There is our restaurant, that breakfast place we went the next morning after that first time. You raved about the waffles and fed me bits of caramel banana flavored sweetness. We over-ordered because we wanted to try everything and we wanted to indulge. After that first breakfast I took off my sandals and we walked around the block so I could have a cigarette. We held hands and beamed our delight at each other. We might as well have been walking on air. We keep returning to that restaurant, despite the sometimes indifferent service, fouled orders and cold food. We went there after our first fight when we didn't speak for a week. We went there after our second fight when we didn't speak for a month. We always over-order. We always order the waffles. We want to try everything.
There is sushi. We love it and we love that the other loves it. There is that tempura that you like and you order a big bowl of the dipping sauce so that everything can be flavored with it. We order way more than we can eat because we are indulgent people who love to feed our senses. We had sushi on our first official date. My friend interrupted us with a crisis and I invited her to come and join us. While waiting for her to arrive I apologized to you and you held my hand and said that what was important to me was important to you too. You meant it.
Now we go to Cupcake off of University and indulge in the best croissant the Twin Cities has to offer. It's our place. During the month of silence, after our second fight, neither of us would go there. It wasn't the same without the other. Now we order three croissants because they are so good that we can't just have one. You always save that certain part of the flakey pastry for me, because you know I love it. We order coffee and chai and bottled water and Izzes – our favorite soda. We over-order because we love to indulge our senses.
Eight years ago I entered The Loring Cafe, underage, sporting a fake ID, and ordered a vodka cranberry. You were my server. You still remember that drink. Seven years ago, you would come into Borders where I was working and buy books so that you could talk to me. You remember me in my stocking feet and white sweater, ringing purchases for the holiday customer. You would come into the deli where I also worked and buy mixed green salads and we would talk and chat and I would ask you to remind me of your name again. Now, seven years later, you cause me to breathlessly whisper that name over and over, barely aware of what I am saying.
One day, seven years ago I was sitting on a bus bench outside of the uptown Planned Parenthood waiting for my test results, writing in my journal and hating my then boyfriend. I was planning a big move. You were walking by and joined me on the bench. You told me that you were going to Germany to perform. You were the showpiece, live art, a multi-media physical theatre dance installation. It sounded like a mouth full and I was suitably impressed. I wrote about you in my journal that day, a fleeting meeting. I didn't see you again until seven years later though we both lived in New York and both returned to Minnesota. That day, seven years ago, I gave you a business card and seven years later you still had it even though I had long quit the job and long forgotten that I ever owned a business card. I insisted that you must have been remembering someone else. You had to prove it to me.
Seven years later I was at the Kitty Kat club and had to go to the bathroom. I passed by your table. When I exited the stall you were there. Now, my trip to the toilet is indelibly etched in our memory. As I washed my hands you re-introduced yourself. You didn't quite remember my name and I didn't quite remember yours but we listed instances where we had met. Oh right, didn't you have a show in Germany? Yes. You were moving to New York, right? Yes. Do you want to go have dinner sometime? Yes. We can catch up. Yes. That would be great. Yes. It was great running into you again. Yes. You knew what that symbol on my necklace meant. You complimented me on it. Long ago you had it tattooed on your palm and I had it tattooed on my neck, just recently.
Seven years later you came into the restaurant where I was working. I had invited you. We didn't know it for sure then but we were soon to be inseparable. Maybe it was something as cheesy as fate. Maybe you were meant to come into my restaurant and order the seafood linguine. Maybe I was meant to sneak you a free glass of the Viognier. You gave me a pendant that you had purchased for me that day, a week after the Kitty Kat. When I exclaimed at the gift you said to me the line that has resonated in my head and heart ever since. I just want to be so nice to you. As long as you will let me, as long as you are here, I am going to be so nice to you. You have whispered variations of that line to me - my head resting on your shoulder, my lips on your neck - many times after that night and I always believe you.
I came to meet you that night, seven years later. Before our official date. I met you at the Kitty Kat. You had spent the time, waiting for me to get off of work, writing a five page letter of poem, prose, memory and free association. You wrote of your amazement of seeing me again. You wrote of your excitement, your passion, your hope. It was beautiful and I want you to know that I read it over and over, humbled that I would evoke such feeling in you. I want you to know that I was in a state of wonder and awe at the answering feelings in me. That night we closed down the bar, even though we had only one drink each. We were talking, talking, sharing and talking. We didn't kiss that night, that night before our official date, but we shared an embrace that lasted for five minutes and felt like forever.
We buy gifts because we want the other to know that we are thinking about them when they are not there. We buy books and pajamas and T-shirts with significant meaning silk-screened on the front. We are good for the economy. We buy charcoals to burn our favorite resin incense that transforms your room into an opium den of exotic smoke. We buy tea and gourmet cheese, wine and truffles. You buy fake meat and bake the best Frito pie this world has ever seen. You use that salsa we found in Santa Fe, the one that's so good we had to buy three jars. I bought you a jar during that time, that time we weren't speaking, and didn't know if I would ever give it to you. I did. We listen to Indian music and dream about traveling to India together. Yes, our love is good for the economy. We over-order. We tip well. We are extravagant because we are indulgent people and we love to feed our senses with the world and with each other.
I missed you.


Comments: 31
I enjoyed how you explained the reasons behind the actions. Very genuine.
Thanks.
It's over 1200 words which is longer than most Gather readers care for but I couldn't break it up into installments. The story of us had to be presented as a whole.
I believe they call this, "The Honeymoon Stage."
:-)
Kelly: You are too kind. Thanks
E.B: Sadly you are right; it is a war time effort sometimes. Alas. After reading your comment that realization sort of snuck up on me.
Winged One: Glad you liked it. Sorry for the sugar rush.
Nan: Your comment gave me warm fuzzies, really. Thanks!
Mme D. Always appreciate your input.
Keith: Thank you, kindly.
James: Don't let the cynic go just yet. As I mentioned earlier, I think it's still the honey moon phase or at least the, "I don't ever want to fight with you again so I'll bend over backwards to make things right" phase. ;-)
Everyone: Please, if you notice errors in punctuation, syntax or spelling please, please, please let me know. I publish here so that I can get better.
Your opening sentence has three "that"s. It is also rather vague and unfocused. Since the narrator is addressing her lover directly, there are a number of other ways it could be phrased. One of them is: Do you remember the breakfast place where we went the morning after our first time? The particular sentence I chose is both more active, more personal, and more provocative. It's not the only way to rework the sentence, but it's one way.
After that first breakfast "First" redundant IMO.
so that I could have a cigarette suggest so I could have a cigarette Lots of unnecessary "that"s in the writing -- could be much tighter. This is a habit many people have . . . just go through and look at each "that" and ask yourself whether it is necessary, or whether it could be changed to something more specific or active.
Personally, I'd like a brief example . . . sounds like a potential ingress point to show how this couple bonded over something funny or mildly traumatic.
We want to try everything Nice double meaning here; nice metaphorical setup for the emotional quality of the relationship.
We over-order because we love to indulge our senses You said essentially this exact same thing in the previous paragraph. This point is already very clear to the reader. No need to reiterate :-)
sporting a fake ID and ordered a vodka cranberry I'd put a comma before the dependent clause: sporting a fake ID, and ordered a vodka cranberry
Borders , not Boarders
How did he know she was in her stocking feet? I assume she was standing behind a cash register counter? I don't know many chain retail stores that allow their cashiers to walk around without shoes.
Now, seven years later, you will cause me I think we're in the simple present tense here: Now, seven years later, you cause me
Going to Germany to perform what? Let us into the character, tell us more about him than the fact that the narrator is, um, totally hung up on him ;-)
fleeting meeting Sounds too cute to my ear, but it might be because I'm, like, a guy, and suffering a little sugar shock already at this point
As I washed my hands you re-introduced yourself Whoa, now I'm confused. Is it a unisex bathroom and he's in there with her? Or is she addressing another woman? I guess I've just assumed the narrator is addressing someone of the opposit sex.
What's the symbol on the necklace? What does it mean? Why did each of you have it tattooed?
pendant , not pendent
You wrote of your amazement of seeing me again Should be at seeing me again
even though we only had one drink each Misplaced modifier. Should be even though we had only one drink each .
We buy gifts because we want the other to know that we are thinking about them when they are not there. My sweet, this sentence is Pronoun Hell. I've had two glasses of champagne and I can't figure out a good fix right now. I will think about it.
I got a little confused with the passages of time . . . all the seven years, and the eight years, and are we in the now, and when were you not speaking to each other? I figured out that it all worked out, though.
I really like the conceit of the piece, that your love is good for the economy. And I retched a little because I'm jealous. I hope you're always this happy . . . I really do.
You arrive like a knight in shining armor, pen thrusting and slashing, to save me from my writing errors.
My humble thanks, Prof. R, sir.
That being said:
In the opening sentence I wanted to be somewhat vague. I mean, I didn't want to just tell the reader that we had slept together for the first time the night before and decided to get breakfast the next day. I agree that there are too many "thats". I will work on it. I want it to flow but stylistically, I want to be direct without revealing too much. Thus I wrote the short, simplistic sentences and used vague terms. I also want to make a point with how many times I mention that we like to indulge ourselves. Did you read Vonnegut's Slaughter House Five? Not that I am anywhere near his level of expertise but I liked how he repeated, "So it goes," throughout his narrative. It created a mood and every time he said it, it emphasized his point.
Is there a way that I can do this without being inane, using too many "that's" and keeping examples to a minimum? Is there a way that I can be vague yet still keep it engaging??
Spelling: Thanks! That's the stuff that spellcheck doesn't catch!
Misplaced modifier: Muchos gracias - it did feel awkward.
As far as the gifts line goes: I wrote and rewrote that line and I still can't get it right. I heard someone say once, "you buy gifts for your girlfriend so she knows you think about her when she is not there." I loved that idea and think it's true. How do I communicate the idea using this narrative's voice? Err.
It is a unisex washing area: I suppose you've never been to the Kitty Kat Club. Jeez. I noticed that it called the gender of my lover into question and we both agreed it was more interesting that way... in keeping with the vague simplicity.
Will work on the passage of time bit... I don't know how I can clarify it though. I guess that's the writer's challenge.
So: too distant, try to insert something that will make you care about the character more, fix the grammatical errors and work on the time sequence...okee dokee.
Thank you so much for this Prof, sir, I really do appreciate it.
I found the repetition thing to be . . . um . . . grating. I don't know a better way to say it, but I don't mean to be offensive. That technique works, IMO, in a stylized piece with stylized language use and far more rhythmic language than this piece has. This piece reads very much like a casual love letter. I think that repetition techniques work better with taut, edgy prose styles in architecturally-structured pieces, where they recur almost as a leitmotif . Again, this may be more about me as a reader than it is about your piece . . . but I do think that for this style, the repetitions are out of place.
I think it is really, really tough to be simultaneously vague and engaging unless you are writing true stream-of-consciousness. Reading is about engaging and relating, and relevance. I guess I would ask you these questions:
1) Why do you want it to be vague? Why don't you want to ground the piece with details that would make it three-dimensional?
2) What was your purpose in writing this piece?
3) Who is your intended audience?
4) What do you want the reader to take away from this piece after reading it?
Answering those questions will probably provide you the direction you need, or at least open a fruitful dialogue about whether this piece works on the level you intended.
I'm just going to say this and be done (since A and David said a lot of what I was thinking, only in a LOT more meaningful way). I agree that it was kind of all over the map with the timeline and a little difficult to follow sometimes, but overall it's a moving piece. I loved it! It inspired me to write something like this of my own. Which means I'll probably not have written anything like this by mid-2007.
Second reaction: Don't ask a man to critique a love letter.
Third reaction: THANK YOU!!! Okay, now I know what to work on - structure, style and make it a tad more engaging so that the reader cares about the character.
Questions: Can you give me some examples of taut, edgy prose? I wanted straightforward, simple prose without the superfluous adjectives prevalent in amateur writing. I like the leitmotif (thanks for the link, BTW) in writing, e.g. Arundati Roy, Chuck Palahniuk, Vonnegut (and this isn't necessarily bad, I am seeing by the two differeing opinions - a matter of taste - if I can pull it off): and I see what you mean about structure. Work on my verb tenses!
Maybe I should drop the simple idea but wouldn't that be a different piece altogether?
My lover is a man and the washing area of the bathroom is unisex. Dear editors, why don't you come to Minneapolis and I'll treat you two to cocktails at the Kitty Kat club (you can see that bathroom for yourselves). I could show you my appreciation with some beverages and pick your brain some more. I think I would also like to witness your banter and witty repartee first hand.
Side cars, anyone??
Profs, I'll work on the piece and submit revisions later... THANK YOU really, for the time you contributed. I do want to improve.
And I know it's a little cheesy, usually these kinds of mushy, lovey dovey things make me nauseous. I sought to modify that somewhat by leaving a lot unsaid; keeping references to the heart and fate and love to a minimum. Just describe how, when we are happy, we indulge and how we've met and re-met over the years.
I want to read your love letter Robiyah, so post. Toot sweet.
You can leave all the heart and fate and love stuff unsaid, and still be more specific. Here's sort of a yardstick . . . you care about yourself and your lover because you are yourself and your lover. The reader won't care more if there's more, um, mushy stuff . . . he will care more if he has an investment in the character. There's more to invest in a character who is going to Germany to play sopranino kazoo in a circus band than there is in a character who is just going to Germany to perform. Does that make sense?
There is no contradiction between specific and simple. None at all. Here are two contrasting examples: one is specific and simple, the other is not. I'll have something to say after the examples, also. Hang on.
1) He said he was going to Germany to play the violin in a small traveling band. They were planning to make a tour of taverns, to play for tips and beer.
2) He said he was going to Germany to play violin in a small traveling band, hoping to resurrect the tradition of the Meistersingers. They hoped their playing would appeal to the unacknowledged collective subconscious of the people, and recreate artistic community.
As you can see, #1 is very specific and very simple. It does not have superfluous adjectives. But it's alive -- it's a description that rounds the character. #2, while not much longer, is far more complex, demands far more of the reader, and brings in a psychophilosophical component that would make the reader wonder what the piece is actually about. Make sense?
I'm actually looking forward to your next loving, mushy letter....keep me posted!
Chris: You sir, are too kind. Thank you too.
Kristina: Don't you worry, you aren't intruding. It's the gather way to go ahead and post your two or three cents. I appreciate your comment so thank you. Welcome to gather btw.
And thanks all for your assurances. I will work on the piece so that it will be worthy to publish and so that it might bring a tear to the eye of even the most romance averse souls...(Rochester?). ;-)