First Page Critique: When Being Too Coy Creates Confusion

By PJ Parrish

Good day, crime dogs. We have an interesting First Pager today. I am going in cold with this one so as to not prejudice you with any preludes. Your first impressions are valuable here, so please weigh in for our writer. No title. But the submitter alerts us that we are in the genre of “Historical Romantic Suspense.”

Chapter One. November, 1954

Her picture was in the paper today.

I would have known her anywhere. Fair hair, tucked neatly under her hat. The same pearls around her delicate neck. A chic woolen suit topped by a short jacket. White gloves. A smile of pure joy on her face. She strode forward with the same confident, take-on-the-world step I once admired so much, a woman ready to cast the old order aside and charge into the future.

Once we had charged into that future together. Then it arrived, rotten with terror and torture and murder. Did she truly not see that? Was it possible she still didn’t? Was that why, even now, she could look so proud of the man beside her?

There was no doubt that the world was still fighting a war for the future. There was also no doubt, or at least not much doubt, that I had chosen the losing side.

I no longer fight for the future. Now I fight only for my family.

Aside from our shared lofty goal of changing the world, we couldn’t have been more different. She was American born; we were immigrants. Her family were genteelly Protestant; mine were Russian Jews. She was private schools, Bryn Mawr, and Yale; I grew up in my father’s candy store, helping out behind the counter .

None of that mattered. We were confidantes, soul mates.

Because who else could understand our lives? Who else knew the dreams and the fears, the resolute denial of the sickening rumors? How could any outsider understand what that cost us?

Then everything changed. A chasm opened between us that could never be breached.
For years there was a hole in my heart where Priscilla used to be. Was it still there?
The picture again. There was her handsome husband, towering over his petite wife. The only hint of the years he had been away was he was a shade thinner. Otherwise, he looked the same. The same boyish charm, the same disarming smile he had flashed at the jury at every opportunity during the trial.

He wore a broad-brimmed fedora, a natty tweed coat, a white scarf round his neck; trousers perfectly creased, shoes buffed to a high shine. A gloved hand under his wife’s arm. He could have been walking out of the pages of Esquire.

He was walking out of federal prison.

__________________________________

Whenever I approach a First Pager, I try to do my first read purely as a reader who might have picked up the book in a store and is reading the opening pages to see if I want to buy the book. Yes, I do this in real life. If there’s enough craft and a certain je ne sais quoi I take the book home, always with a hopeful heart.

I’m drawn to characters with damaged pasts, so I liked this at first blush. I thought, well, it’s a little slow and I don’t mind slow, but I’m not sure it has that intangible “I don’t know what” distinctive quality that will make me want to go on. Let me try to be more precise.

The writing here is clean and solid. The opening line is interesting in that it promises at least an emotional reaction from the narrator. But then what follows it essentially backstory. A lot of it. And it’s all in a style of “telling.”  The narrator is telling us what happened — that some major event caused a schism in their relationship, that the narrator no longer feels compelled to “fight,” that there is a hole in his/her heart where his friend used to be — or is there?

More backstory “telling” is slipped in with this paragraph: “She was American born; we were immigrants. Her family were genteelly Protestant; mine were Russian Jews. She was private schools, Bryn Mawr, and Yale; I grew up in my father’s candy store, helping out behind the counter.”

In short, the entire opening is one moment of present-time action: Someone is looking at a photograph in a newspaper of what I think is an ex-lover with her ex-con husband. The rest is all the narrator thinking, remembering, musing, lamenting. Nothing is happening. There is no sense of being grounded in any present-time reality. Everything is past-tense. By the time I got to the line about the man coming out of federal prison, I was losing interest.

There are other issues, I think.

I can’t tell the gender of the narrator. It feels like a man, given the somewhat generic description of the photograph of Priscilla — “chic suit, white gloves, pearls, fair hair tucked neatly under a hat.”  So I am thinking that Priscilla is a lost love. But then we get this line: “She strode forward with the same confident, take-on-the-world step I once admired so much.”  That sounds like a friend remembering a girlfriend. So I then wondered if the narrator was female. Especially since we get this line soon after: “We were confidantes.” Which signals two females.  (It’s confidants if a man is the narrator but this could just be a typo.)

Regardless, the uncertainty about the narrator’s emotions toward Priscilla — not fully romantic, not clearly friendship — confused me. I can tell he/she is unhappy and maybe rueful. But the tone is like a weak radio signal, wavering annoyingly just beyond my ear.

Another thing that confused me. The writer gives us a time tag of November 1954. Then devotes a good portion of the backstory and thoughts to some crisis:

Then it arrived, rotten with terror and torture and murder. Did she truly not see that? Was it possible she still didn’t? Was that why, even now, she could look so proud of the man beside her?

There was no doubt that the world was still fighting a war for the future. There was also no doubt, or at least not much doubt, that I had chosen the losing side.

Terror, torture and murder. That implies war. And what to make of this line: “There was no doubt that the world was still fighting a war for the future. The world is still at war in 1954? The Cold War between the U.S. and Russia? Confusing.

So, the set-up of someone seeing an old flame/friend’s photo in a newspaper isn’t bad. The writing is solid if a bit bland. I’d like the writer to try harder to insert what we here at TKZ call “the telling detail,”  unique description that paints a picture of your characters and your setting. (The latter, by the way, is non-existent. Where are we?) See line edit for examples of this.

Final point: The heavy backstory has your story stuck in neutral gear. Also, the confusion created by the coyness of the style is off-putting to me. Key: what exactly is the relationship between Priscilla and the unnamed narrator? Why withhold this? Your back copy will spill the beans anyway.  As an exercise, try to write your back copy:

Jack Steiner lost the love of his life in the gray chaos of post-war London. But when he sees Priscilla’s photograph in a New York newspaper twenty years later…

Janice Steiner never forgot her first love and the ugly rumors that tore them apart. But when she sees a photograph of Priscilla with her husband….

As we often say here, there is a big important difference between artfully withholding details from the reader to create suspense and being obtuse. And keep in mind, dear writer, even in romantic suspense, something needs to happen to someone soon. Apologies to Joseph Heller.

Let me do a quick line edit. My comments in red:

Her picture was in the paper today. If you had told me what newspaper, you’d do a big favor and tell us where we are geographically. Her picture was in the New York Herald Tribune today. 

I would have known her anywhere. Suggestion: Ten years had passed since I last saw her, but I would have known here anywhere. We need better grounding in time. Fair hair, tucked neatly under her hat. The same pearls around her delicate neck. A chic woolen suit topped by a short jacket. White gloves. A smile of pure joy on her face. She strode forward a photo can’t show a present-tense action. Perhaps: “The photograph had caught her in confident mid-stride….with the same confident, take-on-the-world step I once admired so much, a woman ready to cast the old order aside and charge into the future.

Once we had charged into that future together. Then it arrived, is “it” the future? rotten with terror and torture and murder. Did she truly not see that? What does this refer to? Because you write this in the present tense, it implies the narrator is seeing something in the photograph. Or do you mean to say: “Had she truly not seen what happened? Confusing. Was it possible she still didn’t? Was that why, even now, she could look so proud of the man beside her? I like this line, especially since we later learn hubbie’s been in federal prison. 

There was no doubt that the world was still fighting a war for the future. There was also no doubt, or at least not much doubt, that I had chosen the losing side. Again, I find this confusing. What war? 

I no longer fight for the future. Now I fight only for my family.

Aside from our shared lofty goal of changing the world, This is somewhat of a non sequitur transition. This line about the family is interesting but it feels tacked on considering his/her next thoughts. we couldn’t have been more different. She was American born; we were immigrants. Her family were genteelly Protestant; mine were Russian Jews. She was private schools, Bryn Mawr, and Yale; I grew up in my father’s candy store on Orchard Street (lower east side NYC or wherever it was)…always be alert for places to drop in TELLING DETAILS. Your opening could use some, helping out behind the counter.

None of that mattered. We were confidantes, soul mates. Again, this feels like friends, not lovers. 

Because who else could understand our lives? Who else knew the dreams and the fears, the resolute denial of the sickening rumors? How could any outsider understand what that cost us? Shades of Lillian Hellman’s “The Children’s Hour.” Are we in Martha and Karen territory here?  

Then everything changed. A chasm opened between us that could never be breached.
For years there was a hole in my heart where Priscilla used to be. Was it still there?

The picture again. There was her handsome husband, towering over his petite wife. The only hint of the years how many? We really need a few concrete detailshe had been away was he was a shade thinner. Otherwise, he looked the same. The same boyish charm, cliche. And “charm” isn’t the right word for a photograph. the same disarming smile he had flashed at the jury at every opportunity during the trial.

He wore a broad-brimmed fedora, a natty tweed coat, a white scarf round his neck; trousers perfectly creased, shoes buffed to a high shine. A gloved hand under his wife’s arm. He could have been walking out of the pages of Esquire.

He was walking out of federal prison. Nice kicker line. But you could slip in another grounding location detail by telling us which one. We’re floating in the geographic ether here.  

As I said, I like certain things about this opening. But it could do with some good details to make it feel less generic and more emotionally involving. And, dear writer, I think you’d be well served to not hold your readers at such arm’s length, especially working in your chosen sub-genre. The best definition I’ve heard of romantic suspense is “a story that is driven by the threat of danger and the promise of romance.” In the best ones, there is a tension between the two. The protagonist is in danger (or someone she or he loves). The romance builds at the same time as the jeopardy, until both reach a crescendo. Mystery solved, bad guy defeated and the main characters live happily ever after.

Sound simple? Ha. This is why my own efforts at romantic-suspense have never seen the light of day. I sense you can tell a good story, dear writer. Clear up the confusion, tell us where we are, jump into your story with more heart and gusto and get things moving. Thanks for sharing with us.

 

This entry was posted in Writing by PJ Parrish. Bookmark the permalink.

About PJ Parrish

PJ Parrish is the New York Times and USAToday bestseller author of the Louis Kincaid thrillers. Her books have won the Shamus, Anthony, International Thriller Award and been nominated for the Edgar. Visit her at PJParrish.com

26 thoughts on “First Page Critique: When Being Too Coy Creates Confusion

  1. What I enjoyed about this first page was the emotion of the narrator. I could feel it seeping through his/her words. Like you, Kris, I felt lost regarding the setting and sex, but it held my interest enough to flip the page to find out.

    With the tweaks Kris mention, this first page will be even better. Best of luck, Brave Writer!

    • True, that the emotional state of the narrator creates interest and sympathy. I should have mentioned that as a positive. Thanks.

  2. A page with potential. I was interested but not sure I was interested enough to turn the page. The main reason was it seemed too vague & jumped around a good bit (something I wrestle with when writing those story openers!). As I read I found myself cutting out about half the page. Though I would probably make other edits too, the 5 paragraphs I mentally kept were:

    Her picture was in the paper today.

    I would have known her anywhere. Fair hair, tucked neatly under her hat. The same pearls around her delicate neck. A chic woolen suit topped by a short jacket. White gloves. A smile of pure joy on her face. She strode forward with the same confident, take-on-the-world step I once admired so much, a woman ready to cast the old order aside and charge into the future.

    Then everything changed. A chasm opened between us that could never be breached. For years there was a hole in my heart where Priscilla used to be. Was it still there? The picture again. There was her handsome husband, towering over his petite wife. The only hint of the years he had been away was he was a shade thinner. Otherwise, he looked the same. The same boyish charm, the same disarming smile he had flashed at the jury at every opportunity during the trial.

    He wore a broad-brimmed fedora, a natty tweed coat, a white scarf round his neck; trousers perfectly creased, shoes buffed to a high shine. A gloved hand under his wife’s arm. He could have been walking out of the pages of Esquire.

    He was walking out of federal prison.

    I would note that I was also confused as to whether the terror, torture and murder was specifically with regard to the guy walking out of prison or in reference to wider world events. With some tweaks to bring clarity instead of confusion, it’s a page with great potential. Thanks for submitting!

    • I like your rewrite BK because it gets the mystery ex-con man up higher. Romantic suspense is often about romantic triangles. Not sure if this is what’s happening here but highlighting it more is a good idea.

  3. This is an example of the”llaying out the wood” opening I described on Sunday. It doesn’t work for this genre. We don’t care about narrators telling us how emotional they are. We begin to care about narrators who are doing something in response to a disturbance. There will be time enough to get to the emotional backstory.

    • As always, Jim, spot on. Disturb first, then explain. Writer, I suggest you go back and read Jim’s Sunday post.

  4. Thank you, Brave Author, for submitting your work.

    I liked the idea of this story, but like you, Kris, I was confused about the gender of the narrator. And the lack of details made it feel ungrounded. (Is that a word?)

    I was thinking about what Jim said about “laying out the wood.” I wonder if the narrator’s reminiscing could be interrupted by present day circumstances. Something like:

    I saw Priscilla’s picture in the New York Herald today. Even after all these years, she looked the same.
    “Mom. Where is my pink Elvis T-shirt?” Fiona shouted down from the landing.
    “It’s in the dryer,” I called back and heard the thirteen-year-old groan loud enough to wake the neighborhood.
    I folded the paper and slipped it under the placemat on the kitchen table. There would be time enough for regrets after the kids left for school.

    I just thought interspersing the current day with memories of the past might make for an interesting read.

    • Yes, this is what I meant when I said that the only present-time action is someone looking at a newspaper. As you suggest, that in itself is not interesting enough to propel the plot and us forward. There is ALWAYS time to tell us what happened in the past but you have to get your story up on its legs and moving forward first.

  5. Not the worst prologue I’ve ever seen, by a long shot, and I’d probably turn the page. Everything here is typical of a prologue, despite “Chapter One” up top. Much of it refers to a previous time frame. “Chapter Two” will contain no action carried forward from this section, because there is no action thread, thus no continuity. Let’s, if we may, compare this to Terry Odell’s suggestions re openings:
    1. Plunge into the action: nope.
    2. Communicate a theme: check. The theme is envy, jealousy, betrayal, murder, class, wealth, war . . . wait. Okay, no check mark; too many themes are hinted at.
    3. Raise a question that needs answering: check, but then that question is followed by another and another . . . This is an example of Item 3 overkill, in my opinion. More is less, here. No check.
    4. Hook the reader’s emotions: Again, check, but with a little overkill.
    5. Communicate the stakes: Check, possible overkill.
    6. Establish tone/voice: Check.
    7. Introduce the main character (if possible, by name): Check, maybe. My guess is that the unnamed narrator is the MC and Priscilla-of-the-pearls is going to be the one rudely interrupted. I’m already suspecting the narrator of being the perp, based on the amount of apparent misdirection and ambiguity here. This is not a bad thing . . . unless she (he?) is, indeed, the villain.
    I think the piece passes the Odell test, with 4 out of 7 points, but I’d suggest some tightening, in addition to relabeling this section.

  6. My thought was ‘who is the narrator and why is the pov character thinking of these things right now for the reader?’

    My one rule for myself in the WIP is that the character has to have a reason for thinking these thoughts right now. So we’re looking at the world from right behind their eyeballs, no narrator at all. It can be a struggle to get to that point, but then the writing seems obvious – I’m channeling the character, not myself.

    Among other things, it keeps the backstory out and forces me to figure out better ways to supply whatever the reader would need now.

    Other writers do things differently, and that doesn’t bother me, but I notice.

    This page delivered a lot of information, so I would continue a bit, but I would be noticing the style as I read.

  7. I once read a widely published author say that the best advice is to throw out your first page because it is generally just some throat-clearing before getting to the actual story, and that is how this strikes me. Does the reader really need to know the entire backstory before getting to the story, well, entire except for not letting the reader know some essential information such as the speaker’s gender?

    At the end, I still have not really been introduced to the narrator, cannot tell from the text the genre or even type of genre, and have not been given any reason to care. If there is anything at stake, it is not hinted at.

    Truthfully, if it were me, I would toss the entire first page. I do not mean that as in any way an insult. The page has very workmanlike writing but the author just seems hesitant to take a deep breath and take the plunge.

    • JR,
      I think the person who said throw out your first page was my editor Mitchell. j/k. But I remember him sending back our MS of one of our series books suggesting the first page thing and he was right. We actually ended up throwing out the first chapter. It was a hundred times better.

  8. Brave Author, overall, I liked the writing and the good pictures you painted of the characters. But please consider Kris’s excellent critique and the lack of forward momentum.

    If you want the photo in the newspaper to be the disturbance, instead of contemplating the past, what if the narrator reacts to the photo with an action…like taking a gun out of the dresser drawer and loading it? Or buying flowers to deliver to her?

    You probably already know what action the protagonist is going to take. Try moving it to the first page and see if that helps.

    The Goldfinch was a good 300 page novel stretched out to 800 pages. IMHO, not worth the time.

    • I liked the seeing the photo in the paper device…it works as a catalyst. But it has to immediately lead to something happening. I will report back to you all on the The Goldfinch… 🙂

  9. I enjoyed this first page, but it frustrated me, too. As PJ pointed out, nothing is happening, but I love the descriptions and felt settled in the characters’ world. My favorite sentence is: He wore a broad-brimmed fedora, a natty tweed coat, a white scarf round his neck; trousers perfectly creased, shoes buffed to a high shine.

Comments are closed.