Feedback on new cover please

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Gregg Bell

Yeah, Hitch. Catlady convinced me to bail on IWS. See the new thread asking for naming help. Thanks.

Thank god!


Hitch

[Hitch]

Gregg:

To be fair, this comment is not really related to the cover, so feel free to ignore it, if you wish.

I know what you meant, in a way, about the Buddhist Monk thing, and the other internal comment that your character had that was somewhat unusual or outrageous. We are supposed to intrinsically "know" that these are outrageous, funny things...but we don't.

Why?

Because we don't know you as an author yet. If I open a book from Spider Robinson, or Carl Hiaasen, those statements (thoughts) made by your character wouldn't make me blink. I'd take them in my stride, and I'd know that it's intended to be humor, or something outrageously silly or hyperbole (by the character).

BUT...we don't know you. (I mean, "we" as new-to-you prospective readers.) We don't know this is humor. Thus, what happens is these statements yank us out of the flow. A criminal offense, in writing, as you know. We're reading this very violent fight scene, and then, these bizarre statements are dropped in...and it shakes us from the suspension of disbelief. BAD.

So, I think that in your new introductory scene, you need to ease into the humor, so that by the time your readers are at the end of that, and headed for the fight scene, they're primed for the dark humor, and Laine's Mary Sue superpowers/skills.

I don't know if this helps, but...I hope it might.

Oh, and howza 'bout PEP? Protecting Earth's Pets???? The members could be Peppers?

Hitch

[Gregg Bell]

Originally Posted by Hitch

Gregg:

To be fair, this comment is not really related to the cover, so feel free to ignore it, if you wish.

I know what you meant, in a way, about the Buddhist Monk thing, and the other internal comment that your character had that was somewhat unusual or outrageous. We are supposed to intrinsically "know" that these are outrageous, funny things...but we don't.

Why?

Because we don't know you as an author yet. If I open a book from Spider Robinson, or Carl Hiaasen, those statements (thoughts) made by your character wouldn't make me blink. I'd take them in my stride, and I'd know that it's intended to be humor, or something outrageously silly or hyperbole (by the character).

BUT...we don't know you. (I mean, "we" as new-to-you prospective readers.) We don't know this is humor. Thus, what happens is these statements yank us out of the flow. A criminal offense, in writing, as you know. We're reading this very violent fight scene, and then, these bizarre statements are dropped in...and it shakes us from the suspension of disbelief. BAD.

So, I think that in your new introductory scene, you need to ease into the humor, so that by the time your readers are at the end of that, and headed for the fight scene, they're primed for the dark humor, and Laine's Mary Sue superpowers/skills.

I don't know if this helps, but...I hope it might.

Oh, and howza 'bout PEP? Protecting Earth's Pets???? The members could be Peppers?

Hitch

Hitch, all your advice helps me! I like PEP! And Peppers! Hmm. But if I want to go beyond pets in the series? Like protecting the endangered moose or something? But I still like it. I certainly plan on starting with pets. By the time I run out of pets I could just have the Peppers have a referendum to see if they'd broaden their jurisdiction. Something ridiculous like that. (Like the rest of the book.) Thanks!

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by Gregg Bell

Hitch, all your advice helps me! I like PEP! And Peppers! Hmm. But if I want to go beyond pets in the series? Like protecting the endangered moose or something? But I still like it. I certainly plan on starting with pets. By the time I run out of pets I could just have the Peppers have a referendum to see if they'd broaden their jurisdiction. Something ridiculous like that. (Like the rest of the book.) Thanks!

People who rescue house pets are not going to be equipped in any way to suddenly decide to rescue wild animals. I think you need to be at least marginally realistic about what the focus of your fictional group is going to be.

Already I'm wondering just what they do with the dogs they're saving from the villain. And you think down the line they may want to save a moose?

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Catlady

People who rescue house pets are not going to be equipped in any way to suddenly decide to rescue wild animals. I think you need to be at least marginally realistic about what the focus of your fictional group is going to be.

Already I'm wondering just what they do with the dogs they're saving from the villain. And you think down the line they may want to save a moose?

Well, hell, to be fair, I've seen far, far too many rescuers take on ferals of all kinda, not to mention actual wildlife. (There's a woman, not that far from where I sit, who's taken in bobcat kittens this year, so...)

Heck, the Peppers could come up with a "sister" agency. It could be a subplot for one of Gregg's novels. {shrug}.


Hitch

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by Hitch

Well, hell, to be fair, I've seen far, far too many rescuers take on ferals of all kinda, not to mention actual wildlife. (There's a woman, not that far from where I sit, who's taken in bobcat kittens this year, so...)

Heck, the Peppers could come up with a "sister" agency. It could be a subplot for one of Gregg's novels. {shrug}.

Hitch

It seems to me that an author should have an idea of what his fictional group is supposed to do, beyond killing men. Even if the purpose and details are not specifically mentioned in the book, they would ground the book in some kind of reality. It's like an actor creating a backstory for a character to flesh out a performance. The reader might not need to know every detail, but I think the author should. I think the author should know exactly what the group does, and not just be winging it.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by Catlady

It seems to me that an author should have an idea of what his fictional group is supposed to do, beyond killing men. Even if the purpose and details are not specifically mentioned in the book, they would ground the book in some kind of reality. It's like an actor creating a backstory for a character to flesh out a performance. The reader might not need to know every detail, but I think the author should. I think the author should know exactly what the group does, and not just be winging it.

Oh, no disagreement here. Of course, I'm a compulsive outliner and on the rare (nowadays) occasions when I craft characters, I know more about them than I do real people, so...ya know, Plotters/Pantsers. ;-)

Hitch

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by Catlady

It seems to me that an author should have an idea of what his fictional group is supposed to do, beyond killing men. Even if the purpose and details are not specifically mentioned in the book, they would ground the book in some kind of reality. It's like an actor creating a backstory for a character to flesh out a performance. The reader might not need to know every detail, but I think the author should. I think the author should know exactly what the group does, and not just be winging it.

Another example would be Dustin Hoffman watching the person he was portraying very carefully to get the character right.
*Dustin Hoffman won 3 awards including an Oscar for that movie.

[Gregg Bell]

Yeah, and the method guys can overdo it. Spend ten years living with cannibals to get it all right. I hear you guys about integrity and all but there's limits too.

[Gregg Bell]

All right. Time for a sincere apology. I haven't read this Animal Rescue book of mine in a long time. I just read the first scene again today. (Even though I gave the first scene to you guys I didn't read it because I thought I knew it so well.) Now I see what you have all been telling me about there being no humor or anything cartoonish about it. My absolute bad. I'm sorry. I've been fighting you guys and you've been right all along. I'll be more careful from now on. And I do so appreciate your help! Thanks!

P.S. I rewrote the first scene and will probably rewrite the whole book.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by Gregg Bell

All right. Time for a sincere apology. I haven't read this Animal Rescue book of mine in a long time. I just read the first scene again today. (Even though I gave the first scene to you guys I didn't read it because I thought I knew it so well.) Now I see what you have all been telling me about there being no humor or anything cartoonish about it. My absolute bad. I'm sorry. I've been fighting you guys and you've been right all along. I'll be more careful from now on. And I do so appreciate your help! Thanks!

P.S. I rewrote the first scene and will probably rewrite the whole book.

No problem. At least now we know you aren't a sociopath.

[BookCat]

If the chapter you uploaded was intended as a final draft, I would suggest you get an editor.
For example, it would be better starting at the passage beginning:
“Hit it, Wanda!”
which ends:
“It is, Lainey. It is.”
after which you could insert an (altered version) of the fight scene.

Textually, there's a major fault in that passage: "Was this day was never going to end?" and there could be many others in the entire chapter. I stopped reading after the second section.

I hate to say, but I would also stop reading if I was checking the "Look Inside" on Amazon. Everything seems so superficial, without real motive. Just what is Donovan doing to dogs which is so objectionable? Can I be bothered to find out? You haven't stirred my curiosity.

As to comments about ARF, it's not animal specific: Animal Rescue Feminists could refer to any species.

And the "seem to" has to go. This sounds like one of those dramas where someone wakes up in bed with a corpse and can't remember the night before. It creates doubt about whether she's actually killing.

UPDATE: posted this before reading Gregg's post #191

[BookCat]

Just a note about what happens to the animals. In feral cat rescue, the main line of action is TNR: trap, neuter and return to a safe area with a caretaker who just overlooks their welfare. Other courses are trap, neuter, rehome, which is what I used to do when I lived in an area with a high feral population. Homes came easily to the young ones and some of the older ones, but I did keep a few (I have three ex-ferals now).

I'm not sure what happens to dogs, but I would imagine, like cats, this depends on the nature of the rescue. Large places, like the RSPCA, keep them for a SHORT time, scan them for a micro-chip and return to person if possible, but they'll put them to sleep after a couple of weeks if not claimed, or sooner if they have immediate health/behaviour issues.

I gather that your organisation is in the US? How have the dogs become homeless? In the US it is common policy for all feral cats to be put down, unless they're caught by someone like Alley Cat Allies (TNR). Dogs running wild usually have the same fate.
It might be worth doing some research about this for your book.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by doubleshuffle

They are falling, hence the vertical lines, and being rescued with the net. I think it's rather obvious.

I get the lines,but, there should not be any lines below the falling dogs.

The color and font used for the author name should be changed.

As for the falling dogs, they remind me of a Monty Python animation. They don't work for me. Also, unless the net isn't clear, why are we not seeing any of the red through the net?

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by BookCat

Just a note about what happens to the animals. In feral cat rescue, the main line of action is TNR: trap, neuter and return to a safe area with a caretaker who just overlooks their welfare. Other courses are trap, neuter, rehome, which is what I used to do when I lived in an area with a high feral population. Homes came easily to the young ones and some of the older ones, but I did keep a few (I have three ex-ferals now).

I'm not sure what happens to dogs, but I would imagine, like cats, this depends on the nature of the rescue. Large places, like the RSPCA, keep them for a SHORT time, scan them for a micro-chip and return to person if possible, but they'll put them to sleep after a couple of weeks if not claimed, or sooner if they have immediate health/behaviour issues.

I gather that your organisation is in the US? How have the dogs become homeless? In the US it is common policy for all feral cats to be put down, unless they're caught by someone like Alley Cat Allies (TNR). Dogs running wild usually have the same fate.
It might be worth doing some research about this for your book.

I think my mom's house has been marked by the cats as a good place to get medical care (if you are old and sick) or have babies (if you are pregnant ).
She has gotten 6 new cats (1 old, 1 mama, 4 kittens) since August. The old guy and the mama just wandered up.