What's wrong with this line?

[barrett1987]

Two thick belts, strapped across his chest, tied him to the bed and his arms ended in stumps, covered in black pitch.

Keeps reading clunky. any ideas?

 

[Brian G Turner]

IMO it would be better to separate into two separate sentences:

Two thick belts strapped him to the bed. His arms ended in stumps, covered in black pitch.

If you mention that belts strap his chest, and tied him to the bed, you are using a similar verb twice and only need use it once, IMO. However, you're in the realm of style issues here.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Two thick belts, strapped across his chest, tied him to the bed and his arms ended in stumps, covered in black pitch.

Keeps reading clunky. any ideas?

I don't think you need the elipsis, which makes it a little staccato (but I'd be prepared to be argued down on that one). And then, like Brian, I think I'd take two sentences because his arms ending in stumps isn't related to the thick belts across his chest. Oh, and I don't like tied, because that's not the action of straps. I'd also like some character reference in there, this all must hurt and because without understanding why he's turned his attention from the strapping to his arm, I can't understand how it's all interrelated.

So:

Two thick belts strapped across his chest secured him to be bed. His arms ached, their stumps covered in black pitch.

 

[Ursa major]

Do you need the 'strapped'?

Two thick belts across his chest secured him to the bed. His arms ached, their stumps covered in black pitch.

And if you do:

Two thick belts across his chest strapped him to the bed. His arms ached, their stumps covered in black pitch.

By the way, what ellipsis?

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Yep, you're right, it could go and then there'd definitely be no use for the ellipsis.

 

[Toby Frost]

I agree with the others in that, to read properly, it needs to be two sentences. It's not technically incorrect, but the emphasis seems all wrong. Even if this is just a corpse among a bunch of other corpses, the fact that he has no arms - no arms! - is surely the first thing anyone would notice (including the person himself). So I'd put the bit about the arms first, and make it a single sentence. Then I'd put the straps bit as another sentence (if it is from the person's POV, at this point he will probably be thrashing about and screaming, and will discover that he's tied down).

 

[Juliana]

I like Ursa's second suggestion.

 

[barrett1987]

Oh, its not the pov's arms! hehe, its a corpse. He enters the room and see's the kid, strapped to the bed and his arms end in stumps covered in pitch. the sentence isn't right though.

 

[psychotick]

Hi,

Like the others I agree that you've got two distinct ideas trying to exist in one sentence, and they simply don't relate to one another. How does the corpse's lack of arms relate to his being secured to the bed? It doesn't unless you're saying that the lack of arms was also part of the way he was held there. Also look to the passive voice. My take - without knowing anything else about the work is:

"The corpse was secured to the bed by two thick straps across his chest. His arms ended in stumps covered in black pitch."

You then need a third sentence to connect these two disparate sentences together logically. Something like:

"He had obviously been tortured."

Cheers, Greg.

 

[Nick B]

Two thick belts strapped across his chest tied him to the bed, his arms ended in stumps covered in black pitch.

I like to keep things simple.

 

[barrett1987]

Thanks guys