Quote:
Originally Posted by Gregg Bell
Seventeen-year-old Annie Rebarchek’s stoked when billionaire Houston Monroe hires her as a nanny for the summer. But something’s not right. Monroe’s baby is sick and getting sicker, and whenever Annie tries to comfort it Monroe won’t let her. Monroe’s nonchalant about it, but Annie suspects something sinister might be happening. Just as she discovers there is, she’s fired.
Annie reaches out for help, but her father thinks she’s exaggerating, the media fear Monroe’s influence, and the police are in his back pocket. Knowing the baby’s health is fading fast, Annie takes matters into her own hands and fights to uncover the terrible secrets Monroe is keeping. In the process she’s drawn into a web of lies, deception and evil that threatens the innocent child and now her own life.
|
You know, I'm sorry. I read the earlier lengthy explanation by you about child welfare, etc., but wouldn't the police automatically call child welfare? I mean..I realize that this is screwing with your plotline, and I'm sorry, but even if she told a guidance counselor, they'd call child welfare. How are you planning to isolate this girl so she can't do any of the normal things that would happen IRL?
So, okay, you say that all the cops are corrupt, and that shuts off that venue. But school's always on, in the summer, nowadays, and guidance counselors--all psychologists and all that--are available too.
I still think you're adding too much detail. Honestly, Catlady's version works
better as a selling tool than yours,
BECAUSE of the very reasons you are mentioning.
When I read Catlady's, I
assume that the author has managed to figure a way to suspend my disbelief, somehow. When I read yours, I have more questions about that, not as a description-helper, but as a reader. As in: okay, so her daddy and the cops didn't work. What about all the OTHER resources she has? When I read Catlady's, I don't even think about that. Her version actually works better, because it has a lot less detail, and it makes me think LESS about the improbabilities, rather than MORE.
When I read things like "Egyptian child-rearing practices," in prior versions, my brain starts to shut down.
I'm simply giving you my unbiased opinion. The more-detailed plotine makes me think that the suspension of disbelief might not be possible, whereas my automatic assumption, as a reader, is that you've solved that problem, using a shorter, less-detailed blurb.
FWIW.
Hitch