Literary Criticism [Archive] - BeatleLinks Fab Forum

SF4-EVER

Apr 15, 2003, 04:52 AM

The most useful critique sessions I've had have been at science fiction conventions. A small group of writers (six max) will exchange drafts beforehand and read them over. At the convention, the writers take turns sharing their impressions of the strong and weak points of the story. The other writers don't just say what they think the weaknesses are; they also give suggestions for fixing them. I feel this is very important, since the writer might not know otherwise how to fix the problem. Even if he/she doesn't follow the suggestion 100%, sometimes thinking about the suggestion can help him/her come up with another idea. These sessions are also moderated by a more experienced author who will also add comments at the end. It's good to get several perspectives on a story, and I've made some friends by going to these workshops. I'm thinking of doing another one this November, depending on where I am with some short stories I'm working on.

Anyway, hope this didn't go off track, Rell. Basically, my main point is that writers should offer suggestions for improvement, not just criticism.

HMVNipper

Apr 15, 2003, 08:31 AM

Rell, I'm gonna send you an email...keep on the lookout! I sent a critique letter to someone this morning, coincidentally, and I'll tell you all about it, but I didn't want to just post something here -- too long!

images/icons/smile.gif

[ Apr 15, 2003, 09:39 AM: Message Edited By: HMVNipper ]

Rellevart

Apr 15, 2003, 09:07 AM

Originally Posted By HMVNipper:
Rell, I'm gonna send you an email...Received and printed out to read on the ride home tonight. Thanks. images/icons/smile.gif

beatlegirl9977

Apr 15, 2003, 09:27 AM

I think the way the critique is worded is key when it comes to evaluating someone's creative writing. Papers for school are a different story, but when it comes down to something that a person has poured their life-blood into, any criticism at all might hurt them. (I compare critiquing people's writing to the way I do conferences with my student's parents. Even with the children who are plain-out AWFUL, you can't flat-out say to the parent "Your child is a flaming moron." It has to be worded the right way.)

I usually try to tell the person what's GOOD about their story first, even if it's one of those stories where you want to blow up your computer monitor so you never have to read it again--there has to be SOMETHING positive about it, like "The topic is a good one" or "You really characterized George well," etc. Then *gently* tell them what's wrong with their work; I usually throw in something like "You might want to try..." on whatever the issue is (grammar, perspective, etc.) I've sort of been trained to do it this way--I worked in the university Writing Center tutoring people on their research papers/essays for 3 years as an undergrad.

Any criticism I've ever received about my writings I've been GRATEFUL for--if someone picked out a glaring error on something, I'd want to know about it!! Younger writers need to just keep in mind that NO piece of writing is ever perfect, and if you trust the person who's reading your work, they're telling you what to fix for your own good. It can only help you become a better writer. I wouldn't be publishing a book right now if I hadn't received honest feedback from a few dozen people who read my work.

HMVNipper

Apr 15, 2003, 10:06 AM

Originally Posted By Rellevart:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />Originally Posted By HMVNipper:
Rell, I'm gonna send you an email...Received and printed out to read on the ride home tonight. Thanks. images/icons/smile.gif <hr /></blockquote>Coolness, babe! Hope it is helpful to you!

MissusLennon

Apr 15, 2003, 08:34 PM

Originally Posted By beatlegirl9977:
I think the way the critique is worded is key when it comes to evaluating someone's creative writing. Papers for school are a different story, but when it comes down to something that a person has poured their life-blood into, any criticism at all might hurt them. (I compare critiquing people's writing to the way I do conferences with my student's parents. Even with the children who are plain-out AWFUL, you can't flat-out say to the parent "Your child is a flaming moron." It has to be worded the right way.)

I usually try to tell the person what's GOOD about their story first, even if it's one of those stories where you want to blow up your computer monitor so you never have to read it again--there has to be SOMETHING positive about it, like "The topic is a good one" or "You really characterized George well," etc. Then *gently* tell them what's wrong with their work; I usually throw in something like "You might want to try..." on whatever the issue is (grammar, perspective, etc.)I completely agree, for both sides.
The wording definately makes a difference, I've had feedback both ways...they might have the same message, but one can make you better, and one can discourage you from writing altogether.

EasternBird

Apr 17, 2003, 10:30 PM

Well, I'm no writer, but I am a critic! graemlins/wink1.gif

I definitely agree with beatlegirl9977 in that criticism should be handled somewhat delicately, especially with young or new writers. I know if I had written something as a teen, and I was really proud of it, only to have it completely ripped apart, I'd be totally crushed (even if the critic was absolutely right)! Wording is everything.

I also have different thoughts on what should be said, depending on exactly what element of the story is being criticized. For me, the 2 things that really bug me most are grammatical/spelling errors and glaring historical errors. I won't even bother to read a story where the author doesn't bother to use correct punctuation and capitilization (and it's amazing how many people don't know that you're supposed to start a new paragraph every time a different person speaks!! ARGH!!) Sorry, major pet peeve. graemlins/teeth1.gif I mean, the least the writer could do is run the story through spellcheck/grammarcheck first! I know every story's going to have a few mistakes, but when I see stories that are just full of them, it just seems like the author doesn't have any pride in their work and don't care how it's presented. And if they don't, why should I?

As for historical things...I actually don't mind when an author alters or deletes a certain historical event to suit the story (it is fiction after all!), as long as the alteration is recognized and explained. I recently pointed out to a writer that she had the Beatles writing a song after it had already been released. It's a really minor thing, but when I see things like that in a story, they "pull me out" of the story because I'll stop and think, "Hey, that's wrong!" But maybe that's just me being obsessive. graemlins/wink3.gif When I do mention those things, I try to offer suggestions to the writer on how they can be either fixed or explained.

When I write a review, I try to focus on the writer's technique and the flow of story, as opposed to the overall plot. In my opinion, ANY idea, no matter how strange, can be made into a great story if it's written well. Whether you want to write a slash, or put the Beatles in an unusual situation, or have Ringo become the first Beatle to land on the moon, or have John reincarnated as a goldfish...whatever type of thing you enjoy writing, DO IT! You might not have a wide audience if your story is very extreme or controversial, but if it's a story you truly enjoy writing and are proud of, that will come through in your work. And any idea, no matter how tired or overdone it is, can be made fresh if the writer takes the time to develop it and make it their own.

And above all, remember you can't please everyone! I know of several writers who have been very discouraged because of just one or two bad reviews. But the problem wasn't really with the story itself - it was that the reviewer wasn't a fan of that type of story to begin with. (That was one good thing about sites like fanfiction.net - it was easiers for writers to reach the audience for their specific genre.) That's why, when I do review something I normally don't read (like slash), I make a point of saying that, and that my review might be biased because I'm not the best audience for the story. Everyone has their own preferences in regards to plot, and just because a story isn't one person's cup of tea doesn't mean that it's not good. So don't get discouraged! graemlins/smile1.gif

Woah, that was long...sorry! This just happens to be something I feel strongly about. graemlins/blush1.gif

MissusLennon

Apr 17, 2003, 11:09 PM

Well said EasternBird!

Sexy_Sadie

Apr 18, 2003, 01:10 AM

You rock E.B.! That was so well said. Yes, you're totally right - the opporative word in fan-fiction is FICTION. We can't become too critical of stories with off-the-wall plots, because it is, after all, fiction. Nor can classify storylines that are "over-done" as inferior, because every writer is unique, and their stories, if well-written, will turn out interesting in the end anyway. I just think that we shouldn't criticize writers, especially if they're new or young. Even if their stories are horrible by our standards, I think that telling them this is going to discourage them from writing, and that would be really sad. There's a really fine line between criticism and CONSTRUCTIVE criticism.

Rellevart

Apr 18, 2003, 04:11 AM

Originally Posted By Sexy_Sadie:
I just think that we shouldn't criticize writers, especially if they're new or young. I don't know if I'd go that far.....I mean, with no criticism at all, they won't know how to improve. I think I agree with all the posters who say you have to deliver it gently though. And wording IS important. There's a big difference between being told "You might want to consider not naming your heroine Brittany because that wasn't a popular name in 1964." and "NO young girls were named Brittany in 1964 and that makes your story utterly implausable and unreadable!" Ok, that was a bit extreme, but you know what I mean. Maybe. Well, you would if I were a better writer. images/icons/wink.gif

[ Apr 18, 2003, 05:12 AM: Message Edited By: Rellevart ]

Rellevart

Apr 18, 2003, 04:17 AM

Originally Posted By EasternBird:
That's why, when I do review something I normally don't read (like slash), I make a point of saying that, and that my review might be biased because I'm not the best audience for the story. Everyone has their own preferences in regards to plot, and just because a story isn't one person's cup of tea doesn't mean that it's not good. This is a really good point. Every author, every critic, every editor has things that they love and things that just drive them insane, but the things that I might hate, someone else wouldn't have a problem with and vice versa. It's like going to the doctor....sometimes you have to seek a second opinion.

Also, I think you have to separate yourself from your work a little bit (I know, easier said than done!) - because someone gives you a harsh review, that doesn't mean that you're a bad person or a bad writer.....it just means that that one piece of your work didn't measure up to one other person's standards. I don't do very well with criticism, but I've learned that I can take it better if I think "They're critiquing my WORK, not ME as a person."

HMVNipper

Apr 18, 2003, 04:33 AM

I spent a few days trying to think about how to answer this topic. I agree with what EB and Sexy_Sadie have said...when I give critique, I try to be as specific as possible and not unkind. I just sent a critique letter to someone the other day -- I had received a submission that was grammatically pretty good, but otherwise needed a lot of work, IMO. What I try to do is point out what is good about a story first -- most stories have something good about them, however small. Then you can move on to the specific comments and critique. The story in question was not usable as is, but it was somewhat salvageable, and I said so in my letter to the author. I can only hope that she understands what I was trying to do when I gave my comments -- but sometimes it is hard for people to read critique of their work objectively, which is understandable.

Because I run Rooftop Sessions, I read a LOT of fanfic. You name it, I've seen it -- stories that run the gamut from so good they doesn't need any editing at all to so incoherent I can't figure out what the person is trying to say! However, I can say that sloppy and careless manuscripts turn me off big time -- if you're going to take the time to submit something to me, the least you can do is proofread it, spell check it, grammar check it, and do everything within your power to make sure it's as good as you can get it before you hit that "send" button. I don't expect perfect -- after all, if every manuscript I got was perfect, there wouldn't be a need for me to be an editor, would there? But I do expect something coherent with a proper cover letter!

One other thing I often suggest to beginning writers is to read, and read widely. Don't just read works in your favored genre -- read things you might not otherwise favor. Get an idea of what works and does not work for you. And take the time to learn grammar and spelling and usage -- and if you have questions, check a stylebook for the proper way to do something.

I agree with EB regarding "bending" Beatles history as long as it is explained in a believable manner. (For instance, in one story in RS, someone just wrote Cynthia out...which may seem like a glaring omission, but which wasn't in context, because she explained it in a plausible and believable manner -- the Beatles were getting famous and John left Cyn behind in Liverpool. It's plausible because that's probably what would have happened had Cyn not become pregnant. So even though it SEEMS major, it's not because it is explained plausibly.) This is fiction, after all, and as such you have a fair amount of leeway.

You can manipulate dates and happenings, within reason, as long as you remain true to the general flavor of the era and maintain your credibility. It's not just Beatles history, either -- I can't tell you how many manuscripts I've received where the character pops in a tape to record Ed Sullivan or gets a cell phone call, and the story is set in 1964!! For me, historical research is key -- I'm a stickler for details as they relate to generalities, though. Don't give me things that are complete and utter anachronisms (and glaringly so), but as long as you're true to the times in a general sense, that's fine. I don't think the average reader is necessarily going to go out and haul up books to check every single date and fact when they are reading a fanfic, but since Beatles history in the context of larger history is so well-known, it pays to concentrate on the details for believability purposes. However, in order for a fanfic to work, it has to be logical and plausible -- particularly if you are sticking a fictional character into what is a pretty well-documented time.

When you write science fiction or fantasy or some other genre, the key is to keep things believable in that genre. Make sure you have a grasp of the way your magical or scientific world is going to work so that it doesn't sound ridiculous! Then go right ahead and stick your Beatles into the thick of things -- if you can make it work, by all means, GO FOR IT!

Anyway...I've rambled on a lot here, so I'll wrap it up. I think that when you are offering critique or writing a review, the most important thing is to find the things you can be encouraging about before you start discussing the things that need work. Criticism isn't easy to hear, but if you are truly interested in becoming the best writer you can be, it is a necessary part of the growth process.

HMVNipper

Apr 18, 2003, 04:38 AM

Originally Posted By Rellevart:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />Originally Posted By Sexy_Sadie:
I just think that we shouldn't criticize writers, especially if they're new or young. I don't know if I'd go that far.....I mean, with no criticism at all, they won't know how to improve. I think I agree with all the posters who say you have to deliver it gently though. And wording IS important. There's a big difference between being told "You might want to consider not naming your heroine Brittany because that wasn't a popular name in 1964." and "NO young girls were named Brittany in 1964 and that makes your story utterly implausable and unreadable!" Ok, that was a bit extreme, but you know what I mean. Maybe. Well, you would if I were a better writer. images/icons/wink.gif <hr /></blockquote>I agree totally, Rell -- young and new writers need critique as much, if not more, than the next person...I know that if I hadn't had some pretty harsh critique in the past, I wouldn't be writing now at all! However, the way you say it is important.

I had a writing professor in college who was pretty nasty -- he hated my writing style, and went so far as to say, in front of the class, that my writing was terrible and that I'd "never be a writer" without offering ANYTHING constructive to help me improve. Well! That stung -- and was the WRONG way to critique my work, IMO. I got stubborn and stopped handing in assignments -- I figured if he was going to rip everything I did to shreds anyway, why bother? And it was a long, long time before I decided that this guy didn't know anything, and that I WAS a pretty decent writer. THe problem was that this guy was really, really harsh -- in front of others. NOT the way to do a proper criticism, IMO.

Still, if you do it constructively (which this professor did NOT), critique can be very valuable -- and all new writers need to learn how to take the bad with the good.

Rellevart

Apr 18, 2003, 04:47 AM

Originally Posted By HMVNipper:
And it was a long, long time before I decided that this guy didn't know anything, and that I WAS a pretty decent writer. I know what you're saying. I had a teacher in high school English who hated my writing style. No matter how hard I worked on a paper or how many brilliant insights I had (hahahahaha), I could NEVER get more than a B out of her. It convinced me that my talents lay more in math.

Imagine her surprise when I was the only student in my school for 6 years to score a 5 (highest score) on the advanced placement English exam! MUAHAHAHAHA. graemlins/devil2.gif

ImaginePeace78

Apr 18, 2003, 07:30 AM

I think when someone wants to critique fan fic, they should start with the good points of the story first and then move to the parts that need improvement. All throughout high school and college, I was taught that by my English teachers and creative writing teachers. I did have one teacher, I felt was a little harsh when she said my 1970s story (with John)..and this was her own words, "I don't see much a of story here." For those of you who have seen my story, can decide what they want to think about that comment. But before that, she did say she liked my descriptions and dialogue. I read all my classmates comments and some were helpful and took advantage of them, others were just plain ignorant when it came to the subject of John Lennon or my blindness. But, yes, there needs to be some criticism, how else would a writer improve if there wasn't?
-Kristi

Darkaardvark

Apr 18, 2003, 07:59 AM

I think critiscm and editing is neccesary and I appreciate it when I get it, being a writer myself. What I don't like, however, is having someone tell you the story itself has a bad plot and is just not worth writing.

Those times do have to happen though, eventually, even for the best of writers.

angelgodiva

Apr 18, 2003, 08:18 AM

ALL writers need to know how to take criticism, because let's face it, if finding out that everyone who reads your work doesn't think it's so great is going to send you away crying, you should get out of the writing game. Not everyone is going to be sweet and kind when it comes to pointing out the flaws in your stories...there really are some brutal editors out there (and readers, too!). Believe me, I could paper a wall with the rejection slips I have collected over the years, and I don't mind criticism at all--it tells me where I need to improve, and there is always room for improvement.
I always try to research things carefully; I am currently working on a storyline that includes a child with leukemia, and I have read more about bone marrow transplant technology and first person transplant patient experiences circa 1978 than I ever thought I would need to know. Yet check this out: I sent Susan a story about John's heroin addiction last week, and it contained a GLARING error--I had Brian Jones, who as Susan reminded me, had died in 1969-- offer John his first snort of the drug. She asked if there was a reason I had him alive and well in the 1970s when he died in 1969...I just replied that it was because I had a stupid moment and had relied on my dumb brain instead of getting off my ass and doing some fact checking. Then the other day I had an adopted child state that in school she had been taught that two brown eyed people cannot have a blue eyed child. This is something I had heard and just believed. I was wrong, and I had to adjust the story a bit to fix it. The point is, I don't mind being shown my mistakes when I make them. I appreciate the help my editor gives me to improve my work and make it more historically and factually accurate (thanks, Susan).
Criticism, writers, is NOT a weapon your editor uses against you. It is a tool she (or he) employs to help you make your work the best it can be.

beatlebangs1964

Apr 18, 2003, 09:34 AM

One of the many things I love about Rooftop Sessions is that it has provided me with a voice and a forum to explore Beatle fan fic.

Critiquing and criticizing are not the same thing. Critiquing is a form of analysis where in the one doing the critiquing is offering helpful pointers to make the work more effective.

One is always taking a chance on rejection whenever they submit any type of work to any publication, but still it is a learning experience. The really good thing and the service Susan has provided is that she is very good about critiquing submissions. Critiques are a type of review; they are an analytical review.

And yeah, Angel, you said it best. Criticism is NOT a weapon editors use against contributors -- it is a teaching tool calculated to help people keep improving their craft.

beatlegirl9977

Apr 18, 2003, 09:49 AM

Originally Posted By angelgodiva:

Criticism, writers, is NOT a weapon your editor uses against you. It is a tool she (or he) employs to help you make your work the best it can be.Exactly. Editors and other people who do critiquing of works do NOT wake up one morning and say, "Hey, I think I'll be Evil Editor Woman/Man today! I think this 14 year old who sent me a fan fic deserves to be ridiculed!" Editors are in it to HELP the writer, not to bring them down. I've dished out writing criticism and I've also received criticism, so I can see both sides of this discussion.

MissusLennon

Apr 18, 2003, 12:02 PM

The worst is definately when there's no constructive bits in the criticism, because then all you get is "your story is no good", but no ways to improve it at all.

I'm the type of person that takes criticism way too personally (although I'm definately improving), so the best for me at this point is criticism that starts off with some good points (even if they're a bit fudged graemlins/wink3.gif ), and then moves on to the bits that need improvement, just so it doesn't seem like it's all bad.

angelgodiva

Apr 18, 2003, 12:20 PM

Originally Posted By Rellevart:
Thanks for all your responses, folks. Can I put a bit of a spin on this topic now? This one is more for the writers than for the editors/critics. What part of a critique have you found to be the most helpful in improving your writing? What parts have you felt were NOT helpful? Is there a particular way that an editor/critic can phrase criticism that will make you more receptive to listening to their advice?As someone (don't remember who, sorry) pointed out already, it is best if an editor begins his or her critique by pointing out and offering praise for the story's GOOD points...there is always at least one, even if it is only that the writer had the courage to take something as personal as their art and offer it for consideration.
Writing is a very personal business. By hitting that SEND button or dropping that manuscript into the mailbox, the writer is exposing a very private area of themselves. When I submit a piece for publication, I am offering to show the public what is in my deepest heart and trusting the editor to help me make it better if need be and the reader not to make fun of my feelings, which are there on display for all the world to see. I am showing my willingness to allow the reader to look inside of me and see me with a completely naked soul. To read my work is to truly know me, because when I write a story, I hold nothing back. I have a need to communicate my feelings, as all artists do. That is the point of art, be it music, painting, sculpture, or the written word.
A good editor understands this and is gentle with the fragile thing they hold in their hands. A good editor tells the writer first of all, what is right with the story. That being said, what is wrong can be pointed out, along with suggestions for improving the work. I have never had a problem with this process, but a lot of writers do, and the editor must treat every writer who submits a piece as though they are likely to become offended or hurt by their necessary criticism.
I have always found the most helpful part of any critique is where the editor points out what is wrong with the story. Obviously, I have no idea that there is a problem in most cases, or I would have fixed it myself before sending the story, so I need to know what, if anything, I have gotten wrong.

Sexy_Sadie

Apr 18, 2003, 04:10 PM

HMVNipper

Apr 18, 2003, 04:22 PM

Originally Posted By Sexy_Sadie:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />Originally Posted By Rellevart:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />Originally Posted By Sexy_Sadie:
I just think that we shouldn't criticize writers, especially if they're new or young. I don't know if I'd go that far.....I mean, with no criticism at all, they won't know how to improve. I think I agree with all the posters who say you have to deliver it gently though. And wording IS important. There's a big difference between being told "You might want to consider not naming your heroine Brittany because that wasn't a popular name in 1964." and "NO young girls were named Brittany in 1964 and that makes your story utterly implausable and unreadable!" Ok, that was a bit extreme, but you know what I mean. Maybe. Well, you would if I were a better writer. images/icons/wink.gif <hr /></blockquote>Ooops, I meant criticize, as in "bash", not as in "critique". So yeah, I totally agree with what you said. No one would grow as writers if we didn't give them feedback.<hr /></blockquote>Any editor or critiquer who would "bash" is not worthy of the title! graemlins/nono.gif

beatlebangs1964

Apr 18, 2003, 11:34 PM

Hear, hear, BG!

In the interest of fairness, I don't think rejecting work makes ANY editor feel good. Imagine having to break it to somebody that their work does not meet the needs or standards of an established publication? That is a challenging issue at best and again, to be fair about it, the editor has to maintain certain standards in order to maintain readership and credentials.

HMVNipper

Apr 18, 2003, 11:45 PM

Originally Posted By beatlebangs1964:
Hear, hear, BG!

In the interest of fairness, I don't think rejecting work makes ANY editor feel good. Imagine having to break it to somebody that their work does not meet the needs or standards of an established publication? That is a challenging issue at best and again, to be fair about it, the editor has to maintain certain standards in order to maintain readership and credentials.You are right, BB -- I don't LIKE to turn stuff down, believe me! Geez, I'd rather have more material for Rooftop than reject something -- however, I also have managed to maintain the integrity and quality of my site by asking that people who send me their work adhere to certain submission guidelines. For all that RS is a "fanfic" publication, I treat it with professionalism and expect authors who are showcased there to treat it that way too.

When I say that my guidelines are a lot less stringent than those for real publishing houses, you can bet I'm telling the truth -- I worked in publishing for many years, and I know what publishers require and how their editors go about rejecting submissions. They AREN'T NICE. 99% of the time an agent or an editor doesn't even take the time to send anything but a form letter -- and if they do take the time to go through your submission and critique it, you can bet your bippy they are saying things you should try to take seriously. If several people reject your work or critique it citing the same problems, it behooves you as a writer to think that maybe, just maybe, they might be onto something -- and then see what you can do to improve the questionable bits.

I can't tell you how many nasty letters I've gotten from people whose work I've rejected (with concise reasons and critique) -- and I can tell you that it doesn't endear you to the editors if you send contentious and malicious justifications, it just makes them want to ignore you even more! But it's not a fun business rejecting things, not at all!

[ Apr 18, 2003, 12:46 PM: Message Edited By: HMVNipper ]

Rellevart

Apr 18, 2003, 11:52 PM

Thanks for all your responses, folks. Can I put a bit of a spin on this topic now? This one is more for the writers than for the editors/critics. What part of a critique have you found to be the most helpful in improving your writing? What parts have you felt were NOT helpful? Is there a particular way that an editor/critic can phrase criticism that will make you more receptive to listening to their advice?

JDanRyan

Apr 19, 2003, 05:45 AM

Originally Posted By HMVNipper (excerpted):
[QUOTE]Any editor or critiquer who would "bash" is not worthy of the title! graemlins/nono.gif Unfortunately, that's more common than not on the professional level. I have actually gotten some rejection letters where the person corresponding with me said, "What the F**K??!" (I guess when their guidelines said 'We take off-the-wall submissions,' I should have defined the wall a little better...)

Frankly, even the "bash" criticisms do have their place, although how you define where you want to end up in your career will influence how much you should take the bashings. If you have desires for a commercial career and want to be the next Danielle Steel of Steven King, then bashing is an essential part of the game. Remember, if you go into that you're trying to write for a lower common denominator in an environment that bears closer resemblance to a Burger King kitchen than a writer's colony. As a result, you have a certain type of individual as the gatekeeper who's not going to have the time (and sadly, sometimes the inclination) to provide solid advice. The only way you can get said people to offer solid advice is to hope to catch them at a good point in their time; either that or research what you should send them via courier to eat or what to show up at their door wearing other than just a smile... graemlins/devil7.gif

If on the other hand you're looking for a career where a dialog is more important in presenting your work, it means the smaller markets where the editor has the time if not the money to nurture a talent. It may mean having to stay in your day job, but then again, the number of writers who could live solely off their work has always been a depressingly small number. (And the way things are going for writers these days, even the lucky SOBs who get contracts with bigger publishing houses still have to punch a clock elsewhere.) Even there, though, you may not get the best of criticism; remember that an editor has to think of the readers first, which means you may have a good story that if it's sent to the wrong market you're not going to get any real criticism.

Your best bet for feedback is to find a reader's circle, whether its a group of friends committed to reading each other's work or a professional workshop. Having done both, I tend to prefer the former. While the friends option has the problem of personal relationships possibly coloring the criticism, in a professional group you get exposure to others who may not truly deal with what you may be trying; masochism is presenting a science fiction chapter to a bunch of wannabes on the Upper West Side who'd rather be Brad Easton Ellis than Alan Steele. At least in a personal circle you have among you people who won't be scarred off. And unlike a professional workshop of a "pick up workshop" at a writer's con, there's longevity in the group that could see you through at least a whole novel. There's also the big advantage of having friends of not shelling out schekles for the privledge of having someone who's just written a gay love scene get huffy when you're tell them it's too mechanical; long story...

My only advice really is, whatever you're handed in a criticism, take it, take it all. Even the worst criticism is helpful in that it strengthens you to handle those inevitable form rejection slips that fill the beginning of every writer's career.

SF4-EVER

Apr 19, 2003, 06:44 AM

I've had over thirty rejections from editors and agents, and none of them have been what I would consider a "bash." Most of them have been form letters, though these can vary from an actual letter to just a sticky note on my query letter. The ones with personal comments are along the lines of "interesting but not commerical enough" or "I liked it, but the pacing was too slow." I can certainly handle comments like this, and I shortened the story that got the "slow pacing" comment before sending it to another market. If I did get a rejection letter like the one Jim described, I'd just shrug it off, cross that editor off my list, and try someone else.

I'm picky about my submissions: I check that the agents are part of a professional organization and are interested in science fiction and fantasy before I send them a query. The one time I didn't screen an agent carefully, he turned out to be more interested in selling me book revising services by some group he was affiliated with -- a scam agent, basically. For short stories, I start with the professional magazines first. Professional writers in another group I belong to advise you not to "undersell" yourself by submitting to poorly-paying markets first. One writer even said selling to semi-pro markets with poor reputations can hurt you when you try to sell elsewhere.

ShowTunes

Apr 20, 2003, 04:42 AM

Sorry to chime in a little late here...

In my long, checkered, and boring past, I've found that giving criticism is both an art and a skill. I've suffered through many a writing class where even the professor didn't know how to critique, and where everyone (including the professor) undercut everyone else because they were all in competition. I've gotten utterly useless feedback from editors and agents. I've sat in on writing groups that were nothing but praise-fests.

The best writing group I ever belonged to was one where every person had a different specialty (poetry, SF, railroad fiction, etc.), so no one felt that they were in competition with anyone else. The best critiquing professor I ever had was a woman who was a scholar of literature, not a creative writer, so she had no reason to feel that I was a threat to her.

I think there's a pattern here...

The best story I ever heard about critiquing was told by the composer-lyricist Stephen Sondheim. As a 15 year old kid he worshiped Oscar Hammerstein II (a family friend), and one day he brought a musical he'd written to Oscar and asked that Oscar critique it for him as if he was a pro. So Oscar did it, and told Steve that the musical was the worst thing he'd ever written. Steve started to get upset, but then Oscar said, "I didn't say it was untalented, I just said that it was terrible. Do you want to know why?" Steve did, and Oscar went over the musical point-by-point. Steve later said that he learned more about the construction of musicals that day than most people learn in a lifetime.

The point of all this blather--well, there are two points. One is that a critic is most helpful when she/he goes over something and points out problem areas and suggests stuff to address those areas. That's the "skill" part and the part that's under the critic's control. (I personally am not interested in having a critiquer fawn all over my stuff; that's not why I have stuff critiqued. I'd rather hear about the flaws so I can fix them.)

Which leads into my second point: that the recipient has to be serious about taking criticism. That's not under the critic's control. I realize that most people do not have nearly as thick a writing skin as I do, and when I give critique I have to judge how open the writer is to that sort of thing. That's the "art" part. (I figure anyone writing for serious publication is fair game, though!) Some people are so sensitive that even pointing out a misplaced comma will make them angry, and frankly, if they're that sensitive, they can go jump; they'll never be writers, and why am I wasting my time on them?

Oh, I must take polite exception to the notion that one should only send stories to "professional" magazines that, presumably, pay. For one thing, most people aren't good enough, or have the right connections, to have even a prayer of getting published there. You can START there, as my father did, but he found a much more receptive audience for his stories in the little, nonpaying mags. (He wound up publishing over 20 stories before he quit writing.) For another thing, there just aren't that many stories published in "professional" magazines. How many people do you want to be competing against? For a third thing, "professional" mags tend to be relatively conservative in what they publish. If you write stuff outside the mainstream, forget about ever getting published there. For a fourth thing, a publishing credit is a publishing credit, especially if you've never published anything before. There's no handy-dandy list of mags with poor reps for other editors to go down and say, "Oh, so-and-so published in such-and-such, which is a terrible mag, so let's not publish him." Beginners have no reps--it's not something to worry about.

Aviva

SF4-EVER

Apr 20, 2003, 04:24 PM

I probably should have made it clearer in my last post that you can certainly submit to semi-pro magazines and not only to pro magazines; I would just put the semi-pros on a B-list. Granted, pro magazines may get thousands of submissions a year, and the odds against any one story being published in one of them may seem small. They're still better than the lottery, though, and if you don't try, the chances are zero. To illustrate, I'm currently working on a short story aimed at a magazine called Say.... There are two issues each year, and each issue has a different theme. They only pay $10/story, but they're considered a good market in the sense that a good story published there will get attention. (Semi-pro magazines can be good or bad; to judge which is which, you can look at a sample copy.) However, I know of a pro market that might be interested in my story, so I'll send it there first when it's ready. Nothing wrong with trying for a larger check and a wider readership, if you ask me. images/icons/smile.gif If the pro market turns me down, then I can try the other market. Hope this makes sense. images/icons/smile.gif

Getting back to Rell's question, the most helpful critiques have taught me general principles of writing I can apply to all my work. For instance, my late writing mentor recommeded I start one of my novels before a character dies instead of with the major event of her death, so my readers have time to become acquainted with my world and with the other characters before dealing with the sudden change. This is something I've tried to do with other stories. Least helpful have been vague comments I couldn't interpret. After one writing workshop, I found this comment on a draft: "It's hard to talk when you're on horseback." I thought to myself, "But not impossible, right? The characters aren't going that fast." graemlins/thinker.gif It was too late to ask the person what she meant, and I can't remember how I revised my draft -- if I did.

I hope you don't mind me asking, Rell, but what kind of stories do you write? Are you a part of any local or national writer's groups?

Rellevart

Apr 20, 2003, 05:49 PM

Originally Posted By SF4-EVER:

I hope you don't mind me asking, Rell, but what kind of stories do you write? Are you a part of any local or national writer's groups?I certainly don't mind you asking! images/icons/smile.gif

Actually, I mostly posed these questions on behalf of some other slightly more shy writers, rather than for myself, although I have also found the answers quite interesting and enlightening.

I personally mostly write non-fiction - articles about entertainment and local bands and humor articles. I love writing short little fictional bits too, but I haven't yet developed the patience to see if I can figure out how to string them together into a coherant whole.

I'd love to have more time to devote to writing, but when you work 45 hours a week, commute another 5, take two kinds of music lessons (and have to practise), try to keep up on your social life.....there just isn't time for everything.