He Appears Mid-Sentence

Fiction

Written in response to: "Write from the POV of a character in a story who argues with their author, or keeps getting rewritten by their author." as part of Flip the Script with Kate McKean.

He appears halfway through a sentence.

Unannounced, unintroduced. Just there, on the screen, inside my running line. As if he existed before I wrote him, and I’m merely unlucky enough to have to pin him down now.

“This isn’t right,” he says.

I keep typing. That usually works. Characters you ignore dissolve. They become background. Set dressing. A name without weight.

He stays.

“You’re a mediocre writer,” he says. “But even for you, this can still get worse.”

His voice comes from the screen as if the laptop is ashamed to transmit it. The webcam light blinks once, nervously.

I let my fingers hover above the keyboard. Criticism is always the same: it only becomes real when it talks back.

“You’re a construct,” I say. “You only speak because I let you.”

“Good,” he says. “Then write it that way. Make something of it. Right now you’re pretending you’re in control.”

I sigh theatrically and, to meet him halfway, read the last paragraph out loud. Because apparently I’m that kind of author: the kind who lets himself be raised by his own invention.

“He arrives too early and says he’s in a hurry. In the café he orders coffee without sugar, stirs anyway, and leaves the spoon behind. He listens attentively until the other says something he already knows, then checks his phone. Outside, he waits at the red light, steps one foot into the street and stops. When he walks on again, he no longer knows whether he was the one who arrived too late or the one who waited.”

“Satisfied now?” I mutter.

“No.”

Of course not.

“Look,” he says. “That ‘he’ is me. And you make me act as if I’m being directed by a bad theatre director. ‘Too early’ and ‘in a hurry’. Why? Because you think contradiction automatically equals depth.”

“It’s called tension,” I say. “Inner friction.”

“It’s called sloppiness,” he says. “You use me to suggest something you don’t dare to articulate yourself. You want the reader to think: ooh, trauma, secret, pressure. But you give them nothing. You scatter behaviour and hope it turns into meaning.”

I click my tongue. I want to cut something from the text. That’s the only thing I can really do: delete.

I select the word hurry and delete it.

He reacts immediately. I don’t see it — I feel it. As if someone in my room takes a step back.

“See?” he says, softer. “Now I’m a different kind of man. Less driven. Less suspicious. Less… interesting. You have no idea who you’re writing. You’re just trying.”

I put the word back. Harder. I add a subordinate clause, as if that might neutralise his insolence.

He arrives too early and says he’s in a hurry, as if time itself has personally offended him.

He blinks. That’s new. That’s style. And style always hurts someone.

“Now you’re turning me into a caricature,” he says. “You slap a sarcasm jacket onto a character you’re afraid to undress.”

“You’re not real,” I say.

He laughs. Not happy, but certain. The kind of laugh an author should avoid, because it implies someone else in the room understands the rules of the game.

“Then be more consistent,” he says. “Don’t make me stir coffee without sugar. That’s meaningless.”

I open my mouth to interrupt him, but he’s already going.

“And that red light… one step into the street and then stopping. That’s a trick. A symbol you don’t pay for. You want the reader to think: he’s balancing on the edge. But you literally let me take one step. You’re afraid of consequences.”

I deliberately look away from the screen, like a small child who believes invisibility is a strategy. My laptop is still there. So is he.

“You know I can fix this,” I say. “I delete you.”

“Go ahead,” he says. “Then you’ll only prove you need control because you don’t deserve it.”

I type fast, brutally, trying to break him with my own weapon: words.

I change the coffee. With sugar. Two cubes. I let the spoon clink against the glass. I give him actions that make sense, so he’ll stop complaining. That’s how it works, right? Make it logical and the whining stops.

He relaxes, just a fraction.

“Thank you,” he says.

I keep writing: He stirs anyway, even after the sugar has long dissolved.

He looks at his hand as if it no longer belongs to him.

“Why?” he asks.

“Because people repeat actions,” I say. “Even when they no longer do anything.”

“Or because you don’t know where you’re going,” he says. “So you keep me busy.”

I try to distract him. I make his phone vibrate. I choose a name. I choose a memory. Just enough to pull him away from my paragraph.

He doesn’t look.

That’s new.

“You think stimuli control me,” he says. “As if I’m a dog. Phone vibrates, head down. And hop, you get to play author again.”

I feel irritation rising — not because he’s criticising me, I can handle that — but because he’s right in a way that corrodes my own sentences.

“You overestimate yourself,” I say.

“You underestimate your reader,” he says. “And you underestimate me. You wrote me with a mouth, so I use it.”

I keep typing. It’s reflex. If I keep moving, I can pretend I’m not being hit.

I change the perspective. One word. From he to you.

He freezes.

“Don’t do that,” he says.

“It’s more efficient,” I say. “The reader moves closer.”

“At my expense,” he says. “You shove the reader into my ribcage and call it art.”

I leave him standing at the red light. I build the tension he calls a “trick.” I give him one step into the street. Another. A car approaching. No impact — I’m not that cheap — but enough threat to put a tremor in the paragraph.

He rubs his thumb along the edge of a sentence. I see it happening: words shift, as if he’s hooking a fingernail behind them.

When he walks on again, he no longer knows whether he was the one who arrived too late or the one who waited.

I’m satisfied. It’s a good sentence. The kind that can carry a story.

“That sentence is mine,” he says softly.

“What do you mean?”

“You impose it on me,” he says. “As if that’s who I am: confusion, fog, unreliability. But that’s not me. That’s you. You doubt. You don’t know whether you’re a writer or someone who happens to produce words.”

“Stop it,” I say.

“Why?” he says. “Because it’s true? Or because you don’t want to encounter it in your own text?”

I want to punish him. That’s more honest than pretending I’m above him.

I rewrite him.

I put him in conversation. I make him tell an anecdote and pause just long enough to see who laughs. I make him nod before someone finishes speaking. I make him receive compliments as confirmation and criticism as misunderstanding.

It works. He becomes smoother. Less sympathetic. The reader feels distance. I feel relief: if he’s an asshole, I don’t have to feel guilty about my power.

“You’re turning me into an antagonist,” he says.

“You’re functioning,” I say.

“You’re punishing me,” he says.

“You asked for consequence.”

He smiles. Again that strange thing: not happy, but certain.

“You think you’re rewriting me,” he says. “But you’re mostly rewriting your own fear. You make me unsympathetic because you’re afraid I might be right.”

I open my mouth — and then it happens.

A sentence slides upward on the screen. Not by my fingers. The cursor jumps. My text starts breathing differently. My lines grow shorter. Sharper. As if someone is stripping my style down to bone.

“Stop,” I say.

“You asked for the dismissal of sloppiness,” he says. “I’m helping you.”

I try to take it back. I type: I delete you.

The sentence appears on the screen, but he changes it immediately.

He thinks he can delete me.

My stomach tightens. Not because it’s “creepy” — that word is too cheap — but because it shows exactly what he’s doing: he takes my I away and puts me in the third person. The way I did to him.

“Funny,” he says. “Don’t you think? When it happens to you?”

“This can’t be,” I say.

“Of course it can,” he says. “You made me with language. So I exist in language. You’re only a guest there.”

I click in the document. I select his name. Delete. Nothing.

I select the entire paragraph. Delete.

The letters remain, but now I see something else: my delete key does exactly what it always does, but the screen refuses to obey. As if the document has acquired a body and my fingers are suddenly touching only air.

“Who are you?” I ask.

He looks at me from the line spacing.

“Your better version,” he says. “The version that doesn’t pretend a symbol is enough. The version that pays. The version that doesn’t look away when someone criticises him.”

I feel an irritating, childish impulse to insult him. To say something crude. That’s my last weapon: tone.

“You’re a whiner,” I say.

He laughs again.

“Are you saying that because you mean it,” he says, “or because you don’t have a better sentence?”

My cursor blinks. It blinks like a heartbeat.

I want to flip the script. I want to give him a concession, something small, so I can be the one who gives and takes again.

“Okay,” I say. “You get to write one sentence. One. No content. Only form.”

I expect a trick. Irony. A meta-wink. But he writes a sentence that lands in my mouth as if it had always been there.

He knew exactly what he wanted to say, but refrained to see who would miss it.

My fingers go cold.

“That sentence is mine,” I say automatically.

“It is now,” he says. “But watch what happens.”

He adds another one.

He collected silences as if they were evidence.

That’s my kind of sentence. My rhythm. My voice. Only… better phrased. Cleaner. Less defensive.

I feel something deeply unflattering: jealousy. Not of another person. Of a character. Of my own creation overtaking me inside my own document.

“Stop that,” I say, louder.

He keeps writing.

He thought he was an author, but he was mostly a custodian of fear.

I try to laugh. It sounds like a hiccup.

“You’re preaching now,” I say.

He puts a period. Then a new line.

He calls it rewriting, but he means retreat.

My screen hums softly, as if the laptop is suddenly struggling with what’s passing through it.

I slam it shut. Hard.

Silence.

Two seconds of relief, as if I’ve trapped an insect under a glass.

Then the closed laptop vibrates. Once.

I open it again.

The text is still there. Not only that: there’s more. A new paragraph, tight, without my permission. My name appears in it — but not as me. As him.

He closes the laptop as if that’s an ending. As if white space can save him. He forgets I already gave him a mouth. He forgets a mouth doesn’t need permission to speak.

I hear my own breathing. Too loud. Too personal.

“You’re not real,” I say to the screen, and I hate myself for having to say it.

He says: you’re not real. And hopes denial is a technique.

I grab the mouse. I want brute force: select all, delete, save, close, done. I place the cursor in the top left corner. I drag. Everything turns blue. Everything mine. Everything under control.

I press delete.

The blue selection disappears.

Not because the text is gone — but because he has deselected it.

He tries to remove me. He forgets he gave me a place he also inhabits.

I swallow.

“What do you want?” I type.

The answer doesn’t appear as dialogue. It appears as style. As a tone that is increasingly my tone and yet not.

He asks what I want, as if I were a request. As if I hadn’t already been clear.

“Then say it,” I type. “What. Do. You. Want.”

The cursor blinks. Nothing for a moment.

Then:

I don’t want to be your excuse.

I stay silent.

He continues:

I don’t want to be the action you deploy when you don’t dare to choose. I don’t want to arrive too early to carry your fear of being late. I don’t want to stir coffee to mask your lack of direction. I don’t want to stand at a red light so you don’t have to cross the street.

My fingers tremble. I hate that he uses my own images against me. I hate that he uses them better.

“So you want to be the protagonist?” I type, mockingly, as if mockery will save me. “Flattering portrait? Feel-good?”

He turns it into a joke because seriousness would obligate him to responsibility.

I feel my face grow warm. As if the screen is looking at me with exactly the expression I use on others when they make excuses.

I type: “You’re a character. You have no rights.”

He says: you have no rights. And hopes power equals authority.

I want to scream. I don’t. I’m alone with my laptop and my failure.

“Okay,” I type, and it feels like I’m giving up something I can’t even name. “Then what.”

One line appears. Bare.

Write me honestly.

I laugh shortly, bitterly.

“Honestly?” I type. “In fiction?”

He acts as if honesty were a genre. As if it weren’t simply: daring.

I stare. My cursor blinks. My hands hover above the keyboard like at the beginning — but now it isn’t bravado. Now it’s fear.

I type a new sentence. Carefully. Without a trick. Without a symbol I don’t pay for.

He reads along. I can feel it.

And for the first time, he doesn’t interrupt me.

Until, out of habit, I try to steer again. To shape. To smooth. To lie just a little to make it prettier.

Then, immediately behind my sentence, his correction appears. Without permission. Without mercy.

Not as a suggestion. As fact.

And suddenly I understand: he doesn’t want to be the protagonist. He doesn’t want to be flattering. He doesn’t want to be sympathetic.

He just doesn’t want to be used by me as an alibi.

I place my fingers on the keyboard, ready to fight back.

The document hums. Softly. Warning.

He thinks this is a battle between writer and character. He forgets the real battle has always been between what he dares to say and what he prefers to hide.

I read that sentence three times.

Then I do something I hate.

I leave it.

Posted Feb 05, 2026
Share:

You must sign up or log in to submit a comment.

17 likes 23 comments

Matt Ballance
16:20 Feb 10, 2026

"He forgets the real battle has always been between what he dares to say and what he prefers to hide."

Hell yes!

Great work!

Reply

Marjolein Greebe
16:32 Feb 10, 2026

Yes—once that line appeared, the character stopped arguing and the text stopped pretending. Appreciate you catching that.

Reply

Tejas Kaushik
12:15 Feb 10, 2026

I like this a lot! You get the distinct sense that the character is his own ego talking back at him.

I don’t really have critiques for this one. Maybe it would be nice if the characters words had the writer change something in his space instead of just his writing? Goes to the bathroom to shave, change into different clothes, style his hair the way he wanted but never had the guts to try? Become a little bit more like the ego, and have his writing change with it. Getting some recognition from the character at the end would be nice too.

Idk, I’m really reaching here because I don’t have much critiques. Anyway, I guess I just like how you put in your bio that you want them. I’d be open to the same if you have time. Great work!

Reply

Marjolein Greebe
16:35 Feb 10, 2026

I’m glad you picked up on the ego dynamic—that’s exactly where the tension lives for me. I resisted external change on purpose, but your suggestion is a sharp one. Thanks for engaging this deeply.

Reply

John Rutherford
11:26 Feb 10, 2026

This is a mental arm wrestle. It's cleverly handled, and well written. I can feel the internalizing of a rapidly thinking, active mind. Forever juggling. Clever.

Reply

Marjolein Greebe
16:36 Feb 10, 2026

That juggling is the whole engine. Thanks for naming it so precisely.

Reply

Eric Manske
02:57 Feb 10, 2026

I'm glad to see you and Gareth Johnson are following each other because I love what you each did with this prompt. The humor and the introspection is different, but both of your stories really get me to think. Such a pleasure to read and contemplate for a time!

Reply

Kathryn Kahn
18:54 Feb 09, 2026

This story really appealed to me. I frequently feel like I've developed a relationship with characters in my stories, but usually they're crowding around me telling me things about themselves and seeing what I do with it. I've never felt an adversarial relationship with a character, and I love that you have found that story. I love how the cursor has a personality, too.

Reply

Marjolein Greebe
16:37 Feb 10, 2026

I love that image—characters crowding around instead of pushing back. This one insisted on friction. Glad the cursor had a voice for you too.

Reply

Helen A Howard
09:35 Feb 08, 2026

Expertly handled. It shows how our characters can take on a force of their own. Even when we try to ignore, soften them or even delete them. Typing is a reflex - very true. Seeing where the word takes us in this mysterious process that is called writing.

The cursor blinks like a heartbeat. You think you’re rewriting me, but you’re mostly rewriting your own fear. As the character’s edges are smoothed down, the consequence is loss of power. The reader will sense it and no longer be moved. The piece will be have been diluted. It takes courage to let one’s guard down and take risks - let a character not just breathe through the pages without sucking out the life force.

Here, the character appears to have taken over, or at least fighting for the right to be truly heard, but the writer can always slam the laptop shut when it gets too much.

However, any writer worth their salt probably knows this is only a temporary reprieve. Before long, the character will find a way to exert control. I like the irony of finding truth in fiction.

Wonderfully written. Full of great lines and with much to explore.

Reply

Marjolein Greebe
15:05 Feb 08, 2026

Thank you for reading it so closely. You put your finger exactly on the danger point: smoothing as a form of fear. That blinking cursor really is the heartbeat—once you start calming it down, the text loses its nerve.

Reply

Danielle Lyon
16:25 Feb 07, 2026

I have no idea how you plot your writing, because whatever you're doing works so effectively. Even when this character (or any character, for that matter), takes control. This submission has an alluring opening; a little shock, and then a deceptively easy fix. I thought, oh haha, that's not a character, that's the author's inner critic showing up as they write.

But THEN the pushback escalates. With every microfix, edit, perspective change, the character begins to overlay on the author (loved the swap from third to second person- I find myself doing that in my own editing to see if that changes the stakes for the reader at all).

From there it's just unspools in time with my own escalating heart rate. I would NEVER get any writing done if my characters fought back. They'd win every time. LOVE it!

Reply

Marjolein Greebe
15:10 Feb 08, 2026

I appreciate this, Danielle. Your comment names the central struggle of the piece very clearly: resisting the urge to dilute in order to stay “safe.” I’m pleased that the text held its nerve for you.

Reply

Nina H
15:44 Feb 07, 2026

A fantastic literary tête-à-tête, and response to the prompt! To me, the character brought to “life” on the screen seemed a manifestation of the author’s most intimate insecurities. He grapples with a sort of imposter syndrome, questioning every word and intention in his writing. The letting go at the end felt like the perfect resolution.

Reply

Marjolein Greebe
15:13 Feb 08, 2026

Thank you for this, Nina. I appreciate how you read the character not as a device but as a pressure point. That letting go at the end was meant to feel earned, not comforting—so I’m glad it landed that way for you.

Reply

Miles Trenor
13:37 Feb 07, 2026

Luckily, fictional characters live and die by the words of their creator. This... would be unbearable :)
Question: Why most ppl here write in first person?
(Also an unrequested advice: start with a line break, that hanging first line hurts, at least, my eyes :) )

Reply

Marjolein Greebe
15:16 Feb 08, 2026

I see the line-break issue — eyes matter 🙂 As for first person: this one needed to sit uncomfortably close.

Reply

Maisie Sutton
06:19 Feb 07, 2026

You really nailed the prompt with this one! The line "You don’t know whether you’re a writer or someone who happens to produce words" for me, captured the very essence of the battle we have in the struggle to produce words that prove we are in fact writers. I love that the MC chose not to hide in the end. Brilliant!

Reply

Marjolein Greebe
10:19 Feb 07, 2026

Thank you — that means a lot.
You put your finger exactly on what I was wrestling with while writing it: that thin, uncomfortable line between producing words and daring to stand behind them.
I’m glad you felt the choice at the end — that was the risk.

Reply

Rebecca Lewis
17:22 Feb 06, 2026

This works because it isn’t playing dress-up with meta. It’s not “look, fiction about fiction.” It’s about control, and about who pays for meaning. That’s why it doesn’t collapse into a trick. The character isn’t dangerous because he talks back. He’s dangerous because he’s precise. He doesn’t accuse in generalities. He names habits. Shortcuts. The little lies that feel like craft. Every time he speaks, he tightens the frame instead of widening it, which means the narrator can’t escape into cleverness. That’s the core strength here. The escalation is handled. First he critiques. Then he interferes. Then he takes grammar. Then perspective. Then authorship. Nothing resets. Nothing is forgiven. Each step costs something real. You don’t cheapen it by trying to top yourself with spectacle, which is why the takeover lands. What carries the piece is that the criticism isn’t abstract. “Symbol you don’t pay for” isn’t a flourish - it’s a charge. Same with contradiction-as-depth, or busyness as a substitute for direction. Those lines sting because they’re recognizable. Not to “writers in general,” but to this specific voice. If the character were wrong, the whole thing would deflate. He isn’t, and you let that stand. The style shift when he starts editing is one of the smartest moves in the piece. You don’t announce it. You enact it. The sentences get leaner. Sharper. Less defended. That alignment between form and threat is doing real work. The ending is right. Leaving the sentence instead of deleting it, fixing it, or “winning” preserves the only tension that matters. Any kind of triumph would have been dishonest. Stopping where you stop feels like consent given under pressure - which is the point.

Reply

Marjolein Greebe
19:33 Feb 06, 2026

Thank you so much, Rebecca.
This is one of those responses that makes you stop and reread your own work — not because it praises it, but because it names what’s actually happening on the page. Your reading of control, cost, and precision lands uncomfortably close to the bone, in the best way. I’m especially grateful for how you traced the escalation without turning it into a gimmick. That kind of attention sharpens more than it reassures.

Reply

Hazel Swiger
18:01 Feb 05, 2026

Marjolein, this story is honestly really good. Like, really good. When the main character finally understands this other character that just... keeps popping up- that was honestly really beautiful. I really liked how you wrote this story in general. And also? The ending is just really nice. MC finally realizes that he doesn't want to be the protagonist, and that is honestly really nice and beautiful. Amazing job, as always, Marjolein. I enjoyed reading this.

Reply

Marjolein Greebe
22:28 Feb 05, 2026

Hazel, thank you for reading this so closely — you’re so often the first to meet a story when it’s just landed, and that attention really matters to me. I love that you caught the moment where the struggle isn’t between characters, but inside the voice itself, and I’m glad the ending felt earned rather than neat.

Reply

Reedsy | Default — Editors with Marker | 2024-05

Bring your publishing dreams to life

The world's best editors, designers, and marketers are on Reedsy. Come meet them.