posted
Let me preface my comments with this statement: I am not directing this topic at any particular person. This is a general issue I have observed that comes up, time and time again, and I wanted to discuss it.
One of the greatest obstacles to becoming a better writer that I have observed is the matter of self-confidence. Self-confidence is a slippery thing: too much of it and it can take the form of pride (I don't need your stinking help) and too little of it can be a way to deflect criticism (I'm no good anyhow, I don't know why I bother to try). Both extremes create a barrier between the writer and critiques that might be used to strengthen the writing.
We tend to think of an ego out of control to be the swollen head "I'm better than you" variety. My experience is that more frequently an ego out of control will go the other direction, into a spiral of "I'm no good." An ego in balance is capable of doing a spot check with reality and doesn't take every critique as a slam against their self-worth.
I find myself less likely to offer critique for people who turn every comment into a personal affront. Frankly, I don't have the time to baby-sit their feelings. If I say, "this is unbelievable" I mean: "In my opinion, I personally don't believe this character, this scene is probable." I don't mean: "you are a crappy writer and a worse human being, and how in the world do you even justify the air you breathe?"
Critiques hurt mostly because a good writer IS emotionally invested in their characters and their stories. I try to approach the critiques given to me with this frame of mind: "Here is the opinion of one person. It is useful for me to see where they got off track from the story I was trying to present. Let me see if I can figure out a way to close up the gaps in my story so this sort of reader won't derail."
I think it's sad to see writers with a serious lack of self-confidence. If I could get only one thing across to every writer, it would be the importance of being able to take constructive criticism and use it as a tool to improve their writing. But don't let it define your sense of self worth. It's about the writing, not about you.
posted
I fully believe in what you say Elan. Self Confidence is of great importance in breaking many barriers with writing.
I feel the biggest thing of all is to be humble, don't expect anything, so when people do like your stuff its a total surprise, but your ready for the criticism. Personally though you must believe in yourself enough to know when the criticism is bad or good and just weigh that out in your mind.
It also comes down to who criticizes your work. My guidlines for criticizing someone elses work, is to first find the overall meaning and what their trying to get across, and tell them everything they do good; then I will go into what I felt they did wrong, while trying not to impede upon their style.
We have to remember that when someone writes something, they put their heart on the page, and more of who they are than they know; which makes their self confidence a shaky thing, and I believe writers should always encrouage each other, before they criticize the authors writing.
Yeah, just kind of going off what you said.
[This message has been edited by Grijalva (edited March 17, 2006).]
posted
Yes, Elan, despite our recent bout in F&F I do know exactly what you are talking about. I know I have a bit of a problem with it--sorry about that. However, I want to clarify about commenting and my reactions to them at times. I do believe comments should be taken into consideration. However, I do not like it when people give generic comments like "I have no clue what's going on" without explaining further. Such a comment is good at first...it shows that its unclear. But in truth, it really doesn't help me very much. However, as you saw, when things are explained and the WHY's are addressed (what EXACTLY is wrong with it?) then its fine.
So, yeah, I DO agree with you that too much self-confidence is a bad thing, especially if you aren't willing to take in comments. So I'll try to be more careful...I didn't mean to sound so mad in F&F. BUt I must say, its better than a lack of confidence. If you can't get confidence in your writing you might as well give up now.
posted
I think criticism can be so hard for some people because they've already given what they think is their best. They don't know they can do even better. And if their best isn't good enough yet, then they think it won't ever be.
I used to feel that way. I'm starting to learn that I can improve, bit by bit. What's my best today may not be quite my best tomorrow. But that can be a hard truth to digest, not because we don't want it to be true, but because it takes so much work.
posted
I have very little self confidence as a normal everyday person. But I think that's why writing has been so good for me. When I first started putting my stuff out there, I got really discouraged. Luckily one of my other character traits is stubbornness. After a while I began to see that I could do better. Always. I now get excited to hear what things my fellow writers see wrong in my work (sure at first my stomach sinks, but I get past it and get editing). I know I can't write a good piece without them. Because the truth is, no writer can just sit down a have it all come out perfect. there will always be issues that need addressing. Sometimes more then others. And what a satisfaction to send out that finished, polished (and re-re-polished) piece and finally have an editor take you seriously.
Posts: 811 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think having self-confidence is important, too. For me, I became confident in my work when I stopped covering up my writing when someone would walk by. If they asked me what I was writing about, rather than say "Nuthin...", I will flat out tell them now. That is probably the fastest way, but it can lead to arrogance, or seeming arrogance, if you start announcing to the world "This is my story and I am proud!"
Plus, you don't want to be too self-confident because then you run the risk of catching the American Idol bug, which is that you think you are so good that you believe all people are wrong if they say something is wrong with your writing.
Just find a balance. Be confident enough to post a story on here. Take the "abuse" people deal to your story. Then thank everyone for their help. If you think they are wrong, keep it to yourself.
posted
Lack of self-confidence is perfectionism run amok. I know I'm definitely not the only one who suffers from an overly active critical eye toward my own stuff. The problem I find is that when I write, I often remember work done by the authors who are out there now, who actually get published and then look back at my own work and think, "Wow, I stink."
It's discouraging when comparing the success of someone's story against the lack of success of my own; especially if it's an amatur piece.
What's also discouraging is feeling like you're being left behind. For example, having the only resourses available to write is a pen and paper when you know you could do much more with a lap top or pc. That's one of my problems, for sure.
At any rate, I know I don't suffer from over-confidence when it comes to writing. I know there are those who are much better than I am and there always will be, no matter how much I improve. Yeah, that can be discouraging too, but it's the truth. There's always someone better out there.
Anyway, blah, all these things tend to get in the way of producing anything, really. Which is mostly why I haven't posted a story on here in a while.
Why don't I quit now? Well, I don't really know. Part of me likes to write and I'd love to get over or around those pesky problems I run into when I do write so I can write better and maybe, just maybe, one will be good enough to publish and not just garbage that I usually kick out there.
posted
Constipatron -- just an idea for you. By posting on this site, you have some acesses to a computer, at least. If nothing else, the local library should have computers that people can use (I'm from the middle of nowhere, and they have eight computers or so). Jump drives are fairly inexpensive ($20? $30?) and can hold tons of data. Maybe if you got one of those, you could at least do some writing on a computer at a library, and save it to your jumpdrive? Not the happiest situation -- but it's an idea.
Posts: 189 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Self-confidence? It's elusive---I have confidence that my work is as good as some of what's been published, but since those that make the decision to publish do not seem to share this opinion, my confidence tends to erode from time to time. But I keep plugging away at it.
Now with critiques, I've taken the position along the lines of, "I'm actively interested in improving my work, so nothing that's said about my work can hurt me." It hasn't always been an easy policy to follow---and I certainly reserve the right to politely argue back, to dispute contentions, to explain misunderstandings, and to ask for clarification if I find the comments fuzzy and confusing.
posted
It's hard to build confidence when people around constantly tell you that your writing is great, but that you don't write anything they really want to read. Then you post it somewhere, like here for example and sometimes you get slammed with critiques about pretty much everything being wrong or you are told it's wonderful. It leaves you feeling like you aren't sure which way to turn.
Posts: 341 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would say that you need to develop a relationship with critiquers whose opinions you trust. The problem with a forum like this is that people are at different levels of writing and they give you the best feedback they are capable of giving. It may take some time to build relationships with the critiquers that can help you, but it is worth the effort.
As Elan pointed out above, you have to have the confidence in your writing to be able to tell which ones are actually helping you. Remember one thing though, no one writes perfectly. If some is telling you it's perfect and don't change a thing--they are probably not helping you to improve.
posted
Dude, if you submit to critique on a forum like this, you have to be thick-skinned enough to take the criticism, and be aware that the criticism might be wrong. In fact, if you are going to try to sell your work, you have to be thick-skinned, period.
Critique is the presumption of authority, and every critique goes through the filter of how that person thinks the story should be written. The writer is the final arbiter of what works. That being said, critique should address strengths as well as weaknesses, and that's something we as critics need to remember.
[This message has been edited by Spaceman (edited March 18, 2006).]
posted
ethersong, just so you know... as I said in the beginning, this topic was NOT aimed at you or anything you've said. In fact, I've been thinking about my "not your dog" story I told in a different thread, and that's what triggered it for me.
In the year I've belonged to Hatrack, I've seen this issue of lack of self confidence/defensiveness over critiques come up over and over again.
I guess what I'm trying to point out is that a hyper-sensitive response really has nothing to do with the process of critique, it has to do with the writer's confidence in themselves. Critiques are aimed solely at the writing... no more, no less. From what I've seen on Hatrack, the vast majority of us, and certainly the better writers are very clear about that fact.
When a writer chooses to take a comment made about the WRITING ("This sentence/story is confusing/not believable/poorly executed") and twist it into a comment about themselves ("You think I'm a crappy writer") it creates an artificial barrier that no one can get around. It's projection... "I feel uncertain about my skill, so I interpret every comment made by others as a confirmation of my low opinion of myself."
I have a friend who belongs to AA, and they have a saying about being "terminally unique." Most people are ego-centric; they see the world through their own eyes and experience. It's hard for people to think beyond their own world/experience and realize that other people come from a completely different point of view. Like my story about walking my dog and encountering people who let their dog wander off the leash because THEIR dog is friendly, not realizing their dog is not the center of the universe or that other dogs in the universe may NOT be friendly.
I find this concept of ego-centric thinking interesting enough that I'm trying to work some of it into my current WIP. Conflict happens mainly because people suffer from a sense of "terminal uniqueness"... a belief that "everything that happens is about me." Character growth happens when the character realizes there are other forces shaping events, in short, when they move beyond the awareness of "me."
We HAVE to be in a different mindset when we ask for advice. If we offer one of our darlings up for critique, and get back advice that strikes hard, perhaps it's because the critic is pointing out a weakness in our writing that we already knew was there.
posted
With all respect, Dude, I'm going to have to disagree with this comment of yours:
quote:Remember one thing though, no one writes perfectly. If some is telling you it's perfect and don't change a thing--they are probably not helping you to improve.
If you find yourself reading a story and you get lost in it to the point where you don't even see the words on the page and at the end you come up gasping for air, it is perfectly legitimate to post that the story is perfect as is and to send it out right away. Granted, the chances of that are slim, but it has happened to me while reading other people, and to some other people while reading me.
I could take almost any published story and critique the snot out of it and find lots of nitpicks, but I feel at the end I'm only doing myself a disservice. Sometimes it's nice to enjoy a story as a reader rather than a critiquer. And if you begin reading a story in critique mode but despite your best efforts you slide into reader mode for the duration, to me that says the story was a success.
I also belong to another writer's forum, where we do believe that it is possible to read a story and not find anything wrong with it. If I ever got a critique that said don't change a thing, I would feel pretty good.
posted
Autumnmuse--I have run across two types of critiquers that tell you your story is great. I believe the ones that point out little nits, but say the story is still ready for publication. There is always something that can be pointed out as a possible issue. I've also read stories that I believed were ready to be published, but still pointed out anything that looked strange or could be tightened up. Maybe with a note stating that they are just nitpicks.
The other type are the critters who love your story because they aren't able to find the nits. The latter group isn't helping you to improve your writing. That is why I suggested that you should build relationships. Sometimes, recognizing which people to believe is the greatest challenge.
The problem with dropping into reader mode is that your mind will gloss over the issues you might otherwise have caught. In that case you are doing the author a disservice because they asked for a critique. If someone asks me for a critique, I'm going to "critique the snot out of it and find lots of nitpicks" because that's what they asked for--unless of course they ask for something else in particular.
posted
I know what Dude is talking about... I've gotten back critiques from people who say "love it" and have nothing more to add, when other people critiquing the same piece point out (and rightfully so) errors I've made. It's why multiple eyes on a manuscript is essential.
I think you can usually tell the difference between people who aren't skilled enough to spot errors and those who can, because those who can usually point out what they DO like and why, whereas the others just say "I don't see anything here to comment on."
quote:If you find yourself reading a story and you get lost in it to the point where you don't even see the words on the pageand at the end you come up gasping for air, it is perfectly legitimate to post that the story is perfect as is and to send it out right away.
I'll agree with this statement with only one qualification. This has never happened to me, and I don't understand how it is even possible. I'm not denying that some people do get caught up in stories to that extent...I just don't know how. It's like claiming that you got so caught up in a peice of musice that you didn't hear any of the notes...I don't deny that it happens to some people, but I cannot understand how that could happen to anyone, and it never happens to me.
If you're the kind of person that can do that...can honestly be deeply moved by a story you're reading to the point that you can't even consciously percieve the words on the page, then it's fine to admit if a story affected you that way. But if you're not, then don't pretend to be. It is never helpful to lie in your critiques, either way. If you can't honestly find anything wrong, then don't claim you did just to look clever. If you honestly did, then don't claim you didn't. It's very simple.
posted
I am still pretty new around here and haven't done much writing (or even reading) of fiction for about 5 years. I have not yet offered to read any work because I do not think I can offer any good suggestions. I took a writing course in college and initially tried to listen to everyone and incorporate their suggestions. Then the TA took me aside and told me most of the class had little writing or critiquing ability so I should ignore 99% of what was said. So, I am reading the first 13 (and ocassionally commenting) but paying attention to the critiques in hopes of relearning that skill.
Posts: 303 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
sholar, one thing to remember is that no one can give your opinion better than you can. While knowing critique style and what to look for is part of the writing process, other writers will also benefit simply from your "seat of the pants" assessment of their work, of what you like and don't like, as a reader. Don't be shy about jumping in and offering your two cents. The more you participate, the more you will learn... AND the more we can learn from you, too!
Posts: 2026 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd agree. You already know how to critique in that you read. As a reader you form impressions. If those impressions are confusing, or you are hungry for more, or if they leave you cold, you already know this. Tell your reactions of the work to the author and as you do more you'll think of more things to say.
Posts: 818 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Agreed. All you need to give is your honest opinion, not the opinion that you think will make you look clever/kind/sane/whatever. Of course, I can't say what benefit there is in honesty, I've gotten precious little reward out of it. It's just one of those things that you're supposed to do anyway.
Posts: 8322 | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
well, I am trying to give my opinions more. Though I am usually giving more general view- the am I hooked vs I didn't like this sentence structure. Thanks for the encouragement. Posts: 303 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Of course, I can't say what benefit there is in honesty, I've gotten precious little reward out of it. It's just one of those things that you're supposed to do anyway.
I have always appreciated your honesty, Survivor, both in critiques and in general message board banter. I know that's little reward for the effort, but it's what I've got to give. Thanks. But yeah, I know what you're saying.
posted
I agree that sometimes the sentence structures need work, I am just not the best person to point them out. Maybe when I have gotten more into it, I will be better at pointing them out. But for now, I am doing what I can.
Posts: 303 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
After a while I began to see that I could do better. Always. I now get excited to hear what things my fellow writers see wrong in my work (sure at first my stomach sinks, but I get past it and get editing). I know I can't write a good piece without them. Because the truth is, no writer can just sit down a have it all come out perfect. there will always be issues that need addressing. Sometimes more then others. And what a satisfaction to send out that finished, polished (and re-re-polished) piece and finally have an editor take you seriously.
