TPG Week 225: When Even The Flawless Victory Is Flawed

[Steven Forbes]

Welcome back, one and all, to another installment of The Proving Grounds! This week, we have a new Brave One in Robert Sprawls. I'm alone this week, so it's going to be all red, all the time this week. Let's see what Robert is able to do with

Roshaan

PAGE 1 (3 PANELS)

The scene takes place aboard the Atlas (not yet named this) as it orbits Earth. (This is something the team doesn't necessarily need, but it doesn't hurt to have.)

DANTE has undergone surgery to install as implant that's given him the memories and experiences of those who also carried the implant. However, as a common side-effect, these manifest as personas of past Ro'shaan. BES is trying to speed the process along and bring Dante back. (This is unnecessary, because this information should be coming through the panel descriptions and dialogue.)

Room: This is a double room, divided by a floor to ceiling wall to wall one way mirror. DANTE ERICSSON and BES (projected) interact in the plain, rectangular and ordinary looking inquisition room, where Dante is seated and BES walks circles around him trying to find out what he remembers and moving the personality to their death events. ESPERANZA STEWART (and Ambassador/Decugosan) watches from behind the one way mirror, as the conversation is piped in. Both rooms have a pneumatic door opening into a hallway on the same side (if looking straight at Dante, it is on the panel right for both rooms). BES is able to project herself as a good looking red head to Dante, through the implant, but Stewart cannot see her. BES' voice comes over the ship's advanced sound system. (Most of this is unnecessary.)

The chair is an ordinary arm chair with a back rest that goes to Dante's neck. (This is almost useless, because this can describe just about any kind of chair.)

NOTE TO PENCILER: don't accentuate either female's figure. No busting out of her top or 3" waist, please. (Another useless statement if these are recurring characters.)

PANEL 1

A large panel, angled from the front and down to show the Atlas passing over the sun lit Americas in a East to West equatorial orbit. The Earth takes up the left half. NOTE: BES and Dante, the new Ro'shaan, speak in the Consortium's interchange language, so all dialog between the two is in <>. (The letterer's note shouldn't be in the panel description. It should be it's own element. However, it's also useless, since the letterer is going to put in everything that's there.)

BES (TAIL TO THE SHIP)

<What do you remember?>

DANTE (TAIL TO THE SHIP)

<What am I supposed to remember?>

BES (TAIL TO THE SHIP)

<Do you remember your name?>

Click here to read more.

[gmartyt]

Second, this is a moving panel. Someone tell me why.

BES walks a circle around him

I'm no expert, but I'd image it'd be rather difficult to draw someone walking in a circle in a still image.

[Steven Forbes]

And there you go!

That was a softball, though. Next time, I'm going to ask something harder.

[SamRoads]

Thanks Steven. A lot of awkward in that script.

The log-line of this 5 page story is:

"Under interrogation, a man doesn't remember his past. Previously, two men on a spaceship discuss their mission."

In my view, writing loglines is a great way to try to understand what the core message of your story is, and the technique works on large or small piece of copy.

In this case, it's clear that the 5 pages submitted don't tell us a story of any kind, nor really hint at anything to come in the next 50 pages.

In every non art-house medium, you have to grab the audience with something. Give them a reason to care, and in comics, to turn the page.

[Robert_S]

Most everything is clear and that script has undergone rewrites even before the review (it was a two month waiting period and I wasn't going do nothing in that time), but I have some questions on things that aren't clear:

(new bubble) (Useless and lazy. Label all your balloons. This lets the letterer know this is a new balloon.)

Label how?

The Sagan is a ring shaped off-world vessel with a long tube hub extending behind it (a donut with a stick through the hole) and two canopy shields against particle radiation. Six large rectangular box containers attach to the hub tube radially by detachable grid works of steel tubing (See reference picture 1A).

It rotates at 3rpm to maintain an artificial gravity within its 200m diameter hull. Its mission, to drop the initial material for a base on Calisto, the most viable of Jupiter’s moons. It’s an expensive feel good mission, a US show of tech achievement to the world and its Middle East antagonist. (This entire paragraph is useless information.)

I got criticized before for NOT describing the Sagan's appearance and this person is criticizing me for describing it.

Which is it?

Room: Cargo Prep. Little more than an 8×6 cell when all equipment is taken into account. There are two workstations, each with two touchscreen panels: one vertical at head height and another angled at about 30 degrees waist height. Piping for fluid transfer and cable collectors run along the walls. All panels on this page take place in this room. (So, you still insist on giving a setting, but don’t describe much. She’s a girl. She’s got two arms, two legs. That’s all you need to know, artist… That’s basically what these settings are doing. If you created a proper establishing shot for whenever you changed locations, your bumhole probably wouldn’t be stinging as much as it is now, because I’d have little cause to crawl up in it the way I am. Then again, if you bothered to tell an interesting story, we’d all feel a whole lot better about this script.)

Again, I've been criticized before for NOT describing the details of a room, now this person is criticizing me for describing the details of the room.

FFS, which is it?

Shot/Panel: Medium panel. Shot from behind and slightly above, through the lens of a camera. (It’s all through the “lens” of a “camera.” Really, breaking out the camera view into its own element isn’t helping you much. It’s just another hot poker in my eye, which I’m turning around and giving back to you. You are the new Cornholio, with a hot poker for your bunghole. Yes, I’m old. Old enough to hate Beavis and Butthead, seeing them as the beginning of the downfall of MTV.)

Seriously? This "person" agreed to set aside time to review review script and he or she or it gets pissy because it's not something out of the gate interesting and uses it as an opportunity to lob personal insults. Really? That's allowed?

May I insult this person back?

MISSION SPECIALIST SUAREZ and PAYLOAD SPECIALIST WILEY work nearly shoulder-to-shoulder with Suarez on the left and Wiley right (What are they doing? They’re “working,” but what the hell are they doing? I don’t know what “working” means, and I refuse to go back up to the top of this page to look for that information, because it is supposed to be in the panel description.

So, don't describe the room in detail, but describe what people are doing?

I don't get it. I'm getting different advice from different people. Some say to describe the room in detail, others say not. Some say describe the object in detail, others not.

I can live with describing what people are doing even when it's kind of brain dead obvious they are working at touchscreen panels checking systems. Yet, this person doesn't want to know the shape or layout of the rooms?

[B-McKinley]

Originally Posted by Robert_S

... the most viable of Jupiter’s moons. It’s an expensive feel good mission, a US show of tech achievement to the world and its Middle East antagonist.

This part can't be drawn (not in one panel at least). So it's useless description to an artist who only wants to know what it looks like, and what it's doing at this very moment.

Which brings me to sort of a corollary. You tell the artist that only Dante can see BES, but unless I missed it, you never explain that to the reader. You describe the details of the Sagan and its mission, but not to the reader. So without the script the reader will have trouble following what's going on.

[Robert_S]

Originally Posted by B-McKinley

This part can't be drawn (not in one panel at least). So it's useless description to an artist who only wants to know what it looks like, and what it's doing at this very moment.

Which brings me to sort of a corollary. You tell the artist that only Dante can see BES, but unless I missed it, you never explain that to the reader. You describe the details of the Sagan and its mission, but not to the reader. So without the script the reader will have trouble following what's going on.

I'm not wanting to start off with an info dump, but let the reader discover as they read into the subsequent chapters.

I could start the story with the Sagan's approach (and this was the original storyline), as opposed to Dante already having accepted with BES trying to get him back by bringing the character and readers up to speed.


They'll find out as they read that Dante will turn to look at her, but everyone else looks to the air. When it's Dante's POV, the reader will see her. When it's someone else, she's not there.

But I did start rewriting and put it down to work on some other details.

[Steven Forbes]

Le sigh...

Here we go.

Originally Posted by Robert_S

Most everything is clear and that script has undergone rewrites even before the review (it was a two month waiting period and I wasn't going do nothing in that time), but I have some questions on things that aren't clear:

Questions are good. I like questions.

Originally Posted by Robert_S

Label how?

Every time a person talks, label that balloon. I don't care if it's in the same panel and the same person is talking in three or fifteen different balloons without a break by someone else: label that balloon with the person's name. You don't need a "new bubble/balloon" notation. The fact that you've got more dialogue under a new label tells the letterer that it's another balloon.

Originally Posted by Robert_S

I got criticized before for NOT describing the Sagan's appearance and this person is criticizing me for describing it.

Which is it?

Look where the criticism is. Eyes are used for seeing. Did I criticise the appearance of the ship? Nope. I criticised the useless information that can't be drawn and doesn't show up anywhere where a reader can see it.

Originally Posted by Robert_S

Again, I've been criticized before for NOT describing the details of a room, now this person is criticizing me for describing the details of the room.

FFS, which is it?

It all depends.

Put the room description in the panel description. After the first couple of pages, I didn't read the top note, because it was chock full of badness. Useless information that can't be drawn. I could have sworn I said to put the pertinent information in the panel description in the rundown.

Originally Posted by Robert_S

Seriously? This "person" agreed to set aside time to review review script and he or she or it gets pissy because it's not something out of the gate interesting and uses it as an opportunity to lob personal insults. Really? That's allowed?

May I insult this person back?

Personal insult? You felt personally insulted? I don't recall personally insulting you. Insulting the work? Sure. I do it all the time, when it's bad. Or haven't you read any previous installments? (If not, that's on you.)

I, and others, set aside our time and do script reviews. For free. Your patience (because it's first come, first served) is rewarded by having your script seen by (usually) two editors. Guaranteed. Posting it online and hoping someone comes along and makes a comment? Something you can do, but it doesn't guarantee that you will get useful, actionable advice.

You may not like the advice you get, you may not like the way it's presented, but it's all useful.

As for getting pissy when it isn't interesting out the gate...

You don't have a lot of time/space in order to get a reader interested. Just because you made something doesn't mean it deserves to be read. The faster you're interesting, the easier it will be to make a sale. My general rule of thumb is that you have 3 pages to be interesting. You weren't interesting in five. You really only had about 1 page of information that could be thought of as useful/interesting, and that's after being condensed down.

And don't try comparing yourself to established writers and what they do. They've earned the trust of readers. Their name is recognized. Is your name recognized compared to theirs? If the answer is no (and it is), then you have to make your own name before you can pepper the reader with something that's boring, and have them trust you enough to stick with it long enough to get to the story.

Without having a recognizable name, you don't have that luxury.

As for insulting me back...feel free. I've got a tough skin. Just as long as you don't insult others, I don't care overmuch what you call me. Only the editors get flamed.

Originally Posted by Robert_S

So, don't describe the room in detail, but describe what people are doing?

I don't get it. I'm getting different advice from different people. Some say to describe the room in detail, others say not. Some say describe the object in detail, others not.

I can live with describing what people are doing even when it's kind of brain dead obvious they are working at touchscreen panels checking systems. Yet, this person doesn't want to know the shape or layout of the rooms?

Of course I do. I want to know the shape and layout of the room...as long as it's in the panel description. I don't know any other way to say it. (Well, I do, but that could possibly lead into the realm of "personal insult", and I'd hate to damage your delicate sensibilities.)

Pertinent information goes in the panel descriptions. What can be seen. What's being done. Nothing is "brain dead obvious" when it isn't in the panel description.

Looks to me like you need to do more studying. I recommend reading more TPG entries (there's always something to learn), and there's an ever-growing archive of those. You got off light. Some others were totally destroyed. I've mellowed in my dotage.

I also suggest reading Bolts & Nuts. There's also a huge archive of those.

You can find both of those at the site in my signature.

[Steven Forbes]

Originally Posted by Robert_S

I'm not wanting to start off with an info dump, but let the reader discover as they read into the subsequent chapters.

I could start the story with the Sagan's approach (and this was the original storyline), as opposed to Dante already having accepted with BES trying to get him back by bringing the character and readers up to speed.


They'll find out as they read that Dante will turn to look at her, but everyone else looks to the air. When it's Dante's POV, the reader will see her. When it's someone else, she's not there.

But I did start rewriting and put it down to work on some other details.

You don't have to start out with an infodump to be interesting. Most of the time, infodumps aren't. They're interesting to you because you're invested in the story, but until the reader is also invested, they aren't going to be interested.

This is why in most stories, the explanation comes near the end. The inciting incident comes first in order to gain interest, then other things happen to the hero, and then near the end, everything gets explained. The infodump doesn't start the story. Put it in the middle or the end.

[Stewart Vernon]

Originally Posted by Steven Forbes

You don't have a lot of time/space in order to get a reader interested. Just because you made something doesn't mean it deserves to be read. The faster you're interesting, the easier it will be to make a sale. My general rule of thumb is that you have 3 pages to be interesting. You weren't interesting in five. You really only had about 1 page of information that could be thought of as useful/interesting, and that's after being condensed down.

I'm going to throw a mini-grenade here... First up, I wasn't offended when I was told my story lacked some interest... so this isn't a personal reaction from me... but it did remind me of something I meant to bring up previously.

In my view... it really shouldn't be the Editor's job to tell me whether or not my story is interesting. It's fair if he wants to also critique my story, but that isn't editing.

I've always valued Editors... and I've always said it's the Editor's job to help me be the best me I can be... but what if I wanted to write a story about vampires and the Editor doesn't like vampire stories. Him telling me my story isn't interesting is less than useful to me completing my story.

To me... critics and readers are who will tell me if my story is worth telling. If my book doesn't sell, and is critically panned... then yeah, maybe my story sucked!

But... the Editor should know what kind of story I want to tell... and he should be able to tell if if I'm doing a good job of telling that story, and help me to tell the story I mean to be telling.

So... if the Editor tells me my story is constructed poorly, or does not convey the topics I mean to convey, or is in the wrong technical format, or whatever... that's what the Editor should be doing.

IF the reason why he doesn't like the story or find it compelling is because of my inability to tell the story properly, THEN that's valid editing... he sees there is something there that I'm not communicating properly.

But just saying "I don't like your story. I crapped something more interesting last night" isn't really helpful editing.

Does that make sense?

[B-McKinley]

I don't think there needs to be an info dump, but when the story is set in an unfamiliar setting (basically any science fiction) you often have a "title card" to set up the minimum the audience needs to know,

Alien:

commercial towing vehicle 'The Nostromo'
crew: seven
cargo: refinery processing
20,000,000 tons of mineral ore
course: returning to earth

Moon:

Mining Base Sarang
Crew: 1
Contract: 3 years

Those are basically half a log line written in a way that fit seamlessly into the narrative, and would easily fit in any one panel.

[Steven Forbes]

Originally Posted by HDMe

I'm going to throw a mini-grenade here... First up, I wasn't offended when I was told my story lacked some interest... so this isn't a personal reaction from me... but it did remind me of something I meant to bring up previously.

In my view... it really shouldn't be the Editor's job to tell me whether or not my story is interesting. It's fair if he wants to also critique my story, but that isn't editing.

I've always valued Editors... and I've always said it's the Editor's job to help me be the best me I can be... but what if I wanted to write a story about vampires and the Editor doesn't like vampire stories. Him telling me my story isn't interesting is less than useful to me completing my story.

To me... critics and readers are who will tell me if my story is worth telling. If my book doesn't sell, and is critically panned... then yeah, maybe my story sucked!

But... the Editor should know what kind of story I want to tell... and he should be able to tell if if I'm doing a good job of telling that story, and help me to tell the story I mean to be telling.

So... if the Editor tells me my story is constructed poorly, or does not convey the topics I mean to convey, or is in the wrong technical format, or whatever... that's what the Editor should be doing.

IF the reason why he doesn't like the story or find it compelling is because of my inability to tell the story properly, THEN that's valid editing... he sees there is something there that I'm not communicating properly.

But just saying "I don't like your story. I crapped something more interesting last night" isn't really helpful editing.

Does that make sense?

I understand what you're saying, and I try to be very broad in what I term "interesting."

I'm no longer interested in zombies. (You can thank Kirkman for that.) However, that doesn't mean I don't think you can tell an interesting story with them.

I'm not interested in what makes an interesting story to "me." I'm interested in the ability to get to the interesting bits quickly. Drawing it out or skipping over it doesn't help you as the creator.

And critiquing the story is part of editing. It's one of the main reasons an editor has a job. The editor is the first reader of the story. In fact, in most cases, the editor is the ONLY reader of the story. The editor is the only person looking out for the audience. The writer just wants to tell their story. The editor is there to make sure the story makes sense.

Interesting is subjective. When you hire an editor, you're hiring them for their educated, subjective opinion. No one is totally right, no one is totally wrong. That's the nature of humanity.

And I've never said something wasn't interesting without saying what wasn't interesting about it. I've never shat on anything without giving a reason why. Because, as you said, that isn't helpful. I may not be as explicit as some would like (this is terrible--go back and give us more info about how the blagonarn reacts with the hipsting, and how both of those impact zurpoflog, because that's what the readers want to see!), because I want creators to think for themselves and come up with their own solutions. Me giving my opinion on what I find interesting may be wrong for the story. (Put the wookie in a tutu, and have him sodomize the turtle! That's what your story is really about! Turtle sodomy!)

I think my point is getting lost...

(Sorry. I started thinking about what a crossdressing transsexual would look like. A woman wearing a dress: if she were really a he, and he was wearing a dress... See my rabbit hole?)

Anyway, the editor's job is manifold. Basically, everything you've just said was "the editor should be helping me to make my story interesting to readers," but broken down into specifics.

[gmartyt]

"Interesting" tends to have more to do with how a story is presented rather than what a story is about. An editor's job is to make sure your story is presented well. As long as they don't try to turn my zombie romance into a space opera, I'm fine with it.

[Stewart Vernon]

Ok, cool... it was mainly a temperature check and it sounds like we're on the same page.

I don't like rap music, but I can appreciate effort and talent and I've seen what seems to be popular... so while I might not like it, I can see why some artists are successful at it and others aren't.

I figured asking here would also help Robert out to see where you're coming from... so if you say the story wasn't compelling in some way or "grab your reader by page 3" you aren't crapping on his story so much as saying good storytelling requires hitting certain beats and keeping your reader in mind so that you're telling the story you want in a way that the reader will absorb and enjoy.

[LukePierce]

Please don't remind of the "beat"... I still have nightmares of that TPG.