Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
This is the Six Sentence Story
Denise is the host.
The prompt word for the week is:
CONFETTI
“Nick, I really fucked things up, man,” the Sophomore, looking up at the bearded face of his mentor at the Six Sentence Café & Bistro, sat like the sole uninvited guest in the last pew during the funeral of a widowed orphan.
“Take it slow, young dude, start at the beginning,” the Gatekeeper spoke quietly, although he had, coming upon the college student sitting alone at the table directly in front of the small bandstand, seamlessly converted a good-natured laugh into a look of quiet concern; with a renewed appreciation of the contrast between his outwards appearance and his inner self, he sat opposite the student.
“What’re you two conspiring about now?” the Bartender, stepping out of the dark of the hall that lead to the Manager’s Office and the elevator to the basement storage, put a case of Chivas on the bar with as much a display of effort as shoplifting a Michael Kors knockoff, and walked towards the center of the Bistro.
“For a young person you have pretty eclectic tastes, quick, tell us something about this song that you think we old folks don’t know…”
“Careful kid, your friendly-if-not-at-times-scary neighborhood bartender is settin’ you up, she’s a living illustration of the etymology of the term ‘fan’… ”
Denise held out a half-crumpled pack of Luckies, and shrugging off the lack of interest, lit her own; the flare of light from her cupped hands illuminated a jagged scar on her upper lip that had the effect of softening already subtle eyes, “Nick, much as I love the artist singing from our very expensive PA, I believe your young friend was about to provide us with some backstory on last night’s break in.”
“Hey, ho!” staring at the bartender’s bandaged wrist, the Gatekeeper’s voice drew the unwelcome spotlight from the student, “Someone be getting ink, and besides the depths of your encyclopedic knowledge of the better music of the late ’60s and early ’70s is surpassed only by the vagueness of your personal history,” looking up at the woman standing next to the small table, Nick’s voice began to clip as accumulating dBs mirrored his growing impatience, “Not that I don’t respect your right to privacy, but ticker tape and confetti ain’t my thing.”
About clarkscottroger
So, what has the Sophomore got to say for himself? I guess I’ll just sit back and tap my foot to the music while I wait…
Feel free to write yourself into the scene*
*no, seriously, plenty of space in these comments… (indicate by italics and I’ll figure out how to come up with an enhanced Six!)
First off, have you hacked my stereo? Was listening to J Winter yesterday!
And…the scene is set…only a slight (return) calibration to the tone Nick is using towards the Bartender ( you tried but…) and you are all set for a Tarantino style interrogation!
lol
Like minds, binyon, like minds
(I’m thinking)… no one appearing, or otherwise permitted access to the Bistro, is flawed beyond redemption… that said, personal flaws are the difference between Whatever and ‘Damn! How is this going to turn out?!’ in story telling.
Complicating matters is how close we allow ourselfs to identify with our fictacious avatars*
The real fun is when the characters decide the character, nature and path of the action
*not a ‘real’ term in writing
* nah, not complicated at all – you only have to keep these “flaws” to your twins and let Nick develop his own…simple…Capisce?
(Had to end it like this , blame Lou…wait, yourself for introducing me to Lou!)
lol
Point taken, Spira.
Which is the inherent (and enjoyable) challenge of writing other’s characters. Said difficulty surely will diminish in direct proportion to the more ‘real’ any given character becomes, aka getting to know them.
but as I tre-read your comment, specifically ‘only have to keep these ‘flaws’ to your twins and let Nick develop his own‘ I stand in early awe of all of us… such emotional juggling this thing will perforce constitute*! In a good way… (Dom Irrera)
I’m taking the lesson (in your Comment) to be mindful of any subjective/emotional attributes when (surely unavoidable) including another Proprietor in a story. At least until I/we know them well enough to not so much know how they might react, but to be sensitive to how they might not react/feel etc
“Parlez-vous a humma humma!
* this was a classic clark gambit a props to anyone what can explain how it is (Use of the Wakefield Doctrine totally permitted).
There should be a LOL at the end of the previous italic…🤣
And they get to smoke cigarettes – jealous.
Thank you.
lol totally agree
# continuing our dimly lit discussion#
Not a lesson, not at all.
Look, each Proprietor is steadily building his or her mythos.
If this was an exercise in the style I give you a word you continue and so on, then all is fair, yeah?
But by shifting with each take the core mythos of a character, continuity or the road to immersion, is dissolved.
Mind you the identification subject is not present to this point ( maybe there is no point of it becoming a subject at all).
“to be sensitive to how they might not react/feel ” is an excellent viewpoint; in other words Clark I guess we are talking about empathy towards the ‘avatar”.
Or at least that is my take – and of course it is informed by and identified with the way I create.
which begs the question, “Err clark? Lou Ceasare is a friend of your….ohkay but Anya Claireaux?!?!”
lol
fun with wordage
Sometimes cake is celebration, sometimes consolation.
Nice description: “much as I love the artist singing from our very expensive PA, I believe your young friend was about to provide us with some backstory on last night’s break in”
Love the music. Of course.
Good scene. There’s a “cinematic” term I’m looking for, can’t quite put my finger on it…
vignette?