What We Owe The Readers

[AchtungNight]

I hope the readers will value what I put out by giving me kind words and not criticism. Unless they’re being constructive, but that is a very hard thing to find.

 

[VerbalAbuse]

I hope the readers will value what I put out by giving me kind words and not criticism. Unless they’re being constructive, but that is a very hard thing to find.

Criticism does not come in kind words. See literary criticism, movie criticism (check rottentomatoes for samples of movie criticism -- does it strike you as kind?) Critics are likely to take your piece apart and destroy it and mock everything about. You may hurt, but that's the only way you learn.

One may also reflect why criticism is more likely to be mean than kind. Ultimately, the reason doesn't matter, you just have to take it as it comes. But generally it's mean because it makes more sense for the critic to give it that way. Sometimes, the criticism is a "product" itself -- it's read by others. The audience generally prefers mean/harsh criticism. Putting up with the not so kind words is the price to pay for getting criticism.

 

[Cali_Love]

The list of five is right on.

If when you write, you can’t satisfy that list, then just don’t. I mean don’t post your story. Not here. Not anywhere. Keep it to yourself.

Notice there’s no mention of grammar or sentence structure. Not as important as storytelling which goes back to ancient times, both verbal and written, and those that did it well were gods, even inventors of gods maybe still worshipped today.

It’s been a while since I’ve read Joseph Campbell’s Hero With a Thousand Faces, but that list of five is surely interwoven within the hero myth.

 

[AchtungNight]

Criticism does not come in kind words. See literary criticism, movie criticism (check rottentomatoes for samples of movie criticism -- does it strike you as kind?) Critics are likely to take your piece apart and destroy it and mock everything about. You may hurt, but that's the only way you learn.

One may also reflect why criticism is more likely to be mean than kind. Ultimately, the reason doesn't matter, you just have to take it as it comes. But generally it's mean because it makes more sense for the critic to give it that way. Sometimes, the criticism is a "product" itself -- it's read by others. The audience generally prefers mean/harsh criticism. Putting up with the not so kind words is the price to pay for getting criticism.

Fine, then ultimately I don’t want to pay that price. I will take silence over meanness any day. And kindness over both. Why is kindness not a priority product too?

 

[VerbalAbuse]

Fine, then ultimately I don’t want to pay that price. I will take silence over meanness any day. And kindness over both. Why is kindness not a priority product too?

I don't know. Ask the critics. But would movie criticism sell (newspapers, magazines, sites, etc) if it were delivered in kind words? I don't think so. I think the audience expects mean.

 

[lustychimera]

I don't know. Ask the critics. But would movie criticism sell (newspapers, magazines, sites, etc) if it were delivered in kind words? I don't think so. I think the audience expects mean.

My ideal feedback is a critique because I want to know people's impressions on a scene, not their prescription on what steps they think I need to take to make it better. The latter's only good for what thoughts and impressions I can parse from their manual.

And constructive criticism is actionable. I don't want someone to tell me how to improve unless they are someone with the experience to tell me how to get it right and the understanding of what my goal is.

But impressions are extremely valuable and always valid.

 

[AchtungNight]

My experience is that if people are too busy insulting others, they can never say anything kind. And kindness is what ultimately gets through to me. I do not come here to be maligned- I don't care if you think criticism sells. I'm not here for it. I'm here to read and contribute good stories and receive positive feedback, hopefully. If all you have is negative crap, I will gladly go away.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Criticism does not come in kind words. See literary criticism, movie criticism (check rottentomatoes for samples of movie criticism -- does it strike you as kind?) Critics are likely to take your piece apart and destroy it and mock everything about. You may hurt, but that's the only way you learn.

Apt that a user named VerbalAbuse would talk about kind words and mean mocking criticism. : P

 

[StillStunned]

But what really is a contract? When two people agree to exchange. That is a contract. You need an exchange and you need an agreement on that exchange. If I read and understand the sign, and for whatever reason I do not agree to the terms, I can step on without paying and take my chances with the driver/fare police. But there is no contract since I and the bus company did not agree to the terms.

It's been a while since I studied contract law, but I'm pretty sure that stepping on the bus counts as acceptance of the bus company's offer. That means a contract, because you know, or should be aware, that you have to pay a fare for travelling by bus. If you don't pay, that's a breach, which is why you'll be fined. You can't just say, "But I was still negotiating terms with the bus company!"

Not sure how that changes the rest of your argument, or the question of what writers owe readers and readers owe writers, but still.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

It's been a while since I studied contract law, but I'm pretty sure that stepping on the bus counts as acceptance of the bus company's offer. That means a contract, because you know, or should be aware, that you have to pay a fare for travelling by bus. If you don't pay, that's a breach, which is why you'll be fined. You can't just say, "But I was still negotiating terms with the bus company!"

Not sure how that changes the rest of your argument, or the question of what writers owe readers and readers owe writers, but still.

Regardless of civilization's laws, these are the contracts of human interaction, be them economic or emotional or any other type of transactions.

Again, the word contract confuses most, because we immediately think of business and such. I'm talking about humans and karma and the logic of our interactions which most of us live a lifetime never truly understanding.

 

[TheLobster]

I don't know. Ask the critics. But would movie criticism sell (newspapers, magazines, sites, etc) if it were delivered in kind words? I don't think so. I think the audience expects mean.

It’s much easier to be perceived as smart and insightful when you notice and dissect flaws in something, as opposed to praising it or even just noticing the good parts. This is the ultimate motivation behind delivering any kind of criticism that will also be read by someone else who’s not the author.

You can see it when you compare the feedback you get in comments versus that in the private messages. The latter had been universally positive for me, whereas the former is much more of a mixed bag.

 

[Britva415]

do you agree that there are things that you, as an author, owe those readers who take the time to enjoy your stories, maybe even follow you, interact with you, or give you votes?

Those people don't do those things until after they've already read something from me that they got something out of.

If I disappoint them in the future, they're free to bail out and stop giving me any of their time. If they do, I don't owe them their time back.

I want to include your five "good elements" because writing well seems like a more satisfying goal than writing shit. To the extent that I do it at all, I don't do it for them, I do it for me.

There are three things I feel like I owe to readers, and they're completely different from your five good things. Those are a good title, a good description, and good tags - I owe it to them to help them develop an idea of whether they'll care to have a look at all, and then (this is all one thing, not two separate things) to not subvert their expectations too badly if they do.

 

[StillStunned]

There are three things I feel like I owe to readers, and they're completely different from your five good things. Those are a good title, a good description, and good tags - I owe it to them to help them develop an idea of whether they'll care to have a look at all, and then (this is all one thing, not two separate things) to not subvert their expectations too badly if they do.

I agree with this, if it's a loose story, or the first in a series. If it's a new chapter or instalment in a series, I think there's more of a burden on the author to meet the expectations of their regular readers. If I write seven chapters of Romance, and then an eighth were it turns out "it was all just a dream!", then I'd understand if my readers were annoyed. But that's just internal consistency.

As for the OP, I see that list more as "things readers probably appreciate". But there are all kinds of stories, particularly here on Lit, and they don't all need to meet those standards. There are also all kinds of writers here, with different levels of experience, storytelling ability and writing skill, and different goals for their writing. To say that "these are the elements that your story should contain" is quite short-sighted and, to be honest, a bit elitist.

I mean, let's face it, most readers aren't here for plot or character, they're here for steamy sex scenes. The story is just how they get there. I love writing sword & sorcery, but I'm under no illusion that the average reader thinks of Lit as their go-to online resource for S&S stories.

 

[MyBareTorso]

We owe the reader our best effort, nothing more, but nothing less.
We owe ourselves the joy (and agony) of creating something that is yours and yours alone. If your not emotionally linked with your work, why bother?

Or at least sexually linked...

 

[BobbyBrandt]

I read an interesting article today about what authors owe readers and it made me think of lit.

The author puts forward that, in general, in exchange for the readers time, authors "owe" the readers five things:

1. A good "Character" that the readers can follow, interesting, distinct and developed.

2. A good "Voice" for the narrator of the story, that supports the tale and is consistent fpr the reader.

3. A good "World" for the story, again, consistent and interesting for the reader.

4. A good "Problem" for the character to resolve. The more interesting the better for the reader.

5. A good "Event" for the character to participate in and the reader to come along through.

So, here's my question. I know that here, in the AH, opinions vary widely on what we, as authors, owe readers - from "not a damn thing" to "everything".

At the macro-level though, outside of a specific story, do you agree that there are things that you, as an author, owe those readers who take the time to enjoy your stories, maybe even follow you, interact with you, or give you votes?

The readers aside, doesn't an author owe it to themselves to at least aspire to produce a work worthy of sharing?

No one posts stories here except for the opportunity to share them with others. Otherwise, they would keep it to themselves and be perfectly content.

There's an adage, "You cannot pick up a turd by the clean end", yet many are shared here willingly regardless.

 

[VerbalAbuse]

It’s much easier to be perceived as smart and insightful when you notice and dissect flaws in something, as opposed to praising it or even just noticing the good parts. This is the ultimate motivation behind delivering any kind of criticism that will also be read by someone else who’s not the author.

You can see it when you compare the feedback you get in comments versus that in the private messages. The latter had been universally positive for me, whereas the former is much more of a mixed bag.

There's an overwhelming consensus on this forum that "criticism" should be praise, and nothing but.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Criticism does not come in kind words. See literary criticism, movie criticism (check rottentomatoes for samples of movie criticism -- does it strike you as kind?)

Most literary and movie criticism is intended for the benefit of the book-reading/movie-going public, not for the authors and directors. Indeed, many authors and directors avoid reading reviews of their own work because they understand they're not the target audience and it's not likely to be helpful. So what flies there is not very relevant here.

Critics are likely to take your piece apart and destroy it and mock everything about. You may hurt, but that's the only way you learn.

It really isn't though; I've learned a lot of things from kind people.

That's not to say that constructive criticism should shy away from discussing the negatives. Learning from criticism does require being able to understand one's own flaws, which can be uncomfortable. But I'm not aware of any pedagogical benefit to making that process more painful than it has to be.

 

[AG31]

I read an interesting article today about what authors owe readers and it made me think of lit.

The author puts forward that, in general, in exchange for the readers time, authors "owe" the readers five things:

I agree with many of the other respondents that "owe" isn't the exact right word.

But is this a reasonable list of attributes of a worth while piece of writing? Yes, IF your goal in the piece of writing was to vividly evoke character and plot and place. But I maintain that a worth while (good) piece of writing can leave out any of these things, if it's done on purpose.

And this gives me a new occasion to hop onto my hobby horse, which I haven't done for a while, and make a case for simple erotica. A common term is "stroker." I reject that because it connotes a situation where the reader brings their own energy to the situation and the writer can get away with some pretty slap dash narratives. In contrast, "simple erotica" can be used to describe works that have artistic worth without the inclusion of character, plot or setting. It's more appropriate to compare simple erotica to essays on surfing or mountain hiking. Descriptions of a human experience that is just about the experience.

When I rock on this hobby horse, I've taken to including three examples of what I think are admirable works of simple erotica from Lit, and two "regular" publications.

The Ring - @konstant - https://www.literotica.com/authors/konstant/works/stories

Vignettes Consacrées à la Maîtresse - @vkseverin - https://i.literotica.com/stories/showstory.php?id=1111901
https://i.literotica.com/stories/showstory.php?id=1434671

Tied up by a Mistress and her Maid - @ElectricBlue - https://www.literotica.com/s/tied-up-by-a-mistress-and-her-maid

The Story of O - Pauline Reage

The Enslaving of Eli - billierosie

And then that's the only kind of erotica that I write, but it's not my place to say whether or not the stories are admirable. All but three are BDSM, but that's irrelevant to the point here.

 

[Bamagan]

Most literary and movie criticism is intended for the benefit of the book-reading/movie-going public, not for the authors and directors. Indeed, many authors and directors avoid reading reviews of their own work because they understand they're not the target audience and it's not likely to be helpful. So what flies there is not very relevant here.

I think this is the most relevant point for readers and authors here.
Comments posted on stories, even if they're intended to be a legitimate critique of the perceived merits and flaws of the work, are a form of direct engagement with the author. It's fundamentally different than a professional reviewer publishing the exact same words to their own audience in a blog, journal, magazine, etc. Choices of tone in the context of a review don't preclude being extremely harsh; some people even seem to find that entertaining, given how much work people like Gordon Ramsey have gotten. But choosing to speak or write the same way in a relatively direct form of communication is just being an ass to someone, without even the thin excuse of doing it performatively.

 

[Bramblethorn]

I think this is the most relevant point for readers and authors here.
Comments posted on stories, even if they're intended to be a legitimate critique of the perceived merits and flaws of the work, are a form of direct engagement with the author. It's fundamentally different than a professional reviewer publishing the exact same words to their own audience in a blog, journal, magazine, etc. Choices of tone in the context of a review don't preclude being extremely harsh; some people even seem to find that entertaining, given how much work people like Gordon Ramsey have gotten. But choosing to speak or write the same way in a relatively direct form of communication is just being an ass to someone, without even the thin excuse of doing it performatively.

Yep. Though I think @TheLobster is right in implying (if I've understood them correctly) that a lot of the comments here that purport to be an attempt to engage with the author really are more about performing to the onlookers. How else to explain the people who leave negative comments and get really angry if the author deletes them?

 

[SimonDoom]

I don't think of myself as "owing" the readers anything, as though it's the equivalent of a moral or legal obligation. But I think of the publication of a story as a two-part transaction, with me as the author and the reader on the other side, and I feel a desire to make it a worthwhile transaction for both of us. I write primarily for my own purposes and my own pleasure, but I'd be lying if I said I was indifferent to the reader's satisfaction. Of course, I care about that. I think that's human. It gives me pleasure to know I've given readers pleasure.

 

[nice90sguy]

I think of literotica like a craft fair, where all the items are free. I'm not selling anything, and people don't owe me anything. I don't even have a tip jar, unless you count the comments section as one.

And, sorry that list in the O.P. is just, trite.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

But choosing to speak or write the same way in a relatively direct form of communication is just being an ass to someone, without even the thin excuse of doing it performatively.

Sure, but if there's anything valid in the criticism to be gleaned, why would the tone matter?

 

[KeithD]

I don't think of myself as "owing" the readers anything, as though it's the equivalent of a moral or legal obligation. But I think of the publication of a story as a two-part transaction, with me as the author and the reader on the other side, and I feel a desire to make it a worthwhile transaction for both of us. I write primarily for my own purposes and my own pleasure, but I'd be lying if I said I was indifferent to the reader's satisfaction. Of course, I care about that. I think that's human. It gives me pleasure to know I've given readers pleasure.

I agree, except that I see it as a three-part transaction. The publisher rightfully also has a slice of the transaction, including both consideration and responsibility.

 

[AG31]

But I think of the publication of a story as a two-part transaction, with me as the author and the reader on the other side, and I feel a desire to make it a worthwhile transaction for both of us.

I never think of the reader when writing a story. I record something that occurred in my mind. After it's published I'm happy to find like-minded people, just for the reason that human beings like finding like-minded people. But I don't expect to find mny.