As we’ve discussed many times here at TKZ, our first job as writers is drawing the reader in. Today’s first-page sample accomplished that goal for me. I’ll let you read it, then finish with my thoughts.
THE SAHARA INTERCEPT
El Al has this silly rule requiring passengers to travel unarmed. I always thought the best way to stop a hijacker was to blow his head off. Thus, I arrived at Ben Gurion International Airport, the site of the nineteen seventy-three Lod massacre, disarmed, without my little Walthers PPK pistol, like the one Double-O Seven carries. He would have found a way, but I’m no James Bond.
I didn’t anticipate any danger in Israel, but it never hurts to practice situational awareness. Not paranoia, just attention to details, in other words — watch my back — a good way to stay alive. For the last two years, it’s worked. I’m still breathing.
Counter surveillance is an art. The most important thing is to be able to blend in, keep a low profile. Don’t project an image someone will remember. I dressed as an ordinary tourist: tan pants, light blue polo shirt, and clean socks.
The key is to appear confident and natural, like you belong. I cleared customs and immigration and strode into the hustle and bustle of the main lobby, resolute in my ability to spot any imminent threat.
“Mister Ross Brannan?”
A slim well-groomed young woman with raven hair and deep penetrating green eyes stood before me: hand on hip, dressed in a neat crisp-pressed olive-green army uniform, her black beret worn at a jaunty angle, her self-assured smile and attitude enhanced by the nine-millimeter Uzi automatic carbine slung over her shoulder.
“That’s me.” How did she pick me out? Expectations can blind you if you simply concentrate on preconceived notions. You may miss a threat that may be real and near. I should have spotted her first.
“Shalom, welcome to Israel. My name is Tamara Alon. I am your escort.” The way she said escort, was both sexy and suggestive.”
“Thanks.” Tamara seemed pleasant enough and not bad looking, not bad at all — matter of fact she was hot. “Say how did you know who I was?”
“I was shown your picture.” Her eyes sparkled. “So I looked for a cowboy from the movies.”
* * *
The humor here works well for me. First-person narrators are tricky to handle, but I like the way this page quickly establishes the main character as an Inspector Clouseau-type. He sees himself as James Bond, but in reality he’s a bit of a bumbler.
I do have a small nit is with the first paragraph. The lengthy sentence with its many commas was a bit of a stumbling block for this reader; I think it would help to use numeric 1973 instead of spelling out the year. I also tripped over the first Double-O Seven reference, and had to reread the sentence that starts “He would have found a way” for clarity.)
I was a bit thrown by the use of italics. The italics, used to show internal thoughts, are interspersed with non-italicized, omniscient pronouncements (“Expectations can blind you if you simply concentrate on preconceived notions. You may miss a threat that may be real and near.”). In this case, I would suggest removing these two non-italicized sentences, leaving only the narrator’s chagrined reaction.
I think it’s unnecessary to italicize the word “escort,” because you provide the inflection in the next sentence. If you both italicize and explain, it’s overkill. (It also is humorous to imagine, as this reader was by now, that the woman’s inflection was only in the narrator’s mind, not intended by her.) Remove the end quote from the end of that paragraph.
This is a personal preference, but I always bridle at “raven” hair and “sparkling” eyes. They’re a bit cliche. You’ve already established that she has penetrating green eyes, so you probably don’t need the sparkle. Also, I’m no gun expert (paging Miller and Gilstrap here), but I would check to make sure exactly which weapon an IDF escort would carry. And I’d work in an IDF reference, for Israel Defense Forces, where you say “army.” The more specific your references are in your manuscript, the more authentic it will seem to the reader.
In the second-to-last paragraph, your narrator’s reaction between “Thanks” and “Say, how did you know…” is a bit distracting, and doesn’t add anything new to Tamara’s description. Right now your character is thinking about the fact that he’s been ID’d, not whether Tamara is hot or not. As a general rule, try to keep every paragraph tightly focused on a single action or reaction.
Those are all minor nits, though. Overall, I’m drawn in by this page. It’s refreshing to have a hard-boiled main character taken down a notch on the first page.
What do you all think?
Kathryn, I was also drawn into this first page. The first person voice is intriguing and interesting, and your critique points are spot-on. I would add that describing an attractive young woman as “well groomed” was a bit strange, and I would also suggest the writer shy away from clichés like “hustle and bustle”. There’s a good chance I would keep reading at least a few more pages.
I enjoyed this character’s take on reality. I agree first person is tricky, but I think it is well done here.
I’d agree with Kathryn’s comments on the italics. But, I will say, I did not stumble on a single thing. I like this page and I would read more. I’d buy the book–just because of this dude’s voice. I like him already.
Definitely agree on all points:
1. Great voice. Great fun. I would definitely read on.
2. Everything everyone said about the copyedit.
3. However, these descriptive words leave me cold and usually result in me dropping the book (and I am a devourer of military thrillers): raven, flaxen, titian, emerald, and sapphire. Unless it is a bodice-ripper or a satire (which this may be), these words often lead to a female character that is a Mary Sue Amazon with a black belt, a PhD, and a tragic past that has led her to a life of danger, intrigue, and sacrifice.
And I say satire because this cracked me up. It has a nice Dirk Pitt touch to it. Would reserve judgment and read more.
Terri
I’m nit-picking here, but the gun descriptions bothered me a bit. I’m a little bit of a gun guy. “Walthers” should be singular “Walther.”
The description of the Uzi as a “nine-millimeter Uzi automatic carbine” is a bit of overkill. Maybe the extra description is there for non-gun folks, but it’s a safe assumption that military issue firearms are automatic. And it’s a little unnecessary to mention it being a carbine as well. Just my opinion, but the over-description sort of broke the flow for me. YMMV.
Overall, I enjoyed it.
Couple points.
1.) I had to read this a few times to get that it was satire. Guess I’m slow. Regardless, I wasn’t compelled by the page.
2.) It IS NOT a safe assumption that a military-grade firearm is automatic.
3.) Uzi carbine’s are not fully automatic-fire capable. Only the subs are.
4.) If Tamara is in the IDF, she’s packing a TAVOR AR, which is standard IDF issue these days.
Ah! Fletch, I knew many readers would know exactly what Tamara would be carrying–that’s why I always go overboard on research in my own books (which is how I found out there’s a pink TASER made especially for women, lol). Terri, I’m with you on the no-titian rule. Even Nancy Drew has banned the titian hair these days (last I heard, she had to be a “strawberry blonde.”)
Loved the opening two lines, but I’d reverse them for greater effect, maybe splice them with a “but”, or “Unfortunately,…”
As in: “… blow his head off, but El Al has this silly rule …”
Otherwise I echo everything the other commentators mentioned. My only weapons comment would be about the “carbine slung over her shoulder”–how can he identify it just by seeing maybe only the last few inches of the barrel?
I’m not a gun expert, and tend to favor the “less is more” approach. Tell enough for the experts to say, “Okay, he got that right enough to pass for plausible without boring the non gun experts with too much detail.”
One last suggestion: to avoid confusion about weapons and when used by various military groups, how about working in some reference to the year the story takes place. 1973 threw me off a bit by suggesting that the story takes place in 1973, so when I quickly realized that was only a historical reference, some suggestion like, “(Thirty) years later,(or ‘post 9/11’, for example) the weapons rule makes much more sense.” Anything to give us some sort of time reference.
Bottom line, I’d read further.
Thank you for your kind comments, especially the criticisms. Your insights are exactly what I was looking for. I am still learning — struggling actually –how to deal with clichés, descriptions, and techniques such as the italics issue.
Unfortunately, I left out one important element, the tagline with the date: 26 June 1980. This is a cold war action adventure novel that weaves in and out of actual events.
I am somewhat perplexed by the notion that this was strictly satire. The first scene is intended to have a satirical edge as it introduces the main character. I wanted to make the point that Ross is not a James Bond type. He’s a regular guy. Yes, he does have a bit of Dirk Pitt in him.
The remainder of the chapter deals with technical details regarding electronic intelligence operations. My goal was to draw the reader in with a lighter touch.
Mark and Fletch are right, it’s Walther not Walthers and its not accurate to describe the weapon she was carrying as a carbine. The weapons descriptions may be overkill, but seems to be the norm for the genre. Perhaps I need to be a bit more judicious where and how I use them.
Raven hair, sparkling eyes — guilty. Maybe I need to stop reading those romance writer’s blogs.
Again, thank you. I have learned a lot from the other critiques, one reason this blog is my one of my first reads of the day.
RG, I’m so glad to have you as part of our TKZ family! I think you’re well on your way to developing a likable, compelling character and story. To me, your piece includes a nice, gentle sense of humor, but does not rise to the level of satire. (Satire, I think, is more about ridicule and has a mocking tone). I may have misled everyone by mentioning Inspector Clouseau! In my own series, the main character is constantly poking fun at herself, and frequently finds herself upended by the world around her. It helps lighten the tone and makes for an entertaining read. Your character is likable and his voice makes the reader want to stay with him. That’s an important hurdle to cross for any writer, and it’s a refreshing change from the macho, Dirty Harry characters we see every day. Write on!
RG – poor choice on my part as well. I didn’t mean satire as in “Get Smart,” I meant leaning toward over-the-top as in Dirk Pitt (and I am a fan of Cussler).
Terri
PS: and every critique has such good tips that I’ve already done some editing
This character reminds me of a book I recently narrated, Ancient Prey by RJ Jagger. A similar type of main character, with the difference that this is written in 1st person.
Seems interesting, in spite of the couple of technical corrections needed as pointed out by Fletch. I’d keep reading.
Enjoyed the sense of character conveyed. Did not feel satirical in content but rather in character’s viewpoint – no worries for me.
The seed of a potentially very interesting character was effectively planted in these few words. Nice. Writing struck me as very clean.
I would defintiely read on.