Dead County prologue.

[anthorn]

Main points I am looking for is, is it. 1. Interesting. 2.Holds attention. 3. Don't include it when sending work in to agents.


From: Michael-Johnson@Newcastleuni.org.uk.
To: Peter_Thompson@Newcastleuni.org.uk
CC:
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2010 18:20:00 +0000
Subject: Research.
Peter,
Greetings and apologies for my late replies; I promise I’ll reply to your next message sooner rather than later, or perhaps try to catch you in the canteen. But, if I am honest, I think you will understand my lack of communication in a moment. I am at a critical juncture in my research; no scratch that, I have made a breakthrough in my research. Today is the beginning of a brave new world Peter.
I have found the cure for cancer and not just breast cancer or throat cancer. I mean EVERY cancer!
Please reply ASAP.
Mikey.

#

From: Peter_Thomspon@Newcastleuni.org.uk.
To: Michael-Johnson@Newcastleuni.org.uk.
CC:
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2010 01:55:23 +0000
Subject: RE: Research.
Replied as soon as I could.
That’s great news Michael, I am so proud of you and your team. We must work on getting this out into the public eye as soon as possible. Email me every single piece of information you have please. (And no I won’t steal your ideas. Ha Ha!) Listen, let me know how things come along; I assume you’re going to test it out, right?
Oh and before I forget, Paula would like you and the kids to come over this weekend. How about it?”
Peter.

#

From: Michael-Johnson@Newcastleuni.org.uk.
To: Peter_Thompson@Newcastleuni.org.uk.
CC:
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 12:20:00 +0000
Subject: RE: RE: Research.
Jane would love that. (You know how women love to gossip.)
As regards to my research I have no problem sending you copies, in fact I would prefer a second pair of eyes if I were honest. Yes I will test it out eventually; perhaps I’ll raid some retirement home for suitable subjects. Fancy coming with me? Joking aside, I actually have a patient in mind.
I’ll email you her medical file too shall I?
Talk later.

#

From: Michael-Johnson@Newcastleuni.org.uk.
To: Peter_Thompson@Newcastleuni.org.uk.
CC:
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2011 13:07:44 +0000
Subject:
Um…Yes, sorry I haven’t emailed you in a while. There was a break into my offices late last week. I don’t know what they wanted though some tell me they wanted to steal my work and sell it to the highest bidder. That is something I doubt for this is not some kind of action film.
The first test begins tomorrow.
How are things with you?

#

From: Michael-Johnson@Newcastleuni.org.uk.
To: Peter_Thompson@Newcastleuni.org.uk.
CC:
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2011 01:00:00 +0000
Subject:
We’ve done it! I cannot believe it actually worked Peter! The subject, a 62-year-old woman with terminal cancer of the ovaries is in remission. It only took one injection for the result to take effect. I believe I am ready to test it on a younger subject. Didn’t you say your cousins’ little boy had leukaemia? When is the next time you are going to Lanchester? Is it Lanchester or Langley Park?

#

From: Michael-Johnson@Newcastleuni.org.uk.
To: Peter_Thompson@Newcastle.org.uk.
CC:
Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2012 9:25:00 +0000
Subject:
There appears to be a problem with the vaccine... I cannot say what exactly, but the only way to find out is to do another test. I think this is connected to the break in a while back.

#

From: Peter_Thomspon@Newcastleuni.org.uk.
To: Michael-Johnson@Newcastleuni.org.uk.
CC:
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 15:00:13 +0000
Subject:
Hello Michael, sorry I haven’t been around, things have been somewhat hectic. I am glad that the tests were successful; it’s good news not just for you, but for the world. Yes, it is called Langley Park, and yes, my cousins’ child does have leukaemia. If I can get her permission I will, I promise.
P.S: What is this about a problem with the vaccine? Don’t do anything rash.

#

From: Peter_Thomspon@Newcastleuni.org.uk.
To: Michael-Johnson@Newcastleuni.org.uk.
CC:
Date: Sat, 26 March 2012 17:00:00 +0000
Subject:
Is everything all right? I haven’t heard from you in a while so I might come round to your offices sometime during the week.

#

From: Peter_Thomspon@Newcastleuni.org.uk.
To: Michael-Johnson@Newcastleuni.org.uk.
CC:
Date: Thu, 7 April 2012 19:00:19 +0000
Subject:
I came around your offices this morning but they were locked so I got the caretaker to let me in. Wow, your lab is a mess, there’s dried blood everywhere. What have you been doing? Look, I am getting really concerned here. Your wife says you haven’t been home in weeks.

#

From the work journal of

Michael Johnson.

Ah, found my pen. Apparently it had fallen from my desk and rolled underneath it. Good thing I am writing this on my Laptop. This is going to be a short update, a quick note on what I am doing. There have been apparent problems with the cure-all cancer vaccine. There are side effects that bring out a violent nature in the subject. I have fears someone may have tampered with my research and with the vaccine and I dare not test it out on someone unwitting.
It is for this reason I’ve decided to test it upon myself. I will inject some cancerous tissue cells into my body and then inject the vaccine just to see what exactly goes wrong. It’s the only way I can be sure the results won’t be tampered with.
Too much is riding on this cure.
I shall write this journal for prosperity.

#

Day One.
Here we go.

#

Day Two.
No effects so far and I feel fine. Everything seems normal.

#

Day Six.
…I don’t know what to say, to write, to…I ah, don’t know what I am going to do. There is something wrong with me and I don’t feel well at all.

#

Day Seven.
My suspicions are confirmed. Oh God I’ve made a terrible mistake.

#

Day Nine.
I’ve locked myself in my laboratory and office, there was no choice in the matter. Something is wrong with me, terribly, terribly wrong. Listen Peter, if you get this message, somehow; please tell my wife and kids that I love them. I haven’t seen them since I started displaying uncontrollable rage and hunger.
Oh God…

[MemoryTale]

I'm not going to go into the grammar and whatnot, because I believe you can be loose with those things when you're using these kinds of formats. In answer to your questions, I would say yes it is interesting, and does hold my attention, and I would definitely include it in what you send out.

I have one criticism, with this section:

I came around your offices this morning but they were locked so I got the caretaker to let me in. Wow, your lab is a mess, there’s dried blood everywhere. What have you been doing? Look, I am getting really concerned here. Your wife says you haven’t been home in weeks.

I find it hard to believe this character would simply go "Dried blood? What's he been doing in here?" and go off to e-mail his friend, especially once his wife says he hasn't been around. Coupled with the brek in earlier, it would be fair of this character to assume someone is out to get his friend and either go to the police or someone else in authority.

Other than that, top stuff

[Fishbowl Helmet]

The format is rather wasteful of space. It looks like padding to me.

The gist is interesting, after a fashion, but it's entirely unbelievable. You have a scientist who has just discovered the cure for all cancer everywhere but he opens with "Sorry about my delayed response." The recipient responds, great news, oh, yeah, my wife asked if you could come over for eats. Don't buy it at all. Unless it's an out-patient schizophrenic emailing his doctor who knows better.

Scientist 1 claims he's discovered the cure for all cancers and Scientist 2 waits 4 days to say, "Well done, bring the wife and kids over for lunch this weekend"? Not buying that at all.

They would be exchanging calls or texts that went, "Get here now and verify this NOW!!!!!!" not emailing days or weeks apart in a conversational tone and talking about their weekend plans. Human testing? No way it would happen that quickly, it would be confirmed by a dozen independent scientists around the world, go through extensive animal testing, repeated independent confirmations, then maybe, a few years later start human trials. So the old lady getting a shot either ends his career that second, or he's doing it under the table, which he would never admit to another scientist unless he wanted his career to end that instant too. Injecting himself, sure why not, but no way there's someone else getting a shot, much less Scientist 1 chatting it up.

The lab break in, buried in the email, nonchalantly? Write these scenes out, there's all kinds of drama here that you're throwing away. Scientist 2 comes to the lab after 3 months of no contact and a break in at his own lab? He finds dried blood everywhere and doesn't instantly flip out and call campus security, etc. Not believable at all.

Main points I am looking for is, is it. 1. Interesting. 2.Holds attention. 3. Don't include it when sending work in to agents.

1. Not really. It's not only tell instead of show, it's tell in a bland format.

2. No.

3. No.

I like the premise and find that interesting. But you're taking events that would make a great opening for a piece and sucking out all the action, emotion, and drama by presenting them as emails.

[stevietee]

Hmm, despite the credibility issues already mentioned I did actually find this very engaging. I am assuming, since this is a prologue then the detail here is merely intended as an easily digestible piece of background for what is to come and on that level it worked for me.

The only other issue I had with it was the fact that I had to constantly check the email headers to keep track of who was writing the email because it didn't bounce consistently between Michael and Peter. There are instances where I was expecting a reply from Peter, but Michael was actually 'double posting' so I had to consciously look at the recipient email address which somewhat interrupted the flow.

[I, Brian]

I have to agree with Fishbowl Helmet's assessment. I think the email conversations look contrived to read as normal, but a vaccine to cure all cancers is *not* a normal situation.

The diary entry suffers similarly, as it's just a couple of sentences about the vaccine. There's no association with the humanity of the diarist at all.

I think the premise is good, but the format and way it is used kills the tension - pace is caused to stutter everytime you have a new email, and when you change the diary format.

The time lapse, as mentioned, is especially a problem. If one of your colleagues says they've cured cancer, you don't wait a month to email that you might pop into their office.

Also, for a working trial you'll need to ensure you have dozens of subjects for the chance of the results being statistically significant.

Another little error - every uni I can think of has a .ac.uk web address, something that I think modern internet-savvy users would pick up on.

[anthorn]

Hmmm. I think I'll rework the prologue, a bit, or just not include it. Leave it something mentioned on blogs and radio stations.

I did take into account, time issues, as it'a a full year before trials begin.

[JoanDrake]

I have to agree with your solution. It's an interesting premise but you have the aforementioned crediblity problems with the emails and the way I've seen that technique used has always seemed primarily meant to heighten believeability, not serve as exposition.