![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
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.
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.
From:
no subject
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...
From:
no subject
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.