See Edward has this plan that if he discourages all other writers, and gets rid of them, he will have less competition when he is trying to get his work published. I mean if you discourage every new writer straight away, then they will never get good. My writing was rubbish with a capital R at the beginning now my writing and my storytelling is kind of good and improving with every 1000 words I write. Isn't it every writer needs to write 1,000,000 words before they start to get good. Think I am now slightly over the 1,000,000 words now I improve as much over the next 1,000,000 I will be pleased.
If you like what you read, then encourage them to write more. It's that simple. If you would honestly like to read their next work, tell them so. That's how you determine. If you don't like what they wrote and you wouldn't read what they came up with next, tell them so. Why blow smoke at them? So they can spend the next ten years failing at something they have no talent for when all the while they could have been developing in that for which they have a real talent? Yes, dreams, when they become delusional, should be crushed because they don't do anything good for anyone. You have to clear them out, get through the loss, and move on to that which you are good at lest what you are good at withers and dies for lack of development. It's just like raking up dead leaves so they don't kill the grass underneath. There is no final arbiter. It's a process they go through until they give up writing fiction and start doing something else. The question is whether you're going to delay the process or help it along. Be honest in your critiques, and don't say "Keep writing!" when you don't mean it.
Yeah, that's it. Especially today when there are a gazillion small presses that will publish anything coming through their doors (so long as you agree to buy 100 copies of the book, yourself.).
Who wants that though? Fact is you can be shafted in an even bigger way by larger publishers if you don't do your homework, at least if you buy 100 copies of the book you have that. You don't lose your story entirely. You need to research publishers if you don't want to be sold down the river. There are plenty of smaller presses that are fine as well. A decent small publisher can be a good bet as you get face to face interaction with the editor/director. Also better returns on your cover price. For me with my second book, unless I was to make a big name for myself with my first, it is going to be difficult to get published so a smaller press maybe a place to start with it.
Is this an approach we should take in other fields as well? If a child struggles to grasp the concepts of mathematics, should we simply encourage them to move on and accept a life without numbers? Or, for a more fair comparison, if a guitarist is not capable of performing massive solos right off the bat, and instead needs time to learn his chords, should we tell him he is unworthy of his instrument, and should stop playing? Should Richard Wagner have quit after the spectacular failure of his first two works? Seeing as how my powers of divination are somewhat lacking (I traded them off for more necromancy, I'm myopic like that) how am I to adequately judge which writers will learn from their mistakes, overcome the challenges inherent with first taking up the art, and become experienced enough they can produce quality work? The last thing I want to do is try to help someone who is beneath my notice, but sometimes 'bad' writers learn from their mistakes, develop their style, become good, and I'd feel awfully silly if I told someone they should just give it up, and they turned around and got themselves published. Now this, I do agree with. The first half anyway. We do have to be honest in our criticisms, otherwise bad habits are encouraged, and any potential a writer may have is slowly choked away. But that is also what we do when we tell someone they can't write, or they shouldn't. Writing is hard, it takes years of practice, and often a great deal of both encouragement and correction. Either in excess spoils the young writer. But for the same reason why I'd never call a piece 'brilliant,' unless I actually thought it was, I would never tell a writer to quit. Doing so, in my opinion, on a site like this, it's anathema to this board's purpose. That only some are worthy of pursuing their art is a position I fundamentally cannot agree with.
I agree with being honest - but you don't have to be discouraging. You can be honest and encourage. And why should someone stop writing - if all they want is to write as a hobby and improve to the best of their ability. To complete a novel whether or not its rubbish is a huge achievment.
Yeah, might be getting a little off topic but I think a complete constructive critique should explain both what works and doesn't work in a piece, because both are helpful to a writer. Considering, and explaining to someone else what you think works in their writing will also improve your own work. To be honest if I can't find anything I like in a piece of writing, I'm probably not going to take the time to critique it- you aren't under some moral obligation to help every single poster. But that doesn't mean I think the writer should quit, if anything it probably means I'm lazy
lol I agree I don't review every piece, I go through periods when I can't. Right now I have deadlines, when I am editing I seriously struggle with any past tense pieces (which is almost all except my own and Reggie's lol), I can't read past tense because I am constantly editing it into past tense. The fault is with me not the piece. However it is possible to say this doesn't work by saying you could try this it might work better - or I can help with this area. Instead of this piece is awful. I find really good work harder to review as I don't want to see the flaws I want to read it.
In the three years I've been on-and-offing it here I've seen a number of reviews from people complaining about how they have to review the teeeeeerrible amateur writing on this site, and then I look at the stuff they post and it's some of the lamest, most vapid and pointless drek I've ever read. I've read and reviewed a lot of really good things here. It's not always the easiest to find, but that's the case in the world in general; great art's difficult to find. That's why everyone makes a big deal when they find someone doing something fresh and awesome, and we have reviewers and critics who get paid to help us sort out the good from the bad. I personally tend to not review the stuff about which I have nothing nice to say, though. I go for the ones where it looks like my ability to review will provide the most benefit for the effort I invest, the most bang for my buck.
