I will not read your f*****g script!

[Darth Angelus]

Originally Posted by Hex

But at the same time, posting something that is not of publishable (or whatever) quality does not mean the poster is lazy or unwilling to put in the work. Most people want to learn and improve, but some of us are inexperienced and find it hard to judge the quality of what we write.

I'd hope that the Critiques section is to help us get better.

On the other hand, if I post again and again with the same errors then people might get annoyed that their critiquing effort was not being listened to.

(I've learned a lot about writing from the critiques section here over the past year and from generous Chrons people giving up their time (some over Christmas!) to read and comment on my work. I'm truly grateful for it.)

Good points! I absolutely agree.
It is just that when you ask for critique, you have to be ready to hear what does not work, and it seems like he was just expected to give mindless encouragement.
I think this process can work just fine between grown-up people. The writer must be willing to work to improve and not have an unrealistic idea of how praiseworthy their script is, and in return the person doing the critique can tell his or her honest opinion without being excessively harsh when it comes to the flaws.
If either or both parties are somehow emotionally immature, there are bound to be clashes, however.

[Teresa Edgerton]

I have to sympathize with the guy who wrote the article.

Since I've been posting on this site, a number of people I've had only a handful of very brief interactions with have asked me to read and critique their work for free. I don't have time to do this for strangers and I wonder why they think I would. Do they think they are the only person who has asked?

When they asked me to look at their synopses, I'd do it, because a synopsis is short and even though it did take a fair amount of time, I felt uncomfortable saying no. Heaven knows why. I don't say yes now, since someone wrote back to savage me because I didn't give the same advice as another published writer (needless to state, the other writer told him he was doing a particular something right and I told him he should be using a different approach to that same thing). So much for being nice and trying to help someone out.

(People who ask strangers for time-consuming favors often have a sense of entitlement. These are not the people who are going to take kindly to criticism.)

I've also had people PM me and tell me it was my duty as a published writer to encourage aspiring writers, after I gave some criticism they didn't like. I don't think I actually have a duty to unpublished writers. My inclination is to be helpful, but I can only do that by being honest -- polite, but honest. And sometimes honesty does not include saying something nice in order to give what some would consider a balanced critique. These are small excerpts, and sometimes there isn't anything I feel that I can honestly praise. In something long, there is bound to be something, but not necessarily on something short. I think that people who put up a piece of writing for critique should be aware of this. Any random 1500 words may not show their strengths.

And I absolutely agree with this:

you cannot discourage a writer. If someone can talk you out of being a writer, you're not a writer. If I can talk you out of being a writer, I've done you a favor, because now you'll be free to pursue your real talent, whatever that may be. And, for the record, everybody has one. The lucky ones figure out what that is.

[Vertigo]

That's not good Teresa and I'm frankly a bit shocked that you should have got that sort of treatment from people here on the Chrons. For myself I feel guilty putting up a piece for critique simply because I am asking for other people's time for free. It wouldn't be so bad if I was doing more critiquing myself but, frankly, I don't really feel qualified (yet) and I struggle to find the time. So I figure if I can't find the time why should I expect others to.

(I really must find the time and make more of an effort, if only because I'm convinced critiquing others work will surely improve my own.)

Oh and I also particularly liked the extract that you quoted from the article!

[springs]

(I really must find the time and make more of an effort, if only because I'm convinced critiquing others work will surely improve my own.)



I definitely find this. I still find it hard to edit up close, but I now have a much more critical eye than I once had.

It's like any professional field - if someone wants to pick my brains as a consultant, I'm happy to go help out (so far there isn't much demand for my skills set, sorry all...) I do a lot of work in the voluntary sector, accept a lower rate when I do, throw in the odd day or meeting for nothing, and that's fine, that's my choice. I get work on the back of it, but nowhere near as much or as lucrative if I went elsewhere.

The scientific minds, and the writers on the Chrons have given me so much of their hard-earned knowledge, and I really can't give anything back on that level, but I do try to do as many crits as I can get to, (and am very happy to discuss management/organisational structures with anyone who wants to be bored by same.)

But, if it became a taken for granted - ask because she's a pro - I'd back away. Not least because I have professional indemnity insurance that only covers me for a contracted agreement, and I can't stand over advice given otherwise. But also because this is a group of people who have a funny little relationship, who've got to know each other in a virtual sense, and the notion of taking that for granted... it doesn't seem quite right.

(but every consultant has to make a living, and that includes - um - charging. - goodwill only goes so far and it doesn't pay the rent.)

[Teresa Edgerton]

Originally Posted by Vertigo

That's not good Teresa and I'm frankly a bit shocked that you should have got that sort of treatment from people here on the Chrons.

Not anyone posting on the boards right now. These tend to be people who haven't been here long and don't stick around for more than a few weeks. I think they take what they can out of the community and leave before they've contributed very much themselves.

The 30 post rule in the Critiques forum has discouraged a lot of them.

[RcGrant]

Originally Posted by springs

(I really must find the time and make more of an effort, if only because I'm convinced critiquing others work will surely improve my own.)

I like to try and critique partly for this reason; I feel it helps me spot errors in my own writing. I also like to read what others are spotting, mostly for the same reason. I posted once (before the board changed, it seems) but I feel I am at a stage where I need more than 1500 words to be looked at for it to be any use for me.

Honestly, I love this forum, and the people on it. The Critique section is invaluable. It makes me sad Teresa (and perhaps some other members too) has had people approach her in such a manner.

[Jammill Khursheed]

I think that, as aspiring writers, critting other people's work is an amazingly good tool for learning to be a better writer...

When we write our own stuff, we are far too close to the project to look at it critically, and seeing other people's work lets us do that... When we see plot holes, they aren't our fault... When the prose is overly flowery and far too long, its not us who have messed up and got carried away with it, making both of those things easier to see...

Then, when we go back to re-write our stuff (even if it hasn't been critiqued by anyone else yet) we can see the same things we have been complaining about in our own, much-loved personal-opus better than if we hadn't critiqued for others...

Expecting PUBLISHED, and therefore professional writers to provide us with a professional service, for free, out of a sense of entitlement, is proper taking the piss...

I'd say it was safe to assume that a professional writer has already learnt how to look at their own work critically, and needs the views of someone trying to get into the industry about as much as Wayne Rooney needs the guys having a kick-about outside my house to teach him how to play football... So the 'mutually beneficial' aspect also falls down flat...

Basically, us aspiring writers helping EACH OTHER out from a sense of community is a hell of a lot different than expecting a professional to help YOU out of a sense of entitlement...


Jammill

[j. d. worthington]

Jamill: While it can have such a salutary effect, the best way to improve your writing is to read the best writers out there, not other aspiring writers... and to read them critically, and read them more than once, as you will certainly miss a great deal otherwise. Other than that... write, write, write. Be ruthless with your own work, put some distance between it and yourself before reading it for editing, and then go after it hammer and tongs.

But, generally speaking, reading the work of others who are still learning their way around is much more given to introducing more flaws into your own work, rather than less.

[Fishbowl Helmet]

This is why most writers simply state that their lawyers advise them not to read aspiring writers' scripts, novels, shorts, etc. It saves them from having to say 'no', and looking like an ass; or writing screeds about things like this, which also makes them look like an ass.

[Darth Angelus]

Originally Posted by Teresa Edgerton

(People who ask strangers for time-consuming favors often have a sense of entitlement.

I cannot fault the reasoning behind this statement. It seems perfectly logical that it would be that way. Asking for a significant amount of the time from someone you do not know at all is not the most reasonable expectation in the history of humankind.

Originally Posted by Teresa Edgerton

These are not the people who are going to take kindly to criticism.)

I can see why this would be the case, too.

Originally Posted by Teresa Edgerton

I've also had people PM me and tell me it was my duty as a published writer to encourage aspiring writers, after I gave some criticism they didn't like. I don't think I actually have a duty to unpublished writers.

I am not sure whether to laugh or cry at that. I mean, omg, duty. Published writers owe complete strangers nothing. These people do go waaay to far.
Anyone who is unwilling to hear what needs improvement in their writing are probably not fit to be writers, anyway, as they will never improve the writing to an acceptable standard with that attitude.

Originally Posted by Teresa Edgerton

My inclination is to be helpful, but I can only do that by being honest -- polite, but honest. And sometimes honesty does not include saying something nice in order to give what some would consider a balanced critique. These are small excerpts, and sometimes there isn't anything I feel that I can honestly praise. In something long, there is bound to be something, but not necessarily on something short. I think that people who put up a piece of writing for critique should be aware of this. Any random 1500 words may not show their strengths.

It depends on whether you mean helpful to their ego or their writing, but the (main) point of critique is the latter, not the former, so I have to agree on that.

[Teresa Edgerton]

Originally Posted by j. d. worthington

But, generally speaking, reading the work of others who are still learning their way around is much more given to introducing more flaws into your own work, rather than less.

I have to disagree with you JD. If you don't look at both the good and the bad, you have no comparison. It is very easy to see the flaws in the work of other aspiring writers, especially when looking for them, and it's very rare indeed for anyone to copy them. (Not, alas, the case when it comes to the less felicitous examples of published writing.) Once you see how clumsy something looks in somebody else's manuscript, and realize you were thinking about doing it yourself, I guarantee you never forget the lesson.

And one thing that happens a lot with writers who never read the work of other unpublished writers is that they will get "clever" ideas and because they have never seen anything of the sort before they'll get the idea that they've come up with something brilliant in its originality -- all the world will be stunned by their genius! -- and it can be hard to convince them otherwise. Let them see how often the same idea comes up in other people's unpublished manuscripts and they understand: It's not that no one ever thought of the idea before; it's that people think of it and discard it all the time when they realize how weak it is.

So I would say that generally speaking it is very beneficial to look at the work of other writers who are at the learning stage, too. The only time it becomes a problem is when you belong to a group that exists solely for the sake of complimenting each others' work. Under those circumstances, there can be a lot of copying.

Originally Posted by Jammill Khursheed

I'd say it was safe to assume that a professional writer has already learnt how to look at their own work critically, and needs the views of someone trying to get into the industry about as much as Wayne Rooney needs the guys having a kick-about outside my house to teach him how to play football

Not altogether true. The non-professionial writer does, at the very least represent the reader, and can be good at spotting problems, if not always good at identifying them or knowing how to fix them. (Although some people are much better critiquers than they are writers -- yet -- and make very good suggestions.)

But when I posted some of my work for critique here (partly so that everyone could have their revenge, and partly because I was expecting some useful suggestions), everyone got so flustered, I probably won't do it again.

Too bad, because I did get some good feedback.

[j. d. worthington]

Originally Posted by Teresa Edgerton

I have to disagree with you JD. If you don't look at both the good and the bad, you have no comparison. It is very easy to see the flaws in the work of other aspiring writers, especially when looking for them, and it's very rare indeed for anyone to copy them. (Not, alas, the case when it comes to the less felicitous examples of published writing.) Once you see how clumsy something looks in somebody else's manuscript, and realize you were thinking about doing it yourself, I guarantee you never forget the lesson.

And one thing that happens a lot with writers who never read the work of other unpublished writers is that they will get "clever" ideas and because they have never seen anything of the sort before they'll get the idea that they've come up with something brilliant in its originality -- all the world will be stunned by their genius! -- and it can be hard to convince them otherwise. Let them see how often the same idea comes up in other people's unpublished manuscripts and they understand: It's not that no one ever thought of the idea before; it's that people think of it and discard it all the time when they realize how weak it is.

So I would say that generally speaking it is very beneficial to look at the work of other writers who are at the learning stage, too. The only time it becomes a problem is when you belong to a group that exists solely for the sake of complimenting each others' work. Under those circumstances, there can be a lot of copying.

You may well have a point (or, rather, several) there. Let me qualify my statement, then, to "in my experience", including in this what I have also heard from a lot of others... but the experience of yet other people obviously doesn't necessarily match.

I would definitely agree about the startling new idea bit... though the more one reads even in established literature, the more one finds that there really is verrrry little which is new under the sun.

I think the one place where I would tend to be a good deal more cautious with this is the fact that -- especially with newer writers -- it is easy for influences, even undesirable ones, to creep in without you being aware; and it is by no means unusual to find someone doing precisely the thing for which they had just recently criticized another, and being completely oblivious to that fact, often even when it is pointed out to them. (Of course, once they do realize they've done so, they tend to feel quite chagrined, but the tendency is, I think, rather common nonetheless.)

[Teresa Edgerton]

Then I take it, JD, that you don't believe that new writers benefit by forming writers groups?

it is by no means unusual to find someone doing precisely the thing for which they had just recently criticized another, and being completely oblivious to that fact, often even when it is pointed out to them.

This hardly argues that they are being influenced by other people's writing habits, however. Rather the obvious: they stick to their own bad habits.

[Karn Maeshalanadae]

Originally Posted by Teresa Edgerton

Then I take it, JD, that you don't believe that new writers benefit by forming writers groups?

I don't think he's saying that; I think what he's saying is that drawbacks can, and probably do, come out of groups as well as benefits. I've been a part of writers groups before, and while I found a lot of feedback to be on the entertaining side, I've never met in person a published author, or one who said they've ever written for more than a school/college assignment, and as a result, never really got any truly deep, solid help with my own side of things from them.


That being said, some of the feedback and reviews I've overheard were quite entertaining and some of the ideas I've been witness to had potential, and even-inevitably, some might say-mirrored others of long time past.


I remember one that stood out to me so well, back about two years ago or so when I went back into college. One woman had written something up for the creative writing course I was taking, and the end of it had some vague similarities to Faulkner's A Rose For Emily. (No, I won't say how. It's a family forum.)


Point is, I'm never at the point where I won't read a manuscript or at least offer feedback via another review. Whether or not the author of said manuscript will take advice and opinions to heart objectively or not, I don't know.

[Teresa Edgerton]

Unless I misread him, Karn, he said nothing about the benefits, and indicated that the general result was that the writing became more flawed.

Writing groups usually become better the longer they are together, as the members take turns helping each other to improve. But of course you need people who are intent on improving. You can usually figure that out after a couple of meetings. If you didn't see that kind of dedication in the groups you joined, Karn, I hope you moved on very quickly.