Author:
Blog About:
Taxonomy upgrade extras:
Well, once again, I've managed to offend a writer.
I find that very frustrating. It's NOT my goal to discourage people or upset people. My posts aren't intended to be attacks.
I just want to talk about writing. I'm trying to figure out how to do it, and I'm not very good at it. I want to talk about the process, and I want to look at what other people have done. I want to look at literary tricks. I want to look at how arcs are opened and closed. (Mostly because plotting is one the things I'm the worst at). I want to look at how people craft emotional hooks. I want to know how you get people to turn the page (or read the next installment).
I just want to talk about writing. I'm not likely to sugarcoat my comments. I'm much more likely to present them in a bald, acerbic style. I'm not interested in building people up, nor am I interested in tearing anyone down. I really, really just want to have a clinical discussion about the writing process, what works for me, what doesn't, and (most importantly) why.
Some people don't like my posts. So I'm going to make a point here of apologizing. It's not my intention to offend, nor is it my intention to attack. And if you're one of the people who's been offended or upset by something I've posted, then I certainly do apologize to you.
If something I've said is helpful, then good. I actually do post with the hope that my comments will actually be useful to the person who's story I'm commenting on.
However, if something I've said isn't useful, helpful, or wanted, then please feel free to ignore me. If I'm impossible to ignore (I know, I tend to go on, and on), then send me a note, I'll stop.
It's really not my goal to ruin anyone's day, I just want to talk about writing.
Comments
Literary criticism
One of the key things about being critical (in the sense of literary criticism) is don't do it in public. Write your really pointed comments in private messages not in public comments.
A dialog between author and reader can be valuable to both but using the comments like a soapbox is going to feel unfair to the author.
Hugs,
Erin
= Give everyone the benefit of the doubt because certainty is a fragile thing that can be shattered by one overlooked fact.
Well, almost all literary
Well, almost all literary criticism is public. I figure it's actually better this way, because it allows the criticism itself to be criticised. There may be things that bug one reader that the rest thinks is an essential part of the story.
I know there are a few authors here who really hate criticism in the comments, which is fine for them, but they're definitly the minority. It would be nice if they warned about it. It is common internet practice to write reviews and criticism in the comments after all. It's big closet standard to be nice about things, but I'd rather know I get into a flamewar with the author if I write anything but a "kudos with text" in the comments. There is also the option to deactivate comments. If public criticism hurts you that much, please do us all a favour and deactivate them. IIRC you still get Kudos.
I've never seen Kalkin rip into anyone... So I can just suggest remember the author and don't bother writing comments there anymore. With some people you just can't do right. I guess there are some people with a really fragile ego here... on the other hand there are also authors who want to publicily discuss their stories. BCTS is a "hugbox" by internet standards, but that doesn't change the fact someone writing a controversial story can expect criticism.
@Kalkin: I really wouldn't want to miss your comments. I had a point myself where I considered writing comments. I continued. There will always be people you accidently hurt, it's part of the human condition. One is annoyed because they're critizised on the net. The other is annoyed since nobody ever tells them what sucks about their stories. I dread when I get maybe 30 kudos and 6 well done comments. I always wonder if that means the story sucks and people where just polite, or if my story was just out of the BCTS mainstream.
Fourteen years of running this place
How have I done it? By preventing flamewars by insisting on Rule One.
Public critical comments is the main reason people have left BC or stopped writing altogether. Half of all flamewars here started from public critical comments.
Remember that BC is completely different from most other fiction sites. Here comments are attached directly to the story, they appear as part of the story presentation. As such, the author is more directly concerned with the comments. This is deliberate on my part but it also means that criticism is right there to be read along with the story.
You say "almost all literary criticism is public." I could dispute that (how would you know how much criticism was NOT public?) but one thing is obvious, most literary criticism, in fact nearly all, is NOT attached directly to the story being criticized. That makes a big difference.
Many authors do not mind critical comments and in fact look forward to them. But not all authors feel that way.
It's also how the criticism is written. Saying, "I felt cheated by how easy the protagonist solved the problem." is entirely different from saying, "You cheated me out of a good ending."
And a lot of people who write critical comments will use the second form and wonder why the author got upset. Commenting on how the story made one feel is legitimate, commenting on the author's supposed intentions or motivations has to be done very carefully.
Hugs,
Erin
= Give everyone the benefit of the doubt because certainty is a fragile thing that can be shattered by one overlooked fact.
welp ..
Certainly I agree with the basic idea that if one can't say anything nice, one shouldn't say anything.
But that's not really what I was trying to say. When I comment, I consider my comments carefully, I weigh them to be sure that they're what I personally feel are emotionally neutral. That they're things that I would want to know about my own writing. I usually rewrite my comments several times before actually posting anything. And ... sometimes they still offend people.
I like the public format of the comments (here on BCTS), I like seeing how others interpreted the story, I like having a chance to discuss things. I've had some really great discussions, both publicly and privately with various authors about their works.
I just find it frustrating when my intent in posting, and the interpretations of others have such a vast gulf between them.
Good practice.....
Much like Erin has already stated, a good practice to keep in mind at all time is "Praise in public, criticize in private."
It's the managerial practice that all good managers should use, and I find that it applies to everyday life as well. Put another way , my mother always told me that if I didn't have anything nice to say, then don't say anything at all.
If you want to talk about writing in general, you shouldn't feel the need to criticize anyone in particular. If you want to criticize a particular author's work (and not all criticism is bad - be constructive!), do it in a private comment.
Dallas
D. Eden
Dum Vivimus, Vivamus
To listen, and to speak
Hi, Kalkin-person!
Comments and critique, like any kind of communication, requires that everyone involved are both respectful and attentive. While it is important for the speaker to pick her words with care (not sugarcoat, but with kindness), it is also very important for the listener to take what she needs from the critique, and accept that it is the opinions of one person, not fact. Just as some people find it more difficult expressing themselves, some have a really hard time NOT taking things said personal.
Speaking honestly is always the best thing to do, in my opinion, but even then someone can have a bad day (or week, or year...) and become hurt by a comment that was actually made in an attempt to understand, rather than admonish.
We're all very different creatures, of thoughts and emotions, and it's not so strange that we respond differently to a clinical inquiry - some might engage in a debate, some might feel bad about how it brings attention to a shortcoming in a story (and, by extension, of the author).
I can only speak from personal experience, but I always read your comments on the story I'm posting here with mixed feelings of curiosity and trepidation. I love how you insightfully pick up on details and hints, and predict things to come. I wince when things I hadn't considered, plotholes, or poor writing, is analysed with equal acuity. BUT! I try to take every comment I get as a learning experience and an encouragement. That's how my heartplaces work.
In the end, I guess what I'm trying to say is this: You can critique without being critical, and pick a voice depending on the audience :)
Hugs,
Hmm...
Hmm.. I suppose. I guess that's an apt approach. It's a little hard for me to tell what "voice" any particular author is comfortable with however.
And ... while we're on the subject, I'm sorry my comments cause you any trepidation. If there's something I can do to mitigate that, do let me know.
Hearts and minds
It's okay, Kalkin-person :)
I guess a lot of it stems from the inherent weakness of the internet - there are no nonverbal cues to help us understand what the other person is saying. There are smilies, sure, but we use so much more of our bodies in communicating ideas to one another.
One thing is a little easier though (at least for me), and that is the way you choose to write. What I mean by this is you can write subjectively, with your own values and feelings; or you can write objectively (as much as anyone can) and analyse. Oh, and the grey stretch between those two points, of course, but let's not go there right now :)
A lot of writers here put an unusual amount of themselves into their stories. Their wishes, their dreams and hopes. Perhaps not self-insertion characters, but enough of themselves that their stories become an extension or representation of themselves. An emotional representation. When that is picked apart and analysed, measured logically, objectively, it could be an unsettling experience for an emotionally vulnerable person. And, let's face it, by the very nature of this place, that describes many writers. I'm likely one of those as well, though trying not to take things too personally - which is what I suppose it all boils down to: writing is a very personal act for some, and having it criticised means having yourself criticised as well.
Yes, posting in a public place like this invites comments and critique, dialogue and arguments, and it's always an option to disable comments. But that shuts the writer away from the community they're trying to reach out to. Nothing is ever easy, is it? :)
The sad truth is that a carefully formed, oft rewritten, neutral analysis can be more offputting than an emotionally charged comment, to some. Because in the latter case, the writer will at least know that they reached the reader in some way. We're all very much different!
For myself? I love my commenters, and try to reply to every one to make sure they know how much I appreciate every single person reading my story. It's my way of interacting with the community here, and a way for me to get feedback (both positive and constructive) on how to become a better writer. Most of your comments are often startlingly clever, but when you bring up your concerns it feels to me like your reading experience was ruined by that something. Then I want to go back and rewrite, or clarify the scene, which takes away from my current chapter or would force an even bigger change. That's when I start fretting :)
I realise that you bring issues up because you want to understand them better, and not necessarily be judgemental about it, and that it is equally my responsibility as the recipient to be mindful about HOW I read the comments as well. So please, continue to write the way you feel most comfortable doing. I can only speak for myself, but I feel that more than one point of view, and more than one voice, is necessary to get an impression on how well a chapter works.
Hugs,
mm.. verbal cues
Yeah, I seldom have trouble in person.
Personally, I do try to be objective when I write (comments), if I include a more subjective comment, I try to clearly label it as such. But.. as you say, sometimes the more objective comments are also off-putting (in my experience). So ... damned if I do, damned if I don't.
And yes, I agree, a lot of the writers here do put a great deal of themselves into their works. I think that's true of most amateur writers, but obviously that's especially true here. A lot of those people are writers on who's works I would never presume to comment. My comments wouldn't be useful or desired. Those are people for whom writing is a form of escape, or therapeutic exercise. But ... at the same time, there are also writers who's potential seems to be to be greater (to me) than this rather specialized, niche genre. Those are the people who's works I tend to comment on. Not of course that I represent any sort of professional expert.
Obviously a lot of professional writers put a lot of themselves into their own works too. J.D. Salinger was famous for his refusal to allow The Catcher in the Rye to be made into a movie during his lifetime (though he did allow a provision for his heirs to do so if they wished).
That having been said, I think professional writers are also usually keenly aware of the other side of writing:
That being: Writing as a craft is about manipulating the emotions and expectations of the reader(s). Perhaps "manipulating" is too negatively charged a word ... "managing" might be more palatable. Writing is about taking the reader on a journey. About encouraging empathy for the central characters of the narrative. It's about creating sufficient tension to draw the reader on. It's about building tension through a series of acts (usually 3, but not always). About constructing arcs (or questions) early in the story, and then resolving them by the end. At least the major arcs at any rate. It's also quite common to leave a hook or two that can be exploited in a future story.
Jim Butcher's Dresden Files series is a good example of the use of progressive hooks that lead on to future stories.
Writing is about taking the reader on an emotional journey, picking them up in one place, leading them along, and then leaving them somewhere else. Sean Connery once commented that he liked his audiences to be "stirred, but not shaken".
So ... yeah, some people (who post here) are clearly writing for themselves (and probably always will be). But some are ready to move beyond that, and actually want an audience. And if you want an audience, then you have to start considering how what started from a personal place will impact those who read it. What do you (the generic, collective "you" that is) want that relationship to be like, to say? How do you want that interaction to feel, what does your reader take away from your work?
For myself, I read everything I can get my hands on (within certain caveats, see below), I read constantly. Mostly, I read fiction. I find non-fiction ... difficult. I generally need some sort of narrative structure to pull me through written works. Of the fiction I read, I tend to stick to the genre referred to as Science Fiction and Fantasy, though that has numerous sub-divisons and I'm generally happy with anything in the general family of SF/F. And of course, I also read a lot of "TG" fiction, though I still tend to gravitate towards the more SF/F stories. If I kept reading, then a "concern" I expressed didn't ruin the story for me. It was just something I noted as not quite fitting the rules of the craft as I've been trying to learn them and understand them.
If I didn't keep reading (which does happen), then mostly likely I wouldn't comment. Or, at most I might leave a "This is where you lost me" type of comment.
An example of a book I stopped reading was The Black Ship, by Diana Pharaoh Francis. It was beautifully written. The world was elaborate, detailed, well envisioned and well described. And ... I hated the central character. He was an ass. He was supposed to be an ass, supposed to screw up his life, and then go through a journey of redemption. But I just couldn't get past how much I disliked him as a person during the first chapter or two.
Hrm.. I seem to be out of thoughts for the moment, however, I don't really seem to have a conclusion to offer, so I guess I'll just have to end abruptly.
Challenge
Ok, I'm going to deviate somewhat from what you're asking. Ex. the argument about the criticism. I want to focus on what you want. You say your not a very good writer and want to improve by discussion or other means.
I, myself, do not consider myself a literature writer. Far from it. So lets get down to the basics. As a writer what type of story are you trying to write? Fantasy, fiction, real life? Are you going from one person to another and so one.
Now how are you starting your story? With a problem or without? Will they run into it or is it a secret?
Here at BC you're allowed to write any type of gene you wish within I'm sure certain stipulations. Plagiarism being one.
Now as into the actual writing are you going from beginning to end or if your like me (and I'm sorry for what I've done to my poor editors) jump all over the place. I've written in the middle, the beginning and the end in no abstract order. To make it worse I had given an outline only to deviate from it slightly. What is your method of writing? Or are you still in the self discovery mode as I am. Quick story or long. Complex or easy. So on an so on.
Ibi
Hmm...
Well, that's an easier set of questions than the more emotionally charged ones above, if a bit more tangential.
Umm... typically, I write what most people would call Fantasy. That is, fiction in the fantasy genre. Sometimes I stray into science fiction (or steampunk), but more along the lines of what's often called space opera rather than hard science. I try to research things enough for verisimilitude, but I don't really have the technical background to present hard science believably.
I typically write using a tight, first person format for my main character, though occasionally I'll use a tight, third person format instead. Sometimes I'll also include perspectives from supporting characters in a looser third person format.
Um ... I'm not entirely happy with my abilities with exposition, I think that could be more polished, but it's not my focus at the moment. I'm fairly happy with my ability to write dialog. My characters could use work, but that really ties in to what I consider my biggest issue: Plotting. You ask how I start stories, when I was first trying to write, I tended to use the seat-of-the-pants method, like many amateur writers. I found that to be unsatisfying as it typically lead me to a place where I had no idea how to proceed further. It also tended to leave me with weaker characters (as I mentioned above) and with stories that were frankly, tepid travelogs at best.
These days, I've been trying to workout a solid plot before beginning to write. Basically, writing out the scenes I want on file cards and arranging them in the order I think makes sense before beginning. (Virtual file cards actually, which Scrivener provides).
When I'm working on a story, I usually try to start at the beginning and head through to the end, before going back and doing any editing (and/or rewriting).
The current story I'm working on is a novel length work with about ... hrm .... 55ish planned scenes. Some of the pre-planning is quite elaborate, and I have a clear idea what I want, and some of it sketchier than that and I'll probably get bogged down when I get to those spots. Frankly ... the whole thing needs more conflict and stronger antagonists. And probably a better balance between scene types (dialog, exposition, action, etc.).
Most of the time I go back to review what I've written, and it seems tepid and dull to me. It would be really great to get more feedback on those aspects of writing, but I don't really feel I can move forward on that until I really understand how plotting works (and/or, is supposed to work).