THE OBJECT OF SIGNIFICANCE – fingerprint!

[joanne-mcclean McClean]

Hi Marcus, I enjoyed this tense and exciting scene. I agree that you might consider losing ‘This was unexpected.’ and possibly also ‘<font face=”inherit”>caught completely off guard.’ because </font>you<font face=”inherit”> do a great job showing us these emotions with actions. </font>

<font face=”inherit”>I’m in two minds about your adjectives for the silence. It’s </font>refreshing to read<font face=”inherit”> interesting/unusual adjectives </font>which<font face=”inherit”> capture the effect an awful silence can have on you at key dramatic moments. I think I like each individually, but </font>I’m<font face=”inherit”> not sure they fit together as a pair. In my mind something humid carries weight, </font>whereas<font face=”inherit”> pendulous makes me </font>think<font face=”inherit”> of something </font>suspended<font face=”inherit”> </font>loosely. Feel free to ignore, might just be me overthinking it!

[Marcus Brewster]

Thanks Joanne – I am grateful for all feedback, especially when I can see consensus forming around troublesome word choices. Appreciate you taking the time to comment.

[Peter Windridge-Smith]

Hi Marcus,

A very dramatic scene. As always from your extracts, Gerda’s character is painted very well.

Two points for possible editing if you agree:

– As others have said I think paras 4 & 5 could be overdoing it a bit as there’s a lot of repetition.

– I’m not sure what Ben’s background is, but for me he speaks quite complicatedly for a detective. I could be way off here depending how you’ve written him, but would he sound more natural if the first para was more like?

‘But the trail’s gone hot,’ Ben continues. ‘That’s why I wanted to catch you both. The system checks against every print on file – not just from the 70s but right up till today. And, blow me if it didn’t find a hit – from this month.’

[Marcus Brewster]

Hi Peter – thanks for your points. One of my first-draft flaws, when I just throw the dialogue down, is that it all sounds like me. I’ve then had to draw up a grid of linguistic tells to distinguish my characters as for most of the second half of the book when Gerda and Ben are detecting together, there are at least three voices in each scene. As Ben is Maltese, I’ve been trying to inject some of the Maltese rhythms into his Malt-English, also to make him speak quite curtly. Elle is extremely loquacious and Gerda is just Gerda.

[Peter Windridge-Smith]

Ah okay. I thought you probably had it covered, but hopefully no harm in asking. I also found my first draft dialogue was too samey. I did a ‘per character’ edit, deciding how each character spoke and then following all their dialogue right through the book. Then going back to the start and following through with the next one, etc. That seemed to work for me.

[Marcus Brewster]

Thanks Peter. Grateful for all your from-the-trenches advisories, as always.

[Cynthia MacFarlane]

Hi Marcus, this is wonderful tension. The simple action of Elle setting her cup and saucer down with a clatter is catnip to a crime reader. If Ben told me my fingerprints were lifted off the muti guy’s skin (which is so cool to learn!) I wouldn’t bat an eye cause I know I’ve never left any incriminating fingerprints anywhere. Elle has just let us know that she has cause to worry. Should Ben give a quick glance at Elle in the beginning of the scene, as he says “That’s why I wanted to speak to you both.” Or maybe he says both, and Gerda notices he only looks at her. That might be telegraphing too much, though, to a discerning crime reader. Love Gerda’s reactions and especially the hairy-assed complications. Gerda totally feels like a character who would have need of her own swear word inventions.

Just a side note on fingerprints and how fun it is to work forensic knowledge into our writing – I just tiled a new shower for my mother. My gloves were a nuisance so I ended up doing it bare-handed. Turns out the adhesive you use to stick the tiles to the wall continues its chemical reaction while you’re using it. My fingerprints were so messed up that for two days after I’d finished, my iPhone wouldn’t recognize my fingerprint. There HAS to be a way to use this in a crime story. 🙂 Best, Cynthia

[Marcus Brewster]

Hi Cynthia – re: fingerprints, there’s a famous case in forensic history of a safe-cracker who decided to beat the system by having his fingerprints removed surgically. The irony was that his new non-prints were instantly recognisable! So be careful if you try any cat-burgling in the next little while because you may be saddled with decades worth of bank heists!

Thanks, of course, for the feedback on the excerpt – much appreciated.

[Cynthia MacFarlane]

NOW you tell me…

That is very cool and I’m going to look up that story. See you next Friday. Cynthia

[Marcus Brewster]

IGNORE – REPLY MIS-POSTED OUT OF SEQUENCE (and not possible to now delete)

Thanks Jim. Appreciate you stopping by, and for the editing cues. I could definitely stand to lose a coupla thousand words.

[Emma McKenzie]

Hi Marcus,

Great extract. I never knew that about fingerprints either. Fascinating. I feel like I learn something every time I stop by.

Thoroughly enjoyed reading!

Emma

[Marcus Brewster]

Thanks Emma. I put myself through two years of Criminology studies before attempting to put pen to paper and the novel highlights the best of the ‘technologies’ I encountered (i.e. that had plotting potential and that I hadn’t seen used before).

In the coming weeks, I may yet introduce you to Cognitive Interview Technique and my absolute favourite (on which the MidPoint turns) – Forensic Linguistics. Can you blame me for being smitten with a forensic tool that involves close textual reading…

[Jane Morley]

Hi Marcus,

I missed last week – although I did read your lovely end scene – and I’m late to the party this week and I think everything I might have said here has already been duly noted! But still want to say I love it! All the elements you mentioned in your reply to Julie about the Agatha Christie conventions – it’s all making sense now! Like everyone else I love the clattering teacup and that final, subtle ‘may want to question you.’ Fab!

Really hope the postcard campaign is going according to plan. Hurry up and get that agent I want to read the whole thing please! 😊 Best Jane

[Marcus Brewster]

Hi Jane – thank you. The fun for me has been innovating on the conventions. In StoryGrid they talk about making things (especially endings – the scenes, the novel itself) ”surprising but expected” a propos genre. In other words, making things satisfying re: reader expectations but – umm – unexpected at the same time. I suppose that’s just a long way of saying twists aplenty.

Re: the postcard campaign, I mailed my next-to-last batch on Friday from Malta, reading:

An unstable make-up artist.

A broken-hearted detective.

A child witness.

Who will spot THE OBJECT OF SIGNIFICANCE

(querying end-November)

Eeeeek – did somebody say ticking clock!

[Jane Morley]

Ooh, Now I’m wondering who the child witness was – not Gerda herself perhaps!!! 😳
Questions, questions…
Bon courage 😊

PS Have we readers been unwittingly privy to the significant object thus far?

[Marcus Brewster]

Hi Jane – no, the child witness is in the 1973/Uncle Laurence timeline and his testimony raises more questions than answers…

P. S. the Object of Significance is my riff on the convention of the MacGuffin – the thing that everyone is pursuing in the story. Books are often named for their MacGuffins (eg The Maltese Falcon, The Bourne Identity, etc), this is my wink at the trope.

Although there are several significant objects (eg the fake suicide note) in the story, the idea was suggested to me by Gerda’s real-life analyst who referred to Gerda’s wanting to always be the object of significance (apparently it’s a therapeutic term). The moment I heard the phrase, bells went off and I knew I had my title. Gerda’s investigating someone else’s story (uncle Laurence) but she has a habit of making it all about her. Laurence should be the subject but Gerda’s self-centredness always pulls the focus back onto herself – she must always be the object of significance.

It will be very funny if after all that, my agent/publisher wants to change the title!

[Jane Morley]

Aha! Makes perfect sense Marcus! Do’t let anyone touch that title! 😊

[Fiona Jefferson]

Hi Marcus

Coming a bit late to this (I just got back from looking for the Northern Lights), so I don’t have much to add to the many editing suggestions already given. I love the tension in this scene: saucers have a lot to answer for in the giving-away-feelings area! Gerda’s wise to use a mug 😊

The swearing is completely in character, and I’d like add my name to the list of those who love the “hairy-assed complication”. This complication certainly is a robust one: I foresee a difficult next scene.

One thing that threw me off was the word “muti”. Feeling a bit dim as no-one else has asked, so I’m guessing it’s in another extract that I haven’t seen, and I looked it up. Makes sense if the reader has already come across it in relation to Arnaud Beetge, and it’s clearly something ordinary in Gerda’s perception.

Great job, which keeps me reading. I love it when one thing leads to another, quite unexpected, development.

[Marcus Brewster]

Fiona! Lovely to have you back, hope the Northern Lights were all they’re cracked up to be.

Muti, as you’ve no doubt researched, is an established phenomenon in Africa. You’re quite right, it comes up in connection with the body Elle found and there’s a scene where Gerda and Elle discuss muti and school Ben (and the reader) in the process.

The point of it all was to set up one of the novel’s fundamental concerns – it’s all in the way you look at things. Your POV, your biases, your background can make you register some things but not others. Gerda finally solves the uncle Laurence mystery by changing her perspective and seeing what she didn’t see before.

[Carolyn]

Hi Marcus

Great to read a twisty moment in Gerda’s story! I love it when another character is suddenly thrust into the swirl!

Others before me have offered good editing tips, esp around the first lines and the merging of a couple of paras.

Like Fiona I had to look up muti – but by this stage of the novel it’s clearly a known thing. (You could add an explanation to the scene description for any later readers?)

I was wondering, does Gerda’s make-up artistry appear much in the novel? Does she do her own in a particular way or have a signature style? (I worked for MAC in London at one time, so have much love for make-up artists!)

[Marcus Brewster]

Hi Carolyn – I would have loved to have Gerda solve the mystery by dint of her make-up artistry but unfortunately, I don’t know enough about cosmetics to make that fly. She does however use her product knowledge to deduce key information from the descriptions (in uncle Laurence’s diary) of two female suspects to be able to infer motives for them.

She doesn’t have a signature look – quite the opposite in fact. Her personality disorder leads her to change her appearance frequently so she is quite the visual chameleon!

As ever, thanks for looking in and sharing your feedback

[Joanna Neville]

Hi Marcus

Love this turn of events.

Particularly like the closing line.

More please!

Jo

[Marcus Brewster]

Hi Jo – very kind of you. Having decided during my previous edit to simplify my life by only following Gerda’s scenes (to check for causation), I’m now enmeshed in inserting everyone else’s missing scenes so their sub-plots also make sense. Your call for ‘more please’ may be met with just that result when actually I need to get my wordcount down!

(A small reprieve – A US writing coach advises that one’s first draft should be 1.2 X genre length. By that metric, I’m comfortably 20% over recommended wordcount, albeit not my first draft).

[Cyrilla Muxlow]

Great to read the later parts of the story, missed last week, I may have to go back to find out more.

I made the mistake of reading an awful lot of the previous comments and I think everything I found a little clunky got mentioned. Having said that I loved the exert and I like others are truly amazed with regard to the finger pints on skin. I love the fact that you attend lectures on forensics, that’s dedication to your art and of course fascinating.

Well done good luck with finding a publisher.

[Marcus Brewster]

Thank you Cyrilla – I only managed two years of Criminology studies because I made the mistake of telling everyone I was writing a detective novel. Although that was true in intention, unfortunately I hadn’t yet written a word. I couldn’t face going back on campus for year three and having to bluff my way through all the question about ‘how’s the novel getting along’ so I decided to de-register and knuckle down. Fortunately I had a lot of good ideas by that point, although most of them have subsequently been left on the cutting room floor.

Thanks for checking in and for confirming where there’s room for improvement. Always!

[richard Flamank]

Hi Marcus

I really liked last week’s post although didn’t get to comment.

You braided the scene very well. Poignant and moving are the two words which spring to mind. Some of your imagery is stunning. I really liked the “endless rolling swells of her love”.

Likewise for this week. A thriller of a scene. Gerda juggling her suspicion with being upended by the outcome of the fingerprints. The reader shocked but speculating about how things resolve. I like the image of the silence being an oppressive swab doing the opposite of mopping their brows.

[Marcus Brewster]

Hi Richard – thanks for stopping by and for remembering last week’s exercise. I’m gratified it made enough of an impression for you to mention it. Makes me feel good about retaining that epilogue as the final scene. Locking it in!

[Mary Kistel]

Hi Marcus–sorry to be late to the game–but it’s so fun to read your posts and writing discussion–I just love it! It’s also fun to read two sections (last week and now) that differ so emotionally. Love it–and love the rabbit holes! I love that Fiona noticed that Gerda had a mug–awesome!! Poor Elle…!

[Marcus Brewster]

Thanks Mary. Because of her moodiness (affective instability is the psych term), Gerda requires me to write across the full spectrum of her ups and downs.

Happy to hear that my bounce-backs are entertaining, informative or both. This one’s for you: I went to see ‘Hiroshima, Mon Amour’ on Sunday (World European Cinema Day) and was amazed at how psychotic the female lead was although nobody treated her as if her crazy was out of the ordinary. A week or two ago, inspired by all the hoopla about Streisand’s new memoir and the Vanity Fair excerpt about the filming of ‘The Way We Were’, I watched that movie and found Streisand’s character to be almost certifiable too. (In fact, her character displayed the same symptoms as Gerda which means today she would be classified as having a Cluster B personality disorder).

It seems to me it’s only recently that psychiatry has given names to certain pathologies and that before these were codified, the world was full of undiagnosed characters. In these older books and movies, madness walks amongst us!

[Mary Kistel]

Really interesting, Marcus. What a blast from the past—70’s The Way We Were—I remember my teenage analysis—Babs was deep and Redford was shallow! I most definitely can vouch for madness walking among us!!

[Marcus Brewster]

Some more Streisand trivia – for Babs to choose a script, it has to have (at least) five great scenes. That’s a useful metric for those of us writing with an eye to Hollywood/Netflix development – does your book contain five incredible (read: emotional) scenes that a great actor/tress could sink their teeth into?

[Mary Kistel]

Great advice! Streisand is brilliant—no doubt about it. Thanks for the tip—makes sense!

[Marcus Brewster]

If you get to read her biog (or the Vanity Fair excerpt), you’ll be amazed at how knowledgeable she is about story-telling. Apparently TWWWere was cut by the studio on release (it was already too long) and Babs fought for years to get the orig Director’s Cut restored. Not just because some of her five big scenes were messed with, but because causality was broken. Her onscreen reactions didn’t make sense without the missing bits.

Clearly she’s not just a singer/actress, she’s very much a director/storyteller with a solid grasp of character arc.

[Mary Kistel]

Interesting! Would love to see the director’s cut and rewatch the released version again to compare—had to be frustrating for her!

I remember thinking What’s Up, Doc was hilarious at the time it came out, but watching it with my teen age kids much later—after telling them it was hilarious—and them thinking it was the worst movie they’d ever seen and I was no longer allowed to recommend movies😬!!

[Anna Ryland]

Marcus, I came very late to this discussion but I enjoyed not only your extract but also reading about your journey while writing this novel and sources of inspiration for it. There is here some fascinating stuff about the investigation techniques, which only crime writers are familiar with. There are some lovely, imagination and senses-triggering passages here.

[Marcus Brewster]

Thanks very much Anna. You’re most welcome, your feedback is sincerely appreciated.