Why is ther no sub-fourm for histrical fiction short stoires? Is this just something forgotten or is it simply that you don't like it? Any ideas.
it's probably because there are too many genres to have a subforum for each and every one... besides, i don't think there are many who write historical shorts, so they can go in the 'general' section along with all the other un-specified genres...
There is always the catch-all General Fiction. As Maia saud, we really don't need an encyclopedic collection of subforums.
I agree. But you know, it would be nice if there was a subforum for it in the novels section. It seems like virtually everything there is fantasy. I think it would be interesting to have a forum just for historical fiction, because it would give us the opportunity to discuss research as well. But, of course, it's not an absolute necessity. I'm pretty happy with the forum system as is. Just a suggestion.
I really don't think there's the demand for it, frankly. As you say, the majority of the threads posted in the novel forum are fantasy, so it seems pointless to differentiate. Not to mention it would just compartmentalise and confuse the forum more. In the short story forum, we have genre based subforums only to allow a basic level of differentiation, and because on general that forum tends to be a good deal busier than the novel forum. Also, we already have a research forum, as a subforum of Plot Creation.
No, it would not. The Review Room is a critiquing workshop, and the critique is to focus on the writing, not to debate content. Research matters have s forum of their own.
Yes, I understand. But when research becomes part of the writing, it really seems like a relevant critique would be about the research, doesn't it? If I write a story about WWII and say the Germans won and it's supposed to be "historical fiction" then it's not really relevant whether I should have used the semi-colon in the fifth sentence. In any case, you need a better phrase than "debate content." Reviewing is always debating content. If I say "I don't think you set that scene up very well", that's debating the content, but it's also a relevant critique, isn't it? I don't agree with you anyway. It's true that if I wrote an essay about abortion, I wouldn't want a billion replies telling me I was morally wrong, and blah blah blah politics. But, on the other hand, if someone had a comment about my content that was actually relevant to the writing, such as I forgot to mention Roe v. Wade...well, that IS relevant and I can't really expect to write a good piece without mentioning it. I would hope that as writers, we would know the difference between a relevant and an irrelevant critique, and could inform the administrators or, better, the reviewer him/herself if we found their review unhelpful. I know historical fiction isn't very popular here. I'm trying to write a piece now, and everyone who responds is a fantasy writer; that's fine for the mechanics and things, but not everything is so analogous about the two genres. Additionally since I'm not a fantasy writer myself, I'm not all that inclined to review other people's work if I know it's fantasy. This could be one reason why there's not that many non-fantasy posts on the novel forum. Once you start assuming that it's all fantasy, you're not so inclined to post something that isn't or review something that is if you yourself are not a fantasy writer. Vicious cycle. Please don't give me a knee-jerk reaction that no, I'm wrong, this site is perfect as is, it is ALWAYS wrong to give a review that questions the research of the author...Please actually consider what I am saying.
I would have to agree with you, that debating is part of the review process. Legacy and I had a long debate on rather novels should be in the past tense or the present tense, but I sort of disagreed with him. We also had a debate that writing novels does not have to come from reality, which means that you can write a fantasy novel that never happen in real life. True, I almost went off topic talking about Matilda and comparing it to my story. It does sound easy to distinguish between relevant reviews an irrelevant reviews.
You can disagree, but thye Review Room rules will not change in that regard. The purpoise of the Review Room is to learn to critique the writing, not how to make a more compelling argument. When members are permitted to discuss the merits of a perrsuasive essay's argument, it sidetracks the discussion away from the writing. This is not just theory. We have seen it happen. Therefore the rule will continue to be enforced. And this is no longer about the original topic of the thread.
