What Makes You Stop?

[Guest]

Oh, Shangy, I'm sorry- I'm just being silly.
And I've just pointed out another pitfall of the writer- readers who don't read carefully...

Which wanders back around to the idea that a reader has has much to do with creating a reading experience as the writer does.

(I also loved the anecdote about the shelf of books with the "One Good Part")

I'd like to suggest that, in general, readers WANT to join into the story with the author and authors WANT the reader to participate. Even authors who don't manage it (because of the aforementioend masturbatory tendencies) fail to include the reader out of ignorance. For most readers/writers, it is analogous to a sexual or loving interaction, with the exception that usually feedback and critique are not possible. That's different here at Literotica (and how appropriate that it is so).

Of course, just like with a lover, there are some things you cannot say or someone cannot hear. Sometimes "well, that was nice, but it didn't do it for me" is as crushing for an author as for a lover. Sometimes, it's the one bit of information the author has been waiting to know.

I suppose how one takes such feedback depends on how accomplished one feels in the particular activity.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I'd like to suggest that, in general, readers WANT to join into the story with the author and authors WANT the reader to participate.

And that's another reason I avoid 2nd-person stories. They always feel exclusionary in a way that first- and third-person stories don't, like you've tapped someone's telephone. There's an implicit voyeuristic feel to 2nd-person stories that just doesn't appeal to me.

 

[BlackShanglan]

Oh, Shangy, I'm sorry- I'm just being silly.
And I've just pointed out another pitfall of the writer- readers who don't read carefully...

I'm so sorry, Stella. If you would have the goodness to ascribe my own surly manner last night to being up too late after a long day, I would be eternally grateful. It was wholly uncalled for, and you are very kind not to give me a quick shot with the quirt for it. (Or, knowing me, to simply hang the quirt up and never touch it again.)

And over Pratchett, no less! I'm a great fan of his work.

Sincere apologies,

Shanglan

 

[BlackShanglan]

And that's another reason I avoid 2nd-person stories. They always feel exclusionary in a way that first- and third-person stories don't, like you've tapped someone's telephone. There's an implicit voyeuristic feel to 2nd-person stories that just doesn't appeal to me.

Yes, and to me they feel rather like orders - "You do this. You do that." I've totally lost all will or volition, and as Malachiteink points out, that's a major turn-off.

(That sex/reading metaphor just keeps getting better!)

Shanglan

 

[Guest]

 

[BlackShanglan]

Thanks, Doc, that's the first reasonable explanation I've seen. I may be a bit oversensitive on this issue, but reading "2nd person stories suck" without explanations grates on me.

There are good stories in second voice. Impressive did a superb one as a challenge once (and for all I know there may be marvelous second-jammies works out there too). I think it's not so much that second person can't work as that it's one of those tools that is rarely used well enough to do so. It's like passive voice, which does have a role in good writing (I hate hearing people intone solemnly "never use passive voice"; why the devil do they think the grammatical structure exists?), but which is misused so often by people who don't understand its ramifications that readers develop a knee-jerk negative reaction to it. When either is used well, it can be part of some excellent writing.

Which brings us back to the point Stella was making so nicely while I was busy acting like a pompous ass last night. Nearly anything can have a place in good writing; perhaps the unspoken addition to every item listed so far would be "when not used for the appropriate effect."

Ooooh. Wouldn't that be a fabulous challenge thread? Every author could take one of the crimes against humanity listed in this thread and write a short-short that uses it in an artistically valuable way. I'd wager comedy would work with many of them. Mmmm. It would be very interesting to see what came of it.

Shanglan

 

[Guest]

 

[OhMissScarlett]

I'm getting to this thread late and someone's probably already said it, but my usual reason for clicking "back" while reading is boredom. I have a short attention span and little free time to read, so if a story doesn't have me from hello or even within a few paragraphs I'm out of there.

If you think this attitude is shallow or lazy or whatever, just keep in mind that I torture myself with my own pet peeve while I'm writing. I obsess over my opening and make half a dozen people read it to make sure it can hold their attention.

 

[BlackShanglan]

There is a second-jammies story out there, yes, which I wrote before I started posting here and hearing the derision heaped on second-person writing.

*nuzzles* Never fear, oh jammied one. We all know that it can indeed be done well, and we all know that you're the author to do it. And socks.

Pompous ass or pompous horsie? Just to clarify...

Pompous horsie acting like a jackass (with no insult meant to my donkey brethren).

And I love your idea--got time to organize the challenge?

I may. If I do, I will know by, say, Monday; I have some work I need to clear away today if I'm to make it. If others are interested in participating, it would be an incentive to me, so do feel free to post or PM.

Oh, and you need to check the thread Vellissima started for you, as I thought of you last night.

Loved it.

 

[BlackShanglan]

I'm getting to this thread late and someone's probably already said it, but my usual reason for clicking "back" while reading is boredom. I have a short attention span and little free time to read, so if a story doesn't have me from hello or even within a few paragraphs I'm out of there.

If you think this attitude is shallow or lazy or whatever, just keep in mind that I torture myself with my own pet peeve while I'm writing. I obsess over my opening and make half a dozen people read it to make sure it can hold their attention.

I think it's an ideal way to look at things. One of my cardinal rules is not to tell myself that it's the reader's fault s/he isn't interested. Yes, it's important to know one's audience, but for me it's at least equally important to validate reader interests and make sure that I am looking after them.

Shanglan

 

[Guest]

I think it's an ideal way to look at things. One of my cardinal rules is not to tell myself that it's the reader's fault s/he isn't interested. Yes, it's important to know one's audience, but for me it's at least equally important to validate reader interests and make sure that I am looking after them.

Shanglan

That brings me to another question -- how valid is it to "blame the reader"? I've heard it said to me the phrase "You just don't get it" when I have made comment on a story. Is that a valid response from an author or an evasion of authorial responsibility to communicate with a reader?

 

[3113]

That brings me to another question -- how valid is it to "blame the reader"? I've heard it said to me the phrase "You just don't get it" when I have made comment on a story. Is that a valid response from an author or an evasion of authorial responsibility to communicate with a reader?

Valid? Maybe not, but how else can we keep writing?

I'm only half joking there. Writers, and I mean those of us who put our stuff out there for people to read, we're curious animals. We are egotistical enough to believe that what we have to say is important and everyone should hear it. But that usually goes hand-in-hand with a self-esteem easily bruised. Our writing is our baby...and when we get criticism, it's rather like someone seeing our kid and remarking, "What an ugly baby!"

First instinct is to pat the baby on the head and say, "That's mean reader doesn't know what they're talking about, my darling!"

It's not a very good split personality we've got. Far better if we had low-ego and high self-esteem, then we could be a Gandhi or Mother Teresa and go out and save the world.

Anyway...if a reader writes you an intelligent criticism--not "This sucks!" but, "It doesn't seem to me that the character would do this...." then, after nashing your teeth and feeling hurt, and denying they're right, etc....then a real writer will sit down and try to explain it to reader or to themselves what they were trying to get across and why. And if they find that the reader was right, it can't be explained or they, the writer, didn't communicate their point well at all, that they took the easy way out, cheated...then a good writer will do what's right for the story.

IMHO, real writers put the story first. Always. What's best for the story is what matters. Always.

Now, of course, some readers aren't going to see the deeper things you put into a story and not everyone is going to "get it." Imagine a reader who likes sci-fi, but doesn't get romance. He's not going to "get" that sci-fi which has romance in it. So we have to judge if the comment comes from a reader who would USUALLY "get it," but the story failed them, vs. one who's not going to get it no matter what you do.

I've found that in most cases, I can tell if the criticism is spot on and I blew it...or if the reader really just doesn't get it. If it's spot on, I usually take it hard, nash my teeth, feel hurt, go into denial...and then fix the story. Readers who really just don't get it and never will no matter what I do, those comments I can pretty much shrug off altogether.

Those comments that are both thoughtful and get under our skin are often right, and we should consider them. At the least, we haven't communicated what we wanted to communicate.

 

[BlackShanglan]

That brings me to another question -- how valid is it to "blame the reader"? I've heard it said to me the phrase "You just don't get it" when I have made comment on a story. Is that a valid response from an author or an evasion of authorial responsibility to communicate with a reader?

Therein lies the problem: it could be either. The fact that it sometimes is the reader is what makes it such a tempting excuse. It's not always easy to tell where the problems lies, either, although I agree with 3113 - the more the comment stings, the more I try to force myself to examine it, because it's a sign that I think it has merit. When weighing up critical comments, it helps to know one's readers and know what their writing and reading preferences tend to be; that helps put things in context. I also like using the SDC forum because one gets comments from many different people. If several people tell me roughly the same thing, then I know that the story is presenting barriers to its readers.

That's not to say that I must change my story; if I want to, I can write a story that I know very few people will like or connect with. Ironically, I thought I was doing that with "The Private Diary of Alexander Pope"; I wrote it entirely for myself and assumed that on posting it would be immediately bombed into oblivion. Who other than me could possibly want to read a poet's diary written in a style and grammar three hundred years out of date? Its success baffles but also cheers me; evidently I'm not completely alone in occasionally liking to mix obscurity with eros. But my point is that I knew I was making sacrifices with that one. I did things that I knew were offputting to many readers, and I had to acknowledge that. It's fine to post something like that while accpeting that it won't appeal broadly; the key thing is not to then blame the readers for not entering a story that charges a high admission fee up front.

I do also think that teaching oneself that saying "you just don't get it" as a method of defending one's work is a dangerous habit. First, of course, it doesn't carry much weight intellectually. If the reader doesn't "get" what the story is about, the story has failed with that reader; it did not convey to the reader what the story was meant to be about. It's possible, of course, that the reader is an idiot, but in my experience that's quite rare. Idiots with no idea how to read and no appreciation of literature rarely volunteer to read someone else's work and offer comments on it. However frustrating it may be to have a reader not understand the story, one has to look carefully at the story and ask why that is.

But the second issue involved I think much more important: one cannot defend one's stories. This is one of the best pieces of advice I've had on writing, if one of the hardest to accept. Good readers are not easy to come by, as I think anyone serious about writing recognizes; in fact, readers of any sort, good or bad, are not easy to find. Even those who don't offer much feedback (or much strong feedback) often come out with a single gem that really changes one's perspective, and so it's worth not offending readers or making their generous donation of time into something they regret. And that is precisely what defending one's story does. It leads one to argue with the person making the comments in an attempt to diminish their impact - which communicates to the reader either "your comments were worthless and wrong" or "I'm too defensive to listen to anything you have to say." What reader wants to come back to that?

I've always admired the way that Varian deals with comments on the SDC. Varian is extremely gracious, even when an external observer (me) might think that some posters clearly have missed the point of the story altogether. Varian isn't just gracious, either; we've had occasion to talk about our work now and then, and I know that Varian weighs every one of those comments carefully and looks for the truth in it. It's surprising how often it's there; I can say the same thing from my own experience. Stepping back from defending the work doesn't just help show one's appreciation for the reader's efforts; it also opens one's mind to more possibilities. It's amazing what good advice can be concealed in what at first might seem to be an off-base comment. I've been grateful for it many a time.

And, of course, there's this last: will the writer be standing next to every reader of the story for the rest of its existence, looking over the reader's shoulder and interjecting demands, admonitions, and advice on how s/he ought to be reading it? If not, the writer had best work out how to create a story that does not require such intercessions.

Shanglan

 

[Guest]

Therein lies the problem: it could be either. The fact that it sometimes is the reader is what makes it such a tempting excuse. It's not always easy to tell where the problems lies, either, although I agree with 3113 - the more the comment stings, the more I try to force myself to examine it, because it's a sign that I think it has merit.

Valid? Maybe not, but how else can we keep writing?
...Anyway...if a reader writes you an intelligent criticism--not "This sucks!" but, "It doesn't seem to me that the character would do this...." then, after [nashing your teeth and feeling hurt, and denying they're right, etc....then a real writer will sit down and try to explain it to reader or to themselves what they were trying to get across and why. And if they find that the reader was right, it can't be explained or they, the writer, didn't communicate their point well at all, that they took the easy way out, cheated...then a good writer will do what's right for the story.

Both of you are saying something I've taken as a truism in understanding and using critique -- if more than one reader picks on something, it's likely a problem, and the more a particular comment stings, the closer one has to look at it.

Whenever a reader says to me "I just don't get it", I usually have to delve deeper to find out what "it" is. Sometimes, like Shanglan says, it comes down to a choice I've made that I'm going to stick to, and in making that choice I'm going to exclude some readers. Sometimes I'm speaking past a particular reader's comfort or knowledge area and I have to figure out how MANY readers that one reader represents.

I can't let "I just don't get it" stand as a critique because it tells me so little. I'm not sure if it's the concept, the voice, a quick of a character,or a typo that skewed the meaning of a sentence causing the disconnect. I only know I have to look and make a decision.

It's fine to post something like that while accpeting that it won't appeal broadly; the key thing is not to then blame the readers for not entering a story that charges a high admission fee up front.

Now that's a valuable bit of wisdom. Sometimes a piece REQUIRES more from a reader, and not all readers want to put in that effort. Others search for stories that challenge them. There's something to be said for "finding one's audience". I know much of what I write will not appeal broadly. I no longer expect it. I read other authors and select those stories which have the highest appeal to me, and then I model my ideas on those stories -- I rarely write just like others, but I aim for the same or a similar audience.

Which, end the end, means I'm writing for myself, under the assumption there are other people in the world like me

I do also think that teaching oneself that saying "you just don't get it" as a method of defending one's work is a dangerous habit.

A friend of mine finished her MFA in creative writing recently, and filled me in on the workshop process she went through. The group sits around the writer and each takes turns critiquing the story. The author is NOT ALLOWED TO SPEAK -- he or she can take notes, or cry, or sit still, but they may not speak. The group will then debate amongst themselves. Once ALL critiques are given, the author is allowed TO ASK A QUESTION of the group concerning the story.

She said it was hellish, but she now teaches using the same technique. Her stories are also being accepted into literary reviews and magazines.

Other workshops (mostly on the Amherst model) use modified versions of this.

But the second issue involved I think much more important: one cannot defend one's stories. This is one of the best pieces of advice I've had on writing, if one of the hardest to accept.

The work must -- MUST -- stand on its own. Once a writer sends it into the world, there is no more standing in front of it and defending "the baby". It's a grown up.

IMHO, real writers put the story first. Always. What's best for the story is what matters. Always.

YES! With extra emphasis. And it ain't easy.

Now, of course, some readers aren't going to see the deeper things you put into a story and not everyone is going to "get it." Imagine a reader who likes sci-fi, but doesn't get romance. He's not going to "get" that sci-fi which has romance in it. So we have to judge if the comment comes from a reader who would USUALLY "get it," but the story failed them, vs. one who's not going to get it no matter what you do.

While I like to think a good, strong story transends its genre, I also grudgingly agree that some readers will give more attention to the trappings of the genre and never see the story. I read across genres and chances are I've sampled at one time or another a story or two from most everything. I have one friend who comes to mind. She loves fantasy. She can quote Tolkien. Yet she sees Star Wars as pure science fiction and cannot/will not watch it because she can't get past the space ships. Even when I break it down and compare it to the elements of high fantasy, she can't get over the space ships. She never will.

Thank you both, Shanglan and 3113, for such deep answers! I can't begin to express how thrilling I find this kind of conversation. Honestly, I ask questions because I want to hear the answers,and not (just ) because I want to stand on my own soapbox to proclaim my wisdom.

 

[3113]

While I like to think a good, strong story transends its genre, I also grudgingly agree that some readers will give more attention to the trappings of the genre and never see the story.

This is going to be especially true here, with erotica. I mean, look at the answers you got to "What makes you stop?" They included certain genres that people just can't read--or elements that stop people dead--like weak men.

I don't really get the incest category. But I liked one author enough to read his incest story. I thought the writing good, excellent even, but I didn't really enjoy the story. A critique from me would most certainly have been a "didn't get it!" critique. Because I don't 'get" that genre and so had no idea how to judge the quality of the story. It's rather like someone reading a horror story with a downbeat ending, writing to the author and saying, "it should have an upbeat ending!" Um, well, genre-wise, horror stories don't often lend themselves to bright and sunny endings. So, is it a valid criticism, or is this a reader who doesn't get it?

 

[Guest]

This is going to be especially true here, with erotica. I mean, look at the answers you got to "What makes you stop?" They included certain genres that people just can't read--or elements that stop people dead--like weak men.
... It's rather like someone reading a horror story with a downbeat ending, writing to the author and saying, "it should have an upbeat ending!" Um, well, genre-wise, horror stories don't often lend themselves to bright and sunny endings. So, is it a valid criticism, or is this a reader who doesn't get it?

Well, as a reader, I don't always blame the author when I "just don't get" a story. Like many people here, there are some stories I know won't interest me (I read very little romance, except in very specific instances -- Georgette Heyer is about it. I like my romance mixed in with something else.) I don't blame the author for not writing well. I know I'm not going to accept the premises, the cliches of the genre, the standards of the story, etc. I've still read a few romances I really loved, usually because they transcended their genre limitations. As for the rest -- to paraphrase, the fault likes not in our authors, but ourselves.

Of course, if I do make a comment to an author along the "I just don't get it" line, I try to define "it". What did I like that kept me reading, and what failed so that the story wasn't satisfying? I just did an edit/close read on a story for someone, and all I did was ask questions -- why this, why that, what's this about? I liked the story, but I didn't LIKE the story, and those questions were the reasons why. That author could have made a set of choices to not answer those questions, in which case I might have remained unsatisfied.

I have had books I wanted to like but ended up throwing with force against a wall (or rapidly backclicking). Usually I won't leave a comment there because the gap is too large to bridge between what the author wanted to say and what I heard.

Here's another thought -- are comments as much about the author as about the reader? Sometimes I suspect comments -- even well meant comments -- are more chances for the reader to feel "right", to demonstrate their knowledge and expertise in rewriting someone else's story. It's a very fine and dangerous line (I've crossed it, thus I know first hand how dangerous it can be).

 

[BlackShanglan]

I can't let "I just don't get it" stand as a critique because it tells me so little. I'm not sure if it's the concept, the voice, a quick of a character,or a typo that skewed the meaning of a sentence causing the disconnect. I only know I have to look and make a decision.

Yes, I agree there. If someone didn't like the story, I'd really like to know why, although sometimes it's hard to get an answer that is specific enough to work with.

Now that's a valuable bit of wisdom. Sometimes a piece REQUIRES more from a reader, and not all readers want to put in that effort. Others search for stories that challenge them. There's something to be said for "finding one's audience". I know much of what I write will not appeal broadly. I no longer expect it. I read other authors and select those stories which have the highest appeal to me, and then I model my ideas on those stories -- I rarely write just like others, but I aim for the same or a similar audience.

I think of Eliot's "The Wasteland" as the ideal model for this. Now there is a work that charges high admission fees! It's a poem - strike one. Many people don't read poetry at all. It's not regularly structured verse and has a wild, challenging poetic architecture - strike two. It's crammed with obscure allusions and fragments in foreign languages and writing systems - strike three. The speaker changes without notice and often without clarity, leaving readers often baffled as to who precisely is speaking - strike four. And so on. Yet it's a masterpiece of Western poetry and an incredible piece of work. It has been willing to sacrifice many, many readers in order to be extraordinary to the relatively small group who will read it - and it's well worth that bargain.

Naturally, one's erotic prose will rarely rise to the level of Eliot. But I think the basic premise sound; it can be worth sacrificing readers in order to achieve something special. It's just important to recognize what sacrifices are being made and to make sure that they are necessary ones, not just weak patches that could be improved or lapses into insular and potentially lazy self-gratification.

This is going to be especially true here, with erotica. I mean, look at the answers you got to "What makes you stop?" They included certain genres that people just can't read--or elements that stop people dead--like weak men.

Erotica does have that odd dimension - the "fantasy"/"science fiction" issue multiplied heavily. Some people have squicks that they just can't or won't read; others are looking for very specific things in erotica, details that match their own fetishes or special interests. It's that wonderful metaphor of the romance novels again; those few pages were what the readers were looking for. Give them that and they are happy, even if the writer grows tired writing essentially the same scene over and over. Sometimes that's all people really want - that one moment, repeated carefully. It's not a fault in a story if it doesn't give that one limited thing that the reader wants, but it is what that reader wants. That, I think, is where one can without prejudice on either side say that that story and that reader are simply not well-matched.

Shanglan

 

[BlackShanglan]

Here's another thought -- are comments as much about the author as about the reader? Sometimes I suspect comments -- even well meant comments -- are more chances for the reader to feel "right", to demonstrate their knowledge and expertise in rewriting someone else's story. It's a very fine and dangerous line (I've crossed it, thus I know first hand how dangerous it can be).

Mmmm! I've seen comments like that. I've been lucky not to have them, but I know what you mean. I've seen many comments of many sorts, well meant and cruelly meant, but I think you're right that there is a specific and recognizable comment that fairly clearly translates as "this is how a real writer like me would have done it."

The opposite number of that, I think, is the request for advice followed by a sneeringly patronizing denigration of any critical comments, often with "you just don't get it" implied or even stated. That's the "I posted to be admired; isn't my work wonderful?" request for review. Lord, I wish people would just say that's what they want. It would save a great deal of time.

Shanglan

 

[rgraham666]

Man, if I was exposed to that workshop technique, I'd crack wide open and never write another word again.

I've had quite enough of everybody within earshot telling me I'm an idiot, thank you.

 

[BlackShanglan]

Man, if I was exposed to that workshop technique, I'd crack wide open and never write another word again.

I've had quite enough of everybody within earshot telling me I'm an idiot, thank you.

Mmm. I did wonder if that critiquing technique had any guidelines for the readers as well. I can see it being very useful to the writer, but also potentially destructive if the readers decide to rip the work apart. But then, I do like models that offer guidance to the readers as well, and that request that they offer positive as well as negative feedback.

Carsonshepherd introduced me to a lovely and simple method for electronic critiquing and editing; he marks things that could use improvement in red and things that he likes in blue, sometimes with comments and sometimes without. It's such a simple and excellent method, and it lets people know what they're doing right as well as what they might need to work on. It's not just ego-building, either; at times it's helped me know where to cut and where not to cut, as I can see passages that he and others have especially liked and can think twice about whether they need to go or not.

I've also seen a workshop method that allowed the writer to ask questions but not make statements defending the work. That also involved time limits; the readers had I think half an hour to make comments, but the writer only had ten minutes to ask questions. It worked fairly well, I think, as it kept the writer focused on asking the most valuable questions (rather than disguised defenses like "Didn't you ever think that I might be trying to do X?"). In workshop situations I have also found the presence of a firm and thoughtful moderator very useful. That allows a relatively objective third party to put a swift end to unhelpful behavior on either side.

Something I have often seen Varian do is state the desired effect and then ask what stopped the piece from having that effect. I think that that is also a very good way to proceed. Rather than simply stating one's intent as if it answered the criticisms, it helps draw the author and reader into a dialogue that can lead to some excellent problem solving. It also helps bridge the gap that can occur when the author and reader aren't together on the goals of the piece; it lets the author clarify the goals and what s/he would like to achieve while still recognizing the validity of the reader's perceptions and putting them to good use.

Shanglan

 

[Guest]

Mmm. I did wonder if that critiquing technique had any guidelines for the readers as well. I can see it being very useful to the writer, but also potentially destructive if the readers decide to rip the work apart. But then, I do like models that offer guidance to the readers as well, and that request that they offer positive as well as negative feedback.

Shanglan

As a note, yes, there were reader guidelines, the biggest one being EVERYONE who participated -- even the instructor/facilitator -- would go through the exact same process. Knowing that what goes around comes around can be a huge motivator. Also, this is a master's degree study program, where you could have some expectation of intelligence and good technique for critique.

My friend did say that some caved to the temptation to be Dorothy Parker, but the facilitator usually cut that off quickly as not being so much about the story as about the commentor's ego. The idea behind this tecnique is that editors, reviewers and readers are not going to listen to you defend your story, (you won't get a chance to speak) so you better start thickening that skin.

 

[rgraham666]

I need a really light touch when I'm being edited. My self esteem is practically non-existent and heavy editing knocks me for a loop.

I sent one piece off to an editor several months ago, and it came back with about 80% of it redlined. They even quibbled about the POV.

Didn't write for a month. And I'm still finding it hard to write. I'm very unsure of my ability, once again.

 

[3113]

Mmm. I did wonder if that critiquing technique had any guidelines for the readers as well. I can see it being very useful to the writer, but also potentially destructive if the readers decide to rip the work apart.

Workshops that I've heard working like this--and one's I've briefly particpated in, not only put a time limit on the critiquer, but also urge the persont to give the writer positive as well as negative feedback--that is, "I liked this...." as well as "This didn't work for me."

What really works in these is when, say, five people all say that same thing. Then the writer usually backs down from a planned defense of the work and--rather like an intervention, I guess--relizes that something is really not working.

That said, I don't think workshops are for everyone. Long workshops especially--ones where the person is writing for ten weeks and being critiqued all the time. I've seen it turn writers into very fine craftsmen, beautiful and careful sentence structures...but it can also rip the heart right out of them.

 

[3113]

I've seen many comments of many sorts, well meant and cruelly meant, but I think you're right that there is a specific and recognizable comment that fairly clearly translates as "this is how a real writer like me would have done it."

But how do you diffentiate between such comments and ones that are valid? After all, if a person is offering a comment, like, say, "This second person p.o.v. really doesn't work and undermines the power of the story. Third person would be better...." aren't they saying, in a way, "This is how I would have done it"?

 

[Guest]

That said, I don't think workshops are for everyone. Long workshops especially--ones where the person is writing for ten weeks and being critiqued all the time. I've seen it turn writers into very fine craftsmen, beautiful and careful sentence structures...but it can also rip the heart right out of them.

It's true. Not everyone can benefit from peer review workshops, or from the same kind of workshops. I attended two workshops last year. One was quite tough, although everyone did "sandwich" the negative with positives. I've lots of ideas about the story that was reviewed, but haven't tackled it yet. The second one was much "softer" -- that is, it was more about praise than direct commentary. Sometimes I felt like I was being put off or that things I knew perfectly well were problems were ignored. It wasn't as useful to me, although it was VERY useful for others in the group.

And, Rob, I've been in those shoes with the editors, too. I stopped writing for a year after one such response. However, I didn't get a form letter rejection, so I took it for what it was and went on (after a long year).