It could be a good end point, but then I could also go back in and fill in the blanks there, too. Dunno. The muse is still playing, but this is what this weeks prompt drew out. They've been chronological up til now, but....eh. Like your last post, sometimes writing things out of order actually helps you see where things are going.

Baltimore Transformations

Ever since Kay said, you know, what she said,(God, he still wished she hadn't,) Ed Danvers gets greeted like the number one Lover Man of the Potomac. Women primp when they see him, and even the perpetually pre-menstrual court reporter he usually works with introduced herself and bought him a Coke. Her name is Stephanie and she has two dogs. No kids, she said, after a long meaningful look in his direction.

Waitresses close to downtown dust off their touristy "Hons" and ignore his punctilious overview of the check, figuring that anyone who could tame the redhaired murder police knows a little something. The young ones try not to look at his thumbs or his feet, or the moment when his tongue darts out to remove meringue from his upper lip, but they all giggle about it anyway. Maybe it really is the quiet ones.

OK, trying to avoid comma abuse here:

It describes the interests, "such as fossil fuel companies and automobile manufacturers, that would directly suffer from a reduction in fossil fuel use, but as a secondary factor." Because the sentence includes two secondary clause, one an interjection, the other modifying the predicate, using commas for both is confusing.

I could try a dash. "It describes the interests - such as fossil fuel companies and automobile manufacturers - that would directly suffer from a reduction in fossil fuel use, but as a secondary factor." or "It describes the interests, such as fossil fuel companies and automobile manufacturers, that would directly suffer from a reduction in fossil fuel use - but as a secondary factor."

The first is technically correct (I think), but because a dash is used to replace the first rather than the second comma looks wrong. The second is not using a dash either to set off an expression or for explanatory comments, so is technically wrong. But the second use of dashes is less intrusive and looks better. I really don't want to break it up into multiple sentences because it adds words, also flows less well in context of what precedes and follows. Any body care to comment or correct false assumptions?

Theoretically, I favor total immersion in one project at a time. The longer I can spend thinking about one universe the better and deeper I understand it, I think. But I'm not very good at not sparking off into other things whenever a stray thought from a different story wanders by.

I do like to keep whatever I'm reading or watching or talking about unrelated to what I'm working on, though, and escape that way.

I need someone who's willing to read three...well, two and a half...chapters of a goofy fantasy novel and help me get past the point where I'm stuck. I need someone to go "Dude, what should happen next is..." and then I can do that.

'cause I been stuck on this one fucking "and then what?" point for, like, two months.

The first sentence, with two dashes, reads easiest to me. Would parentheses be a possibility? It seems like a parenthetical clarification.

Rephrase, maybe?

It describes as a secondary factor the interests, such as fossil fuel companies and automobile manufacturers, that would directly suffer from a reduction in fossil-fuel use.

I'd love to read a goofy fantasy novel, MM. If I can help with the what comes next question I don't know, but I'll try.

Profile addy good, -t?

Yup.

I had to go look at it to be sure. And I have to step away from the computer for a bt, so don't fret if I don't respond right away.