Satisfied with his performance, James was ready to head down when he heard a wheezing coming from below. Below him, another scientist was ascending the tall stairs, his bald spot flaring by the sun’s angle. -- Is it clear that it is the bald spot of the scientists ascending the stairs that is flaring and not James's?
Because "another scientist was ascending the tall stairs" and "his bald spot flaring by the sun’s angle." were separated by a comma, I felt that it was clear. If they were separated by a period, it might make me pause and reconsider, but the sentence structure seems to provide enough context.
It's clear how it is, but I would recommend making it really clear by separating the subjective view of your protagonist from the objective view of the world around him. You do that by tappin' that sweet enter key: "Satisfied with his performance, James was ready to head down when he heard a wheezing coming from below. Below him, another scientist was ascending the tall stairs. His bald spot flared by the sun’s angle."
Yeah, the repetition of "below" is awkward and should be unnecessary. Since it's the last word of the previous sentence, we're pretty much primed to assume that the next sentence in the same paragraph is happening below him. When you write something vague and suggestive like "he heard a wheezing", we typically expect that the next line will investigate the source of the wheezing, so when the following sentence offers a very feasible explanation, we're going to assume that the second scientist is in the same direction as that wheezing unless you make it clear that he's not. I think we get it by the simple rule that the second scientist was the last person identified specifically, so we can assume "he" refers to that person (as long as we don't know specifically that the scientist is a woman, anyway). But yeah, the fact that this isn't even the preceding sentence but the preceding clause makes it about as clear as you could ask for.
As has been said, the repetition of below is a bit off-putting. And you can also solve any hint of confusion about whose bald spot is flaring by... Satisfied with his performance, James was ready to head down when he heard a wheezing coming from below. Below him, Another scientist was ascending the tall stairs, his bald spot flaring by the sun’s angle. It would be even clearer if the other scientist had a name, then we could tie the bald spot to Eric. Incidentally, how big is his bald spot? If it's a spot, I'm imagining something about two inches in diameter. If the sun is reflecting off it, I'd call it a patch, or just his bald head - even if he's got a fringe of hair around his ears. I'm also a little unsure of the layout; James being ready to head down, and being only warned about the other scientist's ascent by his wheezing, suggests a fairly constricted space; I'm seeing a metal spiral staircase in a spaceship. But the fact that the sun is reflecting off the bald spot tells me that there are windows, and quite spacious ones; I'm seeing a country house, with a grand staircase and broad windows...
No. Below followed by below is ugly, and unnecessary. And beware the 'was' trail. ... Satisfied with his performance, James was ready to head down when he heard a wheezing coming from below. Below him, Another scientist was ascendeding the tall stairs, his bald spot flared by the sun’s angle, he... - although, sun glinting off any surface is kind of terrible - a good kick start for the writer, but dull for the reader.
I think we read it differently. I think I'm right - in the measurement, the pace. Read it out...only 'the' [before 'tall stairs'] bumps awkwardly - for me. I worry about that. ... 1. I would really try to present without the def article - as an ambition. 2. = [take out 'tall'] 3. umm, changed my mind, again. 4. Even 'sun's angle' looks better...
I'm entirely confused now. But to expand on "was ascending" before "ascended": To me, "Ascended" would mean, by default, that the ascent is complete. "Was ascending" means that it's in progress. I realize that people do sometimes use simple past tense when they mean past continuous, but in this case I don't see that the ambiguity is buying anything.
'Tall' is vague. If stair height is important to the story then maybe a more precise description would be justified.
OK, to end this ascended/was ascending debate; Satisfied with his performance, James was ready to head down when he heard a wheezing coming from below. Another scientist slowly climbed the tall stairs, his bald spot flaring by the sun’s angle.
Shocking adverb criminal at large, call the guards. ... late entry Satisfied with his performance, James was ready to head downstairs. All of a sudden a wheeze came from below. Another scientist climbed the stairs, his bald spot flared by the sun’s angle. 'Oh mich Gott,' cried James,'seven scientists in a single sitting, surely I shall be completely exhausted.'
