Azarel was raised to believe there was a reason for everything that happened in life. In the last moments before her death, she remembered her mother's words: “There’s a reason for everything, my darling, my jewel.”
Our narrator must not be Azarel? If it is, then there should be some skein over the words, some latent hostility or loving regret or something of her feelings in it all.
Er, minor hang up on the name. It, or a very similar spelling, is the name of a male demon in another book on the shelf. I had some instant character confusion.
Overall, see above suggestions. And make sure you aren't ina genre with demons (the book I'm thinking of is classed Urban Fantasy, as long as you don't cross genres with this book you should be fine).
I'm with the others about the redundancy in the two sentences, although each is well written on its own.
I had a Just_Me moment with the name, too. At first I read "Azazel," who (which?) is a fairly frequently mentioned demon. (GAH! Pretend I didn't just type back-to-back adverbs, OK?)
I assumed Azarel died until I read Lady Glamis' comment. Who's dead here?
I like the idea of opening with her mother's dying words. I agree that you don't need both sentences, unless the repetition is deliberate and your choice is redeemed in the following text. With or without changes, I would be interested in knowing what comes next.
Interesting, but it reminded me of Lovely Bones more than anything. The concept of the deceased telling us his/her story is becoming a bit cliche because so many authors are trying that tool out now.
I think the first sentence could go. The second sentence had me hooked. Except the pet names wouldn't necessarily be a thought of a dying person IMHO. But I'd read on to find out why she's dying and what her "reason" is.
Love the name. First sentence is good, if not terribly intriguing. The second sentence bugs me. It looks like she’s dying, not her mom. Was that intended? Also, it feels repetitious, saying “there is a reason for everything” twice in two sentences. I like that her mom calls her “my jewel.”
I'd take out the first sentence, and start with the second. But the "her death" needs to be clarified --Azarel's or her mother's?
Suggestion:
In the moments before her death, Azarel's mother told her, "There's a reason for everything, my darling, my jewel."
But then the second sentence had better blow me away. You can get away with the cliche here as long as you follow it up with something completely unexpected. Otherwise, my attention would not be caught.
You don't need to tell US how she was raised, then have her Mother tell HER. Use the dialogue to convey that.
ReplyDelete:) Terri
I agree--either take out the mother's quote, or take out the first sentence; kind of repetitive.
ReplyDeleteI like the idea here, but it is too redundant.
ReplyDeleteI don't like the two "was"'s in the beginning sentence, and I don't like the repetition that AC mentions above.
I'd read a bit more to see more of how the mother died . . . or is Azarel dead? That is confusing the way you have it worded.
I would not read on. I hate things that start out with the POV character's death. Just stops me cold and I close the book.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Terri. I like this both sentences individually, but you don't need both of them.
ReplyDeleteOur narrator must not be Azarel? If it is, then there should be some skein over the words, some latent hostility or loving regret or something of her feelings in it all.
ReplyDeleteAgreed that it's hooking but redundant.
Er, minor hang up on the name. It, or a very similar spelling, is the name of a male demon in another book on the shelf. I had some instant character confusion.
ReplyDeleteOverall, see above suggestions. And make sure you aren't ina genre with demons (the book I'm thinking of is classed Urban Fantasy, as long as you don't cross genres with this book you should be fine).
I agree with the repetitiveness. Pick one or the other. Hint: one is telling; the other is showing.
ReplyDeleteThe two sentences say the exact same thing (there's a reason for everything.)
ReplyDeleteI would not read on.
I'm with the others about the redundancy in the two sentences, although each is well written on its own.
ReplyDeleteI had a Just_Me moment with the name, too. At first I read "Azazel," who (which?) is a fairly frequently mentioned demon. (GAH! Pretend I didn't just type back-to-back adverbs, OK?)
I assumed Azarel died until I read Lady Glamis' comment. Who's dead here?
I'd read on. :-)
I like the idea of opening with her mother's dying words. I agree that you don't need both sentences, unless the repetition is deliberate and your choice is redeemed in the following text. With or without changes, I would be interested in knowing what comes next.
ReplyDeleteInteresting, but it reminded me of Lovely Bones more than anything. The concept of the deceased telling us his/her story is becoming a bit cliche because so many authors are trying that tool out now.
ReplyDeleteI think the first sentence could go. The second sentence had me hooked. Except the pet names wouldn't necessarily be a thought of a dying person IMHO. But I'd read on to find out why she's dying and what her "reason" is.
ReplyDeleteLove the name. First sentence is good, if not terribly intriguing. The second sentence bugs me. It looks like she’s dying, not her mom. Was that intended? Also, it feels repetitious, saying “there is a reason for everything” twice in two sentences. I like that her mom calls her “my jewel.”
ReplyDeleteI'd take out the first sentence, and start with the second. But the "her death" needs to be clarified --Azarel's or her mother's?
ReplyDeleteSuggestion:
In the moments before her death, Azarel's mother told her, "There's a reason for everything, my darling, my jewel."
But then the second sentence had better blow me away. You can get away with the cliche here as long as you follow it up with something completely unexpected. Otherwise, my attention would not be caught.