Remember when we were young....

[RX-79G]

As someone new to this board, I would say there is much more stimulating writing discussion of all types going on here than anywhere else I can find. So the relative quality is high in this temporal plane.

As far as being a published author goes, I don't know if that is actually intimidating to anyone who doesn't want it to be. With ebooks, small press and other changes in the last 20 years, I'm not sure how many people outside the publishing industry have any idea whether being "published" is impressive or not. None of the "names" on this forum are ones I had heard about when searching for something new to read. No disrespect - it's a big world full of authors, but I certainly don't feel like I'm seeking engaging William Gibson when I pose a question.


Having read both threads that I believe are being referred to in the OP, I think the difference isn't the type of question or critique sought, but the quality of the approach to those questions. A basic question can be asked in a polite and thought provoking way, and that question should get some traffic. And a somewhat deep question can be posed by someone who isn't interested or equipped to have the discussion, and it might not be the first time. Maybe some of these interactions are case by case, rather than denoting a general condition of the forum?

 

[aThenian]

Hmm. I'm a bit nervous of posting my writing here for comments, but I think that's my own demons probably?

I think it's worth always remembering that there is such a thing as personal taste. Sure, there are trends in writing, but that doesn't mean somebody is "wrong" if they choose to write in an unfashionable voice or use OPOV for example.

 

[RX-79G]

Sure, there are trends in writing, but that doesn't mean somebody is "wrong" if they choose to write in an unfashionable voice or use OPOV for example.

Has it been your impression that is happening here?

 

[The Big Peat]

Anyway, as to critiques. I put something up in the critique section before Christmas, and I need to go back to it. (Both the thread and the story.) Personally I am very reluctant to comment on people's comments, because I feel everyone that has taken the time to read and post on my work deserves to have their opinion considered seriously.

Personally I like it when people comment on my comments (assuming there's anything comment worthy there to begin with) but given how silent I am when the boot's on the other foot, can't complain. I certainly don't think its disrespectful though.

@thaddeus6th might be just the lad for that.

Maybe I'll start a thread fishing for info in a little.

I once asked a favorite author of mine what his opinion was of forums like this and his response was that he was past that and didn't need them.
That was a bit sad, not because I thought he needed them; but because he could really be a help to those who do.

I've said it before and will say it again - but after a certain point, the only way to keep learning is to teach. I doubt any of us are ready to stop learning yet and I sometimes feel I can point at the books of those who do.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

They're everywhere! You early adopters have worn the rest of us down to the point where we no longer notice them, or even (the horror!) occasionally use them ourselves.

I still notice them. Lots of them ... endless numbers of them ... in published books coming from certain large publishers. Where are their copy editors I ask myself? I'm OK when an author uses the occasional comma splice, but when I find every single page crawling with them I have to think that the author has fallen into a pattern and it's not a good one.

I suspect this comes about through an unreasoning fear of semicolons.

There was a period when I was a young writer where I wouldn't show my work to anyone but my husband. For about five years I wasn't ready to ask for criticism because I knew that I wouldn't take it well. When I finally did show a few chapters to a friend she gave her opinions in such a way that I wasn't willing to show the manuscript to anyone else for another year. (Her "I'm accustomed to better" spoken in a very indignant tone is something I still remember more than thirty years later and I still grind my teeth. Note to critiquers: never sound like you are offended because the work someone has posted is not up to your standards.) When I did finally steel myself to show it to someone again -- my brother-in-law -- he gave me some very useful advice in such a way that I was willing to listen to it. I still remember some of his advice more than thirty years later, too, and it's still useful.

Some writers get extremely defensive when they receive even the gentlest critique. They aren't ready yet to receive critiques, and maybe when they've been writing a little longer they'll be ready, or maybe they're so thin-skinned that they never will be. Until they are ready they really shouldn't be asking, but maybe they don't know how they'll react until they've had their first critique.

But when we give a critique, I think we should always try not to give our advice in such a superior or dismissive way that of course the writer gets defensive. We've wasted our time because they are not going to listen, no matter how good that advice actually was. Worse, they may be resistant to that same piece of advice from other people for a long, long time, because they've already got their defenses up and mentally assembled arguments that a) it was stupid advice, b) anyone who gives that same advice hasn't the intelligence to understand the sublimity of their writing, c) it's probably based on jealousy anyway.

But if they had heard that same advice for the first time from someone who presented it more tactfully, they might have listened to it and benefited from it the rest of their writing days. Or not. But at least they'd be more open-minded the next time someone said the same thing, and the time after that, until eventually they were willing to admit that there might be something in it.

Of course writing our critiques in a way that is tactful and constructive takes longer. There is no doubt about that. But if we are going to take the time to write the critique we might as well take a little bit longer to do it right.

 

[Hex]

It does come down to where your critique is aimed. If you're aiming at the person asking for help, and genuinely trying to point out how they can make their story better, then you need to come at it from their side as much as possible (and as gently as possible). If you're aiming at the world in general (or a particular portion of the forum you're on) as some critiques I have encountered in places like AW seem to, then you only need to demonstrate how clever you are and how much more you know than the person asking for a crit.

Of course, as well as being unhelpful, you're often wrong when you do that. Somewhere in the archives of AW's Query Letter Hell (a fantastically useful and entirely terrifying experience) is the query for The Night Circus. She got completely eviscerated, not just for the query but for the book itself, and yet the version published is the same as the version she posted. Some people didn't like it, but there was nothing wrong with the book -- it wasn't unpublishable, and it did very well.

The point about being in a position when you can hear and understand points is also a very important one. I was completely bamboozled by my early crits, went away, rewrote and subbed something significantly worse. I did that several times until I was told to go away and think about it, but it was a useful learning process for me (but apologies to the people who nobly critted the panicked versions I attempted).

 

[Toby Frost]

The only thing I would say in terms of critique is that “This is how you get published right now” and “This is how you write a good story” are two very different things. In a writing group I used to attend, there were a fair few people (often older, but not always) writing for fun or to produce a book that would be distributed among friends and family (my grandmother, who is 96, recently did this). There’s not anything inherently wrong with writing a book as if it’s 1955 (there’s probably an audience out there, if you were honest about it), but in big publisher terms, it will probably be unsaleable. With the growth of self-publishing on the internet, this has become more of a grey area, but it’s still there. In a way it’s the difference between fashion and style. People do have to be honest about it, though.

My introduction to critique occurred when I read out what I considered to be a very good passage from a story at a small writing group. A woman who I remember as Dame Maggie Smith, who didn’t pull her punches (which is usually another way of saying “was downright rude”) asked “Is this for children? Because children like overwriting.” That did something to knock the sense of genius out of me, but I wouldn't wish it on anyone else!

 

[RX-79G]

The only thing I would say in terms of critique is that “This is how you get published right now” and “This is how you write a good story” are two very different things.

I would prefer to think that "how to get published" is a subset of "how you write a good story", rather than being disparate concepts (as it is in Hollywood). There is no formula for getting a book published that involves writing poorly.

 

[tinkerdan]

To be honest there is no formula for writing a book that will be successful.

I would prefer to think that "how to get published" is a subset of "how you write a good story", rather than being disparate concepts (as it is in Hollywood). There is no formula for getting a book published that involves writing poorly.

Since there are plenty of successful books that have been poorly written(be mindful that this term might be subjective as much as it should be objective)I don't think we have the leg to stand on to deride what's poorly written as being unpublishable, because the facts say otherwise.

Often this type of comment comes off as being smug and condescending which I think goes back to the original posters comment here.

I would tend to stay away from that type of judgement when dealing with critiques and just do the best to steer the writer into attempting to write well while realizing at the same time that what they write and how they write is still in their hands no matter how bad I make them feel about themselves.

You can be honest with them and even brutally honest; but when you cross the point where you are just being brutal with no apparent intent on being helpful then yes, it's time to serve the walking papers.

Yes we have to be honest if we want to teach them anything, but there are many ways toward being honest and we need to avoid all of those that leave them naked, alone and bleeding in the back alley with no shred of self esteem left.

 

[Hex]

Writing "poorly" is probably mostly subjective, but it can't hurt to write well. Indeed, I'd imagine that writing well probably increases your chances of being published (all other things being equal).

I guess, also, that some aspects of "poorly" are less subjective. You need to be pretty amazing with language to mess with its conventions -- authors like Russell Hoban, Irvine Welsh or that man whose name I have forgotten (@Jo Zebedee -- help me here! Science fiction, strange planet, weird language and he won some prize a couple of years ago, and is a sociologist) -- get away with it, but most people just look like they don't know what they're doing/ can't punctuate. If you're trying that and you're consistently getting the message that it's not working, you might want to reconsider your approach.

I think for me, the issue is that not everyone can write to what I would (very subjectively) consider a publishable standard, but everyone can be helped to improve.

 

[Nick B]

In the few years since I joined here, I have noticed a few things changing, a few egos have risen, but not so much to make me want to quit the forum.
I don't do critiques, I personally don't find them helpful as I feel a great deal of it comes down to 'this is how I would do it.' which is more about style than correctness. I know many people get a great deal from them though, so this is really just me.

But in general, yes. We need to remember to be gentle with each other.

 

[Phyrebrat]

To the original point, I would suggest that it's not the site that has changed, or the ethos, but those of us who stick around. My writing and contribution is hugely different from when I started here, and my priorities on what I am after, and what I can offer, have changed in line with my learning. However, there are new phyrebrats, Springs', Hex's and Peats joining every day, and they may be learning the lessons we've already learnt whilst at the same time being experts in something else.

Sticking around and seeing what people's specialties are, is just as important as sticking around for general advice (giving and receiving). In that way the site becomes more valuable as you develop knowledge of your chron peers; things you like about their style, their knowledge base, their cultural capital and so on.

As far as crits go; I have found them helpful in hearing if people understand my narrative, rather than regarding grammar or voice. I appreciate any response, and would recommend the answer to any comments you disagree with is 'Thank you'. Do not justify or explain something that you disagree with; it's your story, not theirs, so why should they care about your logic or reasons?

My golden crit rule is: Never rewrite anything for anyone in your own voice; it's just unhelpful and smug IMO.

I'm not a member elsewhere - I have no interest in other sites where strutting and posturing is unchallenged when I have made a network of cherished friends and colleagues here. The thing that has been germane in that regard is participating in the 75 and 300 word challenges, and the Secret Santa workshop challenge. Not only are you perfecting your own writing, but you're getting to see a slice of SFF authorship predilections, strengths and weaknesses, and learn or be inspired from them. They also help you find your voice and give yourself permission to experiment stylistically.

I'm so invested SFFChronicles that I would even pay a tenner a month for membership if it was asked of me.

pH

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

A woman who I remember as Dame Maggie Smith, who didn’t pull her punches (which is usually another way of saying “was downright rude”) asked “Is this for children? Because children like overwriting.”

This makes me wonder if this woman had ever read a book written for children.

Writing "poorly" is probably mostly subjective, but it can't hurt to write well. Indeed, I'd imagine that writing well probably increases your chances of being published (all other things being equal).

I think for me, the issue is that not everyone can write to what I would (very subjectively) consider a publishable standard, but everyone can be helped to improve.

I think both of these statements are very true. They are things that are not said often enough. They should be written over the door of the writing forum here.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

@Hex - Chris Beckett. Eden trilogy. V v good

 

[tinkerdan]

Though in theory I agree with what you think
::

My golden crit rule is: Never rewrite anything for anyone in your own voice; it's just unhelpful and smug IMO.

::
And I wouldn't ask anyone to change their mind about that.
But for myself I have to go with this thought:

Sometimes a rewrite to demonstrate what you mean by too much tell and not enough show or maybe six pages of reference material would be more helpful than just stating the obvious that might or might not be so obvious to the writer.

I once had someone tell me that my characters sounded like overwrought Anime and since I don't know Anime, it might have worked for them to show me or to rework my stuff so I might identify what they fixed and maybe figure it out. As it was when I asked what that might look like I was squashed by the moderators and never did get anything useful out of that. (Thankfully that was not here.)

Technically any time you change anything whether its a spelling or grammar problem you are rewriting their work; but I would totally agree that it would be bad form to rewrite the entire thing.

And it is recommended that you don't rewrite their stuff, so I'm not advocating it other than to say that we learn by example.

Although I must admit to the temptation that teaching would be so much easier if we could get to the bottom of the page and say, "Well, that was all just...bad. And no one in their right mind would read crap like that:" and just leave it at that; which sounds so helpful.

The point is that if we are treating them like someone new to writing and we give a general thought like your point of view is all messed up, we should follow with some example and sometimes it doesn't hurt to pull a piece of the offending material out and give a demonstration rather than assume that they would know what you are talking about. Giving a reference to material on the subject also helps, but it also helps if you can demonstrate what you thought, so that they can decide better if you know what you are talking about or you are just repeating something someone else said.

Still, I suppose it might be better to generalize, than to make yourself look foolish to someone who has put themselves out there where they might look foolish.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I agree that a demonstration can be very helpful, just so long as it is not too big a chunk of the work being offered for critique, and so long as the critiquer makes certain that the writer knows that the demonstration is meant to be one example of how to address a particular issue in the work. Sometimes a demonstration is the only way.

But rewriting too much, and presenting the rewrite as the way it ought to be written, is tampering with the writer's style, and I don't think that is ever a good idea. Yes, the author's style may be atrocious, but that is something they need to figure out on their own or they will never improve. Instead, they'll just go through life trying (and failing) to imitate the style of every author who has written a book they admire, and never hit on their own best personal style.

 

[allmywires]

This is an interesting thread, and especially for someone who has been around on this forum for a few years (I think I joined in 2012 so coming up to 5 years now?! Crazy!!). I took some time off but was initially very active and the vibe now is certainly different from before - it's much quieter around here, for a start. First of all I think it's important to say Chrons - or specifically the friendships and writing group I formed from here - have been and continue to be instrumental to me as a writer, not least that when I joined here I thought I was God's gift to fiction and that I could do no wrong with my rambling descriptions and rather wooden characters ( ). The first critiques I received were harsh but fair, and though I found them tough to swallow initially, I then learned and improved, using techniques learnt from writers more experienced than I that I still use now. It was a tough journey and a lot of the times it was a real struggle for me to reconcile what I thought was fantastic, bestseller material, with someone telling me that frankly, it was boring, but I made it through somehow!

Yes, there have been some critiques lately that are in my opinion, unusually cruel and unhelpful to newbies. On the other hand, you have to come here with an open mind. If you can't accept your writing is less than perfect - of course, most of this is perception; critiquing here isn't much use to me anymore, because I know my style and genre doesn't really fit with what most active Chronners like reading - then you aren't going to find anything from posting and asking for feedback. There's plus sides and down sides to asking for feedback from near-strangers who have a keyboard and a pseudonym to hide behind, and both are present here.

Ultimately, my biggest writing streak as an author came from producing content for people who enjoyed (voraciously in most cases) reading what I did, and the confidence that gave me made me a better writer. Not everyone on Chrons will like your stuff, and that's ok, because we're just a small subset of the SFF readership. For newbies, I would wager most of them are not used to receiving feedback, nor have a trusted circle of people to give that positive criticism and inspiration we all need to go forwards. If we're all writers together, there should be nothing to be gained from ruthlessly chopping these people down - frankly I've never understood the need to give a snappy crit; if it's not your thing then close the tab and move on. Peace 'n' love etc. At the end of the day, it's all just a matter of opinion, after all. If 50 Shades of Grey can make it, there really are no rules...

 

[Luiglin]

It's weird having been a member here for around 5 years I've noticed a subtle change from when I first joined. I found when I started posters were more open in how they answered and who they answered.

These days in my opinion that it is less so and for myself I find that a bit of a shame. I don't believe it's a conscious thing (well I hope it isn't one) but there are to me noticeable cliques. In fact I've made it a bit of a personal challenge in the 75s and 300s to get at least one mention from certain members (forget the votes), no names. I've not managed it yet lol. Edit: it could be that they don't like what I write, which is fine. Still a challenge though

As to the critiquing well @The Judge has already slapped my writing wrists there. Ultimately though, who is to judge what is and isn't good writing. Perfect grammar? Not required. One of my fave novels is Forrest Gump by Winston Graham, read it and you'll see what I mean about perfect grammar. Perfect plot? Not always needed. Some of my most enjoyable reads have been ones where the plot is obvious and formulaic, yet I've still enjoyed them. So my advice is take a critique lightly. By all means take note of what they say but remember it could be that your style of tale is not theirs.

However, I do believe that if you put something up for critique you should also attempt to return the favour. At least that way you can see it from both sides

 

[RX-79G]

My golden crit rule is: Never rewrite anything for anyone in your own voice; it's just unhelpful and smug IMO.

If I rewrite something, I don't use my voice. I write something unspectacular that demonstrates the principle being discussed - like getting rid of passive voice. It is often the quickest way to demonstrate the problem, but it is not me donating style.

 

[millymollymo]

Yes this forum has changed. Does that mean we have to grow out of it? Nah. If this place was mine I'd be adding a section where those with less sharp teeth can find their feet. But it serves to remember Brian set this place up to serve a purpose, those things are what define how it is set out by the creator.
Yes we have all grown in skill, ego, and wordcount while shelf space and available disk space has certainly reduced. Some have time to spend helping while others are still trying to find the time to help themselves. No one is required to contribute after all. I STILL find the crits frightening!
One thing is clear, those who stick around here and get involved have the tenacity to see their words in print