[2604] Charlie and Sian, or a Letter to a Judge

Hey noekD.

Having read this I'm sad to say I don't know your writing too well. I know your username, but browsing your history, I haven't often read anything you've posted here. I say I'm sad because I enjoyed this and wish I'd seen more of you previous work. I'll keep an eye out in the future.

I'm not writing this for points but because I quite liked what I read, so it's going to be short. I won't give it compliments because I thought it was good enough not to need them. For me it only needs a bit of trimming and tightening.

Firstly, I don't think you need the 'letter to a judge' framing device. The story holds itself up on its own. With that in mind I think you can cut a little off the ending. I think the story should end on the line "The week after's when I cracked her head open." You don't need to say nothing's changed; you're forcing epiphany or poignancy on the reader. And the rest is addressed to the judge which I think you don't need.

Other than that, my only major qualm is that the voice comes on a little too thick for my liking. Particularly the use of "you know" and "all" as in all exhausted and all because. I like the voice but I think you're trying too hard to make sure we notice it. Just let the man speak.

For me the story was powerful because while I didn't expect the narrator to be dangerous initially, I also wasn't surprised when he turned out to be. I also like your portrayal of their working-class relationship, using details which aren't cliche, like the light bulb needing to be changed, the smell of bleach, or the aspiration of going on a cruise. I like how the narrator works himself up for his big redemptive moment but immediately flops when Sian comes home while he's in the bathroom (neatly illustrating that he would use literally any excuse and was never really committed).

I'm going to add some line edits to the document for you to consider as well.

Cheers, thanks for sharing.

EDIT: I got halfway through the doc because I'm falling asleep. Might come back later... zzz...

#Overall impressions

I think the overall it is a solid story with a few gaps. The main character is believable, and I think that your representation of depression from a man that doesn't fully understand it is particularly noteworthy. The only thing I would say about the literary device is that in most letters the sender explains why they are writing the letter. In your version, the man just goes into describing his relationship with his girlfriend. I think adding a paragraph where he explains that he doesn't really know why he is writing this, despite the evidence, and that he just wants to explain his side of thing. Not only would this be proper for the format, but it would also serve as a nice hook. As it stands when we start reading we don't know what happened, if the judge is his friend, or he committed a crime. I do realise that you intended to make the final revelation shocking, and I think you can still keep that if you keep the opening paragraph vague. Other than this, I think the letter format works well for this story, and should you wish to continue this you might want to read the original Dracula, the whole story is told through letter fragments which would serve as a nice example.

#Setting

Even with the given format I think that you could find ways of squeezing more descriptions in there. For example, you could expand on the lightbulb theme as being symptomatic of the larger problem. How after coming home from a long day of cleaning Sian refuses to clean the house too, and Charlie still doesn't do anything, leading to more friction. In little snippets like that, you can reveal small things about the house, the way it looks day to day, their poverty. I think that is what I found a bit lacking, there isn't much for the reader to immerse themselves in the story, and I appreciate that novel descriptions are hard to pull off given the limited language skills of the protagonist.

You might also want to consider where the story takes place in the US. For example if Charlie and Sian were from the deep south, the church values would play a role on Charlie's conscience. If they were in a state with the 3 strikes law, this might be an additional motivation for Charlie to write the letter, since another infraction could mean that he goes to prison for life if he had committed other crimes. I think that you missed a few opportunities like this by keeping the setting non-descript.

#Character/Plot

I think the way you handled the progression and pacing was masterful. The plot doesn't go into detail of too many events, instead it focuses on these distinct moments, or breaking points which the character deemed important. Not only is this exactly how one might go about explaining a story like that to a lay person, you also get the sense that there is so much more left unsaid. The story benefits from taking place over a couple of months, with a slow escalation. I also appreciated the subtleness of the Charlies actions. For example he doesn't seem to know himself why he hates the smell of bleach, however it seemed to be evident that it reminds him of how much he's failing. How his girlfriend works all day while he sits around being sad. I can definitely imagine this character existing, and his voice feels authentic.

One thing that I would mention is that the anger needs to build up more. This event takes place over a few months, and all Charlie describes are the outbursts. Instead of seeing them as the points of friction, and a build up of anger I see them as release points. Charlie is frustrated with his life, lack of prospects and struggling to find his place in it after an incident. Every second that he wastes away drinking in front of the tv deepens this feeling, like a mantra: 'I am a failure, I am not doing anything, why am I like this'. Finally when Sian comes home, the smell of the bleach, or another holiday advert is what pushes him over the edge, instead of causing the anger. In my view, Charlie only hits Sian because of his own inadequacies, instead of actually being angry at her specifically. I think this would play really well into the final escalation scene, and make it make more understandable.

When Charlie attempts to fight his rage, showers and waits for Sian, the anger is still there, the frustration. He is trying so hard to overcome it, he gives it his all in an show attempt to try to save his relationship. Then his girlfriend comes home when he's in the toilet and ruins his big gesture. 'I've been trying so hard to make this work, I put in all of this effort to overcome my demons, to be a better person, and she doesn't even appreciate it? That bitch.' I think that's the frame of mind you should be aiming for. I think the simmering anger feeds into the story you're telling and in my mind domestic violence comes as an outburst, so you need to show that build up. I would explain early on how sitting in front of the tv and drinking makes him feel a little bit more. What his mind goes through every time he can't muster changing the light bulb. Then every time Sian comes home, you return to those feelings that you described.

I am sorry for apparently trying to write your story for you, I just don't know how to give critique on a character without doing this deep dive into his psyche. Hope I didn't clash with your vision of the character.

Preamble, written after I wrote everything below: I don't actually think I can count this as a critique. It wasn't supposed to be. I've put all my focus onto a singular idea as it blew me away whilst I was reading. But that kind of ballooned as I read again and again in search of answers/justifications. And this entire "critique" rests on that singular focus being a legitimate one. You'll find me backtracking as I reevaluate certain things, but I've decided to leave them in; hopefully the reason why will be evident by the end. So now: this. I apologise in advance. Thanks for sharing your work!

Did the framing device work for me: Yeah, dualism. My explanation for this has to be viewed in conjunction with the opening lines:

Dear Judge ——, ||| We went around together for a while. Almost three years. We’d been living together about the same amount of time.

You telegraphed the ending from the get go, although not the severity of it. So, quite naturally, I was forced into two contrasting opinions about why Charlie is writing the letter. 1) He genuinely feels remorse for the actions yet to be revealed, or 2) he's attempting to emotionally manipulate the judge into a more lenient sentence. Pity and disgust, respectively. I had to continue reading to reconcile myself. I was "hooked". So, yes, the framing device served its purpose beautifully.

Did the piece feel real, authentic, and believable: Real and believable: yes. Authentic? That's harder because, owing to the plausible definitions of this word, I can't help but conflate this question with my answer to the previous question. Authentic in Charlie's intentions (sincere remorse or calculated manipulation) or authentic in the sense that I could believe Charlie exists, and that this is a real letter.

Let's question if the letter could be real. Yes, it could be, so it's authentic. That would mean Charlie is a skilled writer, meaning the devices and techniques he employed (i.e. the "PSA" paragraph) were to serve a particular function. And that, to me, would suggest manipulation… making it inauthentic in its self-attested sincerity (i.e. his sign off). If the letter is inauthentic, then the remorse that you, the real writer, have woven within comes across as intended to be authentic… which you achieved as I do believe someone could have written this letter (real and believable: yes). So, if I can see it as authentic… then it's not authentic… wait? This was the best thing for this piece. This duality is its entire "hook". We are in a continuous roundabout with how we do, and want, to perceive Charlie as a person. This roundabout reasoning works to its advantage (if you intended this, you might be a fucking genius). My answer is awaiting reconciliation.

Was the narrator's voice distinct? Did it work for me? Was it consistent?: It worked for me. And it was almost entirely consistent (see below). But, distinct? No. It's right for what it is attempting to be. It's considered. Charlie is attempting a matter-of-fact recount of events in as neutral a capacity as he is able, yet his emotions are bleeding through in the form of justifications (somewhat petty justifications, "you know?".). But no, not distinct in the distinguishable sense. I couldn't pick up another "Charlie Latter" and identify it through the originality of voice (as one could with a Nabokov, Woolf, Joyce, or Camus). Not distinct, but effective in its intent; considered.

And about it being "almost entirely consistent". This—

And if you want the truth, sometimes her working hard made me feel worthless, lousy. It sounds daft, [...]

—falls flat to me. I don't believe Charlie lacks the wherewithal to know that his feelings of inadequacy here aren't, in fact, "daft". From what has been presented before hand, he is not a stupid or naïve man. He will have reasoned, and will know that anyone else with half a brain who reads his letter will have also reasoned, that his feelings of inadequacy are warranted. I don't want to digress into a sociocultural speel about constructions here—it's not relevant—but, as a matter of "setting" (his background is clear, very familiar to me), and his cognisance presented, he certainly knows that this is not "daft" (Should it be "daft"? This ain't the forum to ask/answer, despite the evident subtext). Although… If I'm to revisit the above (remorse or manipulation) this could be a failed attempt by Charlie, an attempt to display an inability to be judged "sound of mind"; a very subtle addition to his (apparent, displayed) inability to realise why he started detesting the smell of the bleach (which would support the manipulation theory). This is either a misstep on your behalf, or one hell of a 4D-gambit to subtly let the reader know Charlie's true intention (you've already displayed the ability to pull this type of shit off, so I am willing to believe it). In short, this may or may not be an inconsistency.

1/3

Summary

I think this is very very good. I almost decided to not even try to provide feedback because your writing instincts and skills are better than mine, and if you were to make changes based on my feedback, you might make the story worse, not better. But, in the spirit of trying to level-up as a writer myself, I'm going to try to articulate a few things about this that you might look into.

Typical reviews here talk about elements of the story like characters, setting, and plot. That doesn't feel like the right set of focus areas for this, so I'm going to talk about your piece from these perspectives:

• The premise - is there such a thing as a "letter to a judge"?
• Charlie - What is this character about?
• The colloquialisms - did you overdo it?
• Is it too long?
• The flickering bulb - I'm not sure I "get it"

The Premise

I didn't question the premise on my first read-through. But when I started thinking about how/where this piece would find an outlet, I wondered what a reader who found it might think about the premise. I just did some Googling and, in the US and UK, there is such a thing as a "Pre-Sentencing Letter" that a defendant would write to a judge. I've looked at a few pre-sentencing letter examples (making my Google search history just a little more interesting!) and they usually start with "Your Honor" or, like Charlie's, "Dear Judge X."

But after the "Dear Judge" salutation, the real-world pre-sentencing letters diverge a lot from Charlie's, and make some kind of argument for a reduction of the sentence. In the US, Charlie's attorney would probably do everything possible to stop Charlie from writing this letter. The real-world examples I've found typically ask the judge to consider the whole life of the defendant, not just their one deed, and to have leniency. So - as a pre-sentencing letter, the story is not realistic. I think its a judgement call between using the framing device of a letter to a judge, which lets the reader know something heavy is happening, or framing it as something else - an interview with a local reporter.

One notion is to title the piece "pre-sentencing letter..." or something like that - maybe this would be more powerful foreshadowing than the "Dear Judge" alone provides. And it might prevent a reader from dismissing the premise.