She can be fond of those objects, and take them with her, without them being the reason that she's sticking around. The issue is the idea of her essentially making a bargain where she allows her daughter to be abused in exchange for continued possession of the objects. Come to think of it, where are the objects? Why doesn't she just take them? And is Gemma the only one who is abused, while Lea remains safe?
That's a good question, actually. I was thinking about how I want that part to be. At first, I was thinking, the abuse would be all around, "equal"; but then I started to really think on that: what would happen if she got "equally" as abused as Gemma but all of a sudden it stops. Gemma wondered why. Lea started to eat more, she started to get a bump after 12 weeks. Lea told Gemma that she is having Chris' baby. So that's why the abuse stopped towards Lea and started to get a little more intense for Gemma. I still haven't thought it through all the way, what would be more interesting for the reader, do you think?
That's kind of what's happening with Chris, he is doing it subconsciously but at the same time, he is aware of the extra boost of power he's feeling.
See, I'm hampered here by a pattern that I keep seeing on the various support forums where I hang out. The pattern is the long-term marriage of the abusive, dysfunctional parent, and the "good" parent, the one that the child clings to. "Long-term" in the sense that the "good" parent doesn't leave, or even try to leave, the dysfunctional parent. Then the child starts to set boundaries, usually after they grow up and have the power to set those boundaries, sometimes after they have a child and start to see familial abuse in a new light--it looked normal when they were the ones being abused, but not normal any more when their child, the abuser's grandchild, is being abused. The "good" parent, who all those years mildly protested, who murmured against the abuse, who quietly said supportive things to the child when the abusive parent wasn't around, who did frequent but utterly ineffective things to suggest that they were opposed to the abuse, who apparently also suffered from the abuse, who guided the child in behaviors that placated the abuser, turns out to not be so good after all. When push comes to shove and the "good" parent has to pick a side, they pick the side of the abuser. I'm seeing your characters in the context of that pattern. In the context of that pattern, I think that the most likely outcome now would be that Lea has that child, and Chris treats Lea better and is fond and protective of the child. And the abuse of Gemma will ramp up, and Lea will make a point of "not seeing" that abuse. Gemma will be the scapegoat, now that there's a golden child. And she'll continue to be desperately grateful for every kind word that she gets from her mother. And Gemma will leave that home when she's a legal adult, but will feel responsible for still coming around, because she has to protect her mother, the mother who didn't protect her. She has to come around to be abused, emotionally if not physically but possibly also physically, because she has to protect her "good" mother, her mother who always had such a hard life. And if Gemma has children, she'll bring them to see Grandma and Grandpa, because she believes that she was only abused because she was a "difficult" child, and Chris was different back then and he's changed now, and of course no one would ever abuse her child. And if and when she stops coming around and bringing her child, her good mother will turn on her in vicious character attack, demanding to know how Gemma could possibly be so cruel as the betray and abandon her stepfather who loved her so much and did so much for her, how she could deprive her children of loving grandparents. It happens. A lot. I can't stop seeing that pattern in your characters.
The reason I asked is this. Gemma is your POV character. Meaning, the story is being told through her perspective. (The main character might actually not be the same as the POV character, by the way. I just wanted to be clear.) So ...how does Gemma see these other two characters—Lea and the abusive stepfather? That's actually what you should be focusing on here. If you write Gemma and make her come alive for yourself and your readers, the characters and motivations of your other two characters will fall into place. Does Gemma see her mother as being partly to blame? If so, why? What does Lea do that creates Gemma's view of her mother? That's all she's got to go on. Ditto the stepfather. Stay in Gemma's head as you write, and you'll be fine. If you want to create a contrast, of course you can make Lea and the stepfather both into POV characters as well. How does Lea view her daughter and her husband? And the stepfather as well. How does he view the situation? Whatever you do, try to stay away from telling the reader about these characters. Let the situation evolve. You can do this by staying firmly inside the heads of your POV characters. I'd say make the story effortlessly easy to follow, but very complicated to understand. Don't tell the reader everything about how they should view the characters. Make readers work things out for themselves. That way, the story becomes personal. Everybody won't necessarily reach the same conclusion about the culpability of any of the characters.
Alright, that makes sense. That sounds like a good idea to me. You see, I have so many ideas but I have no clue how to properly execute them and make the story coherent, and overall, just a good read. So, I really like the part about Gemma coming back and her mom blaming her for not loving her stepdad. Although, I'm writing about how Gemma finds love and he helps her with her demons. That's the cliché part I've been talking about at the beginning of my "entry" or whatever it's called. Grayson is the alleged bad boy of her high school. Everyone says he drinks, smokes cigarettes and weed on a daily; but no one really realized that he has only smoked when he's stressed, he's had three cans of beer in his lifetime and he's never had a joint in his life. Grayson Issac Neal is a good person with a bad reputation, just because he gives off the "bad ass" vibes. He's a family man and protects people he loves. So, when he meets Gemma by being partnered up with her in her speech class, he slowly grows attached. Now, I'm struggling with the part where he finds out about Gemma's abuse. Will he find a bruise to high up on her neck to cover? Will the abuse get so bad she runs down the street and go to his house without even knowing she was walking in his direction? This is where I'm struggling. I want Gemma to save herself without needing him to overcome all of the big obstacles for her, but just to have Grayson there for emotional support and someone to keep her up and head high. How would that work? With what you have mentioned?
That makes sense, I just need to figure out a writing style for that. I have been changing my writing style frequently to try to do what you talked about but it's been hard for me. Personally, I haven't got a clue why it's so hard for me.
Are you writing in 'first person?' Meaning your Gemma character is called "I" throughout? If not, you might want to try it. It might help to focus on her thoughts and feelings about the situation. It's not so much a matter of writing style, it's getting into the head of your character. If you're just planning and haven't actually started writing, you might want to just start and see what develops. Pick a scene between at least two characters that you've envisioned and write it. See how it works out. It doesn't have to be the start of your story. Just a scene from anywhere in the story that you have already fixed in your mind. See if you can get the dialogue and interaction to work. The characters will grow as you work with them, and things about their relationships will come to light. How does Gemma speak to her mother? To her stepfather? How do they speak to her? What does this reveal about all three of them?
