Hi Lauren,

Sadly during our three-year closeknit friendship (albeit mostly developed via facebook after the awkward period), I never got to see your writing, so you have to admit this is a big moment in our relationship- just wanted to get it out there. I'm also constantly impressed with your taste in film, literature, and music, so it's a pleasure to crack into your creative mind.

You mentioned that you spent most of your college career with screenplays. Sounds familiar. I wrote eight of them until I realized I'd never have creative control unless I came up with original source material that couldn't be altered. My transition from screenwriting to fiction wasn't an easy one. I took a beating from my sister (the English professor), and I'm pretty sure she still thinks my work sucks.

I mention all this because it's the main thing I noticed while reading this chapter-- and explains a lot of what I felt hindered it. For brevity, I'll keep it to three critical points: 1) Point-of-view, 2) Narrative Voice, and 3) Visibility of Action. If you can address these, I believe your story will communicate better to your reader-- plus you'll get to play a bit more with imagery and language, which I feel are your greatest strengths.

We begin with unnamed girl (Olivia) leaving Paris for London. The first three paragraphs discuss her feelings and motivations, leading to her departure. This is important in establishing character.

Problem. We get no sense of setting. At least in literary fiction, the opening needs to establish setting. Yet we had three paragraphs of thought prior to "cobbled streets on the trail of one man" which is essentially where the action of the story begins. Also, there's no sense of time period. Although from your description I know it's Victorian England, this must come across in your prose (although it needn't be explicitly stated). This can be accomplished with rich visual descriptions or a line of dialogue that captures a voice distinctive of the era. In addition, I don't get a sense of genre. You tagged "gothic thriller" and "mystery" in your description. Yet nothing in the language of the first few paragraphs evokes the tone of a mystery/thriller plot. I'd like to feel the tone through the narrative voice, as well as begin to gain even a vague understanding of what type of plot this may eventually turn out to be-- all in (you guessed it) the first several paragraphs.

scraping of a chair on the floor

This is the only time before your first section break (at the word "Olivia") that I gained any sense of real action to hook me into the story. Why "scrape, chair, floor"? Because it's unusual. If it were just a scene of a woman knocking on a door and an old man opening it, I would feel that nothing really happens until Julian first throws a line at Olivia--(or arguably, no striking action hooks us into the story until Olivia discovers Gabriel's painting).

This is what I mean by "visibility of action." Believe it or not, the average reader doesn't read every word in the story. (It's the same principle as in the sentences with words jumbled up intentionally- "he wnet to the supremakret to purcahse spnicah, mlik and grnaola" ) The reader is glazing over the page and merely catching the gist of what's going on.

Let's look at this passage:

"She knocked again, this time louder and more persistently. From deep inside she heard the scraping of a chair on the floor and a pounding of steps that stopped suddenly just short of the door. After a few seconds the steps creaked on a floorboard telling her that whoever was behind the door had walked away. With little patience left, she gathered her strength and thumped hard on the door with the soft side of her fist.

What if it looked like this?

             "She knocked again. Inside she could hear a chair scraping on the floor and footsteps that stopped suddenly just short of the door. Moments later, a floorboard creaked, suggesting that whoever was inside had walked away.

             Again, she thumped against the door with her fist."

Notice: All I did was cut away excess words to make it easier to see the action!

(Your original text

"She knocked again, this time louder and more persistently. From deep Inside she could hear the scraping of a chair scraping on the floor and a pounding of footsteps that stopped suddenly just short of the door. After a few seconds Moments later, the steps creaked on a floorboard creaked,  telling her suggesting that whoever was behind the door inside had walked away. With little patience left, Again, she gathered her strength and thumped against hard on the door with the soft side of her fist.

There are several sections that I felt could be pared down to make it easier on the reader's eyes. This is another. Check if you feel any of it can be cut out to clarify the action of the scene.

"The door swung open to reveal a man worn from nights spent at the mercy of a canvas. He stopped dead in his accusation and stared. His eyes, dampened by deep circles, narrowed to distinguish the figure before him. And when she lowered the hood of her cloak, a slow breath escaped him as he raised a calloused hand to his mouth and whispered in incredulous panic."

(Oh, and I believed "callused" is preferred here-- although "callous" is acceptable, "callus" can only mean the type on the skin, not hardened emotion.)

Next section, we begin "The first time he saw her working..." And suddenly, we're in POV violation. We've just been in Olivia's POV (3PL), but now we've jumped to Julian's POV (3PL), which I can tell because we're discussing his feelings ("At twenty-four he’d never been in love, but if she was any indication of an alternative he’d happily bid farewell to his promiscuous lifestyle.") Yet when in the next paragraph you write, "No one had ever spoken to her like that before and the frankness threw her," you've switched back to Olivia's POV (3PL). This is a common mistake screenwriters-turned-fiction authors make (myself included). If we're telling a story from Julian's POV, he cannot see what is inside Olivia's mind, so the narrator cannot either. But he can say, "It appeared from the blush in her cheeks that she had never been spoken to in such a manner before."

But then again, you're not really supposed to jump from Olivia's POV to Julian's. Some authors say not unless it's a chapter break. Other authors say not once in an entire novel. Really, this is all a matter of how good of a writer you are. (Good writers can get away with POV switching, as long as the storytelling is clear and intact.) As you know, in screenwriting you can do it whenever you want. But the point is, the reader gets behind the eyes of a main character in a scene-- in his head-- in his thoughts-- and if the author removes the reader from that, the reader may get really confused.

In the remainder of the chapter, we switch POV between Olivia, Julian, Gabriel (and I believe even Madame Verreau, to some degree). In such a short length, this is not a good idea. The reader will have trouble getting immersed in the congruence of the story. Surprisingly this doesn't require the author to have to alter the story all that much-- but doing so will make it exponentially easier for a reader to follow! But choosing POV is also a stylistic choice-- so be intentional when you decide from whose POV this story is told. Remember, you're deciding ultimately who, among your characters, this story ultimately belongs to. Who is the dynamic character? Who transforms at the end with the conclusion of the tale?

            “Ah, yes,” he began with the approach that had done him such service in the past. “Where do you live? I must inquire with your parents about why on earth they would allow a stunner like you out of their sight for even a second.”

            Olivia blushed furiously at the compliment. No one had ever spoken to her like that before and the frankness threw her.

            “Oh, I don’t mean to shock the young lady. It’s just that with so many roguish characters wandering about I’d be afraid of one sweeping you right off your feet."

...

"Being prone to romantic bits of fancy, the young artist could barely contain himself. She could not be more than eighteen but her face showed more than her young years. Her eyes were a swirl of grey and were outshone only by that auburn crown Julian was so drawn to. The way she moved was ethereal. She was effortless as she spoke."

Let's discuss narrative voice for a second. This isn't just about dialogue. The narrator's voice-- which also lends a great deal to tone. If you saw the movie "Million Dollar Baby" or "Shawshank Redemption" you'll remember how both films benefited from Morgan Freeman's narrative voice. In essence, just from the way he enunciated his words, you were able to get a sense of what type of movie it was going to be. This is a far cry from Lindsay Lohan's narrative voice in "Mean Girls." A totally different tone, right?

This is an important tool for fiction authors. Most agents/editors I've spoken to put this on their top 2 things they look for when deciding to accept a project. They ask, "Is this narrative voice fresh? Strong? Fun? Foreboding?" Any aspiring piece of fiction should have a deliberate narrative voice. A narrator with no feeling or bias would be the equivalent of Dick Cheney reading the Harry Potter audiobooks instead of Jim Dale.

I can tell you're trying to emulate the language of Victorian novels. Careful. Because of Monty Python and Black Adder, you risk it coming off sounding comical to the reader. However, too overdramatic and you risk sounding Masterpiece Theater. I think you'd rather sound like Austen or Bronte. Or if you want to capture Victorian era thriller, read anything by Anne Perry (I even have one of her books I'll give you. I'm trying to sell it on Amazon right now anyway).

In regards to dialogue... well, maybe it's just me... but I thought all of Julian's lines were lame. Sorry. I kept thinking, "Who would say this? I mean, even back then, what guy would say this?" But that's not really that important. What is important is when to use dialogue and when to omit. In screenwriting, dialogue is what keeps the story in motion. In fiction, not always.

            “Gabriel!” Julian shouted. Gabriel spun around, his dark eyes glinting in the failing candlelight. He accepted defeat with a heavy sigh and walked toward the door. Julian walked back and cupped his hand around the candle and blew it out before following.

            “Honestly, I could murder you sometimes.” Julian said as they set down the busy street.

            “What is it about this one? Why are you, you, of all people going to such lengths?” Gabriel asked. “You could have any lady off the streets you wanted.”

       “True,” he replied with a pleased cock of his head. “But my man, this is a stunner unlike any I've ever seen. This is the one I need. The one that will make my brush the envy of all London—of England!” He stopped and faced Gabriel. “Of the world.”

I found several instances throughout where there's what I consider "throwaway dialogue," which is totally acceptable in screenwriting-- they add personality to characters and rhythm to a movie scene-- but in fiction, most editors would agree that every word of dialogue must add to the forward progress of the plot. That's right. Every word.

While we're on the topic, make sure you rarely or never use adverbs in dialogue-tagging. The words of dialogue should be strong enough to evoke a sense of how it's being said.

  “Monsieur Julian,” Madame Verreau said coolly as she opened the door.

  “Madame,” he responded with his standard charm. She stepped aside to allow him in but halted at the sight of the uninvited guest.

    
Another hint. While descriptions are important, they can get in the way of action (again, visibility of action)

  “My lady, you are stunning tonight.” Julian said as he went to her and gallantly kissed her hand.

  “I don’t believe we’ve met,” she said moving toward him, her skirt swishing on the wooden floorboards. “I'm Olivia.”

Particularly in dialogue, when you put description of action after "she said/he said" we lose the pace of the conversation-- and we don't always catch that description anyway.

A few examples of passive voice:

"Olivia’s attention however was now on the striking stranger still standing near the door."

"There was not the slightest hint of superiority in her manner and Gabriel appreciated that."

There's a good amount of this throughout. Just try to make them active "Olivia noticed the striking stranger..." or "Gabriel could not detect the slightest hint of superiority..." (It's the same trick as drafting resumes, man...)

I did want to say a word or two about scene structure, but I'm running out of gas... In short, just remember to establish setting first-- then give the reader a character to follow-- the build tension until each scene peaks with some hint as to what will come next... similar to the way you construct a chapter, or how you would construct a 3-minute scene in a screenplay. (You know, setting, character, rising tension, climax, denoument).

Also, I noticed a couple parts where I thought you were giving too much away too soon.

"In fact, the woman he had painted was no more than someone he had dreamt of night after night. She had no face but the passion with which he’d imagined her brought her to life in a way no dream could.

That night as Gabriel began to dream he saw the woman again and this time, she turned around."

"Since Olivia’s entrance into his life, Gabriel had been unable to wipe her from his mind. And now, like a spirit she haunted his dreams giving the faceless woman he had been visited by so often in his sleep her own eyes, her own lips. For weeks he had ignored the temptation to ask, knowing that if Julian found out he’d be furious, but before he could stop himself he blurted it out, breaking the near silence save for the sound of the street below coming from the open window."

And there are also parts where the narrative is a little too "telly" or "explainy" and not enough "showy":

"Julian was a perfectly fine painter but his talent was as erratic as his lifestyle. Having been raised in a well-heeled manner and given the best London had to offer he had always assumed that his good fortune would follow him in all realms of life. So when his fleeting gift began to elude him, the temper resting just below the surface surged to life.

Patient as she was though, even Olivia began to tire of his dramatics. If a stroke of his brush did not meet his expectations, a tantrum would fire across his face. His grip would fasten on the easel as he shook the panel like he was trying to shake the image off the canvas. Finally one day, just as Olivia’s form began to appear with distinction this fury came to life and in one rash act of anger he threw the entire canvas across the studio."

This is author intrusion, where we know the author is trying to explain something to us. It stops the pace of the story and detracts the reader.

Lastly, after reading this, I felt Gabriel (and his obsessiveness) is certainly the most captivating thing going on so far. Yet he's really only given about 1-2 paragraphs in all of nine pages to shine. At least to me I'd like to get more of that to truly hook me into the story.

And lastly, lastly...

"While the scene Julian had painted was nothing short of exquisite, it’s detail beyond compare and technique nearly incomparable to anything he’d ever seen, Gabriel knew the unfinished figure at it’s center would never appear the way Julian imagined her."

C'mon LMF. You're supposed to be the grammar queen. "Its" not "it's"

...and by the way, in the dialogue, contractions being used in Victorian England? Be careful when and where to use them!

Okay, by now you're probably wishing you never agreed to join my circle. But on the upside, I get a faint sense of where you're going with this, and just by knowing a little about you personally (and your love of London), I'm still eager to know what you intend to do with this setup. It reminded me of "Girl with a Pearl Earring" so far, though I'm sure you are aware of that book and are not trying to copy it. You also have a talent with language and description (although I've advised you to cut down some), and I encourage you to read your sentences aloud after you write them-- but when you do, don't have any film soundtracks playing in the background, don't use any accents, don't envision any actors-- just see if the words alone can do the trick. You have skill, and it's evident. This isn't a formula story-- it's a book about feelings, about moods, and from what I suspect, about obsessions. ("Vertigo" is one of my favorite movies.) To be able to conjure that is way more important than the rules of writing structure and plot arc. So stick with this. I look forward to seeing future drafts!

 (Accidentally posted)

 why on earth they would allow a stunner like you out of their sight for even a second.”

I'm not sure if language like this was around in those times.

To start with, I'm not sure who's telling the story.  It starts with Olivia, then moves to Julian, and sometimes is Gabriel.  That's my biggest problem as of yet.  I think it would suit the story to pick a POV and stick with, therefore allowing the readers to empathize with the main character. 

I think Julian is a well developed character, being only minor, but the rest really need to grow.  Olivia in particular.  I'm not really sure who she is or where she's coming from.  The problem with writing is that these things have to be determined from the very beginning, or readers bail quickly.  What makes Olivia special?

You have a lot of details, but very little vivid description that draws readers into the scene.  What were they eating for dinner?  What did the apartment look like? Smell like?  You take us from place to place, but don't create a realistic scene for us to fdisappear into.  What was it like in the hat store?  Upstairs?  What are the differences between London and Paris?  Bring it to life for us.

I look forward to seeing where you take this. Thanks for the read.