I'm (newly) a member of the community in question and I didn't vote because I wasn't there at the time but I just wanted to say that for the most part - I agree with you. I find myself increasingly frustrated that the soul of writing has been lost. Critiquing should be about trying to improve one's writing technically - content and format are what make authors authors...
I am a writer as well as a student of editing and proof reading and the first thing we are taught is not to change a writer but to enhance them - this theory in my experience, does not translate into many of the online experiences.
I truly hope that the experience you had does not turn you away from sharing your work. True criticism is the best way forward towards a professional writing career.
You'll probably think this comment is random but I was skimming through the community's friend's list when I found this and it really did strike on something true.
Writing has a soul - it is partly that of the author and partly that of their audience. Without readers, literature is just a bunch of words collecting dust.
I wish you all the best in your writing future and if you ever want constructive criticism, I'm happy to do so.
I find it ironic that you are the first to respond to this, because you are actually the one of that writing group I have read the most work of.
But in any case:
I don't feel the urge to not share anymore, just to not share with those who aren't willing to truly help me. I've noticed a huge difference between giving my work to people who write (either for a living, the hope of doing it for a living, or just for fun) and those who read quiet often but have never tried writing a novel.
When 'readers' read my work, they tell me what's wrong with my characters, my story, and what doesn't 'sound right'. When 'writers' read my work, they tell me technical things that don't actually help. Someone once told me that you should know the rules of grammar so you know when you break them. I use fragments, shorter sentences, and uncomplicated words when I write fiction because it's easier to read. I don't do these things because I don't know better.
While I'm not saying that all writers do this, I've noticed a good chunk of them do.
Heck, I do, when I read other writers work.
It's like... when we are giving something to critique we forget what it means to read and base our thoughts off of the premise behind the actual writing. A section of writing is no longer about the characters in the plot at a certain scene, but about how often we use adverbs and adjectives.
I guess in the end we're all just competitive. The same peers we feel that we need to bond to are the same that we will need to compete with when we try to sell our manuscripts. It's like turning a pack of hungry, wild dogs on one another.
Only the strong survive.
... Jeeze that was dark and slightly humorless of me. I'm really not this cynical. I'm sorry.
I appreciate the offer of critique and I offer the same likewise... but as a reader, not as a writer.
'I find it ironic that you are the first to respond to this, because you are actually the one of that writing group I have read the most work of.' LOL it's probably because I've posted so damn much!
And - that was pretty dark but in many cases, you are right. Competitive behaviours win out - as do alliances with other writers. I have seen it myself and that kind of critiquing is not helpful. It is actually quite damaging but that is something that will exist through all levels of writing (as you have said).
I personally despise such behaviour. For me, I've always thought of writers like musicians - they're fantastic on their own but it is their body of work with each other (or orchestra) that really represents the human imagination. I have no wish to sabotage any human thought because for me it would be as irrational as a 'cellist destroying a piano. Wow, that sounded tacky and I'm sorry but it's a little early in the morning and it sounded better in my head. :) I should NOT be allowed to converse before breakfast!!!
I think, when it comes down to it, the only thing that matters is whether you can read your work aloud. Writing is a verbal medium recorded, again (not to use the same metaphor) like sheet music.
I will say that when I went back and read the critiques of your application, it was wrong of them to destroy your subject matter and then reject you because of that. I could have been just as easily pulled apart because that week someone didn't like butterflies and I very nearly was because of a disagreement on poetry LOL That's the kind of thing that should be discouraged. I mean there are only so many things that we an write about, odds are someone else has come before us but that does not make our work any less valid.
Goodness, listen to me ramble again. I'll do something useful :D I find that this site: http://webfictionguide.com/ is not bad for online authors.
I'm (newly) a member of the community in question and I didn't vote because I wasn't there at the time but I just wanted to say that for the most part - I agree with you. I find myself increasingly frustrated that the soul of writing has been lost. Critiquing should be about trying to improve one's writing technically - content and format are what make authors authors...
I am a writer as well as a student of editing and proof reading and the first thing we are taught is not to change a writer but to enhance them - this theory in my experience, does not translate into many of the online experiences.
I truly hope that the experience you had does not turn you away from sharing your work. True criticism is the best way forward towards a professional writing career.
You'll probably think this comment is random but I was skimming through the community's friend's list when I found this and it really did strike on something true.
Writing has a soul - it is partly that of the author and partly that of their audience. Without readers, literature is just a bunch of words collecting dust.
I wish you all the best in your writing future and if you ever want constructive criticism, I'm happy to do so.
*elly*
Reply
I find it ironic that you are the first to respond to this, because you are actually the one of that writing group I have read the most work of.
But in any case:
I don't feel the urge to not share anymore, just to not share with those who aren't willing to truly help me. I've noticed a huge difference between giving my work to people who write (either for a living, the hope of doing it for a living, or just for fun) and those who read quiet often but have never tried writing a novel.
When 'readers' read my work, they tell me what's wrong with my characters, my story, and what doesn't 'sound right'. When 'writers' read my work, they tell me technical things that don't actually help. Someone once told me that you should know the rules of grammar so you know when you break them. I use fragments, shorter sentences, and uncomplicated words when I write fiction because it's easier to read. I don't do these things because I don't know better.
While I'm not saying that all writers do this, I've noticed a good chunk of them do.
Heck, I do, when I read other writers work.
It's like... when we are giving something to critique we forget what it means to read and base our thoughts off of the premise behind the actual writing. A section of writing is no longer about the characters in the plot at a certain scene, but about how often we use adverbs and adjectives.
I guess in the end we're all just competitive. The same peers we feel that we need to bond to are the same that we will need to compete with when we try to sell our manuscripts. It's like turning a pack of hungry, wild dogs on one another.
Only the strong survive.
... Jeeze that was dark and slightly humorless of me. I'm really not this cynical. I'm sorry.
I appreciate the offer of critique and I offer the same likewise... but as a reader, not as a writer.
Reply
And - that was pretty dark but in many cases, you are right. Competitive behaviours win out - as do alliances with other writers. I have seen it myself and that kind of critiquing is not helpful. It is actually quite damaging but that is something that will exist through all levels of writing (as you have said).
I personally despise such behaviour. For me, I've always thought of writers like musicians - they're fantastic on their own but it is their body of work with each other (or orchestra) that really represents the human imagination. I have no wish to sabotage any human thought because for me it would be as irrational as a 'cellist destroying a piano. Wow, that sounded tacky and I'm sorry but it's a little early in the morning and it sounded better in my head. :) I should NOT be allowed to converse before breakfast!!!
I think, when it comes down to it, the only thing that matters is whether you can read your work aloud. Writing is a verbal medium recorded, again (not to use the same metaphor) like sheet music.
I will say that when I went back and read the critiques of your application, it was wrong of them to destroy your subject matter and then reject you because of that. I could have been just as easily pulled apart because that week someone didn't like butterflies and I very nearly was because of a disagreement on poetry LOL That's the kind of thing that should be discouraged. I mean there are only so many things that we an write about, odds are someone else has come before us but that does not make our work any less valid.
Goodness, listen to me ramble again. I'll do something useful :D I find that this site: http://webfictionguide.com/ is not bad for online authors.
elly
Reply
Leave a comment