TV and LJ collide

[sistermagpie]

So did anybody else happen to connect QAF tonight with recent lj discussions?



Ben asked Michael to read his book and tell him what he thought. Michael is nervous because he thougt it was boring. So he tells him he loved it. Then Ben hears from others this isn't the truth so encourages Michael to be honest. Michael says, okay, he felt it dragged in parts. He didn't really understand what the main character wanted. He couldn't really tell what it was about. He didn't get how it all added up in the end. Ben gets miffed and forgives Michael for his stupid thoughts because he doesn't have a "literary background" and likes comic books instead. He sends the book to his publisher, who passes on it because the main character's motivation wasn't clear, the theme wasn't presented with any force and the plot was too complex.

Yeah, we all saw that coming, but of course it made me think of the recent lj discussions about criticism not being welcome, which I don't really understand. I understand not everyone is in this to improve as a writer and they just want to have fun. I defiitely see why people hold the opinions of some trusted friends and writers they admire above others. I definitely know that some negative feedback is just wrong and unhelpful. These are not things I would argue with.

But what I don't get is having any trouble with the kind of feedback Michael was giving Ben here, which seemed to be part of what was being rejected. I mean, Michael wasn't telling Ben how to write, he was just telling him what, as a reader, he didn't get. And even if you're just in it for the fun of it what is the point if you're not getting your point across? You don't have to write what the reader wants to read, but surely you want the reader to hear what you're saying! This is not something one needs to have a literary background to do. Many people are completely incapable of putting their problems with a story into something as coherent as, "I didn't understand what the main character wanted..." They'll just say it was boring and move on. I think comments like that are valuable no matter who they come from. They're worth at least a second opinion from someone you trust.

Comments

[cleverthylacine]

Mmmm. I'd never ever ask a SO to review my work unless s/he was my collaborator. It might be because I was once savagely dissed by one of my exes who was jealous of the time I gave to writing, or because I frequently am involved with people whose literary tastes are extremely different than my own, but I just think it's a dangerous thing to do. Even if you think you can handle anything they say, having a lover hate your work feels like a rejection--and it's really hard to review your partner's work objectively, you're afraid of hurting them, etc. I just wouldn't do it. That's what betas or editors are for.

But then I know I'm more Justice League than Ivy League.

I love Salman Rushdie, but I don't like that book all the littriture folks like, "Midnight's Children," so much--I like "The Satanic Verses" because it's fantasy, and funny, quirky, fantasy at that...

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Even if you think you can handle anything they say, having a lover hate your work feels like a rejection--and it's really hard to review your partner's work objectively, you're afraid of hurting them, etc.

I feel the same way--it seems like that's one of those Big Mistakes that somebody would make, giving something they've written to a friend. In fact, I know I've read that as advice to writers who are trying to get published--the fact that all your friends say they love it means absolutely nothing.

And then, as you say, being in a relationship is a whole 'nother set of landmines. If you happen to have a writer/editor relationship to begin with maybe, but not everyone is able to criticize well without getting into all these other issues. Particularly if they're going to make it into a power play, as your ex did. I remember when I was a teenager giving one or two things to my mother and realizing this was not somebody who would ever be getting anything again.

But then I know I'm more Justice League than Ivy League.

And be proud to be so! Actually, my guess is either league has an equally good chance of being a good editor. It just comes down to being able to really see what's good in either one.

[sine-que-non767.livejournal.com]

They're worth at least a second opinion from someone you trust.

Yes, someone you trust. Not someone you love. ;) When it comes to family, these two terms may be mutually exclusive, especially when it comes to laying something as precious as your writing on the line. I choose to make a clear distinction between sharing my writing with people who'll 'get it' and people who won't, purely because of content.

This is not something one needs to have a literary background to do.

Great point. And sometimes, I feel writers can have difficulty putting aside their own ideas on writing aside sufficiently to comment objectively on another writer's work, whereas non-writers don't necessarily have all these writerly ideas cluttering their brain, and can pick out their response as a reader in a more straightfoward way.
/huge generalisation

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

I choose to make a clear distinction between sharing my writing with people who'll 'get it' and people who won't, purely because of content.

Heh--it's so funny that I was using this example and not even thinking about the obvious fact that these two are lovers which brings in all these other issues. But ITA. Thinking that liking a person or getting along in one way is in no way a sign they will be of any help giving you feedback. They could be the worst thing that happens to you.

/huge generalisation

But there can definitely be truth in that. Sometimes I guess it could also help if you're asking somebody who's more of a blank slate because you can ask them questions rather than expect them to come up with things on their own. So you could ask them if they understood why so-and-so did something or whatever, whereas the writer might assume they got everything and are off planning how much better the story is going to be when they rewrite it.

[sine-que-non767.livejournal.com]

So you could ask them if they understood why so-and-so did something or whatever, whereas the writer might assume they got everything and are off planning how much better the story is going to be when they rewrite it.

Completely. You rock, Magpie - you always understand what I'm trying to say at 3am. :D

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

LOL! That's probably just my natural mindset--3AM.:-)

[ptyx.livejournal.com]

Yes and no... I like Joyce and Guimarães Rosa (a let's-say-Joycean Brazilian writer), but very few people I knew like them, and the publishers I knew wouldn't publish them! (I don't know how do they got famous!) If I wanted to write professionally, I think I would like to write like Joyce and Rosa, so I would expect not to be understood/liked. But that's what I would like to write anyway. As a fic writer, I'm not trying to write like Joyce, but I know some of the structures I use aren't the most habitual to people. And I prefer to be appreciated by few than to change my style. It's an option.

[ptyx.livejournal.com]

Er. It's hard to write in a second language, especially in the morning, before tea... "Very few people I know" and "the publishers I know".

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Ah--yes, this is a good point. I think it has to be a balance between the author and the audience or the author and the publisher. On one hand you can't write to only what you think people might like, because then it will fall flat. You have to write what you feel strongly about and hope it comes across the right desk, as those books did. The most valuable thing, I think, is finding someone who can understand what you're trying to say and help you to say it. I think most fanfic writers can tell the difference between someone doing that and someone telling them to write something else and the latter attitude is what gets them so frustrated.

[ptyx.livejournal.com]

The most valuable thing, I think, is finding someone who can understand what you're trying to say and help you to say it.
Oh, yes, that's invaluable!

I think most fanfic writers can tell the difference between someone doing that and someone telling them to write something else and the latter attitude is what gets them so frustrated.
Thanks for helping me to pin this down! You know, I loved all this discussion about feedback. It helped me a lot to understand my own feelings about feedback. And your posts are always very, very interesting.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Thanks! I had a great teacher at school who was wonderful at doing this, so he's probably my role model.:-)

[malafede.livejournal.com]

(deleted & reposted because my typo alert went off!)

I think the best advice I was given on criticism came from a friend of mine: he told me I needed to learn how to discriminate between criticism that's in tune with my vision, and criticism that doesn't accept it as a postulate. Of course disagreement over the premise is possible, but it doesn't say much about someone's writing.

I know it was rather painful for me to learn this lesson. In a writing workshop I joined, we shared our writing and were invited to share our opinions on our classmates's writing too. Receiving criticism was strange - I was incredibly glad someone had taken the time to think about what worked in my story and what didn't. When they pointed out flaws, it helped me to see the reader's perspective, which is the entire point of writing for me. A story is a way to talk with people, and without feedback there's no communication.

Of course criticism hurts, at times. A story especially where I had put a lot of energies and themes I cared about was called inconsistent once. My reaction was very negative, I felt untalented and frustrated, so it's not that I don't sympathise with the pov of the one who's resistant to criticism. Just, I never felt angry at the people pointing out the holes in my narrative, but rather at myself for having them in the first place.

A reader whose response to your Draco gen piece us to worder why there wasn't buttsex isn't giving you any helpful input, not because of the buttsex per se, but because it has nothing to do with your story. But someone who points out discrepancies in the Malfoys's timeline is, and it's very likely that they're telling you because they enjoy your story and want to see it improved.

[sistermagpie.livejournal.com]

Yeah, it's a much harder thing that people realize sometimes. In fact, sometimes you just don't know what's going to set you off. I remember when I wrote something and gave it to this woman who was an agent--she's now my writing partner. I didn't know her very well then, but she went through it and gave criticisms that were totally like therapy--like, you don't realize how much yourself you reveal in something. Luckily I'm so fascinated in myself I could sort of enjoy that part of it even while being embarassed.:-)

But still that can be hard and a lot of people just don't really get it. And when you're listening to people just sort of brush aside your story to tell you to write something else it's like, "Hello? My story? The one I want to tell?"

Just, I never felt angry at the people pointing out the holes in my narrative, but rather at myself for having them in the first place.


Heh--I am totally the same way. Because I at least want to look competent, dammit! Plus I never want to sound like I'm one of those people who are just going to defend every criticism. Like if you say something doesn't make sense they explain how it does make sense, as if they can do this to every person who ever picks up a book if it gets published. There's nothing more annoying than people who think the proper way to deal with criticism is to just argue it down. I mean, sure, you don't have to accept every criticism and follow it because sometimes the person is wrong, but you don't win points by being able to not listen to it at all.

[malafede.livejournal.com]

like, you don't realize how much yourself you reveal in something. Luckily I'm so fascinated in myself I could sort of enjoy that part of it even while being embarassed.:-)

Eeeeh I'm the same. It's amazing how many things you can learn about yourself reading your stuff with an eye to projection. I remember the same friend who gave the bit of advice about criticism firing question after question at me about why I chose X as the main character, why was it so important that he died, why was I fond of this and this and this clichè... he said it was to know me better. Back then I really didn't understand projection and reacted very badly at the implication that my only link with characters could be identification... Are we all Mary Sues?, I asked. Because I knew for certain that sometimes I didn't want to be in the scene, I just wanted to observe. I had these two twins in an incestuous relationship and both their personalities were so different from mine. But talking with him helped me to understand that both my fascination with incest between twins and disturbed personalities said something about me.

There's nothing more annoying than people who think the proper way to deal with criticism is to just argue it down.

Yeah, it's diffult for me to undestand this attitude because it feels so lacking in humbleness. I mean, I don't think I'm flawless. I don't think my prose is. So it's not so unthinkable that someone could spot these flaws I know I have.