hook

You need intrigue. Start with a sentence that the reader would be intrigued with. Example: - John knew that the men standing round him, intended to kill him. or Peter heard the ticking of the bomb, before he even saw it. It will make the reader want to read on to find out what happens. Make sure you put loads of innuendo sentences in, questions unanswered. ie. "why was he here? Didn't she know he was out of place in the children's ward?" The reader will want to know who he is she's talking about. Is something sinister going on? Hope this helps. I'm no expert but have read loads of "Self-help" books, which are good for advice such as this. WHO'S THIS BILL ANYHOW? CAN I CRITISIZE HIM AT ALL? My advice "BE INTRIGUING" BE MYSTERIOUS, even in a slow story. Always keep the reader guessing.

crocodile tears I suspect gosh, have you seen the time? must fly

no, not really. more an invitation for people to talk learnedly about hooks and explain what kinds there are. i mean, if you want to sell books, you certainly need a hook. but if you're intending to write an artistic piece, then shouldn't art reflect life, which clearly doesn't have one? question arises for me personally because this old guy called Bill Monks keeps telling me my stories have no hook or meat to them on thoughtcafe. now, Peter. no e-mail address. think you can conceal yourself from old one-eyed chant? of course you can't. have no fear though. i shall not run off to one-star all your work for your scepticism.

i cant talk learnedly about hooks ... but i could blither on for a short time in an ignorant fashion ... would that do? alternatively i could go and shoot bill monks for you ... or even show him a piece of good prose and a picture of an a.r.s.e and see if he can tell the difference ...

both offers gratefully accepted, thanks Fish; blither on about hooks and then go and run the prose/a.r.s.e test on Bill. in point of fact, i don't rate Bill as a critic, or a writer. but i am keen to improve, so any criticism that is offered (such as his hook thing) is obviously something i feel i have to take into consideration.

well chant ... human nature being as it is ... there can be 12 good comments and one negative and we will always listen to the negative one even if it comes from a moron ... anyway ... as far as i can understand it the hook is something that gets hold of the reader's imagination ... obviously it needs to take place as early on in the piece as poss ... it is the thing that makes them want to read on and find out about ... i dont know if i agree with all this hook business ... or perhaps it is that the hooks in literary fiction are so subtle that we don't recognise them as such ... i don't happen to think about them much and certainly haven't really used them in teaching CW ... i think a short story needs various things .. conflict change climax resolution bleeh blah but i am afraid i dont have these in mind when i write ... stories just come out as they are and then i try to point to various bits later and say "ah ... THAT is so and so ..." perhaps bill thingie has been reading his kids homework ... littlefishbone came home just the other day with her Literacy homework and co-incidentally it mentioned hooks ... she is 9 ... i dont think you need to worry about hooks chant ... or meat ... *off to thoughtcafe with photocopy of a.r.s.e*

hi chant, I wasn't hiding through fear of recrimination, I was merely playing with peter pan words based on your title of 'hook'. I did think your post was tongue in cheek though and had assumed you were having a dig at the critics in thoughtlesscafe. My non literary opinion is that if the aim of the writer is to reach out to the mass market and write a best seller then, without doubt, a hook is a necessity. But, as you say, an artistic piece, which, by its very nature will appeal to a more select audience, does not necesarily need one. I have read plenty of items both here and on other sites where my interest has been maintained by the way the author uses the words rather than the content of the piece. Bill Monks is a pure content man. His comment on Michael Cho's piece "so, it was a simple robbery then" shows that he has missed the quality of Michaels writing. I enjoyed that story very much and thought the humour in it was brilliant. Bill obviously wanted more action. best regards, Peter Pan. (I refuse to grow up)

could have sworn I pressed the 's' key twice. bugger.

yeah, i thought Michael's piece was very funny too, Stormy. and it's not so much the 'listen to the negative over the positive for me.' it's more that when you're rejected by publishers time and again, you're never told why. now i know that, often, the main reason is a commercial one. but you still can't help wondering, well, what if the people who work at Harper Collins, or Faber and Faber, or Penguin are people like Bill? *discovers Bill is MD of big American publishing house and loops noose over metal light frame.*

what about agents chant? ... on the letters academy thing both the agent and the publisher agreed that the chance was better of being picked up by an agent ... still ridiculously slim tho ... the publisher woman said that they will annually probably pick up 0.1% from the slush pile ... doesn't give much room for hope does it? ...

i don't even look at agents these days, Fish. half of them never replied to me. at least the publishers all replied, and some of them even said encouraging things. (well, one of them did. once.)

Bill Monks has been published... you could always ask his advice...

before or after showing him the photocopied a.r.s.e. storms?

before... definitely... ...I think

Proud to say that my work has been savaged by Monks as well, who kindly said that I was 'poor at endings' and my middles weren't even there. I'm humbled and flattered that such a fine writer gave me even a moments thought. If he'd liked it, I'd have taken it down. I see Bill as Jerry Bruckheimer "Lord of the Rings. This kid gets a ring and then he destroys it. Big wows. Catch 22 - some guys fly planes, some die, some don't. Clockwork Orange - teenage hoodlum gets what's coming to him. " Regarding hooks, a hook is just simply whatever gets you turning the page or not hitting the Back button on the browser. For some people, that's action, for others it is character, or insight or phrases that are crafted but not jarringly stylish. You have to write the story that you wanted to write when the idea came. You can try and make it better, tighter, maybe even more commercial, but if you get published with something that isn't what you wanted to write, what's the point ? The lack of enthusiasm will come through. That is what's called hackwork, and it has made Michael Crichton very rich indeed "Jurassic Park ! Now that had a hook. Dinosaurs, but in todays world. And there are cute kids and computers too !"

bill gave meeting mother 5 stars .... *looks depressed*

Is that because I stole his thunder with my faux comment ? (For which I apologise, Alison, I was being childish. ) It's a marvellous piece. End of.

no probs andrew ... made me laugh ... i just wonder if HE got it?

Well Bill Monks thinks I'm fantastic! He has also led me to believe he's after a shag! Just goes to show Alison if he thinks there's a chance of a legover he doles out lots of stars!

yeah - old Billy-goat just wants to get in your fish-nets!

*sighs* not ANOTHER one .....

Suggests Chant repost his pieces as "The Enchantress", Julian a Simpson as Julia and me as Andrea Pack. If this is Monks approach, he must surely have hit on Sarah Browne by now, who er, photographs very well.

Andrew - liked your idea and have posted under female name on T(op)C(at). nothing from Bill so far. dare someone to write 'it's got no hook' on one of Bill's pieces!

Oh, I was SOOOO tempted. But I am supposed to be responsible.

i did it on a haiku ... he seemed to think i was a man so i am safe ...

confession time. before this thread started I posted on one of bill's haiku pieces - under a pseudo of course. I also posted something on one of the cinquain items by some one else. I forget who now. I hate it when people blurghh on about certain poetic forms as if they are the expert when, clearly, they haven't the faintest clue. I think it important to learn the rules first don't you? Although, when i was researching into villanelle, I came across a very good webpage that went into depth about iambic pentameters as well as the rhyme scheme. I struggled to get to grips for a while then, the bastard said "but the rules of poetry are made to be broken" I'm not so sure about that. Surely if you are going to write form poetry you should stick to the rules? any thoughts?

oh well... I'll find a poetry site. they might help. :P

I posted as a man, and Bill still thinks I'm fantastic! I don't think he had any sexual ambitions though.