I dislike the flashforward technique of some prologues, as it really does feel like a gimmick, a “look at me! high stakes!” Thanks for doing these critiques, Mary, and thanks to Shawna for her bravery.

What really hit home for me was Clare’s statement. I AM so involved with these characters that I didn’t see how the reader could not connect with them. I know what happens in the rest of this scene so to me it was perfect! But the reader does not until way down the road, but by then they may not care.

And yes, Cat that is excatly what I was trying to do, I felt like it needed to be big and powerful and knock your socks off, which apparently it didn’t!

Now I just have to decide, do I completely eliminate the preface or work it in chapter 1? Oh and Karen, would love that wheelbarrow of choclate, especially if you make it white chocolate!

Thank you again Mary and thank you all of the commenters, I think I learned just as much from your comments as I did Mary’s.

My second scream goes to Mary for taking the time to do this. Thanks much for proving us with real-time critiques. They are so valuable as a learning tool.

That said, I would like to offer a bit of commentary on the critique and the process. I think Shawna fell into the trap many of us fall into as beginning writers. We are constantly told to start with the inciting incident. So we do. We jump right in with both feet, then have to back-pedal to get the necessary info in.

When we do this, we often fail to give our readers the opportunity to connect with our characters. And if they don’t connect, they won’t care enough to turn the page.

At least that’s what I learned at a recent writer’s conference and is now being demonstrated through Shawna’s manuscript and Mary’s critique.

There is a fine line between jumping in ahead of ourselves and providing scads of boring details. Exercises like this are great educators.

My favorite line: I shouldn’t have followed Jaxen, but I couldn’t let him go without me.