by Tom Lemons

<client’s name>, you’ve written a highly imaginative and ambitious novel that offers a unique take on the spiritual world. It contains ancient, hidden knowledge, supernatural forces, worldwide intrigue, and an epic clash between good and evil: all elements that should easily capture reader interest and imaginations. Best of all, you do all this in a God-affirming way that doesn’t bash the Church, reinvent Christian history, or marginalize Christian faith or other believers. Bravo!

In this document, I will try to lay out some "global" observations on ways I think you can strengthen what you have and make the narrative tighter, more gripping, and with more emphasis on plot and action. In the manuscript itself, I have edited with "track changes," to give you a more detailed, line-by-line look at things that occurred to me as I read.

As with any editing or critique, please remember that these are my opinions—albeit those of, I would like to think, a somewhat informed reader—and may or may not accurately reflect your intentions for the novel. In other words, if what I say seems helpful, by all means, appropriate it; if I seem to have missed the boat, disregard it. This is your critique and your tool; use it as seems best for the work.

Another note on the edited manuscript: although copyediting was not my main priority, it seemed I might as well point out things I saw as I went through. So, I’ve done a fairly extensive copyedit of the manuscript, as well, though not a complete one. In other words, after I pointed out things a few times, I may have allowed later instances to slip through, hoping that you would apply my earlier comments to the entire work. Again, though, mechanical copyediting was not my chief priority for the reading. Okay, on to the substantive comments…

1. Pacing
I think this is my chief concern. Though the novel—especially as it nears the end—contains some scenes of intense, pivotal action, much of it consists of extended discourse from one or another of the characters (especially <protagonist>, as he describes his state of mind, his visions, or his confusion about one or the other). This, in fact, is one of the challenges of using first-person narrative; it’s easy to spend so much time inside the narrator’s head that everything else kind of gets lost. I think you need to find a way to blend in more action with the exposition and explanation in order to better hold reader attention. Some examples…

The sense of impending dread that I congratulated you on in my initial sample edit seems to largely disappear somewhere around chapter 4, not to return until somewhere around chapter 7. In its place, we have a sort of general sense of <protagonist>’s confusion and oblique mentions of some group or other who are trying to interfere with what he and <supporting character 1> are attempting to do at <setting>. In fact, I think the narrative, from their arrival at <setting> onward, could be greatly trimmed and streamlined, cutting out all but the most important elements that advance the plot and develop <protagonist>’s character. The rift among the disciples at <setting>, for example, though presented as having some vague connection with the spiritual contention surrounding <deceased character>’s remains, needs to be either better integrated with the plot or greatly reduced (for example, could <supporting character 2> reappear later in the book as a participant in the violence? Could someone <protagonist>; meets at <setting> be one of the "rebalancers" later in the story? Maybe not good ideas, but…).

The chase scene in chapter 7, which could be a gripping, pivotal scene, loses much of its power because it comes across as vague and nonspecific. We hardly see the person <supporting character 1> and <protagonist> are pursuing; we get few of the sights, sounds, smells, and sensations the characters experience. I wonder if this scene could benefit from being re-imagined in greater detail, using more verbs. I wasn’t sure at the end, for example, whether the dead man in the room was the Doctor or a lackey—which then made me wonder whether the Doctor had some further role to play in the story (and, by the way, might the Doctor reappear later in the story? This would be another way to more closely integrate the events surrounding <deceased character> and <setting> with the rest of the book).

In the second part, "<title>," there is more of the same. I wonder if some of the action, especially in the spiritual plane, could be moved up a little earlier, to counterbalance the long passages of <protagonist>’s introspection? I just think most readers of suspense stories will need more tangible conflict—occurring outside <protagonist>’s head—to draw them forward along the storyline. I especially think that the exposition of the method and the symptoms of the demons’ attack could come earlier and be a tool to signal danger to the reader (the mysterious wounds, for example, and the marks that appear on <deceased character>’s, <protagonist>’s, and others’ bodies, could be a device you could use to advance the plot, give clues about the action, and heighten suspense. As it is, I’m still not sure I understand the marks’ significance to the <spiritual phenomenon> or to the demonic attacks).

Above all, the pace will be improved by every effort you can make to show, rather than tell. Much of the exposition in the story is conveyed by someone explaining or narrating something to someone else. While dialogue can be a good device to convey important information, it needs to be balanced with action that can give the reader clues and allow him to draw conclusions for himself—to "discover" the secrets as he reads (a very satisfying thing for a reader). Some of the explanations of what was happening in the spiritual and cellular planes lacked interest, when they ought to be intriguing revelations of crucial clues to the meaning of the action.

2. Thematic development
As mentioned above, the chief improvement here, in my opinion, would be to pull throughout the novel, in a more consistent way, the principal themes that propel the story. My general impression upon this reading is that I get the notion that spiritual evil (in some organized sense) is trying to gain control of human culture—though I’m not certain to what end—but I don’t feel I have a good grip on the mechanism by which this is occurring, why this process is or should be frightening to me, or exactly why I should have a stake in the outcome (as a reader). I may not be stating this very clearly… I wanted to get more of a clear sense of the dichotomy between the two possible outcomes of the book’s principal conflict: In your story, what would a victory for evil mean on an individual, human level? Theologically and by faith, we know that evil can’t "take over" human souls that have been ransomed by Christ, so what’s the downside that <protagonist> and his allies are trying to rescue humanity from? (And making this distinction, by the way, is what will set your book apart from other theologically less-informed, "Armageddon"-type thrillers that offer the possibility of some kind of "hostile takeover" by Satan and then set the good guys—"St. Rambo" types, mostly—to preventing it.) It seems to me that this big "what if" is what should be propelling the plot and compelling us to care as readers whether <protagonist> et al. are successful; it should offer a clear alternative that readers will understand and have a stake in. Does this make any sense?

One idea that occurred to me: what about opening some or all of the chapters with a "quote" from one of the works mentioned in the book—<title of fictional work 1>, the diary of <ancient character>, <fictional work 2>, <fictional work 3>, etc. You could use these quotes to underline or foreshadow the action in the chapter (or other chapters), and this device could be a nice way to create a sense of verisimilitude for the world you have constructed. See, for example, Frank Herbert’s use of such quotes in his Dune trilogy.

3. Various matters
Here are a few random thoughts that occurred to me while reading and thinking…

Contractions are part of the way people speak. But and the others just about always seem to prefer "it is," "I will," "they are," etc. Consider this as a possibility for change.

Who, exactly, is the Chairman? This character appears for the first time well into Part 2, yet he seems to be a prime mover in the onslaught of evil. If he is <protagonist>’s counterpart in the physical plane, perhaps you should consider developing his character, motivation, and backstory a bit more? I still don’t understand what he stands to gain from the unbinding, even though his "ends" are alluded to several times as he contemplates the actions of his political pawns. Also, bringing him on stage earlier, even in a shrouded way, would allow you to heighten suspense and begin propelling the plot by setting up the dichotomy between him and his motives and those of <deceased character>, then <supporting character 1>, and finally, <protagonist>.

Similarly, <protagonist>’s "dark beauty" could be introduced a bit earlier, perhaps, since she turns out to be so important to the final resolution. You’ve already used her presence as a theme, but I think it could be even more prevalent, perhaps—does she maybe highlight <protagonist>’s conflicted feelings about his relationship with <former love interest>, for example? By the way, in light of Matt. 22:30, do you think anyone will object to the overtly sexual references to the angels?

For all the length of the manuscript, I wonder whether the ending is a bit abrupt? For instance, I would have liked a sort of epilogue, where we get a sense of what the resolution of the spiritual contest looks like in daily life. Consider making a bit more concrete the benefits and consequences of the curbing of the Unbinding.

Strengths of the Manuscript

I think it’s also important to let you know what I thought were the best parts of the work, so that these can possibly be highlighted and brought even more to the forefront in your next draft.

Characters By far, I found your characters to be the most interesting and surprising parts of the story. <protagonist>, is, of course, just as conflicted, complex, self-doubting, profane, well-intentioned, and shortsighted as many people you meet in the three-dimensional world; this is what gives him his interest. <supporting character 1>, also, does and says the unexpected; he is anything but a caricature priest. Continue to allow your characters to do and say the unexpected; readers will fall in love with them, want to know more about them, and root for them to succeed.

Concept The overall idea for your central conflict is intriguing. And, as mentioned above, I relish the fact that you aren’t interested in positing some secret, ungodly agenda for the Church or some theologically improbable scenario in the name of creating suspense and conflict. As suggested above, I do think that the subtlety of your concept, while being its greatest strength, may also be its greatest weakness in terms of sustaining reader interest throughout the narrative. However, I’m confident that you’ll find ways to do the one without forsaking the other.

Okay, I think that’s about it. I hope I’ve given you some useful food for thought; I’ve tried to give you your money’s worth with this critique. May you find herein the grains of wheat and allow the chaff to blow away on the wind.

Yours,

Thom Lemmons