posted
For me, all you need to do in the first thirteen is avoid looking like you don't know what you're doing. The problem isn't that the first 13 is too short, the problem is that most novice writers have real difficulty writing 13 lines that don't reveal fundamental gaps in their grasp of the basics of narrative writing.
The problem is that 13 lines with no glaring mistakes is a lot to ask from a new writer.
That's why I don't demand that you give me a perfect 13 before I'll read. I know that you're workshopping because you want to improve your story. If you think that I can tell you anything helpful, it means that there are techniques, tips, even tricks that I might be able to tell you. I'm perfectly willing to read for fun when I'm pretty sure that there won't be a lot for me to say other than "this is perfect". But I'm not demanding that you be perfect before I'll read when the point is how I can help you be better.
But if your first thirteen reveals that you don't have a basic grasp of written English or the art of narrative, or if it's a story I'm going to hate reading, I'll give it a pass. You don't need the feedback I'd give you on that story, and I don't want to give it to you.
quote: For me, all you need to do in the first thirteen is avoid looking like you don't know what you're doing.
bump
With reference to earlier comment I made, I see it was incomplete: I was referring particularly to clumsy hooks that prove to have little bearing on the rest of the story.
[This message has been edited by hoptoad (edited March 26, 2007).]
quote:With reference to earlier comment I made, I see it was incomplete: I was referring particularly to clumsy hooks that prove to have little bearing on the rest of the story.
Now that would be a good forum contest. I feel a thread coming on...
posted
I concur with the sentiments about the thirteen lines not because they are inadequate (they aren't), but because the critique is so seldom relevant. In the thirteen lines I posted I got feedback that said basically there wasn't enough story, I don't feel anything for the character, etc.
It simply isn't possible to do that in thirteen lines. A character evolves and we come to know them through the course of the story. The other reason, and I'm sorry if I'm a little direct here, is that a number of people offer advice on what editors are looking for. That would be great if in fact the advice was relevant, but it isn't.
When submitting the 13 lines those who volunteer to critique should focus on those thirteen lines: Is there a hook? Does it pique your interest? Does it make you want to read more? Is it clearly written, etc.
I understand the importance for the first thirteen lines to have a spark, but the critiques are, in my opinion not very helpful and the problem lies in the audience. We as writers owe it to the reader to invite them into the story. We don't smile, shake hands, and introduce ourselves ten minutes after we meet someone, we do it at the beginning. We should be doing the same with our stories.
But they who critique ought to critique the first 13 for what they are and should be. An introduction and invitation to read more; not for what they aren't.
[This message has been edited by jongoff (edited March 27, 2007).]
posted
I think some people just don't know how to critique (you may put me in that group). At least, maybe some don't know how to crit the first 13 very well. There is a section on Hatrack that tells people how to crit. I think maybe people should refresh themselves on what needs to be in the first 13, because I don't think everyone has a realistic expectation. Yes, you need to hook, yes, you need to get your grammar and spelling right. But what else?
I think that when you post your first 13 you should also ask for those who are interested in critting the whole thing (or if a novel, the first chapter). Then you are essentially saying, "here's the intro, is this interesting enough to keep reading?" That's how editors work. If the first bit is good, they'll keep reading. If not, then it's trash. Or sent back in your self-addressed stamped envelope. Whatever.
posted
There should probably be a section entitled "How to Accept a Critique." Most of the complaints I've seen of critiques being invalid are silly.
A critique is one person's point of view. End of story. If you think the person has a valid opinion, then listen to it. If not, ignore it. If several people point out the same issue, then it would do to take note of it.
A critique is a chance to peer into one reader's mind. If they are telling you they aren't hooking into your story, and why, that's useful information.
The problem NEVER lies with the audience. If you think it's the audience at fault, you are lost. An opinion about writing is never wrong... because opinions about writing are not true/false things. I like it; I don't like it... one is not right and the other wrong. Opinions are barometers, not statements of fact. If the opinion is based on a false conclusion, you can only blame the writer for that. It is the writer, after all, who completely controls the words on the page. As a writer, you can assess where a particular reader veered off course and make a decision on whether you need to clarify, edit, expound, develop. And that is the gift in critique, a chance to see where a reader veers off course so that you can make a course correction.
I know exactly what you mean. I eventually read Treason, which is (I think) a rewrite of "A Planet Called Treason." And I read it under the high recommendation of a friend and the fact that it was written by OSC. I did finish it, and can honestly say there is no other book like it.
I wanted to drop it several times and found the situation of our main character distasteful, creepy, and just plain weird. The entire book is amazingly clever and brilliantly creative, however, despite its artistic value, it is nothing short of a severe acid trip and don't think it would be a breakthrough success for any up and coming author.
Your observation about the audience never being wrong ONLY applies to a passive audience. In other words readers who haven't taken upon themselves the responsibility of providing helpful feedback. When a person takes on that role they have a responsiblity to provide feedback that is relevant and useful to what is posted.
Useful feedback on the thirteen lines would include telling the author how effective it is as a hook, whether the writing is clear, etc.
Feedback that is less than helpful are comments about the character being underdeveloped, or there not being enough information about this or that aspect of the world (this is exceptional because if the opening scene begins describing a world, it should obviously have some detail).
The thirteen lines excercise is to help us develop as writers that can hook a reader, and from a professional point, an editor's interest. It is impossible to really develop the characters, the world, or the plot in thirteen lines. We can only provide a snapshot, but that snapshot should be well framed, interesting, and in focus.
So if we take up the mantle of critic we should be aware of the responsibility to provide good observations, and where possible suggestions on how to improve.
Now having said all that it's important to point out that sometimes it is possible to tell a lot in 13 lines. I'm reminded of a story in an anthology of the world's shortest stories. The entire tale was told in remarkably few lines. I don't recall the author's name, but the story, in it's entirity was rather brief. If you'll indulge me I'll present it here:
A Short Story for Mindreaders:
It was a dark and stormy night... you know the rest.
The End.
Thanks to everyone for your indulgence in my prattle.
[This message has been edited by jongoff (edited March 30, 2007).]
[This message has been edited by jongoff (edited March 30, 2007).]
posted
In adendum to my previous post I tried to find the author of the short story I mentioned. I came across the following by our own gracious host, at least it's attributed to him:
The baby’s blood type? Human, mostly. - Orson Scott Card
Printer-friendly view of this topic
