Miss Snark's First Victim
Yes. I want to know more about her already.Violet - #29
No.Everything about this sentence is too normal. To be intriguing, something needs to be just slightly off.
If it had been "since what happened last time, or after that horrible incident, Isha..." it would have been an instant grab.It felt a teeny bit bland, but over all it is a yes.
On the fence, leaning toward yes. Overall, I'm intrigued, but I agree with the last commenter that it felt a little bit bland. To me, it wasn't super clear that this was going to be a legal thriller (I didn't read the genre until after I read the first line)—it could be the first line of a sci-fi, or a fantasy, or a dystopian, etc. A bit more specificity could really boost this to a DEFINITELY YES! :)
I lean toward yes. For me the hook is about that first sentence asking questions. This does that. We're given a situation that is not normal and we want to know how and why she is in that situation. We'll read on to find out.
No. For me it is very generic.
No. As MollyB mentioned, this first line is exactly what you would expect from a legal thriller.
No: I've read too many books with "dangerous" protagonists and I'd want this to stick out more.
on the fence - I read a lot of legal thrillers and the situation, while 'normal' doesn't bother me at all. So much more depends on who Isha is and where the writer takes the story.I have more of a problem with the construction of the sentence (warning: English teacher alert!). The use of "Since", which is so prominent because it is the first word, is almost never paired with the past tense.For ex, you wouldn't say "Since the storm, I didn't go to the beach." You'd say " . . . I haven't gone to the beach."What DOES go with past tense is a word like 'after', as in "After her arrest etc,, Isha was never removed . . ."okay, I know it's picky :/
No. It reads to dry to me. More like a line from a newspaper article.
No. It's not bad, but I can't say it really grabbed me either. Perhaps it it were a little sharper or more specific it would have gotten my attention better.
No. It didn't grab me.
No, but almost a yes. The sentence started out boring. I was maybe a little interested in the manacles attached to her waist, but it isn't enough.
No. the sentence seems overly wordy, and the concept of a prisoner in handcuffs is fairly generic as a hook.
No. This doesn't give me enough to make it interesting, but I would read the next couple of sentences to see if things picked up there.
No. There's interest to know what landed her in that position, but Isha didn't feel unique to me. I'm sure there's a lot of people who exit their jail cell in the same fashion.
No. I'd rather SEE her walking with the shakles than be TOLD she wore them.
NoThere's nothing that really grabs me as special or makes me sit up in my seat
No. The voice is too passive for a thriller.
No. I didn't like the passive voice.
YES, (because of the genre) but could benefit from some editing. don't need "and detention" for example. Maybe make it more personal?
No. This doesn't feel different enough. Using the past tense with since as the opener feels awkward, and the passive voice doesn't make me feel connected to the character.
Yes. I'm curious about why she's shackled, so I'd read on.
No. This might be a taste of genres. But as I read it again there's nothing interesting or special about her. Prisoners have to be manacled all the time.
No. Too generic.
No - I just felt like I've seen something like this before. It doesn't make me expect anything new.
No--I don't think this is an engaging first line that draws me in to the character or story. This is perfectly fine for a follow up or something later, but I think something a little more provocative would work better, perhaps dialogue.
Thanks everyone. Because of your comments, I realize I buried my lead.
I'd say "yes, but" - yes I'm intrigued but it feels like a lot of telling jammed into one sentence. I think less would be more in this instance.
No. There are plenty of criminals like this in the world. What makes her unique?
No, it's complicated way to say she was 'schackled'. It would read better simplified.
No. It's not unusual to have a person manacled when under arrest so it doesn't spark something new and different for me. I'd rather have a hint at why she's been arrested or why she's dangerous (which I assume comes in the next line).
Wordy. Rework it and I'd say yes.
No. The sentence was clunky.
No. Not as is, but I think if more of an ominous danger element of why she's restrained is added, I'd quick change to a yes.
No - you don't need the first five words at all. Just show her walking out of her cell with her wrists manacled.
Just needs some minor tweaks. You may also want to change the title of your novel. In some parts of Asia, comfort room means restroom.
No. It didn't catch my attention.
No. Sounds like standard protocol for an unruly inmate.
No - but really liked some of the langauage. Consider shortening it to: "She was never removed without manacles." Manacles is a great specific word.
No--The telling doesn't do anything for me. Perhaps show her being led to wherever with her hands shackled. It would have a bigger impact.
No. It's not unique enough to grab me. Maybe a reason why she's always shackled would change this.
No. A little too generic.
No. did not hook me. I agree that the reason why she's in manacles might make a difference.