Thursday, January 8, 2015

Appearing in issue #2, January 12, 2015


Title:  The hold up

By Author:  John M. Floyd

 ZERO STARS.  ZERO. ZIP. NADA.

Tag line:   The thief should have known better than to try to outwit Angela Potts and Sheriff Jones!

Police characters:   Sheriff Charles Jones.

The gist:    Sheriff Jones arrives at the pawn shop five minutes after the call was dispatched as a robbery. Just as Jones had begun to interview the clerk, in walks Angela Potts.  She said she saw him in his patrol car, light bar flashing, and she followed him.  Then she added that she needed a new toaster anyway.  The clerk pointed Mrs. Potts to the appliance section. Jones said, “She isn’t here shopping for a toaster, she’s here to interfere with police business.”  Then Jones asks the clerk what the sign meant (Pawn-E Express) but she didn’t know.   The owner was not there but the clerk had just called him. 

Jones took a statement from the clerk.  She said a tall, bearded robber came in 15 minutes earlier, waved a big hunting knife under her nose, and demanded all the cash in the safe. He had on a wool cap, sunglasses, and work gloves, which he never took off.  He stuffed the cash into a grocery sack, then asked her for her wallet. He had no accent. He didn’t take her money, he just looked at her driver’s license.

Mrs. Potts asked how he could read her driver’s license with sunglasses on.  The clerk said he took it out of its little plastic sleeve, held it up to the light, then returned it and threw the wallet at her.  “Now I know who you are,” he said, “You better keep your mouth shut or I’ll be back.”

Sheriff Jones snorted, “I wouldn’t worry about that.  He’d know there’s not much you could tell us anyway.”

The clerk said the robber tucked the sack of bills under his arm and ran off down the street.  She didn’t see a car.

Sheriff Jones said, “Do you mind if I take a look around?” Mrs. Potts asked the clerk if the vehicle parked outside, a Ford Bronco, was hers.  She answered yes.  Mrs. Potts then asked her to take her keys out of her purse and unlock the car because the sheriff wanted to take a look in there.  Sheriff Potts said, “I do?” Mrs. Potts said she suspected the cash was in the Bronco.

Crime scene:     Pawn Shop.

Clues:    The robber wore work gloves.

Suspects:   The store clerk or some robber guy.

Red herrings:    None.   But if there were any, I bet they would be awful.

Solution:  If the robber wore gloves he wouldn’t have been able to manipulate the license out of the little plastic holder.

My two cents:    Right away, right at the tag line, I noticed WW is billing Potts before the sheriff.  “The thief should’ve known better than to try to outwit Angela Potts.  And, oh by the way, the town sheriff.”

There are soooo many things that don’t make sense in this silly little story.

Pawn shops take toasters?  You can buy a new one at Walmart for $8.99.  Anyway I thought it odd that Jones said Potts was there to interfere with police business when half the time he takes her to the crime scenes in his cruiser, and the other half he calls her to meet him there.

Pawn-E Express sounds like Pony Express to me.  But what do I know. And what that has to do with the robbery is not clear to me. Or anyone else for that matter.

Sheriff Jones snorting at a victim seems a wee bit unprofessional. Ya’ think?

Sheriff Jones said, “Do you mind if I take a look around?”  Earth to Sheriff.  It’s a crime scene.  You’re SUPPOSED to look around.

When Potts told the clerk that the sheriff wanted to look in her car, Sheriff Jones said, “I do?”  At this point my eyes begin to hurt from so much rolling around.  

The police can’t look in your car without your permission or a search warrant but of  course Mrs. Potts was probably bluffing to see how the clerk would react.  Because she’s brilliant and the sheriff is a dummy.

So no security camera in the store I suppose, and the clerk knows the combo to the safe.  Yep, that’s happening.  More eye rolling.

I don’t know about the rest of the world, but I can see fine when I’m wearing sunglasses.  That’s why they let me drive a car when the sun is shining.

“Now I know who you are,” he said, “You better keep your mouth shut or I’ll be back.”  Duh.  I know that the clerk made that up but doesn’t the author realize if he wanted to find her he would just come back to the pawn shop where she worked and he wouldn’t need her home address?   Wait, I think my left eye is stuck up there.  No, it’s okay, it came down.

So let me get this straight.  The story goes the robber took the license out of the plastic case, looked at it, and then put it back into the plastic case all nice and neat? What a polite thug.  Don’t see many of those.  And he didn’t take her money?  The author needs this handling of the license in the story to make his clue work but they way he tried to achieve that was so poorly executed that everyone in the universe had to suspend their disbelief.  Now one eye is twitching.

The pacing was poor, the writing was unimaginative.  Believable characters?  Naw.  This week they weren’t even acting like their usual selves.  Well, okay, I take that back.  Sheriff Jones was clueless as usual.  The clue (that the robber handled something he couldn’t possibly have with those gloves on) wasn’t bad but it got sucked up in a vortex of stupid.  The police work was off.  There was no motive.  None.

This story is no bueno.  Now, excuse me while I go get some ice for my eye.  (I’ll get you for this, John.)

53 comments:

Mary Jo said...

Oh, Jody, Mr. Floyd is probably weeping salty tears over this review while he counts another $500. The thing is, I happen to agree with you. Does anyone out there (besides the WW editors, of course) like these characters?

Chris said...

Sorry folks but I thought this one was funny. I loved Sheriff Jones saying 'I do?' when Potts said he wanted to examine the car. And Pawn E Express - surely that's a punning reference to Pony Express? Maybe not relevant to pawn shops but still, I've seen worse on real shops. I liked it!

John has come up with a winning combination with these two - we know what to expect when we see their names and gear ourselves up for a bit of grumpy detective versus perky granny wordplay. And it's not like the inept cop being helped out by a l-o-l is unheard of in crime fiction. For me, this was fine.

Tamara said...

Story wasn't half as entertaining as Jody's review.

Tamara said...

Liv, you asked about the errors pointed out in my article, and in case you don't go back to the previous blog section, they are: "misplaced only"; "I vs. me"; "like vs. such as"; "misplacement of prepositional phrases"; and "hung vs. hanged".

Jody E. Lebel said...

@ Tamara. It's a badge of honor to get lampooned on this blog. :)

Julia said...

Jody-thanks for your review. I agreed with you 1000% plus. I actually posted my own little reactions to this dud on some other place on this blog the other day because I was practically screaming with frustration after I read this. I really think someone out there (Floyd or Granger or someone - Stephanis _ above her) insulted the WW readership with this one. And I also am seriously beginning to think John has (perhaps an informal) agreement with WW to take a certain # of his stories annually. He is such a good writer when he works at it, that I do find it offensive that he would even offer this for publication at all.

Julia said...

p.s. I realize now I posted my first reaction to this under the comment section about Marianna's story. (Her story made sense.) And I rushed out and bougth WW as soon as I read Bettye's post saying she'd enjoyed this Floyd "masterpiece." Bettye!!! I know you're a good writer with a great sense of humor . . . were you kidding us????? Tamara - you are so right. Floyd must have needed a quick $500 - and I do mean quick - this reads like he tossed it off while driving down the freeway. Either that or he's got some legally binding agreement that WW will publish a certain number of his stories. And don't tell me that can't happen; I won't believe you. (cynical attitude of retired newswoman - anything can happen.)

Jody E. Lebel said...

@ Julia. I have to wonder if this story suffered from red-pen disease. I don't John even reads this blog anymore. When I've asked him to stop by in the past, he has, and he's always taken the 'slice and dice' with good humor, and he's always been a gentleman.

PS I would love to hear he has a contract. If it can happen to him, it can happen to us. :)

Jody E. Lebel said...


@ Chris. I'm sure you're not alone in liking this story. WW readers seem to love these characters. But didn't you think there were some quirks to this story that made it a bit off? I don't think it's John's best work, although I know they can't all be gems. I'm thinking the editing messed up his pacing here.

Julia said...

Jody- you're kinder than I am, I guess. I blame John for this; maybe that is unfair. I agree with you - I too would like him to get a contract because, as you say, then it could happen to "one of us" also I like John's public personna. I find his contributions to the writing community are helpful and kind. But this story is simply not worthy of him. Glad you said "no stars." I feel vindicated by your reaction.

Susan said...

So much to say about this one. I thought of the Pony Express when I read Pawn-E Express. Then the sort of punch line at the end... the Pawn-E Express cash in the Bronco. I thought that was a funny play on history, but then I do have a weird sense of humor. I was taken aback by the sheriff's sudden bad attitude toward Angela. She does irritate him, but this seemed a little more mean-spirited. Lucy's reply to the sheriff's explanation of Angela's presence seemed odd and out of place. I could go on, but really overall, I liked the story's plot and solution. I'm with Chris on this one. When you see their names in the tag line, you should expect more fun story than police procedure accuracy. Congrats to John on the sale.

Bettye Griffin said...

Crying foul at having been misquoted, Julia. Contrary to what was written, I did NOT say this was story was a "masterpiece" (a word I never use, so if this was a mystery it definitely would've raised my suspicions), so please refrain from using quotation marks unless it's an accurate quote. I actually said I thought it was excellent. This good writer absolutely HATES being misquoted.

Back to our regularly scheduled programming. Yes, I did like the story. Sure, there were some things that seemed silly, but there are always silly things in these 500-word stories, probably because there's so little wiggle room. As someone who does remove my sunglasses indoors, I was unable to pinpoint the clue (although it did seem easier to remove sunglasses than it would be to remove the license, and I kept going over that part and still couldn't figure it out) To me that's the biggest factor in determining whether or not the story works, silliness or not, since I do recognize so many of them (maybe I was just having an off day with this one).

Julia said...

Bettye - sorry, the quotes were mine only and intended as sarcasm. I don't think anyone would consider this story a "masterpiece" in any sense of the word. I did not and still do not consider this story worthy of publication anywhere. Poorly written dreadful clue, silly characters. Oh - you said the stories were 500 words. I read them, don't write them. Aren't they 700 words? Regular contributors probably know. Jody?

Tamara said...

My most current issue has a mystery that is 727 words, which excludes the title and tagline and includes a 90-word solution.

Jody E. Lebel said...

@ Julia WW asks for 700-word mysteries and 800-word romances. They pay $500 for the mysteries and $800 for the romances. The word count does not include the title or tag line, but does include the solution.

Jody E. Lebel said...

@ Tamara re: 727 words... interesting. I haven't read the story yet, but to me if you have to use 90 words to explain it, you have written a story that is too complicated.

Tamara said...

Yes, it's one of those with too much information, most of which should have been included in the story.

Anonymous said...

Just a couple of quick points (and FWIW, I have about a dozen WW sales). Knowing first hand how much editing is done, I would be very reluctant to criticize a fellow writer. These stories can end up drastically altered, and not always for the better. Secondly, any time the solution to one of my stories has run long, it was the direct result of editorial changes. Presumably, someone somewhere along the line thought the clue needed more explanation. And when the extra information gets added, it doesn't always jibe smoothly with the body of the story.

Jody E. Lebel said...

@ Anonymous If you're reluctant to criticize a fellow writer's edited story, then it's not a good idea for you to start a critique blog that analyzes weekly stories. Well, look at that. You didn't. I did. I guess you're off the hook.

This blog's purpose is to critique the mini-mysteries in WW. I can't very well do that if I don't criticize the story when it's not up to par. And no one wants to read a blog that LOVES all the stories and blows smoke up everyone's butt. Most read this blog for the entertainment value and to maybe learn a little bit about what it is that WW is looking for in a story.

We all know the editing screws with a lot of our stories, but that final product is all I have to work with. Authors get good and bad reviews all the time. They learn to deal.

Your comment about the extra information getting added and it doesn't always jibe smoothly with the rest of the story might work if the editing was coming from students, but we're talking about professional editors hired by WW to organize and place fiction stories in a magazine that sells over 84 million copies a year. It better darn well jibe or they shouldn't have okayed it.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, Jody. I was just trying to add a different perspective to the discussion. I shan't bother again.

Jody E. Lebel said...

@ Anonymous. I welcome all comments, whether I agree with them or not, and invite you to stop by again. Diversity makes the world go round. Like I said folks don't read the blog to hear all good news, they like a little controversy. I take pokes at the stories; at time readers take pokes at me. It's only fair. Bring it on. :)

Julia said...

Has anyone read reviews of WW written from the inside of the publication? They are enlightening and sound like there's a revolving door at Bauer Publishing. This could explain the strange editing. I know Johnene and some others are long-timers, but the lower level people seem to be young college grads who are learning on the job in a sink or swim mileu. When they learn to swim, they swim away and more newbies come on board. (Can't help wondering what they pay!!!)

Julia said...

Anon-congrats on your sales. I would like to suggest that, when a story of yours is edited to death, you share it with the readers of this blog. Post as written. We all read the mag and can compare. I don't know about others, but I'd find that terrifically interesting.

Jody E. Lebel said...

@ Julia. Don't you dare leave us in the dark. Tell us where to find these other reviews.

It was my understanding that the first readers, that come and go, are young journalism majors that get hired to do the first reads. They then pass on the stories that fit the mold so to speak. And, yes, they move up the publishing ladder and new blood comes in to fill their tired and worn shoes. I believe the final edits lie with Johnene and her boss, the EIC. So I don't think we can blame the newbies for these editing bloopers.

Julia said...

Jody - I just "googled" Woman's World Magazine: employee reviews and found a really interesting site. I don't know who does the final edit; having worked in daily newspapers, I figured the time pressure on Johnene and Steph would be so great they wouldn't have time to do much hands-on stuff; that's the way it was in the newspapers where I worked. But I don't know; magazines are different and you are obvisoulsy more in synch with WW than I.

Julia said...

Jody - I'd never leave anyone in the dark!!! Newsfolk are all about casting light on what's really going on behind the scenes!!! I love your blog, BTW.

Joyce Ackley said...

Jody, your review had me in stitches! Those comments about your eyes were so funny! Girl, you should write in a new genre - humor! I didn't read this story, but I picked up on the clue right away. My daughter lives in a gated community. Each time I go in, I have to show my driver's license, although I've been there a gazillion times. Last time, I couldn't get it out of the plastic compartment in my wallet, and I wasn't wearing gloves. I was holding up a long line of cars behind me. I asked the guard to try, and she couldn't get it out, either. She just let me in without ID. So the license/gloves clue was obvious.

The comments on here kept me entertained, too!

Jody E. Lebel said...

@ Joyce. As if a robber would take the time to remove the license for a better look. Good grief. Don't get me started...my left eye still hurts.

Anyway, speaking of humor, I just wrote a short 20-mintue play, a romantic/comedy. I presented it to the local theater group, and they read it and liked it, and are going to perform it. So now I can add playwright to my resume. :) Once they present it, I can then try to sell it to other small theater groups. Opens up a whole new sales door.

Glad you like the blog. People like you make me want to keep writing it.

Julia said...

Congratulations on your play! You are a funny lady, I always find a chuckle or two in your blog. Glad you're pursuing humorous writing.

Chris said...

Congratulations on the acceptance of your play, Jody. Yet another string to your bow. I did a scriptwriting course at my local theatre a few years ago but didn't like the jerkiness of writing only dialogue, with no connective description. Well done you.

I also enjoy your blog but your 'tell it like it is' style doesn't suit everyone. I know how much you hate exclamation marks but they do help soften the effect of a jokey comment sometimes, just so we know it's tongue in cheek.

By the way, can someone explain what FWIW (in one of the comments above) stands for? It's probably very obvious, and I've tried to work it out, but I don't have a clue.

Tamara said...

Julia, I totally agree that Jody is so funny (I especially like sarcastic humor anyway). Jody, that's really exciting that you wrote and had a play accepted. I haven't tried that yet. I am interested in the notion that there may be other first readers lightening the load for Patty Gaddis. I have a romance I want to resubmit, because I got it back from her without comment (it's been a few years), and I got some other great feedback on it. I did this once before and was almost successful (alas, top editor rejected it). I don't want to make Patty Gaddis angry, but I think it's worth a shot. Think I should try it?

Julia said...

Chris - thanks for asking what FWIW means. I wondered too, but didn't ask as I am a newbie on this site and figured everyone else already knew the answer! We'll soon find out!

Jody E. Lebel said...

RE: the play. Thanks, ladies. It is a different type of writing for sure. It's tell, not show. Not something we're used to doing. And the director gets to have input as to how a scene should go. And the costume lady does her thing. And then the set director plans a set that is nothing like what's in my head. And THEN the actors inject their personalities into it. It's a whole other world from story writing.

RE: resubbing a story. I waited over a year, and then dragged out a story that I liked but that never made it to Johnene. I changed it up a little bit but not too much, changed the title, and sent it in. It made it past Patty this time. Unless, of course, it's lost in the mail. I sent it in July. So, I'd say dust off that old story and give it a new chance at life. IF Patty were to say something to you, like Haven't I seen this before? Send her back a little note saying, Sorry, my record keeping isn't as good as it used to be; didn't realize this had come your way before.

Jody E. Lebel said...

@ Chris FWIW For what it's worth.

Chris said...

Ahhh, for what it's worth. I see. Thanks, Jody.

Julia, I'm in the UK so I often don't get what's said over there. We speak the same language but in very different ways sometimes, so I just ask. Keep visiting the site (and Kate's, of course). I've learned loads and it's nice to swap info and markets news.

Julia said...

Chris - I will indeed keep on reading this blog and Kate's as well. So many interesting contributors and a chance to learn new things like the meaning of FWIW. (I never would have figured that one out!) You "speak" (write) American-English so well I would not have figured out that you're from Britain either.

Chris said...

Just goes to show how it rubs off after a while, Julia. I'm waiting for the day when I see some of my American friends using Cockney rhyming slang in their stories...

'Lucy ran up the apples and pears to put on her whistle and flute and get some slap on her boat race. Steve had just called on the dog and bone and asked to meet her in the rub-a-dub for a Vera Lynn after work. She couldn't wait!'

The day I see THAT in WW I'll know my work here is done!

Susan said...

Chris, Oh my Goodness! Your work is definitely not complete. What does that mean? The first sentence I have not a clue. Is dog and bone a phone? Is rub-a-dub a pub? Vera Lynn a drink? Love it.

Susan said...

Well, darn. Today I received a rejection letter for a story subbed in August. It came from Seattle. Sad, rainy Monday. On to the next story. :)

Chris said...

Susan, commiserations on the rejection. Always a pain, but recycle it and try it somewhere else. Fast Fiction in Australia take a variety of lengths, from 600 to 2,600, and in lots of genres. Guidelines available on
http://www.thatslife.com.au/FastFictionGuidelines AND you submit by email.

There's a new, female fiction editor there now and she has taken two of my WW rejects so far, plus a third longer one that I'd tried over here (UK) but hadn't found a home for. There's always a market if the story is strong enough.

Okay, Cockney rhyming slang... apples and pears, stairs;
whistle and flute, suit; boat race, face; rub-a-dub, pub; Vera Lynn, gin! Slap is just a slang name for make-up. Well done with your guesses, you are now an honorary Brit.

Julia said...

Chris - LOVE that rhyming slang. And thanks for so generously sharing the information on Fast Fiction and its website. A lot of good writers get those big bad rejections from WW; it's good to know alternative markets exist.

Susan said...

Chris, thanks for the Fast Fiction info. Much appreciated. :)

Chris said...

Check the others on Jody's list, ladies. As well as many US mags, there are UK ones and a handful in other countries. Kate also has a list that I sent her last year under the title Overseas Markets.

Jody E. Lebel said...

@ Susan Sorry about the Big R. I heard from the WW group that someone got a rejection from a September submittal, so the pile is starting to move. Not in a good direction...but starting to move.

Chris is so right. Find a new home for it.

Jody E. Lebel said...

@Chris. Yes, now I see how confusing the languages can be from country to country. Do the UK mags have that type of lingo in their stories as a rule? Is it something we should think about inserting here and there?

Chris said...

Jody, NOOOO - it was a joke to illustrate how colloquial use of language can make it hard to understand if you aren't familiar with it. Don't go filling your UK subs with rhyming slang if you want to make a sale, any more than you'd use Bronx type talk in a romance for WW. The poor ladies on the fiction team would blow a fuse.

Mary Ann said...

Holy cow this went off the rails--but there was some interesting banter thrown around! I am just chiming in late to say that I love the stories about Mrs. Potts and Chunky. (Although I noticed this one didn't have mention of him as "chunky" or his weight issue. Maybe they decided against that nickname?) But I wholeheartedly agree with Chris (scroll up about a mile) that we know what to expect when we see it's a story with these two characters. Granted, the mystery part was not the best of John's, but I still thought the story was amusing. And that seems to be the ticket with Woman's World mysteries.

Jody E. Lebel said...

@ Mary Ann. Believe it or not I have given one of John Floyd's Chunky/Potts stories 5 stars. But each story has to stand on its own and they have to earn their stars. Those two characters can be amusing, and they can be annoying.

Does anyone have a visual for what Mrs. Potts looks like? I do, but I'll hold off until I hear others.

Tamara said...

She's thin, with spectacles, and a bit bent. Her hair is brown with large grey sections, and she wears it in a bun.

Jody E. Lebel said...

Orthopedic shoes? Lavender jogging suit or buttoned-up white blouse?

Tamara said...

I definitely see a big grey sweater over a dress.

bettye griffin said...

My bad re the word count, Julia. I'm confusing the word count with the payment!

Jody E. Lebel said...

Estelle Getty would have made a great Mrs. Potts. Someone who's living? Betty White.