Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Short Stories - 50 words or less -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neenny who wrote (134)	5/28/1998 8:56:00 PM
From: jbe	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2633

Response to "Dogs: City, Suburban, and Country" Neeny, as an invitee to your thread, I'll have a go at your short story. First of all, is it a story? (Check out my post to Thomas.) I think the answer is no. Let us call it an essay, a short meditation on Life (and Death). But even so redefined, the piece does not present your central point to best advantage. Let's try a rewrite, and see whether that brings it out better. In the city, few people have dogs. In the suburbs, many people have dogs, and the Veterinarian takes good care of them. In the country, everyone has dogs. When they get sick, they are taken care of in the woods. We hear the gunshots. As you can see, I eliminated the "when we lived in the city.." and "moving to the suburbs," because 1) the fact that you moved from one place to another did not affect the Fate of Dogs in general, and 2) you don't mention living in the country, which is the third term of the comparison. Secondly, I added "In the country, everyone has dogs." The context seemed to require it. You say that few people had dogs in the city. Then you say that many people had dogs in the suburbs. The reader is waiting for you to tell him how many people had dogs in the country, but you don't tell him. You don't need to spell out that "country dogs are not so fortunate." That should be obvious from the context. And "THE GUN SHOT RANG OUT" won't do (even though it helps you get in under your 50-word limit), because 1) more than one gun shot is involved, and 2) you are talking not just about the past, but about the present as well. You see how much analysis can be done of a mere 50 words! Try your own rewrite, and see how many variations you can come up with. It can be a fun exercise. Best (and no offense, I hope!), jbe