuine question
I think there's a fine line between "doubling down and making flimsy and transparent excuses" and "disagreeing with your explanation of why they were wrong, and trying to explain to you why you were wrong about them being wrong". From his perspective, it may well have been his initial challenge that was "explaining why you were wrong" and your first reply to him that was "doubling down and making flimsy and transparent excuses".
Depends on how good your excuses were. I personally don't see the difference between an 'explanation' and an 'excuse'. Saying that I missed the point without explaining what your point was would have irritated me, though I believe you have both accused each other of missing the point (and you have both followed up with an explanation of what the point of your previous post was intended to be)
I wasn't going to reply to you anymore as you are just coming off as a "I'm the teacher so listen to me" kind of guy. You putting your "sessional instructor in a 4th year professional prep course" is an appeal to authority, which you have none here. This is a forum, not a class you have control over. I, or anyone, is coming here to see your opinion and maybe adding our opinion to it. I never said you were wrong. I just said there is another way to do this that isn't so simplistic. Just another opinion. If you want to just lecture, stay in your classroom where people paid to hear you. This is a forum, expect discussions and don't try to shut down those discussions by putting out you are a teacher.
That's because it's not intolerable conduct. Any teacher worth their salt is there to be a resource. Asking questions is just picking their brain.
Well, one is a question and one is a statement. A question is an inquiry about a thing - a statement is a declaration of a thing. There's a big difference. But if you want to know why I came down on him, it wasn't his initial challenge that set me off (although I did find it quite off-putting). You may note that in my first reply, I just explained why he was wrong. It was when he doubled down on it and started making flimsy and transparent excuses that I came down on him (and, I will admit, on a personal level, I can't stand that sort of garbage - if you get caught out in making a mistake, just own it, take responsibility for it, and move on for crying out loud!). That's when the kid gloves started coming off.
Let me ask you this: if instead of replying to your concern with a detailed explanation of where I was coming from and what my approach was, I had started making excuses and suggesting that your concerns were invalid due to missing the point, how different would your second reply have been, and what tone would you have taken with me?
You should have listened to that instinct. Now the kid gloves are coming all the way off.
No, it isn't. It's called "credentialism," ie. a statement that authority on a subject exists because of my credentials in that field. An appeal to authority is to an external source. An example would be a statement that a thing is true because Stephen King in his book On Writing states X, Y, and Z. If you're going to accuse me of something, at least use the right terminology.
If there's one thing I can't stand it's this type of crap. Yes, you did, and by saying "that isn't so simplistic," you just implied that here again. You came into a guide about how to properly put a story hook into opening sentences, and said that it was better to put the story hook somewhere else. Take responsibility for yourself.
Now, if you think I've got a problem with you, you are absolutely right. I do - but it's not because you waltzed into my guide on opening sentences and started offering alternatives. It's because I find you to be a sloppy writer who doesn't know what he's doing, and therefore has no business telling anybody else how to write. Shall we do a deep dive into the sins of your example opening paragraph?
Redundant description. "It was a dark and stormy night" is an old, established, and highly evocative sentence. It immediately creates a very specific and detailed image in the reader's mind of wind, lightning, and thunder. Once this image is created, no further environmental description is necessary. The problem is that it is so well established a sentence that it is a cliche, which causes unintended consequences in any paragraph it is used in. But, that's a discussion for another day.
Telling rather than showing. "One that hasn't been seen in ages by the local populace" is a sentence that tells the reader that the storm is geographically exceptional, but the problem is that it just flat-out tells the reader that the storm is geographically exceptional. A better sentence would be "The locals would later call it the 'storm of the century'." Now the reader is drawing the conclusion that the storm is geographically exceptional for him/herself.
Changing person in the middle of the paragraph. This paragraph is written in the third person. "It was the type of storm that came down in sheets, reducing visibility to no more than a few meters in front of you" now shifts it to a first person personal narration. It should have read "It was the type of storm that came down in sheets, reducing visibility to no more than a few meters ahead."
Incorrect imagery. This is the opening paragraph to a ghost story, as indicated by the final sentence. The imagery you have selected is that of rain, which is the traditional imagery of change, rebirth, or cleansing. The emotional impact it creates is of relief, when instead it should be of foreboding - which would have been the case if you'd left this sentence out in the first place.
"But this night was different." There is so much wrong with this sentence that it deserves its own list. It's redundant - you've already established the exceptionalism of the storm, and thus of the night it is taking place during. It raises unnecessary confusion in the reader's mind - so the storm is geographically exceptional, but it's even more so? Or is it talking about something different and unrelated, and if so, why is it being mentioned here with the storm? The only thing this sentence accomplishes is making the paragraph look bad - it should not be able to survive the most cursory of edits.
Poor grammar. Normally, in a post like this, I'd give this a pass, but the point I'm making here is in regards to sloppiness, so I won't. "This night, ghost were out" is wrong - it should be "This night, the ghosts were out."
This is what your sample paragraph could have looked like:
"It was a dark and stormy night, one that the locals would later call the 'storm of the century'. And this night, the ghosts were out."
Or, if you really felt like adding that extra environmental information, it could have looked like:
"It was a dark and stormy night. Deafening thunder crashed without end as lightning cast the streets into sharp, jagged relief. The locals would later call it the 'storm of the century'. And this night, as the wind howled, the ghosts were out."
If you can't construct a decent opening paragraph you have no business telling others how to do it.
Now, you're right - I've been teaching long enough that this is my default mode when I write a guide or the like. But it also means that as a teacher, I have a responsibility to not lead people astray. I take that responsibility very seriously (I literally tell my students every year that if it turns out something I told them in class ended up being wrong, to come back and tell me about it). And that means that when somebody comes into a guide I wrote offering bad advice, I feel a responsibility to answer it.
And if you don't like that, too bad. I'm not the one who came into this thread with pretenses of expertise backed by lousy writing - you did. All I'm doing is calling you out on it.
I will summarize then.
I think you're a lousy writer with pretenses of expertise that you can't back up with your prose, and that you have no business telling anybody else how to write. I find your prose sloppy, you misuse terminology (it's called "credentialism", not "appeal to authority"), and you don't appear to understand the actual meaning of the imagery you are employing. All of which might have been forgivable if you would just take some responsibility for your actions when you get caught out getting something wrong, but you don't.
Is that better?
Stop tagging me in your ego trip. I literally don't care about your opinion anymore and won't engage in your childish forum war. You have proved you are nothing more than a "teacher" that wants to talk down to others in a public forum of ideas. You went way to hard on a paragraph I wrote as an example of structure, while at breakfast while reading a manga. I didn't turn in an assignment.
What a weird threat and come on, it's really not that deep. If someone isn't receptive to critique or advice, why not let them be. There are plenty of professionals here on the forum who bring up their credentials without lording it over others who ask for advice or enter into discussions with them. You helped one person, why not quit while you're ahead?
Oh, I guess it is that deep.
I'll own this. That guy got under my skin on day 13 of a low-grade fever from a flu or flu-like thing that's been driving me crazy for the last two weeks. Not my best moment, and I'm sorry for how bad this looked to everybody else.
This did not elevate the level of discussion, and at least half of that is on me. For that, I apologize.
I'm sure ballofhate would appreciate that. Just always remember that this is a public space, where opinions will clash. You can rely on your credentials to bolster you advice or opinions, but not everyone will care and sometimes getting into an argument gets you both nowhere. Just as long as you understand that.
1 month later
closed Aug 9, '22
Suggested Topics
| Topic | Category | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Who is your most annoying character? | Writing | Novels | 15 | 406 | Jan 20 |
| Lycans Wolves Vampires | Writing | Novels | 3 | 129 | Jan 17 |
| What’s Holding You Back? | Writing | Novels | 35 | 676 | 13d |
| Violence in story? | Writing | Novels | 12 | 303 | Nov '24 |
| A New Writer 😀 Currently editing my first book | Writing | Novels | 0 | 83 | Feb 1 |