Board Thread:Writer's Workshop/@comment-25114042-20140702033104/@comment-25114042-20140702053021

CassistRabbit wrote: Sorry, but it's quite stupid.

While there are viable motives for a person to be killed, there's no conceivable reason to hang someone by their own intestines from anywhere. It would actually be scarier if the mother was found dead with just a gunshot wound or two because that is far more believable and also easier to picture.

Never try to use gore as THE shock factor. While you can and should include it in situations that call for it (like someone's hand being lopped off by a papercutter), gore alone is weak and cliched in addition to unbelivable. Don't use it until you have a solid plot and characters going, and when the time arises, don't make the gore scenes long. Do give us a good, clear image, though. (Look at pictures of organs if you have to. :p) Hm.

I've heard this a lot before, that using death the main shock isn't very effective. I completely agree. Reading stories like "Laughing Jack" has lead me to belive that very quick, gorey, and gruesomely explained deaths from out of nowhere are more effective and shocking than someone just randomly dying for no good reason.

I've decided that this would just be a part towards the end of the story, after the mother is introduced as a very likeable character. There would be signs that the kid is being followed by someone. For example, when the kid is walking home from school, he hears his footsteps as well as something else, making a loud clanking sound. But "it" stops when he does, and nothing is there when he turns around. And I know that this is very cliche and has been used before, but it would be unique, and the kid would see things out of the corner of his eye.

Everything sounds cliche when you make it really short and simple. :T

I will definately take your advice and improve upon the story as I create it. :D

Thank you for the feedback!