All Comments on 'How High a Price: Another View'

because i think i read this version of the story before? how is it different in this version? or is something different in the next chapter?

this one is without doubt the best.

it is among the shortest but it is packed with mountains of information about life's curvy ball and how a person, however strong, will have to deal with it, never knowing whether he'd come out on top but is determined to come out on top and move on to build a better life with someone else,,,

bill's life story, though, was an interesting lesson, too. but early's life need not run in parallel to it. i think moving on to finding happiness with a totally different person is the best solution, although Susan did, from the description, sound and look truly devastated, knowing that she had, truly, beem severed from Early's thinking and his future, when she was brought to a stop a few feet from him by his cold, deaden voice, next to the "For Sale" sign of their former home,,, which is now just an empty house to be sold at the highest bidder,,,

This is by far the best rewrite.

My only hope is that you don't follow up this story with one where Early and Susan get back together.

BM

This is by far the best rewrite.

My only hope is that you don't follow up this story with one where Early and Susan get back together.

BM

I honestly hope there's more. Cause if u end it now.. yr doing a great injustice to a brilliant story

The story is the most real of the series. I doubt it Stickner would have accompanyied the wife to her home but I am sure Early would have eventually got his revenge one way or the other. Most of us are tired of stories of whimpy guys who forgive the wives for fucking others.

well done - a fitting and sad ending. Sometimes there is no happily ever after.

Done by one of the masters. Troubadore would say by this work, "you did me proud. Thanks for the story.

Gary

its about fucking time...

I will wnat to hear susan side of things in this alternate sequel but No rconciliation. Clearly SOMETHING happened to the whore wife as the cop was about to tell Early but what I dont know?

I suspect the whore wife attempted suicide just to PROVE how much she REALLY loved Early...

tell us from your story,why she did it and the excuses for having the affair.tell us what happen at the divorce and how she much she suffered.you told of his suffering.let us know of the suffering of the wife,when other wives read this they have a measuring stick to what to expect in these affairs.the first writer was a coward with this story.i was hoping that he would meet someone that the wife new and was happy everafter.make her and lover job pay for his marriage been destroyed.

This is a fun read. It is brisk and action packed. I wonder what happened to the wife. I like that Early is not a whimp. Just deserts -- I hope some just deserts come to Susan, -- Does John's surgery site become infected leaving him with a permenant scar?

Roger

I liked what I read, but what you didn't tell us is why I couldn't give this 100. It was chopped off totally without any hint about Susan and the impact on her. I for one needed a bit more.

All you had to do was complete the thought when the policeman said, "your wife..... " it would have told us something. Like, "Your wife died of a heart attack." or "Your wife has been committed." or "Your wife is ....." Anything would have filled that gap.

Thank you for your efforts, if you chose to continue this version I will certainly read on.

Charleybear

I agree with almost all of the other commentators - - I loved the story. It captured real emotions and had a sense of the real world that far too many of the stories here do not.

I also agree that your version screams out for another chapter - - what happens next for all of them.

Great job.

Bob

For the same reasons that others have asked you to continue I beg you - please don’t! As a bonus I will award you the “Non formulaic honorary award” for the courage to not follow the trite ‘cheating wife’ formula from a-to z. That is unless you have an original continuation which DOES NOT follow further confrontations; counseling with official and un official “therapists”; being slammed with a psychological diagnosis from left field (let’s say that this time she had PTSD as she participated in a war he never knew about!) which would yield him an evil man, or learn that she was raped then black mailed; drugged and the same and on and on…

So please, DO NOT continue. You wrote well. The pace was right the emotions were strong, and the ending made it clear that the husband was fully aware of what is ahead of him; but for now he passed one major step. You could not get better ending.

In addition you provided some subtle observations which were delightful. They point to your eye for details and humor even in sad situations. For example: “Sergeant Simmons waited as police officers do so well. When he thought sufficient time has passed, he said, "Aren't you going to ask about your wife?"”

hey folks

I was going back and looking at this author's OTHER or previoius stories... MOST of his stuff dates back 2-3-4 years ago... BUT one story that is just filled with snappy dialogue real Twists and turns and a Strong Husband Man character is a story xalled SPEEDY

I am NOT into these bizzare alternative lifestyle stories but this pone SPEEDY is really different.

I urge to to read it -- IF you want a truly different story... with a strong man but alos a guy who is NOT excessively vindictive...

God I wish this guy eZ Riter would write a lot more and chumps like JPB would write a lot less

I think I gave it the highest mark I could then too.

Personally for me, I liked everything up to the violence part, but at least he didn't seek to screw over the other guy. Just let him get in the first shot, then just one back, then called it even. No end his life as he knew it while leaving the wife getting off easy.

The wife on the other hand got away really easy. No elaborate revenge on her, he just walked away with what he brought into the marriage. And he was civil about it. He saw what needed to be done, did it, and now walked.

To me that takes more determination than anything else.

-Risq

I agree with charleybear, it was incomplete. Part of the pay off, the very reason, for this kind of take on the cheating spouse is the reaction of the cheater. By its exclusion, there is no closure to the story. It's as if you just got tired and just decided to stop.

What EZRiter wrote was superb. And I appreciate his giving me billing as writing it. However, EZ did not write an ending to How High A Price.

The original story was written without giving any actual evidence against Susan. It is natural to read the story when seeing it on an erotic site and clicking Susan's guilt into place. But her guilt just isn't shown only assumed due the things coming to Early's attention.

With EZRiter's rewrite her guilt is well and completely proven by the time the basis of the story is read and Susan actually comes on the scene. So... in effect EZ did not write an ending to HHaP.

I was and am anxious to read how others can take the basically innocuous but suspicious facts and carry the story through to completion.

(I say this despite having had many critics tell me the ending of my segment was all that was needed for a complete story)

What I was and still am looking for was seeing a twist or so in the facts Early discovered in the story. I am a romantic and I wanted to see how many could come up with a believable ending based on the actual points I included in the story. Not the innuendos.

Before I posted this three years ago my wife and I brain stormed the story. We came up with over a dozen logical, reasonable endings. All of which showed Susan as innocent of the suspicions.

All that aside, this is an excellent story. I'm sad that I can't vote. While the story deserves a 5 or even higher, as do ALL of EZRiters stories, he did not meet my challenge. That was to write an ending based on the story I wrote.

. . . Learn to spell, punctuate, and . . . well, quite a lot, really.

Commenters so far include

the 'Glaringly Obvious Mistyper' ... "story xalled SPE", "this pone SPE", "but alos a guy"

the 'Shouter' ... "which DOES NOT follow", "DO NOT continue"

the 'Mis-Speller' ... "action packed" without a hyphen, "whimp", "deserts" (twice), "permenant"

the 'lower case guy' ... "told of his suffering.let us know", " this story.i was hoping"

and last but not least

the "Name Dropper who Missed" ..." Troubadore would say" (Troubador)

I am now hoping that authors pay attention to critics who can Write, as well as Read.

Oh yes, Nice Story.

Yours,

Kilroy

OK I dont REALLY mean that but I do have Importnat question for doug / troubador

I dont know how to say this without hurting anyones feelings... He said in his post below

..."Before I posted this three years ago my wife and I brain stormed the story. We came up with over a dozen logical, reasonable endings. All of which showed Susan as INNOCENT of the suspicions."

OK in his original story Ssuan is caught in several LIES... early see belyiond ALL doubt that susan spent that night over at Jon Strickner's Hosue -- the other guy--

then ADMITS to fucking Strickner... from the story

EARLY

"That makes no sense, Susan. How can your cheating on me, cuckolding me, not have a thing to do with us?"

SUSAN

"It was something I felt I had to do, Early. I was trying to repay John for what he had done for me. It had nothing to do with the way I feel toward you, with my love for you!"

see ? susan does NOT says.... "its not what it looks like Early"... . She does not say "I dis have sex with him...' him...

so is Troubador and his ife totally fucking nuts? No of course not.... so what the hell is the author saying???

can anyone tell me? The author did NOT say I came up with at least a dozen posisble explnantions/ scenarios... THAT I could see... some would led to reconciliation and some NOT.

but troubador is asserting ALL possible scenarios that he and his wife showed susan to be 10000% completely innocent???

please can anyone explain this --given how the author

set this story up?

You mean like lying and cheating (as having sexual intercourse with another man) are INNOCOUS? Please, as Harry before me asked, could anyone explain? But please NOT in theory; not in your personal system of morals; not even in Troubador’s – but strictly by the ACTUAL ORIGINAL text. Was there any agreement on open marriage; sexual experimentation; swinging or system of rewards via sex? If so, I have missed those hints altogether!

The original story turned into a classic due, to a large degree, to its follow ups. As far as the original story goes, I do not mean to be an iconoclast, but I always felt that that particular story of yours was ok . Not extra ordinary, but definitely ok. What was ingenious though was the appeal to readers to add their own ending! That was a strike of brilliance, turned into a trend, and the rest is history. Because of your idea we got a series of many good stories; few of them were truly remarkable. In retrospect a lot of the current status of the original is due to the multiple endings or variations on your story - such as this original take by EZRiter.

Your comment left me with some bad taste though. You said you could not vote and you voted. Not only with the score but with your words. Your value system is yours, but the story stands on its own legs. For you, somehow, lying and cheating are still neutral of guilt. To others these are self evident manifestations of one’s guilt, as in 'actions speak louder than words' (unless some force major intervene – which was not the case IN your story). So, claiming that this and other writers have not met your bench mark feels quite over the line. You produced the story. You produced the challenge. Now, as you designed it in the beginning - the story gained a lot of clout (due to all of the follow ups). It is in the public domain, and subject to other minds and other interpretations, equally good or bad as yours. What I am trying to say is – your perspective is one of many. We all read the text. IMO, for you (unlike any other reader)to give one particular version any thing other than an honorary 100 is quite out of line. The best tact though would have been a quiet respect to those who respect you with their follow up stories.

I too noticed your comment about how you and your wife could think of over a dozen ending where Susan was innocent. I mean, like Harry said, but no offense, but you intentionally wrote the story to give the reader the IMPRESSION based on what Early said to Susan, and Susan's refusal to challenge or change Early's believe in what he said to her, that Susan was indeed guilty.

You wrote the story in such a way that Early ACCUSED Susan repeatedly of being guilty, and Susan never tried to explain or give a valid excuse of why she might be innocent once in the whole story.

In the story you wrote, you wrote over and over and over and over, Susan saying "It was something he deserved" to ANY comment Early made about her spending 2 days over at another man's house, or that she might be spending it in his bed, or what she was doing was having repeated sex with Strickland, or when he asked if she enjoyed being in another man's bed, and yet in your story she said nothing to make him believe otherwise. Not one thing.

You even gave the reader the impression that she did sleep with Strickland when you wrote these lines:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

....Oh Susan, how can you say one thing, then another so contradictory. Can't you see the contradiction? You gave the one thing that was most important to me, the one thing in the whole world that I felt most proud of, yourself. You gave it to another man. And sitting here, listening to you talk, I am beginning to believe you hold intimacy with yourself of little value. You gave it to a man you say hadn't even asked for it. To hear you talk, I am beginning to think you had to beg him to take it."

"Then you tell me that it had nothing to do with me," he added in a soft, hopeless voice.

"But it didn't mean anything, Early. I am still all here, nothing in me is changed. I love you totally. I AM yours," sobbed Susan.....

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Ok, please explain how you didn't expect how anyone would believe she DIDN'T cheat on her husband when she keeps telling him "It didn't matter", "He deserved this for all the help he gave me at work", "Nothing in me is changed after this", etc. You wrote it so that when Early said she gave herself to Strickland her response was "Nothing in me is changed?!?!"

And you say:

...I was and am anxious to read how others can take the basically innocuous but suspicious facts and carry the story through to completion....

I'm sorry but those are "NOT" innocuous fact. When you lead someone to believe something happened a certain way (and that's what you lead us the reader to believe) and you call it "innocuous but suspicious facts", dude I believe you're kidding yourself. We drew conclusions based on what you gave us, not what you wanted us to read inbetween the lines from the missing facts. That's called ESP when we can do that as the reader.

When you have a woman spend two days at another man's house, lie to her husband where she is, and when the husband accuses her of sleeping with another man, you have her defend her self by saying "this doesn't change who I am" or "He deserved this for helping me out at work" and you act SURPRISED that people who continued the story didn't write an ending where she wasn't guilty?

Guy you lead us down that path, then comment on how this ending "Who everyone loved greatly by the way" missed your mark because it wasn't written as the wife being innocent, when you gave all the clues pointing to her guilty.

Your kidding right?

Maybe it should have been turned into a "Hildy" clone where the wife gets mad at him for not forgiving her, straps him to their bed while he's sleeping, drags his best friend into the bedroom, makes Early watch while she gives him the best sex of her life, well into the night, a repeat preformance the next day, in the shower, then after its over Early BEGS her to take him back for being a fool for not trusting her.

I mean it worked so well in the Hildy story, why not here too?

-Risq

I remember Troubador's original tale very well, and I do agree EZ took it for a different spin, so it would not technically qualify as a sequel, as the facts differed. That being said, I enjoyed it the most of all the other sequels, because it was the only one where divorce was the option chosen. Every other story had them reconcile. Reconciling is not always possible. I think the story should be continued a little ways for the following reasons:

Early should sue Susan's law firm. Her supervisor (i.e. at least a person in authority over her) took advantage of her, and destroyed his marriage. This should be a very expensive sexual harrassment law suit, since Susan wanted John to support her bid to become a partner.

How will the law firm react when they get a sexual harrassment lawsuit ( or at the very least graphic evidence of inappropriate behavior of 2 employees)? Chances are both Susan and John signed a contract with the firm that included a morals clause. There really is no defense of adultery against a morals clause. John should be fired with cause (especially if there is a sexual harrassment lawsuit, and his name dragged through the mud so he will have to move far away and have a much less lucrative practice). Susan may or may not be fired, it would depend on the lawsuit. It might be better to give her a generous settlement, and a good recommendation and just let her go. She was part of the problem, and her effectiveness is definitely going to be hurt due to the divorce. She's damaged goods.

Early of course would bring up a few facts to her if she insisted on seeing him: what does she not understand about her marriage vow to "forsaking all others"? There is no wiggle room there. If she wanted to have a family with him, why would she betray him and have sex with someone else? Reminding her of the dreams they had for themselves, and that now they were destroyed all because of her actions is a great way to twist the knife. Getting Susan's family to give her a piece of their minds works also. She needs to know that she destroyed her great life by her own choice - she can't blame anyone else, or any drugs or alcohol.

Lastly Early eventually needs to find someone else, and any chance susan feels that she could get back together with him needs to cut off with finality. Maybe susan will have to pay early alimony for cheating - it could be in a pre-nup. I'd just like to see the story taken a bit farther, and see the fallout of the actions.

Enjoyed it E.Z. Riter but I too would have liked to have seen it be a little longer.

She was planning a suprise party for him and didnt want to ruin it.

'Early, I just admitted to whoring myself out for promotions so I didnt ruin the suprise. You're not angry are you? I only did it because I love you.'

What could be more logical?

Back on topic - I like this ending. Yes I consider this an ending even if EZRiter did take a few liberties with photographic evidence and not continuing on from the exact momment Troubador left off.

I think this did present a logic conclusion for the story Troubador set up (see above - the original had Susan admitting to cheating unless you want to twist things so much they make no sense). Having proof or and admission of guilt is just semantics since its a given that Susan cheated no matter which way you slice it.

I also think that this Early is closer to happily ever after than he would have been if he had cried, got drunk and then went to therapy like most husbands seem prone to do. All he has to do is get over his anger, start dating, fall in love and then live happily ever after.

Maybe easier said than done but still much better odds of that turning into a fairy tale ending than a guy convincing himself that his hollow shell of a marriage can ever be the same again. No matter how much therapy he goes to and how good he gets at self-delusion, it will still only be an approximation. Nothing either ever does can make it perfect.

Real life isnt perfect and there is nothign wrong with realistic settling stories 'and we lived good enough ever after'. I find it annoying as hell that so many people seem to equate reconciliations with happy endings though. Reconciling with someone that you found out didnt give a shit about your feelings, or didnt love you like you loved them, or didnt have the same opinion wrt major issues such as extra-marital sex, or can lie to you with no problems at all, etc. is about the hardest way to get a happy ending going.

This Early has a great chance at being happy imo. He went right to angry and didnt waste emotions on a whore (Im using it literally here as well since she is fucking for a promotion/money). Chances are he can get over his anger and hopefully find true love with a woman who isnt hollow and self-centered.

Thanks for writing author.

PS - thank you as well Troubador. Its quite a complement that so many people have been so affected by your story that they wanted to continue it.

Could have been longer. Best ending yet. Early does not wimp out, which is as it should be. (zed)

Joesephus wrote the following intro to his story "How High a Price - Another View-M" that was posted earlier this month:

BEGIN QUOTE

Authors Angst... This is not a stand-alone story. In order to understand it, you must read E. Z. Riter's "How High a Price - Another View," Mr. Riter's version of The Troubadour's excellent "How High a Price," With Mr. Riter's permission and The Troubadour's I'm using the characters from both their stories. I have attempted to pick up exactly where Mr. Riter's story stopped.

END QUOTE

The problem is that Joesephus had Susan lie thru her teeth (for example, she told Early she only did sex with her lovers in the missionary position, yes she had others while he was on travel). This story ended in the reconciliation of all reconciliation where Early totally beytayed his professed beliefs regarding martial fidelity.

Thank you posting this story! Your story was well written and very real. I an not anti-reconciliation but the resolution should make sense. I loved this version which was so consistent with Early's character.

SleeplessinMD

Go for that terrific suggested spin of yours? I totally agree with you on every of those suggested points you suggested. They really do make a lot of sense.

Remember, Early --- as a resolute man who felt he's been badly wronged --- would also get some satisfaction. No matter what, they law firm would NOT want to have its name dragged in the mud, with two of its more visible and more prominent lawyers fucking around on their spouses like that.

Law firms stake their image of credibility on how their lawyers conduct themselves, inside and outside of their work place. Having prominent lawyers from your law firm fucking each other silly, on week days and weekends when their respective spouses were supposed to be unaware of, such acts, when PUBLICALLY reveal, can do a lot of damage to a firm's prestige.

Again, since Early has decided to end his life with Susan, why just take a way a lot of bad memories? He should be taking away a lot of hard cash, too! The law firm would very likely settle out of court, for a good amount. Even if it is just a couple hundred thousand dollars, he could use it towards some far-away and needed vacation and buy a clean, unsoiled house somewhere else and build new memories.

As the beautiful woman in THE PUNISHER (which, by the way, is a great cartoonish movie on crime and punishment, with John Travolta and Tom Jane, with the latter doing some extremely good stunts, including the transformation of his physic, almost as well done as Christian Bale in THE MACHINIST, the best movie I've seen about crime and punishement and paranoia), said: "Good memories can save your life."

That's what Early need. Good and fresh memories.

But, lastly, I think, despite what think we read or saw in the Troubador's also equally short and emotional original installment -----

++++++++++++++++++++++

Taking another sip of tea, Early continued in the same dead, flat voice, "Somehow I don't think the bed you were in Thursday and Friday nights was all that lonely. Do you want to tell me about it Susan? Can you make me understand what happened?"

Susan was weeping openly now, her head shaking side to side, her face hidden in her hands.

"Early, I love you! This had nothing to do with you, with us. Please try to understand, this was something I felt I had to do. It had nothing to do with my love for you, with us." """"""

+++++++++++++++++++

,,,,, IF the Troubador is right, and OBVIOUSLY he must be, since HE'S THE ONE WHO STARTED the original story, then HE must reveal to us one of those dozen or so endings he and his lovely wife were able to come up with which NO WRITER OR READER has been able to: and that is that Susuan ACTUALLY DID NOT HAVE SEX with that other person she spent some night with.

It is very possible that despite its apparence, the Susan in the Troubador's story really DID NOT have sex with that other man. Again, it's for the original author to tell us HOW that is possible, no?

There are a lot of different takes on this story. I have read most, if not all, of them. Yours is the best by far. I fear that the queers and sorry motherfuckers will disagree, which is their privilege. They are as fucked up as the cheating slut and her paramour.

Thanks for the good story.

I agree with most of what you said except (you may not be surprised) your last comment. The original text is what it is. The intentions of ANY author are another thing.

Words; grammar; syntax and semantics in the language are not privately regulated and that's why we all have similar access to the meaning of the final text. We ALL fill the gaps in every story that we read in order to comprehend it. This is especially true reg. those stories which are purposely left partially unfinished. Unlike puzzles; equations; Sudoku and logical quizzes, there will never be one; two; twelve or any finite number of correct interpretations. Bound by the text on one hand and the reader’s imagination and creativity on the other, there could be endless interpretations and continuations to any story. (See: ongoing interpretations to bible stories or Shakespeare plays).

Back to Troubador story’s endings. Are there really possible endings with the wife being innocent? Let’s try some. In fact the possibilities to work SOMETHING are indeed endless, some price will have to be paid though but I’ll get to it later.

Following are four UNRELATED endings which attempt at leaving the wife innocent.

1. Wife helped lover heal a traumatic experience, involving cruel rejection by a woman, by spending one weekend with him. This could work as long as no one could tell that nothing happened.

2. Wife is responding to blackmail on lover. He is forced to create the appearance of betrayal or else a family member of his will be killed. Any disclosure will lead to killing of the family member. The weekend has been filmed and now will be used for further blackmail against the lover.

3. Wife lost consciousness/ has been drugged. As a result she thinks something happened even though nothing has happened (as lover is impotent). Now lover plans on taking advantage of her misperception.

4. Both wife and lover were blackmailed at gun point/ under drugs to spend weekend and perform sex acts. The purpose: having tapes which would allow a competitor’s firm/ crooked client access to the firm’s files and /or destroy their career. If she talks to Early the destruction of the whole firm will be immediate.

You get the gist. In all versions there is a lot of additional information which does not fit the spirit of the original; the suggestion of the language; the impact of the behaviors, and the overall mood. none of the above contradict any thing that is written, it simply imposes an override on it. The overrides (similar also to Average- Joe’s version) waves wife’s truth value frm her speach. She never lied because what ever she said DOES NOT COUNT ANYWAY for one reason or another: drugs; blackmail; loss of memory; some bigger plot; vow of secrecy – (the latter is actually cheating as far as lying is cheating). In all cases you discount part of the text by super imposing new meaning to it. That is NOT what I call a legitimate reading or a legitimate interpretation of a text. But it’s ok to call any of the above NEW STORY suggestions BASED on the original though.

No one has looked at the "proof" that Susan spent the time in John's home.

Her car was parked there, she was never seen.

She "confesses" what she did was done because she owed John for all the things he had done to her. What things? And for heavens sake stop assuming the things she did were sexual. I know it's hard to do on an erotic story site, but try.

There are several other comments I could make. But the weakest part of the story was Susan becoming nearly speechless when accused. What the hey! This is a successful practicing attorney! Speechless? It is possible, but the circumstances would have to be severe. What if... Susan had been dealing with a life or death matter, John's life or death, all by herself for a week. Or perhaps she, John, her personal assistant along with several other members of her firm were frantically working out a solution to "something." No one has even considered these possibilities. So, yes! There are other ways to look at everything I wrote.

Now on voting... Using the "Please Rate This Submission" box has to be filled in before a comment can be posted. However that does not count as a "vote" for the story. To do that you have to vote on the separate voting section, or so I have been informed.

And as I said in my comment, this is an excellent story. But EZ only used the frame of the story, adding a number of black and white irrefutable facts. Not my story. I've even had comments that since he did this it was plagiarism. My answer to that is, "Get a life!" I asked for endings to the story. If one can't be found without modifying the story, fine. But it is not an ending to the story I wrote.

And last, there have been endings written that saw them breakup and divorce. And there have been a smattering where they stayed together. All of them assumed that seeing a car parked next to a house, which showed no sign of it's occupants, proves there was hanky panky going on in the house.

I have emailed "the Troubador" with a couple of possible non-sexual explanations. His latest comment suggested others. He said in his first comment there were many explanations. If you keep thinking about it, you keep coming up with more. Everyone needs to keep an open mind and think. Things are not always as they seem.

There is no "proof" of Susan cheating. I noted the car in the driveway and no lights on in the house. This could be "proof" that they were out at a series of social events where the unmarried John Stickner needed an escort, for example. Rather mundane, really. Should Susan have done that without discussion with Early? Not a chance. Early makes that very point at the end of “the Troubador’s” version. But everyone does things unthinkingly. Even things done in full view often come out wrong.

The only other "proof" is the lying, which is a bit trickier. All married people have "secrets" from their spouses, which may lead to prevarication on occasions. It may be that Susan has learned from experience with Early that he is sensitive, hard-headed, quick to anger and slow to forgive at times about certain things in their relationship and she just wanted to dodge that bullet without him ever finding out. Foolish? Yes! But only that.

Good read.

Phil

You know I love ya man.

But I think you are standing to close to the trees here.

You tell us there is plenty of wiggle room for her NOT to have cheated.

I ask where, and this is why...

For every reason that I and even the ones that you present, for Susan staying at John’s house, or even just leaving her car there and NOT being home; it fails a simple test unless the story is SO contifuted and twisted to make it cinematic.

Why did she lie?

“Oh she was tongue tied and ..”

Sorry right answer to the wrong question. Why did she lie when he was calling her?

What possible reason can she have for NOT telling him, besides “build tension for reader”?

Lets create a perfectly stable reason why she could be there:

John lives with his sickly mother, she’s not infirm but needs care, he has a day nurse but this is special.

John has a date…not only a date but he WAS going to spend a few nights with her before she is shipped off to Iraq (I know stretching but hey)

The nurse can’t come or stay that long because they have sick kids.

John is heart broken then Susan steps in to watch Momma. John can’t get his full weekend, Susan wants to stay with Early and be back with him when he returns on Saturday BUT she will take two days off and help John for all he’s done for her.

He is very happy.

All good?

Ok, why is Hubby so much of an ASSHOLE that she can’t explain that while on the phone with him?

Why does she have to tell him that she’s lonely and at home?

Why does she tell him that she is cleaning the kitchen INSTEAD OF explaining that she is watching Mrs. Stickler?

I also tried the idea of a sudden development at work and she and John had to fly out to deal with, hence the out of service Early got at one point. And what about the car? It was there because it was safer than being at the airport lot.

Again why lie?

Working hard on a project? Why NOT be at home and why spend the night at John’s NOT at home OR even a hotel close to work?

And Why not tell Early? What is so wrong with him that she doesn’t think ON THE PHONE to go “honey this has been a bitch and this is why (fill in reason here)”

ANY excuse she gives him would have to answer all three questions:

1: What was she actually doing?

2: Why did she have to stay at his place, or at least her car?

3: Why did she lie to what she was doing and where?

Then we can get to the other lines or sets of them like:

"So, since he wouldn't ask, was too honorable to even suggest you break your vows, why did you volunteer? Is that I'm hearing? What am I missing?"

"You are making this all sound so tawdry! It wasn't like that! It was something he deserved! I keep telling you, it had nothing to do with you and I, with us."

She’s tongue-tied BUT reasonable enough to call it tawdry the way he talks about it? Why not a:

“You think I slept with him? NO!”

Again … YOU might see where there are areas of grey that can be used for the ‘non cheat’ answers.

Unfortunately many of us don’t for the reasons of why would she have to do what she did?

The only answers are both cinematic “John and I were doing a sting on a company and we thought our house might be bugged so the FBI said we should stay at John’s, it had been cleared before, and I couldn’t tell you on the phone due to worry that they might be listening in on us.”

OR make Early out to be an ass…

“I didn’t tell you because I know your temper and I know what you would have felt about me leaving my car there/sleeping at his house watching his mother.”

If you want to talk to me in private HURRAY (I DO LOVE your stuff BTW) and let me in on a secret ending you like (but would like others to do) then I would be not only honored but also relieved to actually find my questions answered.

I have written stories where the readers have gotten something TOTALLY different from it than I wanted or expected. I was going “ah ha this is the ONLY thing that people can get form this”

Post

“Where the heck do they get THAT from”, check story…”oh there, woops.”

We have BOTH seen it with other writers where they defend the story and we CLEARLY see there they wrote things to be one way … but the author doesn’t see it that way.

Is there something wrong with the author? The story?

Nope

They are just too close to the trees.

The strength of your story is that it can lead to reconciliation OR a break up, depending on the level of ‘crime’ Susan did AND how soon she can get it through Early/her own head what happened. We love that, and any story that 3 years after it is written provokes that response from readers ... has to be good.

EZ, took me long enough huh?

I honestly say that I can take or leave your stories as they come. BUT I do like your vision here. Clear-cut and no nonsense.

Sometimes a breath of fresh air is good.

Keep it up and I’ll read each one… no matter what I might think of the PLOTS you are a great writer IMO.

I think it speaks volumes that Phil who seems to love wimp Husband reconciliations and Doug/ Troubador who is infamous for writing super WIMP Hubby stories time afer time after time

are now going to tell us that we you see Bullshit it is in fact.... Lasagna!

The problem is that Troubador cannot remember his Own story correctly!

Troubador says..."Her car was parked there, she was never seen.''

wrong !!!! it was seen there overnight. Something DOUG fails to mention

Doug says

..."Or perhaps she, John, her personal assistant along with several other members of her firm were frantically working out a solution to "something."...

sure...so why LIE did she HAVE to LIE about it? If this was a work emergency at work why wasnt her car THERE?

why didnt susan secty (jennifer ?) know about this work emergency whren Early called Twice?

and NOTE how Troubador never mentions all the lies Susan Told Early while she was AT John's Place... and he was in their own house alone

sorry Toubador your super wimp tendencies are coming through here Big time. You are unable to recall the Facts of your OWN story and the chain of events with accuracy.

Lets look at PHIL's silly statements... PHIL said

.."There is no "proof" of Susan cheating...".

doesnt that include her confession phiL... I mean get a fooking clue

..."I noted the car in the driveway and no lights on in the house. This could be "proof" that they were out at a series of social events where the unmarried John Stickner needed an escort, for example. Rather mundane, really.

My god PHIL can you be this obtuse?

1) why was it necessary to spend the night at his place? .. Opps you forgot that FACT !!!

2) OK if so why did she LIE to her husband that she as in home and in bed?

3) why did she lie that she was working really hard?

again to support PHIL perposterous irrational BS all Susan had to do was say was this

..."But Early we were at the Chamber of Commerce function.... !! Dont you remember dear I told you about that last week..."

Then PHIL says this..

..."The only other "proof" is the lying, which is a bit trickier ..."

wrong again. What about the car overnight at John Strickner's house? that is NOT a lie... it is a FACT .

Nice try Phil

In the original, Early is a broken man; things look very bad from where he is looking. Yes she might be surprised, maybe even temporarily out of words. But knowing what he thinks, are you telling us that given that she has NOT permanently lost her tongue She could NOT have said “But dear nothing happened “(or something to that effect), and THEN leave it open to the readers? I can see why you would not to do it though. It would have closed most of the openness of the open ending. In the story she responds in equally devastated way, which could only be justified by a recognition of a pending devastation that cheating could create. Every thing else is Post story revision.

Last but not least. It’s upsetting to read you telling the WHOLE READERSHIP of Literotica that THEY are possessed with ‘reading in’ sexual context into a story. Just because people read LIT. does not turn them into illiterates or mindless readers. I am reminded of a folk proverb: “If you think that the floor is unstable; yet everyone says that you are drunk, you’d better go to sleep”

Thanks again Riter for hosting this debate!

You've gotten lame, man! Check this out: "There are several other comments I could make. But the weakest part of the story was Susan becoming nearly speechless when accused. What the hey! This is a successful practicing attorney! Speechless? It is possible, but the circumstances would have to be severe. What if... Susan had been dealing with a life or death matter, John's life or death, all by herself for a week. Or perhaps she, John, her personal assistant along with several other members of her firm were frantically working out a solution to "something." No one has even considered these possibilities. So, yes! There are other ways to look at everything I wrote."

Yep, and you can look at the sky and say the Sun is a block of cheddar cheese and heat actually comes from an invisible orbiting furnace, but will that make it a reality? You said so yourself that this is an ATTORNEY! When she spoke w/Early, she should have been honest about her whereabouts, or failing that, tell a lie that couldn't be checked out so easily! Be honest, "Troubador"! You MUST be Tony Snow!

E.Z.Riter:

I know I'm using the feedback for your story but my remarks are intended for 'the Troubador.' My apologies.

the Troubador:

I know I just recently posted a comment to the feedback for the original story. While I was composing my comments you were posting yours.

As I mentioned in my prior post, you have 'Early' telling 'Susan,' "...How can your cheating on me, cuckolding me, not have a thing to do with us?" 'Susan's;' reply, "...I was just trying to repay John for what he had done for me. It had nothing to with the way I feel for you,..." Troubador, she is responding directly to his charging her with infidelity! She counters his accusation with IT was something she felt she had to do. Implicit in her remarks is that she felt IT was the right thing to do in expressing her gratitude. There is no ambiguity in their conversation. They are both talking about the same thing. Troubador, am I missing something?

I've seen some remarks justifying her lies: that perhaps 'Early' was the jealous type, etc. But this is "reading into" the story facts which you did not present. 'Early' aquits himself as a reasonable, intelligent and sane individual. Other than that, what can the reader assume? Perhaps 'Early' was a miser and she stayed with 'John Stickner' in order to conserve money. Pretty silly! Troubador, it may not have been your intention but the facts, as you presented them, leave little doubt as to what happened.

Again, your story is a classic. And E.Z.R., your tale was most enjoyable as well. To "KOLKORE": I like that proverb!

Philip

Why are you really so determined, based on what open ended facts from what you wrote, that Susan should be more innocent than guilty?

You wrote this below:

...There are several other comments I could make. But the weakest part of the story was Susan becoming nearly speechless when accused. What the hey! This is a successful practicing attorney! Speechless? It is possible, but the circumstances would have to be severe. What if... Susan had been dealing with a life or death matter, John's life or death, all by herself for a week. Or perhaps she, John, her personal assistant along with several other members of her firm were frantically working out a solution to "something." No one has even considered these possibilities. So, yes! There are other ways to look at everything I wrote....

But, in the Original story "You wrote":

-Susan didn't try to defend herself. Not once. You allow the reader to belive she's guilty due to her silence. Who would let someone accuse them of a "marriage ending" crime of adultry while sitting the whole time in silence, allowing thier mate to believe the worst?

-Her husband is upset and repeatedly accuses her of adultry. And when he (according to what you wrote) ask her DIRECTLY how she could sleep with the other man, her answer is "But it didn't mean anything, Early. I am still all here, nothing in me is changed." And you are puzzled that people believe she is guilty?

-He comments about finding her car at another man's house. Again she sits there saying nothing to make him believe otherwise. Not even "It wasn't what it looked like", just "He deserved what I did for him" or "What I did had nothing to do with you" over and over again.

-He commented that she wasn't home for two days. And when ever she called she either said she was in their bed or in the kitchen. She obviously wasn't because Early was home and saw she wasn't.

-Her secretary was off. Early commented that she never took off unless Susan wasn't there. Early asked the covering receptionist when his wife was do back in and she said "Monday morning"

-To every comment Early made she commented back, this isn't about you or "John deserved this". When Early asked if he deserved for his wife to have sex with him, Susan tried to "deflect" Early off on another path. Again you make susan look guilty by having her try to "handle" Early instead of answering him directly.

Troubador, I'll say what I said before: You set the stage to make the readers "BELIEVE" Susan was guilty. Plain and simple, but you WANTED writers to write endings where she wasn't. You didn't say that. You gave only clues, the way you wrote it, where Early accused Susan and she didn't defend herself or explain it away. You did that intentionally. Why? And why didn't you say to the people who "took your challenge" that you felt that there were reasons that Susan could be found guilty or innocent? I mean people have been convicted in a court of Law for looking less guilty.

Why is it so important that Susan be found innocent when you deliberatly left enough clues to find her guilty?

You don't make any sense here. You might have reasons, but why spend the whole story making her look guilty only to later to express surprise that no one thought she should have been found innocent like you and your wife found her?

-Risq

...the wife got off far too easy for what she did. All she had to do was marry her lover, move to another town and it would all be in the past. I mean, if he's that rich and hot, why wouldn't she? She's not going to contest the divorce so nothing is going to come out to the public other than what the gossips spread throughout their circle of friends.

Troubador's original story was very cleverly written with a subtle suspense building plot of what might happen to a loving couple when a supposedly intelligent wife pulls an incredibly stupid, boneheaded act. Your sequal is skillfully written but is too vindictive for my taste. Comparing your story to Troubador's is like comparing a sword (Troubador's story) to a club(your story). 60 year old George

I am amazed by your comments! One of the great strengths of the Hitchcok films is the ability to make a point by inference. We did not have to see the woman in the shower getting stabbed to know that she was being attacked and was murdered.

Of course, there is the possiblity of an innocent explanation for Susan's actions but when the weight of the evidence points to only one conclusion readers go to that conclusion. You set us up!

You set the stage with a "seemingly" loving couple who are attractive and successful. You state "They are highly intelligent, caring and feeling individuals." This couple kept each other apprised of their comings and goings.

So Early comes home as soon as possible so he can be with his loving wife. When he checks at work he finds that Jennifer whose schedule is closely aligned with his wife's schedule is out of the office for two days (he later finds out that Susan was out of the office until Monday). Why didn't Susan mentioned this fact to Early (this behavior was not like Susan)?

When Susan calls Early she is upset because of his change in his itinerary. She talks glowingly about John S. and her pending promotion all the while she is deceiving him about her whereabouts and actions. Her car is parked at John S.'s place overnight and her second call repeats the same lies as before. When she is confronted instead of denying the accusation that she cheated she start speaking in code about John S. Early (or any other reader) did not know what she was talking about which is inconsistent with being such a successful attorney. Ok -she was in shock being caught red-handed but (1) a NO or simple denial is almost inherent to the human nature and (2) she had planned this deception so if there was an innocent explanation this was the time to hear it. I will not repeat their conversation but (1) blackmail was ruled out; (2) Early was not involved at all; (3) Early repeatedly accused her of cheating on him which she never denied; (4) John S. was a very honorable man; (5) Susan was not ashamed of "it"; (6) John S. deserved "it"; (7) "It" was something Susan had to do to thank John S. to thank him for what he did for her; and (8) Susan denied

being involved with other men. Susan never explained what the "it" was.

Bottom Line:

Susan with forethought deceived her husband and failed to deny that the "it" John S. got was not her body for two nights. Is it possible she did not cheat? Of course, there may be some reason to explain all of this confusion but that is not the point! Susan did not trust Early with the truth before her overnight stay with John S. and she did not come clean with the truth when confronted by her hurting husband.

Would the marriage survive? Early as written is a wimp (definition: someone who talks the talk but does not walk the talk) so he would take her back. The mechanisms that a logical troubleshooter like Early must use to trust a woman like Susan may be the high price he must now pay to keep her.

E.Z. - I loved your version of the story!

SleeplessinMD

try to redo other peoples shit? :-)))

Doug's story, EZ's Story and Josephus's story are 3 tellings of a common situation. They aren't the same story and shouldn't be taken as such. Personally, I like Doug's the best. I like his writing and his characters are a bit more fleshed out. But I am amazed at all the fighting, pissing and moaning going on here! Granted, in Doug's story Susan's actions should be taken as proof of anything. They are EVIDENCE of something, however, if you get my distinction. Just as if I am found over a freshly killed corpse, one that has been shot in 3 times in the chest, and I am holding a pistol doesn't PROVE I killed him, but it is damn good evidence of it! ;-)) Or as my dear sainted Pappy used to always say, "If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck, it ain't no eagle!"

Best Regards, EZ and keep on writing and posting!

C

There is a danger in writing open-ended stories like The Troubador sometimes does. I've read this and other follow ups to the original story and this is as good as and maybe better than the others. The only thing that is left is for the original author to write his own follow up.

Boyd

Watch THE PUNISHER, especially the last set of dialogues between Quentin and Howard and then Howard and his lovely wife, Livie, and you might see some parallel between it and the Troubador's original HHAP, in which he and his wife insist Susan did NOT cheat, despite ALL "evidence" which said she must have done it!

"We", the readership, are like Howard Saints (John Travolta), the main antagonist... All the "evidence" we (John Travolta) see point to her fucking around...

Every question about hers and Quentin's "coincidental" convergence at the Hotel, etc., was never being given a straight "No" answer. (Howard, personally, also found something more "damaging at Quentin's bedroom!)

All Livy could say in desperate response is usually,

"Howard, there's an explanation!" He asks but has already made up his mind in NOT believing any thing, because to him it's NOT conceivable that ALL the evidence could be ALL wrong! One or two but not all! And since ALL point toward infidelity, that MUST BE the ONLY possible answer!

Finally, after all kinds direct questioning and evasive answers from Livy, Howard/John Travolta says: "I am accusing you of fucking Quentin."

"Howard, that would be hard to do!" Livy answers.

"Oh, how true!"

(Quentin is now laying dead on the floor, so, yes, it'd be impossible for her to fuck him now, ungrateful bitch, he says to himself!)

Then she glances over and is shocked, but NOT BEFORE she utters, "Howard, Quentin's GAY!", which angers Howard even more! (Bitch, now you see how serious I am, you'd say any thing, don't you?)

Howard's out of it by now, grieving truly and deeply, because he truly loves Livy more than any thing and ALL THE EVIDENCE, from her dancing and chatting very intimately with Quentin, touching him flirtingly. The one most devasting piece of "evidence," to Howard, is finding, personally, one of her favorite diamond (given to her by Howard) ear rings in Quentin's bed!

Quentin died truly clewless like Howard!

Unfortunately, it's seemingly IMPOSSIBLE for Howard's lovely and also totally loyal wife, Livy, to "explain" about all the "evidence" Howard has gathered on her and Quentin's rendezvous.

She has also run out of time! He's right; she's wrong; and that's all there is to it...

They're being driven to the old "Little Cuba" neighborhood he found her ages ago and, after kissing her quickly one more time, hoists her over the guard rails, to be run over by a train approaching....

'Tis only an analogy; the Troubador will still have to tell us HOW his and his wife's Susan could be innocent of cheating, given ALL THE EVIDENCE we, the readership, are being pointed, falsely?, to!

But, again, worst comes to worst, we could go back to THE PUNISHER's dialogues: "Don't let your memories kill you.... You can create new memories. Good ones... Good memories can save your life..."

First of all, in order to have a story where there is some dramatic tension, there has to be some things that fool the reader during the story. As the “the Troubador’s” version is an incomplete story, those things that fool us must remain unanswered. It might be more apropos to pick on “the Troubador” for giving us an unfinished story.

I have said this before, Harry. Prior to, say, my fiftieth birthday, I might have murdered my wife and her shit-for-brains lover if I’d have found out she’d been cheating. Failing that, I’d have walked away, divorced her and had no contact with her or our children. Now? Pissed? Yes! But likely an amicable divorce. If, and it’s a big if, judging from the over-the-top nature of your personal comments, you actually grow emotionally and spiritually as you are here on earth to do, you’ll find that things get grayer every year and things you were passionate about earlier in life just don’t seem all that important anymore. Read Ronnie Wachuka’s latest story for an example of this. I wish I had learned this lesson earlier in life, as it would have saved a lot of aggravation. But, I wasn’t ready for it yet.

I am for reconciliation only under certain circumstances where it is reasonable. The key is whether or not the people involved are nice people deep down. Go to www.marriagebuilders.com and read some of the material. I remain amazed by some of the reconciliations that take place. An awful lot of people marry the first viable person that pays any attention to them and they don’t think they can find anyone else. So, they are very reluctant to let go of the one they brung to the dance, regardless of the circumstances. My own personal scorecard? Ten cheating husbands seen, ten reconciliations. Two cheating wives seen, two divorces. Many wives realize a divorce with children means they will take a very short trip down the road from the courthouse to the town of Poverty Junction. Many husbands realize they don’t earn enough money to support two families.

I think DoctorWyldcard answered your questions with one of many scenarios. I’ve thought of others, which are perfectly reasonable. I certainly did not forget Susan’s car (maybe not her, though) was there overnight. There are numerous reasonable explanations. As for Susan’s lies, I think DWC answered that, too, in the following quote. He came up with my thoughts exactly, as they are the comments my wife would make to me under the circumstances. We both had thermo-nuclear tempers, so I can relate.

OR make Early out to be an ass…

“I didn’t tell you because I know your temper and I know what you would have felt about me leaving my car there/sleeping at his house watching his mother.”

Thanks to E.Z.Riter for hosting this soiree.

Phil

The character in your example said:"Howard, there's an explanation!”, and the man did not believe her. I don’t see the comparison. In Troubador’s story, the wife does not offer a specific explanation (or even promises that there will be one), and the issue of believing her or not is therefore not relevant.

Chagrined: Personally I don’t feel like I am fighting, and as long as the exchange is civil - why not call it a debate?

I read the story again. Could not find a hint for any temper issue with Early. QUITE THE CONTRARY: “a friendly, sunny natured man with a constant smile on his face was a trouble shooter/negotiator” Sunny and problem solver point to easy going nature; rationally motivated with a concrete approach to problems. One way or another, the fact is that the author DID bother to put a list of characteristics to Early IN the story. It makes a consideration for a major ADDITION of a characteristic (such as someone who has temper problems) which seems to divert AWAY from the cluster which the story DID present seem unreasonable.

Second point. They are described as caring/ loving couple. Early is in probably the worst crisis in his life; terribly suffering. For the sake of the argument let’s imagine that he does have a hidden temper issue. Although – would not we see it by the time they talk, say after few minutes of their confrontation? Now, given her declarations of love and care, and seeing his tremendous suffering would the elusive fear of temper still be in the way for her to tell him that nothing happened? Would not that in fact help SOOTH his temper? Would not a caring and loving woman do all she can at this point to alleviate his pain? Yes she is a caring person as the story tells us. The problem is - she can’t deny what she has done to soothe him not because of Early’s imagined temper but because of the possibility that he could check it, and find if she lied.

There are infinite possibilities for legitimate readings which do not CONTRADICT or Stretch what’s IN A story. However, that infinite number is limited in its range. Not every thing goes.

Sorry Riter for my many postings here. The questions which were raised did intrigue me and I felt I wanted to add my stir to the communal cookout…

I'm happy to join the chorus of approval for EZ Riter's version--in no sense a sequel or completion, but a different re-telling of the tale. It's much more decisive and completed than Troubador's great original, which is sadder, perhaps, but less angry, and which leaves the door open to what might happen next.

As I've written in a comment to Troubador's version, I find his own remarks (among the comments here) as to Susan's possible innocence unconvincing. I hope he'll perhaps write his own continuation to illustrate what he has in mind. Otherwise, like many commenters here before me, I find Susan's responses to Early's accusations that she slept with Stickner impossible to read in any other way except that she spent two nights in bed with him (whatever did or did not happen there).

ohio

I can't tell you how much I've enjoyed all the comments and all the letters I've received privately. For those of you who referred to Troubador's original story or some of the other versions, I certainly have no problem with that.

It is the THEME which drew all our attentions. The cheating wife and what to do with her is certainly a compelling subject. Some readers strongly feel any reconciliation only can come from a wimpy husband; however, in real life, reconciliation is more common. I have written a few of those stories, too. In fact, someone referred to my story "Speedy" in a comment.

Troubador was correct when he said this was not an extension of his tale. His was a different story with the same characters. His story was shades of gray drawn subtly, intended to make his reader wonder. Mine was slashes of black and red leaving no doubt.

I am posting another story dealing with a cheating wife to Lit. It's entitled "Loneliness." If you think this story was cold, read that one.

What did susan say about what happened and how the affair got started and who started it going?

are you going to write a second chapter?

Pat Murray

Atlanta,Ga.

As a reader who has been consistently critical of writers who cannot write believable and appropriate endings for their stories, I do not give a damned how E.Z. Riter wrote the story. This whole mess started when Troubador had neither the balls nor the ability to write an acceptable ending to the original story.

Maybe some writers and readers get kick out of guessing how the original author might have ended the story, but the fact is that the original author did not write an ending.

I was having lunch with several folks the other day and the subject of movies with open endings came up. Everyone there commented on how this approach really pissed them off. The all said, without anyone prompting them, that the movie writers and producers did not have the skill, and were probably too lazy to learn it, to write a satisfactory ending. The same applies to many Lit.com writers. In the end, who gives a shit?

...doesnt have the imagination. 'feed me, feed me'.

when you write a revenge story tell what was going with thinking of the wife.one more chapter would took care of the small details.give the reader the full story and not half ass details.the revenge or justice was sweet.give us her suffering to make it work in our minds as readers.i like your turnaround as a writer in giving justice to the weaker or betrayed.

This was a great alternate story with the Troubadour's "How High a Price" characters. It's refreshing to see someone take charge instead of just being wimpy. Perhaps because it has never happened to me (thank God), I wonder why every time a man finds he has been cuckolded and is upset about it, he throws up, usually with gusto. Upset, tears, anger, despair, there are many emotions and reactions I can understand, but why do all or nearly all the guys experience extreme nausea? Of course the tragic betrayal, once found out, is hardly comical, but all the puking seems to get that way sometimes . . . Other than the vomit plus an encore upchuck, I really enjoyed this story.

EZ, this is the best ending Ive read. Please consider an additional chapter just adding a little more to the conclusion . You know, what happens next. Thanks

Different from the original in too many ways to be the same story, but good.

<p>

With respect to the Troubadour's comments, she lied through her teeth repeatedly and really does not matter why. Under the circumstances I could not trust her again or lover her again.

I liked the story but it still has a lot to be told. How did the divorce turn out, and what did his ex-wife do? Did she marry the guy she was cheating with? That seems to be the usual thing. Thanks .........Rich

story open ended...Well fuck him but it wasn't your story to do anything except to have Early act like a man instead of as the Trubador had him act. If the trubador had written another episode then he would have had Early sucking John Stickler out of his wife. Glad to see that you ended the story once and for all with balls instead of dripping pusseies. Susan cheated and that was that. Early smashed John Stickler's face and that was that. Good ending...final ending

Just what a spouse would do in real life,very real the sickos won't like it so tough.

I like this version of Early, though the trap and quick divorce has become a common resolution to such a tales on this site. The original story definitely intimated at infidelity on Susan's part, even if it was not made 100% explicit, so to dispute that point or to write an ending that ignored that would be a form of 'cheating'. Susan cheated. Period. And that parameter is what makes it a challenge to continue the story. So far, I'd say the endings by andrewpeters and Longhorn__07 are the best that I have read and I've read quite a few by now. Nobody comes away clean from such betrayals, not even the innocent victims. The hurt always lingers. You can forgive, but you can never forget. At least this Early figured that out early and took the initiative to get on with his life. It's hard, but sometimes in life it's the hard decisions that are the best.

It would have been good on its own as a revenge story. It certainly fits what a lot of readers think is the manly thing to do. You know, the self-righteous, perfect human beings that "BY GOD I'M A REAL MAN" "THROW THE CHEATING BITCH OUT!" "I DON'T WANT TO HEAR HER SIDE!" I DON'T CARE THAT SHE HAS BEEN A PERFECT AND LOVING WIFE FOR YEARS!" SPUTTER-SPUTTER-SPUTTER "SCREW OBAMA!" "SCREW EVERYONE IF THEY DON'T AGREE WITH WHAT I THINK!" SPUTTER-SPUTTER- "DAMN LIBERAL WIMPS ANYWAY!" "WHAT'S THIS SHIT ABOUT LOVE AND UNDERSTANDING, COMMUNICATING, FORGIVENESS!" "NOT THROWING STONES!" "BY GOD...IF YOU MESS WITH ME WOMAN YOUR ASS IS ON THE STREET!" "PARTERSHIP BETWEEN LOVING SPOUSES MY ASS!" Bullshit folks! This was just a revenge story for a certain group of folks that are holier than thou hypocrites! They only think they are fine examples of the real human race! Even the church does not want hypocrites and those who judge others without compassion and understanding! I went through combat for 2 years and was a state cop for the next 40 years and I have yet to see any perfect, righteous souls who deserve to go straight to heaven! Most of you self-righteous types are alcoholics and do not have that many people that really love you... Of course, you don't need many because you love yourselves and only your way of thinking! But then...this story was for you wasn't it? Not for the thoughtful, understanding, loving man like the Early in the original story? There! You vent and I vent! Fair?

Personally I liked the story it had everything a cheating wife story should have apart from the bit where the husband finds someone who truly loves him nOT this woman who gave up her self respect for a partnership in a LAWYERS firm.

But I guess he will find someone to help him get over his failed marriage. The ex-wife got everythign she deserved as did her lover.

Dude, you got no balls buddy, I mean you think like a gay guy or something. I read your Bio and I think you have some issues you haven't addressed, you have pushed a cockold lifestyle on two wives with terrible results, yet it still appeals to you. It's hard to take your view on a story as being valid, espically for me.

seems like this character has some intelligence but does not use it. He is running from the act of adultery by his wife...Why doesn't he confront her more so than what he did?. I like to see retribution for the cheating spouse be it woman or man....not being a wimp or a runner from the facts. I like to see payola for the cheater..

against the law firm are necessary. YOu dont want them to sweep it under the table you want them to eat shit. Ruined in the community they love.

we need to know what happens next - do them two assholes get what they deserve. Hope you get around to completing the story and not leave it open ended like this.e - and is it all brought out in the open?

Well written, but out of character. Even in the middle of adultery melee mild mannered Early is suddenly vicious and harsh even conversationally.he is crude and rude. Too big a change in character.

the Ct. Yankee

for posterity-great version!

A very heart breaking story, but one of the best I have read.

I hope that one keeps the dump the slut crowd happy lol

A totally viable way to play the story out - no less painful than the others and in its way simple and elegant. Nice writing style as well.

I did not need to think too much with this approach it was straight forward direct and quick, like taking the bandaid off a cut. It will not ease the after math much and my only issue with this approach is it makes it sound like the whole process is actually that simple for a felling person which this Early is - and it meant both of them have thrown away years of dedication and effort in one weekend.

That may be the right answer but with no attempt at any thing else it seems a bit presumptive.

Thanks for a good read

aka 'men who still have balls crowd' don't relish the end of a marriage, they mourn it like Early did. If the wife ran over the family dog Early would bury it and spend a few days grieving, not carry the decaying corpse around like some spineless idiotic cuck.

Great story.

That the lawyer would physically attack; let alone be sent to the hospital. Therefore, I rated it 1*.

ASSHOLE.

and has never had a life experience - coupled with no imagination anything being a fart or burp is beyond her comprehension

Eating Stickner's creampie is the only acceptable outcome; perhaps Early getting a sloppy seconds pity fuck if he was a good boy and took his cucking like a castrated pussy.

Anyone that thinks divorcing a lying, cheating, adulterous whore is the right thing to do is a meanie; real men spank their tiny weenies as they look at the photos of their slut wife getting cornholed and deepthroating strange cock.

Staying with someone who cheaped, finding it sexy.. that is not within me.

A lot of true emotions and thoughts of a hurting man. Thanks for sharing this awesome story.

but you did a great story.

Maybe too simple - or simplistic?

But certainly a valid approach to it and a very real tale -

Thanks -

This story in my opinion was the best of the How High a Price Stories. BDad's version wasn't bad either. They were all ok to read. But reading through the comments here and seeing the Troubador's own thoughts really just didn't square up. Apparantly what he wrote in the orginal story and what he believed that he was writing appear to be two different things.

I have read this story a couple of times before, but I never had read the comments until now. If in the original story, the Troubador was trying to build toward an ending where Susan was innocent, then to me it was written in a way to purposefully mislead the readers.

That's cool. No criticism is intended. It was his story and he could write it how he wants. But the readers get to read it how they want as well. And we all did.

MissouriUSA

This one is well written. It is my fav from the many other versions that i have read of it so far. Take a bow.

Almost without exception, other endings turn Early into a spineless wimp. Refreshing that this ending did not.

Is there more....I think you shouldtell about the wife trying to make him come back to her-or telling her side of story.

no matter that its a Bitter Ending. TK U MLJ LV NV

Early is definitely a different type of man than myself. In the original and other "retells", I could never understand how after that first night he or any man could stand passively by and let it continue. Wouldn't it be fun to call her when she is in John's bed and let her know he was only 5 minutes from home because he wanted to surprise her? In the original story it seemed as though they were just bickering back and forth with her trying to justify her actions. I mean is there any married man or woman out there that would accept her justifications after sitting there at home while she lies her ass off for two days and nights? At least in this story he is standing up for his rights.

Keep on keeping on ...

This is the best version yet. He finds his wife is cheating on him, the trust is broken, he does a thorough investigation and takes appropriate action. Awful as it may be - she murdered the marriage and it is over. Early actually made the end mercifully quick, rather than torturing himself and for that matter her and everyone else with a long drawn out death.

That has made a lick of sense. Well written and believable.

He's sitting in his dark home talking to his wife on the phone and thinking of the many lies she's throwing at him. Next paragraph "he suspected she was lying". You think?

most realistic and believable version so far

Why did she do it?

Why did Strickner attack him?

Was the divorce messy?

How did he BTB?

..after punching Strickner and crushing his face in, Early should have used his shoe heel and crushed Susan's in...

Best version I would say.

Wouldn't have minded some drama with the wife,but still better than the others.

This sequel shows the right way to handle the cheaters.

Five Stars

This is THE best conclusion by far. Thanks.

Susan says nothing in this. Totally different from most where she spends a lot of time trying to explain the unexplainable. I like 5*

Boy, did you nail this ending. This is by far the best ending. She cheated, he left. He didn't care why, etc. She did it, so it was over. Who cares about Susan, she is simply a cheater. He did good.

I had thought that of FTDS's ending, which was humorous but this one is really good too. I, like one other commenter, have wondered throughout the entire array of these finishes why the husband sits at home and allows the cheating to continue. I realize that this is the dog vomit that these "finishers" have inherited, but man I wouldn't put up with that shit for a minute. If she wants to screw around, get a divorce, if she wants to thank a co-worker for helping her, buy him lunch and have it delivered to his office. If she wants to live, don't do what Susan did. That kind of disrespect and duplicity can't go unanswered. Riding a pale horse type answer, you know "and Hell followed with him". Even lawyers understand that type of response.

Very well written. An 8 for sure, but a 5 because that's all of the numbers.

I've read all the "How High A Price" pieces, including of course, the original.

In my view, this is simply the best ending & resolution of them all.

With a one track mind like that no wonder she found someone else. His hard ass is really going to hurt when her lawyer breaks the stick off in it. But he can let his bitterness keep him warm at night now.