Why not?
I think ,'…failed to notice… more than adequately fits the bill. Unless there was some, pre mentioned requirement, for them to pay attention to her.
My first line:
vic
Neglected seems to … passive. And it is awkward. As in not smooth. If the passive “mistake” type meaning is needed then maybe simply “didn’t” would be an option. Sounds like there are good reasons for neglected though.
Oh man, now I am soooo confused. 
Its all right Mary feeling neglected, and you being confused, I feel as if Im being boycotted whenever I put my sensible hat on! 
Neglected/Boycotted of Stockport
Line: Raucous laughter spilled from men and women both as the wine overflowed.
Notice the adjective-noun-verb sets. I want to keep that parallelism, if at all possible.
I will ponder that “neglected”. “Failed” is a good alternative, if I can’t figure out something better. Hm.
Thanks, ya’ll.
coughNo comma!cough A-HEM. Excuse me. Frog in my throat. Not triggered by your split subject and verb, no sir. :mrgreen:
(To make it obvious, cut the extra modifiers: “Her state was attributable…”)
Oh stop. No one here believes you have a hat that Matches that description.
Same hat.
Well, I’ll take the dissenting view (why isn’t my wife surprised?). I like the parallelism of “spilled” & “overflowed”.
I also liked “neglected”. To me this was the opposite of passive. It was not just that they failed to notice, but that they didn’t care to notice. That she wasn’t worth noticing. They neglected to notice. It implied social hierarchy of some sort in a way that “failed” would not.
The downside of this is I am doing something that I don’t like - pulling apart individual phrases and sentences, out of context and without reference to overall style and content. Case in point: Stephen King. The great SK is one of the best and worst writers I have ever read. Reading individual sentences from a Stephen King novel can be painful. BUT when you put those sentences in context, then you keep reading them because he has you hooked. I am not a Stephen King fan, and rarely choose to read his work, but there are few of his books that I have not finished once started. In contrast, there are some more “artistic” authors who write at a level of perfection that is breathtaking. Each sentence is beautiful. But combine them together it’s like walking through a gallery of independent art pieces - all nice to look at and incredibly skilful, but I forget the story and eventually lose interest. Then, of course, you come across someone like Tim Winton who hooks you with the narrative and writes beautifully all the way through (and he’s good looking, lives in the bush, surfs and is apparently a nice bloke. The fink).
Also, as I’ve noted before, there is the fact that great literature rarely follows the rules of formal grammar and often bends the rules of punctuation in unusual and potentially painful ways. How many words did Shakespeare actually create? How often did he distend words and phrases, not to mention pronunciation, to fit his rhythm and rhyme?
Vic: Again, I’m going to be a voice of dissent. I think the qualifiers are essential. Remove “heightened” and “of arousal” and the sentence loses it’s meaning and intensity. Was she sexually aroused? Emotionally aroused? Was it fear? Anger?
Having said that, I’d rather know what her heightened state of arousal entailed. Increased heart rate? Breathing? Perspiration? Butterflies in the stomach? Sexual arousal? Racing thoughts? Clenched fists? I learnt in the “describe, don’t tell” school, so this is my own prejudice coming through. Since I don’t know what is coming up, it may be you want the ambiguity so you can surprise me later, I’m hesitant to make recommendations or suggestions.
I am less enamoured with “sadistic juxtaposing of certainty and uncertainty”, but I would read on to find out. As an opening sentence, what you wrote would carry me on to at least the end of the first paragraph, maybe to the end of the second. Like every other author, you’d have to earn my eyes from then on.
BTW: I like your hat.
O Sweet gentle Dee,
Im an Ex-hairy-arsed welder, not a MA English Language. I wouldnt know what a split subject and verb was, even if the explanation was tattooed backtfront on my forehead, and I was a chronic narcissist 
How do I show she was in a highly aroused state, rather than a torpid state, for example, if I remove those two modifiers. I must confess I don`t follow your reasoning on that at all.
Does this do anything for y`?
vic
I think 'dee’s statement was about the spurious comma, not a comment about the actual need to remove the qualifiers.
Vic-k, what follows? I guess that means you got my attention.
Nom,Jaysen,
Just noticed posts. 2am here. Brain gone walkabout. Will respond ??pm
Good night
Vic
Um, sorry. Lemme clarify: I removed the modifiers merely to demonstrate why the comma should be removed. I didn’t mean to say that you should remove them altogether.
EDIT: So Jaysen read my words as I’d intended them. It makes me feel a bit relieved that somebody did. 
shrugs Still no comma. The clause is necessary to the sentence, so the comma actually interferes with the meaning.
And thanks for that feedback, nom.
And this is different from the norm how?
You’re right, Caradee, I did ask for it! All I can say is that we have very different styles. I do not think of style as something to be worked on separate from content, and I never have. I’m a minimalist by inclination, and have never attempted anything as long as a novel before. But I have been writing, on and off, for close to thirty years - and I’ve got to say, you’re the first reader I’ve had (that I know about) who didn’t want to keep reading my novel-in-progress after the first paragraph.
As to your first paragraph, do you mean to say (or imply) that the wine spilled? That the girl was trying to avoid puddles of wine? If so, “overflowed” isn’t a bad way to put it. If not, it’s confusing. But that’s just the way I see it, and it’s clear we have very different styles. Yours seems ornate to me; perhaps overly so. I find it a bit off-putting for that reason.
But I have a rule for the kids in book club that I try to follow myself. You must always read at least the first chapter before expressing an opinion. One or two sentences isn’t really enough to go on.
BTW, perhaps the best opening I ever read was from a good, solid kid’s book (Torn Away by Henaghan. ) As I said, the book is good, indeed, very good of its kind. I’m not sure it’s a classic. And that goes to show you that a really exceptional opening, by itself, doesn’t always indicate an exceptional book. It does give you a fair indication of the tone, setting and type of book you’re in for. Heneghan does all that, and quite well.
And - this is reminding me of a fun exercise on another board. People quoted first lines from various books and then tried to guess authors and titles. Here’s one for you:
“It was six o:clock on a very warm evening in the Seeonee Hills.”
Not a lot one can tell from that one, is there?!
In my copy it was seven o’clock, and the sentence continues for a couple of lines before ending with, “…sleepy feeling in their tips.” Unless another book has an exceptionally similar opening, I think I recognise it.
Good incentive to reread it too. Thanks. 
I like your Children’s Book Club rule: 1 chapter before judgement. Nice.
Oh. 
Agreed. No comma needed.
'welcome. Since other’s have put up a few lines, I might post the next few sentences of mine (although I’m still not convinced I should start with them). Not this week though. Deadlines looming on research and marking, so recreational writing is at a standstill for a while.
Hmm, shouldn’t be here. Should be offline making phone calls. 
Nom, thanks for the correction! That’s what you get for not looking at the book. Here is the first sentence from Heneghan’s Torn Away (looking at the book this time):
That is my idea of a dynamite opening line! And here are a couple more.
And (quoted on the Sounis board on livejournal)
Finally (the last two are from adult classics of speculative fiction), an opening line from a classic children’s book:
The point? I admire all of these writers - and I admire the last three very greatly. Golding(2) and Le Guin(3) are, IMHO, among the finest writers, and finest stylists, of the twentieth century. But, beyond saying that they don’t waste words, I’m not sure you could fairly critique their works from the first lines. You might even think Torn Away (which is certainly good, but not quite that good) the best book of the four.
The question, I guess, is: What can you actually judge from the first sentence of someone’s work? You can, perhaps, tell that you are intrigued or turned off. But why?
I do think it’s a good practice to at least read the first chapter before giving up on a book, but I said that before.
Ahem, er . . . that may be a line from a classic children’s book but it is also, harrumph, the opening line of a “classic,” Paul Clifford, from one Edward Bulwer-Lytton:
Dave