Miss Snark's First Victim
Yes! I love the imagery of putting your hand in an urn/jar full of dead person ashes. Great!
NoJust find it a little creepy to feel the ashes.
No. Nearly there. Like the premise and want to know more, but I'm going to be horribly pedantic about the use of 'his'. Would probably work better if you named the person's ashes or just 'ashes' on its own.
No. Liked the ideas here but just a bit too creepy.
No.Liked the imagery a lot but the sentence reads as trying too hard to be poetic.
Yes. The sentence could use a little tightening, but it draws me forward.
No. I dislike full name starts to novels. It's my pet peeve. Also, Edith is a girls name and I got confused over who was 'he'. It took me a few moments to realize there's three people in the sentence, two girls and whoever's ashes were in teh jar.
No, I had to read it twice because I originally thought the person in the jar was urging her to touch the ashes.
No. I found I was confused by who the characters were in the first sentence. And, the fact that Bryn was a he really confused me (since Bryn sounds like a girl's name.)
No, almost there. It confused me a little, like too much in one sentence. It felt impersonal for something as personal as touching someone's ashes.
No.I like what you're trying to set up in this scene but I can't take in three character in the first line. And why does one get a full name, one get a first name and one no name at all?
No.You crowded a lot into the sentence. It's a bit of information overload. I'd slim it down."Edith urged Bryn to reach inside the urn and feel the ashes, cool now after a day perched on the mantelpiece."You don't need to specify fingers (what else would you reach with?) and we don't need to know her last name just yet. Also, if you specify "urn" we know what kind of ashes they are (a dead person's) and that way you don't have to say "his ashes," which confused me a little bit. I didn't know if Edith was a boy, who owned some ashes he wanted Bryn to touch.
No. The pronouns are confusing me. Bryn is female, right? And Edith is a female name, but the "his ashes" appears to refer to Edith.
No. I was confused about whose ashes we were talking about, and felt like the cool feeling was something that would be better shown in next sentence rather than told to us up front.
Yes.But, yuck. I wouldn't want to touch them either.
No. I was confused by whose ashes we were talking about. Also, do they put hot ashes in urns anyway? The idea that the ashes she had would've been hot yesterday confused me which make me wonder if I was wrong in assuming these are human ashes.
No. Too many introductions and direct objects for a first sentence.
No. The sentence was a little confusing and kind of long. Like others said I had to re-read it a few times to figure it all out. But it has potential, just needs to be rephrased.
No. If it ended at 'ashes' I'd have said yes as that's certainly interesting, but the last bit doesn't flow well. She hadn't felt them yet, she's only being urged to.
NoThis is too confusing. At first I thought Bryn was dead and he was urging Edith (why put in her last name?) to touch his ashes. Then I thought it might be 3 characters: Edith, Bryn, and the dead guy. Also, the ashes would be cool at any point they got them, a day being on the mantlepiece isn't going to matter.
No.Too many characters, confusing use of names and pronouns. Also, is urged the right word? You urge someone to do something they really should do, but are reluctant. No one needs to be putting their hands in an urn.Now, dared is a little stronger and tells us a little more about Edith. I think using only Edith's first name and then instead of Bryn, use a relationship (sibling, friend) and tell us who the ashes belong to - grandpa, uncle Joe, whatever.
Yes. It's a little confusing with the names -- a little contrived -- but it gave me shivers, so I'm giving you a yes.
Yes - but only because it's creepy enough to intrigue my warped mind to keep reading.
Yes. This is really creepy and Id want to know know. Just FYI though, the names were confusing (wasn't sure if Bryn was the "her" or "his" on the first read).
No. Like the concept, but feels a bit overwritten and unwieldy.
No. I would have said yes, because I really like the idea of starting off on such a creepy note, if not for the confusion."His" seems to refer back to Edith.I can't tell which of the girls is the MC. If it's Bryn, then "cool now" is a POV issue because she hasn't touched the ashes yet. If it's Edith, I don't think the ashes being cool matters enough to include it. It feels like that information was just stuffed in there to tell us the person was cremated the day before.I feel very distanced from the scene. Unless this is very third-person omni, I think it would work better if it got into one head or the other, focusing either on Edith's anticipation of her dare or on Bryn's nervousness and disgust at the idea of touching the ashes.It needs a bit more sensory and a bit more voice.
Yes- there's a lot of things going on in this sentence. That being said, I'd rather have just first names to keep track of characters in the beginning.
Yes. I think the sentence would be stronger if you ended it at "feel his ashes," and gave "his" a name, but this would definitely get me to read further.
No.Mostly personal preference but GROSS. It's also confusing with so many names. I think you have a good start here, but it needs to be simplified. I have no idea who the main character is or who I'm supposed to care about. You have a great eye for detail and clearly appeal to the senses, but it needs to be refined a bit.
No. But almost. I like the language, I'm just put off by too many characters (and, as Holly said, one full name, one first name, and one no name seems odd) and the set up is odd. Sorry.
No. Eww. And whose ashes? And why would you do that?
No. I was another person who was confused at first about whose ashes they were touching. I had to read this more than once, which is definitely not something you want in a first sentence.
No. Too gross for me.
No. The sentence was too clunky for me, esp with the full name reference, but I thought the scene was interesting.
No. I can't see why anyone would try and get someone else to touch someone's ashes. That seems like a cruel thing to urge someone to do.
Yes, I like the imagery - the ashes don't bother me at all. However, I'd take out at least one of the names, or keep the first one to just the first or last name...it seems like too much information for a first sentence.
No.I was intrigued at the thought of feeling the ashes, but the pronoun soup was confusing. Whose fingers? Was Edith paralysed and needed Bryn to manoeuvre her fingers? I always knew Bryn as a male name, so that really threw me. I'm now guessing Bryn is a female and was being urged to stick her own fingers into a dead guy's ashes. And why does one character have a family name but not the other?Now if the dead guy was urging a woman to fondle his ashes... I'd read on! (Ok, I have a sick mind)
No. The image in intriguing, but the pronouns confused me.
No. The idea is unique but the way it's worded had me question 'his ashes' confused .....who's ashes?
Yes, because I like the image and idea. But I do think this could use tightening up. I agree that just using Edith's first name would help (or Mrs. Locke, or whatever), cut "her fingers," and either say who the ashes belonged to or just say "the ashes."
No. Too many words - and who is the MC? Edith or Bryn?"Bryn reached inside the jar to feel his ashes." That totally would have grabbed me. Less is more.
No. I like what you're going for here, but whose ashes, and who's your progatonist? I like what macaronipants suggested - simplify it, and you'll have it.
No, I'm intrigued by what's happening, but I think a different line should go before this. This one feels clunky as an opener.
No. The sentence construction doesn't work for me. I'm not sure who the 'his' is referring to, as Bryn can be a male name, and it distracted me. Plus, though the idea is neat, I'd rather be shown what they're doing than told it.
No.The idea is interesting but maybe it needs to go further - whose ashes? Her dead father's? Grandpa Joe's? The Fuller Brush Man's? The creepy factor is fine, but I think we need just a little more.
No. But I think you're close. I would drop the last name and shorten it to: "Edith urged Bryn to reach her fingers inside the jar and feel the ashes." I wouldn't use "his" either. I know you probably want to show that it's a person's ashes, but I think we still get that idea, since the ashes are in a jar. In fact- we would want to read on out of intrigue--is it a person?? The second half of the sentence can become the second sentence. Sounds interesting!
No.There's too much stuffed in here and it makes the sentence clunky. I like Jessica Negron's suggestion as a way to trim it down, but I'd go farther and cut it off after "ashes." The rest could be a separate sentence or be dropped altogether. If I were touching ashes, the temperature wouldn't be the most important characteristic. I think I'd notice that they felt powdery or gritty or however human remains feel.I think the idea is intriguing, though, and I wonder what Edith is up to.