posted
I noticed a trend when I give stuff to people for input. Writers' (here, in a Creative Writing class I took in college, and other places) reactions range from lukewarm to vehement dislike.
When "lay" people (pretentious much?) read my work, they love it. Not just people who really know me either. (I’m not basing this on my mother’s opinion or anything) Just, like, people I work with, passing acquaintances.
I don't think I write anything particular highbrow, but I don't pander to the LCD either. I don't churn out vapid, pop fiction.
It's rather bizarre. I was just wonder if anyone else experienced similar reactions.
posted
I find that critics are lukewarm at best most of the time. It's sort of the frame of mind one enters when they are in a position to search out faults on a subject they know. If you ask a book review to look over some schematics for a building you want (and they aren't knowledgable in the subject) they will be more likely to issue compliments and be more energetic because they are giving an opinion instead of actualy being CRITICal.
posted
Most people are lukewarm about my stories when they criticize them. I know it doesn't mean they thought that they were awful, but sometimes I just can't help wondering if that means they weren't fantastic either. I tend to be a perfectionist and someone who's sensitive to criticism (although I can be a harsh critic) and I tend to take things a bit too personally. I try not to, though, but it's hard...especially when people are only ever lukewarm concerning my stories. It's hard not to think that they really didn't like them.
Posts: 202 | Registered: Mar 2005
|
posted
Mine also tend to range from lukewarm to blistering.
I think most crits from a place like this are well-intentioned. People try to focus on what they see as possible areas of improvement, because in general that is what we're after.
Now in my case, if I were to look at all the feedback I've received and condense it into a single theme I'd have something like:
"Your prose/style is decent but your story blows" Without fail they go on to provide very accurate descriptions of where the effort fell short, and great suggestions on how to approach repairs.
What gets me is how blind I am to the problems to begin with. It's not that I'm overly enamored with my "baby", but once I conceive an idea anything I right turns into a trigger for the whole image I have in my head, leaving me unable to judge where I need to say more and where less. The best thing I can do is put the story aside for a few months and pick it up again, but even then I can't completely put aside the original vision.
Oops, I guess I got a little off topic.
It would be nice to have someone gush enthusiastically over something I come up with someday, but if could only be one way I'd rather have the negative accentuated.
Myself, I realize that at the stage I'm at, I probably don't deserve more than lukewarm comments, that's just how it is until I get better. It's a tough thing to face.
As far as non-writers who are very positive, I tend to take their praise gardedly, especially when it is my mother. They are probably just surprised I'm literate enough to string together that many words all at once--some even with three syllables.
I sometimes give rave reviews, but only for things that really blew me away. It is far more usual for my critiques to focus on things that I see as being broken or at least in need of a bit of repair.
One good way of judging how much non-writers really love your work is to ask them to pay for it. Naturally, you then get into all the complexities that come about because different people have different amounts of money to spare. But generally speaking, it's a very quick way to sort out the geniune complements from the easy courtesies.
If I can borrow JmariC's blueprint analogy, I almost always feel a surge of dread and weariness whenever someone shows me a blueprint. Because, often as not, I'm going to be asked to actually help build the thing. And I have a lot of experience about what kinds of outcomes are associated with certain kinds of features in the blueprint. That doesn't mean that I never think anything is a good idea. It's just that most things aren't
It reminds me when I was a supervisor at a customer service place. I had to take tapes of the reps recorded phone conversations and then grade the rep on how well of a job they did. Giving everyone 100% got boring, and instead at started just looking for anything I could mark off.
JOHN!
[This message has been edited by JOHN (edited August 02, 2005).]
posted
The thing I notice is that when I ask someone to read my writing, they critique the grammar more than the overall story. I'll get a red marked story returned with hardly any feed back about if they liked or disliked my plots, or characters.
I think it's hard for someone to just look at the story w/ the knowledge that it is a draft, and tell you "Yes, your character's voices are great!" Or "I didn't really get a feel for this idea or concept"... That's what I need! I can fix a grammar mistake at anytime, but ideas and concept mistakes aren't as simple to make perfect.
Sometimes "critters" seem to focus on physical mistakes more than story and plot ones. If your story isn't strong enough, it won't matter HOW well you spell or use a semicolon.
posted
Friends usually give compliments because they're friends. Critics are looking for something to criticize, because that's what they've been asked to do. I think both aren't perfectly average responses.
Posts: 2830 | Registered: Dec 2004
|
posted
<Your prose/style is decent but your story blows>
Actaully, I wish I had that problem. I usually get the opposite remark. Good story, but while the writing is not bad, it's like "walking on scattered pebbles".
There a differention between spelling, punctuation and grammar typos, and bad writing (poor word/sentence flow, low prose readability, adjective/adverb misuse and overload, passive voice, 'to be' syndrome, ect). The former are more easily fixed, and shouldn't be worried about until final draft, the latter is more pesky.
[This message has been edited by ChrisOwens (edited August 02, 2005).]
posted
I never ask my friends to read my stuff, aside from my best friend Matt who's a fellow writer. Now before you thing his opinion is subjective, let me tell you he's one of the hardest and best critics I have (and I'm the same for him). I've had him read the first two paragraphs of a rewrite to a story he read in the original form, chuck the manuscript back at me and say, "It doesn't work. It's crap."
I'm talking about people at work who are pretty indifferent towards me one way or the other. There's nothing personal at stake. Pretty much the same people who would go to the store and possibly buy the book. They like it.
When I say dislike, I mean HATE! This is the attitude at least from that Creative Writing course. Where I had to blast Pearl Jam's "Not For You" everyday before I went in. They absolutely HATED my work. The thing was, NONE of them, including the instructor, could write.
posted
My theory is with crits, one approaches as a 'writer', with the assumption that something's wrong with it to begin with.
And possibly for some [like the episode of Magnum, where Magnum related how as a boy, he thought he was playing a circle everything that's wrong with this picture, when he discovered he was circling an ad] that assumption might be scewed too far.
Sometimes it would be nice to also have honest feedback from readers with no aspirations of writing, who have no bias either way. However, the feasibility of such a program seems rather improbable.
Of course, in the end, I'm suspecious of over-enthusiastic feedback, especially when I've received more negative assessments.
posted
Sometimes, I think the descrepency between lukewarm/ethusiastic might just be how you're getting the critique. Best critique I ever had was for the novel I'm finishing up. Since this is someone I know, I was able to sit down with him for an hour and talk about the manuscript when he was done. He flipped through ever chapter -- pointed at things he really liked and laughed again at the good parts. The written part of the critique gave me the impression he only thought the novel was so-so. Talking outloud however, he was extrodinarily enthusiastic about the whole project. I learned a lot, and my novel is, consequently, much better than it was. And I got the morale boost of knowing that someone thought I was really writing something worthwhile. So, lukewarm vs. enthusiastic might just be a paper vs. spoken thing.
Posts: 189 | Registered: Jul 2005
|
posted
I'm a bit ambivalent about thwacking typos. On the one hand, I just don't feel that it's worth my time to check another person's work for typos. On the other, I think that if you can't output a clean manuscript, then you need to learn. I mean, one of the basics of writing is, you know...putting what you mean down onto the page. Otherwise known as "writing".
If a typo catches my eye, and I feel that the story is good enough that there isn't much major revison left, I'll note the typo. If it catches my eye and I've noticed the same error being made consistently, I'll also mention it. If it is something that changes the meaning of a line or passage significantly, I'll also mention it.
If I end up commenting mostly on simple technical errors in the text, then that means one of two things. Either there was nothing else wrong with the story, or the text is unreadable. And I say which one is the case.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
