I agree 100%. The reviews I get about my story in progress are often bone-head things that would have gotten my submission tossed before the end of the first chapter. If anything, it's an embarrassment that I made the mistake in the first place, not the candor of the reviewer. And let's point out another thing, one bad review from a member here is nothing like a few hundred pans if your work is published. You mention being thin-skinned. I think that's the real crux. When the writer is smarting from a bad critique, it's easy to say, "Well, he was picking on me."
On another writing site I'd been on, I decided to critique someone's work. Did a complete critique of everything I could that I thought needed touching up and all that, even stated everything is my own personal opinion. They replied with "ty." I didn't mind, until I looked at all the other critiques, which were all praises in one way or another, and every time the author replied to them it was an actual full sentence. I even got on their blocked list since they didn't like me pointing out errors. Pfft.
Well, wear that in honor, I'll save you a seat on The Group W Bench. Take heart. "He who He loveth, He burnish." I'll bet you a chocolate chip cookie I'm on more 'ignore lists' than you are! I wouldn't let that stop me from trying to provide some sincere and helpful information. You could be the catalyst that gets his book published.
We all have different styles of writing and I think you have to respect the writer's; be careful not to impose your own style and preferences over the writer's.
That's my point in helping to define 'originality' as part of the critique for a story submitted for viewing. If we as members read the first paragraph and our eyes glaze over, so will a potential publisher's. Let's be honest here. You get a treatise from a member here about zombies in medieval England. The story opens with a conflicted, brooding zombie putting on his armor as pangs of anger flash through his countenance. You open the thread and read the first sentence... "...for a zombie, he was a dark and stormy knight." So, trying to be fair, how would you mentor this young writer?
Well, let's face it - how many westerns have been written over the decades that did *not* involve a loner, a greedy cattle/land baron, and a comely daughter of a down-trodden dirt farmer? How many romances have the poor but determined young woman who never intends to marry meeting an arrogant but misunderstood bastard son of royalty/wealth and they end up together? Cowboys, bastard sons, zombies, vampires - they're characters. If the author doesn't make them cardboard cutouts, who cares what they are? In the realm of critiques, no one should. If they are cardboard, or looking like mirror images of the Already Famous (or Infamous, depending on your outlook), the author needs to be made aware of that as a characterization issue - but without totally destroying the author. Writers, of all people, should be able to find the words needed to be honest without being nasty or arrogant.
For critiquing and reviewing, I do my damned best help the media in question to a better finished product. This includes providing personal interpretations as well as technical suggestions. When receiving a critique I assume that even the technical aspects are only opinions. The one critiquing might have little or no idea what I want the finished product to look like. I find that personal statements are more helpful than technical ones. When someone's reviewing my work I crave to know what they thought of the action. Whether they find a character likeable. Whether or not suspense carried to the end of the paragraph or fell flat. Those things are subjective and vary individually. The only way I get more feedback on that type of construction is by finding more readers and reviewers. I try to provide the same type of information, hoping that the subjective information will prove useful to the author, whether it contradicts or confirms their intentions. I also, I find it never hurts to buffer a phrase by reminding the one receiving the critique that they are getting a subjective opinion. "To me, this paragraph is sloppy and uncoordinated." The author and other readers are welcome to think it is an artfully arranged passage. Saying, "To me," didn't squash my pride or anything. Although sometimes I will assume that the author already knows and understands that what I'm saying is objective. Psuedo-authoritative diction might trump courtesy in how humans react to language, but it isn't necessary when providing an opinion. Seen below. "This paragraph is sloppy and uncoordinated" (though phrased as a statement it is still an opinion) However, if it's my job to do a critique or I have a vested interest in the final product of the piece then my methods may vary. If it takes a little antagonization to produce results then I am not ashamed to do so. But if it is not my duty or place to do so then no good will come from intentionally spilling milk. Can I say "then" one more time? Oh, I just did. I didn't mean to make so many conditional statements, but that's how I review in essence.
I do like the idea that you got rid of the "To Me" phrase. Especially when it is a simple mistake or an error that needs to be corrected.
Oh, I was advocating the usage of the "To me" phrase saying that excluding it was more likely to make one sound like a dick.
Shadow, I can understand your sincere attempt to protect younger authors or be positive in doing a critique on a piece of work. I get that, and I applaud your invovement. That's not exactly to what I'm referring. There are millions of young actors, fighter pilots, even guys on motorcycles that shouldn't be anywhere near their chosen profession. They love the craft, and they flat out have no talent. They seem to grab onto any current fad, give it a minor tweak and call it an original piece of work. In point of fact I've seen answers to threads here that show more creativity and turn of phrase than I do at some of the submissions. It's not the idea of writing stories that's on trial, it's the glut of contributors followed by sincere people such as yourself trying to be fair. Writing is not my chosen adult profession, it's just a lark, a diversion. But when I worked I had to be my best, and I had to go up against legions of 'boomers trying to wedge themselves into a limited number of jobs. You put your best foot forward, and there was no "grief counselor" there if you faltered. It should be the same here. There's an old joke about a talentless MA practioneer who received a hard critique from his sensei. He was told to carry an axe and then awarded a pink belt. We are not all writers. And the problem with trying to make everyone feel good is that we deny them a chance to find their real passion.
I don't advocate making people feel good. I advocate being honest without being a jerk. And frankly, it will do no good for me to tell someone they're not a writer. One, they won't believe me; two, they may actually learn to be one.
I understand. I don't mean to make it sound that black or white. But look at the volume of "new talent" that piles up on the desks of agents. They all have dreams, and almost none of them have any talent. There has to be some middle ground. I don't know how a vetting process for writers would even work. However, there has to be more to write about than zombies. And like you pointed out, we are the guys who should be able to use the language--and all we can think of is zombies? We've gone overboard with 'self esteem.'
I am confused with your statement on making people feel good. Regardless I do believe that critiques are suppose to be mean or attacking one's work. More or less it revealing what works and what does not and what needs to be fixed. Sometimes I find people (experience of critiquing artwork and other forms of medium) take it as a personal attack regardless of what we say. It is almost as if what we present we want to force a positive reaction rather than display our work or "works in progress" as an opportunity for improvement.
I think you touched on the crux of the problem. Let's go with the conundrum of all married men. Does your wife look good in white pants? You lie to spare her feelings, and she walks out into the public looking like a stuffed sausage. So, do you think you're going to be on better footing if you tell her the truth. "Honey, maybe you should come to the gym with me more so all of your clothes fit..." Yikes! I have guns at my house! I wouldn't make it to the front door! Same with writers. Do you think you are actually doing them a favor by saying, "Well, Tyrone, your use of the language in describing mottled flesh in the seventeenth zombie story I've read this week..." No matter how you word something negative about their baby you're attacking. You choose your poison.
I can see why sometimes when my boyfriend takes me out he suggests to me what to wear. The other day he was going through my closet trying to find me an outfit to wear to a baby shower. I agree with him that I do need to update my wardrobe because I only have comfy clothes. Then again you are right on what thing. It is all about perception too.
Well, I didn't mean to blow his cover, and I meant to offer a contribution with a bit of humor, but it's a valid example. How would you feel if choosing your clothes was his way of "being positive with criticism"? If you found out that he was just "guarding your self esteem" by a little deception, you might be insulted. You might feel he treated you like a child, or that he let you wander around in public at less than your best. Same here. Are we helping people if we seek to be polite over honestly helping them?
It is somewhat of a "father like" act to be choosing what I should or should not wear. (I would not blame him because he also is a father too). There is also the idea of being being approachable and what is appropriate or not. If I took him shopping with me just to go clothes shopping, and I wore an outfit that would be appropriate for everyday wear, versatile, could be used as lounge wear or that could be used for work. He would probably tell me it would look good on me or if it is that terrible tell me if it is bad. However lets say we were going to a wedding. There is no way he would let me go dressed in something that would either not be flattering or would not be appropriate. My point is that it is the appropriateness and when to approach for the right reason. I would not walk up to somebody and tell them they look awful in a pair of paints without having a situation or an environment to compare to. Nor would I read a writer's piece and tell them the story is horrible based upon personal opinion of tastes. I could but karma would come back at me with a wave of retaliation. However I would approach it to say it is not my tastes but here is what I can offer you.
^^ Now there is an analogy in a finished and complete thought. I'm tired of half finished coke bottles left on the counter like kids these days don't know what is worth. A cold refreshment gone to waste, like the poor kid only drinks coke as hobby but goes back to pepsi like its more popular.
It is highly unlikely that anyone on this forum has the authority and or responsibility to tell someone here they will lack talent as a writer. Second, Tourist, what's the obsession with zombies? I can think of tons of other fads; rogue FBI agents, farmboys destined to save the world of evil and bang at least one woman of unearthly beauty in the process,SUPER HEROES, white rappers, middle-aged men riding hogs and holding knives I don't really believe there's that many people out there who are truly trying to write "zombie" novels just because they think they're going to make bank. It's too much work. More likely, these people (for whatever reason) are intrigued by the concept and want to try their own hand at writing such a story. Maybe its cliche, or poorly written, but at the end of the day, they're no more or less enthralled by their own work than the guy trying to be the next Tolstoy. Honest criticism of their writing is going to help them get better at writing just as its going to help the guy trying to be the next Tolstoy. Learning to write well takes time, patience, effort, and feedback. Originality is not something any of us critics need to be worrying about. And this is coming from someone who believes in originality and dislikes cliches. Btw, I think I hear more about zombies, werewolves, and the Hunger games from you than I do from everyone else here on this forum combined
Obviously there are writers out there (and they don't have to be new to the game either) who want nothing but praise for whatever crap they churn out. And it's pretty obvious from the gitgo who they are. I see that and I tell them to come back when they're serious about their writing. However, subject matter (zombies, vampires, werewolves, cowboys) shouldn't matter to the person doing the critique. It's how they're written. I've beta'd some stories that I wouldn't read if I were paid to - but I wasn't reading them for enjoyment; I was the beta. I was there to find where the story contradicted itself, where a phrase didn't make sense, where the character didn't act 'right', where the flow was off. So what if it's the 17th zombie story you've read this week? Nobody cares. All that matters is This One. If the language is cliche, tell them, because it's going to be cliche no matter how many stories you've personally read. If the author asks for your personal, overall opinion of their book, tell them. But you don't have to be nasty about it. A critique should never be nasty - that's just ego talking.
It's euphemism for just being lazy and jumping on the bandwagon. I don't even finish reading a post if the 'writer' uses the words 'zombie,' or 'vampire' or 'elf' within the first paragraph. I think it was Shadowwalker that admonished us to slack off of harsh criticism because as writers we should have enough of a commanding use of the language to make a point without rampant negativity. I agree. But that's only one side of the coin. If I'm supposed to have this use of the language, then the writers should be held accountable by the same criteria. If you cannot start a story without latching onto a craze then your time is better served by selling used cars. The better question then becomes why do so many need a crutch? Why is the idea of 'originality' such a dirty word? Why shouldn't we look for an increasing standard of excellence? Set the bar low, tell everyone that writing like a hack is okay and we are going to be tripping over mottled flesh continuously. What's wrong with seriously asking, "can't you think of something else?" As for The Hunger Games, we all ready have variations. There are two sequels by the original author.
There is a wry irony in this. Aren't you leaping onto a bandwagon as well? I'm not generally a fan of the undead, or of traditional swords and sorcery fantasy, but there are good exceptions out there. Bandwagons are not for me.
So no one should look at what's popular and decide to give it a shot? See if they can do something different with it? Do it better, perhaps? Or maybe we should be saying, forget the dang aliens taking over the world! All drek! What's this dystopia nonsense? Take your argument one tiny step further and no one should write genre fiction because that's just jumping on the bandwagon. Who needs more detective stories? Who needs westerns? Why all the darn romance? And good grief, stop with the spy thrillers, will ya? Bleah! All drek because it's all about the same darn thing, over and over! What people choose to read for enjoyment is their own decision. But when speaking of critiques, the only thing that matters is the writing. And telling someone not to write about anything is not a critique. It's a personal opinion about what someone likes or doesn't like to read, and has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the writing itself.
Then again of a member wrote a story about, as an example, vampires trying to kill zombies to prevent a human shortage. If the story has potential and an original idea, so what if it is a mainstreamed topic, the writer should keep writing. However if the story does not make any sense or is just terrible then I would recommend straying away from the subject or brainstorming another idea.
