Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm writing a sequel to my first book about a horse (his name is ACE)
Quick back story: When Ace was born, his mother had to be put down due to difficulties. He escaped from the ranch as a 3 year old stallion. Now, several years later, he is back with the owners in the stables where he was born.
Numerous times I've tried to reword this paragraph BELOW, and it still doesn't sound right. OR, maybe it sounds okay?)
I'd appreciate it if any of you can help me reword it better?
Thanks, Ann
Ace gradually lost his fear. Imprinted at birth by kindness and human intervention due to the tragic loss of his mother, Ace once again accepted their trust. He no longer pressed against the rear of the stall, when Julia or Martin entered.
I'll state up front that editing can seem rude and even aggressive when it is given without the social niceties generally reserved for those who haven't enough talent to improve. The red pen and sharpie can be seen as weapons or scalpels depending on the person.
Your paragraph:
Ace gradually lost his fear. Imprinted at birth by kindness and human intervention due to the tragic loss of his mother, Ace once again accepted their trust. He no longer pressed against the rear of the stall, when Julia or Martin entered.
Quick thoughts:
You have inversions that slow the flow and confuse.
Ace lost his fear - of what? Of people? Of dogs? Of apple pie?
Starting the next sentence "Imprinted at birth" brings a connotational connection to branding, that confuses. Branding is literally imprinting upon skin. Psychological imprinting is a complex subject. There is an imprinting of newborns to their mothers, and to a lesser degree, fathers. Are you attempting to say that the foal imprinted on the humans present at his birth as his parents? If so, that is a throw-away attempt at stating it and distracts from the thrust of the paragraph.
I think that what you are attempting to state is that Ace was untrusting (of what we can only infer) and became more trusting because of remembering depending upon the kindness of strangers around the time of his birth. The tragic circumstance of the mare's death is (I guess) a parenthetical attempt to explain that inherent trust that somehow had been suppressed.
Ace gradually lost his fear.
Imprinted at birth by kindness and human intervention due to the tragic loss of his mother,
He was imprinted BY kindness? Or do you mean WITH kindness?
He wasn't imprinted with human intervention, as that is impossible, and yet you have a compound object where that can be misunderstood.
Ace once again accepted their trust. He no longer pressed against the rear of the stall, when Julia or Martin entered.
The comma isn't needed.
OK, attempting to make some modifications:
Gradually, Ace lost his fear.
The thrust of the paragraph is less that he lost his fear, but more that it took time to lose his fear. By putting "gradually" first, you emphasize it.
Next comes the expansion of how that loss of fear manifested:
He no longer pressed against the rear of the stall when Julia or Martin entered.
OK, sounds good. Next expansion:
Once again he accepted their trust.
OK, this is an inversion of who has fear and who trusts who. (Yeah, yeah, who, whom, what, whatever)
You had Ace not trusting people and you now switch to people having to trust Ace. At a minimum, you need a qualifier:
Once again he accepted their trust in him.
(I skipped the repetition of Ace, since he is the subject of the paragraph.) That leads to the question of pathetic fallacy. Does a horse have the ability to put himself in the other man's shoes (horseshoes?) to recognize various emotions in the third person?
A sample of how the paragraph might be improved. Substitute what you want for apple pie.
Gradually, Ace lost his fear of people smelling of apple pie. He no longer pressed against the rear of the stall when Julia or Martin entered. Once again, he accepted their trust in him and returned that trust with a nuzzle. That vague memory of the kindness of humans when he was born and his mother died had somehow overcome his fear of having an apple pie thrown at him.
Harry, I chuckled when I read your reply. You remind me of someone I respected who didn't a$$pat when I used to be an artist and posted paintings on a critique site.
Some were quite blunt with cutting remarks, and some padded their replies with niceties. While I appreciated both sides for their help, gaining knowledge was my intent. So, my take is, if people can't handle the remarks, then don't ask for help.
Thank you for your reply.
Here is my revision. Go ahead and throw a pie at er!
Ace gradually lost his fear of being handled by Julia and Martin. He no longer pressed against the rear of his stall when they entered. Orphaned at birth and raised on the ranch until his bold escape as a four-year-old, vague memories of human kindness helped him overcome his mistrust.
The first two sentences are a little choppy; maybe join them with a semicolon. Be nice if you had a second example of his growing trust.
Ace gradually lost his fear of being handled by Julia and Martin; he no longer pressed against the rear of his stall when they entered, and would start to eat before they left the stall.
This one is a little harder. Did you already explain that he didn't trust the people, and why? This is a lot of back story; maybe it deserves a longer paragraph earlier in the story. If the people were so nice when he was young, why did he make a bold escape? I assume that's all in the first book, but a recap seems in order.
Orphaned at birth and raised on the ranch until his bold escape as a four-year-old, vague memories of human kindness helped him overcome his mistrust.
Ok, I an reacting as a reader here. The following sentence is not needed if the book is about what happened to Ace
[i][Orphaned at birth and raised on the ranch until his bold escape as a four-year-old, vague memories of human kindness helped him overcome his mistrust./I]
You should not need to recap your story in the last sentence.
The first two sentences are a little choppy; maybe join them with a semicolon. Be nice if you had a second example of his growing trust.
Ace gradually lost his fear of being handled by Julia and Martin; he no longer pressed against the rear of his stall when they entered, and would start to eat before they left the stall.
This one is a little harder. Did you already explain that he didn't trust the people, and why? This is a lot of back story; maybe it deserves a longer paragraph earlier in the story. If the people were so nice when he was young, why did he make a bold escape? I assume that's all in the first book, but a recap seems in order.
Orphaned at birth and raised on the ranch until his bold escape as a four-year-old, vague memories of human kindness helped him overcome his mistrust.
Thank you for your input!
Even with the semicolon, don't you think the sentence is too long? Prowritingaid (an editing site) kept telling me in the first book that some of my sentences were too long. Readability is easier with shorter sentences.
Quote:
why did he make a bold escape? I assume that's all in the first book, but a recap seems in order.
Yes, his escape is in the first book. He jumps a fence to go after a wild stallion and his herd. I've touched on it earlier in this second book.
He's a secondary (horse) character, but an important one. I'm not going into huge details about his rehab because this second book isn't about him, but mention it because he adapts to captivity again. Plus, any readers that haven't read the first book would wonder why he has memories of the ranch.
Ok, I an reacting as a reader here. The following sentence is not needed if the book is about what happened to Ace
[i][Orphaned at birth and raised on the ranch until his bold escape as a four-year-old, vague memories of human kindness helped him overcome his mistrust./I]
You should not need to recap your story in the last sentence.
But it sounds like a fun story.
Thank you Silibran. I hope readers find it as fun as I am in writing it. Please see my answers in post #8.
Last edited by gouligann; 01-29-2022 at 06:20 AM..
I'm writing a sequel to my first book about a horse (his name is ACE)
Quick back story: When Ace was born, his mother had to be put down due to difficulties. He escaped from the ranch as a 3 year old stallion. Now, several years later, he is back with the owners in the stables where he was born.
Numerous times I've tried to reword this paragraph BELOW, and it still doesn't sound right. OR, maybe it sounds okay?)
I'd appreciate it if any of you can help me reword it better?
Thanks, Ann
Ace gradually lost his fear. Imprinted at birth by kindness and human intervention due to the tragic loss of his mother, Ace once again accepted their trust. He no longer pressed against the rear of the stall, when Julia or Martin entered.
It's not the humans who are trusting but Ace. Maybe Ace responded to their kindness.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
