Guilt is a bar of soap

[burntpunk]

Below is a vignette I have composed; I hope it isn't too controversial.



When you are standing all magisterial in your luxurious shower, golden-tapped, slick as a monkey’s incipient vagina, with just about the dirtiest **** on your mind, all you can think is that: guilt is a bar of soap.

The soap is green; your sins are red.

You stretch a little, blink a dozen times, and smile yellow teeth beauty, and at that moment you think you’ve lifted the burden. But Allah almighty, that is something you ain’t gonna do, it’s like that bomb that you planted is strapped to the bottom of your stomach. Dense and ticking like a mother****er.

You shake your head. You want to deny everything. You are a bastard. You think you are seeing clearly now. This is better; this is the straight and narrow. You just better not get recognized for your cowardice; hopefully the good people will accept you, even if you tried to blow the **** out of them.

Shake your head. Shave your head. Wash all over. Repeat.

You rub the soap against your skin. Green. The soap cost forty-four pound sterling. The soap was a present your uncle. He got it from Bagdad. It was manufactured in a factory by starving children.

You’ve got your cash. You’ve done your deed. You’ve got a million pounds sterling. You paid for the shower with this. You paid for the tasteless mansion with this. You paid for the sex with this. You shower.

You have a lot of money and a lot of sin. You thought you knew which would come out the winner in the end. You’re not so sure now. You scrub the soap against your greasy skin.

The soap is green; your sins are red.

The cool blue water drips off your nakedness.

You did what you did. You regret it like a mother****er, you wish you could go back and ... well be honest you wouldn’t change what you did. You were a hollow mother****er. You might as well have been made out of glass. You had no drive. No motivation. You wanted nothing more than your material goods your luxurious shower, golden tapped, slick as a monkey’s incipient vagina, dude, that’s what you used to dream about, in the gardens with Amir. And guess the **** what, you’ve got that, you’ve got everything you want and more, you are a tasteless bastard. You’ve got your material ****, what more? Can’t you just be happy? So what if you killed some rich ****s, they had it coming, they’re rich.

Your heart beats. Slow. You feel like that Glassman in you, that one, waiting to break out, guess what — maybe the explosion was too loud. The glass has broken. Every time you move, glass flitters around. Fragments, piercing that slow bomb of a soft red heart.

You need some cheering up. Perhaps, when you’ve showered, you can head off to London, right into the city, buy some good ****. If that doesn’t cheer you up, nothing will.

You sniff, the glass, is in your nose. And you can smell nothing but the sweet scent of abortion. Puce.

You’ve washed nicely now. You turn the heat up. Red hot. Wonderful. Splendid.
You know when you place your two index fingers so that they’re touching, right in front of your eyes, and then move them back and forward, and then you get the illusion that there’s a slab a flesh in between. Your eyes kinda take a weird stance. Well you get that, staring through the Perspex of the shower.

You are trapped. Water rushes. This is oblivion. This is hell. And you are just waiting for a moist Satan to give you a kiss. For crows to rip out your smiling heart. This is it, this is the moment that you give up living, this is the moment when the sin, when the guilt epitomises. Where you look through the Perspex, and see nothing but green and red.

There is no redemption, for you.

There is no God, for you.

I’m afraid, you’re gonna have to suck the red hot **** of karma. Good luck.
Still looking through the glass. You own so much now. So much you don’t need. Your flatscreen fifty-six inch plasma blu-ray television. Your two Ferraris. Electric Green. Scarlet Red. You can see them now. Stream-lined. Low. Gliding through African plains. Purposeless. A village full of malaria and aids and poverty. Rushing past.

You can be the butcher who became the vegetarian. Red. Green. Together, they make blue. You turn the shower down. Cooler. Better. You wanna hug all the blue-eyed Africans, you wanna give away your million pounds. You wanna give away your two Ferraris. You wanna give away your flatscreen fifty-six inch plasma blu-ray television. You wanna forget your guilt, it was done, you had no purpose before, you got a purpose, it was a bad purpose, but good at the time. Now you need a new purpose. A purpose good for now, and good forever.

You dreamed about meeting Allah in paradise. You wondered whether you would bow or say your prayers first, you were ready to hug Allah. To be welcomed.

You lost belief. Or maybe you just screwed up. Nevertheless, you didn’t die. Everyone else did. You took the burden. The world wants your head, maybe you could try and be good, or maybe you’ll give them it on a silver platter, alongside a nice green bar of soap.

[dingyjoe]

did you really need to swear this much??
isn't swearing the lowest form of art?

[Delta40]

Burntpunk thanks for this read. I like how you highlight the colours and how the story centres around the device of the soap. Do you think it would be more powerful written in the third person (is that the correct term?) The reason why I ask is because I found it difficult to fully appreciate the story as I was aware that I am being asked to be that person in the shower. This, to me is a greater ask than if I read about a character. I would actually appreciate the tone you are attempting to set and also my ability to empathise and understand would be more easily engaged as I follow his journey, experience his mixed emotions, while he showers. This sounds strange and it is my first experience of writing this to someone.

[aBIGsheep]

The one problem that plagues me harder than anything is that you keep inferring 'you.'
Are you talking about me? I'm not feeling much of anything right now. Just a tad bit confused, but nothing else.
I didn't do any of those things in the story. I'm not taking a shower. I didn't go blow stuff up or commit horrible atrocities for blood money. The 'you' at the beggining of the majority of the sentences take away from the story. Not only is a bit redundant, but it also puts the reader in a situation that they're more than likely unfamiliar too. They're not doing anything.

If this was a character, a he, she, or maybe even I, the story would be improved a great deal.

Read it a loud to yourself and see if it flows. It's a bit difficult to read.

Don't be afraid to use some variety. You can only say mother****er and **** and damn and ***** and every other word to be muttered out of the mouth of a sailor. Sometimes they're good to emphasize, but when you use them over and over and over and over and over it's beating a dead horse.

Name that dog. You're trying to make a connection when you write a story. If you give something names, something concrete and specific, you'll only reinforce that connection. Kids starving in a 3rd world country? What's the factorie's name? What's the kid's name? What's the country's name?

[burntpunk]

Thanks for the response, guys.

DingyJoe: As far as I am concerned, we live in a world where we don't need to pigeonhole our creativity to the confines of taboos, as far as I am concerned the use swearing embellishes the story with reference to the mindset of the protagonist and the atmosphere of the vignette. Nevertheless, I still feel that it needs some toning down.

Delta40: Thanks for the suggestion of the use of third-person, given the feel of the story it's not something I considered. Although I do feel that the use of second-person POV lends a certain oral feel to the prose, as if the protagonist is talking to you. Recently, I have been struggling to detach myself from monologues and personal rants in my prose, I never figured that this would be a good place to start, focusing on third-person would allow me to develop my imagery and metaphors more, on the other hand, I do feel that the true magic only begins here with the awkward mindset of our protagonist, which can be accessed easier through second-person POV.

aBIGsheep: I do appreciate that perhaps the prose does come across as rough and could flow better. I doubt that this could be altered through editing, as this piece is intended to have a cathartic effect, thus cutting here and there is hard to maintain that quality, alongside being able to read well. Haven said that I challenge you to expand upon why it's difficult to read.

[Delta40]

The 'you' is definitely the key flaw here. You're asking the reader to imagine they are a bastard. Asking the reader to put themselves in an unfamilar situation and assign perhaps unfamiliar characteristics to themselves will go beyond their limit of imagination as opposed to reading about, let say 'Azam' who is a bastard, slowly turning the soap in his hands as he mulls over his recent deeds. The reader is then free to assign any amount of things to your character and relate at a much more realistic level.

Should you make changes I will be happy to read it again.

[dingyjoe]

As far as I am concerned, we live in a world where we don't need to pigeonhole our creativity to the confines of taboos, as far as I am concerned the use swearing embellishes the story with reference to the mindset of the protagonist and the atmosphere of the vignette. Nevertheless, I still feel that it needs some toning down.

at the end of the day, swearing is just a 'get-out-of-jail-card'. your probably bored, well I know you are, weve discussed this, your bored of writing tame stories, you want to stand out.

fair play.

thing is, most people will be turned off by that. be honest its filthy.

[Silas Thorne]

at the end of the day, swearing is just a 'get-out-of-jail-card'. your probably bored, well I know you are, weve discussed this, your bored of writing tame stories, you want to stand out.

fair play.

thing is, most people will be turned off by that. be honest its filthy.

Yet I wonder if you can describe a conversation at smoko time in a factory or building site without using swearing.. it just wouldn't be natural.

And I believe swearing is sometimes necessary to express anger or negative emotions (not in every story though) . Some characters will swear constantly, and asking them to say things like 'Oh Shucks!', 'goshdarn it' , 'bums and biscuits', or 'sugar alley' just won't cut it.

[aBIGsheep]

I'm guessing you read Fight Club.

Thanks for the response, guys.

I do appreciate that perhaps the prose does come across as rough and could flow better. I doubt that this could be altered through editing, as this piece is intended to have a cathartic effect, thus cutting here and there is hard to maintain that quality, alongside being able to read well. Haven said that I challenge you to expand upon why it's difficult to read.

Everything can be improved. That's a wonderfully juvenile statement you just claimed. You doubt, really, you doubt that this could be altered through editing? You're really that good, aren't you? Nothing should be changed. Everything is perfect. Please, let me land on my knees and sing the good graces you so deserve and demand.

When you are standing all magisterial in your luxurious shower, golden-tapped, slick as a monkey’s incipient vagina, with just about the dirtiest **** on your mind, all you can think is that: guilt is a bar of soap.

Say that to yourself. You're trying to be conversational, but you're failing. Say this sentence out loud to yourself -- isn't that a mouthful? One of the easiest ways to find out if you have good flow is to read it out loud. Are you all that successful? Maybe. When I read it out loud to myself were you successful? Nope.
Some of the words can be cut. Magisterial and incipient are great $5 dollar words but this is a vignette. A quick, off the wall, style of art. Do 'magisterial' and 'incipient' add anything to the piece? They're unneeded. One adjective is enough, buddy. It might mean having to bust out a dictionary, but they add nothing.

You rub the soap against your skin. Green. The soap cost forty-four pound sterling. The soap was a present your uncle. He got it from Bagdad. It was manufactured in a factory by starving children.

I'm guessing this is a quiet rip-off from Palahniuk. Supposed to give the reader some grief over how their simple commodities are the products of evil. Well, feel free to borrow the idea. But you can strengthen this line so much more by bothering to be a bit more specific. If you give actual names, numbers and dates, (much like Palahniuk) you reinforce the connection between your piece and your reader. Where in Baghdad? How much food did the children eat in a day? One, maybe two bowls of rice?
What kind of uncle gives their niece/nephew soap? Pretty odd context.

You need some cheering up. Perhaps, when you’ve showered, you can head off to London, right into the city, buy some good ****. If that doesn’t cheer you up, nothing will.

Using **** is a great way to emphasize something, but when you use it here, it's just lazy. People often say **** when they don't have anything else to say. Pretty apparent here.

I'm not done. Far from it. I'm just getting texts from my friend and I gotta head out. I'll see you later.

[JacobF]

did you really need to swear this much??
isn't swearing the lowest form of art?

Profanity, if done right, can be extremely effective. Judging from the OP's avatar of A Clockwork Orange (my favourite movie btw) he's inspired by controversy.

Unfortunately, it doesn't always work, nor does it make it any more controversial. Brave New World and 1984 were both controversial novels yet they rarely had profanity in them. I believe in freedom of speech, so I do not condemn profanity. But it hit me over the head in this story. Plus, the highlighted words were a bit insulting. As if I don't know what the colour blue looks like.

[Martini]

since I am a guilt ridden rich girl... this piece actually does affect me. My problems though, come from different areas. I don't care about the cursing... I think they'd be more affective if you told me who was in the shower and why I should feel remorse for him? is he a redeemable character? I'm not sure, i dont know how far up material alley he's gone and how much his beliefs have stuck to him. I mean you do peek into those topics but you dont develop anything. Maybe i'd rather this be a story... I'm interested in the character. I love the red and the green and then I love how they make blue... but why does that matter? Does this character really care anymore? Is he still connected to his roots? What are his roots? working class? palestinian? and what does he do? If you want to highlight exploitation and globalization, I need for the character to be closer connected to the object or the act/tragedy.

Otherwise, I enjoyed the tone, I liked the cursing and I liked the theme, a lot.

[aBIGsheep]

You can be the butcher who became the vegetarian. Red. Green. Together, they make blue. You turn the shower down. Cooler. Better. You wanna hug all the blue-eyed Africans, you wanna give away your million pounds. You wanna give away your two Ferraris. You wanna give away your flatscreen fifty-six inch plasma blu-ray television. You wanna forget your guilt, it was done, you had no purpose before, you got a purpose, it was a bad purpose, but good at the time. Now you need a new purpose. A purpose good for now, and good forever.

Jesus Christ, don't be scared to have some variety in your piece. How many times did you use 'you?' You didn't say 'purpose' or 'good,' nearly as much as 'you' but it's redundant when you use them so closely together. Maybe that was the intent --being redundant to reinforce an idea-- but the way you executed it was pretty sloppy.
A thesaurus is your best friend.
Thesaurus.com gogogogogogo
Just for starters:
purpose - meaning, intention, ambition, will, reason, design
good - righteous, meaningful, positive, fine, wonderful, worthy, positive, acceptable
All are strong words and can be interchanged freely with their synonyms.

You are trapped. Water rushes. This is oblivion. This is hell. And you are just waiting for a moist Satan to give you a kiss. For crows to rip out your smiling heart. This is it, this is the moment that you give up living, this is the moment when the sin, when the guilt epitomises. Where you look through the Perspex, and see nothing but green and red.

This feels pretty removed and robotic. Where is the voice of the story? Avoid 'be' verbs. 'Are,' 'is,' and 'am' are all 'be' verbs. They're passive and don't paint a picture.

You are trapped. This is oblivion. This is hell.

Those are painfully weak. The reader is ON FIRE. They're BURNING. You can say that the reader is in hell, but does that convey any emotion? It's so monotone.

And quick question, is this about an Arab? I'm guessing all your allusions to blowing **** up and because it's the present day, that you're writing about an Arab. Or at least, you're making the reader feel like they're a terrorist from the middle east. Do you really think that a terrorist would be having these sort of thoughts?
It's all quite questionable.

[Silas Thorne]

I've heard there are writers who use second person narration well. See Jay McInerney 'Bright Lights, Big City'. I haven't read the novel yet myself, though several books on style have quoted from it as a good example of the technique. I want to see how it's done well. Although I doubt he would use 'I' as well, as you do, with 'I'm afraid...karma.' If you want to use 'you', then I would very much doubt you can also use 'I'. This means you make your readers into murderers while you sit back and laugh at them.

And you do use 'you' a bit too much.

[burntpunk]

Thanks once more for the critique, guys. I've taken this vignette elsewhere and my critiques have been futile, either, 'omg this is win!!!!!!!' or 'omfg this swearzzz!!'. I'm pleased with the critique, I feel that by taking your changes into account, I will be able to give this piece some direction which it clearly lacks.

I do appreciate that perhaps the prose does come across as rough and could flow better. I doubt that this could be altered through editing, as this piece is intended to have a cathartic effect, thus cutting here and there is hard to maintain that quality, alongside being able to read well. Haven said that I challenge you to expand upon why it's difficult to read.

Everything can be improved. That's a wonderfully juvenile statement you just claimed. You doubt, really, you doubt that this could be altered through editing? You're really that good, aren't you? Nothing should be changed. Everything is perfect. Please, let me land on my knees and sing the good graces you so deserve and demand.

I realise that with this statement, I've come across as quite the A-Hole, when I played down the use of editing I wasn't saying that my work is flawless, far from it. Far from it. I believe that rewriting is a better solution, given that this vignette requires a cathartic tone, which wouldn't work if I deliberated over word choice of what has already been written. Needless to say, I'll be taking your advice when I rewrite.

The one problem that plagues me harder than anything is that you keep inferring 'you.'
Are you talking about me? I'm not feeling much of anything right now. Just a tad bit confused, but nothing else.
I didn't do any of those things in the story. I'm not taking a shower. I didn't go blow stuff up or commit horrible atrocities for blood money. The 'you' at the beggining of the majority of the sentences take away from the story. Not only is a bit redundant, but it also puts the reader in a situation that they're more than likely unfamiliar too. They're not doing anything.

If this was a character, a he, she, or maybe even I, the story would be improved a great deal.

The 'you' is definitely the key flaw here. You're asking the reader to imagine they are a bastard. Asking the reader to put themselves in an unfamilar situation and assign perhaps unfamiliar characteristics to themselves will go beyond their limit of imagination as opposed to reading about, let say 'Azam' who is a bastard, slowly turning the soap in his hands as he mulls over his recent deeds. The reader is then free to assign any amount of things to your character and relate at a much more realistic level.

Should you make changes I will be happy to read it again.

So the oral effect created via second-person POV creates more weaknesses than strengths? This crass, vomity tone I was looking for find can be found in other writing techniques. Thus, I think you've swayed me; I'm going to rewrite this in first-person POV.

Name that dog. You're trying to make a connection when you write a story. If you give something names, something concrete and specific, you'll only reinforce that connection. Kids starving in a 3rd world country? What's the factorie's name? What's the kid's name? What's the country's name?

Definately. There's a point I did miss, I feel that utilized this technique would balance out the abstract ethos with concrete, allowing it to be easier to follow. I'm definately gonna do this. ^^

at the end of the day, swearing is just a 'get-out-of-jail-card'. your probably bored, well I know you are, weve discussed this, your bored of writing tame stories, you want to stand out.

fair play.

thing is, most people will be turned off by that. be honest its filthy.

This is where I defend my work. Some people have a problem with swearing. Some people don't. I respect your opinion, but as a writer, I feel that this is the best way to approach this piece of work. With hindsight to what the others have said though, I will tone it to down, not to appear lazy. I want my prose to have energy; not lethargy will be permitted.

Say that to yourself. You're trying to be conversational, but you're failing. Say this sentence out loud to yourself -- isn't that a mouthful? One of the easiest ways to find out if you have good flow is to read it out loud. Are you all that successful? Maybe. When I read it out loud to myself were you successful? Nope.
Some of the words can be cut. Magisterial and incipient are great $5 dollar words but this is a vignette. A quick, off the wall, style of art. Do 'magisterial' and 'incipient' add anything to the piece? They're unneeded. One adjective is enough, buddy. It might mean having to bust out a dictionary, but they add nothing.

Agreed. Big time. In the past I've always minimalised the use of adjectives and adverbs, here I have experimented with breaking that rule. In the writing stage, I felt that by using words fitting with the sociolect of an upper-class person, whilst contrasting it with filthy language fitting into the sociolect of an uneducated person -- that I would create a contrast which would spark interest in the character. Whether or not this effect worked, I am unsure.

I'm guessing this is a quiet rip-off from Palahniuk. Supposed to give the reader some grief over how their simple commodities are the products of evil. Well, feel free to borrow the idea. But you can strengthen this line so much more by bothering to be a bit more specific. If you give actual names, numbers and dates, (much like Palahniuk) you reinforce the connection between your piece and your reader. Where in Baghdad? How much food did the children eat in a day? One, maybe two bowls of rice?
What kind of uncle gives their niece/nephew soap? Pretty odd context.

Although Palahniuk has had an influence on my writing, the symbol of the soap wasn't ripped-off from him, the intention was to work with the symbol of our protagonist attempting to cleanse himself with the green soap, from the red sins that permit him. A nod at Lady Macbeth in Macbeth. As for the development of the concrete details, this is another element I want to rehash in the next draft. And Martini, another element I want to alter is my character development, I'm not fulfilling his potential. He lacks consistency, yes?

Jesus Christ, don't be scared to have some variety in your piece. How many times did you use 'you?' You didn't say 'purpose' or 'good,' nearly as much as 'you' but it's redundant when you use them so closely together. Maybe that was the intent --being redundant to reinforce an idea-- but the way you executed it was pretty sloppy.
A thesaurus is your best friend.
Thesaurus.com gogogogogogo
Just for starters:
purpose - meaning, intention, ambition, will, reason, design
good - righteous, meaningful, positive, fine, wonderful, worthy, positive, acceptable
All are strong words and can be interchanged freely with their synonyms.

The use of 'you' is likely to be cut down if I change the tense from second to first, however, I must admit I do have a penchant for personal pronouns, yes, I will reduce. As with 'purpose' and 'good', I did intend to repeat certain words for effect. Did the effect not work? Haven said that, the words that I have chosen to use are pretty poor and don't pack many connotations, which I usually make a conscious decision over. Will consider the synonmyns.

This feels pretty removed and robotic. Where is the voice of the story? Avoid 'be' verbs. 'Are,' 'is,' and 'am' are all 'be' verbs. They're passive and don't paint a picture.

You are trapped. This is oblivion. This is hell.

Those are painfully weak. The reader is ON FIRE. They're BURNING. You can say that the reader is in hell, but does that convey any emotion? It's so monotone.

I hope to bolster the way that I narrate the story. I never noticed how the variants of 'be' verbs managed to suck much of the power from my prose, I will certainly alter this.

And quick question, is this about an Arab? I'm guessing all your allusions to blowing **** up and because it's the present day, that you're writing about an Arab. Or at least, you're making the reader feel like they're a terrorist from the middle east. Do you really think that a terrorist would be having these sort of thoughts?
It's all quite questionable.

Definately questionable, I've tried not to conform to stereotypes or archetypes, haven said that, it probably reads like I've gone into this blindly.



Thanks for all the critique guys, especially aBIGsheep, I will be posting a rejigged draft shortly. ^^

[dingyjoe]

This is where I defend my work. Some people have a problem with swearing. Some people don't. I respect your opinion, but as a writer, I feel that this is the best way to approach this piece of work. With hindsight to what the others have said though, I will tone it to down, not to appear lazy. I want my prose to have energy; not lethargy will be permitted.

its your work, and your right to defend it, actually itd be stupid if you didnt.
fair play.
i reread this, and tbf you have justified it well enough.
swearing is okay I guess if you do it for a reason!